Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 4.djvu/894

810 against the armies of the French conqueror. He encouraged the spirit of resistance in the Spanish nation, supported the Spanish armies, first with supplies of arms, and then with the active co-operation of the English forces, and was one of the first to recognize and employ the military capacity of the future duke of Wellington. Unfortunately, an event soon occurred which deprived the country of his services, when the need was greatest, and when he was the only statesman in England whose talents were of the first order. In 1809, Lord Castlereagh, as Secretary-at-War, had organized the expedition to Walcheren, the worst conducted and the most disastrous of the whole war. In consequence of it a dispute arose between his lordship and Canning, which resulted in a duel, and in the resignation of both. From this unfortunate incident till 1822, Canning took no very prominent part in the Government of the country. This is particularly to be regretted, as the period in question includes the decisive years of the Napoleonic struggle, and the new settlement of Europe by the peace of Vienna, when Canning might have done good service by insisting, more than was done, on the claims of nationality and constitu tional liberty. In this he was not free from blame, as he allowed his personal dislikes too much to interfere with his duty to his country. But the chief reason was his advocacy of Catholic Emancipation, which lost him favour at court Men s motives must always remain to some extent doubtful ; still it seems clear that at one time his dislike of Castlereagh, at another his insistance on Catholic Emancipation, prevented him from resuming his place in the Foreign Office. He lived to regret this deeply, and to declare that two years of office at the termination of the European struggle would have been worth ten years of life. Even now, however, he was not idle. In 1812 he made a powerful speech in favour of Emancipation, which was carried in the Commons by a large majority, but rejected by the Lords. From 1814 to 1816 he was ambassador at Lisbon, and from 1817 to 1820 President of the Board of Control for India As a member of the Cabinet during the latter period he was very active in support of Government, strongly advocating the coercive measures employed at home during the years which immediately followed the Revolution. It is indeed a noteworthy fact in his political career that, though unable to act with Castlereagh in the most dangerous crisis of the French war, he found it right to join him and his associates in such severe measures of repression, : noteworthy, but quite explicable, as Canning never professed to be anything else than a disciple of Pitt.

At the head of the Board of Control, Canning gained the entire confidence of the directors of the East India Company. In consequence, they had appointed him to the governor-generalship of India, and he had proceeded to Liverpool to take leave of the constituents who had four times returned him to Parliament, when news came of the death of Castlereagh (then earl of Londonderry). The voice of the country had already named him successor in the Foreign Office, and, in this capacity, under the premier ship of Lord Liverpool, Canning entered upon the last and most brilliant period of his career. The state of Europe had greatly changed since his resignation of the same office in 1809. The Holy Alliance now aspired to regulate the affairs of the world. Inaugurated by the emperor of Russia, under the inspiration of Madame Krudener, it was at first a sincere attempt of the rulers of Europe to govern on Christian principles. But even the Russian emperor was soon frightened from the path of benevolent reform by the revival of the revolutionary spirit and its appearance in his oT,yn army ; while interested statesmen like Metternich so utilized the pious aspirations of kings to the profit of despotism, that the Holy Alliance soon became a byword in Europe. Castlereagh had yielded too far to this ten dency. The country was getting weary of it. And now Canning came forward to assert the free action of England and the universal right of self-government. He was, how ever, no revolutionist. In his home and foreign policy alike he aimed at holding a middle course. At home he advocated Catholic Emancipation, and believed in Free Trade, but strenuously opposed Parliamentary Reform. In his foreign policy his principle was that England should hold the balance between the reactionary and the revolu tionary parties, &quot; that in order to prevent things going- to extremities, she should keep a distinct middle ground, staying the plague both ways.&quot; Seeing that the reactionary party predominated in 1822, he judged that England should throw the weight of her influence into the Liberal scales. In accordance with these views, he protested against the doctrine that free institutions should be held only as a spontaneous gift of the sovereign, and disapproved of the measures adopted at the Congress of Verona in 1822, especially of the French invasion of Spain for the restora tion of absolutism in 1823, a year, too, which was marked at home by the passing of the Reciprocity Act, the first step in the direction of Free Trade. In order to render the protest against the invasion of Spain more effectual, it was determined in 1824 to recognize the independence of the South American colonies. On the threatened invasion of Portugal by reactionary Spain in 182G, Canning, again interposed with the utmost decision, and the invasion was abandoned. The speeches he made on these occasions, and his general attitude of defiance to despotism, had a mar vellous effect, not only in Parliament and in England, but in all civilized communities. He was everywhere hailed r.,s the champion and spokesman of national and popular liberty. The party of progress recovered from the torpor consequent upon the Revolution, and returned to new life. The enthusiasm for his name was heightened when i j became known that he had taken the initiative in another act of international justice, by proposing (1826) to France and Russia that combination of the three Powers which led to the battle of Navarino and the establishment of Greek independence. But ere that result had been attained the great statesman was no more. Early in 1827 Lord Liverpool, who had been the nominal head of the Government since 1812, was disabled Canning, who now became premier, expected the co-operation of the members of the late administration, but was disappointed, and had to struggle on under tho greatest difficulties, and against the most virulent opposi tion. His exciting labours and the alienation of so many friends were too severe for his sensitive temperament. He caught a severe cold, and died on the 8th of August 1827. He was buried in Westminster Abbey, in the Statesmen s Corner, by the grave of his master Pitt. His death created a sensation commensurate with his world-wide fame and with the hopes still entertained of him. The splendour of his talents was only matched by their versatility. In his high and brilliant career he had proved himself equal to anything from guiding the destinies of a great nation through the storms of the Napoleonic wars, down to the editing of a comic journal. He had all the natural endowments of a great orator, a graceful and commanding form, a musical voice, a perfect mastery of the choicest language, and a ready wit that played with all the resources of his intellect. In private life he was even more admirable, in his own family, an almost perfect model of all the household charities, and towards his mother, whose imprudent marriages had endangered his infancy, full of the tenderest and most affectionate piety.  CANNING, (1812-1862), Governor-General of India, was the youngest child