1854.]

PUBLIC FRENZY.

309

before this war commenced? (Applause and cries of 'No.) Rely upon it that the verdict of events will be given, if there can be no verdict to-day. And that verdict of events will be given in our favour." (Cheers.)

The meeting unanimously tendered to Mr. Bright a vote of thanks "for the manliness with which he has stood forward in the face of such a meeting as that we have left, to avow his unflinching attachment to those principles which have hitherto guided his conduct, and will continue to guide him."

Mr. Cobden more than once told Mr. Bright that when the people themselves were in a state of frenzy, when their reason seemed as if dethroned, it was useless to argue with them, and he recommended Mr. Bright to wait until there came a cooler and a more reasonable time. Cobden meanwhile looked on sad and dejected, waiting the termination of the strife, but Bright could not look on calmly when he read of the shocking slaughter of his countrymen, and of fields covered with the dead. He availed himself of every opportunity of entering his protest against the continuance of this useless war, which entailed the shedding of so much blood, and the waste of vast treasure.

There are few things in history so noble and, at the same time, so tenderly moving as the incidents in Mr. Bright's life. There is a sincerity and a reality in everything that he says. His pathos is no bright cold gleam of the imagination, but bursts warm from the heart. It would be difficult to find, in the annals of any country, an instance of more splendid popularity than Mr. Bright's up to the breaking out of this war; and yet, perhaps, there never was an occasion upon which the fickleness of popular favour was more strikingly or basely exemplified. Yet through all that stormy time he never swerved for a moment from the position he had assumed. Nothing in his life was so noble as his attitude towards the warlike spirit of 1855. Previously his ears were filled with the praises of his countrymen. Now, however, he found himself cast out by auditories who had hung on his very words. Amid all this he never flinched from the path of duty.

One of Mr. Bright's most powerful and profound speeches was delivered in the House of Commons on the 22nd of December, 1854. Certainly the House was not with him; that was of course impossible. He had, however, the most deferential attention, deepening every instant. The rapid piling up of his charges, the accumulation of his proofs, the cogency of his argument, and the impetuosity of his conclusions equalled anything of the kind yet delivered. It was as superior to any mere parliamentary vituperation as the subject itself was

superior to the trivial and evanescent personalities that impart piquancy to individual exhibitors in the public arena. It was in vain that official callousness assumed an unconsciousness of its force. Before he had got half into the speech, almost every man on the ministerial bench had turned round in his seat, and gazed at the speaker. Lord John Russell tried desperately to do the dignified, and covered his face with his hands, which he occasionally removed to attempt a spasmodic laugh; but when Mr. Bright came to talk of Colonel Boyle and the widow, and the five little orphans, the tears started to the eyes of many a brave man who heard him, and Lord John laughed no more.

"We all know what we have lost in this House," remarked Mr. Bright. "Here sitting near me, very often sat the member for Frome (Colonel Boyle). I met him a short time before he went out at Mr. Westerton's, the bookseller's, near Hyde Park Corner. I asked him whether he was going out? He answered, he was afraid he was; not afraid in the sense of personal fear-he knew not that; but he said, with a look and a tone shall never forget, 'It is not a light matter for a man who has a wife and five children.' The stormy Euxine is his grave; his wife is a widow, his children fatherless. On the other side of the House sat a member with whom I was not acquainted, who has lost his life (Colonel Blair). Who is there that does not recollect his frank, courageous, and manly countenance? I doubt whether there were any men on either side of the House who were more capable of fixing the goodwill and affection of those with whom they were associated. Well, but the place that knew him shall know him no more for ever.'

At the outset of Mr. Bright's speech Lord Palmerston "had pulled his hat over his eyes, folded his arms, and thrown himself back in his seat-his custom always of an afternoon, especially when afternoon gets towards next morning. But case-hardened as he was to every emotion, inured by fifty consecutive years of parliamentary fighting on both sides, for and against almost every cause, he was so completely roused by Mr. Bright that he could not maintain even the sham of seeming torpidity from the most casual observer. True, he too tried to laugh-not, like Lord John, at that part of Mr. Bright's speech which spoke of the accuracy of his own judgment, but at that passage when the member for Manchester talked of the member for Tiverton upsetting the New Testament in a couple of sentences at an agricultural dinner. Short-lived, however, was the merriment. For presently Mr. Bright passed on to the buffooneries at the Reform Club,' and contrasted the general flippant levity of this Ministry, amidst the grief and mourning that then filled the land, with the grave decorum of Peel, even in the shadow of an anticipated war; and he laughed no more. As for Mr. Gladstone he seemed much distressed. With the two exceptions, Disraeli and Graham, everybody was deeply affected.

1854.]

A POWERFUL SPEECH.

311

This extraordinary Philippic did not last more than half an hour, yet all the Coalition could not furnish a debater to reply to it. The consternation of Ministers as they hurriedly whispered when Bright sat down, the painful silence (far more significant than the most tumultuous applause) that pervaded the benches, as if there had been affirmed some dread calamity for which there was neither denial nor remedy-all told emphatically that Bright's point was the point."

"I am not, nor did I ever pretend to be, a statesman," said Mr. Bright; "but that character is so tainted and so equivocal in our day, that I am not sure that a pure and honourable ambition would aspire to it. I have not enjoyed for thirty years, like these noble Lords, the emoluments of office. I have not set my sails to every passing breeze. I am a plain and simple citizen, sent here by one of the foremost constituencies of the Empire, representing, feebly perhaps, but honestly, the opinions of very many, and the true interests of all that have sent me here. Let it not be said that I am alone in my condemnation of this war, or of an incompetent and guilty Ministry. And, even if I were alone, if my voice were the solitary one raised amid the din of arms and the clamours of a venal press, I should have the consolation I have to-night-and which I trust will be mine to the last moment of my existence-the priceless consolation that I have never uttered one word that could promote the squandering of my country's treasure, or the spilling of one single drop of my country's blood.'

CHAPTER XXXII.

THE CRIMEAN WAR.

Lord Russell's Oxford Reform Bill-Mismanagement in the Crimea-Proposals of Peace Mr. Bright with his Constituents-Discussing the Subject of the Prosecution of the War-With his Townsmen-Failing Health-Letter to his Constituents and the Reply-The Termination of the War.

MR. BRIGHT's public speaking during the Anti-Corn-Law crusade was certainly powerful, still he had amazingly advanced in force and finish since that time. The attention he exacted from the House of Commons, notwithstanding the unpopularity of his views on the question of war, was the best tribute to his great abilities. Indeed, some short time before this date, Lord John Russell, at a political dinner in his own house, said he considered Mr. John Bright to be the most powerful speaker in the House of Commons.

During the session Lord John Russell introduced his Oxford Reform Bill, which was intended to make further provision for the good government and extension of the University of Oxford and its colleges. Mr. Bright, in opposing this measure, remarked that ::

"It seemed to him that two principles had been at work in the formation of this Bill, which was the result of a compromise between them, and he thought it was a question whether a Cabinet that could not agree on the fundamental principles of a measure should bring it forward. He felt a repugnance to assist in the tinkering amendment of an institution from which, though national, he as a Dissenter was excluded, and with which he had no sympathy. You do not exclude us when you send your tax-gatherers round, or when you ask for the performance of the duties of citizenship; you do not exclude us from the statistical tables of your population, of your industry, of your wealth, of your renown. You take all your population in, and say, 'This is a great, an united people, which are called the British people;' and you declare in your speeches and perorations that you are proud to rule over such a nation. But when you come to the question of education in the institutions which you call national Universities, then you, the House of Commons, and you the Liberal-Conservative, or the Conservative and Liberal Administration-you who occupy the offices from which you ignominiously ejected your predecessors-you who say there are no men to come after you-you ask us to accept a Bill of this pusillanimous and tinkering character, insulting, as I have already described it, to one-half the population of the country.'

Mr. Bright also, during this session, supported a bill for the repeal of the stamp duty on newspapers and periodicals, and he pointed out how the spread of knowledge and education was seriously retarded by the existing law.

1855.]

SOIRÉE AT MANCHESTER.

313

Mr. Berkeley introduced a Bill in favour of the Ballot, and Mr. Bright, in supporting it, expressed the opinion that intimidation prevailed at almost all the contested elections in the United Kingdom. Scenes took place at contested elections which were not only degrading to the country, but to human nature itself. He believed that so great was this evil, that it very much warped all their efforts, whether by education or by religious influence, to improve the standard of morality, patriotism, and honourable feeling amongst the people. Moreover, no harm would arise from the experiment of the Ballot, while a candidate who could not then get a vote by intimidation or threats might get one by kindness, argument, and persuasion. The Bill was thrown out by a narrow majority.

Sir W. Clay brought in a measure to abolish Church Rates. Mr. Bright gave it his support, but it was lost by a majority of 27.

In the Estimates it was proposed to grant £38,745 to defray the expenses of the Nonconforming, Seceding, and Protestant Dissenting ministers in Ireland. Mr. Bright objected to the grant, but the vote was carried by a majority of 87.

In January, 1855, the members of the Liberal party of Manchester got up a soirée in the Corn Exchange in honour of Messrs. Gibson and Bright, and amongst other gentlemen present were Messrs. R. Cobden, John Cheetham, M.P., Joseph Crook, M.P., Edward Miall, M.P., James Kershaw, M.P.; George Hadfield, M.P., L. Heyworth, M.P., the Duke de Rousellon, Major-General Thompson, and a large number of gentlemen from the surrounding towns. Mr. George Wilson presided.

"I know I am opposed to many of my countrymen," remarked Mr. Bright in his speech; "I am opposed doubtless to many in Manchester, and to some even in this audience, but that opposition, that discordance, will last only for a time. (Applause.) You know that I have never flattered either court or cabinet, and I will not now stoop to flatter even the people. (Cheers.) I know that passion forms no part of reason, and can be no solid foundation for the truth. behold the abyss into which multitudes would plunge the country. If I cannot save them from it, if they will not save themselves, at least I will warn them of their danger, and I will be no partner in the deeds which I am convinced in my conscience will receive, as they well merit, the condemnation of posterity." (Tremendous cheers.)

At the annual meeting of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, in February, 1855, Mr Bright made an opportune speech on the general commercial consequences of the war, but more especially on the influence it exercised over the price of food,