Page:History of the Anti corn law league.pdf/149

Rh might have asked himself whether his want of health was not attributable to the conflict between his sense of duty to his constituents and his conception of the duties he owed to the government, of which he formed a part. A similar conflict must have been endured by Mr. T. M. Gibson, when, at a later period, he also represented Manchester and held office; but he wisely resolved to sacrifice his position in the ministry, in order that he might, by an untrammelled course, retain the confidence of his constituents. Thomson had the merit of carrying out the designs of Lord Durham as to Canada, and he died a peer. There was a brighter career before him had he left the government, which he could not influence to adoption of his measures, the and taken active part with Villiers in the house, and Cobden out of the house, to compel its attention to the things necessary to the public comfort and peace. The apathy upon the Corn-Law question of which he had so justly complained, no longer existed. A great movement had commenced, and he might have been at its head. He thought Peel could abolish the Corn Law, if he had the courage to do it; but Peel did not, until more courage was required to support than to repeal it. The emancipating measure was a matter of necessity with both whigs and tories. Mr. Thomson was an exceedingly useful pioneer, and it was deeply to be regretted that he did not see how still further he might be useful, by taking part, heart and hand, in the rapidly approaching battle.

The candidates for Manchester were Mr. Robert Hyde Greg, the brother-in-law of Mr. Mark Philips, and a member of the League; Sir George Murray, brought forward by the tories; and Colonel Thompson, brought into the field, greatly to the prejudice of that gallant veteran in the cause of free-trade, without any reasonable ground of expectation that he would be elected, but rather with the view of damaging Mr. Greg, who was considered not