Salisbury, MARQUIS OF. Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoyne-Cecil, third Marquis of Salisbury, was born at Hatfield House on the 3d of February 1830. The famous name Cecil is said to have been Sitsilt originally; a certain Robert Sitsilt, who served in the Welsh wars of Rufus' time, is believed by the family to have been its founder. It is more distinctly traceable to David Cyssell, of Stamford, who was sheriff of Northamptonshire in the reign of Henry VII. David's eldest son found a place at court as one of Henry VIII.'s pages, and after returning to private life became sheriff of Rutland. His dwelling was at Burghley, near Stamford (q.v.); and here his son was born (his eldest son) who served England and Elizabeth so wisely for forty years. This statesman, Lord Burghley (q. v.), had two sons, one by his first wife, a daughter of Sir John Cheke, the other by his marriage with a daughter of Sir Anthony Cooke. The eldest was made Earl of Exeter, and from him the present Marquis of Exeter descends. The younger son was the famous Robert Cecil, whose great services to James I., and to the state, were rewarded within two years by three steps in the peerage. In 1603 he became Lord Cecil of Essendine, in 1604 Viscount Cranborne, and in 1605 Earl of Salisbury. The marquis is directly descended from the first Earl of Salisbury, and inherits Hatfield (q. v.) from him. As Lord Robert Cecil he proceeded from Eton to Christ Church, Oxford, in 1847. Two years afterwards he took the B.A. degree with an honorary fourth-class in mathematics. He shared in the Union Society's debates, always as distinctly Conservative, and yet more distinctly as a churchman. He was treasurer of the Union Society in his time, and gave great satisfaction in that office. His Oxford life over, Lord Robert Cecil went forth on a round of travel, extending to Australasia. On his return he was elected a Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford, and very soon afterwards entered the House of Commons, at the age of twenty-three being returned for Stamford. His address to the electors declared him a Conservative, warmly attached to the Church of England, eager to associate religion with education, and anxious for social and sanitary improvements—for the good of the poor particularly. He took his seat in the House of Commons when that assembly met in February 1854; and his first speech therein (on university reform) was delivered in the April following. A year afterwards he made his first foreign-affairs speech—on the terms of peace that should be imposed on Russia (Crimean war). He came further into notice when, on a motion condemning the conduct of the Aberdeen administration as 'the first and chief cause of the calamities that befell' our soldiery in the Crimea, he seconded General Peel in moving 'the previous question.' He took a busy part in the domestic reforms of 1856.
In 1857 Lord Robert Cecil launched his first legislative proposal, which was that parliamentary electors should be enabled to record their votes by means of voting papers, filled in before a justice of the peace; a proposal of particular service at county and university elections. In 1858 he opposed the abolition of church-rates in a speech which further advanced him in the estimation of his party; and he again distinguished himself in supporting a motion of Mr Gladstone's backing up the plan of uniting Moldavia and Wallachia. The Conservatives were now in office, and their leaders resolved to take up the question of Parliamentary Reform. In 1859 Mr Disraeli introduced his Reform Bill of 'fancy franchises,' Lord Robert Cecil supporting it by arguments which he had set forth in the 'Oxford Essays' for 1858. The bill upset the government. When, in the time of its successors, the paper-duties question threw the two Houses into conflict, and when Mr Gladstone paralysed the opposition of the House of Lords by including the abolition of the duties in one single Budget Bill, Lord Robert Cecil opposed the novel device with extraordinary vigour and acerbity. It was now seen that he had all the gifts that carry a man from the back seats of the House of Commons to the most honourable positions on 'the front bench.' From this time forth Lord Robert Cecil became a frequent speaker; facile on many subjects, studious of all that he dealt with, pugnacious, vigorous, often brilliant, and remarkable for a rather unfortunate kind of sarcasm. In debates on pauperism, on army organisation, on civil service reform, on finance he was heard to considerable effect in those years; but he never spoke more warmly, or with more obvious personal interest, than in defence of the church or when popular education was discussed. Foreign affairs engaged his attention hardly less, as was seen, for example, when the German attack on Denmark, and the conduct of Lord Palmerston's government in relation thereto, was brought before the House of Commons by Mr Disraeli.
The years 1865 and 1866 were important in the history of Lord Salisbury. On the 14th of June in the first-named year he became Viscount Cranborne and heir to the marquisate by the death of his elder brother; in July of the following year he was admitted to the cabinet under Lord Derby's administration as Secretary of State for India. In 1865 parliament had been dissolved, and Lord Palmerston had been confirmed in office by the constituencies; but within three months afterwards (October 18) Palmerston was dead. Thereupon Mr Gladstone took the leadership of the House of Commons and virtually of the cabinet; the Reform question was revived, and a bill brought in of which Lord Cranborne was one of the most effective opponents. One of his speeches (on an amendment by Earl Grosvenor) is an epitome of some of the strongest objections of Conservatism to such an extension of the franchise as was soon afterwards carried by Mr Disraeli. Mr Gladstone's Reform Bill was defeated; and when on the resignation of the government Lord Derby took office, Lord Cranborne was made Secretary for India. It is asserted by many and denied by none that to this office Lord Cranborne brought good business habits and a remarkably prompt apprehension of detail. But he was not to hold it long. The Reform agitation continued, and Lord Derby and Mr Disraeli resolved upon one of those measures called 'dishing.' The first business of the new Tory government was to concoct a Reform Bill. Discontent with its provisions compelled Lord Cranborne, Lord Carnarvon, and General Peel to resign their offices. The bill was proceeded with when, quitting his place on the Treasury bench for a seat below the gangway, Lord Cranborne fought against the measure with extreme pertinacity and vigour; we should add, with honourable consistency. His unsparing invective on this occasion did not improve his relations with Mr Disraeli, which were never rooted in personal friendship at any time.
When, in the spring of 1868, Mr Gladstone moved for the disestablishment and disendowment of the Irish Church his strongest opponent was Lord Cranborne. The last speech he ever made in the House of Commons was addressed to this subject. On the 12th of April 1868 he became Marquis of Salisbury, and his first work in the House of Lords was still to defend the church. After speaking against anti-ritual legislation, he had again to deal with the disestablishment question.
This he did with his accustomed vigour, prophesying that the disestablishment of the Irish Church would have no such effect in dispelling Fenianism as Mr Gladstone anticipated. In 1868, the first year of Mr Gladstone's first administration, Lord Salisbury proposed to abolish the rule whereby bills are dropped when both Houses have not time to pass them in the same session; this proposal fell through. He supported Earl Russell's Life Peerages Bill (1868), which was rejected. Next year he was elected Chancellor of the University of Oxford. Meanwhile disaffection and outrage in Ireland went on, and when in 1870 the government framed a strong Peace Preservation Bill, Lord Salisbury (who was now recognised as the leading Conservative in the House of Lords) supported it in a sub-sarcastic speech, the graver argument of which was conveyed in the following sentence: 'In this country you have long been content only to guide; in Ireland it is essential that you should govern.' The Irish Land Act of 1870 was less to his taste, but it passed without violent opposition. In the following year Mr Gladstone's action in abolishing the army purchase-system by royal warrant, when legislation for that purpose appeared difficult and tedious, called Lord Salisbury to the front. The bill for abolishing religious tests in the universities gave him more arduous employment in criticism and amendment, chiefly addressed to the maintenance of religious instruction.
An important speech made at the time of the Franco-German war, recalling the obligations of Great Britain to maintain the independence of (exactly) half-a-dozen states, enhanced Lord Salisbury's reputation as a student of foreign affairs. As to home affairs this period of his career may be epitomised in the remark that he took an active part in expounding the errors of the government, which were gradually preparing for the defeat inflicted on it with the rejection of the Irish University Bill. Resignation ensued (March 1873); the Conservatives declined office; in January 1874 parliament was dissolved, and the Conservatives came in with a great majority.
Whether Lord Salisbury would consent to serve with Mr Disraeli, whether Mr Disraeli would invite Lord Salisbury to join him, now became a question of the day. There was no love between them; but the one wished for a footing in the cabinet, and the other felt that his omission would be a danger; and so Lord Salisbury became Secretary for India a second time. It must suffice to say that in this post he gave unfailing proof of great administrative ability. Before the end of the year Lord Salisbury had again come into collision with his chief. He hotly opposed the Public Worship Regulation Act (a government measure); and Mr Disraeli replied to him very tartly in a speech remembered by the words, 'He is not a man who measures his phrases; he is a great master of gibes, and flouts, and jeers.' But the rupture which neither man could afford was avoided. Lord Salisbury now took a very active interest in university reform, but he was soon called to more bustling employments. The Eastern Question was reopened; Turkey was at war with Servia and Montenegro; the Bulgarian atrocities were made known; and to stay the mischief a conference of the European Powers was held at Constantinople. Lord Salisbury was chosen as envoy from Great Britain, and the choice was presently repented of in Downing Street. His conduct at Constantinople surprised not only the uninformed public, but his colleagues. Indeed he did not scruple to act against the whole spirit of his instructions, nor did he heed the remonstrances sent out to him from the Foreign Office. Thus did he come into direct collision with Lord Derby (then Foreign Secretary). But once placed in the position of envoy Lord Salisbury was practically beyond control: to recall him was of course impossible. Later, when the Turks were beaten down, and the treaty of San Stefano became known, there was so much disagreement in Lord Beaconsfield's cabinet that his own policies (wise or unwise) were paralysed. When Lord Derby's secession followed Lord Carnarvon's, Lord Salisbury became Foreign Secretary. Without the loss of a day he signalled the change by publishing a circular despatch so powerfully assertive of the British objections to the San Stefano Treaty that it electrified the public mind; but its glory was sadly dimmed when a famous secret agreement with Russia crept into the newspapers a little while afterwards. Russia being compelled (mainly by the resistance of the British government) to submit her peace treaty with Turkey to a congress of European Powers (held at Berlin), Lord Beaconsfield resolved to act for Great Britain himself, Lord Salisbury accompanying him to the German capital. This arrangement is not improbably explained by Lord Salisbury's too wilful conduct as envoy at Constantinople. The government had a troublous time in Afghanistan and South Africa after these events, Lord Salisbury taking an energetic part in repelling the opposition attacks that arose therefrom.
The 'Midlothian campaign,' in the winter of 1879, was followed by a dissolution of parliament in March of the following year, and that by a heavy defeat for the Conservatives. The worsening state of Ireland and the action and inaction of the Gladstone government in relation thereto, the abandonment of Kandahar, and the peace after Majuba Hill kept Lord Salisbury busy enough even before he succeeded to the leadership of the Conservative party on the death of Lord Beaconsfield. The Irish Land Act and its complete failure as a pacifying measure, the troubles with the Boers, the disturbances in Egypt, a new Reform Bill, the Redistribution of Seats Bill, the Soudan, Gordon's mission and his abandonment gave Lord Salisbury a busy time as opposition leader till the resignation of the government in June 1885. Lord Salisbury now became prime-minister and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Mr Gladstone soon returned to power, was wrecked in 1886 by his Home Rule Bill, and after a general election in that year Lord Salisbury again took office, the government being now known as Unionist. The ministry resigned soon after the (unfavourable) general election of 1892; and the main work of the Unionist party was successful opposition to the Home Rule Bill of 1893. Lord Salisbury's third administration, formed in 1895 on the resignation of Lord Rosebery, included the Duke of Devonshire and Mr Chamberlain. It has had to deal with embarrassing situations in Armenia and Crete, in South Africa, in Venezuela, and in China. The conduct of British interests in China in the face of Russian encroachments provoked much criticism, some of it unreasonable. The recouquest of the Soudan in 1898 was emphasised by the withdrawal of the French expedition from Fashoda and the Upper Nile, after a period of very strained relations between France and Britain, and the display of not a little 'firmness' by Lord Salisbury. The fleet has been greatly strengthened; an amicable understanding with Germany has been arrived at; there has been an extraordinary growth of friendly feeling between Britain and the United States; and Ireland, more contented and prosperous than heretofore, began in 1899 to work its new system of local government.
President of the British Association in 1894, Lord Salisbury is by temperament a student; a man of robust thought, of high and scornful intellect; a recluse, to be relieved of the torment of association with inferior minds. A masterly and most impressive orator, he yet neglects the art of persuasion; and in speeches of which every word seems to have been well weighed and carefully chosen some startlingly injudicious sentence almost invariably breaks loose. His will is commonly believed to be as firm and well-knit as his speech. It must always be remembered that the difficulties of his task as Foreign Secretary were enormous, though they would probably have been much lighter had he gained a larger measure of popular liking; in 1900 he became Lord Privy Seal. Lord Salisbury was married in 1857 to Georgiana, daughter of Sir Edward Alderson (she died 20th Nov. 1899), and has had issue five sons and three daughters.
See F. S. Pulling, Life and Speeches of the Marquis of Salisbury (2 vols. 1885); the short Life by Traill (1891); and the Life and Times by Jeyes (4 vols. 1894-95).