218 PEEL, THE HOME SECRETARY. down, and the narrow isthmus now formed between them stands between 'Two kindred seas, Which, mounting, viewed each other from afar, And longed to meet.' Shall we, then, fortify the mounds which are almost in ruins? or shall we leave them to moulder away by time or accident? an event which, though distant, must happen, and which, when it does, will only confer a thankless favour-or shall we at once cut away the isthmus that remains, and float on the mingling waves the ark of our common constitution" ?* The principal speaker against the motion was Mr. Peel, who, as a follower of Perceval, had acquired considerable influence in the House of Commons, and had recently accepted the Home Secretaryship. At this time, as a contemporary writer remarks, his political predilections, sympathies, principles, and prejudices, were very much the same with those of Lord Sidmouth; so that the substitution of the one for the other had had no effect on the course of administration. He was the recognised spokesman of the extreme section of the Tory party. On this occasion, however, his opposition proved unsuccessful; the second reading of the bill was carried by a majority of 11 (254 to 243), increased on the third reading to 19 (216 to 197). In the Lords it was rejected; but thoughtful observers were from this time convinced that the ultimate triumph of the movement could not be long delayed. The future success of a measure, akin to it in principle, that for the enlarged *Parliamentary Debates,' iv. 1311. THE INDIAN VICEROYALTY. 219 representation of the people, might also have been predicted with certainty in this session, the minority in favour of Lord John Russell's Reform Bill being unex-. pectedly large and confessedly influential. On the question of Reform, Canning clung to the old dogmas of the Tory party, though it is difficult to understand why, in the one measure, he should have seen anything more revolutionary than in the other. But in the spring of 1822 it seemed probable that his career as an English politician would be terminated, or, at least, suspended. The splendid post of the GovernorGeneralship of India was offered to and accepted by him. Many were surprised that he should thus consent to withdraw from the arena where he had won such brilliant victories. But his private fortune had been considerably impaired, and the noble income of the Indian Viceroyalty was not without its attraction. Moreover, the King's antipathy to him, excited by his magnanimous refusal to concur in the persecution of the Queen,* promised to exclude him for years from official advancement at home; while it must be admitted that for the highest genius and the loftiest ambition, India offered and offers a great field of activity. Having accepted the appointment, he repaired to Liverpool to take leave of his constituents. At Liverpool he had always been popular. It had returned him * Mr. Stapleton ascribes the royal animosity not so much to Canning's personal conduct as to the active part taken by Canning's friends in the House of Lords against the Pains and Penalties Bill, which the King attributed (erroneously) to Canning's influence. George Canning and His Times,' p. 323. 220 LORD CASTLEREAGH'S SUICIDE. to Parliament four times in succession, and always by large majorities. His connection with the great seaport had been commemorated by the formation of a "Canning Club." During his visits to Liverpool, he usually resided at Seaforth House, belonging to his friend Mr. Gladstone, the father of the distinguished statesman who has achieved a fame greater even than that of Canning's. As he journeyed to Liverpool, in August, 1822, he received the startling intelligence that the Marquis of Londonderry (Lord Castlereagh had succeeded to the Marquisate in the previous year) had died by his own hand, and that Canning was generally regarded as his successor. But the contingency, knowing what he did of the King's feelings, seemed to him very dubious, and he continued his route to Liverpool. There, on the 22nd, he dined with the Canning Club; and on the morning of the 30th, received an address from his con 66 It seems Lord Londonderry had been unwell for some time, but not seriously, and a few days before this catastrophe he became much worse, and was very much dejected. He told Lord Grenville some time ago that he was worn out with fatigue, and he told Count Munster the other day that he was very ill indeed. The Duke of Wellington saw him on Friday, and was so struck by the appearance of illness about him that he sent Bankhead to him. He was cupped on Saturday in London, got better, and went to Foot's Cray. On Sunday he was worse, and the state of dejection in which he appeared induced his attendants to take certain precautions, which unfortunately, however, proved fruitless. They removed his pistols and his razors, but he got hold of a penknife which was in the room next his, and on Sunday night or early on Monday morning he cut his throat with it.... No event ever gave rise to more speculation with the few people there are left to speculate, and the general opinion seems to be that Canning will not go to India, but will be appointed in his room. It certainly opens a door to his ambition as well as to that of Peel.”—C. GREVILLE,Journal,' i. 52. CANNING'S CONSERVATISM. 221 stituents, in which all the Mercantile Associations concurred. In the evening he was entertained at the Lyceum by upwards of 500 gentlemen. From the speeches delivered on these occasions we extract a few illustrative passages: Apart from the interests of separate classes, we have all a common interest in the conservation of that order of things which is the security of the whole. We must feel, I am sure, and none feel more than those whom I am addressing, that it would be a peevish and unthinking spirit which, under the irritation of a temporary inconvenience, should quarrel, not with the immediate sources of immediate suffering, but with all that surrounds them, with all that is contemporary with them, with passive circumstances as well as with active causes; as a child, in its anger, beats the ground because for a moment it has fallen. To maintain to our native land that supremacy which it has long exercised, we must look to the maintenance of its institutions; and if, in a moment of uncomfortable pressure, we lay hold, in anger, on those established institutions, and shake them to ruin, we may be perfectly sure that, while we produce no remedy for the evil that assails us, we shall take from our posterity,—probably from ourselves, the means of safety as well as the hope of reparation." In reference to Parliamentary Reform he said :— "My purpose is mistaken, if it is supposed that I impute to those who support the question a distinct apprehension of the consequences to which, I think, their doctrines lead, and a design to promote these 222 ON PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. consequences. It is with their doctrines that I quarrel, and not with their motives; and it has been my desire always to discuss the question argumentatively, rather than angrily, with those who are opposed to me in opinion. I wish them to state to me-to me? I wish them to state to themselves distinctly, the object which they have in view, and the means they think they have to attain it. Why, what are the general arguments by which we are urged to admit a change in the constitution of the House of Commons? These arguments are derived from expensive wars, from heavy taxes, and from severe enactments, constituting, as is affirmed, so many outrageous inroads upon the constitution. Granted, for argument's sake, that all these charges are true. Granted that all the proceedings of Parliament, for many years past, have been reprehensible. But were they the proceedings of the House of Commons alone? Does the British Constitution act by a single organ? Has there been no concurrence in the maintenance of these wars, no consent to the imposition of these taxes, no co-operation in the passing of those enactments? Is there no other assembly in existence which partook of the opinions in which the House of Commons has proceeded, and which would make, therefore, the reform of the House of Commons nugatory for the professed purposes, unless the coordinate authority was also reformed? If you reform the House of Commons, on the grounds of past misconduct, what will you do with the House of Lords?" "I have never stated it as a beauty of the constitution, that Old Sarum should have but as many voters as |