Produced by Charles Aldarondo, Keren Vergon, Robert Fite and PG

Distributed Proofreaders

LORD ELLENBOROUGH'S DIARY

1828-1830

VOL. II.

  A POLITICAL DIARY
  1828-1830
  BY EDWARD LAW
  LORD ELLENBOROUGH

EDITED BY LORD COLCHESTER

[Illustration: fide et fiducia]

IN TWO VOLUMES VOL. II.

  LONDON
  RICHARD BENTLEY & SON, NEW BURLINGTON STREET
  Publishers in Ordinary to Her Majesty the Queen
  1881

DIARY

April 1, 1829.

The Duke of Wellington wrote to the King to ask if he had any objection toraising the galleries. He had none. So we sent for Sir T. Tyrwhit, and hadhim at the Cabinet dinner to ask him whether he could fix the galleries byfour to-morrow. He said No. So we must do as we can.

Forty foreigners applied for seats to-day after four o'clock.

In the House I made the second reading of the Bills an order of the day atthe desire of Lord Malmesbury and Lord Grey. It is more formal so, but thesecond reading might have been equally well moved without it.

Lord Grey said a few words on presenting a petition expressing a hope to beconvinced on the subject of the Franchise Bill, but laying ground forvoting against it. Lord Malmesbury likewise expressed himself against it.We shall be hard pushed on this Bill. The Duke says we have 122 sure votesand no more upon it.

The Bishop of Chester read prayers, his wife having died about ten daysago. Really some one of the other Bishops might have relieved him.

Lord Shaftesbury, in the absence of the Chancellor, sat as Speaker. I movedthe bills pro formâ for him.

At the Cabinet dinner at Peel's, Peel said the Bishop of Oxford was readyto speak at any time, and wished to follow a violent bishop. He may easilyfind one.

We had much talk about our approaching debates. Peel, after the Duke wasgone, regretted his having taken the line of expressing his anxiety torelieve himself from the obloquy cast upon him, and his having put thatdesire forward as his reason for pressing the second reading of the Bill onThursday. The Duke having said so, we could not back him out. We mightavoid taking the same ground, but we could not alter it.

Aberdeen mentioned the case of the Candian blockade. I am sorry to see hedoes not communicate beforehand now with the Duke. He never looks forwardto the ultimate consequences of his measures. Now he talks of convoyingEnglish ships to Candia, and telling them they may go there safely, and ifstopped shall be indemnified. But if the English ship finds a Russian offCandia, and is warned off, yet persists, under the expectation ofindemnity, we should be obliged to pay the indemnity. The Russians, havinggiven warning, would be justified in taking the vessel.

So if we give convoy, and the convoy ship persists, we should come toblows. All these things should be foreseen. Aberdeen thinks Lièven isignorant of Heyden's having had any orders. He excuses him as having actedin the spirit of the treaty, to avoid the effusion of blood!

One thing is clear; we cannot permit Russia, as a belligerent, to defeatthe objects of the Treaty of London, and yet act with her under thattreaty.

April 2.

Second reading Catholic Relief Bill. T

...

BU KİTABI OKUMAK İÇİN ÜYE OLUN VEYA GİRİŞ YAPIN!


Sitemize Üyelik ÜCRETSİZDİR!