"A war in Italy," he said, "is not a war in a corner. An Italian war may by possibility be a European war. The waters of the Adriatic cannot be disturbed without agitating the waters of the Rhine. The port of Trieste is not a mere Italian port; it is a port which belongs to the German Confederation, and an attack on Trieste is not an attack on Austria alone, but also on Germany. If war springs up beyond the precincts of Italy, England has interests not merely from those principles, those enlightened principles of civilization, which make her look with an adverse eye to aught which would disturb the peace of the world; but England may be interested from material considerations of the most urgent and momentous character."

of the Austrian minister from Turin. The | the struggle. However much the people war that followed is one difficult to justify. sympathized with the cause of Italian Lombardy was secured to Austria by the independence, they were not prepared to settlement of 1815, and she held it by purchase it at the expense of English blood as good a title as that by which Sardinia and English money. The views entertained herself held the territory of Genoa. Unfor- by Mr. Disraeli on the subject were those of tunately, however, Austria had not confined a vigilant neutrality. He did not wish to herself in Italy to the legitimate exercise of go to war against Austria-it was not his the rights confirmed to her by the congress business to meddle with Italian independat Vienna. Her influence had extended to ence; but he was prepared for war should the duchies of Tuscany, Modena, and the necessity arise. Parma; her troops occupied the Legations; and even at Naples her authority was predominant. It was this domineering interference that crushed the spirit of Italian independence and induced the Emperor of the French, who was always anxious to divert the attention of Paris from his dynasty to foreign complications, to aid Sardinia in her attempt to relieve the peninsula from the despotism of an alien and hated race. At the instance of Austria, Count Cavour refused to disarm, and the advanced posts of the Austrian army crossed the Ticino. The passage of the Ticino was regarded by the Emperor of the French as a declaration of war against France, and hostilities began-Sardinia and France once more fighting side by side. In the war that ensued, the sympathy of England was wholly on the side of Italian independence. It was known that Lord Palmerston was hostile to Austria, and therefore, personally, his policy was popular; but the Conservative policy, as interpreted by Mr. Disraeli, was in favour of maintaining neutrality during the struggle; and the nation having had enough of war, preferred to crush its sympathies for the sake of peace. Therefore at the hustings it was feared that if Lord Palmerston was returned to parliament with a large majority, England would again be plunged into the horrors of war, whilst with a Conservative majority there was no probability of such an alternative; hence, many an elector, though he favoured the cause for which France and Sardinia were fighting, gave his vote to a Conservative in order not to be drawn into

During the elections the Conservatives had made a clear gain of twenty-nine seats; but this accession of strength, it became at once evident, was not sufficient to defeat the tactics of the Liberal majority. The fate of the government was soon decided. Shortly after the reassembling of parliament the Marquis of Hartington moved an amendment to the address expressive of a want of confidence in the government. With amusing candour he frankly stated that the move was a party one, and that the Liberals were in a state of division. Mr. Disraeli followed after the seconder of the amendment. He found no fault, he remarked (June 7, 1859), with the course taken by the Opposition, as it was of great advantage that the government should be informed whether it possessed the confidence of parliament or not. Still he was desirous of

knowing what ministers had done to inspire | purposes. They have believed that the distrust. He then criticised the reckless allowance to innkeepers for the billeting of assertions of Sir James Graham at Carlisle, who had alleged that the publicans had been bribed by the government; that Lord Derby had subscribed largely to a fund to manage the elections; that a compact had been entered into with the Pope in order to secure the Irish vote; and other accusations equally inaccurate but equally offensive. So venomous and unfounded were these charges, that Mr. Disraeli pretended, when first he read them, that he had attributed them to the lips of youth-to the young man whom Sir James had then been anxious to introduce into public life.

soldiers was absolutely increased at the arbitrary wish of a war minister in order to bribe the publicans to vote for government candidates, though every honourable gentleman in this House must be perfectly aware that their predecessors had passed the Act by which that increase of allowance was constitutionally made, and that the Act had been for some time in operation. The public did believe that barracks were built and contracts given when contracts were never entered into, and barracks were never built. More than that, the public really did believe that my Lord Derby had subscribed £20,000 to a fund to manage the elections. The Earl of Derby has treated that assertion quoted by the right hon. gentleman with silent contempt. All the other assertions made at the time have been answered in detail, and therefore I suppose he thought the time might come when, the subject being fairly before the House, he could leave it to me to say for him what I do say now, that the statement was an impudent fabrication. But what are all these contracts with innkeepers to the compact with the Pope? Next to nothing. Sir, it is not an agreeable duty to have to listen until parliament meets to statements made by privy councillors, by men who have filled the highest offices of the state, and who for aught I know may be about to fill high offices of state, but upon which, the moment parliament meets, every one is silent. Neither the mover nor the seconder of this great indictment of want of confidence condescends even to mention them. And yet the charge is a weighty one."

"When I read that charge upon the ministry," said Mr. Disraeli, amid the loud laughter of the House, " which, I was told, was to be the basis of a vote of want of confidence, and which was made without the slightest foundation and with a bitterness which seemed to me to be perfectly gratuitous, I naturally said, 'Young men will be young men.' Youth will be, as we all know, somewhat reckless in assertion; and when we are juvenile and curly, one takes a pride in sarcasm and invective. One feels some interest in a young relative of a distinguished member of this House; and although the statements were not very agreeable to Her Majesty's ministers, I felt that he was a chip of the old block. I felt and I hope my colleagues shared in the sentiment—that when that young gentleman entered this House, he might, when gazing upon the venerable form and listening to the accents of benignant wisdom that fell, and always fall, from the right hon. gentleman the member for Carlisle, he might learn how reckless assertion in time might mature into accuracy of statement, Mr. Disraeli then touched upon the and how bitterness and invective, how-charge, that the diplomatic negotiations to ever organic, can be controlled by the prevent war between France and Austria vicissitudes of a wise experience.

The public have really believed that a corrupt administration has been obtaining returns from the hustings by the vilest means, and for the most infamous

had failed. Were the Conservatives, he asked, singular in that respect? How about the negotiations which had preceded the Crimean war? Had not the cabinet which possessed such men as Lord Aber

deen, Lord Clarendon, Lord Palmerston, | exchequer, was that because they had and Lord John Russell-the cabinet of failed in the question of parliamentary "all the talents"-failed in negotiation? reform, therefore they were not entitled Yet that cabinet had possessed every to deal again with the subject, which advantage; it was filled by experienced they undoubtedly would do if continued statesmen, it had a parliamentary majority, in office. This gave Mr. Disraeli an and it had a patriotic Opposition. "You opportunity of launching forth against had," sneered Mr. Disraeli, "an Opposition Lord John Russell, who sat, all smiles, numerous and fairly ambitious; but in the below the gangway. midst of your negotiations that Opposition "There were great objections," said Mr. did not bring forward votes of want of Disraeli alluding to his bill, "to details, confidence, nor propose cunning resolutions but still details no doubt of importance, to embarrass the public service. We aided urged against that measure. It was said, you in your difficulties, and supported you for instance, that it would disfranchise heartily and truly. Is there any one can county freeholders living in towns, that murmur 'No'? I defy any man to bring it would enable votes to be given by an instance during that war in which we papers, and other objections were made to brought forward a single motion to em- it. Admitting, for the sake of argument, barrass you; and when by your general that these propositions perfectly deserved misgovernment and misconduct of the war the condemnation they received, have no there arose a public outcry which called propositions to amend the representation for your fall, it was a member on your own of the people been coupled and connected side of the House who struck the blow, with propositions which were equally unand it was by the votes of several mem- successful and equally condemned? Why bers of the Liberal party that you were don't we hear of them? Why are we ejected from office. I hardly know always told of our unhappy proposal to who are our rivals; still less do I know who disfranchise freeholders and to give votes are to be our successors. If it is the noble by papers? The noble lord the member lord (Lord Palmerston) and his friends, I for the city has been in office almost all might contrast his policy with ours, his his life; he has had a monopoly of this failures with ours, and make out a case question of reform; he has been handling upon which the House might adjudicate. it and fumbling it as long as I can rememBut then the noble lord-who lives not ber. What, then, has he done? He has in the good old days of constitutional twice brought forward reform bills, and rivalry, but in the days of reconciled twice unsuccessfully. He proposed at one sections will tell the House, 'You cannot time-he, the great patron of the working judge of my resources by the gentlemen classes-to disfranchise all the freemen in who are sitting near me; others will England. Why should not that proposicome to my aid, and by their unquestioned tion be urged as a reason for no longer abilities and their varied experience, and intrusting him with the preparation of a with the bright evidence of their triumphant reform bill? In one bill he introduced careers, I shall form an administration which a proposition hostile to the very principle will put you out as the glorious sun does a on which representative government is farthing rushlight, and the whole country founded, and alien to the spirit of the will immediately see that they have a constitution-representation by minorities. strong government entitled to their con- If there ever was a proposition received fidence.'

The next charge against the government, proceeded the chancellor of the

with universal condemnation, that was it. Why should not that disqualify the noble lord from meddling again with the sacred

question of reform? The noble lord, who | him, Lord Palmerston was sent for by Her cannot for a moment tolerate government Majesty, and the following government was by a minority, within my memory sat on framed. We give only its more prominent. these benches, and led this House as prime members :minister, in an avowed minority, resting entirely on the counsel and the support which he received from Sir R. Peel. * The noble lord, who is so constant in his

First Lord of the Treasury,. Viscount Palmerston.
Lord Chancellor, .
Lord Campbell.

Gladstone.

Sir G. C. Lewis.

Lord President of the Council, Earl Granville.
Lord Privy Seal, . . . Duke of Argyle.
Chancellor of the Exchequer, { Right Hon. W. E.
Home Secretary,
Foreign Secretary,
Colonial Secretary,
War Secretary,.
Indian Secretary, .

Lord J. Russell.

Duke of Newcastle.

Right. Hon. Sidney

Herbert.
Sir C. Wood.

Chancellor of the Duchy of Sir G. Grey.

Lancaster,
Postmaster-General,
First Lord of the Admiralty,

denunciations of government by a minority,
himself proposed to change the English
constitution, and give representation to
minorities at the hustings. I suppose he
is the only person who can be intrusted
with the preparation of a reform bill,
because the other noble lord, the member
for Tiverton, does not like the subject at
all. It is one to which he does not
conceal his disinclination. We, who at
least have prepared and introduced a Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland,
measure which would more than have
Chief Secretary for Ireland,
doubled the constituency of the kingdom,
are never to be allowed to give our opinions
on a measure of this kind, while the noble
lord, who scarcely conceals his opinion that
all parliamentary reform is a bad thing,
and who tells you that if you are to have
it you shall have as little as possible, is
the popular candidate for the command of
what we were told yesterday are now 'the
united sections of the Liberal party.' I
congratulate the honourable member for
Birmingham (Mr. Bright) on the lamb-
like manner in which he abdicated those
portentous opinions which a while ago
frighted the island from its propriety."

The debate lasted three nights, though Mr. Disraeli was anxious for the House to divide on the first night. It was not till the 10th of June that members went into the lobby, and gave their names to the clerks. On a division the numbers were 323 for the amendment, 310 against it; majority for the government, 13.

Upon this defeat the Conservatives resigned. On the failure of Lord Granville to form an administration owing to the refusal of Lord John Russell to serve under

See the history of the Russell government, formed in 1846, as stated in this work.

VOL. I.

Earl of Elgin
Duke of Somerset.
Earl of Carlisle.

Mr. Cardwell. The Board of Trade was offered to Mr. Cobden, but declined; upon his refusal the post was filled by Mr. Milner Gibson. It is worthy of notice that between the June of 1846 and the July of 1859 no less than six changes of ministry had occurred.

Mr. Disraeli was not one of those leaders who, in the hour of defeat, abandon all hopes of future success, and by placidly resigning themselves to failure damp the ardour of their followers. He still believed in the fortunes of the Conservative party, and if that party were only patient and united a great future, he declared, was open before them. Speaking at a dinner given to the late ministry at Merchant Taylors' Hall he alluded to the subject. Since the reform bill the Tory leaders had been four times. recalled to office; and though their rule had been brief, Conservatism had gained in sympathy and influence throughout the country. "The Conservative party," said Mr. Disraeli (July 16, 1859), “is now a great confederation, prepared to assist progress and to resist revolution. We have arrived at this commanding position at the very moment when it has devolved upon us to abandon power; but there is no inconsistency in the situation if we examine

57