lords by help of the waverers, he wrote, 'They have ruined themselves and us' (Desp. 5 and 23 Nov., 7 April; Speeches, 26 March and 19 April 1832).
Seeing that there was no longer any chance of throwing out the bill, he turned his mind at once to mitigating its evils. It was his rule to make the best of circumstances, and he could afford to disregard the charge of swallowing principles for place. William IV, who had so long held on with Grey untired, had begun to hang back, and on his refusal to create peers enough to overcome the opposition in committee, Grey resigned on 9 May. The king consulted Lyndhurst, and sent him to Wellington, and the duke felt bound to make an effort 'to enable the king to shake off the trammels of his tyrannical minister' (Desp. 27 April. 10 May). He consented to take office, either as head or member of an administration pledged to bring in an extensive reform bill. But Peel refused; Manners-Sutton, the speaker, was scared and drew back; and on the 15th Wellington and Lyndhurst informed the king of their failure. To avert the creation of peers, they promised to absent themselves from the further discussions of the bill (Desp. 10-17 May; Speeches, 17 May; Croker, ii. 153-70; Greville, ii. 294-304). Grey resumed office; peers enough followed Wellington's example to allow the bill to pass; and on 7 June it received the royal assent.
The odium incurred by all opponents of the bill fastened especially on Wellington. The windows of Apsley House were broken by the mob on 27 April 1831, three days after the death of the duchess, though her body was still lying there; and they were broken again on 12 Oct. Wellington left them unmended, and subsequently put up iron shutters, which remained till his death. On 18 June 1832 he was threatened by a mob as he was riding home from the mint, and had to take shelter at Lincoln's Inn (Desp. viii. 359; Gleig, iv. 62, 196). But his unpopularity did not last long. The university of Oxford, which had created him D.C.L. on 14 June 1814, elected him chancellor on 29 Jan. 1834, and he was received with the wildest enthusiasm when he went there to be installed on 9 June (Croker, ii. 225). His election helped to cause a temporary coolness between him and Peel, who had declined an invitation to stand, but was nevertheless sore on the subject (Peel, ii. 227-37).
Not one-fourth of the members of the reformed House of Commons were conservatives; but the weakness of the opposition lessened the cohesion of the government, and Ireland proved a stumbling-block. In November 1834 Melbourne (who had taken Grey's place in July) laid before the king the difficulties of the situation caused by the removal of Althorp to the lords. William IV seized the opportunity to change his ministers, and sent for Wellington (Croker, ii. 242; Palmerston, i. 309; Peel, ii. 251). The duke advised that Peel should be prime minister; but Peel was at Rome. Messengers were sent off to him; and, to prevent counter-manœuvres during his absence, the outgoing ministers were called upon to give up their seals. Wellington was sworn in as home secretary on 17 Nov., and was also appointed first lord of the treasury (Greville, ii. 148, 162). For the next three weeks he carried on the government almost alone, in order that Peel might be free to form his own cabinet. He passed from one department to another, and took care that there should be no arrears. Grey complained that he was 'uniting in a manner neither constitutional nor legal the appointments of first lord of the treasury and secretary of state' (Lieven, iii. 47), but the country was more amused than irritated. Peel arrived on 9 Dec., and Wellington then became foreign secretary.
The administration, born prematurely, lasted only four months. The election of 1835 strengthened the conservatives, but left parties so balanced that O'Connell's followers could turn the scale; and after three defeats on the Irish church question, Peel resigned on 8 April. Wellington damaged the ministry by choosing Londonderry [see Stewart (afterwards Vane), Charles William] as ambassador at St. Petersburg (Speeches, 16 March; Greville, iii. 225); but though he had disapproved of the foreign policy of Grey and Palmerston, the latter, on returning to the foreign office, wrote: 'The duke has acted with great fairness and honour in his administration of our foreign relations; he has fulfilled with the utmost fidelity all the engagements of the crown, and feeling that the existence of his government was precarious, he made no arbitrary changes in our system of policy' (Palmerston, i. 318).
Peel and Wellington resumed their former line of conduct in opposition; not trying to turn out the government, but to mend its measures, and to support the whigs against the radicals. They followed this course for six years, though with increasing difficulty as their party gained strength. The conservative majority in the lords was often restive under Wellington, and he himself differed on some questions from Peel, espe-
