ABSTRACT
To vindicate the sagacity o f Castlereagh’s foreign policy has become, in these latter days, superfluous. In regard to the domestic administration for which, together w ith Sidmouth, Castlereagh was held mainly responsible, it is very different. ‘Social war o f the Haves against the Have-nots was Castlereagh’s programme for the nine teenth century. . . . Recent historical research has done much for Castlereagh’s reputation as a Foreign Minister, but less than nothing to justify the domestic policy for which he made himself personally responsible by introducing the Six Acts into the House o f Com m ons.’ 1 Mr. Trevelyan undoubtedly represents a widely prevalent opinion. Even Lord Salisbury, as already indicated, recommends the prudent panegyrist to con fine himself to the record o f Castlereagh’s foreign policy. But the biographer can hardly decline, in the case o f Castlereagh, a task which Lord Salisbury himself accepted in the case o f Castlereagh’s master. Lord Salisbury made a spirited defence o f P itt’s domestic policy against the bitter invective o f Lord Macaulay. Conditions in England during the post-war years were not precisely parallel w ith those which prevailed in the early years o f the French Revolution. Far otherwise. Y et it is arguable that the situation which confronted Castlereagh and Lord Liverpool was intrinsically more menacing than the situation that evoked and, in Lord
1 Lord Grey of the Reform Bill, p. 181. z-l 8
Salisbury’s opinion, justified the repressive legislation o f Dundas and Pitt.
