all the
harm he can. Never certainly was there such a Government as this,
so constituted, so headed--a chief with an imposing exterior, a
commanding eloquence, and a character[5] below contempt, seduced
and governed by anybody who will minister to his vanity and
presume upon his facility.
[5] By character I mean what the French call _caractere_,
not that he is wanting in honour and honesty, nor in
ability, but in resolution and strength of mind.
There has been nothing remarkable in either House of Parliament
but an attack made by Londonderry on Plunket, who gave him so
terrific a dressing that it required to be as _pachydermatous_ as
he is to stand it. He is, however, a glutton, for he took it all,
and seemed to like it. I dined with Madame de Lieven a day or two
ago, and was talking to her about politics and political events,
and particularly about the memoirs, or journal, or whatever it
be, that she has written. She said she had done so very
irregularly, but that what she regretted was not having kept more
exact records of the events and transactions of the Belgian
question (which is not yet settled), that it was in its
circumstances the most curious that could be, and exhibited more
remarkable manifestations of character and 'du coeur humain,' as
well as of politics generally, than any course of events she
knew. I asked her why she did not give them now. She said it was
impossible, that the 'nuances' were so delicate and so numerous,
the details so nice and so varying, that unless caught at the
moment they escaped, and it was impossible to collect them again.
March 9th, 1832 {p.266}
Went to Lord Holland's the other night, and had a violent battle
with him on politics. Nobody so violent as he, and curious as
exhibiting the opinions of the ultras of the party. About making
Peers--wanted to know what Harrowby's real object was. I told him
none but to prevent what he thought an enormous evil. What did it
signify (he said) whether Peers were made now or later? that the
present House of Lords never could go on with a Reformed
Parliament, it being opposed to all the wants and wishes of the
people, hating the abolition of tithes, the press, and the French
Revolution, and that in order to make it harmonise with the
Reformed Parliament it must be amended by an infusion of a more
Liberal cast. This was the spirit of his harangue, which might
have been easily answered, for it all goes upon
|