the Morning Chronicle. "The 'unextinguishable hate of Mr. Disraeli for Mr. O'Connell found vent last night in a maiden but not very modest speech, which even his nearest friends will tell him was a ridiculous failure. We call it ridiculous, because the laughter of the House was continually excited by its extravagance of thought, phrase, and gesture. The honourable Member may in time prune some of his luxuriances, and then he may stand a chance of being heard with about as much patience as the House usually shows to Mr. Borthwick. Last night he was even worse treated than that ordinarily ill-used gentleman, and sat down without being able to complete his sentence."

Two facts, finally. The speech was heard by Lord Stanley and Sir Robert Peel. Lord Stanley, who immediately followed Mr. Disraeli, passed over the speech of the new Member with contemptuous, and, under the circumstances, ungenerous silence. Sir Robert Peel received it with expressions of enthusiastic admiration, very unusual, if not almost unprecedented in him. With respect to this point, Mr. Grant says, "it is particularly deserving of mention that even Sir Robert Peel, who very rarely cheers any honourable gentleman, not even the most able and accomplished speaker of his own party, greeted Mr. D'Israeli's speech with a prodigality of applause which must have been very trying to the worthy baronet's lungs. Mr. D'Israeli spoke from the second row of benches immediately opposite the Speaker's chair. Sir Robert, as usual, sat on the first row of benches, a little to the left of

Mr. D'Israeli; and so exceedingly anxious was the right honourable baronet to encourage the debutant to proceed, that he repeatedly turned round his head, and, looking the youthful orator in the face, cheered him in the most stentorian tones.” *

"British Senate in 1838," ii. 334. The picture which Mr. Grant gives of Mr. Disraeli after his failure is worth quoting. "He seemed," writes Mr. Grant, "to feel deeply mortified at the result of his maiden effort. He sat the whole evening afterwards-namely, from ten till two o'clock in the morning-the very picture of a disappointed man. He scarcely exchanged a word with any honourable gentleman. He did not cheer when his party cheered Lord Stanley and Sir Robert Peel; neither did he laugh when they laughed. He folded his arms on his breast for a considerable part of the evening, and seemed to be wrapped up in his own unpleasant reflections."-Sketches of London, new edition, 158. Was it of this mauvais quart d'heure Mr. Disraeli was thinking when he spoke in one of his works of the "hell of failure"?

177

CHAPTER VIII.

"HUMBLE, BUT FERVENT."

THE reader who has followed this narrative so far will be able to fully appreciate the significance of the utter fiasco in which Lord Beaconsfield's maiden speech ended. It has been seen how Lord Beaconsfield had for years forced himself, in season and out of season, into public notice, and that he had thus always occupied a prominent, if not always a creditable place in the public eye. We know that he had contrived to pick more personal quarrels than almost any man of his time, and that, as a consequence, his political opinions and political conduct had been as frequently and hotly discussed as those of a leading Minister.

The reader has also had an opportunity of seeing the many examples Lord Beaconsfield had given the world of overweening conceit. He has learned how Lord Beaconsfield had proclaimed himself a great statesman, a great novelist, and a great poet. The feeling of the public can then be well understood when the papers of the day following December 7,

1837, were read. What! had the brazen-trumpeted boast of years ended in that?

Moreover, as has also been seen, Mr. Disraeli had himself specially invited attention to this especial event in his life. In the "Young Duke," Mr. Disraeli had written" One thing is clear, that a man may speak very well in the House of Commons, and fail very completely in the House of Lords. There are two distinct styles requisite: I intend in the course of my career, if I have time, to give a specimen of both. In the Lower House, 'Don Juan' may perhaps be our model; in the Upper House, Paradise Lost.'"*

But besides this we have in "Vivian Grey" the toast—“ Mr. Vivian Grey, and success to his maiden speech." In another way, too, had Mr. Disraeli drawn the eyes of the world to his maiden speech. In the course of his quarrel with O'Connell, he had warned the agitator that they would meet at Philippi, and that then O'Connell would be properly punished.‡ Mr. Disraeli took care to remind his audience of his former boast by rising the moment after O'Connell had sat down. The meeting at Philippi had taken place; and this ridiculous and terrible failure had been the result.

These facts are recapitulated for the purpose of pointing out how inexhaustible was the fund of Mr. Disraeli's self-conceit. A man of even ordinary sensitiveness would have felt this catastrophe so seriously as to hide his head, if not for ever, at least for a con*New edition, p. 287. † See ante, 37. See ante, 110.

siderable period. Not so Mr. Disraeli: seven days after his first calamitous effort, he again addressed the House of Commons.

He was wise enough, however, to alter his plan of operations. In place of making a long and set speech, he spoke but a few sentences, which cannot have occupied more than a few minutes in delivery. The occasion was the introduction of Serjeant Talfourd's Bill to amend the law of copyright. Mr. Disraeli

spoke in favour of the Bill.

He spoke on but three or four other occasions during this first session of his, and always with brevity.

In the following session, he adopted a somewhat bolder tone; his speeches, though not frequent, were tolerably long, and were on leading, not subsidiary subjects. He joined in the opposition of the Conservative party to the wretched grant of £20,000 in aid of education, which Lord John Russell proposed in 1839; but signalised himself by going out of the beaten track of the Conservative orators into a long eulogium of the doctrine of laissez-faire in education.

Some time after this, he delivered an address in which we find the first germs of the principles which afterwards became those of the "Young England" party.

In the course of 1839 the Chartists had organised their forces and formulated their demands. On the 14th of June in that year, the famous National Petition was presented to the House.

Mr. Disraeli, on this occasion, preached the doctrine