Thence to Nuneham, a charming place, and on Monday to London. I heard an anecdote at Nuneham which was new to me: Harcourt gave it on the authority of Sir Robert Peel. He said that when the discussion took place about the East Retford question during the Duke of Wellington's Government, _in the Cabinet_ Peel was for giving the representation to one of the great towns, and Huskisson against it; that Peel was overruled by a majority of his colleagues and consequently took the part he did in Parliament; while Huskisson was induced to change his opinion and to take in Parliament the opposite line from that which he had taken in the Cabinet; he and Peel, in fact, both changing sides. His colleagues were naturally very indignant with Huskisson, and this accounts for the bitterness which the Duke of Wellington evinced, and for his celebrated 'No mistake.' This seemed to me a strange story, though some people there wondered I had never heard it before. If it be true, it is equally discreditable to both Peel and Huskisson; in the former it was both a fault and a crime; it was a great error in judgement and very wrong in itself. I found a letter from Clarendon when I got to town, telling me he had been 'much bothered by the vacillation and timidity of our rulers on this occasion as on the preceding ones, when I was compelled to insist on further power for the protection of life and the maintenance of law and order. It is not pleasant to have to poke a Cabinet into a sense of duty, or to extract by threats as if for a personal favour that which should be readily acceded to when the public necessity for it was proved and manifest. However, that has been my task, and I don't much care if the thing is achieved and nobody knows it.... Against the clubs a law of some kind was necessary. No one could doubt that, and so I insisted, making _for the third time_ my remaining here conditional upon it. So they succumbed, but not with a good grace.' All along the Government have been afraid to adopt a vigorous and decided course, and have been fencing with Clarendon, who has insisted on it. The consequences of endeavouring to make the law work are now apparent in the failure of the first of the trials. It is trying to make bricks without straw; the people will not work the machinery of the law, but, on the contrary, abhor and will oppose the law itself; everybody sees that and still the Government do not dare openly say so, and adopt the measures that are necessary to cope with the difficulty. There was an excellent article in the 'Morning Chronicle' yesterday in this sense. I pointed it out to Lord Lansdowne, who expressed his concurrence with it. However, for the present I believe Clarendon is in possession of power enough to keep the country in order. He can imprison everybody and put down the clubs by so doing, but he will never be able to obtain convictions. Indeed, it would probably be better they should all fail at first than have one