CANNING, George, a celebrated statesman and orator, was born in London on the 11th of April 1770. His father by an imprudent marriage had drawn down upon himself the displeasure of his parents, and was by them cut off with the scanty pittance of L.150 per annum. The youth, thus discarded by his family, who possessed considerable property in Ireland, left that country, and repaired with his wife to London. His efforts to extend the means of their subsistence were, however, unavailing; and exactly twelve months after the birth of his son he died, the victim, it is said, of a broken heart. The mother of Canning, thus left comparatively destitute, attempted the stage, but without success. Of her after history little is known, except that she was twice married, and to the day of lier death experienced the tender regards of her illustrious son, whose success she lived long enough to witness.

The education of Canning, however, was not neglected. By the liberality of an uncle he was placed at Eton, where he greatly distinguished himself, not only in his scholastic exercises, but also as a literary aspirant. At the age of sixteen we find him editor of a periodical miscellany entitled the Microcosm, which was got up amongst his school associates. To this work he contributed a variety of papers, distinguished for their elegance and taste, and also for a playful humour, which afterwards became so formidable a weapon in his hands. To this period likewise is assigned the composition of a poem entitled The Slavery of Greece, which displays a glowing fancy, and a rare maturity of thought, whilst it breathes the warmest sentiments of freedom. This was a happy presage. For he [7:6:82]afterwards rose to a situation which enabled him to mititigate the destiny he thus early and feelingly deplored; and it is pleasing to add, that the fervour of the youthful bard was never altogether quenched in the after calculations of the statesman. In the year 1787 he left Eton for Christ Church, Oxford, where he rapidly rose to distinction. He gained several prizes for his Latin essays, and attracted "considerable notice by his orations. The general impression of his compeers appears to have been, that he was destined to excel, and would rise to the head of whatever profession he chose to adopt. Amongst his fellow collegians was the Honourable Charles Jenkinson, with whom he contracted an intimacy which was afterwards of great advantage to him. It became ncecessary for him, however, to think of a profession, and he fixed upon the law as that most likely to afford scope for his talents. He accordingly quitted Oxford for Lincoln’s Inn, whither his fame had preceded him. It may be doubted whether he was as laborious a student of law as he had been of learning. His disposition was highly soeíable, and his wit was the theme of general admiration. Hence his society became courted by a numerous and rapidly extending circle of friends; and he also began to attend debating clubs, where he frequently spoke. These trials of skill gave him confidence as a public speaker, and tact and acuteness as a debater, 'whilst at the same time they exercised his powers of elocution; thus preparing him for contending with more powerful and expert antagonists in a more exalted arena. At this period his principles were liberal. He had long been in familiar intercourse with Sheridan, by whom he was introduced to Fox,-Burke, Grey, and the other leading Whigs of the time, who looked upon him as the future champion of their cause, and advised him to turn his thoughts from the bar to the Senate; and this he accordingly determined upon. Buta change soon came over the spirit of his politics. What motives induced him to’ abandon tlíe creed in which he had hitherto believed, it is difficult to conjecture. Probably he felt that even genius like his would not rise to the full growth of its ambition On the opposition benches, or that the interests of his Country would be better-served if he could infuse into the measures of his new associates a portion of that liberality which distinguished those of his old. But whatever may have determined the choice of the young politician, certain it is, that after a friendly and candid explanation to Sheridan, he entered into terms with Pitt, and in 1793 took his Seat in parliament under the auspices of that minister. But it was not until 1794 that he ventured to address the house. The occasion was by no means auspicious; it was iπ support of a large subsidy th the king of Sardinia for prosecuting the war. He was brought into immediate collision with Fox, whom he ventured to treat with a considerable degree of levity; and it did not reflect much credit on Pitt, that he thus subjected his great and generous rival to the flippant attack of a man so young and so arrogant as Canning. Apart from this circumstance, the speech displayed considerable tact and dexterity in the management of an argument. From this period his support of the premier was close and undeviating, and he gradually rose to distinction amongst the party to which he had allied himsfelf. In 1796 he was appointed one of the under secretaries of State, and for the first two years during which he held the situation he principally confined himself to the laboribus duties connected with it. In 1798 he recorded his sentiments on the sùbject of the slave-trade, being favourable to abblition; and in the same year he electrified the house on a motion of Mr Tierney’s respecting a peace with the French republic. It was a speech of masterly skill and eloquence, and fully justified the partiality of his master. The same year his consequence was materially increased by his union with Miss Joan Scott, one of the daughters and co-heiresses of General Scott. Miss Scott’s two sisters were married to noblemen; and Canning’s parliamentary interests were thus not only powerfully strengthened, but he was furnished with a respectable independence.

In 1800 we find him discussing in parliament the overtures of peace made by the consular government of France, the habeas corpus suspension bill, subsidies to the Emperor of Germany, ånd the state of the nation,—subjects on all of which he supported the minister, and in regard to some of which he displayed more devotedness as a ρartizan than wisdom as a statesman. Out of doors also he employed the formidable weapon of the press in the same warfare.- In conjunction with his friends Mr Frere and Mr Ellis, he brought out the Antijacobin Examiner, a weekly paper, alike distinguished for its wit and talent and for its satire and ribaldry. The poetical compositions of Canning formed the attic salt of this print; and, keeping out of view their malignant invective and personality, they are unquestionably full of wit.

The resignation of Pitt in 1801 deprived Canning of his situation; and the ministry which succeeded he took every opportunity of strenuously opposing. The return of the former to power in 1804 again restored him to office as treasurer of the navy. From this period till the death of Pitt nothing remarkable occurred to call forth his energies, except the impeachment of Lord Melville, whose cause he warmly espoused. By the demise in 1806 of his illustrious preeeptor in politics, Canning was again removed from office; and during the reign of the ministry which succeeded, he conducted himself in the same manner as he had done upon a like occasion before; strenuously opposing· all measures except those which he considered as sanctified by the authority of Pitt. Nothing cdn more forcibly exhibit the influence of party spirit over his mind, than the manner in which he allowed the question of the abolition of the slave-trade to be carried in parliament. Under other administrations it had received his powerful advocacy, and all the resources of his genius were arrayed on the side of humanity; but now he scarcely lifted his voice upon the occasion. What he did say was cold and petulant. On a great moral question touching the rights of human nature he could not subdue expressions of hostility to the existing ministry. The latter having abandoned office, the Tory party came again into power, and Canning received the seals of the foreign department.

The office of a minister of foreign affairs at the commencement of the Portland administration was any thing but an enviable post. With the exception of the short interval of the peace of Amiens, England had been engaged in a war of fifteen years’ duration. Most of the continental powers, formerly her allies, were now either leagued against her, or condemned to an inglorious neutrality. The nation, which previously divided its belief between the two great leaders now no more, looked in vain for one sufficiently prominent to command its confidence. The mantle of either prophet appeared to have ascended along with him; for as yet Canning had not gathered all his fame, and was looked upon by the country as a light and harassing skirmisher rather than a heavy man-at-arms. The administration»just dissolved presented a formidable opposition; and a number of the members of it, indeed, Canning had made personal enemies of by his caustic raillery in parliament, and his reckless satire out of doors. In circumstances of such difficulty the new ministry found themselves placed. It was on Mr Ponsonby’s motion relative to the expedition to Copenhagen that their strength was first properly put to trial. This attack could not be [7:6:83] justified on any principle of justice. Canning, however, fearlessly threw himself into the arena, and delivered a defence of the conduct of ministers, at least remarkable for its ability and eloquence. Both friends and opponents regarded him with admiration. The former saw the value of the acquisition they had made, and the latter the formidable talent with which they had to contend. From this period Canning continued to rise in importance and increase in fame. He was the most able and strenuous supporter of the administration to which he belonged. In 1809 a political misunderstanding with Lord Castlereagh led to a duel, in which Canning was wounded. Both secretaries resigned, and the consequence was a dissolution of the ministry.

During the two years which followed this event, Canning seldom appeared in the stormy arena of debate. Two speeches, however, on the resumption of cash payments by the bank of England, belong to this period, but are numbered amongst his least successful exertions. In the beginning of 1812 he advocated the claims of the Catholics to civil power, which he invariably supported, not as an abstract question of right, but as a matter of expediency. On the assassination of Mr Percival, overtures were made to him to accept a place in the cabinet; but his favourite measure of Catholic emancipation forming no part of their arrangements, he declined taking office. In this year he was chosen as representative for Liverpool, which also returned him to other three successive parliaments. In 1814 he accepted the situation of ambassador to Lisbon, and continued there till 1816, when he returned, and soon afterwards joined the ministry as president of the board of control. During the last two years great events had taken place, in bringing about which Canning had no inconsiderable share. “if there was any part of his political life,” he declared on one occasion, “in which he gloried, fit was, that in the face of every difficulty, discouragement, and prophecy of failure, his had been the hand which had committed England in an alliance with Spain.” Never,” said he on another occasion, “ought we to relinquish our hold of the Peninsula. The ruler of France has one grand object to which he stands pledged—the establishment of his dominion there. If he fail in this, his defeat will be most signal.” The result realized his prediction. By British policy and valour, which he animated and encouraged, the tide of military despotism which had overflowed the Continent was repelled beyond the Pyrenees, and the ancient landmarks of nations re-appeared above the subsiding wave.

As a member of the cabinet from 1816 till 1820, Canning was a strenuous supporter of its measures. The celebrated six acts called forth all the resources of his eloquence to prove their necessity, and to lessen the abhorrence with which a large proportion of the community contemplated them. The manner in which he treated the case of one Ogden, who was incarcerated for sedition under the suspension of the habeas corpus act, was aggravated by opponents into a serious crime, and in any view evinced a reckless and unfeeling levity, which it is easy to palliate but impossible to justify.

On the demise of George III. in 1820, parliament was dissolved, and Canning, at the next election, was for the fourth time returned for Liverpool. On this occasion he put forth all his strength in vindication of the proceedings of ministers. During his speech he also took an opportunity of expressing his unmeasured hostility to all parliamentary reform, which he afterwards reiterated in parliament in 1822, in one of his most finished orations. On the return of Queen Caroline to share the throne of her husband, Canning, who had formerly been on terms of great intimacy with her, felt constrained to absent himself from England during the progress of the proceedings which were instituted against her. On his return from the Continent he resigned the presidency of the board of control, and on his retirement, received the most flattering testimony from the Court of Directors of the East India Company, of the value which they attached to his services. The golden opinions which the members of that influential body entertained of his character, and the universal conviction that no man was, better qualified or entitled to occupy the highest official situation which théy had it in their power to bestow, induced them ultimately to confer upon him the appointment of governor-general of India. But just as he was preparing to quit England, the Marquis of Londonderry died; and a vacancy having thus been created in the cabinet, Canning was invited by his Sovereign to resume the situation of secretary for foreign affairs. He accepted the offer, and though second in office, in public opinion and in real efficiency he was considered as the first. This took place in 1822.

During the remainder of Canning’s life his history becomes so closely interwoven with that of his country, that a minute detail is unnecessary. He infused into the counsels of the cabinet a degree of liberality which, for a long period, had not characterized them. The spell of the holy alliance it was his studious endeavour to break; and without altogether alienating the continental powers from Britain, he aimed at placing her in a situation where, untrammelled, she might exercise her own free will. It was his desire that his country should occupy a neutral station, and assume the character of mediator, not only between conflicting kingdoms, but between the hostile factions of individual nations. He strongly countenanced, both in theory and practice, that amelioration in regard to commerce, navigation, and manufactures, which the force of circumstances and the progress of information had rendered imperative. In June 1824 the cabinet determined on recognizing the independence of Mexico Colombia, and Buenos Ayres. This measure was principally brought about by the exertions of Canning, and in one of his speeches he claims the merit of it. In answer to the argument that ministers had sanctioned the attack on Portugal, by having permitted the occupation of Spain by France, he said, “Was it, necessary that we should blockade Cadiz? No. I looked another way. 1 resolved that if France had Spain, it should not be Spain with the Indies. I called the new world into existence to redress the balance of the old.” In the autumn of 1826 he went to Paris, and was received with great distinction. The treaty with France and Russia respecting Greece, and the events at Navarino which followed closely after it, throw light upon the object and intent of his visit. His highest powers were also called forth on the occasion of the aggression of Spain upon Portugal. He warmly maintained the necessity of England’s interference upon the occasion; and the demonstrations which were made produced the desired results. These are the three measures on which the fame of Canning, for liberal policy, principally rests.

In the beginning of 1827, at the funeral of the Duke of York, he caught a severe cold, from the effects of which he never altogether recovered. Shortly after this, the Earl of Liverpool, then, prime minister, was seized with paralysis; and though he rallied afterwards, he was politically dead from the moment he was struck. Canning was ultimately appointed first lord of the treasury. Considerable opposition followed this appointment, and six members of the former· cabinet resigned. The new premier, however, struggled manfully against this rather unexpected opposition, and with great celerity completed the com-plemεnt[7:6:84] of the cabinet. But the harassing contest which he had to maintain against a virulent opposition visibly affected his health. Towards the latter end of July 1827 he was invited to the seat of the Duke of Devonshire at Chiswick, in hopes that the change of air might renovate his constitution; and he did recover so far as to be able again to transact business in Downing Street; but his malady, which was an inflammation of the kidneys, returned, and he expired on the 8th of August, at the age of fifty-seven. His remains were interred in Westminster Abbey, near to those of his great preceptor Pitt, on the 16th of the' same month. The funeral, though private, was attended by the Duke of Clarence, now William IV., and a number of noble and other friends.

The death of Canning was a circumstance rarely paralleled in interest amongst civilized nations. In his foreign policy he had identified himself with the march of independence. From Lima to Athens the effects of his friendly interposition had been felt, and a sorrow corresponding to the benefits he -had conferred was expressed when he fell. He was cut oft' in the midst of designs of high enterprise, and before all his plans were completed; and thus liis system, and much of his fame, was left at the mercy of his successors. The great events which have taken place since his death have also tended in some measure to eclipse his popularity. His accomplishments as an orator were of the highest order. His form was commanding, and his features handsome and impressive. His voice was richly toned and highly musical, and his attitudes were elegant and striking. His delivery was manly, and for the most part he was in complete possession of himself. These qualities and accomplishments set off to double advantage the more exalted gifts of intellect with which he was so richly endowed. His diction was splendid, his reasoning acute and refined. He exercised a sovereign command over language, and it flowed from him with classic elegance and ease. His style, strictly speaking, was not ornate. Wit was an ingredient with which he frequently seasoned his oratory, thereby imparting to it a high relish. The vein was peculiarly his own; it was lively and playful, and calculated more to ridicule than to lacerate. His poetical powers may be ranked among his elegant accomplishments; and, for the most part, the productions which resulted from them are the least worthy of his fame—not that they want the requisite talent, but that they are in general disfigured by scurrility and invective. “He was,” says Sir James Mackintosh, “a man of fine and brilliant genius, of warm affections, of high and generous spirit; a statesman who at home converted most of his opponents into warm supporters, who abroad was the sole hope and trust of all who sought an orderly and legal liberty, and who was cut off in the midst of vigorous and splendid measures, which, if executed by himself, or with his own spirit, promised to place his name in the first class of rulers, among the founders of lasting peace, and the guardians of human improvement.”