5th of July he resigned. On the following day Parliament was prorogued and dissolved.

The general election which took place immediately was not a very exciting affair. The masters of the constituencies, the landowners, Whig and Tory alike, were anxious not to raise any troublesome questions, and agreed to support Palmerston as the great preventive of change. In that case it did not much matter whether the nominal Liberal majority was a little greater or a little less; the Premier was to be retained in office in either case. The large popular constituencies gave evidence of their continued desire for reform, and in some cases made the Ministry feel the effect of their discon

Thus Sir Charles Wood had to leave Halifax, which required a more independent Liberal; and Frederick Peel was dismissed from Bury, to make way for a good Radical in the person of Mr. R. M. Phillips. An important addition was made to the ranks of the party by the election for Westminster of John Stuart Mill. The action of such a man was a fresh refutation of the charge that Radicals were mere thoughtless demagogues, without a knowledge of the great principles on which the government of a country should be founded. Here was a man who had deeply studied the laws of political economy and the philosophy of society and politics, and who, as the result of his knowledge and thought, was convinced that the safest foundation for national well-being was the extension of the area of popular representation. It is probable that a nominal loss of one election was as great a real benefit to the cause as the gain of several others. The University of Oxford, by its rejection of Mr. Gladstone, only showed, as far as it was itself concerned, that it hated anything like sympathy with popular desires or support of popular measures. But as respected its late representative, it set him free from that desire to represent even the prejudices of his old constituents, which, if it could not affect the growth of his political opinions or the sincerity of his convictions, might hamper and impede his practical progress. The sense of relief from this indefinite but real restraint was not absent from his own mind, as some

of his addresses to the electors of South Lancashire proved; but it was more distinctly felt and more openly expressed by Liberal politicians of all sections, and especially by those of the most advanced school.

The general result of the elections was to increase the Liberal majority, and to strengthen the position of the minister. The Times calculated that the Liberal gains were fifty-seven, and the losses thirty-three, showing an increase of twenty-four, equal to forty-eight on a division. The full numbers it gave as-Liberals, 367; Conservatives, 290, or a majority of seventy-seven.* McCalmont's "Poll Book" gives-Liberals, 361; Conservatives, 294; majority, 67. Either of these totals would show a good working majority, and if it had been a victory gained on clear political lines, there would have been ample means in the hands of the Government to secure a sound progressive policy. Unfortunately, this was not the case; a considerable number of the majority were Liberal only to the extent of preventing the accession to power of the Conservatives, and were prepared to check any active reform legislation. To this extent the party was Palmerstonian rather than Liberal, a fact which soon became painfully evident.† For the master into whose hands the new Parliament was willing to place almost unrestricted power, was fated never to exercise it. Palmerston died on the 18th of October, and his death closed the period of political compromise and inaction. There was now to be that conflict of opinions which is the sign of real national life, and it was a contest which, whatever might be the result of the first campaign, could end only in one of two ways, either in the victory of Radical principles or in national weakness and decay.

The Times, July 25, 1865.

+ There were, however, nearly 170 members who had never sat before, and who were to some extent untried. Many of these were Radicals, among them being Mr. Trevelyan, Mr. Fawcett, and Mr. Samuel Morley.

CHAPTER XIX.

FROM THE DEATH OF PALMERSTON TO THE PASSING OF THE REFORM ACT (1865-1867)-CONCLUSION.

IT was generally felt that the death of Palmerston closed the truce which had existed between Conservatism and Radicalism during his tenure of office. Both parties hesitated to attack the minister, in whom neither believed, and who, in fact, seemed to have no deep political convictions of any sort. It was a pause before battle, which both sides had been willing to prolong, but which now came to an end. Those timid politicians who called themselves Liberals, but dreaded reform, had to decide upon a definite course of action, and many of them chose to go over to the Tories in the struggle which was now commenced. In this they were as foolish as they were cowardly, and what they succeeded in doing was to defeat the moderate measure of reform which the Ministry offered, and which the Radicals were willing to accept, and by so doing to arouse a spirit of determination in the country, before which their temporary combinations were scattered, and on the strength of which the popular wishes were more thoroughly carried out.

The new Ministry, which was now formed by Russell, consisted mainly of the same men who had composed the last, but it was known that there was a great difference in its spirit and intentions. Some indication of the change of feeling was given by the appointment of Mr. Stansfeld and Mr. Forster to office. The great alteration, however, was the substitution of Mr. Gladstone for Lord Palmerston as leader of the House of

Commons; of a statesman for a political manager; of a man who" made a conscience of his work " for one who was content to take what came, and to change his opinions with a change of fortune.

Parliament met on the 1st of February, 1866, and the preliminary business having been gone through, the Queen's speech was delivered on the 6th of the same month. When that speech was read, it was known that the reform contest had really begun. It said that information as to the right of voting was being prepared, and that when it was complete the attention of Parliament would be called to it, "with a view to such improvements in the laws which regulate the rights of voting in the election of members of the House of Commons as may tend to strengthen our free institutions and conduce to the public welfare." As much as this had been said before; but now it was known that the matter must go beyond speaking, and it was soon announced that ministers meant to stake their existence on the success of their proposal. They would fulfil their promise to the country or resign. The history of this short Parliament is mainly the record of the struggle of privilege and prejudice against popular rights-successful for a time, but inevitably doomed to ultimate defeat.

There was a difference not only in the spirit shown by ministers, but in the tone of the House of Commons. In nothing was this more marked than in the position taken by, and the attention paid to, the Radical leaders. In the case of Mr. Bright this took the shape of constant attacks by the Whig and Conservative allies. For some time past the member for Birmingham had been arousing and directing a popular agitation in favour of reform. At first he was sneered at for attempting an impossible task-he was whipping a dead horse; he was piping with no one to dance. Now there was a change in the accusation, and he was charged with exciting the passions of the people and leading them on to a violent onslaught upon the Constitution. He was setting class against class; he was Americanizing our institutions; he was endangering the throne; he was doing all kinds of

terrible and indefinable things. The ridiculous pertinacity of these attacks was rebuked in the House of Commons by Mr. Baxter, who said "he might be permitted to say, at the same time, that he hoped the discussion would be allowed to go on without any more personal and monotonous attacks upon the honourable member for Birmingham. He was sure the country was tired of these incessant personal references. The other day he met a gentleman who was constantly in the habit of attending the debates in that House, and who entirely differed from the honourable member for Birmingham in politics; and he (Mr. Baxter) asked why he had not appeared lately in the gallery. He replied, 'You people in the House of Commons seem to be doing nothing but discuss John Bright, and I am quite sick of it.'"* The fact which lay at the bottom of all this abuse was, that the subject of it represented a depth of public opinion which was dangerous to all obstructives, and which gave to his actions an importance not to be denied and a power, which could not long be resisted. Mr. Mill, even on his entrance into Parliament, spoke with unquestioned authority, which was in the first place due to his fame as a thinker and writer, but was soon increased by the thoroughness of his principles and the force of his advocacy. There were many other members of the party who vindicated its influence in Parliament, and altogether its position became more in accordance with its strength in the country than it had been before.

The introduction of the promised Reform Bill was delayed by the discussion of two other subjects which had been referred to in the Queen's speech, the ravages of the cattle plague in England, and the Fenian Rebellion in Ireland. With regard to the Irish troubles, the old short and easy method was of necessity adopted, but on this occasion it was applied with unwonted rapidity. An Act to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland passed through all its stages in both Houses of Parliament in a single day, Saturday, the 17th of February, the sitting of the Lords being prolonged into the Sunday to

Speech in the House on the second reading of the Reform Bill, April 13.