ATTACKS SIR R. PEEL. 



meet the man he had unequivocally impugned, if not 

 insulted, in thus making the retort to the other's 

 reproof, given in the course of duty, harshly as it 

 was delivered, should at least have made a decided 

 step towards a reconciliation, and have withdrawn the 

 word " dared " from the offensive expression.' 



On this matter there can, I think, but be one 

 opinion ; that, in refusing to meet the man who had 

 suffered the injury, Lord George showed the pos- 

 session of little moral courage — in this instance at 

 least. 



As touching his career as a politician, it is recorded 

 of him that ' on the occasion when he addressed Sir 

 Robert Peel as having 1 " wounded his illustrious 

 relative, Canning, to death," accusing him of pre- 

 meditated tergiversation in reference to the emancipa- 

 tion of the Roman Catholics, the language of the 

 Conservative leader assumed a tone impassioned, 

 fierce, and scornful as an onslaught of Fox or Pitt, 

 and effectually startled the House and honourable 

 baronets from everything like a disposition to som- 

 nolency on that especial evening.' 



Here, again, we can scarcely admire the license given 

 to the tongue in the use of 'fierce invective and scornful 

 words ' to one whose recognised abilities, oratorical 

 powers, and good sense were so infinitely superior to 

 his own. Some may think it rather betrayed the 

 weakness of a light character. Mr. Disraeli may have 

 held a similar opinion of him ; for when in the House 



