Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

cause great difficulty, and possibly disaster, to the Government in the House of Commons. In this conviction Brougham, whom Wellesley had enjoined Littleton to consult in the matter, concurred. The two ministers, without consulting their colleagues, wrote separately to Wellesley and urged him to represent to Grey that he was prepared to abandon the meeting clauses. In the meantime, after the letters had been sent, and before answers could be received, the Cabinet resolved to adhere to the clauses, no mention being made by Brougham of the letter he had written to Wellesley. Wellesley replied to Littleton, "I entirely agree with you, and have written to Lords Grey, Brougham, and Melbourne accordingly." A day or two later he wrote again, "I have looked over the Protection Act, and I think the clauses you enumerate, with the alteration you propose, will answer all purposes." The Irish attorney-general, Blackburne, also concurred with the viceroy as to the expediency of abandoning the meeting clauses. Armed with the viceroy's letter, Littleton now consulted Melbourne and Althorp. Melbourne was evidently surprised at what had been going on, and vexed that Wellesley had not, as he apparently intended, written to himself; but he said to Littleton that "there could be no question that the clauses must be given up, as no Government could ask Parliament for an unconstitutional power in Ireland, the necessity of which the Lord-Lieutenant had been led to disclaim." Althorp said that Lord Grey was likely to refuse any concession, and might even retire if it were pressed; but that the clauses in question would certainly form no part of the new Bill, as he himself was resolved to resign sooner than allow them to be renewed. Littleton then asked Althorp whether it would not be desirable and prudent to see O'Connell and apprise him that the precise form and extent of the measure were not decided upon. "Lord Althorp," says Littleton, in his account of these transactions, "concurred in and sanctioned that step, cautioning me, however, not to commit myself to any detail."

Littleton now set himself to " manage Dan." He sent

1834]

LITTLETON AND O'CONNELL

335

for O'Connell to the Irish Office, and "cautioned him against any unnecessary excitation of the people in Ireland until he should have seen the new Coercion Bill, which would be renewed, but with certain limitations. "He thanked me," continues Littleton, in his narrative, "and promised to consider my communication as strictly private and confidential." This is Littleton's account of the matter. O'Connell, in the House of Commons, declared that the chief secretary's language had been more precise. However, for a few days the negotiation was still kept secret. O'Connell, in consequence of his interview with Littleton and the satisfactory assurances which he thought he had received, withdrew his support from the repeal candidate whom he had started for a seat vacant at Wexford, and cancelled an address to the reformers of England, in which Lord Grey was outrageously vituperated. A day or two after Littleton's interview with O'Connell, the Cabinet met, and Lord Grey laid before it a private letter from the viceroy, in which the latter expressed his readiness to dispense with the meeting clauses. Lord John Russell, on hearing this letter read, remarked that it seemed to be written as an answer to some inquiry, and not as a spontaneous communication, and asked whether any member of the Cabinet had communicated with Wellesley on the subject. Brougham thereupon found himself compelled to acknowledge the share he had had in the transaction. "The oft-tried patience of the veteran chief, on this discovery, gave way. He said afterwards, with warmth, that had he been a younger man he would have turned out the chancellor and gone on, as he might very well have done; but at seventy he did not feel himself equal to the effort, or prepared for the consequences of such a step."1 Lord Grey, however, was not at this time aware of Littleton's communications with O'Connell, and Althorp, who had recommended caution, could not suppose that anything like a pledge had 1 "Life of Melbourne," vol. ii. p. 3. Wellesley's letter was regarded by Lord Grey as a private and confidential one, and he persistently refused to allow it to be presented to Parliament. It was first published in the Edinburgh Review for July 1871, and is reprinted in Lord Hatherton's "Memoir,"

been given. The Cabinet was therefore free to consider Lord Wellesley's letter on its merits, and, in view of the fact that he had assented to the withdrawal of the meeting clauses, in defiance of his judgment formerly expressed, rather in consideration for Parliamentary necessities in England than out of regard for the actual condition of Ireland, it decided, at the prime minister's urgent instance, to renew the Act as it stood with the exception of the courtmartial clauses, which had never been put in operation.

This happened on June 29.1 On the 30th Littleton crossed the House of Commons and communicated what had happened to O'Connell. What passed between them was subsequently a subject of controversy. "You must resign," said O'Connell, as both parties seem to admit. According to Littleton, his answer made no reference to his possible resignation, but simply urged O'Connell to say and do nothing until Lord Grey had made his statement in the House of Lords. As a matter of fact, O'Connell was silent, but he abandoned a motion for the reprinting of a report made by Sir Henry Parnell on Irish disturbances in 1832.

This report was unfavourable to coercive measures. On July 1 Lord Grey introduced the new Coercion Bill in the House of Lords. O'Connell now thought himself absolved from the promise of secrecy which he had given, and on July 3 he told the whole story in the House of Commons. On the 4th Littleton decided to resign, and on the next day his resignation was placed in

1 Some days previously-indeed, immediately after the receipt of Wellesley's letter-Grey had made up his own mind on the point. Wellesley wrote to Littleton on June 25, "I have received a letter from Lord Grey, expressing great aversion to the omission of the meeting clauses, and stating a positive opinion that 'the proposed concession would not facilitate the progress of the Tithe Bill, or of the remaining part of the Coercion Bill, and still less would render it possible to propose any extension of the term of the Coercion Bill.' I should be very unwilling to oppose his opinion, and shall certainly be satisfied with whatever course the Cabinet chooses to adopt " (Hatherton's "Memoir," p. 43). This should have shown Littleton the treacherous character of the ground on which he was standing. He had heard exactly the same from Melbourne and Grey themselves; but he still persisted in believing that the meeting clauses would be abandoned, and he took no steps to inform O'Connell of the difficulties that had arisen.

1834]

RESIGNATION OF LORD GREY

337

Lord Grey's hands. It was not accepted, and a few days afterwards Lord Althorp, in presenting some papers connected with the subject to the House of Commons, declared that Littleton had had reason for stating to O'Connell, at the time of his interview with him, that the question was unsettled and under the consideration of the Cabinet. Nothing was as yet known in Parliament of the share which Brougham had had in the transaction, nor of the encouragement which Littleton had received both from Melbourne and Althorp to believe that they would neither of them be parties to the renewal of the meeting clauses. Littleton accordingly represented to Althorp that some further explanation should be given, in order to put the matter in its true light. Althorp, however, was by this time resolved to resign, and in transmitting his resignation to the king Grey accompanied it with his own. The power

of his ministry was shattered, and he could no longer bear the humiliation inflicted on him by incompetent subordinates and disloyal colleagues. It is difficult fairly to distribute the blame in this remarkable and most instructive episode in the Parliamentary government of Ireland by England. Grey blamed Brougham, Wellesley blamed Melbourne, Littleton blamed O'Connell and the members of the Cabinet who had not fulfilled their pledges. The historian may perhaps blame all a little, and none much.

The great Reform ministry was thus overthrown, and an Irish question had overthrown it. The ministry, it is true, was ultimately reconstructed, but for a time it was dissolved. Lord Grey had resigned, and Althorp, in announcing his own resignation in the House of Commons, at the same time announced that of the prime minister, and stated that in consequence "the administration was at an end." Brougham, however, declared on the same day, in the House of Lords, that he at least had not thought it his duty to retire, and that the only resignations tendered to the king were those of the prime minister and the chancellor of the exchequer. But the ministry was at an end all the same, and if the king had had his way it would never have been reconstructed. On announcing his resignation to the

Y

Cabinet, Grey had handed to Melbourne a summons from the king. The king desired Melbourne to undertake the formation of a new Government, but at the same time called upon him "to enter into communication with the leading individuals of parties, and to endeavour at this crisis to prevail upon them to afford their aid and co-operation towards the formation of an administration upon an enlarged basis, combining the services of the most able and efficient members of each," and specifically desired him to "communicate with the Duke of Wellington, with Sir Robert Peel, with Mr. Stanley, and with others of their respective parties, as well as with those who have hitherto acted with himself and have otherwise supported the administration, and to endeavour to bring them together and to establish a community of purpose." Melbourne, in his reply to the king, pointed out the impracticability of the arrangement suggested, and, having agreed to abandon the meeting clauses of the Coercion Act on which Lord Grey had insisted, he succeeded in persuading Althorp to resume his place as chancellor of the exchequer and leader of the House of Commons.

Althorp's conduct in returning to office was much criticised, but it is not easy to see what other course was open to him. His dislike of office amounted to a positive hatred. But it is a fundamental maxim of constitutional statesmanship that the sovereign must not be left without a Government. Lord Grey had resigned; he had long wanted to retire, and it was perfectly clear that his resignation was final. After all that had occurred, nothing would have induced him to remain in office and consent to the modification of the Coercion Bill. Althorp knew, what possibly no other of his colleagues knew, that Grey had practically made up his mind to retire even before O'Connell had revealed what had passed between himself and Littleton.1 A Tory Government was impossible. The

1 This appears from a letter in the Althorp papers, addressed by Grey to Althorp on June 30, the day after the Cabinet had agreed to adhere to the meeting clauses, but before the Bill had been introduced into the House of Lords, and therefore before O'Connell made his statement in the House of Commons. The letter is too long to give in full, but the following passages may be quoted: "I at present see no way out of our difficulties but that

« ForrigeFortsæt »