; it was one which had
never been entertained or opened by me in connection with this
subject, since the former of the two points had offered an absolute
preliminary bar to the acceptance of office. He, however, explained
himself as follows, that Mr. Disraeli had stated his willingness to
surrender the leadership to Sir James Graham, if he were disposed
to join the government; but that the expressions he had used in his
speech of Thursday[373] (apparently those with respect to parties
in the House and to office), seemed to put it beyond the right of
the government to make any proposal to him. He at the same time
spoke in the highest terms not only of the speech, but of the
position in which he thought it placed Sir James Graham; and he
left me to infer that there would have been, but for the cause
named, a desire to obtain his co-operation as leader of the House
of Commons. With respect to the proposal as one the acceptance of
which would separate me from my friends, he hoped it was not so. It
was one made to me alone, the immediate vacancy being a single one;
but the spirit in which it was made was a desire that it should be
taken to signify the wish of the government progressively to extend
its basis, as far as it could be effected compatibly with
consistency in its opinions. He added that judging from the past he
hoped he might assume that there was no active opposition to the
government on the part of my friends, naming Lord Aberdeen, Sir
James Graham, and the Duke of Newcastle.

I told him with respect to the leadership that I thought it
handsome on the part of Mr. Disraeli to offer to waive it on behalf
of Sir James Graham; that it was a subject which did not enter into
my decision for the reason I had stated; and I hinted also that it
was one on which I could never negotiate or make stipulations. It
was true, I said, I had no broad differences of principle from the
party opposite; on the whole perhaps I differed more from Lord
Palmerston than from almost any one, and this was more on account
of his temper and views of public conduct, than of any political
opinions. Nay more, it would be hard to show broad differences of
public principle between the government and the bench opposite.

RENEWED PROPOSAL OF OFFICE

I sa