Peace with Dignity, by William Ewart Gladstone

❰

1 2

❱

AND certainly if the business of a Foreign Secretary properly were to carry on such diplomatic wars, all must admit that the noble Lord is a master in the discharge of his functions. What, Sir, ought a Foreign Secretary to be? Is he to be like some gallant knight at a tournament of old, pricking forth into the lists, armed at all points, confiding in his sinews and his skill, challenging all comers for the sake of honour, and having no other duty than to lay as many as possible of his adversaries sprawling in the dust? If such is the idea of a good Foreign Secretary, I for one would vote to the noble Lord his present appointment for his life. But, Sir, I do not understand the duty of a Secretary for Foreign Affairs to be of such a character. I understand it to be his duty to conciliate* peace with dignity.*

by William Ewart Gladstone 1808-1898

abridged

Abridged from ‘Substance of the speech of the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, MP for the University of Oxford: on the affairs of Greece, and the foreign policy of the administration, on the 27th of June, 1850’ (1850), by William Ewart Gladstone (1809-1898).

* Gladstone used ‘conciliate’ in an old-fashioned sense, meaning ‘gain e.g. popularity, esteem or goodwill by pleasing acts’. That is, the Foreign Secretary’s job is to win peace for the country without behaving dishonourably.

* Gladstone was supported in his criticism by some heavyweights, including Benjamin Disraeli and Richard Cobden. “To govern such a people as this,” said Palmerston with artful tolerance, “is indeed an object worthy of the ambition of the noblest man who lives in the land; and therefore I find no fault with those who may think any opportunity a fair one, for endeavouring to place themselves in so distinguished and honourable a position.” But Cobden at any rate was acting out of principle rather than ambition. He was steadfastly opposed to military interventions abroad all his life, and had warned against this kind of thinking since the 1830s. See A Passion for Meddling.

Précis

Gladstone went on to say that if the role of the Foreign Secretary consisted in chivalrously vanquishing other nations, as if he were a mediaeval knight at a joust, then Palmerston was the ideal candidate; but he himself thought the post should be about defusing tensions without compromising principle, and to that his lordship was clearly unsuited.

Questions for Critics

1. What is the author aiming to achieve in writing this?

2. Note any words, devices or turns of phrase that strike you. How do they help the author communicate his ideas more effectively?

3. What impression does this passage make on you? How might you put that impression into words?

Based on The English Critic (1939) by NL Clay, drawing on The New Criticism: A Lecture Delivered at Columbia University, March 9, 1910, by J. E. Spingarn, Professor of Comparative Literature in Columbia University, USA.

Jigsaws

Express the ideas below in a single sentence, using different words as much as possible. Do not be satisfied with the first answer you think of; think of several, and choose the best.

Viscount Palmerston was Foreign Secretary. Gladstone did not like the way he did it.

See if you can include one or more of these words in your answer.

IApproach. IICriticise. IIIOffice.

Précis

Questions for Critics

Jigsaws

Tags

Read Next