The Shadow of Great Britain

Capítulo 1572: Chapter 12: Palmerston, World Peace Ambassador

Palmerston must have prepared for this conversation for quite some time; Arthur even suspected that this British Foreign Minister might have dispatched the intelligence department under the Foreign Office to conduct a background investigation on him over the past few weeks.

In a Parliament full of talented individuals, Palmerston was never known for his eloquence.

If one were to ask who in the Whig Party was most adept at leading debates in Parliament, winning public opinion, and shaping agendas, the first person that would come to mind would definitely not be Palmerston.

Most people might think of the High Chancellor, Lord Brougham, whom the Tory Party referred to as the “volcano of words,” for delivering over six hours of speeches in two consecutive days of debates on parliamentary reform with scarcely any rest.

And in 1832 on Fleet Street, the most frequently quoted sayings also came from Lord Brougham.

“If we do not reform Parliament, then Parliament itself will be reformed by history!”

“You are not blocking a law, you are opposing the awakening of an era.”

His marathon eloquence directly inspired public support for reform, so much so that a saying circulated on the streets of London at the time: “God save the King, save Lord Brougham.”

Or, some may unabashedly express their admiration for Thomas Macaulay, “the Cicero of the Lower House.”

Faced with the Tory nobility’s arguments against the parliamentary reform of 1832, which claimed “people do not understand politics and cannot be trusted.”

The historian and Member of Parliament who shaped the early Whig perspective delivered a speech in the Lower House, narrating the legacy of ancient Rome, the Tudor Dynasty, and the 1688 Glorious Revolution, openly declaring war on the opposition in the Lower House: “We do not deny the rights of the people because they are imperfect, just as we do not revoke the King’s power because he has flaws. A system that denies the people’s voice is not conservatism; it is self-destruction.”

Or perhaps, one might occasionally think of Viscount Palmerston’s political mentor from his youth, Sir George Canning.

Canning was known throughout his life for his skill in sharp debate and was especially adept at using satire to mock his political opponents.

When adversaries in the Lower House attacked Canning, he unhesitatingly retorted: “The manner in which the opposition speaks reminds me of a violin — full of vibration, yet devoid of notes.”

And when criticized again for his “poetic speech,” Canning teased: “If I am a poet, then you are the rhyme — always appearing last, yet without any power.”

Besides, Arthur’s old boss, the father of the London police, Sir Robert Peel, nicknamed “Slippery Bob,” was also recognized as an eloquent figure, who could deftly use rational language to extricate himself even in adverse situations.

At that time, Peel, considering the then-critical situation, had to concede on the issue of the Catholic Emancipation Act and fully support the passage of the Act.

Yet, even facing pressure from the hardliners in the Tory Party, Sir Peel still stood up in Parliament, candidly acknowledging his change of stance: “If mistakes must be made, I hope that I am the one who errs, not Britain. Now, I must do something I once viewed as a betrayal in my youth. I hereby announce that I have changed my stance on the issue of Catholic emancipation, but this is solely because Catholic emancipation is necessary to maintain national stability and prosperity.”

Palmerston clearly did not possess the verbal prowess of these few individuals.

If he were truly someone who, without any preparation, could expound on political viewpoints for hours on end, then he could not have been trailing behind George Canning until 1827. It was only in August of that year, after Canning’s death, that he inherited Canning’s political legacy alongside Hesketh, Dudley, and others.

In terms of oratory talent and personal charisma, Palmerston was not even comparable to Mr. Benjamin Disraeli.

Despite Mr. Disraeli’s peculiar fashion of corsets and suspenders, those acquainted with Disraeli, like Arthur and others, knew that although he appeared insignificant within the Tory Party, in reality, a little circle had already formed around Disraeli as its core.

Of course, even though Disraeli was extremely charismatic and his passionate oratory style quite appealing,

at this stage, he certainly couldn’t sway the Tory Party leaders.

However, this did not impede him from influencing the youth.

Because “Young England,” with Disraeli as the absolute leader, was comprised mainly of the offspring of Tory Party leaders.

Palmerston certainly knew that merely relying on verbal persuasion and debate to convince Arthur was unrealistic.

After all, the former police officer standing before him was also exceptionally eloquent, and there were even rumors that Sir Peel and the Duke of Wellington had once extended an olive branch to Arthur on behalf of the Tory Party.

Although this rumor had never been confirmed, it was so vivid that even the list of constituencies had been drawn up.

If the rumor was true, Arthur would most likely represent the Tory Party in the northern constituencies dominated by traditional agrarian estate economies, vying for one of the two seats in York City, or easily securing the one in Richmond.

Of course, considering Arthur’s long tenure at Scotland Yard and his relatively Whig educational background, it was also possible that the Tory Party might dispatch Arthur to contested areas, such as the reform stronghold, the textile center of Halifax in Yorkshire, or the industrial strongholds of Sheffield and Leeds in Yorkshire.