ne vast appropriating
clause."[101]

Some of his eulogists assert that he had made up his mind on the great
measures he carried through Parliament long before he had given them his
support, but that he was awaiting a favourable opportunity to declare
his views, whilst he was in the meantime educating his party. If this be
intended as a compliment, as it seems to be, it is a very doubtful one.
Assuming it to be true, he must for many years of his life have been a
mere hypocrite. The opinion that he himself was gradually educated into
these views would seem to be the truer as it is also the kinder one;
besides his own declarations coincide with it. There was what is called
a Bullion Committee in 1811, and another in 1819, Sir Robert (then Mr.)
Peel being chairman of the latter. The former was called Mr. Hooner's
Committee. In 1819, speaking of the inconvertible paper money, he
recanted his views of 1811, as his opinions with regard to the question
had undergone "a material change." "He had," he said, "voted against Mr.
Hooner's resolutions in 1811, he would now vote for them if they were
brought forward." In his Memoirs, speaking of the Corn Laws, "he had,"
he says, "adopted at an early period of his public life, without, he
fears, much serious reflection, the opinions generally prevalent of the
justice and necessity of protection to domestic agriculture, but _the
progress of discussion_ had made a material change in the opinions of
many persons" [himself of course amongst the number] "with regard to the
policy of protection to domestic agriculture." It is true, then, that
this eminent statesman was at school all his life, a diligent student,
willing and anxious to learn, but always conducting his studies from a
Conservative standpoint. It is no discredit to him--far from it. And
although the tide of progress carried him to the extent of breaking up
his own party, in doing so he was acting, he considered, for the
interests of England. Nothing can be more absurd and wicked in a
statesman than to allow himself to be impounded within the narrow
iron-bound circle of party, and to persevere in sustaining the views and
principles of that party against justice, conscience and fact.

Great and varied as were the powers of Sir Robert Peel as a public
speaker, he was not an orator in the strictest and highest sense of that
word. True oratory is the offspring of genius, and he, gifted though he
was, had not the sacred fire of geniu