ever heard.'
'Gladstone,' said Lord Aberdeen later (1856) 'does not weigh well
against one another different arguments, each of which has a real
foundation. But he is unrivalled in his power of proving that a specious
argument has no real foundation. On the Succession bill the whole
cabinet was against him. He delivered to us much the same speech as he
made in the House of Commons. At its close we were all convinced.'[286]

Differences that might easily become serious speedily arose upon details
in the minds of two or three of them, and for some days the prime
minister regarded the undertaking as not only difficult but perilous.
Sir Charles Wood, in cabinet (April 11), strongly disapproved of the
extension of income-tax to Ireland, and to the lowering of the exemption
line. On Ireland the plan would lay more than half a million of new
taxation, whereas much of the relief, such as soap and assessed taxes,
would not touch her.[287] Palmerston thought it a great plan, perfectly
just, and admirably put together, only it opened too many points of
attack, and it could never be carried: Disraeli was on the watch, the
Irish would join him, so would the radicals, while the succession duty,
to which Palmerston individually had great objection, would estrange
many conservatives. Lord John Russell perceived difficulties, but he did
not see an alternative. Graham then fell in, disliked the twofold
extension of the income-tax, and thought they should only take away half
the soap-tax. Lord Lansdowne (a great Irish landlord) agreed with him.
Mr. Gladstone told them that he was willing to propose whatever the
cabinet might decide on, except one thing, namely, the breaking up of
the basis of the income-tax: that he could not be a party to; he should
regard it as a high political offence. With this reservation he should
follow their judgment, but he strongly adhered to his whole plan. Lord
Aberdeen said, 'You must take care your proposals are not unpopular
ones.' Mr. Gladstone replied that it was after applying the test of
popularity, that he was convinced the budget would be damaged beforehand
by some of the small changes that had been suggested.

At the end of a long and interesting discussion, there stood for the
whole budget Lord John, Newcastle, Clarendon, Molesworth, Gladstone,
with Argyll and Aberdeen more or less favourable; for dropping the two
extensions of income-tax and keeping half the soap duty, Lansdowne,
Graham, Wood; mo