to set aside the severe judgment pronounced upon
this proceeding by the Universal opinion of contemporaries, including
Lord John's own closest political allies. That a minister should run
away from a hostile motion upon affairs for which responsibility was
collective, and this without a word of consultation with a single
colleague, is a transaction happily without a precedent in the history
of modern English cabinets.[339] It opened an intricate and unexpected
chapter of affairs.

The ministerial crisis of 1855 was unusually prolonged; it was
interesting as a drama of character and motive; it marked a decisive
stage in the evolution of party, and it was one of the turning points in
the career of the subject of this biography. Fortunately for us, Mr.
Gladstone has told in his own way the whole story of what he calls this
'sharp and difficult passage in public affairs,' and he might have added
that it was a sharp passage in his own life. His narrative, with the
omission of some details now dead and indifferent, and of a certain
number of repetitions, is the basis of this chapter.

I

LORD JOHN'S RESIGNATION

On the day following Lord John's letter the cabinet met, and the prime
minister told them that at first he thought it meant the break-up of the
government, but on further consideration he thought they should hold on,
if it could be done with honour and utility. Newcastle suggested his own
resignation, and the substitution of Lord Palmerston in his place.
Palmerston agreed that the country, rightly or wrongly, wished to see
him at the war office, but he was ready to do whatever his colleagues
thought best. The whigs thought resignation necessary. Mr. Gladstone
thought otherwise, and scouted the suggestion that as Newcastle was
willing to resign, Lord John might come back. Lord John himself actually
sent a sort of message to know whether he should attend the cabinet. In
the end Lord Aberdeen carried all their resignations to the Queen. These
she declined to accept, and she 'urged with the greatest eagerness that
the decision should be reconsidered.' It is hard at this distance of
time to understand how any cabinet under national circumstances of such
gravity could have thought of the ignominy of taking to flight from a
motion of censure, whatever a single colleague like Lord John Russell
might deem honourable. On pressure from the Queen, the whigs in the