His wish, no doubt, would have been to maintain and perpetuate a cordial understanding with this Power, under whose union with England he wished the education of Europe to be achieved.

But, from causes which I have more or less explained, the French Cabinet had hardly connected itself formally with ours than it began to be uneasy under the connection, and to seek the sympathy of those states against whose policy we had been combating together.

At last arose one of those questions in which the interests of Great Britain were deeply involved. England could not allow the ruler of Egypt to be independent of the Porte under the protection of the French government.

The French government, notwithstanding, aimed at carrying out, more or less gradually, this project, and only wished to do so with such cleverness as not to give us an apparent cause for offense. Lord Palmerston did his utmost to open the eyes of Louis Philippe's ministers as to the futility of their plans, and he had to deal alternately with M. Molé, Marshal Soult, and M. Thiers. Finally, believing he had to do not so much with the ministers of the King of the French as with the king himself, he broke from an ally who wished (as he imagined) to make him a dupe, and successfully opposed France, with the

aid of Austria, Prussia, and Russia, as he had previously opposed those three Powers with the aid of France. In both cases the policy of England triumphed under his auspices; and in both cases the policy of England was a natural policy in conformity with her principles in the one case and with her interests in the other.

It is not, however, to the success which attended his efforts so much as to the mode in which that success was obtained, that as his biographer I wish to draw attention.

There was nothing mean, shifty, underhand, or vacillating in his course. Whatever line he took, he pursued it openly, straightforwardly, firmly. There is hardly a paper he ever signed up to the time of which I am speaking, that every Englishman on reading it would not have said, “Well done, Palmerston!”

His brave yet gentle nature was, indeed, manifest in his boyhood; and I have just received a letter from one of his schoolfellows, which, coming too late to be inserted in the body of this work, shall close its Preface:

Letter from Sir Augustus Clifford.

“WESTFIELD, RYDE, September 21, 1870. “When I went to Harrow in 1797, the late Lord Palmerston was reckoned the best-tempered and most plucky boy in the school, as well as a young man of great promise. We were in the same house, which was Dr. Bromley's, who was then called Old Parr,' and by whom we were often called, when idle, young men of wit and pleasure.'

“ The late Lord De Mauley—then William Ponsonby-Poulett, a son of Lord Poulett, and myself, were fags to Althorp, Duncannon, and Temple, who messed together; and the latter was by far the most merciful and indulgent.

“I can remember well Temple fighting behind school’ a great boy called Salisbury, twice his size, and he would not give in, but was brought home with black eyes and a bloody nose, and Mother Bromley taking care of him. I went to sea shortly after, and though I cannot bear testimony to his future career, I can to the invariable kindness he has always shown me, and the happy hours I have spent in his society.

“Lord Lonsdale and Lord Headfort were also in the same house, and would, I am sure, confirm what

I say.

Believe me, yours very truly,


« ForrigeFortsett »