LORD  BYRON  and  his  TIMES
Documents Biography Criticism

The Creevey Papers
Thomas Creevey to Elizabeth Ord, 18 October 1820

Vol. I. Contents
Ch. I: 1793-1804
Ch. II: 1805
Ch. III: 1805
Ch. IV: 1806-08
Ch. V: 1809
Ch. VI: 1810
Ch. VII: 1811
Ch. VIII: 1812
Ch. IX: 1813-14
Ch X: 1814-15
Ch XI: 1815-16
Ch XII: 1817-18
Ch XIII: 1819-20
Vol. II. Contents
Ch I: 1821
Ch. II: 1822
Ch. III: 1823-24
Ch. IV: 1825-26
Ch. V: 1827
Ch. VI: 1827-28
Ch. VII: 1828
Ch. VIII: 1829
Ch. IX: 1830-31
Ch. X: 1832-33
Ch. XI: 1833
Ch. XII: 1834
Ch XIII: 1835-36
Ch XIV: 1837-38
Creative Commons License

Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Produced by CATH
“House of Lords, 18th Oct., 1 o’clock.

“Alas poor Cole!* I had always a misgiving she would get her death from me, and last night I fear the presentiment was nearly verified. It was a great deal too contemptible to hear the leader of the Whigs, with this damnable Bill of Pains and Penalties before his eyes, meet a question of adjournment with the ridiculous amendment of a shorter adjournment, and without uttering a syllable upon the Bill itself or the circumstances of the time. I was compelled, therefore, to take the field, as no one else seemed inclined to shew. I had not pronounced two sentences before one and all of his troops deserted him. The roar that resounded from every part of the benches behind him (which were very full) was as extraordinary to me as it must have been agreeable to him. . . . As to the speech itself, being right and absolutely necessary to be spoken were its principal merits. I lost my head in the middle of it, and thought I should have been obliged to sit down, tho’ I never was so cheered during any speech I have made in Parliament. Sefton overheard a conversation between Cole and Duncannon at night, in which the latter said—‘Had you come to town a day earlier, an arrangement might have been made, and all

* Note by Mr. Creevey.—“The reason I call Tierney by the name of ‘Cole’ is this. It used to be his constant practice in making his speeches in Parliament to bear particular testimony to his own character—to his being a ‘plain man,’ ‘ an honest man,’ or something of that kind. Having heard him at this work several times, it occurred to me that he had formed himself upon that distinguished model Mrs. Cole, an old lady in one of Foote’s farces, who presided over a female establishment in Covent Garden. Mrs. Cole was always indulging herself with flattering references to her own character.—‘For fourteen years,’ said she, ‘have I lived in the Garden, and no one has said black was the white of my eye. For fourteen years, did I say? Aye, for sixteen years come Lammas Day have I paid scot and lot in the parish of St. Bride’s, and no one has said, “Mrs. Cole, why did you so?” excepting twice I was taken before Mr. Justice Duval, and three times to the Round House.’ Brougham was for many years quite enamoured of the resemblance of the portrait. He christened Abercromby Young Cole, and the whole shabby party ‘the Coles;’ but he has become much more prudent and respectful of late.”

this scene avoided.’—‘No,’ said Cole, ‘I am confident nothing would have stopt
Creevey’s mouth.’ Poor thing! she has not been here to-day, so I suppose she has returned to the sea . . . Lord Donoughmore had a curious conversation with Sefton yesterday, in which the former said the Ministers ought to be impeached for having brought the Bill forward—so compleatly had they deceived him as to their case. He mentioned his visit to Windsor last Sunday, and the difficulty he and his brother had in making the King see that the Bill would never go down. One of the royal arguments was:—‘Why, Lord Sefton has betted Lord Thanet 10 to 1 that the Bill will pass the Lords, and as Lord Sefton is known to be so strongly against the Bill, surely this is quite convincing.’ . . . It was perfectly true that this bet had been made by Sefton with Thanet, which of course greatly enhances the merit of the royal argument. . . .”