Lord John Russell by John Prest (review)

REVIEWS 215 definedthemovement's position whenhe toldJoseph Sturgeon thefoundation of theBritishand ForeignAnti-Slavery Society, '... donotfearif yournumbers be small.Keep to rightprinciples and do whatyouare able;and trustwith all yourheartsto Go.d'(p. 75). Dedicationto moral principle,however,had its limitatio.ns both as a guide to tacticsand as a basis of politicalinfluence. This wasdemonstrated by the x839-4x struggle overthesugar duties. Slave-grown BrazillianandCubansugar undersoldthe free grown Bwi product and the free tradersclamouredfor equalisation of the duties.The anti-slavery interesthad hithertowo.rked in collaboration withthefreetraders andJoseph Sturge was prominent bothasa freetraderandan opponent of slavery. The sugar duties issue, however, divided themovement. The LondonCommittee madeoppositio,n to slavery itsprimary moral concernand abandoned the free trade allianceon the groundthat to stimulatetrade with Braziland Cuba couldonlyincrease the slavetrade. In theprovinces, however, auxiliaryanti-slavery committees madetheneeds of the labouringpoora priorityand emphasised that currentpricesput sugarbeyond the reachof 'our actuallyfamishingpopulationat homewhereour charity shouldbegin' (p. I47). The SugarDutiesissue alsomakes clearthat thepoliticaleffectiveness of this morally-conscious groupdepended entirelyon beingableto sustain an alliance with the bigbattalions of Britain'scommercial interest.Once that alliancewas destroyed themovement losta greatdealof support andbeganto dwindleinto a small,respectable liberalpressure groupforcedto revivethe techniques of protestusedin the veryearlydaysof the anti-slavery movement and openfree producestores. The implications of these findings for a reassessment of theanti-slavery movementarenotexplored bytheauthor.He points,however, in an appendixto the inadequacy of Eric Williams'economic-determinist interpretation and theneed for substantial modification;his own work can be read asjust sucha contribution . MARY RECKFORD DalhousieUniversity LordJohnRussell. joan vREsT. Columbia,University of SouthCarolinaPress, x97e.Pp.xvi, 558,illus.$I7.95. During the interregnumfollowingPalmerston's death in Octoberx865,The Timessenta lightningshaftdownuponLord Russell. A leadingarticlewarned that catastrophe wouldfollowfor the Liberalparty shouldthe queenfind it necessary to returnthispurest of 'pureWhig'to thepremiership. RobertLowe, authorof the article,then madea casewhich,if exaggerated and venomous, wasnevertheless substantial. He conceded that Lord Johnhad donegreatwork in hisearlyyears:hadreformed themunicipal corporations, repealed theTest and Corporation Acts,sponsored theReformbill of x83e , led the government to accept some responsibility for theeducation of thepoor,andattempted to do 216 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW justice in Ireland.But,ironically, hehadfailedto growalongwiththechanges hisactivities had workedto bringabout.ManifestlylackingPalmerston's 'exuberantelasticity ,' encapsulated byartistocratic relations, proudandvain,Russell contributed importantlyto the politicalinstabilityof the late fortiesand the fifties.What Lowe thoughtthe 'progressive' forcesneededafter i846 was a leaderwho could'conciliate andoverawe opposition,' a man capableof 'entering into and catchingthe feelings of the people.'Englandfoundsucha man in Palmerston, but for morethana decade thecountryhad to suffertheerratic behaviourof little JohnnyRussell, whoseconsiderable talentsseemed increasinglydirectedat 'upsetting the coach.'Withoutconsulting anyone, he sentoff his Durham Letter, plungingthe nation into 'a barren, anti-papalagitation' and,in the process, alienatinghispotentialPeeliteallies.Consulting no one,in the midstof the CrimeanWar, and out of a sense of personal pique,he broke up the Aberdeencoalition.Sentto Vienna to negotiate peace,he impulsively agreedto concessions his colleagues were obligedto repudiate,and, after this debacle, he repaidPalmerston's loyaltyby intriguingwith the opposition and bringingthe ministrydown.When at lastreconciled to second placein •859, he earnedthe contemptof both Franceand Prussia by firstblustering about Bismarck's aggression againstDenmarkand then ignominously retreating. John Presttakesup theseand othercharges, subjects them to a meticulous scrutiny, and assigns praiseand blamefar moresoberly and fairly than Lowe attemptedto do. Yet the conclusions he reaches are not soradicallydifferent. He shows that Russell's mind workedswiftly,that he had a well-defined, if circumscribed anddogmatic, setof objectives, that hewasconstantly generating constructive legislation, but that he wastemperamentally incapable of winning peopleoveror reconciling opponents. Setoff against hisaristocratic pridewas hisshyness; sometimes imperious with hiscolleagues, hewasbrowbeaten byhis wife and brother.Under Grey and Melbournehis assets were fully employed andhisdefects of personality ledto nodisastrous consequences, butoncein the leadership, histalentfor,asLoweput it, 'consolidating hisopposition' didcontributeto the politicalflux of mid-century. It wasa 'tragedy,'Prestconcludes, that Russelldid not keephis temperunderAberdeen;had he doneso,a reformingRussell -Gladstone ministrymighthavebeenpossible in i856 instead of x866. Why tragic?Prestdoesnot elaborate. Presumably he believes that an accidentof temperament delayed in somecrucialwaythe marchof progress. This seems anachronistic. Even if we were to suppose the impossible-thatLord JohnhadnotbeenLordJohnbutsomeone else-wouldit followthata unified LiberalpartyunderRussell and Gladstone couldhaveextended the franchise and liberalizedthe administration a decadeearlier?JohnVincenthaswarned usabouttheerrorof lookingexclusively to Parliament andparliamentarians to discovercauses of fundamentalchange.The processes which were forminga constituency for the Liberalpartyamongupwardlymobileartizans and nonconformist shopkeepers hadonlybegunto workin the i85os.Russell did little to...