but they were approved by Canning. A more direct method was to see that accurate copies of state papers and speeches were inserted in the foreign Press, and this was done, and with marked effect, in the case of Canning's famous speech of the 12th December 1826.

It will be seen that, despite all his efforts, even Canning occasionally failed to withhold information from astute or unscrupulous journalists. It is certain that no Foreign Minister could withhold private or confidential information from Pressorgans to-day. But Canning can claim to have been more scrupulous in the matter than his colleagues or than foreign diplomats.

2. CANNING'S PERSONAL VIEW OF THE POWER AND USE OF THE PRESS

Canning was not an enemy of the Press; he was a discriminating supporter of it. "I acknowledge its power," he said in 1816, "I submit to its judgment, but I will not be summoned to its bar!" This utterance seems to mean that, while he allowed it a sphere of power, he did not think it necessary to defend himself against any personal attack a paper might make upon him.

None the less, he fully recognised the great importance of the new power that had arisen. He compared the Fourth Estate to another new power which had arisen upon the earth, and urged the public to "take into account other powers extrinsic to the two Houses of Parliament, which are at work in the political world and require to be balanced and counterpoised in their operation.

"What should we think of that philosopher, who, in writing, at the present day, a treatise upon naval architecture and the theory of navigation, should omit wholly from his calculation that new and mighty power,-new, at least, in the application of its might,—which walks the water, like a giant rejoicing in his course;-stemming alike the tempest and the tide;-accelerating intercourse, shortening distances;-creating, as it were, unexpected neighbourhoods, and new combinations of social and commercial relation; and giving to the fickleness of winds and faithlessness of waves the certainty and steadiness of a highway upon the land? Such a writer, though he might

describe a ship correctly; though he might show from what quarters the winds of heaven blow, would be surely an incurious and an idle spectator of the progress of nautical science, who did not see in the power of STEAM a corrective of all former calculations. So, in political science, he who, speculating on the British Constitution, should content himself with marking the distribution of acknowledged technical powers between the House of Lords, the House of Commons, and the Crown, and assigning to each their separate provinces,-to the Lords their legislative authority,-to the Crown its veto (how often used?) to the House of Commons its power of stopping supplies (how often, in fact, necessary to be resorted to?)and should think that he had thus described the British Constitution as it acts and as it is influenced in its action; but should omit from his enumeration that mighty power of Public Opinion, embodied in a Free Press, which pervades, and checks, and, perhaps, in the last resort, nearly governs the whole;-such a man would, surely, give but an imperfect view of the government of England as it is now, modifies, and would greatly underrate the counteracting influences against which that of the executive power has to contend." 1

Canning recognised public opinion as the steam driving the government engine, and in the last resort he seems to have viewed public opinion as a more important influence than the Press itself, which it ultimately controlled. Thus it came about that he trusted to bring public opinion to his side first and to leave the Press to follow it.) The Courier, for instance, was important if it represented England, worthless if it represented France. The Times could be defied, for if he won public opinion, it would be borne along with the stream. Some of his methods have already been indicated (pp. 303-4). His view seems to have been that the Press ought not habitually to receive private information, nor be encouraged to comment upon foreign affairs when undesirable. The Press was not like the sun, which could lighten every dark place it had the more limited power of throwing a beam of light on one or other dark corner. Hence, at one time it was as inconvenient as at another it might be useful. When Canning considered the moment ripe he gave an open and

1 Aug. 30/22. Liverpool Speeches, [1825], pp. xiv-xv.

frank exposition of policy in the Commons or on the platform, and made the most careful effort to see that accurate reports of his speeches reached the public. Every speech delivered was corrected for the Press, revised, and frequently almost rewritten with the most meticulous care, so that every word could be weighed and balanced. A revised and corrected report of a speech nearly always followed the jejune or malicious extracts which were given on the morning after delivery. But, whenever he considered the crisis delicate or the time inexpedient, no one was more careful to refuse all information. Some statesmen had been wont to transmit correct public information to the Press, and others to send to them private communications. Canning did not, as has been seen, entirely escape from some indirect connection with it. His peculiarity was that he eschewed this connection and preferred direct communication of documents to private communication of information. He used the Press to enlighten the public, but looked, as it were, beyond the Press to the people at large. He wished to make the Press the instrument of public opinion, not public opinion the instrument of the Press.

3. SECRET VERSUS OPEN DIPLOMACY

This policy of popular appeal quite confounded contemporaries, and particularly the diplomats. It was novel, it was alarming, it was successful. Castlereagh had displayed! a lofty contempt for public opinion: why did not Canning do the same? He did not, in fact, believe that it was right or expedient to do so. His strength, as he wrote to Sir Henry Wellesley in 1823, lay in making foreigners believe that he said the same things in public as he did in private. When he broke loose from the Neo-Holy Alliance he had, indeed, no other resource than an appeal to the public. If he could not influence foreign States in conference he must influence them first by British public opinion and next by the infection which that influence spread to other countries. He was, in short, compelled to adopt the method of open diplomacy,' and pleaded the Parliamentary system as an excuse for doing so. But, in reality, he was always looking beyond the walls of Parliament to the people outside.

This method was one which no foreigner and few British Ultra-Tories understood or approved. The Times, for instance, commented on Canning's speeches to Liverpool in August 1823, suggesting that such attempts to win favour with the public were unworthy of a minister. George IV. complained to Wellington of Canning's attendance at the Mansion-House dinner in 1824, because this attitude separated him from his colleagues; "the King will never consent that his government shall be degraded by such attempts to acquire popularity" (Ist May 1824). And the Duke agreed with his

master.

Foreign diplomats were unanimous in their condemnation. "He tries," wrote Chateaubriand, "to compel himself to find a support which his predecessor disdained." Metternich wrote, "He flatters revolution and is a Radical" (20th March 1823). "The fatal divergence of principles which is anew displayed in all its deformity . . . Mr Canning has no other aim than to sacrifice to the opinion of the day, to flatter the pride of some, the blind cupidity of others, and to impose silence on the factions. It is not far-sighted for the future, but it seems that the present moment is constantly the only one which this Minister consults" (30th January 1824). "His strength consists only in a certain popularity" (30th May 1824). "The basis of the erroneous policy of Mr Canning is to be found in the search for a personal popularity which is unattainable "2 (11th December 1824).

Metternich's views on the subject were unquestionably sincere, for on the accessions of two genuine LegitimistsCharles X. of France and Czar Nicholas of Russia-he rejoiced at their autocratic tendencies but deplored their attempts to win popularity. "For a number of years I have heard so much of public opinion that it is the duty of men entrusted with the first interests of society, to examine the worth of this phrase. I doubt very much if there is anyone, placed above the mists of illusion, who knows what real public opinion is, and what is represented under the colours attached to it by

1 A.A.E., 617, to Polignac, Oct. 11/23.

V.S.A., Weisungen nach England. Metternich to Esterházy, Mar. 20/23; May 30, Dec. 14/24. England, Varia, 1824, Jan. 30/24; ibid to ibid.