ttle in
parliament was hard, but was as nothing to the internal fighting;
and we won it. We likewise succeeded in the plan of uniting the
financial proposals in one bill. To this Spencer Walpole gave
honourable support; and it became a standing rule. The House of
Lords, for its misconduct, was deservedly extinguished, in effect,
as to all matters of finance.

Of the "internal fighting" we have a glimpse in the diary:--

_April 10, '61._--Saw Lord Palmerston and explained to him my
plans, which did not meet his views. A laborious and anxious day.
11.--Cabinet. Explained my case 1-3. Chaos! 12.--Cabinet 1-3. Very
stiff. We 'broke up' in one sense and all but in another.
13.--Cabinet 3-3/4-6. My plan as now framed was accepted, Lord
Palmerston yielding gracefully; Stanley of Alderley almost the
only kicker. The plan of one bill was accepted after fighting.
15.--H. of C., financial statement for three hours. The figures
rather made my head ache. It was the discharge of a long pent-up
excitement. _May 13._--Lord J.R. again sustained me most handsomely
in debate. Lord P. after hearing Graham amended his speech, but
said we must not use any words tending to make this a vote of
confidence. 30.--H. of C. Spoke one hour on omission of clause IV.
[that repealing the paper duty], and voted in 296-281. One of the
greatest nights in the whole of my recollection. _June
1._--Yesterday was a day of subsiding excitement. To-day is the
same. Habit enables me to expel exciting thought, but not the
subtler nervous action which ever comes with a crisis. 7.--To-day's
debate in the H. of L. was a great event for me.

The abiding feature of constitutional interest in the budget of 1861 was
this inclusion of the various financial proposals in a single bill, so
that the Lords must either accept the whole of them, or try the impossible
performance of rejecting the whole of them. This was the affirmation in
practical shape of the resolution of the House of Commons in the previous
year, that it possessed in its own hands the power to remit and impose
taxes, and that the right to frame bills of supply in its own measure,
manner, time, and matter, is a right to be kept inviolable. Until now the
practice had been to make the different taxes the subject of as many
different bills, thus placing it in the power of the Lords to reject a
given tax bi