Memoirs of the Life of Sir Walter Scott, Bart.
Sir Walter Scott to John Gibson Lockhart, 10 May 1827
“Abbotsford, May 10, 1827.
. . . “To speak seriously of these political
movements, I cannot say that I approve of the dissidents. I understand
Peel had from the King carte blanche for an Anti-Catholic
Administration, and that he could not accept it because there was not strength
enough to form such. What is this but saying in plain
![]()
![]()
| 32 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
![]()
words that the Catholics had the country and the
Question? And because they are defeated in a single question, and one which,
were it to entail no farther consequences, is of wonderfully little import,
they have abandoned the King’s service—given up the citadel because an
exterior work was carried, and marched out into Opposition. I can’t think
this was right. They ought either to have made a stand without Canning, or a stand with him; for to abdicate
as they have done was the way to subject the country to all the future
experiments which this Catholic Emancipation may lead those that now carry it
to attempt, and which may prove worse, far worse, than any thing connected with
the Question itself. Thus says the old Scotch Tory. But I for one do not believe it was the question of Emancipation, or any
public question, which carried them out. I believe the predominant motive in
the bosom of every one of them was personal hostility to
Canning, and that with more prudence, less arbitrary
manners, and more attention to the feelings of his colleagues, he would have
stepped nem. con. into the situation
of Prime Minister, for which his eloquence and talent naturally point him out.
They objected to the man more than the statesman, and the Duke of Wellington, more frank than the rest,
almost owns that the quarrel was personal. Now, acting upon that, which was, I
am convinced, the real ground, I cannot think the
dissidents acted well and wisely. It is very possible that they might not have
been able to go on with Canning; but I think they were
bound, as loyal subjects and patriots, to ascertain that continuing in the
Cabinet with him as Premier was impossible, before they took a step which may
change the whole policy, perhaps eventually the whole destiny of the realm, and
lead to the prevalence of those principles which the dis-![]()
| CANNING, &c.—MAY, 1827. | 33 |
![]()
sidents have uniformly represented as
destructive to the interests of Britain. I think they were bound to have made a
trial before throwing Canning, and alas! both the King and
the country, into the hand of the Whigs. These are the sort of truths more
visible to the lookers-on than to those who play.
“As for Canning, with his immense talent, wit, and eloquence, he
unhappily wants prudence and patience, and in his eager desire to scramble to
the highest point, is not sufficiently select as to his assistants. The
Queen’s affair is an example of
this—Lord Castlereagh’s was
another. In both he threw himself back by an over-eager desire to press
forward, and something of the kind must have been employed now. It cannot be
denied that he has placed himself (perhaps more from compulsion than choice) in
a situation which greatly endangers his character. Still, however, he has that
character to maintain, and unluckily it is all we have to rest upon as things
go. The sons of Zeruiah would be otherwise too many for
us. It is possible, though I doubt it, that the Whigs will be satisfied with
their share of orts and grains,
and content themselves with feeding out of the trough without overturning it.
My feeling, were I in the House of Commons, would lead me to stand up and
declare that I supported Canning so far, and so far only,
as he continued to preserve and maintain the principles which he had hitherto
professed—that my allegiance could not be irredeemably pledged to him, because
his camp was filled with those against whom I had formerly waged battle under
his command—that, however, it should not be mere apprehension of evil that
would make me start off—reserving to myself to do what should be called for
when the crisis arrived. I think if a number of intelligent and able men were
to hold by Canning on these grounds, they might yet enable
him to ![]()
| 34 | LIFE OF SIR WALTER SCOTT. | |
![]()
collect a Tory force around him, sufficient to
check at least, if not on all points to resist the course of innovation. If my
old friend is wise he will wish to organize such a force, for nothing is more
certain than that if the champion of Anti-Jacobinism should stoop to become the
tool of the Whigs, it is not all his brilliancy of talents, eloquence and wit,
which can support him in such a glaring want of consistency. Meliora spero. I do not think
Canning can rely on his Whig confederates, and some
door of reconciliation may open itself as unexpectedly as the present confusion
has arisen.”
George Canning (1770-1827)
Tory statesman; he was foreign minister (1807-1809) and prime minister (1827); a
supporter of Greek independence and Catholic emancipation.
Queen Caroline of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel (1768-1821)
Married the Prince of Wales in 1795 and separated in 1796; her husband instituted
unsuccessful divorce proceedings in 1820 when she refused to surrender her rights as
queen.
Oliver Goldsmith (1728 c.-1774)
Irish miscellaneous writer; his works include
The Vicar of
Wakefield (1766),
The Deserted Village (1770), and
She Stoops to Conquer (1773).
