e 1846, when I got the
circulation box with Peel's own memorandum not only arguing in
favour of resignation but intimating his own intention to resign,
and with the Duke of Wellington's in the opposite sense. The duke,
in my opinion, was right and Peel wrong, but he had borne the brunt
of battle already beyond the measure of human strength, and who can
wonder that his heart and soul as well as his physical organisation
needed rest?[176]

DEFEAT OF THE GOVERNMENT

In announcing his retirement to the House (June 29), Peel passed a
magnanimous and magnificent eulogium on Cobden.[177] Strange to say, the
panegyric gave much offence, and among others to Mr. Gladstone. The next
day he entered in his diary:--

Much comment is made upon Peel's declaration about Cobden last
night. My objection to it is that it did not do full justice. For
if his power of discussion has been great and his end good, his
tone has been most harsh and his imputation of bad and vile motives
to honourable men incessant. I do not think the thing was done in a
manner altogether worthy of Peel's mind. But he, like some smaller
men, is, I think, very sensible of the sweetness of the cheers of
opponents.

He describes himself at the time as 'grieved and hurt' at these closing
sentences; and even a year later, in answer to some inquiry from his
father, who still remained protectionist, he wrote: 'July 1, '47.--I do
not know anything about Peel's having repented of his speech about
Cobden; but I hope that he has seen the great objection to which it is,
as I think, fairly open.' Some of his own men who voted for Peel
declared that after this speech they bitterly repented.

PEEL'S TRIBUTE TO COBDEN

The suspected personal significance of the Cobden panegyric is described
in a memorandum written by Mr. Gladstone a few days later (July 12):--

A day or two afterwards I met Lord Stanley crossing the park, and
we had some conversation, first on colonial matters. Then he said,
'Well, I think our friend Peel went rather far last night about
Cobden, did he not?' I stated to him my very deep regret on reading
that passage (as well as what followed about the monopolists), and
that, not for its impolicy but for its injustice. All that he said
was true, but he did not say the whole truth; and the effect of the