delible impression. Its point lay in that which nobody before had seemed to perceive, and which now every one applied mentally-and many with eyes following the impulse of the mind-the club-foot of Byron in contrast with the flying feet, so scornfully referred to by Peel, as Turnus. The flush of fierce and angry mortification which passed across the face of Byron-presaging, how truly! his future-the "settled majesty of calm disdain" which dilated the form of Peel, and the quick and assenting perception, not of their school-fellows only, but of an audience made up of the élite of the land, constituted altogether a dramatic episode, brief almost as a flash in duration but of undying memory. Yet both the speakers and the present narrator were then boys only 14 or 15 years old. In after years Byron thus spoke of his school-fellow in one of his letters:

"Peel, the orator and statesman, (that was, or is, or is to be,) was my form-fellow, and we were both at the top of our remove. We were on good terms, but his brother was my intimate friend. There were always great hopes of Peel amongst us all-masters and scholars and he has not disappointed them. As a scholar he was greatly my superior; as a declaimer and actor I was reckoned at least his

equal; as a school-boy out of school I was always in scrapes, he never, and in school he always knew his lessons, and I rarely; but when I knew it, I knew it nearly as well. In general information, history, &c., &c., I think I was his superior, as well as of most boys of my standing."

From Harrow, Peel passed to the University of Oxford, and was entered a commoner of Christ Church. Here, as at school, his classical attainments, to which by diligent study he added much mathematics, secured him honorable distinction, and at the close of the collegiate course he received the double first-class degree, indicating the highest proficiency in classics and mathematics. His life at college was free from the irregularities into which wealth, (and by this time his father had become very rich,) and the evil associations to be found in all colleges too often mislead the inexperience of youth.

Ambitious to found a family, and proud of his promising son, old Sir Robert early set his heart upon making him a public man, and accordingly he had just attained the age of 21, when, through his father's influence he was re

turned to Parliament for the Borough of Cashel, the father then representing, as the son now does, the Borough of Tamworth.

This was in 1809; and at the same time Brougham, Lord Palmerston, Mr. F. Robinson, and Lord Ripon came into the House, in which Canning, Castlereagh, Windham, Tierney, Sheridan, Whitbread, Horner, were already distinguished members. It was at this period that occurred the misunderstanding between Mr. Canning and Lord Castlereagh, then colleagues in the ministry, (consequent on the disastrous expedition to Walcheren,) which led to a duel between these two ministers, and subsequently to the retirement of both from the cabinet, and the resignation of its head, the Duke of Portland.

The administration was reconstructed with Mr. Percival as Chancellor of the

Exchequer, Lord Wellesly, Lord Liverpool, and for the first time, Lord Palmerston, as Secretary of War. At the opening of the Session in 1810, Peel, then in his 22d year, seconded the address; and his speech, as well as subsequent speeches in support of ministers during the Session, were looked upon as promising, but not as indicating any decided superiority. Indeed, Mr. Robinson then, and for some time afterwards, was deemed the superior man, yet the eye of Mr. Percival disscerned the value of young Peel, and appointed him Under Secretary in the Colonial department.

At the Session of 1811 occurred the remarkable discussion on the Currency, brought on by the famous report of the "Bullion Committee," made by Francis Horner. On the 8th May, that eminent man brought forward sixteen resolutions, in which were embodied the conclusions of that Report. The main points of its were-1, that during the suspension of cash payments, the Bank of England should have regard to the state of the foreign Exchanges, as well as to the price of bullion, in the issue of its notes; 2, that the convertibility of all paper into coin is an indispensable restraint upon excessive issues; 3, that a definite period should be fixed for returning to cash payments. These resolutions were violently opposed by the government, by the Bank of England, and especially by men of the class of old Sir Robert Peel, who believed that " Pitt and paper money" had saved England from falling under the arms of France,

Pledge ourselves to believe!" exclaimed Canning. This is, perhaps, more than any man ever before avowed of himself; but certainly more than any man ever openly declared his intention to exact from others. Belief is not usually matter of volition, therefore one should think it cannot reasonably be made matter of undertaking and engagement."

But neither reason nor argument availed. The resolutions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer were carried, and the Commons House of England, in the year 1811, voted in effect, that nobody could believe there was any difference between metallic money and depreciated paper, and the two Peels, father and son, voted with the majority. Old Sir Robert stuck to his faith to the last, and when, in 1819, his son-more assured of his own position, and then unconnected with the administration-carried through his great Currency measure, which gave the lie so effectually to the resolutions of 1811, old Sir Robert mourned over his degeneracy— more, indeed, in sorrow than in angerbut still mourned.

The assassination of Mr. Percival, in the lobby of the House of Commons, (in

May, 1812,) led to a dissolution of the ministry. Lord Liverpool became the Premier and the Duke of Richmond, being appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Mr. Peel was named as the Chief Secretary for that country. That function he exercised till 1818, through a period of very great excitement and difficulty.

The part he had taken in Parliament, in 1812, against Catholic Emancipation, and the ability with which he sustained himself in debate against the eloquence of Canning, the great advocate of the measure, undoubtedly contributed-in addition to his practical business talent-to recommend him to the responsible post of First Secretary. The measures which, in this capacity, he was called upon to propose and to enforce in the House of Commons, exposed him to the fiercest assaults from the friends of Emancipation, and eventually led to a personal difficulty with O'Connell-which resulted in a chal

*

lenge from Mr. Peel-which he left England and crossed over to France, in order to be in a condition to carry out. For causes not essential to our narrative to relate, no duel occurred-Mr. Peel, however, it should be said, was ready. His career as Irish Secretary was distinguished by boldness, and decision of measures and of conduct, but without passion or ill-temper. While discharging the duties of this honorable office, he received, in 1817, the distinguished compliment of being elected the representative in Parliament of the University of Oxford. He was, undoubtedly, mainly indebted to his course on the Catholic question for this high honor. Many years after, when Mr. Canning was prime minister, he enumerated among the sacrifices to which his steady advocacy of the Catholic claims had subjected him, that it had deprived him of what had been “ the fond dream of his ambition," the representation of that University. Mr. Peel resigned his post as Secretary for Ireland, in 1818, and confined himself to his public duties as a member of Parliament, unattached. It was at this period (1819) that he introduced and carried through his great and beneficial measure for reforming the cur rency. Being an independent member of Parliament, though usually supporting the ministry, he was chosen chairman o the committee to which that whole subjec

was entrusted.

In that capacity he brought in resolutions diametrically opposite in doctrines and principles to those to which he had pledged his belief eight years before. "I am ready," said he on that occasion, "to avow, without either shame or remorse, that I went into the inquiry with a very different opinion from that which I at present entertain: for my views of the subject were most materially different when I voted against the resolutions brought forward in 1811 by Mr. Horner. Having gone into this inquiry, I determined to dismiss all former impressions that I might have received, and to obliterate from my memory the vote which I had given some years since, when the same subject was discussed."

The issue of investigations thus candidly entered upon was the introduction of a bill which, under Mr. Peel's advocacy, was carried triumphantly through the House, and became the law of the land. This bill, known as " Peel's Act," required the Bank of England gradually to resume cash payments, and its necessary effect was to banish from circulation all notes under five pounds. This provision, it may be incidentally mentioned, which was designed to be extended to Scotland, was frustrated of its effect there by the Scottish banks, aided by the pen of Walter Scott, under the signature of Malachi Malagrowther.

The influence of this great and bold measure upon the whole property of the kingdom was prodigious, and in proportion was the storm of obloquy which it raised against its author, on the part of those who, having contracted or incurred debts in a depreciated currency, saw them selves compelled by this bill to discharge these debts in coin or its equivalent. Even fourteen years afterwards, when that common libeler Cobbett obtained a seat in the House of Commons, he moved an address to the throne asking the dismissal of Mr. Peel from the Privy Council because of this cash payment act. Such a motion was of course lost-indeed, it only had one second; and such was the strong sense of the unfitness of such a proceeding, that on the motion of Lord Althorpe the almost unprecedented course was adopted by the House, of causing the record of Cobbett's motion to be erased from the journal, upon which, as a matter of course, it had gone.

In 1822, on the resignation by Lord Sidmouth of the Home Department, Mr. Peel was appointed his successor. It

was shortly previous thereto that Sir Samuel Romilly had commenced and partially carried through some of his humane and enlightened attempts to mitigate the severity of the criminal law. In that very year Sir James Mackintosh, following in such illustrious footsteps, carried a motion in the House of Commons, "that this House will, at an early period of the next session of Parliament, take into their most serious consideration the means of increasing the efficacy of the criminal laws by abating their undue rigor." In the ensuing session, Sir James having renewed his motion, upon an intimation from Mr. Peel that the government was about to take the whole subject into consideration, the previous question was carried, and then the matter was put into the control of the ministry, to be introduced in the form and at the time they should judge best.

The death of Lord Castlereagh by his own hand had just, in 1823, restored Mr. Canning to the ministry; and upon the whole a more liberal policy in all things was infused into the government, both in its domestic legislation and foreign relations. Lord Liverpool was still the head of the administration, but with Canning for his Foreign Secretary and Peel for the Home Department. Not only did England break loose from the Holy Alliance as illustrated in particular by its refusal to cooperate with it in aiding Spain to subjugate her former American colonies, and in concurring with the United States in recognizing and fostering the independence of those colonies, and by suffering the alien bill to expire-but at home more liberal views were taken, and liberal measures adopted, in respect to political enactments, to trade, and especially to the criminal law. As falling specially within his department, the proposed reforms in the penal code and criminal law of England were committed to Mr. Peel.

In bringing forward his plans in the House of Commons, Mr. P. did not hesitate in saying that a more splendid name might attend the originator of a new code than could be hoped for by any cautious improver of an old system of law: it was, however, just in itself and encouraging to him, that other members declared that no form more truly valuable could be gained than by steadily pursuing the course in which Mr. Peel himself was proceeding. Mr. Peel's great object was to invigorate by simplifying the penal

code to apportion punishment more equitably to crime-and, following that wise distinction which Montesquieu applauds, "Quand il n'y a point de différence dans la peine, il faut en mettre dans l'espérance de la grace," to mark judiciously the distinctions of guilt by making the difference in punishment matter of legal enactment instead of executive grace.

It has been well said of Mr. Peel, that both "in amending and altering the criminal law, and in condensing and consolidating its diffuse provisions, he followed strictly in the path marked out by the wisest, because the most cautious and practical, of reformers, Lord Bacon, in his proposal to James I. for amending the laws of England."

The general tendency of the alterations effected by Mr. Peel was to diminish, and never materially to increase, the severity of punishments. Transportation for life was made the punishment for several offences before capital, and other offences previously capital were visited with yet lighter punishment. "The amount," says a competent authority, "of the abridgments and reductions in mere volume effected by Mr. Peel, may be judged of from the fact that his repealing statute (which is made a distinct law, affording an easy knowledge of the acts got rid of) has annihilated the principal part of not less than 137 statutes. The parts repealed contained 623 sections, and about 8472 lines. The substance of all this, so far as continued in force at all, is contained in Mr. Peel's four acts, which altogether contain only 152 sections and about 1300 lines-a reduction of about five-sixths."

Mr. Peel acted throughout with the advice and concurrence of technical lawyers, and the approbation and assistance of the judges of the realm; and often, with wise caution and statesmanlike moderation, consented to waive something of the completeness of his own design, out of deference to the doubts or scruples of others. In thus acting, he secured the confidence of the public, while acquiring for himself the character not more of an enlightened than of a safe and practical legislator.

So much in consonance with the feelings of the nation were the general policy and conduct of the administration at this time, that its measures received in Parliament the general support of the Whigs, and out of doors all voices were in its favor. It was analogous to, and almost

contemporaneous with, our " era of good feelings," when Mr. Monroe was reelected President of the United States without opposition, and by the coöperation of all parties.

In the commencement of 1827, physical infirmity compelled the retirement of Lord Liverpool; and then a new modeling of the cabinet became necessary, which resulted in making Mr. Canning Premier, avowedly that, among other things, he might carry out Catholic Emancipation. Lord Liverpool had been its steady opponent. In that opposition Mr. Peel and others of his colleagues shared; and when, instead of an opponent, a zealous friend in the person of Mr. Canning was placed at the head of the government, Mr. Peel and his colleagues resigned. Mr. Peel, as has been seen, had been strenuous in opposition to the Catholics. As far back as 1812, he was the opponent of Mr. Canning, and again in 1817, in the Commons, in his efforts at emancipation; and in 1827 he said in debate that he had not heard, neither could he devise, any securities which would prevent them from overturning the constitution if admitted into Parliament. "We are, indeed, assured that the number returned to Parliament will be very limited. There may be danger, but it will not be very great. You will not have more than ten Roman Catholics in the House, and ten cannot overthrow the establishment! And such are the clumsy securities offered to us! If the Roman Catholics entertain no principles and views hostile to the establishments of the state, admit them to privileges without reference to numbers: if they entertain such, exclude them, not because their number will be limited, but frankly and openly because you cannot trust them." Mr. Peel steadily adhered to these views, resisting all efforts to modify or remove the disabilities of the Catholics; and acted therefore in character in relinquishing his station as Secretary of the Home Department, when Mr. Canning was placed at the head of the government, committed as he was to carry, if he could, Catholic emancipation.

Mr. Canning's career as prime minister was soon cut short by death; and after the brief and feeble intermediate administration of Lord Goderich, (Mr. Frederick Robinson ennobled,) which was broken up by the "untoward event" of Navarino, the Duke of Wellington was called on to form a new ministry. He made Mr. Peel the leader in the Com

mons; and his sagacity having indicated to him that the hour was come when resistance to Catholic emancipation could not much longer be successful, while there was yet time by gracious concession to obtain credit for doing that voluntarily which ere long would be forced from him, be assented to it; and Mr. Peel giving in his adherence and his full support to this long and fiercely opposed measure, it was carried. One of the most memorable things in his speech in the Commons on this occasion, was the admission that even as far back as 1825 his opinions had undergone a great change on this subject; and although, as we have just seen, he actually renounced his seat in Mr. Canning's cabinet because of that eminent person's decided commitment in favor of the Catholic claims, Mr. Peel admitted that his views on the subject did not then materially differ from those of that great minister. The bill was carried through both Houses of Parliament, and received the royal assent on the 23d of April, 1829.

This is the measure which, perhaps more than all others, exposed Mr. Peel to obloquy, more particularly by reason of the avowal so frankly made-so honestly, we must add, since it was sincere that even when still resisting emancipation, he had great scruples and misgiv. ings about his course. Yet evidence of a hesitating assent to the policy which excluded Catholics is to be found in his speech, in 1821, in reply to a noble appeal made to him by Mr. afterwards Lord Plunkett, in the House of Commons, on occasion of his motion for a committee on the subject. Alluding, in his grand and solemn way, to the great men now no more who had advocated Catholic Eman cipation, Mr. Plunkett exclaimed, "Walking before the sacred images of these illustrious dead, as in a public and solemn procession, shall we not dismiss all party feelings, all angry passions and unworthy prejudices?" Then personally addressing himself to Mr. Peel, he said, I assure him that in selecting him, I do it with all the respect due to his talents, to his acquirements, to his integrity, and to his high principles as a statesman and a gentlemen. I am well aware that there is no member likely to be more influential on this subject; and I may add that there is no person whose being confirmed in what I must call unfounded prejudices, is likely to work more serious injury to the country."

Mr. Peel's answer was in a strain not unworthy of such an appeal:

*

*

"He never could hear," he said, "those names mentioned which were ranged in authority against him, as they had been cited in this instance, and feel altogether satisfied. The authorities referred to, made it the paramount duty of every man to examine the grounds of his opinion, and to ascertain that no interested views, no ideas of visionary danger, no irrational hostility to a great class of his fellow-subjects influenced his decision. But if, after such a close and scrutinizing examination of their own motives, he and his friends found it necessary still to retain their opinions, he would trust to the liberality of the right honorable gentlemen for doing them the justice to suppose that it was in the fair and candid exercise of a free judgment concerning matters most important to the religion of the State, that they ventured to differ from him, and the great authorities which he had cited. He could most conscientiously assure the House, that no result of the debate could give him unqualified satisfaction. He was, of course, bound to wish that the opinions which he honestly felt might prevail; but their prevalence must be still mingled with regret. If, on the other hand, the motion succeed, no man who heard him would more cordially rejoice if his predictions proved unfounded, his arguments groundless, and that the result should exemplify the sanguine expectations of the right honorable mover."

Notwithstanding the obvious misgivings indicated by this speech, Mr. Peel defended his withdrawal from the cabinet, 1827, on the appointment of Mr. Canning as Premier, expressly on the ground that he had for eighteen years resisted, on principle, any farther concessions to the Catholics-that the maintenance of the Constitution and the interests of the Established Church required the continuance of the bars to the acquisition of political power by the Catholics, and that by the appointment of Mr. Canning, the transfer of all the influence and power which belong to the office of Prime Minister, and to be brought to bear on this question, was not from one ordinary man to another ordinary man, but from the most able opponent (Lord Liverpool) of the Catholic claims to their most zealous and eloquent advocate. The first consequence of his new course in relation to Emancipation, was the resignation of his seat for the University of Oxford, for which he was indebted to his former opposition to that measure. In despite of strenuous