Memoir of Francis Hodgson
John Herman Merivale to Francis Hodgson, [18 November 1834]
And was I not a prophet when I whispered through the hole in
the rock to our good friend,1 ‘Beware of
Brougham’? He has, to be sure,
and I thank Heaven for it, escaped the wreck; but what a goodly and gallant
vessel has foundered under the guidance of this its most splendidly gifted, but
incautious and (may I not add) reckless and unprincipled steersman! I hope I
shall not be accused—certainly not by you—of cant. But really, in
the full confidence of friendship, I cannot but say that I see, in all that is
now passing around us, the fullest confirmation of the persuasion of the utter
insufficiency of man’s corrupt and degraded nature, unaided by the Divine
grace, and by a deep inward conviction of its own weakness. A very
| PARLIAMENTARY REFORM. | 223 |
strong moral principle,
founded on a broad philosophical basis, may to a certain, but a very imperfect,
extent, supply this grand deficiency,—but even this was wanting in the
quarter to which I allude—and the fall, as it is (I am persuaded),
irrevocable, so it will prove most momentous, in the shape of example, to such
as are in a condition to profit by it. You, I am sure, will bear with remarks
such as these, in all their sober seriousness. Very few are there, besides
yourself, to whom I would breathe them.
As for the event itself, whatever may be the immediate
causes—in whatever manner brought about—I have been too long
impressed with the daily increasing conviction of the absolute necessity of
making a firm and determined stand against popular encroachments, now to
hesitate about the duty of every honest citizen, unfettered by party
engagements, to rally round the throne and its chosen ministers, so long at
least as they possess the essential principles of Reform in Church and State
which I presume no minister at the present day can do otherwise than adopt for
the colours of his administration. The only solid ground of difference between
the outgoing and incoming occupiers, that I can discover, is the inviolability
of
224 | MEMOIR OF REV. F. HODGSON. | |
Church property; and upon this ground I am inclined to
believe, though not without occasional misgivings, that the moderate Tories
may, at the present period, securely take their stand. So far as the state of
public feeling through the country at large may be judged of by that of the
metropolis, they are in no danger whatever. Not the smallest excitement in the
populace, the failure of every attempt (so far, at least) to get up the
semblance of a strong public meeting, the non-depression of the Funds, the
general satisfaction upon ‘Change, the unequivocal ebullitions of loyalty
at the City dinner, and even such lesser indications as are afforded by the
hissing of Brougham and cheering of
Lyndhurst (!!!) as they respectively
left the audience chamber, besides other similar demonstrations—all these
are, I think, amply sufficient to warrant the belief that a great and extensive
reaction has taken place, and that the mountebank tricks and grimaces which
have so long been exhibited in high quarters have produced the effect of
irretrievably disgusting even the lowest of that mob which so recently threw up
their caps in applause of the actor.
O but man—proud man—
Drest in a little brief authority,
|
|
LORD MELBOURNE. WILLIAM IV.
|
225 |
Most ignorant of what he’s most assured,
His glassy essence, like an angry ape,
Plays such fantastic tricks before High Heaven
As make the angels weep.
|
Among divers anecdotes, more or less vrais or vraisemblables, the following, which I have just
heard, will amuse you—that the greeting of Majesty to Lord Melbourne,
when he stated the difficulties of their position, was conveyed in the
following nautical terms:—‘My Lord, you need say nothing.
Lord Spencer is gone to Heaven; and
my mind has long been made up that, whenever that event happened, it would
be high time to send you all to the ——.’ By way of
appendix I must state that one of the romances of the day is that it is all a
device to get rid of Brougham, and that the
new Lord Spencer is to return as Premier.
Henry Peter Brougham, first baron Brougham and Vaux (1778-1868)
Educated at Edinburgh University, he was a founder of the
Edinburgh
Review in which he chastised Byron's
Hours of Idleness; he
defended Queen Caroline in her trial for adultery (1820), established the London University
(1828), and was appointed lord chancellor (1830).
John Singleton Copley, baron Lyndhurst (1772-1863)
The son of the American painter; he did legal work for John Murray before succeeding Lord
Eldon as lord chancellor (1827-30, 1834-35, 1841-46); a skilled lawyer, he was also a
political chameleon.
Thomas Denman, first baron Denman (1779-1854)
English barrister and writer for the
Monthly Review; he was MP,
solicitor-general to Queen Caroline (1820), attorney-general (1820), lord chief justice
(1832-1850). Sydney Smith commented, “Denman everybody likes.”
William Lamb, second viscount Melbourne (1779-1848)
English statesman, the son of Lady Melbourne (possibly by the third earl of Egremont) and
husband of Lady Caroline Lamb; he was a Whig MP, prime minister (1834-41), and counsellor
to Queen Victoria.
George John Spencer, second earl Spencer (1758-1834)
Educated at Harrow and Trinity College, Cambridge, he was a Whig MP aligned with Edmund
Burke, first lord of the Admiralty (1794-1801) and home secretary (1806-07). He was a book
collector and patron of the poets John Clare and Herbert Knowles.
John Charles Spencer, third earl Spencer (1782-1845)
English politician, son of the second earl (d. 1834); educated at Harrow and Trinity
College, Cambridge, he was Whig MP for Northamptonshire (1806-34) and chancellor of the
exchequer and leader of the lower house under Lord Grey (1830).