The Reform Act of 1832 was a Whig com promise; it failed to satisfy the Radicals, but it gave them a foothold which they never lost. It was indeed the first attempt to apply abstract principles to the English constitution, and it started a momentous process of change. Tra dition was dethroned, and the old party names had become unpopular. The Whigs began to call themselves Liberals, a name which some of them declined, because it suggested hurnanitam tendencies with which they were not in sym pathy. Macaulay, for example, would not call himself a Liberal, because, as he said, he was in favor of "war, church establishments, and hang The Tories in their turn became Con servatives; they accepted the results of 1832, but deprecated any further change in fundamental institutions. The Radicals of that day were middle-class men, disciples of Bentham; they stood for cheap government, freedom of con tract and individualism. Socialism made its ap peal to the unenfranchised laborers, but as yet without much visible success. The Factory Acts, for example, were carried by Tory human itarians, against the opposition of Radical manu facturers. Free trade, when it came, was the work of a Conservative administration; the Liberals approved; the older Whigs, like Lord Melbourne, thought that Peel had betrayed the landed interest. Lord Derby, a hereditary Whig, was carried over to the conservative Tories by his fears for the Church and his dis like of free trade.
The conflicting tendencies of the half-cen tury after the first Reform Act are summed up in the careers of two men who were to take a leading part in the transition to democracy. Disraeli entered life as a Radical; he was al ways hostile to the Whig oligarchy. His sym pathies were with the Tories; his father, a quiet scholar, had taught him to take the side of the Stuart kings, and to regard the old nobility as the true leaders of the people. If Peel had given him office, he might have become an orthodox Conservative; but the leaders of that party had no place for an able Jew, who lacked the public school and university stamp. Dis raeli took his revenge by attacking Peel and his free-trade policy; his merciless wit gave hint the ascendency, even with men who still dis trusted him ; he gained the confidence of Lord Derby, and in alliance with him began the con struction of what was really a new party, the party of Tory democracy. In 1867 the new Tories took their famous "leap in the dark' by establishing household suffrage in the boroughs. The immediate result was a crushing Liberal victory; but in 1874 the forces of Tory demo cracy were strong enough to place their leaders in power. Six years later the pendulum swung back and Mr. Gladstone was once more supreme.
Lord Beaconsfield died in the moment of defeat, but his genius presides over the party which he formed, and profoundly affects the mind of the nation. He never concealed his belief that the conduct of public affairs, espe cially foreign affairs, must be left to sovereigns and statesmen. At the same time he was al ways in sympathy with the aspirations of the workingmen. He was the only public man of his generation who perceived that Benthamite Liberalism was certain, sooner or later, to be come unpopular, and he prepared the way for that modified socialism which is now the ac cepted creed of both parties. And again he
perceived that Englishmen, without distinction of class, are conscious of their position as an imperial power, and determined to maintain it. Disraeli himself, in his earlier days, had taken the narrower views of England's responsibility to India and the colonies; his later speeches are full of the sentiment of empire. Englishmen are all (to some extent) socialists now; and are all (in one sense or another) imperialists. .
Mr. Gladstone began his career as the rising hope of Oxford Toryism. He was honestly afraid of Radicalism ; he distrusted the Whigs; the mission of the Tory party was to "main tain truth') by supporting the Church of Eng land. At the age of 30 he published his book on The State in its Relations with the Church' — a noble vindication of the Church as a spiritual society, pledged to maintain her conflict with sin and selfishness, a society to which the support of the state is not essential, but may, under proper conditions, be useful. It was in the interest of the state that Glad stone argued for the establishment and endow ment of the Church. His argument was coldly received; the qualified approval of Peel, the scornful criticism of Macaulay, began to work a change in Gladstone's political mind. No criticism touched his ideal; but in the present age of the world the ideal was, perhaps, un attainable. If Whigs and Conservatives were equally unable to rise to his conception of the Church, if the price of establishment was to be subordination to the state, what then? The Church, to preserve her freedom and purity, might withdraw from the alliance, surrendering those of her privileges which might be found inconsistent with abstract political justice. Within a few years after the publication of his book, Mr. Gladstone was discussing the possible advantages of disestablishment.
Sir Robert Peel was not pleased to see an able young party man so preoccupied with ecclesiastical questions. He drew Gladstone into his ministry, placed him at the Board of Trade, and worked him very hard. In the transition to free trade, master and pupil moved steadily together. While Peel was leader there could be no doubt as to Gladstone's party connection; when that guiding influence was removed he was carried about by various kinds of doctrine. Though more than half a Liberal, he was still afraid of Radicalism. He approved of Lord Palmerston's passive resistance to the extension of the franchise, but this was his only link of sympathy with the coming leader of the Liberal party. There was much agreement between Gladstone and Lord Derby; both were Oxford Tories and devoted Churchmen; but by this time Lord Derby was identified with Disraeli, and the Peelites would not serve under the man who had planted so many barbed arrows in the sensitive spirit of their chief. After long hesi tation, Mr. Gladstone threw in his lot with the Liberals. In June 1859 he supported Lord Derby in a critical division; 10 days later he took office under Lord Palmerston.