ord Grey, by which he might consider
himself bound, he might safely consent to such changes as would
make the adjustment of the question no difficult matter; that
with regard to the rejection of the Bill, whatever excitement it
might produce, it was evident the Government had an immediate
remedy; they had only to prorogue Parliament for a week and
make their Peers, and they would _then_ have an excellent
pretext--indeed, so good a one that it was inconceivable to me
that they should hesitate for a moment in adopting that course.
This he did not deny. I then told him of the several
conversations between Lord Harrowby and Lords Grey and Lansdowne,
and mine with Lord Grey; that Lord Harrowby protested against
Lord Grey's availing himself of any disunion among the Opposition
(produced by his support of the second reading) to carry those
points, to resist which would be the sole object of Lord Harrowby
in seceding from his party; and that Lord Grey had said he could
not make a sham resistance. Palmerston said, 'We have brought in
a Bill which we have made as good as we can; it is for you to
propose any alterations you wish to make in it, and if you can
beat us, well and good. There are indeed certain things which, if
carried against us, would be so fatal to the principle of the
Bill that Lord Grey would not consider it worth carrying if so
amended; but on other details he is ready to submit, if they
should be carried against him.' I said that would not do, that I
must refer him to the early negotiations and the disposition
which was then expressed to act upon a principle of mutual
concession; that when Lord Harrowby and his friends were
prepared to concede to its fullest extent the principle of
disfranchisement (though they might propose alterations in a few
particulars), they had a right to expect that the Government
should surrender without fighting some of those equivalents or
compensations which they should look for in the alterations or
additions they might propose. He said that 'while Lord Harrowby
was afraid that Ministers might avail themselves of his weakness
to carry their details, _they_ were afraid lest Lord Harrowby and
his friends should unite with the
ultra-Tories to beat them in Committee on some of the essential
clauses of the Bill.' I replied, then it was fear for fear, and
under the circumstances the best thing was an understanding that
each party should act towards the other in a spirit of good
faith
|