lexion may have
induced Mr. Perceval to soften it. He made an attack upon Peel
(that is, upon somebody whom they concluded to be Peel),
reproaching him with sacrificing his conscience to political
objects in consenting to Catholic emancipation, not _totidem
verbis_, but in words to this effect. Hook's sermon appears to
have been the stronger of the two. He told the Queen that the
Church would endure let what would happen to the throne. On her
return to Buckingham House, Normanby, who had been at the chapel,
said to her, 'Did not your Majesty find it very hot?' She said,
'Yes, and the sermon was very hot too.'

[18] [Afterwards Dean of Chichester, and author of the
'Lives of the Archbishops.']

July 28th, 1838 {p.117}

The letters between Lord Palmerston and Mr. Urquhart which
appeared two days ago in the 'Times,' have made a very great
sensation, and thrown the friends of the former into great alarm.
Urquhart's letter is so enormously long, so overlaid with matter,
and so stuffed with acrimonious abuse, that it is difficult to
seize the points of it; but that to which general attention is
directed is the positive assertion of Lord Palmerston that he had
nothing to do with the 'Portfolio,' and the announcement of
Urquhart that in consequence of such denegation he will
demonstrate that Palmerston had everything to do with it. He is
said to make exceedingly light of it, and asserts that he can
clear himself of all the imputations Mr. Urquhart seeks to cast
upon him. He has, however, committed a great blunder in entering
into a paper war at all. In his letter he correctly lays down the
principle of the irresponsibility and omnipotence of a Secretary
of State in relation to his agents, and there he ought to have
stopped, and, acting on that principle, have declined any
controversy; but he entered into it, and descended from his
pedestal; and, though his letter is clever and well written,
there are some very weak points in it, and some things which
incline one to doubt his veracity. Who, for example, can believe
that when Strangways[19] gave him a letter from Urquhart
containing (as he informed him) a statement of his conduct, which
conduct he thought so reprehensible that he had desired
Strangways to admonish and caution him, he should have put this
letter in his pocket, and not even have broken the seal till a
long time after? The Government people are evidently in great
consternation, and it is very