The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1865-11-19
A Sketch OF Earl Rus..u.

wa- bern Il 172322; that that h..:; ssrly man
hood was spent in Parliamentary
struggles, the effects of which we feel
but the details of which have long
been forgotten; that he was Cabinet
Minister thirty years ago, and that
thirteen years have elapsed since he
ceased to be Prime Minister Lord
Russell was never distinguished by
that vlgor of body and that exuberant
! elasticity of animal spirits which dis
tinguished Lord Palmerston. The
latter may be truly said to have gone
on improving up to within short
time of his decease, while the greatest
admirer of Lord Russell will hardly
maintain that he has made any pro-
gress for the last thirty years, if, in
deed, we consider him to be now
equal to what he was i'll 1885, when
he was certainly the leading spirit in
the government of Lord Melbourne.
Then again Lord Russell, with all the
instincts of q pure Wing, surrounds
himself with an aristocratic clique,
and does not obtain the sympathies
of the great body of the people He
consohdates the opposition when he
is In power, and does not strengthen
his own government. Indeed, the
Ministry declines under his guidance.
The SIX years when he was Premier
were period of decadence, and so
also was the time during which he
was In Lord Melbourne's government.
Well skilled in the dead lore of the
English constitution, he fails to grasp
the living spirit. His foreign policy
IS copied from the worst phase of Lord
Palmerston's, viz: to persist in offer
ing unwelcome advice to foreign ma
tlons, and, after carrying remonstrance
to the verge of menace, drawing back
when danger is apprehended. His
domestic policy is simply reform, and
his views on this subject have not
hitherto been very acceptable. Be-
sides all these objections, are others
founded upon Earl Russell's treat
ment of his colleagues. Sometimes
he would take momentous steps with
out consulting them, sometimes sacri-
fee them for himself, and sometimes
desert them in their hour of need. In
1850 he wrote the famous and abortive
Dersham letter without consulting his
colleague, or, as Leech rendered it.
he chalked ''No Popery" on Cardinal
Wiseman's door and then ran away.
In 1852 he resigned on account of his
defeat on the Militia bill, and again
without consulting his colleagues.
During the Crimean war he seriously
impaired the stability of the Aberdeen
government by insisting upon his own
appointment as President of the
Council. In January, 1866, forsee-
ing that the Aberdeen government
would fall, and, hoping to be entrust-
ed with the chief Office, he abandon
ed his colleagues, and denounced
them for proceedings in which he had
taken part. Being disappointed of
this, he condescended to accept Office
under Lord Palmerston, but resigned
on account of the outcry made against
his diplomatic failure at Vienna,
although Lord Palmerston was quite
willing to have carried him through.
In 1857 he joined the tories and radi-
calls, and, without cause of offence
against his old colleague, voted
against him on the Chinese war; and
again on the Conspiracy to Murder
bill. Finally, he has the unapproach-
able distinction that he, six years the
Premier of a liberal government, was
principal means of throwing out
two liberal governments in succession
in the course of three years, of caus-
ing two dissolutions of Parliament,
and of re-uniting the liberal party on
the basis of the six-pound franchise,
which has just finally crumbled away
beneath his feet. 1t is easy at this
time to form government out of
whatever elements the leaders of the
liberal party choose to compound to-
gether, but it deserves very serious
consideration how far the Premiership
of Lord Russell is likely to continue
to US the advantages that we have en-
joyed under the leadership of Lord