to deliver such lectures. The difficulties besetting the measure would not be insuperable if both parties laid aside their prejudices.' The bill was subsequently carried through the House.

Before the close of this year Mr. Gladstone published a pamphlet entitled Remarks upon Recent Commercial Legislation. It had been suggested by the expository statement of the revenue from Customs, and other papers lately submitted to Parliament. The author dealt in several aspects with the recent reductions of Customs duty-showing the proportion of the entire trade which they had affected, the entire amount of revenue surrendered, and the particular results of the reductions on revenue and on trade. He also discussed their results upon domestic producers, and examined the policy of these financial measures with special reference to the recent proceedings of foreign Powers in matters of trade. His general conclusion was that English statesmen should use every effort to disburden of all charges, so far as the law was concerned, the materials of industry, and thus enable the workman to approach his work at home on better terms, as the terms in which he entered foreign markets were altered for the worse against him. With a few more years of experimental instruction, such as that afforded by the figures of the statement he had given of the relative growth of the British trade with Europe and the world, such results could not fail to exercise a powerful influence on the intelligence and the

will of governments, and of the nations whom they ruled.

These ideas were speedily to receive a nobler and a fuller acceptance and expansion. On the 4th of December, 1845, the Times announced that Parliament would be summoned for the first week in January, and that the Royal Speech would recommend an immediate consideration of the Corn Laws, preparatory to their total repeal. This startling news took the other daily journals by surprise, and several of them gave it the most direct and positive contradiction. The original announcement, however, was speedily confirmed. The hour had come, and the Corn Laws were doomed. Mr. Gladstone, though unable to mingle in the debates in Parliament during this last episode of a great struggle, was in thorough harmony with the policy of Sir Robert Peel. His investigations and financial experiments for some years back had been tending in this direction, though, with one brought up in the rigid school of Protection, a complete reversal of past policy, and the acceptance of an entirely new commercial régime, could not be the work of a moment. But the time came when he could no longer resist the arguments in favour of Free Trade, and he at once announced his changed convictions. As upon many other occasions in his history, his attitude on the question of the Corn Laws led to the severance of long and closely-cherished political and personal friendships.

Sir Robert Peel having been informed by Lord Stanley and the Duke

of Buccleuch that they could not support a measure for the repeal of the Corn Laws, and being doubtful whether he could conduct the proposal to a successful issue, felt it his duty to tender his resignation to her Majesty. Lord John Russell was accordingly summoned to form a Ministry; but failing in this, the Queen desired Sir Robert Peel to withdraw his resignation. That statesman resumed office, and when the list of the restored Peel Cabinet was made known, it was found that Mr. Gladstone had accepted the post of Colonial Secretary, in the room of Lord Stanley.

Mr. Gladstone's acceptance of office in a Ministry pledged to the repeal of the Corn Laws led to his retirement from the representation of Newark. The Duke of Newcastle was an ardent Protectionist, and could not sanction the candidature of a supporter of Free Trade principles. His patronage was therefore of necessity withdrawn from Mr. Gladstone; but unless his action could have been endorsed by the constituency, the latter would naturally have felt honourable scruples in continuing to represent, merely under the friendship and influence of the Duke, a borough for which he had so long sat upon opposite principles.

The new Minister accordingly issued his retiring address to the electors of Newark, which is dated January 5th, 1846. Its chief paragraph runs thus:'By accepting the office of Secretary of State for the Colonies, I have ceased to be your representative in Parliament. On several accounts I should have been

peculiarly desirous at the present time of giving you an opportunity to pronounce your constitutional judgment on my public conduct, by soliciting at your hands a renewal of the trust which I have already received from you on five successive occasions, and held during a period of thirteen years. But as I have good reason to believe that a candidate recommended to your favour through local connections may ask your suffrages, it becomes my very painful duty to announce to duty to announce to you on that ground alone my retirement from a position which has afforded me so much of honour and of satisfaction.' The right hon. gentleman further goes on to explain that he accepted office because he held that it was for those who believed the Government was acting according to the demands of public duty to testify that belief, however limited their sphere might be, by their co-operation.' He had acted in obedience to the clear and imperious call of public obligation.' An exile from Newark, Mr. Gladstone remained without a seat in the House during the ensuing session; and to this fact is to be attributed the lack of his powerful personal advocacy of the great Government measure of that memorable year.

It is no secret that the most advanced statesman on the Free Trade question in the Peel Cabinet was Mr. Gladstone. The policy of the Government in regard to the great measure of 1846 was largely moulded by him, and his representations of the effects of Free Trade on the industry of the country and the general well-being of the people strengthened

the Premier in his resolve to sweep away the obnoxious Corn Laws. The pamphlet on recent commercial legislation had prepared the way for the later momentous changes; and to Mr. Gladstone is due much of the credit for the speedy consummation of the Free Trade policy of the Peel Ministry. In the official sphere he may be regarded, perhaps, as the leading pioneer of the

movement.

But that terrible calamity in Ireland—the failure of the potato crophad furnished a final argument in the mind of Sir Robert Peel for the abolition of Protection. With the prospect of famine in Ireland-and such a famine as had never been experienced in that island-the Premier saw clearly that the time had come when corn must be admitted into the country free of duty. Moreover, the Anti-Corn Law League was becoming a powerful and irresis tible body, while many influential landlords, both in Great Britain and Ireland, who did not belong to the League, were prepared to extend to Sir Robert Peel their hearty support. The friends of Protection, knowing that the personal power of the Premier was greater, perhaps, than that of any other Minister who has virtually governed this empire, opposed the repeal by every means at their command, legitimate or otherwise. Happily, their efforts were doomed to be frustrated. The question whether Peel ought to have left the passing of the Corn Law Repeal Bill to the Liberals is out of the sphere of practical politics. Free Trade had by no means received the support of every member

of the Liberal party, even up to so late a date as the year preceding that in which it became an actuality; and Sir Robert Peel was placed in a peculiarly favourable position for carrying the measure. Mr. Cobden wrote at this juncture that the Premier had the power, and that it would be disastrous for the country if he hesitated.

But this great Minister did not hesitate. He felt that a crisis had arrived, and he determined to grapple with it. His duty to the country at this period was higher and greater than any fancied loyalty to party. Accordingly, when Parliament assembled, he entered into a detailed explanation of the late Ministerial crisis, and unfolded his proposed measures. The failure of the potato crop, he said, had led to the dissolution. of the late Government, and matters now could brook no further delay. An immediate decision required to be taken on the subject of the Corn Laws; but while the calamity in Ireland had been the immediate cause of his determination, he could not withhold the homage due to the progress of reason and of truth, and frankly confessed that his opinions on the subject of Protection had undergone a great change. The experience of the past three years had confirmed him in his new opinions, and he could not conceal the knowledge of his convictions, however much it might lay him open to the imputation of inconsistency. Though he had been accused of apathy and neglect, he and his colleagues were even then engaged in the most extensive and arduous inquiries into the true condition of Ire

land. As these inquiries had proceeded, he had been driven to the conclusion that the protective policy was unsound, and consequently untenable.

Mr. Gladstone had rendered conspicuous service in these inquiries, as well as in other investigations of a general character which led to the Premier's determination. But it is instructive to note his rival's attitude at this juncture. Speaking in the House of Commons, Mr. Disraeli said: To the opinions which I have expressed in this House in favour of Protection I adhere. They sent me to this House, and if I had relinquished them I should have relinquished my seat also.' It would be an unprofitable task to unravel the many inconsistencies of Lord Beaconsfield's career; but with regard to this present deliverance upon Protection, the curious in such matters may turn back to the records of 1842, when they will discover that at that time he was quite prepared to advocate measures of a Free Trade character. But we must pass on from this important question of the Corn Laws, with the angry controversy to which it gave rise. Sir Robert Peel brought forward his measure, and, after lengthened debates in both Houses, it became law, and grain was admitted into English ports under the new tariff.

Having carried their important Corn Law Repeal scheme, Sir Robert Peel and his colleagues were doomed to fall upon an Irish question. The very day which witnessed the passing of the Corn Law Repeal Act in the House of Lords saw the defeat of the Ministry

in the House of Commons on their bill for the suppression of outrage in Ireland. Being in a minority of 73, Sir Robert Peel tendered his resignation, whereupon Lord John Russell was sent for, and he succeeded in forming a Whig Ministry.

It was not until the brief session in the autumn of 1847 that Mr. Gladstone again appeared in the House of Commons. On the 23rd of July the Queen had dissolved Parliament in person.

The succeeding elections. turned in many notable instances upon ecclesiastical questions, and more especially upon the Maynooth grant. Mr. Gladstone was brought forward for Oxford University. Sir R. H. Inglis was admitted to have a safe seat, so that the contest lay between Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Round. The latter candidate was of the ultra-Protestant and Tory school. The contest excited the keenest interest, and was expected on all hands to be very close. Mr. Gladstone, in his address to the electors of his Alma Mater, confessed that when he entered Parliament, and for many years after, he had struggled for the exclusive support of the national religion by the State, but in vain. The time was against him. I found that scarcely a year passed without the adoption of some fresh measure involving the national recognition, and the national support, of various forms of religion, and in particular that a recent and fresh provision had been made for the propagation from a public chair of Arian or Socinian doctrines. The question remaining for me was,