The paradox of peel as carlylean hero

Historical Journal

Volumn 40, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 97-110

  Morrow, John ^a  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY OF WELLINGTON   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84933478982     PISSN: 0018246X     EISSN: 14695103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0018246X96007017     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Thomas Carlyle, Latter-day pamphlets (1850), hereafter cited as L.D.P., numbers 3 and 4
2. ‘Ireland and Sir Robert Peel’, Spectator, XXII (1849), 1085.
3. Unless otherwise specified all references to Carlyle's writings are from Thomas Carlyle's Works (20 vols., London, 1893).
4. Important aspects of the relationship between Carlyle and Peel are discussed by Jules Seigel; he also reproduces a fragment in which Carlyle quite self-consciously defends his admiration for Peel; see Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel: the prophet's search for a heroic politician and an unpublished fragment’, Victorian Studies, XXVI, 2 (1983), 181–195.
5. For other comments on Carlyle's attitude towards Peel see Chris Vandem Bossche, Carlyle and the search for authority (Columbus, Ohio, 1991), pp. 125–6, 128–9. While the present writer is indebted to Seigel, his reconsideration draws upon recent historical literature to extend and in some cases revise aspects of his analysis.
6. Carlyle, ‘[Peel fragment]’ reproduced in Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel’, p. 192.
7. Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel’, pp. 192, 193
8. Carlyle, L.D.P., p. 145
9. see also the journal entry from 1850 in which Carlyle notes his reservations on Peel's ‘strict conservatism and even officiality of view’; John Anthony Froude, Carlyle's life in London (2 vols., London, 1896 edn), 11, 49–50 (1850). Carlyle usually viewed both conservatism and ‘officiality’ with suspicion.
10. See Carlyle, ‘Signs of the times’, Critical and miscellaneous essays, 11, 233–250
11. Chartism, ch. X
12. Past and present, bk IV, ch. 111.
13. Boyd Hilton, The age of atonement. The influence of Evangelicalism on social and economic thought (Oxford, 1988), pp. 220–1, 230–1
14. Peter Mandler, Aristocratic government in the age of reform. Whigs and liberals 1830–1852 (Oxford, 1990), pp. 203–4. Hilton prefaces his account of Peel's views on this issue with a reference to Carlyle's critique of mechanicalism.
15. See Paul Adelman, Peel and the tory party (London, 1989), p. 39.
16. Hilton, The age of atonement, pp. 224–6, 230–1
17. Peel's ‘managerial’ conception of government is discussed in this work and in Hilton's earlier article, ‘Peel: a reappraisal’, Historical Journal, XXII, 4 (1979), 585–614.
18. Mandler, Aristocratic government, pp. 35–38.
19. Mandler, Aristocratic government, discusses clashes on factory legislation (p. 240)
20. public health (p. 245)
21. the Poor Law (p. 251).
22. Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel’, p. 183.
23. Edwin W. Marrs, Jr, ed., The Utters of Thomas Carlyle to his brother Alexander with related family letters (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), p. 387 note 2.
24. Carlyle's relationship with Charles Buller began in 1822 and continued until the latter's death in 1848; see John Anthony Froude, Carlyle's early life (2 vols., London, 1896 edn), 1, 144–145
25. Froude, Carlyle's life in London, 1, 483.
26. During the 1830s Buller was associated with the Benthamites but he later gravitated to the Foxite whigs. In a speech before the house of commons in 1844 Buller defended Lord John Russell's proposed ten hour day and promoted a ‘new and bold principle of legislation’. This principle made government responsible for ‘properly organizing [the working classes], guiding them by religion, bettering them by education, restraining them by police, ensuring their comforts by sanitary regulations, and checking the growth of mischievous social habits among them by legislative interference.’ Cited Mandler, Aristocratic government, p. 244; Carlyle can hardly have asked for more.
27. Froude, Carlyle's life in London, 1, 465;11, 44, 48–9
28. Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel’, pp. 186–187.
29. Carlyle, L.D.P., p. 33.
30. Carlyle, L.D.P., pp. 38–39.
31. L.D.P., pp. 142, 127ff.
32. L.D.P., pp. 1 34, 140–1.
33. An earlier statement of his view appeared in an article which Carlyle wrote for The Spectator; see ‘Irish regiments (of the new aera)’, The Spectator, XXII (1848), 464–465.
34. Carlyle's general impression of irresponsible Irish landlords and the ineffectual work provisions of poor law administration were confirmed and sharpened by contrast with a land improvement programme he observed at King William's Town in Co. Cork; see Thomas Carlyle, Reminiscences of my Irish journey in 1849, ed.J. A. Froude (London, 1882), pp. 146, 148–51, 201–2.
35. Carlyle's ideas on the role of the state in relation to the performance of the private sector are not dissimilar to some socialist views of the role of the state in a mixed economy. For a well-informed contemporary comment on the socialistic implications of Carlyle's ‘regimentation’ of paupers see the review of L.D.P. in the North British Review (Nov. 1850)
36. David Masson, a friendly critic; Jules Paul Seigel ed., Thomas Carlyle. The critical heritage (London, 1971), pp. 349–352.
37. The critical heritage p. 139.
38. Charles Richard Sanders et al., eds., The collected letters of Thomas and Jane Welsh Carlyle (Durham, NC, 1979-), V, 294. Subsequent references to this edition will appear as CL.
39. CL, V, 204 note 17; VI, 329.
40. The collected letters of Thomas and Jane Welsh Carlyle VII, 84; 22–3; V, 289; VII, 23.
41. Carlyle, L.D.P., pp. 74–75.
42. L.D.P., p. 76.
43. For an account of Carlyle's application of his analysis of Cromwell to contemporary politics see John Morrow, ‘Heroes and constitutionalists: the ideological significance of Thomas Carlyle's treatment of the English revolution’, History of Political Thought, XIV, 2 (1993), 205–24, 214–15, 221.
44. Thomas Carlyle, ‘Ireland and the British chief governor’, The Spectator, XXII (13 May 1848), 464.
45. L.D.P., pp. 93, 98.
46. This comment relates closely to Carlyle's claims concerning the positive significance of the opacity of Cromwell's speeches; see Carlyle, On heroes, hero-worship and the heroic in history (1841), p. 201
47. Morrow, ‘Heroes and constitutionalists’, p. 216.
48. For Carlyle's distinction between ‘ dead’ and ‘living’ aspects of the past see Morrow, ‘Heroes and constitutionalists’, pp. 206, 221.
49. Carlyle, L.D.P., p. 78.
50. Marrs, ed., Letters, p. 631
51. see also p. 629. Carlyle thought that the Corn Laws ought to be repealed because they discriminated against the bulk of the population and were, therefore, unjust. However, he brushed aside an attempt to recruit him for the Anti-Corn Law League in 1842 with the remark that he had ‘already engaged for a far bigger League (that of the oppressed Poor against the idle Rich; that of God against the Devil)’; Marrs, ed., Letters, pp. 545–546.
52. C. S. Parker, ed., Sir Robert Peelfrom his private papers (3 vols., London, 1899), 111, 474.
53. In the same letter Peel vowed that he would never again ‘burn my fingers by organising a party.’; see also Adelman, Peel and the conservative party, p. 76.
54. [Thomas Carlyle] ‘Irish regiments’, pp. 463–6, 464–5
55. ‘Legislation for Ireland’, Examiner, 13 May 1848, p. 308
56. ‘Ireland and Sir Robert Peel’, The Spectator, XXII (1849), 1085.
57. These articles are discussed by Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel’, pp. 182,184–9.
58. Commenting on the last of these pieces in his journal, Carlyle said that he was ‘very cruel upon Russell, commanding him to get about his business for ever’.; see Froude, Carlyle's life in London, 1, 486.
59. For Peel's views of the state as an agency which could promote relief by encouraging economic development in Ireland see Parker, ed., Sir Robert Peel, 111, 502, 509
60. for his intervention in the Paisley crisis see Tony Dickson and Tony Clarke, ‘Social concern and social control in nineteenth-century Scotland: Paisley 1841–1843’, Scottish Historical Review, LXV (1986), 48–60. The authors' ascription of Peel's role in this case to the need to maintain ‘social control’ reflects his general concern for strong, effective government; this ideal was, of course, shared by Carlyle.
61. Cited Adelman, Peel and the conservative party, p. 29
62. see also Peel and the conservative party, pp. 12–13
63. Norman Gash Sir Robert Peel (London, 1972), pp. 708–710
64. Ian D. C. Newbold, ‘Sir Robert Peel and the conservative party’, English Historical Review, CLVIII (1983), 529–57 for accounts of Peel's attitude towards party.
65. Cf. Seigel. ‘Carlyle and Peel’, p. 182 where Peel is described as a ‘staunch party man.’
66. These signs of heroism are apparent throughout Carlyle's writings on Cromwell; they also play a prominent role in Carlyle's reports of his meetings with Peel. See Froude, Carlyle's life in London, 1, 465–6; 11, 46.
67. For discussions of the idea of political heroism in Carlyle's writings see Thomas Calviner, ‘Heroes and hero-worship: not so simple in The French Revolution’, Victoria Institute Journal, XIII (1985), 83–96
68. Philip Rosenberg, The seventh hero (Cambridge, Mass., 1974), pp. 176–204
69. Vandem Bossche, Carlyle and the search for authority, pp. 97–102.
70. Hilton, ‘Peel: a reappraisal’, pp. 613–614.
71. The view of Peel as rationalistic is advanced by Norman Gash, Mr. Secretary Peel (London, 1961). It is not clear that these interpretations are mutually exclusive: Peel may have been committed passionately to a rational conception of administration designed to eliminate impediments to acts of providence. This possibility is reflected in Peel's warning to the house of commons that before attributing the Irish famine to an ‘all-wise and merciful Providence’ its members should satisfy themselves that its privations ‘have not been caused, they have not been aggravated by laws of man restricting, in the hour of scarcity, the supply of food!’
72. cited Hilton, The age of atonement, p. 250.
73. On social occasions Peel's rationality was accompanied by a sense of humour: Carlyle observed that Peel's ‘quiet talk’ was ‘distinguished by its sense of the ludicrous shining through a strong official rationality and even seriousness of temper.’; Froude, Carlyle's life in London, 11, 45.
74. Carlyle's and Cromwell's tutorial roles are clearly signalled in the letter accompanying these volumes; see Froude, Carlyle s life in London, 1, 403–404.
75. In an incomplete and unpublished essay on ‘Democracy’ which sketched many of the themes of L.D.P., Carlyle stressed the importance of ‘career open to talent’; see Froude, Carlyle s life in London, 1, 461 which reproduces a journal entry from 5/3/1848.
76. Cf. Seigel, ‘Carlyle and Peel’, p. 191: ‘Carlyle's faith in Peel has changed his contempt for parliament into hope, a hope based on faith in honest people.’ This judgement obscures the fact that Carlyle wished to transform parliament in a way that would deprive it of its conventional characteristics or roles.
77. L.D.P., p. 204.
78. Later, in his History of Frederich II of Prussia, called Frederick the Great, 11, 114–31, Carlyle attributed these functions to Friedrich's ‘Tobacco Parliaments’ but these were not even elected bodies.
79. This point is stressed in Carlyle, ‘[Peel fragment]’, pp. 193–195.
80. Carlyle's thoughts on this issue unwittingly echo those of his hero. Peel argued that if a leader's pursuit of the public interest was frustrated by his party he should ‘retire from office, but not from power; for the country will do justice to his motives, and will give him the strength which his party has denied him’; cited Adelman, Peel and the conservative party, p. 29.
81. For an account of Peel's contemporary and posthumous reputations see Donald Read, Peel and the Victorians (Oxford, 1987).
82. Carlyle, ‘[Peel fragment]’, p. 192.
83. For contemporary remarks on the radically unconstitutional implications of Carlyle's arguments in L.D.P., see the reviews by Aytoun and Masson in Seigel, ed., The critical heritage, pp. 325, 327, 359–61.
84. Carlyle, L.D.P., p. 84.
85. Thomas Carlyle, On heroes, hero-worship and the heroic in history (1840), ed. H. M. Buller (2 vols., London, 1926), 11, 16
86. L.D.P., p. 114.