A Political Diary 1828-1830, Volume II | Page 4

humour again. All are glad to get rid of the question. The Duke of Cumberland, Falmouth, and Winchelsea, perhaps Kenyon, are lost to the Government, but no others.
Lord Middleton voted with us, having been against on the second reading. The Duke of Rutland against, having been with us before.
The Duke of Clarence was absent, being ill. He had fourteen leeches on his temples.
The House was full of ladies. Mrs. Fox, Lady Jersey, Lady Pitt and her daughters, Lady A. Brudenell, Lady Harrowby, Lady G. Wortley, Lord Eldon's daughters, Lady Glengall, Mrs. and Miss Sheridan, the old Duchess of Richmond, Lady Manners, Lady Rolle, Lady Haddington, and many others.
The intended row failed altogether. Only four carriages went down to Windsor. Halcomb and his two friends saw an equerry. They were told their petition must be presented through the Secretary of State, and went away quietly.
The Duke of Cumberland said he must withdraw his support from the Government; but he was temperate. In fact he was beaten.
The Duke of Norfolk was in the House, as happy as man could be.
_April 11._
Dr. Clarke and H. Fane both spoke of the Chancellor's speech in attack upon Eldon, as in bad taste and offensive. I shall endeavour to ascertain whether this is the general opinion. Not having heard Eldon, they cannot know how very mischievous and disingenuous he was.
_April 12._
Met the Lievens, Lyndhursts, Sir J. Murray, and others at dinner, at the Esterhazy's. The King has not yet sent back the commission to pass the Catholic Bill.
The Lievens are more shy of me than ever.
Lord Bathurst seemed to be much pleased with my idea of carrying on the Government of India in the King's name. He said it should be under a Secretary of State for India.
The Chancellor approved highly of my notion of suggesting Herries for the Government of Bombay, if the directors will not have Courtney. He is useless to us, and a discredit. Besides, we want his place.
Had some talk with Vernon at Lady Jersey's. He has the Canning venom about him still, and said we should still regret having lost Huskisson, &c.
I said NEVER. He was an able man, but he would never do as a member of a Cabinet in which he was not chief. The Government would not have lived if he had continued in. I told him I had become satisfied from my short experience that a coalition Government could not conduct the affairs of the country with advantage--especially where the difference was [blank].
The Duke of Cumberland is gone to Windsor. If the commission should not arrive to-night I dare say the Duke of Wellington will go to Windsor early to-morrow.
Lady Jersey was very loud in her dispraise of the Duke of Richmond. Every one who knows him says he is very cunning. There is a mixture of good and bad taste about him. He is popular, and he would make a good man of business.
_April 13, 1829, Monday._
Chairs at 11. Informed them of Sir Sidney Beckwith's appointment to the command at Bombay.
Told them my general idea was that it was necessary to fix a Lieutenant- Governor at Agra. I showed them it could be done without expense. Sir Charles Metcalfe should be the person appointed, with precise instructions obliging him to a system of non-interference in the internal concerns of the Malwa and Rajpoot States. Sir J. Malcolm would have interposed.
The treaties with the Rajpoot States generally secure their internal independence. Those with the States of Malwa give us the right, and impose upon us the duty of supervision. It requires, therefore, a most delicate hand to bring the whole into one system animated by one spirit.
I said incidentally to-day, 'I will not sit here to sacrifice India to England,' a sentiment which escaped me, but which I feel to be correct, not only socially but politically.
Ashley came and bored me about a petition of some Hindoos and Mahometans in Calcutta, who wish to be grand jurors. I told him I could not proceed hastily in any matter of legislation, and that this was one of much delicacy. I should speak to Fergusson.
A Cabinet had been fixed for 3. I concluded it was on account of a delay on the King's part in giving the Royal assent to the Relief Bill. The Cabinet was counter-ordered, the Commission having arrived at two.
The Chancellor had sent a note to the King with the Bills, calling his attention to them. The King, on sending them back with the Commission signed, thanked the Chancellor for having called his attention to the Bills, and said he gave his assent reluctantly.
The Chancellor had sent a note last night to Watson, the Equerry, desiring him to remind the King of the Commission.
So at a few minutes before four to-day the Chancellor, Lord Bathurst, and