A History of England, Period III. Constitutional Monarchy (part 3 of 4)

A History of England, Period III. Constitutional Monarchy (part 3 of 4)

The Parliament which assembled early the following year (1801) was the first united Parliament of Great Britain and Ireland, and but a few days of its existence had elapsed before a great and most unexpected change took place in the position of affairs. There had long been a want of harmony among the members of the Cabinet with regard to the war; but there had now arisen an even more formidable question. The union had been effected by much bribery in money, titles, and places; these promises had all been fulfilled. But there was one section of the Irish whose opposition would have been fatal to the measure, but to which such promises could not be made. The tacit support, or at all events neutrality, of the Irish Roman Catholics had been secured by a vague but very well-understood promise that their claims should be considered under the new arrangement. It is certain that both Castlereagh and Cornwallis understood that this was so, and Pitt felt it an imperative duty to make an effort to fulfil this promise. The matter had been talked over in the Cabinet as early as the autumn of 1799, and was formally discussed in the presence of Lord Castlereagh at the end of September 1800. The Chancellor, Lord Loughborough, was at that time in attendance upon the King at Weymouth. He was a man of a base and time-serving nature. At this Cabinet he displayed his hostility to any measure for the relief of the Catholics, and used his opportunity to instill into the King's mind that to consent to any such measure would be a breach of his coronation oath. In this he was backed up by Lord Auckland, who had always been a friend of Pitt's, but who was inclined to underhand intrigue, and did not think it beneath him to prejudice the King's mind against Pitt's policy. Matters were brought to a crisis when, at a levée in the beginning of 1801, the King mentioned openly to Dundas that he was aware that such a measure was in contemplation, adding his usual formula, that he "should hold any one who supported it as his personal enemy." It became plain to Pitt that he could hesitate no longer, and although the King sent Addington the Speaker, a personal friend of Pitt's, to persuade him not to bring the matter forward, he sent a letter to George declaring his intention and his determination to resign if he was not allowed to fulfil his promises to the Irish. The King wrote back urging him to remain in office and to drop the measure, but Pitt was determined, and the King was forced to accept his resignation. In his place he desired Addington, a man of very second-rate ability, to form a ministry, a duty which, on the advice of Pitt, he accepted. The resignation of the great minister, as it was only personal, did not imply the resignation of the whole ministry, but all the great members of it, Grenville, Dundas, Windham, and Spencer, retired with him. It is pleasant to think that Lord Loughborough's duplicity received no reward, he was excluded from the new arrangements, Lord Eldon, at the King's own request, became Lord Chancellor, and Loughborough had to content himself with the earldom of Rosslyn.

[Sidenote: Illness of the King.]

[Sidenote: Character of the Addington ministry.]

The shock of parting with a minister he had so long trusted brought on a renewal of the King's insanity, and measures were taken for a regency under the same restrictions that Pitt had before insisted upon. George was at this time so popular that even the Opposition treated him in his illness with every consideration. His popularity, the natural consequence of his well-ordered domestic life, had been considerably increased by an attempt in the preceding year on his life. When entering Drury Lane Theatre a man had risen in the pit and discharged a pistol at him, two bullets passing a very little above his head. The miscreant who made the attempt was a lunatic of the name of Hadfield. The King, always remarkable for his personal courage, had displayed great calmness under the circumstances, and the loyalty of the nation had been much excited. Fortunately, under Dr. Willis's treatment, his illness was speedily mastered, and in the beginning of March he was declared convalescent. But his illness, which he himself traced to Pitt's conduct, had such an effect upon that statesman, that he wrote promising never to reintroduce the Catholic question. His friends did not see why, under these circumstances, he should not remain in office, but Addington naturally objected to giving up the place he had just gained, and the Government continued in his hands, supported by a Cabinet of complete mediocrity, upheld for the present by Pitt's influence. It was indeed just such a minister and Cabinet as suited the King's well-known views--safe, conservative, submissive, and without commanding ability. Nor did the great country party object to a change which freed them from the imperious domination of one so vastly their superior as Pitt, and placed over them a man whose talents were not superior to their own, and whom they might hope to guide rather than follow. Though Pitt acted honestly in the first instance, it is only too probable that he regarded Addington as a temporary substitute for himself, and designed to return to power after the present difficulty was over, and when he had made a public demonstration for the purpose of saving his honour. However this may be, his somewhat lukewarm support was before long changed into open enmity. At first, however, he spoke with even exaggerated admiration of the new Cabinet, which in the House was completely successful, while great successes both by sea and land somewhat relieved the nation from its embarrassing position.

[Sidenote: The French army in Egypt.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Alexandria. March 21, 1801.]

The French army, deserted by their great commander, was left shut up in Egypt under the command of Kleber, a man of organizing genius, who bid fair to establish the French influence in that country. He was, however, assassinated by a fanatical Mussulman (June 1800), and the command fell into the hands of Menou, a general of but second-rate capacity. Before this change of command, a treaty, known as the Treaty of El Arish, had been completed (Jan. 24), by which the French army was to be allowed a safe return to France. This convention was concluded on board the flagship, and with the full approval of Sir Sidney Smith; but, meanwhile, intercepted despatches had made known to the Cabinet the almost hopeless condition of the French army, and orders were sent to the Mediterranean that no treaties should be sanctioned by the admiral which did not insist on the surrender of the French. The Treaty of El Arish had been concluded without this knowledge and before these orders had reached Sir Sidney Smith. Moreover, affairs in Egypt had much changed, for Kleber, indignantly rejecting all idea of surrender, had at once proceeded to attack the Turks, had won over them a great victory at Heliopolis (March 20, 1800) and reoccupied Cairo. It became necessary therefore to renew the war, and Sir Ralph Abercromby, who, with Pulteney, had been employed in fruitless expeditions against Ferrol and Cadiz, collecting the troops employed in both expeditions, in number about 20,000, proceeded to Egypt. Troops also under Sir David Baird were ordered to attack the country from India. A landing was forced at Aboukir Bay, under the immediate command of General afterwards Sir John Moore, and on the 21st of March a battle in the neighbourhood of Alexandria was fought, where the French were thoroughly defeated. The English had to deplore the loss of Sir Ralph Abercromby, but General Hutchinson, who succeeded him, continued to act with vigour. The Grand Vizier, with a large but disorderly Turkish army, attacked Cairo, while the English kept Menou besieged in Alexandria. In June Cairo fell, and General Baird having arrived from India, the combined English army compelled Menou to capitulate in Alexandria on the 27th of August. The terms of surrender were honourable. The French army was allowed to return to France, but all ships, together with all the objects of art which the French had collected, became the property of the conquerors. This success, which showed the unbroken vigour of England, tended to accelerate the peace which was gradually becoming necessary for all parties, and for which negotiations were already set on foot in London with the full approbation of Pitt.

[Sidenote: Battle of Copenhagen. April 2.]

[Sidenote: Peace between England and Russia.]

Meanwhile, but a few days after the victory of Alexandria, the cloud which had risen in the Baltic was also dispersed. The renewal of the Armed Neutrality, and the general conduct of Russia, made it evident that that country was engaged in the French interests. A fleet under Sir Hyde Parker, with Nelson as second in command, was despatched to the Baltic. Negotiation was tried with the Danes, but wholly unsuccessfully, and Parker, a dilatory commander, was induced by Nelson's energy to consent to an attack upon Copenhagen. The passage of the Sound was forced without loss, but an examination of the enemy's position showed that they had used the delay which had been given them to great advantage. Shore batteries had been erected and put into fighting trim; floating batteries established, and the harbour covered with a line of vessels of all sorts four miles in length. Within this lay the Danish fleet. Nelson offered to attack with ten sail of the line; he was allowed twelve. The attack was made from the south, Sir Hyde Parker on the outside threatening the batteries and the vessels at the mouth of the harbour. At ten o'clock on the 2nd of April, Nelson began his attack. Several vessels grounded and were rendered useless, and so hot was the engagement that Sir Hyde Parker thought it better to hoist the signal for discontinuing action. Nelson declined to obey it, and the other captains took their orders from him. Many of the Danish ships had struck, but being constantly reinforced from the shore, continued the fight, it is said, even after they had surrendered. This was probably an accident; but Nelson took advantage of it to write a friendly letter to the Crown Prince. "The Vice-Admiral Lord Nelson," he said, "has been commanded to spare Denmark when she no longer resists. The line of defence which covered her shores has struck to the British flag; but if the firing is continued on the part of Denmark, he must set on fire all the prizes he has taken without having the power of saving the men who have so nobly defended them. The brave Danes are the brothers, and should never be the enemies, of the English." He then agreed to a truce while the wounded were moved from the prizes. Having taken advantage of the lull to withdraw his fleet from the difficult channel in which they were entangled, he went on shore to negotiate a treaty. To enable him to attack the Russians, he insisted on a long armistice, which a threat of immediate bombardment induced the Danes to grant. The English fleet then sailed against the Swedes, who withdrew, and were left unmolested, while the fleet proceeded against the Russians. On his way, however, Nelson received the news that the capricious despotism of Paul had excited his courtiers to a conspiracy, which, though apparently aimed only at the deposition of the Emperor, had in fact ended in his assassination. The accession of the young Emperor Alexander I. completely changed the policy of Russia. The embargo was removed from the British shipping and the merchant seamen liberated. As the Armed Neutrality still existed, Nelson would have proceeded to strong measures; but Sir Hyde Parker was satisfied, and though he was recalled, the complete change in Russian policy rendered further action unnecessary. In June a treaty of peace was signed in St. Petersburg, by which the Armed Neutrality, with its claims, was given up, but the right of search accurately defined. It was also agreed that blockades must henceforward be really efficient in order to be valid. Blockades by proclamation were thus abolished, and could be only sustained when the blockading force was sufficient to enforce them.

[Sidenote: Preliminaries of peace. Oct. 1, 1801.]

Bonaparte was still threatening an invasion of England, and gunboats and rafts had been collected at Boulogne. These the Government ordered Nelson to attack, but the attempt was on the whole unsuccessful. However, the supremacy of England on the sea was so great that there could not be much fear of the landing of a foreign army, and the French, defeated in Egypt and thwarted in their Northern policy, were ready to come to terms. In October the preliminaries of a treaty were signed. By this England gave up all its conquests except Trinidad and Ceylon. "The Cape of Good Hope was to be restored to the Batavian Republic, and to be used as a free port. Malta was to be restored to the Knights of St. John,[17] under the guarantee of one of the great powers; Porto Ferrajo was to be evacuated. On the other side, the Republic of the Ionian Islands was to be acknowledged, and the French were to withdraw from Naples and the Roman States; the integrity of Portugal was to be secured; Egypt was to be restored to the Porte, and the Newfoundland fisheries to be placed on the same footing as before the war."[18]

[Sidenote: Opinions in England concerning the peace.]

Although the preliminary treaty had been signed, it cost some time and much anxious negotiation before its final ratification in the March of the following year. These negotiations were held at Amiens, on the part of England by Lord Cornwallis, on that of France by Joseph Bonaparte, assisted by Talleyrand. At the opening of Parliament, on the 29th of October 1801, the minister had been able to mention in the King's speech with satisfaction both the preliminary treaty with France and the arrangements with the Northern powers which put an end to the threatened Armed Neutrality. By the bulk of the people the return of peace had been hailed with extreme delight. General Lauriston, who had brought the authority for signing the preliminaries, had been received with a public ovation, the populace had dragged his carriage through the streets, and London and other towns had been illuminated. In completing these preliminaries Addington and his friends had acted with the entire approbation of Pitt, who, at heart cordially disliking war, had brought himself to believe that Bonaparte, having now obtained the supreme power in France, would probably be satisfied; at the same time, as he himself pointed out, Jacobinism had been already checked in England, and the lesson taught to the world that the fruit of Jacobin principles was terrorism and anarchy, and its end a military despotism. Seeing the isolated position which England now occupied, and believing the causes for further war removed, Pitt accepted the terms of the peace, although the concessions on the part of England, especially the surrender of the Cape of Good Hope, were no doubt great. With the support then of Pitt and of the general feeling of the country, the ministry found in Parliament large majorities in favour of their peace. But Pitt's views were by no means shared by a considerable number of his late colleagues. Grenville, Windham, and Spencer clung tenaciously to their old view that Bonaparte's career was but beginning, that his policy would continue to be one of aggression, that his present offers of peace were delusive, and that for the honour of England and the safety of Europe the war should be continued.

[Sidenote: Napoleon appropriates Holland, Switzerland, and Italy.]

Before the preliminaries were ratified abundant proofs were given that they were right and that Pitt was wrong. Taking advantage of the exhausted condition of the Continent, of the eager desire of Addington to secure peace, and of the position of England, which was not only without allies, but unable while negotiations were still pending to make objections upon the score of treaty rights, Bonaparte hastened to complete his ambitious projects--by the appropriation of those smaller States which had already fallen into a state of dependence upon France (the Republics of Holland, Switzerland, and the North of Italy, now called the Cisalpine Republic), and by the re-establishment of the French colonial power by means of a great expedition to reconquer St. Domingo. His method of proceeding with regard to the Republics was craftily arranged so as to give to the assumption of French supremacy the appearance of voluntary action on the part of the people themselves. For Holland a constitution was drawn up in France of a strongly republican character, which, when rejected by the National Assemblies of Holland, was put to the vote of the whole body of the people, and being accepted by a very small minority, while the rest abstained from voting, was declared established by the national will (Oct. 17, 1801). In Switzerland, not yet ripe for annexation, instructions were given to the French minister to thwart all efforts at the formation of a stable constitution, and to keep things so unsettled that an appeal to France was certain sooner or later to be made, while French troops garrisoned the Republic ostensibly for the purpose of keeping order. Less delicacy was used with regard to Italy. The chief rulers of the Cisalpine Republic were summoned to Lyons, a constitution of Bonaparte's creation given them, and they were ordered to elect as their President Bonaparte himself (Jan. 1802). The expedition to St. Domingo was made still further to advance Napoleon's projects; for thither was sent, to be destroyed by the climate, almost the whole of the army of the Rhine, the only part of the military establishment of France not wholly devoted to him.

[Sidenote: Negotiations at Amiens.]

[Sidenote: Peace concluded. March 27, 1802.]

Meanwhile the projects for the ultimate annexation of Piedmont and Genoa were carried on, and distinct orders sent to the negotiators at Amiens to withdraw entirely from discussion the affairs of Holland, Switzerland, and the Italian Republics, in other words, to treat with England as if the affairs of Europe were entirely beyond her cognizance. The withdrawal of these points of discussion left little to be settled except minute points with regard to fisheries and prisoners, for Bonaparte also entirely refused to entertain the idea of a commercial treaty with England. The only point of interest left was Malta. According to the preliminaries this island was to be evacuated and to be restored to the Knights under the guarantee of Russia. But a new sovereign was now upon the Russian throne less likely to be under the immediate influence of France. Bonaparte therefore wished to change the terms, to destroy the fortifications of the island, thus rendering it useless in a military point of view, and to place it under the guardianship of the King of Naples; in other words, to render it at once worthless to the English and an easy prey to the French whenever they should desire to reoccupy it. In their eagerness for peace the English ministry consented to be blind to Bonaparte's aggressions, though firm upon the point of Malta, and though they refused to acknowledge the existence of the newly-organized republics. No doubt, what the English meant was that, for the sake of peace, they would bear what Bonaparte had already done, but that any further step would produce war. Bonaparte, on the other hand, argued that the refusal to acknowledge these republics was in fact a resignation on the part of England of the right of interference with them; henceforward that country could not complain although they were incorporated with France. There were thus a number of outstanding questions left unsettled at the peace, which was finally completed on the 27th of March 1802.

[Sidenote: Napoleon mistakes the temper of England.]

[Sidenote: Continues his aggressions.]

But it had begun to be plain to all thinking men that it could be but a short truce; and indeed Napoleon was already writing that "a renewal of war was necessary for his existence, as the memory of old victories was likely speedily to pass away." In fact, he totally mistook the temper of England. Addington's ministry, no doubt, was pledged to peace, and was anxious at all hazards to make it durable. The people of England were indeed weary of the war and eagerly desirous for peace; but they had lost none of their independence and pride, and anything which should prove either that their honour was attacked, their commercial activity trammelled, or their independence of action limited, would easily produce a reaction, and bring them back to their warlike temper. Bonaparte, while intending to renew the war sooner or later, meant to keep the occasion in his own hands, but, trusting to the weakness of Addington, he pursued a line of conduct exactly fitted to prove to England the absolute necessity for an immediate renewal of hostilities, and which touched the sensitive nation in its most tender points. He never ceased from his course of aggression, thus treating the remonstrances of England as if they were completely worthless and beside the point. In August he annexed the island of Elba, in September the whole of Piedmont, in October Parma and Placentia; and at length, taking advantage of the carefully fostered disorders in Switzerland, he suddenly occupied that most important military point with an army of 30,000 men under Marshal Ney, and took to himself the title of Mediator of the Swiss Republic. It has been mentioned that he refused a commercial treaty with England at the Peace of Amiens; this under the plea of a desire for the protection of native commerce he undoubtedly had a right to do; but he now obliged all the countries dependent on him to adopt a similar course, to exclude English productions, and thus closed half Europe to English trade.

[Sidenote: Demands the repression of the English press,]

[Sidenote: and the expulsion of the emigrants from England.]

Not content with this conduct abroad, he took upon himself to interfere with the internal affairs of England. His course of policy was such as to be wholly incompatible with a free press; his underhand machinations were certain to be exposed where such a press existed. On the Continent he had succeeded in enforcing silence; in England alone an unfettered press was able to direct its assaults both on his policy and his character. No doubt some of the attacks were sharp enough; especially had an emigrant, one Jean Peltier, established a French paper in London called L'Ambigu, which was full of strong invective against the First Consul. Again, the emigrants had not ceased from forming conspiracies against the French Government, conspiracies which Bonaparte delighted to exaggerate, to mingle with doubtful charges of assassination, and to connect (wholly without grounds) with the English ministry. Those emigrants were enjoying the hospitality of England: Otto, the French agent in London, was therefore instructed to bring the matter to the notice of Lord Hawkesbury, and to demand the suppression of the obnoxious papers, and the dismissal of the emigrants from England. Hawkesbury's answers were at first of a peaceful and conciliatory character. He replied that he would consult the law officers on the matter of the press, and would go so far in the matter of the emigrants as to withdraw them from the isle of Guernsey. This answer was followed by still more peremptory demands, requiring effective measures of repression with regard to the press, the withdrawal of the emigrants from Jersey, the removal from England of the Bourbon princes, and the expulsion of all emigrants wearing the orders or distinctions of the old régime. What rendered these demands more grotesque was the fact that the Moniteur, the official paper of France, was constantly full of assertions of the complicity of the Government with the attempts of assassins in France, and of libels on the English Constitution; there was even an English paper, the Argus, published in Paris, a counterpart of the Ambigu of Peltier. To demands thus formulated no English Government could afford to give a temporizing answer, and Hawkesbury replied that the freedom of the English press was limited by English law alone, and that the exercise of hospitality could not be curtailed. At the same time, as Peltier appeared to have exceeded all legal license in his writing, an action was commenced against him, and in spite of a brilliant defence by Macintosh he was found guilty.[19]

[Sidenote: Consequent change of feeling in England.]

[Sidenote: Negotiations for Pitt's return. Nov. 1802.]

Such conduct on the part of Bonaparte was rapidly changing the feeling of England and rendering war inevitable. It became evident that, no longer to uphold an aristocratic government, but for our very existence as an independent country, we must plunge into war. As this feeling gained ground, so did the desire that when that war should come it should find England in the hands of its ablest statesmen, and not in those of an incapable man like Addington. Even from the first, as soon as it was understood that Pitt, in deference to the King's weak state of health, had consented to forego the support of the Roman Catholics, his immediate friends had desired his return to office, and had regarded as false his position as the supporter out of office of Addington's weak ministry. Already, in November 1802, Canning, the most eager of his supporters, in conjunction with Lord Malmesbury, had set on foot an address to Addington begging him to resign. This plan had been peremptorily closed by Pitt himself. Indeed, the obstacles in the way of his resumption of office were very awkward. In some sort the creator of the present ministry, and known to have had a share in most of their earlier measures, Pitt could not come forward in opposition till some flagrant instance of incapacity or some great national crisis should justify such a step. The only other hope was that modesty (which was not one of his characteristics) might induce Addington to acknowledge his incompetence, and himself advise the restoration of Pitt to the ministry. Fully aware of these obstacles, and feeling his position an anomalous one, Pitt withdrew for a time from Parliament.

[Sidenote: Napoleon examines the resources of Egypt, England, and Ireland. 1803.]

[Sidenote: His interview with Lord Whitworth. Feb. 18, 1803.]

During his absence the difficulties with France continued to increase, and the signs of Bonaparte's intention of making war sooner or later became more obvious. At length, in January 1803, was published a report of Colonel Sebastiani, who had been sent by Napoleon, nominally for commercial purposes, to examine the resources of Egypt and the East; in fact, so far from being commercial in its character, the report was devoted almost entirely to show with what ease Egypt could be again conquered by the French. It was impossible that such an official document could be issued by a power which was really friendly. At the same time Bonaparte had sent both to England and to Ireland agents who, under the same commercial pretext, were really minutely examining the resources of England and instigating Irish rebellion. Nor was the question of Malta as yet at rest. The project of obtaining a guarantee from the European powers had failed, and in face of the constant aggressions of Bonaparte, it was impossible for England to evacuate the island with the certainty that it would be immediately occupied by the French. But Bonaparte was still anxious to keep the occasion of war in his own hands, and still hoped to impose upon the feeble ministry of England. He summoned Lord Whitworth, the English ambassador, to an interview, in which he declared that he did not desire war, but that he would rather see England in possession of the Faubourg St. Antoine than of Malta, that he was ready to attempt a descent upon England if necessary, but how much better would it be for England to join with him and share his spoils and his greatness. Two things only were necessary for this,--the suppression of the press, and the removal of Georges, a Chouan leader and emigrant, from English protection. As for the counter-charges of the appropriation of Piedmont and of Switzerland, they were but trifles not worth mentioning. Almost immediately after this the Moniteur declared, in its annual account of the condition of the nation, that as long as party government existed in England an army of 500,000 must be kept on foot for defence and vengeance.

[Sidenote: The militia embodied. March 11, 1803.]

[Sidenote: Failure of renewed negotiations for Pitt's return.]

[Sidenote: War declared. May 18, 1803.]

This was too much even for Addington, and on the 8th of March a message was brought down from the King to the Commons, declaring it necessary that measures of precaution should be adopted, alleging for this the great military preparations which were going on both in Holland and in France, which were in fact intended for St. Domingo, but which in the feverish state of international feeling were a just cause of uneasiness. In accordance with this message the militia were on the 11th ordered to be embodied. In spite of all that Bonaparte had done he pretended to be indignant at this step; and at a public reception at the Tuileries accosted Lord Whitworth with passionate words, accusing England of driving him into war. Then at length Addington began to yield to public feeling, and through Lord Melville opened negotiations for the return of Pitt to office. But a frank resignation and an open acknowledgment that Pitt was the better man of the two was beyond him. He stipulated that Grenville and Windham, who had throughout opposed him, should be excluded from the new arrangements. He wished Lord Chatham to assume the position of nominal Prime Minister, while he and Pitt should be equal Secretaries. Pitt was not a man to accept a position of even nominal subordination; he did not even hear Lord Melville's proposition to the end. "Upon my word," said he, "I had not the curiosity to ask what I was to be." And thus England plunged afresh into war, while all her best statesmen were still excluded from office. For the crisis came rapidly nearer. The feeling of the nation was aroused, and Addington could no longer withstand it. An ultimatum with regard to Malta was drawn up, demanding its retention for ten years, its surrender after that period to the inhabitants, and the cession to England in its stead of the island of Lampedusa. Bonaparte was somewhat taken aback by this exhibition of vigour, but as his answer to the ultimatum was not satisfactory, Lord Whitworth demanded his passports, and withdrew from Paris on the 12th of May. The French ambassador left London on the 16th, and on the 18th a declaration of war was published.

[Sidenote: Character of the war.]

[Sidenote: Napoleon arrests all the English in France.]

This war was of a distinctly different character from that which preceded it. The one had been undertaken in the interest of aristocracy and of property, in a panic of fear of the growth of the liberty of the people; now the whole nation was driven to defend itself, and, while defending itself, Europe also, from the aggressions of a gigantic and all-absorbing ambition. The outbreak of this war marks a change in the career of Napoleon. He had hitherto acted, nominally at all events, as an agent for the propagation of national liberty. He had pretended throughout to be spreading the principles of the French Revolution; he had met with much sympathy from downtrodden nations; he had found it easy to overwhelm effete and unpopular dynasties. He was now entering upon a war against the people themselves, and, though success at first attended his arms, when it became evident that it was not assistance against tyrants but subjugation to a foreign power that he brought, the efforts to oppose him became national, and before the uprising of nations he ultimately succumbed. Bonaparte's first step after war was declared corresponded exactly with this change. Crowds of Englishmen had thronged to see with their own eyes the condition of revolutionized France. All the English in France between the age of eighteen and sixty, numbering it is believed about 12,000, were suddenly by a single decree taken prisoners, and kept confined till the close of the war, thus spreading sorrow and discomfort broadcast through England. The pretext was the capture of two ships before war was declared; they were not however captured till after the ambassadors had withdrawn, nor, as has subsequently been made evident, till Bonaparte had himself ordered an embargo to be laid on the English shipping.

[Sidenote: He excites discontent in Ireland.]

Bonaparte's interference in the affairs of Ireland had also its share in rendering the war truly national. It had been hoped that the great work of the Union, following the suppression of the Rebellion of 1798, would have introduced peace and prosperity into the island. Nor at first did the hopes appear ill founded. Both Lord Hardwicke, the Lord-Lieutenant, and Lord Redesdale the Chancellor, appear to have believed in the rapid improvement both of the physical and political condition of the country. The Catholics, although disappointed of their hopes, seem to have understood the state of affairs which obliged Pitt to refrain from the further prosecution of their claims, and to have postponed all idea of present agitation.

[Sidenote: Emmett's Rebellion. 1803.]

But the miserable cultivation and the prevalence of waste lands in Ireland allowed of the existence of an extremely ignorant and prejudiced peasantry, and among them it was not difficult to excite again their old animosity to England. Bonaparte took advantage of this opening, and while the Peace of Amiens lasted many French agents seem to have been poured into Ireland, both for the purpose of inquiring minutely into the resources of the English Government there and of establishing a connection with the discontented peasantry. Many intercepted letters proved to Government the existence of these agents; their presence in Ireland was excused, like Sebastiani's mission to Egypt, by the assertion that they were merely commercial agents, following a system which had obtained in France ever since the time of Colbert. Their success was limited by the distaste of the Catholics for the French Revolution. In spite of Bonaparte's intercourse with Rome and the establishment of the Concordat with Pius VII., by which he established Roman Catholic Christianity as the religion of France, the Catholics could not forget the destructive doctrines which had attended all the former steps of the Revolution. It was therefore among the republicans only (not an influential body) and the ignorant mob that the agitation took any hold. A leader was found in Robert Emmett, the son of a Dublin physician, who with his brother had been more or less implicated in the affairs of 1798. He visited Paris early in the Peace, had personal interviews with the First Consul, and returned home ready to instigate the rebellion. The other leaders were Russell, a religious enthusiast, and Quigley, a professional agitator. About Christmas 1802 the conspirators began their operations. Arms and powder were collected at depôts in Dublin, and members of the conspiracy were enrolled. Some of these informed the police of what was going on. The explosion of the powder in one of the depôts, and the discovery of pikes there, still further warned the Government, and Emmett considered it necessary to hasten the outbreak. Saturday the 23rd of July was the day fixed for the rising. It proved to be little more than a city riot. As no soldiery had been brought into Dublin, it was for some time in the hands of the mob, who plundered and got drunk. The only important incident of the riot was the murder of Lord Kilwarden, the Chief Justice, who, returning from his country-seat with his daughter and nephew, was met in the streets by a part of the mob and brutally murdered. The arrival at the castle of his daughter, who had contrived to make her escape from the murderers, at length set the military in motion, and the mob was dispersed without much difficulty. The depôt was discovered, with the supply of arms, green uniforms, and the proclamation of the provisional government which was to have been established. Emmett sought safety by pretending to be a French officer; but the French were not liked; his flight was not favoured by the people; he was captured and hanged. The importance of the outbreak lies chiefly in the disclosure of the deepseated hostility of the Irish, and the necessity laid upon the English of establishing a series of coercive laws, which remained in force for many years, and went far to neutralize the healing effect which it was hoped the Union would have exercised.

[Sidenote: Difficulty of Addington's position.]

[Sidenote: His vigorous measures inefficiently carried out.]

The declaration of war called Pitt from his retirement, for the war, in the form it had now assumed, seemed to demand the co-operation of all patriotic men. Pitt therefore again appeared in the House; he thought it his duty to see, now that war had come, that no laxity was displayed in its support, and returned to his place, intending, as he himself said, not to join in any opposition to the ministry so long as their measures seemed energetic, but to forget all that was past (and many things had been done of which he could not fully approve) and devote himself to insuring vigour and activity for the future. Few positions could now be more embarrassing than that of Addington. His peaceful plans had come to nothing; and conscious, as he could not but have been, of his own inferiority, and of the general desire under present circumstances for Pitt's return to office, he had now to withstand the powerful attacks of an unusually able Opposition, and the damaging criticism of a so-called friend whom all the world regarded as his rival. And it must be owned that Pitt's views were far more in accordance with the views of the Opposition than with those of the minister. Grenville, Windham, and Spencer, the consistent supporters of the preceding war, had entered into a close alliance with Fox, its consistent opponent. Their common view, which was shared by Pitt, was that the condition of the country was so critical that nothing but the ablest possible ministry could be tolerated--that the present ministry, consisting as it for the most part did of the least able members of Pitt's old Government, was wholly incompetent to meet the present dangers, and that the one thing necessary was a great combined arrangement by which the administration of affairs should be intrusted to men of all parties of the widest experience and the greatest talents. They were naturally anxious that Pitt, whose views they knew to be almost identical with their own, should openly join them, but, as has been seen, although he shared their views, he felt himself still bound to give some sort of support to a ministry which he had himself created, and which nominally upheld the same principles which he had always advocated. In this trying position Addington's Government showed very creditable activity. Their budgets, with which Pitt had at first been discontented, were now conceived in accordance with his own principles. A considerable portion of the increased burden was borne by taxation, especially by the reimposition of a property tax, and loans were contracted only as far as needful. Militia to the number of about 70,000 were embodied; an army of reserve 50,000 strong, raised by ballot to serve for four years, voted; and by a Bill, known as the Military Service Bill, the enrolment as volunteers of all men between the ages of seventeen and fifty-five provided for. The number of these volunteers speedily rose to beyond 300,000. As the standing army was kept at about 120,000, there must have been of one sort or other upwards of 500,000 armed men for the purposes of defence. The temper of the nation was thoroughly roused. Pitt himself, as Warden of the Cinque Ports, raised and commanded 3000 volunteers, and caused considerable offers of gunboats to be sent in to the Government from the maritime towns.

[Sidenote: Increasing opposition.]

[Sidenote: Pitt offers to undertake the Government.]

[Sidenote: Addington resigns. April 26, 1804.]

But great though these preparations were, they were carried out with a dilatoriness and want of energy in which Pitt and the Opposition found much cause of complaint. Windham was an enthusiast for the regular army and disliked the volunteers. Pitt pointed out, that although volunteers were exempted from serving in the militia, they could only claim their exemption when properly enrolled and armed, and the issue of arms was so slow as to throw a great damp upon volunteering, which this exemption was intended to encourage. There was also a great blot in the administration which afforded plentiful room for attack. Lord St. Vincent, great as an admiral, had proved himself incompetent as the head of the Admiralty. In the desire of the ministry for economy many of the gunboats and other ships had been rapidly broken up, and the stores in the dockyards sold, much of them to the French themselves. Attacks directed on these points began to tell. Other circumstances combined to drive Pitt to declare himself. He was perfectly conscious of his own greatness, and of the universal feeling that his present position was unworthy of him, and he believed that he was the right man to be intrusted with the Government in the present crisis. It was with much alarm that he heard that the King's health was again failing. There seemed every prospect that a regency would be necessary. If that regency were established, it was understood that Lord Moira, the Prince of Wales' chief adviser, would be called upon to form a Government. Pitt declared that under those circumstances he should be compelled to decline office; fearful of being thus permanently removed from the ministry, he thought the time for action had arrived; if he was to be minister at all he must take steps to become so; he therefore declared his total want of confidence in the present ministry, and stated his intention, should the state of the King's health permit, of writing to him, stating his views, and putting himself at his Majesty's service; he desired, if possible, a broad Government, but that if the King objected to that he should state his willingness to attempt to form one even upon a narrow basis. He further declared his belief that after the recess the combined Opposition would be sufficiently strong to compel the ministers to resign. Addington also was so conscious of this, that when, on the reopening of Parliament on the 5th of April, the Opposition assault began, he authorized Lord Eldon to enter into communication with Pitt. Through the Chancellor the letter before alluded to was laid before the King. Meanwhile the ministerial majorities were diminishing. The Irish Militia Bill was carried by a majority of twenty-one only, at that time regarded as very small. On the 23rd Fox moved to refer all Army Bills to a committee of the whole House. His motion was rejected by only fifty-two; while, two days afterwards, on his attack on the Army of Reserve Bill, the ministerial majority again sunk to thirty-seven in a House of 443 members. Upon this Addington resigned.

[Sidenote: Pitt desires a broad ministry.]

[Sidenote: Pitt yields to the King's opposition.]

[Sidenote: He forms a Tory ministry.]

On the 30th Mr. Pitt was informed of the King's desire that he should draw up a plan for a new administration; he accordingly stated, first in writing, and subsequently (May 7) in a long interview, what he considered best for the country. On three grounds he strongly urged a large and comprehensive ministry. The war was a national one, and promised to be both long and expensive; to induce the nation to make the required sacrifice unanimity was most desirable. To wage war singlehanded was beyond the power of England; but while party divisions were rife in Parliament the confidence of foreign nations could not be gained. And lastly, if the King wished to keep the question of the Catholic emancipation from discussion, it was desirable that there should be no formidable Opposition certain to make use of the Catholic claims as a means of offence against Government. On these grounds the new minister urged the admission of both Grenville and Fox to the ministry; but he here found the King obstinate. Grenville he would admit, Fox never. The course that statesman had followed with regard to the American War, his strong language in favour of the Revolution, his strenuous opposition to the last French war, had rendered him politically hateful to the King. His friendship for the Prince of Wales, and the share which the King believed he had taken in the direction of the Prince's conduct, had excited his strong personal dislike. To these prejudices Pitt, in an evil hour for himself, yielded. He had indeed, as he had already stated, intended to do so. He consented to exclude Fox from his arrangements. But he still hoped to win the support of his old colleague Grenville, and since Fox, with great magnanimity, told his partisans that he had no wish that the King's personal prejudice against himself should influence their conduct, he was not without hopes of strengthening his Government by the addition of some of the Whigs. These hopes were disappointed. The two sections of the Opposition held separate but simultaneous meetings. In one Grenville declared he would not take office without Fox, and his followers accepted his decision; in the other the friends of Fox determined to decline office if their chief was excluded. No resource was therefore left to Pitt but to form his government as best he could upon a narrow Tory basis. The political sections from which he was enabled to draw were his own immediate followers, and such of the late minister's as did not feel themselves pledged to follow Addington in his retirement. The result was not wholly satisfactory. Lord Eldon, the Duke of Portland, Lord Westmoreland, Lord Castlereagh, and Lord Hawkesbury, continued to hold office, Lord Hawkesbury surrendering the important post of Foreign Secretary to Lord Harrowby, and receiving in exchange the Home Office. Dundas, who had been created a Peer as Lord Melville, became First Lord of the Admiralty, while Lord Camden, Lord Mulgrave, and the Duke of Montrose, also became members of the Cabinet, which consisted of twelve, all of whom, with the exception of Pitt and Castlereagh, were in the Upper House. Several other men of importance were admitted to subordinate offices; Canning became Treasurer of the Navy, Huskisson one of the Secretaries of the Treasury, and Mr. Perceval, the future Prime Minister, remained in the position of Attorney-General.[20]

[Sidenote: Difficulties of Pitt's position.]

The change of ministry implied a complete change of policy. As Addington's ministry had been from the first intended as a peace ministry, so the accession of Pitt to office implied a vigorous prosecution of the war. But it was with very maimed influence that it entered upon its work; all hope of acting in foreign affairs with the full weight of a great combined national party behind him had disappeared from Pitt's view. The same opposition which had opposed Addington was ready to oppose him; while Addington himself, unable to act in any great or magnanimous manner, had also joined its ranks, and was in open opposition to his old friend. It was with a majority scarcely larger than that of the ministry he had succeeded, supported by the same mediocre men, and aided in the Commons by one minister alone, that Pitt found himself obliged to encounter the bitter enmity of Bonaparte.

[Sidenote: Real danger from France.]

The necessity for energy Pitt probably felt more strongly than any of his contemporaries. Strange incredulity was expressed both by Fox and Grenville as to the reality of the invasion with which Bonaparte was threatening England. Yet it is certain that the intention of invasion was perfectly real. Bonaparte had determined to carry out the threat he had let drop to Lord Whitworth. In the first place it suited his policy to keep his army together and thoroughly employed. The temper of the Parisians was lukewarm; he felt that some pressure was necessary to induce them to give him the support his ambition required, and such coercion could in no way be more certainly procured than by exciting the personal devotion and enthusiasm of his soldiers by unfolding before them constant visions of glory. At the same time his exasperation against the English led him to underrate the difficulties which lay in his way, and to believe in the real practicability of his scheme. The minute and careful preparations in which he engaged are incompatible with the idea that the invasion was a mere feint. In all the ports of the Channel boats were being built; even inland towns with any water communication with the sea were busily employed in the same labour. A great basin was constructed at Boulogne, of a peculiar shape, intended to allow of an extremely rapid embarkation of the army, which was encamped upon the neighbouring heights, and fortifications were raised to render the flotilla secure from the sea. Yet in all probability, had the plan been tried, it would have proved a failure. The boats used to transport the troops were to be of several classes and sizes, and the mere action of the tides, which are of great strength and complexity in the Channel, would have been exerted quite differently on these different sized vessels, and would almost of necessity have separated the flotilla; yet the whole success of the movement depended on the simultaneous landing of the army at one point. Moreover, for the passage of heavily-laden and flat-bottomed boats an absolute calm of two days would have been necessary, and a calm of two days is a phenomenon of rare occurrence in the Channel; while, thirdly, success presupposed the complete absence or idleness of the British fleet.

[Sidenote: Preparations for defence.]

However, whether practicable or impracticable, Napoleon intended to make the effort, and Pitt, in common with the English nation, believed in his intention. The excitement was universal. The country was entirely occupied in drilling and warlike preparations; martello towers were built along the southern coast, beacons rose on every hilltop, a great canal or ditch was dug along the coast of Kent, and Pitt excited the ridicule of Grenville by the energy with which he superintended the numerous reviews which he set on foot through his brother Lord Chatham. Such defences have been derided as ridiculously inefficient, and certainly neither the Kentish ditch nor a few round towers mounting one gun each, nor a half-disciplined militia, could have checked the French army had a landing been effected. The real value of such preparations was the life and energy and courage which they roused in the people. The more real work of the minister was the restoration of the national forces to their full efficiency, and the effort to induce the other countries of Europe to combine in withstanding the dangerous ambition of the French usurper.

[Sidenote: The Additional Force Bill.]

[Sidenote: Increase of the navy.]

With regard to the army the great ministerial measure was the Additional Force Bill. There existed at this time two systems of enlistment, the one for a limited term, the other for the general service; the recruiting officers in these two branches had entered into a sort of competition, the effect of which was that very large and quite unnecessary bounties were offered to induce men to enlist on one or other of the two systems. A second difficulty was one which constantly attends a volunteer army, the difficulty of procuring a constant and regular supply of recruits. The intention of the Additional Force Bill was to obviate these two difficulties. Pitt thought that this might be done by raising an additional force of 50,000 men, whence a supply of trained soldiers could be constantly passed into the regular army. There already existed an army of reserve, collected under the Reserve Bill passed by the late ministry, but its full complement of 50,000 had not been reached; there was a deficiency of 9000 men. At the same time the militia had risen much beyond its usual numbers. It was at present 74,000 strong, instead of 40,000 for England and 8000 for Scotland, which was regarded as its normal strength. The present Bill reduced the militia to its old dimensions. The remainder, with the 9000 as yet unraised men of the army of reserve, was to form the additional force from which 12,000 annually were to pass into the army. Parishes were to be assessed at a certain number of men, and if they failed to supply them a moderate fine was to be laid upon them, to go to the general recruiting fund. It was an attempt, in fact, to introduce in some degree the principle of compulsory service, already slightly recognized in the militia. The newly-organized body had this also in common with the militia, that it was connected with the regular army by forming second battalions not bound to serve abroad, but to be used to supply the place of the regular army when it was required for foreign service. It was supposed that there would be no difficulty, when military habits were once formed, in finding the annual 12,000 to feed the regular troops. The whole strength of the Opposition was brought to bear against the Bill, which certainly, in its compulsory clauses, introduced a new principle into the English military system, and it was only with the comparatively weak majority of forty that it was carried through the House. As far as the naval forces were concerned energy and activity were all that was required, and these were supplied by Lord Melville. In the first year of his administration he could boast that he had added to the fleet no less than 166 vessels, either completed or in a state of forwardness, while during the same period 600 ships had been docked and repaired.

[Sidenote: Napoleon attempts to form a coalition.]

With regard to foreign affairs Pitt's position did not at first seem hopeful. He wished to follow out the policy of the last war, and to form a third coalition. But Bonaparte was engaged in almost the same process in opposition to England, and the chances at first seemed all in favour of the success of the French in this vast competition. By the Treaty of Lunéville those German princes who had been dispossessed by the advance of the French to the Rhine, and by the withdrawal of Tuscany from the House of Austria, were to be indemnified at the expense of the ecclesiastical principalities of the Empire. This arrangement might have been carried out without much difficulty by the Germans themselves, but the avarice of the great powers Prussia and Austria, and the difficulty which the smaller princes found in obtaining their restitutions, rendered mediation necessary, and by a strange act of folly the arbitration of Bonaparte himself was sought. He had used this opportunity to flatter Russia by suggesting that the Emperor should be joined with himself in the duty of arbitration, to please Prussia by unduly favouring its claims, and to foment all the rivalries of the Germanic body. He had further, on the rupture of the Peace of Amiens, suggested that some of the points at issue should be decided by the arbitration of Russia, hoping thereby to silence for ever any complaints Alexander might have to urge against him, so that neither that power nor Prussia was disposed to be unfriendly to him, while Austria was exhausted under the late heavy blow which had been dealt her, and much occupied by the rivalry of the other German powers. But in spite of this appearance of friendship of both Russia and Prussia for France there were secret causes of hostility between them. Alexander had seen through the somewhat barefaced attempt to purchase his favour by the offer of the position of arbitrator, and while consenting to act as mediator, had continued to urge the injustice of the conduct of the French with regard both to Piedmont and to Germany. To such an extent had the angry correspondence been carried, that a scene had taken place (July 29, 1803) between Bonaparte and the Russian ambassador very similar to that with Lord Whitworth. With Prussia also the ambition of the first Consul had prevented him from completing his work of conciliation. He had displeased that Court by a persistent refusal to withdraw his troops from Hanover. On the whole, the feeling of Lord Harrowby, when he entered upon the plan of forming a coalition, was that his best hope lay in the direction of Russia; but that all Europe would remain quiet till the great invasion of England should either have destroyed that power or by its repulse offer a favourable opportunity for assaulting France.

[Sidenote: Napoleon's conduct with regard to Georges' conspiracy.]

[Sidenote: Murder of the Duc d'Enghien. March 21, 1804.]

[Sidenote: Napoleon Emperor. May 18, 1804.]

Napoleon's own conduct went far to remove all expected difficulties. No one could have played more completely into the hands of his enemies. A conspiracy was set on foot against his Government by the royalists; it was principally in the hands of Georges, the Breton leader, and of General Pichegru. At the right moment the Count of Artois was to appear upon the scene, and the Bourbons to be re-established. The police and Bonaparte obtained early information of it. Bonaparte made use of his knowledge to foster the conspiracy, and to implicate General Moreau, whom he had always regarded as his rival since the battle of Hohenlinden, and who appears to have been guilty only of having consented to be reconciled to his old friend Pichegru, from whom political differences had separated him. Although there is not the slightest proof of the truth of the fact, it was asserted that the plan included the assassination of the First Consul; and, determined to make the most of his knowledge of the conspiracy, Bonaparte sent agents, who entrapped two of our ministers abroad, Messrs. Drake and Spencer Smith, into consenting to the conspiracy. Of the real plot they knew nothing, but were led to believe in the existence of some royalist scheme and to lend it their aid. Bonaparte then charged them publicly with having joined in a plan of assassination, demanded, and ultimately (April 1804) succeeded in procuring, their expulsion from Bavaria and Wurtemburg, and sent to all the Courts of Europe a coarse and virulent attack upon the English Government. The reply of Lord Hawkesbury (April 30)--for this took place during the Addington ministry--to the effect that England had the right, and would use the right, of taking advantage of the political situation of countries with which she was at war, justified the conduct of England in the eyes of all foreign powers, and excited a strong feeling against the conduct of the Consul. The conspiracy was followed by a still more startling act of violence. Unable to secure the person of the Count of Artois, who received timely warning of the plot, and burning to strike some blow against the Bourbons, Bonaparte, regardless of the neutrality of the country, sent a body of troops into Baden, there captured an innocent and unoffending Bourbon prince, the Duc d'Enghien, son of the Prince of Condé, brought him into France, had him summarily tried by a military tribunal, and immediately shot. The effect of this great crime upon the crowned heads of Europe was instantaneous, and was not decreased when Bonaparte threw off all mask of moderation, and gave an outward form to the despotism he had long practised by declaring himself Emperor. But there were still many difficulties to be overcome before the Courts of Europe could be brought to see the absolute necessity of forming a coalition. It required a whole year of negotiation, and of further proofs of Napoleon's character, before Pitt's object was attained.

[Sidenote: Lord Harrowby's retirement. Dec. 1804.]

[Sidenote: Addington rejoins the ministry.]

The loss of his able Foreign Minister added fresh difficulties to his negotiations. In December 1804 Lord Harrowby was disabled by an accidental fall, and had to resign the Foreign Office. His place was supplied by Lord Mulgrave; but Pitt was made conscious of the weakness of his ministry by the severe blow that the loss of one member of it was to him. Addington, since his retirement from office, had been in open opposition to the minister; but as their views were generally similar, and the division between them had been entirely owing to the soreness arising from the manner in which Addington had lost the premiership, there seemed no reason for a further separation. Addington therefore rejoined the ministry, taking the title of Lord Sidmouth and the office of President of the Council, which the Duke of Portland was compelled by ill health to resign. Pitt's majority was thus increased, although the strength gained by the adhesion of Addington himself to his ministry was not much.

[Sidenote: Spain joins France.]

While the negotiations for a coalition were continuing, England carried on the war singlehanded, and before long such power as Spain possessed was added to that of France. To support his vast expenditure Napoleon demanded subsidies from foreign countries under his influence, and a treaty had been made with Spain, now ruled entirely by Godoy, Prince of the Peace, by which a considerable sum was annually paid to the French exchequer. Although this was virtually an act of hostility to England, the English ministry, aware of the weakness of Spain, had passed it over in silence; but at the same time our minister, in February 1804, declared that the preparation of any naval armaments in Spanish ports would be regarded as a cause of war. In September the English admiral on the coast of Spain notified the existence of such an armament in Ferrol; a strong note was written to the Spanish minister, and ultimately the English ambassador retired from Madrid in November, and in December war was declared. But already in October, before the declaration of war, the English had seized four treasure-ships, well knowing that the money would sooner or later find its way into the hands of Napoleon. The justice of the action was questioned; but, considering the declaration of the preceding February, and the known fact that Spain paid subsidies to France, the seizure seems to have been thoroughly justified.

[Sidenote: Failure of attempts to destroy Napoleon's fleet.]

While our enemy was thus strengthened by the open adhesion of a country which could at least assist him with ships and convenient harbours, our efforts to weaken his preparations for invasion, which were continually being pushed on, were unavailing; descents were made upon the coast and a few outlying boats captured; but the great attempt which was made in October to destroy the flotilla produced no result. The expedition is known as the Catamaran expedition. It was proposed by means of vessels filled with combustibles to burn the flotilla in Boulogne harbour, but when the fire-ships were sent in, they either failed to reach the vessels, or a passage was made for them, and they drifted harmlessly through.

[Sidenote: Success of the war in India against the Mahrattas.]

It was only outside the limits of Europe that the English showed a decided superiority, and that great successes kept up the hope of both ministry and people during this fearful period, when the arrival of Bonaparte in England was daily expected, and when as yet all Europe seemed to hold aloof from our alliance. Surinam had been conquered from the Dutch, and in the year 1805 a great war was brought to a triumphant conclusion in India. After the capture in 1799 of Seringapatam, the capital of Tippoo Sahib, the ruler of Mysore, the territories of Mysore had been divided by what is known as the Tripartite Treaty between the English, the Nizam of the Deccan, and a descendant of the ancient Rajahs of Mysore, whom Hyder Ali had dispossessed. By these new acquisitions the English had come in contact with the great Mahratta power.

[Sidenote: Extent of the Mahratta empire.]

The great empire conquered by this warlike race, which had been founded by Sivajee in the seventeenth century, extended from Delhi in the north to the Tumbudra, a southern tributary of the Kistna on the south, and from the Bay of Bengal on the east to Gujerat in the west. The authority of the Rajah of Satara, nominal head of the race, had passed into the hands of his minister the Peishwa, who resided at Poonah, in the Western Ghauts. His authority had in turn become nominal, and the empire was broken up among five great chiefs, of whom the Peishwa may be ranked as one. The others were the Bonslah or Rajah of Berar, occupying the north and east of the Deccan, and including Cuttack and the mouths of the Mahanadi in his territories; Sindia, who occupied the north-west of the Deccan and Kandesh, and whose property extended northwards through a portion of Malwa as far as Delhi, of which he held possession, and westward into Gujerat, where he had considerable property; Holkar, who lay almost entirely in the Malwa, north of the Vindyha range of mountains, to the east of Sindia, between him and Berar; and, lastly, the Guicowar, who possessed in Gujerat all except those territories that were in the hands of Sindia. He alone of the Mahratta chiefs preserved neutrality during this great war. To the south of the Mahratta states lay that part of the Deccan which was governed by the Nizam, now tributary to the English; and south of his dominions, touching on its north-west the southern extreme of the Mahratta country, was Mysore. All three Presidencies were therefore in contact with one or other of the Mahratta states.

[Sidenote: Lord Wellesley's subsidiary system.]

At the beginning of the century the Mahrattas were at war among themselves, and Holkar, in his rivalry with Sindia, had thought it advisable to expel the Peishwa from Poonah, and to set up a creature of his own there. The deposed Peishwa sought an asylum among the English in Bombay. The presence of the predatory chief Holkar in the south induced the English to occupy their northern frontier in Mysore with an army of observation. While things were in this position the Peishwa offered to enter into a perpetual treaty with the English if they would reinstate him in Poonah. Lord Wellesley was at this time Governor-General of India. He had set on foot a policy which had been much opposed by the authorities in the India House, and the support of which by Pitt had been constantly assaulted by the Opposition. This policy is known as the subsidiary system. It was found impossible, in the presence of the native powers, naturally anxious to rid themselves of the English conquerors, and certain to find ready assistance from the French, to remain in a state of inaction. On the other hand, Wellesley did not think it desirable or just to conquer and annex all the neighbouring territories, which would in fact only have enlarged the sphere of danger. He preferred to establish English influence, to oblige the native rulers to enter into permanent treaties with him, to place the political management of their provinces in the hands of a British resident, to pay for the support of an army largely officered by Europeans, while the native princes, at the same time, retained the domestic government in their own hands. It is now generally allowed that this was a wise system, but at the time the outcry against it was so great, that even after the success of the Mahratta war Wellesley had in fact to yield to it, and returned to England in 1805. While this policy, however, was uppermost, such an offer as that of the Peishwa was certain to be accepted, and at the end of 1802, by the Treaty of Bassein, the English accepted the friendship of the Peishwa, and undertook to restore him.

[Sidenote: Outbreak of the Mahratta war. 1803.]

The threatening attitude of the English compelled the Mahratta chiefs for a time to lay aside their private enmities, and Holkar, Sindia, and the Rajah of Berar made common cause against the invaders. What rendered this coalition more formidable was, that Sindia had established in the Douab, or district lying between the Jumna and the Ganges, a French state in the hands of a certain M. Perron, in which there was a considerable number of troops drilled in the European fashion, and officered by Frenchmen, while in the south, the neighbourhood of Pondicherry, which had been restored to France by the Peace of Amiens, gave an opening to that power to interfere should war again break out in Europe. The first act of the war was rapidly and successfully carried out. General Wellesley marched, in the spring of 1803, from the frontier of Mysore, was joined by Colonel Stevenson with the Nizam's army from Hyderabad, recaptured Poonah on the 20th of April, and by the middle of May had reinstated the Peishwa. The General at that time believed that all disputes with the Mahratta powers would be settled by negotiation. It before long became evident that on the part of the Mahrattas these negotiations were a feint, and that the three chiefs, with their French allies on the north, were still determined to fight, and had designs upon the territories of the subsidiary Prince, the Nizam, who was at the point of death. To withstand this great confederacy a large and well-combined plan of operations was made. To secure unity of action, General Wellesley was invested with supreme authority in the Deccan, General Lake was given similar powers in the valley of the Ganges, while secondary attacks were directed against Sindia's territories in Gujerat under the command of Colonel Murray, and against the Bonslah's province of Cuttack under Colonel Harcourt. The confederation was thus assaulted simultaneously at four points. In the meantime the rupture of the Peace of Amiens had become known. Pondicherry was carefully watched, and French troops recently landed there taken prisoners.

[Sidenote: Battle of Assye. Sept. 23, 1803.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Argaum.]

[Sidenote: Subsidiary treaties with Sindia and Berar.]

In August General Wellesley left Poonah, Colonel Stevenson acting in correspondence with him further to the east. He marched direct to Ahmednuggur, which he captured, crossed the Godavery river, and arrived at Aurungabad. Meanwhile Sindia had fallen back northward, and in September the two English commanders joined their forces a little to the east of Aurungabad, and advanced to meet him. Sindia's forces, reinforced by sixteen battalions officered by Frenchmen, lay not far from Assye on the river Kaitna; between them and the English extended a range of hills; to prevent their escape the English commanders separated--Stevenson marching by the eastern, Wellesley by the western end of the range. When Wellesley heard that the enemy were moving off, he determined upon an attack without waiting for Stevenson's arrival. To get at the enemy it was necessary to cross the river which was on his right; although assured by his guide that it was impassable, he conjectured the existence of a passage from the appearance of two villages immediately opposite each other on the two banks of the river. He found his conjecture was correct, and his troops, when they had crossed the river, exactly occupied the space between that and another stream on which Assye stands. His two flanks were thus covered. He there with 4500 men entirely defeated Sindia's army, numbering more than 30,000. At the close of the day he found himself in possession of nearly 100 cannon and the whole of the camp equipage. The General mentioned it afterwards as the bloodiest battle for the numbers that he ever saw; the killed and wounded among the English amounting to more than 1500, a third of their entire force. The Mahratta army separated into two divisions, one division under the Rajah of Berar retiring westward as though to attack Poonah. Leaving Stevenson, therefore, to follow the northern division under Sindia, Wellesley hastened in pursuit of the Rajah. Sindia, being close pressed by Stevenson, begged for a truce; but as it was found that his troops were still serving in the army of the Rajah of Berar, and that the truce was merely deceptive, the pursuit was recommenced, and the enemy brought to a final engagement on the plain of Argaum, where they were again entirely defeated. The war in the Deccan was closed by the capture, by the combined armies, of Gawulgur, near the sources of the Taptee river. Two days afterwards, on the 17th of December, the Rajah of Berar submitted, and before the end of the month Sindia also consented to treat. By these treaties the province of Cuttack was annexed to the English possessions, Sindia was driven entirely from the Deccan, and lost some strong places in the Douab. Both princes entered into subsidiary arrangements, and promised to admit no foreigners but English to their confidence.

[Sidenote: Lake's successes in the Douab.]

[Sidenote: Conclusion of the war. 1805.]

These treaties were the consequence of the combined campaigns of Wellesley and Lake; for during the brilliant campaign of Assye in the Deccan, Lake had been carrying on war with equal success in the valley of the Ganges. The French province in the Douab had given but little trouble. Perron had retired from one of his fortresses, Coel, without fighting; his second stronghold, Alleghur, had been captured; his troops had indeed remained to fight, but he had himself surrendered to the English. The capture of Alleghur had been followed by a great victory over the Mahrattas within sight of Delhi. Lake had entered that capital, restored the aged Shah Allum to the Mogul throne, and attached to the English by so doing the whole Mahommedan population of India. He had won further victories at Muttra and Agra on the Jumna, and finally, on the 1st of November, at the same time that Wellesley was carrying out the pursuit which preceded the battle of Argaum, won the great battle of Laswari. The secondary attacks had been no less successful. While Murray had captured Baroach and subjugated the rest of Sindia's possessions in Gujerat, Harcourt had secured Cuttack at the mouths of the Mahanadi and the great temple of Juggernaut. The subsidiary treaties signed at the close of the year were the consequences of this series of victories. In reward for their services Lake was raised to the Peerage and Wellesley made a Knight of the Bath. Holkar alone remained unsubdued. The following year, 1804, he was again in arms, and though thoroughly defeated by General Lake, succeeded in obtaining the support of the Rajah of Berhampoor, and prolonged the war till the close of the year 1805.

[Sidenote: Sad close of Pitt's career.]

The success in India was no doubt of great importance both in sustaining the courage of the people and in cheering the last days of Pitt; but he was not destined to close his life in happiness and triumph. He lived, indeed, long enough to see the great coalition for which he had been working completed, and to receive the adhesion to it of Russia, Austria, Sweden, and Naples; he lived long enough to see the English again triumphant upon the ocean, to hear the news of the greatest victory which had ever attended their arms, and to rejoice at the dispersion of the threatening cloud which for more than a year had hung over the country. But he also lived just long enough to see, as far as his foreign policy was concerned, the whole of his careful structure dashed to pieces, and the complete triumph of his arch enemy at the battle of Austerlitz.

[Sidenote: Attack on Lord Melville.]

[Sidenote: Naval inquiries. Feb. 1805.]

[Sidenote: Vote of censure against Melville. April 8, 1805.]

If the close of his life as a foreign minister was sad, a still thicker mist of misfortune hung over the last years of his home government. The man on whom he most relied in the ministry was his old friend Lord Melville, who had fairly justified his confidence by the energy and success with which he had reconstituted the navy. It was through him that the Opposition found means to inflict a deadly blow upon the minister. Lord St. Vincent, though his general administration had been weak, had been laudably anxious to improve the condition of the Admiralty, especially in regard to its expenses. He had therefore established a commission of naval inquiry, which from time to time sent in its reports. The last of these, the tenth, had been sent in in February 1805. Even before its publication it was understood to reflect upon Lord Melville's conduct as Treasurer of the Navy, an office which he had held along with several others in Pitt's first administration. On one point he had certainly shown remissness. He had allowed Mr. Trotter, Paymaster of the Navy, to pay public money to his own account at his banker's, and to use it as his own. No loss had accrued to the State in consequence; but no doubt it was a highly censurable misapplication of public funds. But beyond this, it was asserted that Lord Melville had himself acted in a similar way, and undoubtedly there were certain sums unaccounted for. Lord Melville's own account of this matter was, that since his retirement from office he had destroyed all old vouchers; but that even if he possessed them, as he at that time held various offices, and did not keep the accounts entirely separate, he would not have been able to give a satisfactory account without disclosing confidential transactions of Government. This no doubt meant that the money had been employed for some secret service; but his enemies did not scruple to say that he had appropriated it to his own uses. Upon the report Mr. Whitbread founded a parliamentary attack upon Melville, and gave notice that he would bring in a vote of censure upon the 8th of April. Government had now to determine what they would do. Pitt and his own immediate friends, entirely disbelieving the charge against Melville, resolved to withstand it openly. But there was a division in his own Cabinet. Lord Sidmouth and Melville were great enemies, and, declaring that he regarded it as impossible for Melville to clear himself, Sidmouth warned Pitt that if he persisted in defending him he should be obliged to resign. As this would have been complete ruin, Pitt yielded to a middle course, and determined to request that the inquiry might be referred to a select committee. On the 8th the great debate came on. It was plain that the question would rest with the votes of the independent members, and when Wilberforce, whose character carried great weight, declared that he must support the vote of censure, those members who were pledged to neither party were induced to follow his lead. The anxious moment for division arrived, and the numbers were declared to be equal--216 having voted on either side. The Speaker was then called upon to give his casting vote. The scene is thus described by Lord Fitzharris:--"I sat wedged close to Pitt himself the night when we were 216; and the Speaker Abbot, after looking as white as a sheet, and pausing for ten minutes, gave the casting vote against us. Pitt immediately put on the little cocked hat that he was in the habit of wearing when dressed for the evening, and jammed it deeply over his forehead, and I distinctly saw the tears trickling down his cheeks. We had heard one or two, such as Colonel Wardle, say they would see 'how Billy looked after it.' A few young ardent followers of Pitt, with myself, locked their arms together and formed a circle, in which he moved, I believe unconsciously, out of the House, and neither the Colonel nor his friends could approach him." The Opposition were not content with the vote of censure; although Melville at once resigned his office, Whitbread proceeded to move an address to the King that he should be removed from the King's Councils and presence for ever. The feeling of the House did not justify so extreme a measure, and the motion was withdrawn. But before long the minister thought it necessary so far to yield to public opinion as to have Lord Melville's name withdrawn from the Privy Council.

[Sidenote: Sidmouth resigns. July 7.]

[Sidenote: Parliament prorogued. July 12, 1805.]

The disagreement between Pitt and Sidmouth upon Lord Melville's conduct terminated in the withdrawal of the Lord President and his followers from the ministry. On the appointment of Sir Charles Middleton, a very old man, to the Admiralty, in which he had been the constant assistant of Melville, Sidmouth took the opportunity of expressing his displeasure and resigned. The charge against Lord Melville was pressed to impeachment. He delivered a defence before the House of Commons, but it was not regarded as satisfactory. The House of Lords were therefore called upon to decide the question, and when it subsequently came to the vote (June 12, 1806) a very large majority, on all the charges, declared the prisoner not guilty. But Pitt did not live to hear either this declaration of the innocence of his friend or to suffer from the desertion of his colleague Sidmouth. The impeachment was not carried up to the Bar of the House of Lords till the 26th of June; on the 12th of July Parliament was prorogued, and Pitt did not live to see the opening of another session.

[Sidenote: Progress of the war. 1804.]

While misfortune was thus following the minister in Parliament, his great plans of European policy had been continued and had at last met with success. In fact, in this matter Napoleon had been his best ally, and had been gradually forcing the great powers of Europe into hostility. The ill feeling which had arisen between the Emperor Alexander and Bonaparte in the preceding year had been increased by subsequent events, and the Czar had been gradually taking up a position of more defined hostility. On the 24th of May 1804, he contracted a defensive alliance with Prussia, though not intending immediate war if it could be avoided. The murder of the Duc d'Enghien and the violation of neutral territory had forced him further in the same direction. So strongly had he resented this act, that it was through his representations to the Diet of Ratisbon (July) that Austria and Prussia, who would otherwise have passed it over in silence, were induced to take any notice of it, and at length, finding his indirect action through the German powers of no avail, he had remonstrated directly with France and withdrawn his ambassador from Paris (Aug. 18). Prussia, which pursued throughout a weak and vacillating policy, also expressed its disapprobation of Napoleon's conduct by a change of ministry, which removed Haugwitz, a constant friend of France, from office. But instead of seeking to allay its fears, Napoleon still further excited its jealousy by intriguing with the smaller States of Germany, and making a violent inroad into the territory of Hamburg (Oct. 25), to carry off thence the English minister. Austria too, though restrained by her weakness from overt action, in November contracted a treaty with Russia similar to that of Prussia. Very little was wanted to bring all three powers into open hostility with France.

[Sidenote: Treaty of St. Petersburg. April 11, 1805.]

[Sidenote: The coalition practically formed. Sept. 1805.]

The character of Alexander gave indeed to Napoleon an opportunity which he ought to have seized. He was full of high-flown notions for the regeneration of Europe, for the more equitable division of states, and some generally established system of public law. With some such scheme his minister Nowosiltzoff came to England in 1805. Pitt speedily modified his views, and proved to him that before so grand a scheme could be realized the practical work to be done was to insist upon the establishment of the terms of the treaties of Lunéville and Amiens. Accordingly, on the 11th of April, the Treaty of St. Petersburg was signed. The two countries pledged themselves to support a general European league, for the purpose of demanding the evacuation of Hanover, Italy, and Elba, the real independence of Holland and Switzerland, and the complete establishment of the kingdom of Naples: they especially pledged themselves not to interfere with the internal government of France, and to close all questions by a general European congress. As England refused to evacuate Malta, the Czar declined to ratify the treaty, and determined to make one more effort singlehanded to avoid war. For this purpose he despatched an ambassador with much more favourable terms than those implied in the late treaty. But Napoleon declined to see him for two months, and in those two months he had had himself declared King of Italy (May 26), had accepted the offer of the Doge of Genoa to comprise the Ligurian Republic in his Italian kingdom (June 3), had created Lucca into a principality for the husband of his sister Eliza (July 21), and had received an ambassador from the Court of Naples with the most stinging threats and insults. The Russian ambassador was therefore recalled, and, though without declaration of war, the coalition was in fact in existence, and arrangements for a general attack upon France began. The coalition was thus the fruit rather of Napoleon's conduct than of Pitt's diplomacy; the occupation of Hanover, the violation of the neutral territory of Baden, the murder of the Duc d'Enghien, the establishment of the kingdom of Italy, the annexation of Genoa and Lucca, and virtually of Holland and of Switzerland, supplied ample reasons to excite the alarm of Europe and to drive the powers into coalition.

[Sidenote: Napoleon prepares to invade England.]

But while the coalition was forming, and Napoleon seemed wantonly to be insulting Europe and ignoring the danger of exciting fresh enemies, he was in fact urging on with all rapidity his schemes for the invasion of England, which he probably hoped might be so successful as to paralyse all action on the part of the European powers. The constantly repeated representations of his naval officers had forced him, much against his will, to believe that his descent upon England would be impracticable unless secured by the presence of his fleet. In spite of the general voice of those who knew the condition of the French navy, he determined to act with his fleet on the same principles as he would have acted with his army; a gigantic combination of various squadrons was to be effected, and a fleet great enough to destroy all hope of opposition to sweep the Channel. For this purpose the eighteen ships of the line at Brest under Admiral Gantheaume, the squadron at Rochefort under Villeneuve, and the Toulon fleet under Latouche-Tréville, were to unite. The last mentioned admiral was intrusted with the chief command. Sailing up the coast of France, he was to liberate from their blockade the squadrons of Rochefort and Brest, and with their combined fleets appear before Boulogne. But Latouche-Tréville died, and Napoleon intrusted his plans to Villeneuve. Those plans, all of them arranged without regard to the bad condition of the French ships, or to the uncertainty of the weather, were frequently changed; at one time Villeneuve from Toulon, and Missiessy, his successor, at Rochefort, were to proceed to the West Indies, drawing the English fleet thither; then Gantheaume was to appear from Brest, throw troops into Ireland, and thus cover the flotilla. At another time, all the fleets were to assemble at the West Indies, and, joining with the Spanish fleet at Ferrol, appear in the Straits of Calais.

[Sidenote: Nelson's pursuit of Villeneuve. May 1805.]

To complete this last measure Villeneuve set sail from Toulon on the 30th of March 1805, joined Gravina at Cadiz, and reached Martinique on the 13th of May with twenty-eight ships and seven frigates. His voyage was so slow that Missiessy had returned from the West Indies to France, and the junction failed. In hot pursuit of Villeneuve, Nelson, who had at length found out his destination, had hurried. At Martinique Gantheaume, with the Brest fleet, should have joined Villeneuve; unfortunately for him Admiral Cornwallis blockaded his fleet. Villeneuve therefore had to return to Europe alone, sailing for Ferrol to pick up a squadron of fifteen ships. He was then, at the head of thirty-five ships, ordered to appear before Brest, liberate Gantheaume, and appear in the Channel. Back again in pursuit of him Nelson sailed, but supposed that he would return to the Mediterranean and not to Ferrol; he therefore again missed him; but as he had found means to inform the English Government that Villeneuve was returning to Europe, Calder, with a fleet of fifteen ships, was sent to intercept him. The fleets encountered off Cape Finisterre. The French had twenty-seven vessels, Calder but fifteen, and after an indecisive battle, in which two Spanish ships were taken, he was afraid to renew the engagement, and Villeneuve was thus enabled to reach Ferrol in safety. However, all the operations towards concentration had led to absolutely nothing, and the English fleets, which the movements towards the West Indies were to have decoyed from the Channel, were either still off the coast of France or in immediate pursuit of the fleet of Villeneuve. Nelson returned to Gibraltar, and as soon as he found out where Villeneuve was, he joined his fleet to that of Cornwallis before Brest, and himself returned to England.

[Sidenote: Failure of Napoleon's schemes. Aug.]

The day before Calder had also left nine ships with Cornwallis, who had thus a fleet of thirty-five vessels. He divided them into two equal parts, sending one to Ferrol, and keeping the other to guard Gantheaume in Brest. Meanwhile Villeneuve had not been able to get ready for sea till the 11th of August. Had he then sailed he would probably have encountered with his own nineteen ships Cornwallis' fleet of thirty-five vessels off Brest. Had he indeed postponed his sailing for a few days he would have found Cornwallis' fleet separated, but even then it was improbable that he would have escaped one or other of its divisions. But in fact he did not know of its division, and therefore, acting in the belief of the union of the great fleet off Brest, he was afraid to venture northwards, and with the full approbation of his Spanish colleague Gravina, determined to avail himself of a last alternative which Napoleon had suggested, and sailed to Cadiz. This was a fatal blow to the gigantic schemes of Napoleon. Up till the 22nd of August he still believed that Villeneuve would make his appearance, and in fact wrote to him that day at Brest, closing his letter with the words, "England is ours." As the time for his great stroke drew near he grew nervously anxious, constantly watching the Channel for the approach of the fleet, and at last, when his Minister of Marine, Decrès, told him that the fleet had gone to Cadiz, he broke forth in bitter wrath against both his minister and Villeneuve, whom he accused of the most shameful weakness.

[Sidenote: He changes his plan and marches against Austria.]

But Napoleon was not a man who let his success be staked upon one plan alone. Though studiously hiding from his people the existence of the coalition, and not scrupling to have recourse to forged letters and fabricated news for the purpose, he was fully aware of its existence. He knew too of the movements of the armies of Austria and Russia, and had already taken some steps to meet them. Without much difficulty, therefore, he at once resigned his great plans upon England, and directed his army towards the eastern frontier, determined to wipe out by a great campaign, in which the chances were all in his favour, the disgrace and ridicule of his long-threatened but abortive attack upon England. The largest and best part of the Austrian army was in Italy under the Archduke Charles. On the Inn there were barely 80,000 men, commanded by General Mack. The Russians had yet far to go before they could form a junction with the Austrian troops, and Napoleon, when he first changed his plan on the 25th of August, intended to march by the most direct route to meet the Austrians, and if possible prevent them from crossing the Inn. For this purpose he could bring, counting the army of occupation of Hanover, nearly 200,000 men into the field. The passage of the Rhine was open to him; it was no longer necessary as of old to fight his way through the Black Forest. By pursuing a direct course he would be able to pick up the troops who were in Hanover on his way, and bring his whole army to bear at once upon the Inn. The Austrians, however, little calculating on the rapidity of his movements, believing that the army was engaged on the northern coast, and desirous of securing the assistance of the Bavarian army of 25,000 men, rashly crossed the Inn on the 7th of September, and advanced to Ulm. Their movements were accurately known to Napoleon, who had sent Murat in disguise into Bavaria to watch them; and when he heard that they had taken up their position so far in advance of their base of operations, he formed his great plan for surrounding and capturing the whole army at Ulm.

[Sidenote: Capitulation of the Austrian army at Ulm. Oct 19.]

While Napoleon was thus hurrying off to destroy the Austrian troops, Nelson, having heard of the destination of Villeneuve, and feeling that the fleet he had so long pursued was his fair prey, offered his services to Government. They were gladly accepted, and on the 13th of September he left his home for the last time to take command of the fleet off Cadiz. Thus, each on its own element, the two great nations of Europe, commanded by the two great leaders of the day, were engaged almost simultaneously in undertakings of the last importance, and almost simultaneously the results of those undertakings became known. On the 19th of October, Mack, finding himself surrounded and cut off from Vienna, with all hope of relief gone, capitulated at Ulm, and his whole army of 30,000 men laid down their arms before the enemy. On the 21st of the same month the English and French fleets encountered just within sight of Cape Trafalgar, outside the Straits of Gibraltar.

[Sidenote: Battle of Trafalgar. Oct. 21.]

The fleet of the English numbered twenty-seven vessels, Villeneuve had the command of thirty-three, without reckoning five frigates and two smaller ships. In other respects, in ability of seamanship, and in knowledge of the management of guns, the English were undoubtedly superior. Some days before the battle Nelson had conceived and made known his plan of action. The assault was to be made in two lines; at the head of one Nelson was himself to break the line in the centre, while Collingwood led the second to the attack of the rear squadron. The French were formed in one line, and were sailing in a south-easterly direction. Nelson's plan was therefore calculated not only to destroy the enemy, but also to cut off his retreat from Cadiz and the north. This part of his plan Villeneuve saw through and avoided. He changed the direction of his line, so that the rear squadron became the leading squadron, and the road to Cadiz was kept open. In this order, in full sail, with the wind in their favour, the English attacked and broke the French line. All the advantages of this well-known manœuvre were gained, and by half-past five in the evening, of the thirty-three vessels of the enemy eighteen were in the hands of the English, eleven with difficulty retreated towards Cadiz, and four others, which had formed the leading squadron of the French, were standing out to sea, only to be captured a few days afterwards by another fleet. But the victory was dearly won. Nelson, who had appeared as usual with his orders on his coat, had formed a mark for the riflemen with whom the rigging of the French ships was filled. He fell early in the action, but lived long enough to hear of his complete victory. He died thanking God he had done his duty, and even to the last, mindful of the safety of his fleet, giving orders that it should at once anchor to await a gale whose approach he had foreseen. The storm came as he had expected; a considerable part of our prizes was lost, and three of the French fugitives were wrecked before they reached the port of Cadiz. Of the whole fleet eight vessels alone escaped, which remained blockaded in Cadiz till they fell a prey to the Spanish insurgents.

[Sidenote: Battle of Austerlitz. Dec. 2, 1805.]

But though the sea thus passed entirely under the command of the English, though all chance of invasion had disappeared, a crushing blow upon the Continent shattered for the time all hope of permanent opposition to the advance of Napoleon. The catastrophe at Ulm was followed by a rapid advance upon Vienna. The wisdom Napoleon had shown in concentrating his troops for one great and decisive blow at once bore fruit. The army of Italy was obliged to retreat before the advance of Massena, in time to defend if possible Austria itself. It was too late even for that, and it was compelled to withdraw into Hungary, for the Emperor, desirous of saving the Viennese from the horrors of a siege, had withdrawn with his troops into Moravia, in the hopes of there meeting the main body of the Russians whom Alexander was bringing to his succour. Thither Napoleon pursued him, and there, with his back to the citadel of Brünn, not far from Olmutz, he brought on the great battle of Austerlitz, and before the close of the day the forces of the coalition were completely beaten, losing upon the field 27,000 killed and wounded, 20,000 prisoners, and 133 pieces of cannon.

[Sidenote: Death of Pitt. Jan. 23, 1806.]

While these stirring events had been happening, the health of the English minister had been sensibly declining. Cheered for a moment by the news of Trafalgar, clouded though they were by the death of Nelson, the rapidly-occurring disasters of Ulm and Austerlitz, and the dissolution, by the Treaty of Presburg, of the coalition he had so laboriously established, went far to render fatal the disease which was already threatening him. He returned from Bath, still hoping against hope that he might be present at the opening of Parliament, withdrew for quiet to his villa at Putney, and there died on the 23rd of January 1806.

[Sidenote: New ministry.]

The death of Pitt was followed by the break-up of his Cabinet, which was not so constituted as to be able to stand without him. The King did indeed attempt to continue it under the leadership of Lord Hawkesbury; but upon his refusal to accept the responsibilities of the Premiership, the King was obliged to have recourse to the Opposition, and to summon Lord Grenville to his Councils. The admission of Grenville to the ministry implied the admission of Fox; the close political alliance they had formed, the determination they had already expressed, when rejecting Pitt's offers, never to join in any separate arrangements, rendered it quite impossible for either to accept office without the other. In spite, therefore, of the King's anger and dislike, he was compelled to admit his old enemy Fox to the ministry. The basis on which Grenville and Fox had been united in opposition was the strong belief which both felt that in the present crisis a ministry of a broad and national character was required. On this principle they formed their new administration, which was known by the name of "the Ministry of all the talents." Lord Grenville became First Lord of the Treasury; Earl Spencer and Mr. Windham, members of Pitt's first administration, Secretaries for the Home and War departments; Fox became Foreign Secretary, and his friends Earl Fitzwilliam and Grey (now Lord Howick), the one Lord President of the Council, and the other First Lord of the Admiralty. Lord Moira, Master-General of the Ordnance, represented the friends of the Prince of Wales; while Lord Sidmouth became Lord Privy Seal, and as he insisted on bringing one friend with him into the Cabinet, introduced with questionable wisdom Lord Ellenborough, the Lord Chief Justice. It has since this time been generally held that such a position is incompatible with high judicial duties. Lord Henry Petty, afterwards Lord Lansdowne, was Chancellor of the Exchequer. Before the ministry went out all due honour had been paid to the late minister; a public funeral and monument had been voted, together with the sum of £40,000 for the payment of his debts.

[Sidenote: Character of Fox.]

The character of Fox as a statesman was now upon its trial. After thirty years of exclusion from office, in perpetual opposition to the King and the general feeling of the upper classes, Fox had at length an opportunity of proving the justice of the reliance which men of liberal opinions had always placed in him. Large-hearted, with great warmth of personal affection, and general love of the human race, he had uniformly opposed war, had constantly declared that either the mismanagement or ill-will of the ministers had been the main obstacle to peace: he had believed devoutly in the excellence of the Revolution, traced its excesses to the wanton opposition of the crowned heads of Europe, and still persisted in believing that straightforward and friendly negotiations would bring about a right understanding with Napoleon. The brief period which elapsed between his acceptance of office in January and his death on the 13th of September, sufficed to prove to him the futility of his hopes; and the ministry found itself obliged to take up identically the same position as that of their predecessors. Like his great rival, he closed his life in the midst of the unutterable sadness caused by the complete frustration of those plans on which, according to his view, the welfare of his country rested, with this additional bitterness in his cup that upon him was forced the conviction, not only that circumstances were too strong for him, but that the optimism which had been the very breath of his political life rested upon no solid ground, and that the work to which he had devoted himself, and the maintenance of which had perpetually debarred him from a share in the government of the country, had been wholly misdirected. That destruction of illusions which comes to most men in their youth fell upon him when he was already breaking with age and disease, and when he must have been conscious that no time was left him to correct the errors into which he had been led. It is difficult to conceive a sadder close to a noble political career than that which fell upon the minister as he discovered too late that the practical logic of facts contradicted all those high aspirations which had throughout guided his conduct. So complete, however, was the proof afforded him by his short ministry of the futility of his hopes, that his friend Lord Howick, after just a year of office, was compelled to declare of the late negotiations that "there never was any opportunity of procuring any such terms as would have been adequate to the just pretensions and consistent with the honour and interests of this country; 'one thing is clear, the progress of Bonaparte has never yet been stopped by submission, and our only hope therefore is in resistance, as far as we can resist his ambitious projects.'"

[Sidenote: Negotiations for peace. March.]

The negotiations of which Lord Howick thus confessed the disastrous conclusion were opened by Fox almost immediately after his accession to office. A few days after his appointment an unknown person called upon him, and disclosed a plan for the assassination of the Emperor. With natural indignation, Fox caused the man to be apprehended, and while warning Bonaparte that the law of England prevented his lengthened detention, he promised that it should be long enough to enable the Emperor to provide against the nefarious plan. It is not improbable that the whole conspiracy was devised by Napoleon himself for the purpose of opening a negotiation with Fox, in whom he believed he had a sincere well-wisher, and on whose simple-hearted optimism he believed he could play. He caused a copy of a speech to reach Fox in which he expressed his willingness to make peace with England on the stipulations of the Treaty of Amiens. This led to a direct negotiation between Fox and Talleyrand, in which the English minister, in accordance with his views, attempted, as he said, to act upon the assumption that the countries would treat as two great powers, despising any idea of chicane. But this was not at all Napoleon's view of negotiation. His diplomacy constantly assumed the same form--separate treaties with different members of the coalition, and the hurried continuance of aggression during the time that negotiations were pending, so as to compel the treating power either to accept the aggressions or to break off the treaty. This had been his plan before the Treaty of Amiens, and this he had just repeated after the battle of Austerlitz.

[Sidenote: Treaty of Schönbrunn, Dec 15, and Presburg, Dec. 26, 1805.]

Prussia was already so far pledged to join the coalition that it was on the point of receiving the first payment of a subsidy from England. But Bonaparte succeeded in inducing the vacillating court to break with both its allies. Two separate treaties were made, one at Schönbrunn, by which Prussia withdrew from the coalition, and entered into an offensive and defensive alliance with France, receiving Hanover in exchange for Anspach, which was to be restored to Bavaria, and the Principality of Neuchatel, which was to be annexed to France, and the other at Presburg, in which Austria, having lost all hope of any assistance Prussia might have rendered, was induced to accept the most disastrous terms. The kingdom of Italy was to receive Venice and the Adriatic provinces; the three German powers which were consistently friends of France--Bavaria, Wurtemberg and Baden--obtained portions of the German dominions of Austria; the royal title was secured to Bavaria and Wurtemberg; the rights of the Empire over the immediate nobility were renounced; the reorganization of Italy was admitted; and Austria even agreed not to interfere in the affairs of Naples. On these terms the constitution of the Germanic Confederation was guaranteed. It is needless to point out what a seed of hatred was sown by these treaties, in which one of the German powers was humiliated by its ignominious bargain, the other driven almost to despair by the ruthless manner in which it was pillaged.

[Sidenote: Napoleon erects dependent kingdoms. 1806.]

It was shortly after this that Pitt died and Fox entered office. There were left of the coalition England and Russia, with whom Napoleon had now to deal. Fox felt, as any honourable man must have felt, that it was his duty to stand by his allies, and to engage only in negotiations in common with them. Napoleon, on the other hand, pursued his old policy, and determined to treat separately; but while treating he continued the work on which he was then engaged--the erection of a number of small independent kingdoms and principalities in vassalage to France. In February and March he overran Naples and established his brother Joseph as king. In March he ordained a similar fate for Holland, and before June had established his brother Louis there. Numerous other principalities were called into existence for his relations and marshals, and the work was completed by the organization in July of 1810 the Confederation of the Rhine, consisting of Baden, Bavaria, Wurtemberg, Hesse-Darmstadt, and several other smaller states, who acknowledged the protectorate of France, and promised to keep on foot an army of 63,000 men at Napoleon's disposal.

[Sidenote: Progress of the negotiations.]

[Sidenote: Negotiations broken off. Death of Fox.]

While thus proceeding with his aggressions he was treating with both Russia and England. To the letters of Fox had succeeded personal negotiations between Talleyrand and Lord Yarmouth, who had been detained a prisoner after the Peace of Amiens. The terms which were first offered to Lord Yarmouth show the contempt with which Bonaparte regarded Prussia, the change in the terms as the treaty continued shows how little intention there was of really coming to an honest arrangement, should it prove possible to separate the interests of Russia and England. At first Talleyrand told Yarmouth that no difficulty would be found in taking Hanover, which had already been given to Prussia, and restoring it to England, or in giving Sicily back to the King of Naples. Sicily indeed Napoleon had not yet conquered; but as the separate treaty with Russia advanced and became more possible, Yarmouth found the terms changing. He was told that Sicily was to be conquered and added to the kingdom of Joseph; and finally, when the treaty with Russia was provisionally signed, although Yarmouth had been assured that the constitution of Germany should be unchanged if peace were made, the Confederation of the Rhine was called into existence. Fox's eyes had been almost opened by this time. The refusal of Sicily, the separate peace with Russia, the interference with the constitution of Germany, led him to see that his friendly negotiations were not likely to lead to much result. He therefore sent Lord Lauderdale, with fuller authority than Lord Yarmouth, to re-establish the old basis of negotiation. His complaints were listened to, but there were no signs of withdrawal on the part of France. As for the compensation of the King of Naples, it was desirable enough, but it must not be at the expense of France. He might perhaps have Albania, which belonged to Turkey, or Ragusa, which belonged to Austria, or the Balearic Isles, which belonged to Spain. While affairs were in this unpromising situation news arrived that the Czar had entirely rejected the provisional treaty his minister had signed, and almost immediately afterwards Fox died. The diplomatic intercourse continued about a month longer, and was then broken off.

[Sidenote: Abolition of the slave trade.]

[Sidenote: The Abolition Bill passed. March 25, 1807.]

Fox's friends thus learnt the error of their previous views, and the necessity of carrying on the war with vigour; but Fox's ministry was not entirely without fruit. As he had himself stated, the second great object of his life was the abolition of the slave trade. For upwards of thirty years the horrors of slavery had occupied the minds of a large section of benevolent men in England. In 1783 the Quakers had petitioned against the slave trade. From that time till 1788, Clarkson, a young Cambridge man, had devoted his life to collecting evidence on the horrors of the trade. He had succeeded in interesting in his cause Pitt, Fox, and, before all, Wilberforce; and in that year Pitt had brought the matter before Parliament, and a resolution had been carried to take the slave trade into consideration. Circumstances and the interests of public business had prevented Pitt from entering fully into the plans of the abolitionists, although Wilberforce was constantly urging him to do so. Still, again and again, in 1792 and 1796, Bills had been carried in favour of abolition in the House of Commons, though subsequently defeated in the House of Lords. In 1804, on Pitt's resumption of office, Wilberforce renewed the question, which had been allowed to slumber by the Addington Cabinet, and a Bill for abolition, or rather suspension of the trade for a term of years, was again carried. In the House of Lords it was again postponed, but Pitt tried what could be done by a royal proclamation, which was issued to prevent the trade at all events in the conquered colonies, the possession of which had greatly increased the trade, so that nearly 60,000 slaves were yearly imported in British vessels. In February 1805 a larger measure had been rejected in the House, but on the accession to office of Fox, who was known to be more enthusiastic on the matter than Pitt had been, the hopes of the abolitionists rose high. Nor were their hopes disappointed, though the party against the measure was strong. The West India merchants were all against it, and a number of Tories, with the King at their head, regarded slavery as a natural and scriptural institution by no means to be lightly touched. On the 10th of June 1806, Fox pledged the House of Commons, almost without opposition, to take measures as speedily as possible for abolishing the trade. Even in the House of Lords the minister found that there would be no serious opposition, and determined to produce a Bill to prohibit the slave trade entirely. This Act prohibited slave trading from and after the 1st of January 1808, but as the punishments were only pecuniary, it required a new Bill, introduced by Mr. Brougham in 1811, making slave trading felony, to secure its final extinction. These Bills did not abolish slavery, but only the slave trade. Fox did not live to bring in the Bill, but it was produced by his colleague Lord Howick, afterwards Lord Grey, on the 2nd of January 1807, and in spite of the opposition of the royal dukes, of Lord Eldon and of Lord Sidmouth (Feb. 3), the Bill was passed by a majority of sixty-six. When it was brought to the House of Commons (Feb. 23) it met with quite an enthusiastic reception, and was passed by an overwhelming majority of 283 to 16. The Bill was rapidly hurried through its other stages, in order that the ministry which had been successful in passing it might have the honour of completing it; for before the royal assent was given it was well known that the Grenville ministry had ceased to exist.

[Sidenote: Fall of the Grenville ministry.]

[Sidenote: Revival of the question of the Catholic claims.]

[Sidenote: The Grenville ministry resigns. March 18.]

The cause of this rapid termination to a ministry which had begun under such good auspices was the attempt again to bring forward the Catholic claims, against which the King was set with immoveable obstinacy. Grenville's conduct was dictated by high policy, and in itself wise, although, if we regard the minister as a mere party politician, in the last degree indiscreet. As he himself told the King, he and the majority of the Cabinet thought that in the present critical state of England it was most necessary to secure content and unanimity at home, and to be in a condition to use to the full the military capacity of every class of his Majesty's subjects. For this reason he was desirous of removing so much of the disabilities both of the Catholics and of the Dissenters as affected their military position. There seems, however, to have been some complication in the matter. The Irish Catholics, headed by Lord Fingal and Mr. O'Connor, were preparing a great petition, demanding not only change in the army regulations, but the admission of Catholics to the offices of sheriff and to corporations; and although Grenville was careful to forestall the presentation of their petition and to avoid all appearance of compromise, it is probable that his measure was in fact in some degree a concession to prevent further agitation; besides which he could not help feeling that the just expectations of the Catholics had not been satisfied at the Union. By a law passed in Ireland in 1793 the Roman Catholics had been permitted to hold rank in the Irish army up to the rank of colonel; but certain restrictions had been laid on their holding staff appointments. By the Union the two armies of Ireland and of England had been made one, and the anomaly had therefore arisen, that officers capable of holding their rank while in Ireland were incapable of so doing when they came to England. The ministry determined to remedy this glaring anomaly, and at the same time to remove the disabilities which tended to exclude the English Dissenters from the army. For that purpose a clause was added to the Mutiny Bill of the year. Some of the High Tories in Parliament, such as Lord Eldon and Mr. Perceval, thought it unnecessary, and the King's friends, as Lord Sidmouth and Ellenborough were called, offered some opposition, but on the whole the proposal was regarded as reasonable. The intention was notified to the Viceroy in Ireland, and the King himself was finally induced to consent, at the same time declaring that he would not allow any further step in the matter. The question then arose in Ireland as to whether the new clause retained the restrictions as to rank or not, and the majority of the Cabinet determined that they were removed, and that the whole army and navy were thrown open to the Catholics. This determination was laid before the King, and for some reason or other he took no notice of it, conduct which the ministers (although the Bill undoubtedly exceeded what the King had already accepted) construed as giving the royal consent. It was then thought better to make a separate Bill instead of merely adding a clause to the Mutiny Act; Lord Howick took the Bill to the King, and understood that he had his consent. But meanwhile Lord Sidmouth had had interviews with the King, and attempted to rouse his fears, and for the same purpose had sent in his resignation. Even more than this, Lord Malmesbury and the Duke of Portland thought they saw an opening for dislodging the ministry, and between them concocted a letter, exaggerating the difficulties of the situation, and containing an offer on the part of the Duke of Portland to form a ministry according to the King's wishes. Thus, apparently alarmed as to what he was doing, and feeling his hands strengthened by the Duke's offer, the King sent for the ministers, and told them he did not agree to anything beyond the completion of the Act of 1793. As soon as this determination of the King was known, the conduct of all Pitt's friends was fixed, and although they were at that moment thinking of joining the ministry, they now expressed their determination to oppose the Bill; the whole party felt itself bound by Pitt's promise that the question should never be moved; so strong was this feeling that even the ministry expressed themselves willing to drop their Bill. But in dropping it they were guilty of a most impolitic act. They drew up a minute of the Cabinet, reserving to themselves the right of avowing their sentiments if the petition from the Catholics, which was at that time in preparation, was presented, and of submitting to the King from time to time such measures as they deemed advisable for the good of the country. Upon this the King demanded from them a withdrawal of their minute, and a written declaration that they would never offer him any advice upon the subject of Catholic concession. It was of course impossible for any constitutional ministers to give such a pledge; and it was upon this point--a point of real constitutional importance--that the Cabinet were dismissed. On the 19th of March the Duke of Portland received orders to form a ministry in consultation with Lord Chatham. The health of the Duke was such that his Premiership could be little more than nominal. Indeed, from the first he suffered Lords Hawkesbury and Eldon in fact to supersede him, and when Mr. Perceval became Chancellor of the Exchequer he virtually assumed the lead of the new administration. Canning became Foreign Secretary, Lord Hawkesbury Home Secretary, and Castlereagh Secretary for War and the Colonies.

[Sidenote: Constitutional importance of the question.]

We have here, then, the final triumph of the policy of George III. It was again his personal wish which overthrew the ministry, it was again the underhand intrigues of those professing to be his friends which strengthened his hands in doing so, and we again find such things mentioned as that the nephews of the Duke of Portland had had his distinct orders to vote against the ministers' Bill should it be produced. The same exercise of prerogative that secured the ministry of Pitt and supported the feeble ministry of Addington now again introduced into the ministry men entirely after the King's own heart--pledged to oppose the great Liberal measures of the day, and, say what they would, really answerable for the unconstitutional pledge the King had demanded from his late ministry. The conduct of the incoming ministry was not allowed to pass without comment. Attempts were made in both Houses to establish two points of constitutional law now absolutely received--first, that it is contrary to the first duties of the confidential servants of the Crown to restrain themselves by any pledge, expressed or implied, from offering to the King any advice which the course of circumstances may render necessary for the welfare and security of the Empire; and, secondly, that it was impossible for the King to act without advice. In upholding this last point, Sir Samuel Romilly asserted that there could be no exercise of prerogative in which the King could act without some advice. No constitutional doctrine is more important than this, for without it the King, who theoretically can do no wrong, would be answerable for his own acts. On a motion by Mr. Brand supporting these doctrines, the Opposition thought themselves secure of a majority. But so great was the royal influence, so strong the Protestant feeling of the country, that they found themselves in a minority of more than thirty. A dissolution of Parliament followed on the 27th of April. And as the King, in the speech with which Parliament was closed, appealed as it were to the constituencies for the vindication of his conduct, the personal loyalty of the people, combined with their attachment to the old cry of Church and State, placed the ministry in possession of a majority which secured its permanence.

[Sidenote: Continuation of the war. 1806.]

[Sidenote: Prussia declares war with France. Oct. 1, 1806.]

During the last days of the Grenville ministry it had been compelled to pursue the warlike policy of its predecessors, and had exhibited an incapacity which might have been expected from so mixed a body acting upon compulsion, and in contradiction to its preconceived ideas of policy. The renewed war which at once followed upon the cessation of the negotiations undertaken by Fox was on this occasion directed towards a new enemy. We have seen the contempt with which Bonaparte habitually regarded Prussia: his conduct seems to have been wilfully directed to drive that country into war, and it is interesting to observe that it was this unjustifiable conduct which gave the first obvious proof of the changed character of his policy, and roused that animosity, not of the Court, but of the people assaulted, which finally caused his ruin. All his late acts had tended to the detriment of Prussia. By the Confederation of the Rhine the constitution of Germany, in which Prussia might at all events have claimed some voice, was entirely changed; French fortifications had been raised on the German side of the Rhine at Mayence, and the fortress of Wesel had been re-established; the very bribe with which the apparent friendship of Prussia had been secured had been tampered with. Hanover, which in the winter had been given in full possession to Prussia, was in June without scruple offered to England; as a sort of counterpoise to the Rhenish Confederation, the King of Prussia had been invited by Napoleon to form a Confederation of the North; but he soon found how illusory the offer was, for he was everywhere practically thwarted by the diplomacy of the French. The people even more than the Court had smarted under the disgrace of the Treaty of Schönbrunn; and when Napoleon showed the temper in which he intended to interfere in Germany,--by the apprehension (in a neutral town which chanced to be occupied by French troops) of the bookseller Palm, and his cold-blooded murder on the charge merely of selling a book exciting the national feeling of Germany,--the popular anger grew so high, that the King of Prussia was obliged to act with some energy, especially when the young Queen put herself prominently forward as the leader of the national war party. A declaration of war with France was the consequence.

[Sidenote: Mismanagement of Prussia.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Jena. Oct. 14, 1806.]

But it was too late to be of any use. The French army, considerably more numerous than any troops Prussia could bring against it, was already in Franconia, a few marches from the frontier. There was no time to put to good account the strong national feeling which had been excited. Prussia could rely upon its army alone, and though strong in the military reminiscences of the Great Frederick and admirably appointed, the Prussian troops had never seen war; the generals were old men wedded to obsolete traditions, while the King, in his anxiety to please Napoleon, had even gone so far as to discharge many of his troops in the previous year. The consequence of an encounter between such an army and the veterans of Napoleon might have been foreseen. The catastrophe was hastened by the bad arrangements of the generals. The King and his Court and crowds of enthusiastic nobility were with the army, but the chief command was in the hands of the Duke of Brunswick, an old man past seventy. Anxious to incorporate the troops of Hesse-Cassel, he repeated the error of the Austrians of the previous year, and advancing far beyond the Elbe, which forms the only good line of defence of which Prussia can boast, he took up a position between Eisenach and Weimar, covered by the Thuringian Forest, behind which the French could make any dispositions for the assault they pleased. The mistake was much too obvious to escape the eyes of Napoleon. His army passed rapidly through the defiles which lead to the upper waters of the Saal, and proceeding down the course of that river, interposed themselves between Brunswick and the Elbe. Perceiving too late his false position, the Duke attempted to withdraw towards Magdeburg. With the larger portion of his army he found himself stopped near Auerstadt as he approached Naumbourg on the Saal, by the division of Davoust, while the Prince of Hohenlohe, with a smaller division of the army, who was to have followed him, was fallen upon and overwhelmed at Jena by Napoleon himself with the greater part of his army. Beaten back from Auerstadt, Brunswick retired towards Weimar, only to meet the fugitives of Hohenlohe's army and their victorious pursuers. His troops were involved in the disaster, the whole Prussian army was broken and destroyed, and that one day's defeat drew with it the destruction of the monarchy. Such fugitive detachments as still kept together were one by one destroyed, and Napoleon entered Berlin in triumph (Oct. 27).

[Sidenote: The Berlin Decree. Nov. 21, 1806.]

The temporary annihilation of Austria at Austerlitz, and the complete overthrow of Prussia at Jena, had made Napoleon master of nearly the whole of Europe. Nothing is more remarkable than the rapid expansion of his ambition; each new success seemed to supply him with a new starting-point for further schemes. His mind, in spite of its practical character, had a strong tendency towards romance; as in his youth he had been fired with the idea of a great Eastern monarchy, so now, as circumstances had been favourable to him, the idea of repeating the rôle of Charlemagne, and the re-establishment of the Empire of the West, seems to have been prominent in his mind. Already, in his dealings with the Pope, in the Confederation of the Rhine, and in the creation of vassal kingdoms, he had shown his wish to imitate the conduct of that great ruler. The idea was confirmed by the conquest of Prussia, and strengthened by a petition from one of his armies that he would take the title of Emperor of the West. Russia was the only opponent left upon the Continent. If Russia could be either conquered or won over, not only would he have been in truth the Western Emperor, but he would have the means, as he believed, of wreaking his vengeance upon his detested rival England, which still refused to yield to his ascendancy. Already in fact, he believed that this vengeance was in his grasp. On the 21st of November he issued the extraordinary measure known as the Berlin Decree. Even during the negotiations with Fox he had insisted upon Prussia closing against English traffic the mouths of the Elbe and Weser. The measure had not been a success, 400 Prussian vessels had been seized in reprisal, and the mouths of the North German rivers declared in a state of blockade. That blockade had been real. But the Emperor now, as he said by a just use of the law of retaliation (while he was unable with safety to place a single ship upon the ocean), declared that the whole of the British Isles were in a state of blockade, forbad on the part of all his dependent countries any commerce or correspondence with them, declared every subject of England found in a country occupied by French troops a prisoner of war, and all English merchandise, even all private property of Englishmen, confiscated. Thus was established what is known as the Continental system. It laboured under three disadvantages. In the first place, it was absolutely impracticable, Europe could not be supplied without England, as Napoleon himself found in the course of the year when he authorized the clothing of his own army with English cloth; secondly, it enabled England by retaliatory measures to destroy every mercantile marine in Europe except its own; thirdly, it was so distressing and vexatious, and interfered so wantonly both with private property and the supply of necessaries for the people, that, more than anything else that Napoleon did, it excited popular indignation against him, and tended to his downfall. And yet it was not without a certain plausible excuse, which rested on the difference then existing between the laws of war as carried on by land and upon the sea. By land the property of an enemy was not considered lawful prize unless it belonged to the hostile government itself; by sea the property of peaceable merchants was liable to seizure and confiscation. By land no one was considered a prisoner of war unless taken with arms in his hand; by sea the crews of merchantmen were imprisoned as well as those of armed vessels. The second point which formed Napoleon's excuse was the extension given by England to the right of blockade. These two points afforded the pretext under which the Decree was promulgated, and was declared to be a fundamental law of the French Empire, till England should recognize the laws of war to be the same by sea and by land, and should consent to restrict the right of blockade to fortified towns actually invested by a sufficient force. In issuing his Decree, then, Napoleon put on a specious appearance of magnanimity, and took upon himself the part which he was fond of assuming, that of champion of the rights of nations against the tyranny of the English.

[Sidenote: Orders in Council.]

[Sidenote: Their effect on America.]

The necessity under which England as a belligerent lay of employing to the full the power which usage gave it of necessity inflicted considerable inconvenience upon neutral powers. The retaliatory measures which the Government thought it wise to take still further injured the neutrals, and threatened almost to annihilate the American trade. A series of orders in Council was issued, extending from January to November 1807. By the first of these orders vessels were forbidden to trade between any ports in the possession of France, or of her allies if under her control. By the second, issued in November, after the extension of the Continental system to the Mediterranean, general reprisals were granted against the goods, ships, and inhabitants of Tuscany, Naples, Dalmatia, and the Ionian Islands. By the third, all ports from which the flag of England was excluded were declared in blockade, all trade in their produce unlawful, and their ships a prize, while all vessels carrying certificates of origin (a measure which Napoleon had insisted upon to prevent evasion of his system) were declared liable to capture. By the fourth, another plan of evasion was forbidden; the sale of ships by a belligerent to a neutral was declared illegal, because the French had managed to preserve much of their commerce by fictitious sales, enabling them to continue their business under neutral flags. The Americans were the chief sufferers by these orders, and the irritation already felt by them was so increased that it ultimately ripened into war. Their two special grievances were the constant search of their vessels for deserters, and the refusal of the British authorities to recognize their customhouse arrangements. By the English law as then existing an English subject could not get rid of his nationality. But America was full of English and Irish emigrants and deserters from English ships, and the Americans had the constant mortification of seeing even their war-ships stopped and searched, and the asylum of their flag violated by the apprehension, under the rough justice of English naval officers, of many of their best seamen. By the neutral laws direct trading between the colony of a belligerent and its mother country was forbidden, but neutrals might trade for their own supply with the colonies. More than this, if they imported from the colonies more than they wanted they might re-export it even to the mother country; the proof of a bona fide interrupted voyage was the payment of the customhouse dues in the ports of the neutral. But these dues were in America paid not in money but in bonds, which were cancelled when the goods were re-exported. The payment of goods was therefore fictitious, and English officials refused to recognize them. The irritation produced by these two causes was but slightly allayed by negotiations in 1809, and, as will be subsequently mentioned, the people, especially the Southerners, forced the States into war in 1812.

[Sidenote: Battle of Eylau. Feb. 7, 1807.]

To enable Napoleon to carry out his idea either of a Western Empire or of the complete annihilation of English trade it was necessary that war with Russia should continue. As a means for injuring that power he had already held out hopes of restoration of liberty to Poland, and in December he was received as a national saviour at Warsaw; but some remnant of the Prussian army had formed a junction with the forces of the Czar, and Benigsen, in command of the combined armies, refused to give the French a resting time in their new quarters. Napoleon had again himself to take the field. The allies fell back northwards to Eylau, not far from Königsberg, and there, on the 7th of February, was fought a great battle, which, for almost the first time, the French could not claim as a victory. Their exhaustion was great. Three times within seven months fresh conscriptions had been ordered in France. The firmness of the Russians at Eylau gave rise to well-grounded hopes that the chance of checking Napoleon had arrived, but money and reinforcements of troops were sorely wanted.

[Sidenote: Incapacity of the Grenville ministry.]

But at this critical moment the Grenville ministry exhibited to the full its incapacity for carrying on war. The Emperor of Russia was told that he need expect no great assistance from England, and money was doled out to him with ridiculous parsimony. There was indeed in England a total misapprehension of the necessities of a great war. Since the time of Marlborough and Queen Anne the idea of war on a large scale, except upon the sea, seemed to have wholly disappeared from the minds of the public men of the country. Even the great successes of Chatham had depended principally upon his good fortune in securing the alliance of Frederick the Great, and now all the resources of England were frittered away in a ridiculous series of small expeditions. When a concentration of troops and a frank and open-handed assistance to its allies might have saved Europe, the English Government taught them by its conduct, that while urging them to fight it would practically desert them at the moment when its assistance was wanted, and spend its men and money on such frivolous expeditions as the attack on Buenos Ayres, Alexandria, or upon the Dardanelles. These were the three military projects of the Grenville ministry.

[Sidenote: Expedition to Buenos Ayres. May 1807.]

In 1806 the English had recaptured from the Dutch the Cape of Good Hope. Sir Home Popham, who commanded the fleet, without orders from Government, determined upon a similar assault upon the Spanish colonies in America, and proceeded to capture Buenos Ayres. He thence wrote home a triumphant letter calling upon the English merchants to come to the magnificent new market he had opened. His triumph was of short duration. The colonists rallied under command of a French colonel, the city was recaptured, and the troops compelled to surrender as prisoners of war. In February 1807, 3000 men were sent out under Sir Samuel Auchmuty to assist Popham. Too late to save Buenos Ayres, he attacked and captured Monte Video. Before his success was known fresh reinforcements were sent out under General Whitelocke, with orders to assume the chief command, and with Popham's forces recapture Buenos Ayres. The attempt was a disgraceful failure; the troops were ordered to enter the city with unloaded muskets, and to rendezvous in the central square. The effect of so strange an attempt at street fighting may be easily conjectured. From the side-streets, housetops, and barricades thrown up across the roads, a destructive fire was kept up. Though Auchmuty met with some success, by nightfall 2500 of the English were either killed or prisoners, and Whitelocke was glad to accept the freedom of the prisoners both of the present engagement and of the past year, and to withdraw his troops, surrendering Monte Video and all he had conquered. In the judgment of the court martial which tried Whitelocke he was held totally unfit to serve his Majesty in any military capacity whatever, and the popular voice changed his name to General Whitefeather.

[Sidenote: Turkey declares war against Russia.]

[Sidenote: Expedition to the Dardanelles. Feb. 1807.]

During the continuance of the great European war the friendship of Turkey had been a constant object with the great powers. The ambassadors from Russia, France, and England had used all their powers of persuasion and menace to secure the adhesion of the Sultan. Before the end of the year 1806 the threats of Russia had had the effect of driving the Sultan to the friendship of France, and the Porte had declared war with Russia just after the battle of Jena. Wanting his troops for the defence of his own country, and being at that time in close friendship with England, Alexander requested the English Government to take charge of his interests at the Turkish capital, and despatch a fleet to oblige Selim to give up his friendship with France. The plan, being one which could be carried out by the navy, suited the policy of the Grenville Government, and orders were sent to Lord Collingwood, then cruising off Cadiz, to send a squadron to the Dardanelles. He was not allowed to choose his own commander, but received orders from home to appoint Sir John Duckworth. Nothing could be worse managed than the expedition. Collingwood had given strict charge to Duckworth not to be drawn into negotiations. But when the passage of the Dardanelles, at that time almost unfortified, was forced, Duckworth, forgetful of Collingwood's advice, suffered himself to be entangled in negotiations. Sebastiani, the French ambassador, aroused the temper of the Turks, and instructed them in the best manner of fortifying their coasts. The English fleet was in danger of being shut up in the Straits. It became necessary to withdraw; but that step was no longer easy. On the 1st of March the fleet sailed back through the Dardanelles. Batteries had been erected at every point, and though the fleet succeeded in running the gauntlet through the terrible fire, with the loss of only some 300 men, it found itself entirely prevented from any return. The object of the expedition had completely failed, and the only resource left was to keep the Turkish fleet blockaded.

[Sidenote: Expedition to Alexandria. March to August.]

In connection with this expedition a body of troops had been despatched under General Fraser to capture Alexandria. It was hoped that on the receipt of the news of Duckworth's expected success, it would have been able to advance to the reconquest of Egypt. Want of food necessitated an attack upon Rosetta. It was undertaken in the same foolish spirit as Whitelocke's attack upon Buenos Ayres. Entangled in the streets, the English soldiery were shot down in great numbers, and with the loss of a third of his troops the general in command withdrew to Alexandria. A subsequent effort was made to besiege Rosetta in form, but the forces of the Pasha of Egypt proved too strong for the besiegers; with heavy loss they withdrew to Alexandria, and in August 1807 were compelled to evacuate the country.

[Sidenote: Expedition to Sicily. July, 1806.]

The only gleam of success which attended the military operations of the Grenville ministry was gained in the south of Italy. It will be remembered that immediately after the battle of Austerlitz the kingdom of Naples had been appropriated by France. Sicily, however, was not conquered, and in that island there was an English army commanded by Sir John Stewart. Urged to do something for the assistance of the Neapolitan Court, he landed in Calabria in July, and there fought and won the battle of Maida, in which the French general Reynier was completely beaten. The forces at Stewart's command were insufficient for the reconquest of the country, which fell again into French hands on the retirement of the English, after a lengthened opposition on the part of the peasantry.

[Sidenote: Complete dissolution of the coalition.]

The attempt made at the Peace of Westphalia to establish the balance of power in Europe, and to secure the rights of small states, had proved unsuccessful. It had been rudely shocked by the career of Frederick II., and almost annihilated by the partition of Poland. A spirit of jealousy and a desire for selfish aggrandizement had taken possession of the great reigning houses, and had proved a fatal obstacle to the formation of loyal coalitions for a general purpose. It is to this that may be traced the failure of united effort in the last war, and the terrible reverses which both Austria and Prussia had undergone; England had in the same spirit just been frittering away its strength in attempts to secure the mastery of the sea, and the opening of new markets for her trade; thus left without the assistance they had a right to demand, the Russians were completely defeated at the battle of Friedland (June 14). It was now the turn for Russia to seek its own ends, and to secure them by deserting its allies. Disgusted with the lukewarm assistance afforded by England, attached to the principles of the Armed Neutrality, and eager to carry on its schemes of aggression against Turkey, the Czar allowed himself to be dazzled by the flattering offers of Napoleon. The Emperor had found his difficulties increase with his empire; he had discovered that the Russians were more difficult to conquer than the Austrians or Prussians, and he was now willing to purchase the friendship of the Czar and his assistance against England by an arrangement by which Alexander should be Emperor of the East, while he kept for himself the envied position of Emperor of the West.

[Sidenote: Treaty of Tilsitt. July 7, 1807.]

The meeting between the Emperors took place, as upon neutral ground, on a raft in the middle of the Niemer at Tilsitt. "I hate the English as you do," Alexander is reported to have said. "Then," replied Napoleon, "peace is made;" and the two Emperors set to work to arrange Europe according to their own fancies, upon the common basis of dislike to England, and under the showy pretext of checking her overweening pride upon the sea. As Russia was fighting not for herself but for her allies, a treaty of peace and amity was all that was wanted between her and France, and of course the lately conquered King of Prussia had to pay the price of the treaty, the terms being chiefly in favour of France. Prussia was deprived of all its provinces between the Rhine and the Elbe, and of its Polish possessions. The former were incorporated with Hesse, Brunswick, and a part of Hanover, to form a kingdom of Westphalia, which was given to Jerome Bonaparte; the latter were formed into the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, and given to the King of Saxony, one province only excepted, which was given to Russia, nominally to cover the expenses of the war. All the alterations which Napoleon had effected in Europe were accepted; the Duchies of Oldenburg and Mecklenburg were restored to their possessors, on the condition that the French should hold their ports till the conclusion of a general peace; Silesia and the German provinces on the right bank of the Elbe were restored to Prussia, but a military road was allowed to Saxony through Silesia, to afford the Saxon Prince access to his new dominions. Prussia was, however, to acknowledge the Berlin Decree, to reduce its troops to 42,000 men, to pay France £6,000,000 of money, in addition to the charges of the war, amounting to about £20,000,000, and to leave Berlin and its chief fortresses in the hands of the French till the debt was paid; as the yearly revenue of Prussia was not much more than £3,000,000, this promised to be for some time.

[Sidenote: Secret articles of the treaty.]

But the real point of the treaty was its secret articles, which were dimly suspected at the time, and the existence of which has subsequently been fully proved. By these articles, if England had not consented by the 1st of November to conclude peace--recognizing that the flags of all Powers ought to enjoy an equal and perfect independence on the seas, and restoring all conquests won from France or its allies since 1805--Russia was to make common cause with France against her, and oblige the Courts of Lisbon, Stockholm and Copenhagen to join in the alliance. In exchange for this, which was to wreak Napoleon's vengeance upon England, it was stipulated that if the Porte did not accept the mediation of France, France would make common cause with Russia against the Porte, and would agree to take from the Turks all the provinces of the Ottoman Empire in Europe, with the exception of the town of Constantinople and Roumelia. Napoleon had thus thrown over, for his own advantage, the Poles, on whose hopes of liberty he had traded, and the Turks, whom he had induced to declare war with Russia; Spain and Portugal were left open to his ambition; Sweden was placed at the disposal of Russia, which was likewise rid of all difficulty from Poland.

[Sidenote: Conduct of Alexander.]

The conduct of Alexander has an appearance of extreme treachery. Only a few days before he had written to the English King that "there was no salvation to himself or to Europe but by interminable resistance to Bonaparte;" moreover, he did not refuse to accept a considerable portion of the territories of his ally the King of Prussia. His apologists assert that his readiness to accept Napoleon's terms was assumed to afford him an opportunity for strengthening himself for future opposition to French aggrandizement. More probably he was led away, partly by his peculiar enthusiastic temperament, which made him wish to have a large share both in the establishment of peace and in the rearrangement of Europe, and partly by an undercurrent of ambition which laid him open to offers securing him the acquisition of Poland, and the command both of the Baltic and the Black Seas.

[Sidenote: Consequences of the Peace of Tilsitt.]

[Sidenote: Capture of the Danish fleet. Sept. 8.]

[Sidenote: War between Russia and Sweden. Oct. 31.]

Already, before the signing of the Peace of Tilsitt, information had been brought to Canning, our Foreign Minister, that the fleets of Portugal and Denmark were to be taken by the French and used for an assault upon England. The secret articles of the treaty vindicate the truth of this information, and justify in some degree the immediate action which the English Government took upon it. For although there seems to be proof that the Danes themselves were anxious to maintain their friendship with England, it was more than probable that they would be unable to resist the combined pressure of Russia and France. Refusing the mediation offered by Russia, unless England was put on a fair footing with France by a frank disclosure of the nature of the late treaty, the English Government despatched a squadron to require the immediate surrender of the Danish fleet. It was no doubt a harsh measure, rendered still harsher by the courageous conduct of the Danes. Although Copenhagen was unprepared for an attack, the demand was refused, and it was found necessary to bombard the city. The effect of this step was, on the one hand, a surrender of the whole Danish fleet, which was brought to England, and on the other, to make Denmark, whatever its previous intention may have been, a close ally of France. In a second direction the consequences of the treaty became immediately obvious. Russia demanded of Sweden her adhesion to the Continental System. Christian IV., the king of that country, was chivalrous and impetuous to the verge of madness. He refused all solicitations to forsake his alliance with England, and became entangled in a war with France and Russia at once. When scarcely strong enough to defend his own country, he began an assault upon the Danish province of Norway, and consequently lost all his territory in Pomerania and Finland, which amounted to nearly a third of his kingdom. Sir John Moore, with an army of 10,000 men, were sent to his assistance, but found him so wild and unreasonable that he thought it better to sail home without even landing his troops. Frightened at the eccentricities of their sovereign, the Swedes removed him from the throne, setting up his uncle in his place.

[Sidenote: Continental System acknowledged everywhere except in Portugal.]

In the North, then, the Treaty of Tilsitt had produced the effect which Napoleon had desired. Advantage had been taken of the bombardment of Copenhagen, which was held to be a fresh proof of the lawless ambition of England, to oblige Austria, Russia, and Prussia all to declare war with England. Denmark had joined the French alliance, Sweden had been compelled to forego the friendship of England. But there still existed one part of Europe where the Berlin Decree was unacknowledged, and the blockade of the British Isles was thus incomplete; this country was Portugal.

[Sidenote: Condition of the Peninsula.]

[Sidenote: Napoleon's pretext for war with Portugal.]

Napoleon had long had his eyes fixed upon the Peninsula; by the Treaty of Tilsitt it had in fact been delivered into his hands as Finland into the hands of Alexander. The condition of the Peninsula was very favourable to his schemes. Charles IV., a weak old man, was on the throne, governed by his wife and by her favourite minister Godoy, the Prince of the Peace. In strong opposition to his father and to the Queen was Ferdinand, the Prince of Asturias. Both parties intrigued for the support of Napoleon, but Godoy had been able to offer the more tempting bait. Napoleon had induced the Prince of Asturias to enter into communication with regard to a marriage with a lady of the Bonaparte family. The secret correspondence had been brought to the knowledge of the King, and made use of by him and his minister to affix a charge of treason upon the Prince, and to imprison him for having conspired to drive his father from the throne. By the people the story of the conspiracy was regarded as a calumny of the minister to destroy the Prince, and fearful of the storm he had excited, Godoy now attempted to mediate a reconciliation between the King and his son. The Prince in his imprisonment was induced to write penitential letters, and a solemn pardon was given. But though the attempt to remove the Prince had thus failed, Godoy's own connection with Napoleon, who had probably been at the bottom of the late affair, was almost immediately shown by the publication, on the 29th of October, of the Treaty of Fontainebleau. This treaty disclosed the bait with which Godoy had been enabled to secure the alliance of Bonaparte. He suggested that France and Spain should join in appropriating Portugal if only he were allowed a principality out of the spoil. The house of Braganza was to be dispossessed; the northern province of Portugal was to be given to the King of Etruria,[21] whose own province, Tuscany, might thus be appended to the Italian kingdom; Godoy was to be rewarded with the principality of Alentejo and Algarves. Some excuse was of course wanted for this wanton attack upon Portugal. It was found in the way in which the Court of Lisbon obeyed the demand addressed to it after the Peace of Tilsitt, to close the ports of Portugal against England, to detain all Englishmen resident in Portugal, and to confiscate all English property. Meanwhile all Portuguese merchant ships in the ports of France were to be detained. The Prince Regent of Portugal was not strong enough to resist the demand. He obeyed the first order, without however forfeiting the friendship of England, which confessed the coercion laid upon him. To the other two demands he also at length conceded, but not till he had given plentiful warning to the English to withdraw and to sell their property. The delay was, however, sufficient to afford Napoleon the pretext he wanted.

[Sidenote: Junot's army enters Spain. Oct. 18.]

[Sidenote: Ferdinand VII. succeeds his father Charles IV. March 19, 1808.]

[Sidenote: Murat occupies Madrid. March 23.]

[Sidenote: Napoleon places Joseph on the throne.]

While negotiations were still proceeding with Portugal, the real intention of the Emperor--to appropriate both that country and Spain--became obvious. For this purpose nearly 30,000 French troops were to enter Spain, and 40,000 more were assembled at Bayonne. While Junot, with "the first army of the Gironde," poured through Salamanca (in October 1807), and proceeded to the conquest of Portugal, the domestic quarrels of the Spanish Court continuing, the 40,000 men assembled at Bayonne moved in two armies into Spain, and while apparently preparing to follow Junot, really occupied the line of mountains north of Madrid, and cut off that capital from the northern provinces, which were thus practically conquered without a blow. In March 1808 riots both in Madrid and Aranjuez, ending in the abdication of Charles and the accession of Ferdinand, gave the French, now under the command of Murat, an excuse for crossing the mountains by the Pass of Somo Sierra and occupying Madrid. By a series of shameless intrigues Napoleon attracted both Ferdinand and his father to Bayonne. Ferdinand was there induced to restore the crown to his father (May 5), who abdicated a second time, placing the crown in the hands of Napoleon. Napoleon immediately established his brother Joseph upon the vacant throne (June 15).

[Sidenote: Insurrection in Spain.]

[Sidenote: Operations of Napoleon's three armies from Madrid.]

[Sidenote: Joseph evacuates Madrid. Aug. 1, 1808.]

But the Spaniards, especially the Castilians, were a people of high temper; in spite of a century's degradation, certain remembrances of a former greatness hung about them. They saw with scorn and disgust the treacherous conduct of their own rulers, who were handing them over, bound hand and foot, to a foreign prince, whose very virtues rendered him doubly detestable to them; for the rule of the French meant splendid and centralized organization, restraint, self-denial, and wise government, very much opposed to Spanish feeling. While their rulers were basely truckling to the invader the people rose; the flame of insurrection spread far and wide; great riots in Toledo and Madrid were followed by similar exhibitions of national anger throughout the country, and Napoleon's armies, though they found no regular opposition, though intrigue and treachery had apparently removed all obstacles, found themselves in the midst of a hostile population, and masters only of the ground on which they stood. To meet this new difficulty the fertile mind of the Emperor had at once a plan ready. Madrid was to be a centre from which should radiate in all directions expeditionary armies to suppress the insurrections, Madrid itself resting for support on France. To hold the communications between Madrid and France therefore became a prime object. This work was intrusted to Bessières, while Duhesme operated in Catalonia, and expeditions were sent out from Madrid against Valencia under Moncey, and against Andalusia under Dupont. Bessières, though his general Lefèbvre failed before the desperate energy of the Saragossans, thoroughly defeated the Gallician troops under Blake and Cuesta at the Rio Seco. Duhesme effected nothing, and was obliged to raise the siege of Gerona. Moncey, though he reached the town of Valencia with success, was unable to take it, and had to retreat. Dupont pushed at first as far as Cordova, but losing heart, and badly supplied from Madrid, also attempted to retreat, was pursued by the Spaniards, and compelled to lay down his arms with 18,000 men, after the battle of Baylen, before he could recross the Sierra Morena. Unsuccessful, therefore, on all sides, and though victorious yet hard pressed upon the North, the French were obliged to retire, and King Joseph, evacuating Madrid, withdrew to France.

[Sidenote: The Portuguese royal family emigrate to Brazil. Nov. 29, 1807.]

[Sidenote: Junot's army occupies Lisbon. Nov. 30.]

Meanwhile Junot's army had proceeded direct to Portugal with orders to occupy it by the 30th of November 1807. As Junot approached the capital, the Prince Regent, acting under the advice of Lord Strangford, the English ambassador, determined to leave his European dominions and to transfer the apparatus and seat of government to Brazil. On the 29th of November as many as 15,000 persons were carried by the English fleet down the Tagus. The last ship had hardly sailed when Junot arrived. He had wished to stop and reorganize his troops in Salamanca, but pressed by the Emperor, he hurried forward in spite of the difficulties of the way, and marched upon Lisbon with only a few thousand weary and travel-worn soldiers. He however met with no opposition there, and after the manner of Napoleon's lieutenants, at once set about Gallicizing the country. The Portuguese army was chiefly sent away to France. The police in the hands of the French was well administered, and though the people of Lisbon obeyed unwillingly, order was successfully maintained. The position of Spain and Portugal was thus closely analogous; in both cases the people had been deserted by their natural rulers, in both cases the consequences were the same. The insurrections in Spain were followed by similar movements in Portugal. The people took the government into their own hands, and a popular Junta was established at Oporto under the influence of the Bishop.

[Sidenote: Enthusiasm in England for the Spanish insurrection.]

[Sidenote: Asturian envoys arrive in England. June 1808.]

The insurrection in Spain had been observed with enthusiastic admiration by the people of England. It seemed at last as if that popular insurrection against the tyranny of Napoleon, which had long been expected, had arrived. Nevertheless, the total absence of central authority produced its inevitable effects upon a country so ill ruled and so ignorant of self-government as Spain. Ambitious men everywhere laid hold of the local authority, and irresponsible juntas arose. The provincial feeling, always unreasonably strong in the Peninsula, found full vent. Junta disputed with junta, and the whole country was involved in the wildest anarchy. None the less the feeling of the English people was a true one. Napoleon had reached the point when he came into collision with that very power which formed the basis of his own success--the power of the people. Already his behaviour in Germany had excited among the lower classes enthusiastic feelings of hatred to their conquerors and of desire for national liberty; and the outbreak of the Spanish insurrection added fresh vigour and raised fresh hopes in the lovers of liberty throughout the whole of Europe. To the English Government the arrival of two Asturian envoys in the month of June seemed to offer an opportunity which had long been wanted of giving a national and unselfish character to our opposition to the great conqueror. In the course of time it afforded also a battle-ground on which at length the military power of the country found room to move in larger and more combined action, than in the feeble expeditions of the earlier part of the war. But as yet this was not foreseen. For some years the great war in the Peninsula was starved, while money was lavished upon useless and isolated efforts in other parts of the Continent; it was only slowly and by degrees that the genius, the steadfastness, the success, of Wellington taught England the necessity of large and well-continued efforts in one direction. The Asturian envoys were received with enthusiasm not only by the Opposition but by the Government. But the opportunity offered was not wisely made use of. Spain was inundated with agents of no political ability, who were deceived by the boasting assertions of the Spaniards. Money and arms were sent over in lavish quantities to be left unopened on the quays, appropriated by the rival juntas for their own personal or local advantage, or to fall into the hands of the enemy, and the Spaniards, who did little or nothing for themselves, were taught to demand the assistance of England as a right.

[Sidenote: An English force sent to Portugal.]

[Sidenote: Wellesley lands at Figueras. Aug. 1, 1808.]

The position of Portugal seemed to offer a more favourable ground for action, and thither it was determined to send an English armament. But the Government could not yet conceive of war upon a large scale, and in entire ignorance of the real condition of Spain believed that a mere handful of English troops, aided by the boasted enthusiasm of the Spanish nation, would be able to withstand the enormous armies Napoleon was ready to pour into the Peninsula. The army at first sent was little better than an expeditionary force. A body of troops ready at Cork for war in South America were despatched under Sir Arthur Wellesley, at that time Secretary for Ireland; but by some ridiculous mismanagement two senior officers, Sir Harry Burrard, and Sir Hugh Dalrymple, Governor of Gibraltar, were put over his head, and Sir John Moore, who was despatched with a second body of troops to reinforce him, though he had served as commander-in-chief both in Sicily and Sweden, also found himself in a subordinate position. The expedition touched first at Corunna, but was persuaded by the members of the local junta to proceed to Portugal, where they declared the numerous Spanish army was already collected, and whither they promised speedily to send reinforcements. Upon reaching Oporto, however, the commander found that there were no Spanish troops in the north of Portugal, neither were there any Portuguese troops; but upon the river Mondego there appeared to be a disorganized body of about 5000 men, representing 40,000 for whom the Bishop of Oporto had received accoutrements. With them there were some 10,000 peasants without arms. Wellesley had now a choice left. He might land north of Lisbon and act against Junot, or proceed to Cadiz, and joining Spencer, who had a small command there, act against the French in Spain. He preferred the first alternative, and determined to land at the mouth of the Mondego, near Figueras. He sent to Cadiz for Spencer's troops, but fortunately that general, on hearing of the victory of Baylen, had already determined to sail for the Tagus. The two corps when joined amounted to about 12,000 men. The landing of the English at the Mondego confined the operations to that tongue of land which lies between the sea and the Tagus in its south-westerly course, and which is terminated by the city of Lisbon.

[Sidenote: Combat of Rorica. Aug. 17.]

Wellesley determined to strike rapidly, and bring affairs in Portugal to a crisis at once. Therefore, although deserted by the Portuguese troops, he advanced directly southward towards Lisbon. Junot's troops were somewhat scattered, and the temper of the people prevented him from energetic action. He proceeded, however, to concentrate his troops, and while this movement was going forward the English army came into contact with one of his divisions under Laborde, occupying a strong position at the end of a valley leading from Obidos to Rorica. Here, after a sharp contest, the French general found himself outflanked by the hills which line the valley, and withdrew, allowing Wellesley to proceed. Meanwhile Junot had been continuing his concentration, and had collected 14,000 men at Torres Vedras, to bar the road to Lisbon. Sir Harry Burrard, Wellesley's superior officer, had now arrived at the coast, and Wellesley begged him to allow Sir John Moore's division, on its arrival from England, to land on the Mondego river, and cross the tongue of land to the Tagus, thus cutting off the natural line of retreat into Spain, which would be up the valley of that river. He then proceeded to advance against Junot. But Burrard, a commonplace general, disregarding his advice, determined to bring Sir John Moore up as a reinforcement, and forbad Wellesley to undertake any offensive movement till that general's arrival.

[Sidenote: Battle of Vimiero. Aug. 21, 1808.]

Wellesley was therefore obliged to return to his army, which was in position at Vimiero. A little hill covered the village to the front. On either side of it ran a chain of heights, from which on the east a branch ran off southwards. There was a direct road between Vimiero and Torres Vedras, and a second road from Torres Vedras to a place called Lourinham ran along the top of the branch ridge crossing the main ridge. On the hill before the village and upon the ridge to the west Wellesley took up his position, expecting to be attacked on his right. But early on the 21st the French came into view on the Lourinham road, and as they pressed forward evidently threatened the left, and not the right, of the English position. A considerable body of troops was therefore moved from the right to the left ridge, a movement unobserved by the French, for the valley between the armies was thickly wooded. For the same reason a ravine which rendered the left wing nearly unassailable was unobserved by the French. Junot directed two main attacks, upon the central hill and upon the left ridge. The attack upon the centre was defeated, for it was open on the flank to the fire of an English brigade moving to the left, which halted half-way up the hill when the strength of the central attack was seen; the left attack was ruined by the ravine. Meanwhile troops had been sent to turn the English left by the Lourinham road and to advance along the left ridge, which the French believed almost unoccupied; but, as has been mentioned, it was now covered with troops, and Ferguson's brigade beat the assailants back, and pursued them along the ridge till he had wholly separated them from the rest of the French army. They must have capitulated had not an unexpected order arrived to halt. Sir Harry Burrard, who had been on the field all day, had just assumed the command, and the change of leaders became at once perceptible. When the battle was over, thirteen guns, and many prisoners, including a general, were in the hands of the English, and the French had lost between 2000 and 3000 men.

[Sidenote: Convention of Cintra. Aug. 30.]

The road to Torres Vedras from Lourinham, on which the beaten French army had collected, was two miles longer than the direct road from Vimiero. Wellesley designed to push forward with his victorious army, part of which had not been engaged, to forestall the French at Torres Vedras, and cut them off from Lisbon, a measure which, had Sir John Moore been landed from Mondego, must have completed their ruin. Again the prudence of Sir Harry Burrard thwarted Wellesley's plan. He was compelled to allow his army to rest in their old position. Sir Harry Burrard having thus spoilt a great victory, was almost immediately superseded by the arrival of Sir Hugh Dalrymple. Their combined wisdom allowed an advance upon Lisbon, but insisted on bringing Sir John Moore to join the army. While this was being settled, an envoy arrived from the French offering to treat, and finally the convention known as the Convention of Cintra was entered into, in many points against Wellesley's advice. It stipulated for the evacuation of Portugal, but for the transport of the whole French army, with their guns and horses, to France. It was likewise arranged that the Russian fleet, at that time in Lisbon, should be regarded as in a neutral port; but as some English regiments had got possession of the mouth of the river, and had hoisted the English flag, this clause was overruled, and Siniavin, the Russian admiral, with his fleet, passed into the hands of the English.

[Sidenote: Napoleon's position in Europe.]

It was not to be supposed that Napoleon would calmly watch the defeat of his troops even in an obscure corner of Europe, still less when their defeat seemed to thwart the completeness of his system, and was connected with events which had driven his brother from his throne. Though he knew that conquered Prussia beneath the surface was glowing with inextinguishable hatred, and though Austria, in spite of the war against England in which she was nominally engaged, was strengthening her army and re-establishing her finances in a way which seemed to threaten fresh efforts at freedom on her part, he determined to turn the full strength of his Empire upon the devoted Peninsula. He felt that so long as his friendship with Russia existed, so long as the Peace of Tilsitt held firm, his position was tolerably secure. He therefore renewed his alliance with Russia at a meeting with the Czar at Erfurth (Oct. 12), and suddenly ordered the widely scattered divisions of the grand army to concentrate on Paris preparatory to marching into Spain.

[Sidenote: Preparations in Spain.]

[Sidenote: Sir John Moore's march to Salamanca. Oct.]

Unconscious of the coming danger and of the vast strength of its enemy, the central Junta at Madrid went on with its ill-arranged preparations to secure the freedom of Spain, and with its idle boasts as to the strength of the national armies. The English Government had not yet lost faith in Spanish assertions, nor learnt the absolute worthlessness of Spanish generals and armies; the fables of the Junta gained credence, and while all the other generals who had gone to Portugal were recalled, some 25,000 men were intrusted to Sir John Moore, with orders to advance into Spain and assist the Spanish troops, which were now occupying the valley of the Ebro and closing the French frontier. Even had the Spanish troops been worth anything, there was an absurd disproportion between the forces prepared and the scene of action for which they were intended. Nor did this weakness fail to strike military men. The Duke of York, though by no means a first-rate general, called the attention of Government to the wide dissipation of the Spanish troops, and the great distance of Portugal from the scene of action, and gave it as his opinion that to employ less than 60,000 men was merely to waste them. The Government refused to listen to his advice, Lord Castlereagh, the War Minister, was unmoved, and Moore was sent forward to certain failure. With a raw commissariat, and ill supplied with money, although it was at that very time being lavished upon the Spaniards, he embarked upon his dangerous march through a country where the roads were so bad that his artillery to reach Salamanca had to proceed all up the valley of the Tagus almost to Madrid and come back to meet him at Salamanca, where he was to be joined by reinforcements from England under Sir David Baird. Moore's concentration at Salamanca was wholly based on the supposition that the Spanish armies were strong enough at all events to retard, if not wholly to resist, the invasion of the French. Yet the grand army was rapidly approaching, and before long the forces collected upon the frontier rendered resistance hopeless. In September arrangements were made for the incorporation of the troops coming from Germany with those already in Spain, and eight great corps d'armée, commanded by six French marshals and Generals Junot and St. Cyr, besides the Imperial Guard, were collected to bear down all opposition.

[Sidenote: Napoleon arrives at Vittoria. Nov. 8, 1808.]

While Moore was painfully completing his concentration at Salamanca, Napoleon himself arrived at Vittoria, and almost immediately the Spanish troops, which the English general was to support, were scattered to the winds.

[Sidenote: Destruction of the Spanish armies. Napoleon at Madrid. Dec. 4, 1808.]

From his central position the Emperor was able to concentrate his chief force now on his right, now on his left. In a rapid succession of victories Lefèbvre and Soult destroyed the armies upon the left and centre of the Spanish line, and on the 11th of November Blake was entirely ruined at Espinosa. Immediately the whole strength of the French army was turned against the right, and on the 23rd of the same month Lannes crushed Palafox and Castaños at Tudela. All the boasted armies of Spain were thus swept away as it were in a moment, and Napoleon advanced upon Madrid, forced the passage of the Somo-Sierra, and after some slight opposition took possession of the capital on the 4th of December. The news of the defeats of Espinosa and Tudela reached Moore at Salamanca before his artillery had joined him. He resolved to await its arrival, and then to retreat.

[Sidenote: Sir John Moore's retreat.]

Meanwhile, although Napoleon at the head of nearly 400,000 men was pressing onward rapidly to Madrid, in a few days to drive the members of the supreme Junta fugitives to Badajos, the old system of misrepresentation was kept up. Mr. Frere, the English plenipotentiary, had been persuaded to share in the illusions of the Junta, and he wrote peremptory letters, urging Moore to advance, and to rally the Spanish armies around him behind the Tagus. But news had at length reached Moore that those Spanish armies did not exist; the national excitement he had been taught to expect was nowhere visible, and he presently heard that the capital itself was in the hands of Napoleon. For 25,000 or 30,000 English soldiers to oppose the grand army with Napoleon at its head was simply ridiculous; their retreat was a matter of necessity. But Moore determined before retreating to relieve if possible the pressure upon the south of Spain, by pushing forward against Soult and threatening the French communications with France. In acting thus he judged that Napoleon was far more likely to direct his efforts against the English force than to spend his time in subduing the southern provinces, which would easily fall into his hands afterwards. He therefore advanced towards the Carrion river, where Soult had collected his army. The measure succeeded. Napoleon heard of the advance on the 21st; dismissing all thought of the Spaniards, he checked the further advance of his troops, and turned all his attention to crushing the English. On receipt of the news that Napoleon had left Madrid, Moore, who had been hoping to strike a blow before the arrival of Napoleon, at once began his retreat. He was closely followed by Soult, while Napoleon, forcing the passes of the Guadarama, which were deep in snow, came up from the south upon his flank. The retreat was attended with great difficulty. Moore's troops were young, the subordination was not perfect, and the enemy pressed him close; and at length, on the 1st of January, Napoleon and Soult formed a junction at Astorga, and their combined army amounted to 70,000 men. In ten days Napoleon had moved in the depth of winter 50,000 men across 200 miles of hostile country. But Moore's rapidity had spoilt the effect of even this stupendous march; he had already passed Astorga.

[Sidenote: Napoleon leaves Spain.]

[Sidenote: Moore reaches Corunna. Jan. 10.]

There news reached the Emperor of the approaching declaration of war from Austria, and he found it necessary to resign the command to Soult. Some of his troops he took with him; but Soult himself, and Ney, who supported him, still commanded upwards of 60,000 men, by whom the pursuit was recommenced. Amid many scenes of disorder the English army pursued its career towards Vigo, where it was expected that the fleet would be ready to receive it. But information was brought that the harbour was not fit for the embarkation of troops. The line of retreat was therefore changed to Corunna. At Lugo, so close was the pursuit that Moore thought it necessary to prepare for battle, and the troops, though they had suffered much and become disorderly in retreat, at once showed that their spirit was unbroken. To the number of 16,000 they formed willingly and regularly in array of battle. But as the French did not attack, and as the supplies would not permit of more than one great battle, the army being now concentrated and encouraged, Moore marched off at night, and resumed his course towards the sea. Although the movement was executed in the midst of a heavy storm, and though so much disorganization followed that the loss between Lugo and Betangos was more than in all the former part of the retreat, from thence to Corunna, the army being collected, marched in good order. As they approached the port, to their horror they discovered that the fleet had not arrived. Contrary winds were still detaining it at Vigo, "and the last consuming exertion made by the army was rendered fruitless." Battle was after all necessary. Large magazines of arms and ammunition left unappropriated and undistributed by the Spanish authorities, though their armies were in desperate want, were found and destroyed. The horses, many of them already broken down, were put to death. Soult's army, almost as exhausted by pursuit as Moore's by retreat, did not assemble till the 12th, but it was not till the 14th that the English transports arrived. The cavalry, who had lost their horses, the sick, and fifty pieces of artillery, were put on board, and preparations made for covering the embarkation of the troops. The ridge on which Soult's army was drawn up overlooked and commanded the position of the English, and some generals were desirous even then of entering into negotiations to secure the safe withdrawal of the army. Moore would not hear of it.

[Sidenote: Battle of Corunna. Jan. 16.]

It was determined that upon the evening of the 16th the embarkation should take place, but about the middle of the day the French army began the attack. Even in the last hour of retreat the English showed their strength; the assaults of the French were repulsed on all sides, and when night closed they were everywhere falling back in confusion. Moore had fallen in the battle, and the command devolved on Hope. Had he known that Soult's ammunition was nearly exhausted he would have continued the strife, and the disaster of the French would have been complete. As it was, he held it wiser to embark the English army during the night, an operation which was performed successfully and without confusion. The loss of the English was estimated at 800, that of the French at between 2000 and 3000. But though, no doubt, the battle of Corunna was an English victory, it was advantageous only in allowing the army to be withdrawn, and left the north-west provinces of Spain and the north of Portugal open to the French. Sir John Moore, whose character as a soldier had already been acknowledged, decoyed by false hopes and misled by false information, had yet nobly succeeded in withdrawing for a time the pressure of the French from the south of Spain, and in the midst of overwhelming difficulties had saved the British army and closed his career with a brilliant victory.

[Sidenote: Discouragement of the English ministry.]

[Sidenote: Beresford made commander of the Portuguese army.]

[Sidenote: Wellesley arrives. April 22, 1809.]

The Convention of Cintra and the retreat of Sir John Moore, the greatness of which was not understood, discouraged the English ministry with regard to its policy in the Peninsula. The cause of the Spaniards was however so popular that it was not deemed advisable wholly to desert them. For three months after the convention Portugal had been left a prey to its own anarchy, but in December Sir John Cradock was sent out to command the English troops. The armaments which had been sent to Cadiz having failed to effect anything there, collected at Lisbon. The Portuguese were at length wise enough to demand an English general for their army, and Beresford was sent out to take the command, and thus something like order was re-established. But Napoleon had commanded the conquest of Portugal, the troops of Victor threatened it in the valley of the Tagus, while Soult had entered it from the north and mastered Oporto. Refusing to act with insufficient troops, and waiting for reinforcements, Sir John Cradock had wisely taken the position to defend Lisbon from the advance of Victor, and was stationed at Lumiar and Sacavem just above Lisbon. It was in this position that Wellesley found the English army when he came to take the command on the 22nd of April. With his arrival begins what is properly called the Peninsula War, a war which, by constantly sapping the strength of Napoleon, by exhibiting the possibility of his defeat, and by showing him and his rule, in opposition not to a government, but to a people, was to do more than anything else to complete his final overthrow.

[Sidenote: Division of opinion in England.]

[Sidenote: Scandal of the Duke of York.]

But the English ministry, even while continuing the war, by no means regarded it in this light. Their hopes were not unnaturally turned rather to political coalitions in Europe and to expeditions which appeared more directly to attack the heart of the French empire. Moreover, political feeling in England was strongly excited. Though there was a general desire for the continuation of the war, there was no unanimity as to the means of carrying it on, or as to the people by whom it should be carried on. Every disaster was exaggerated for political purposes, every obstacle thrown in the way of ministerial action. Our system of party government is not well suited either to great European combinations (because the open hostility exhibited to the ministry of necessity gives an appearance of uncertainty to our engagements) or to the carrying on of war where secresy is necessary, and where reliance upon those to whom the war is intrusted is required. In domestic affairs its effect is different, and at this time the Opposition was doing good service in bringing abuses to light and rendering salutary reforms necessary. Early in the spring they found grounds for assaulting the ministry in the conduct of the Duke of York, the commander-in-chief, who was accused by a certain militia colonel, Wardle by name, of being influenced by his mistress, Mrs. Clark, in his appointments, while her favour was said to be procured by money. The scandal excited was great, and the immoral details of the story were in everybody's mouth. The inquiry made it evident that Mrs. Clark's influence had been used, but it was not so clear that the Duke had ever himself acted otherwise than conscientiously. The majorities in his favour, however, were so small, that he felt it necessary to resign his office, and Sir David Dundas was appointed in his place. Before long his accuser was himself sued by a tradesman for the price of goods with which he had furnished a house for Mrs. Clark. This gave such an air of malice to the charge, and displayed Colonel Wardle's desire for purity in so strange a light, that it greatly lessened the feeling against the Duke, who was before long restored to his office.

[Sidenote: Charges against Lord Castlereagh, May.]

This quarrel, in addition to the case of Lord Melville, excited attention as to the general purity of the administration. Considerable sums of money, amounting to nearly £20,000,000, were unaccounted for. Nor did a committee of inquiry, though it sent in its report, throw much light on the matter. But in March the Chancellor of the Exchequer brought in a Bill to prevent the sale and brokerage of office. Among other matters, attention was drawn to patronage in India, and Lord Castlereagh confessed to having purchased a seat in Parliament for a friend by a gift of an Indian writership. Lord Castlereagh's frank confession induced the House to resolve that no criminating resolution was necessary. Again in May a fresh charge was brought involving Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Perceval also. They were charged with procuring the election of a certain Mr. Quintin Dick, and of afterwards influencing his vote. They were acquitted by a large majority. None the less, Romilly remarks in his Memoirs, "the decision of this night, coupled with some that had lately taken place, will do more towards disposing the nation in favour of a parliamentary reform than all the speeches that have been or will be made in popular assemblies." This question of parliamentary reform was now again beginning to occupy the public mind. Though still commanding majorities, the Cabinet was not at one with itself, and before the year was over the ministry had to be reorganized.

[Sidenote: Opposition to Napoleon in Germany. 1809.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Aspern. May 22, 1809.]

But meanwhile the war was proceeding in its course. The threatening news from Austria which checked Napoleon in his pursuit of Moore proved true. The cruelty and injustice of the attack upon Spain, and the spectacle of a people in revolt, had strongly excited the feelings of Germany. Earnest men of all ranks had enrolled themselves in the secret society known as the Tugendbund, which was shortly to show its strength. The same feeling of hostility to France had shown itself in irresistible force in Austria, smarting under its repeated disgraces. There the Court and Government put itself at the head of the movement, and the Archduke Charles, who was regarded as a military genius, issued a proclamation declaring that the liberty of Europe rested with the Austrian arms. There was no regular coalition formed, but Austria felt that it could rely upon the friendship of England (although still nominally at war with it), of Prussia, where the popular feeling ran high, and probably even of Russia. Armies numbering more than 200,000 men were set on foot, and on the 9th of April Austria declared war against Bavaria, an ally of France. The generals left in charge of Napoleon's army in Germany somewhat mistook his orders, and the Archduke succeeded in forming a partial concentration of his troops and occupying Ratisbon. The arrival of the Emperor on the field soon changed the face of affairs. A series of battles was fought; the left wing of Charles's army was separated from the right, and his forward advance entirely frustrated by defeats at Abendsberg (April 20), Eckmühl (April 21), and Ratisbon (April 22). Napoleon again advanced to Vienna. But there he found the Archduke Charles still fronting him upon the northern side of the Danube, and the great bridge which crosses the river at Vienna broken down. Near that city the course of the Danube is divided by an island called Lobau, about three miles in length. Napoleon constructed bridges at the island, and brought his army across them into the level called the Marchefeldt on the northern side. There was fought the great battle of Aspern. Victory declared for neither party, and Napoleon found himself in an awkward situation, for the river had risen, and aided by the efforts of the Austrians, had swept away the bridge, and he was thus cut off from reinforcements. He contrived to get back to Lobau, and there awaited his opportunity.

[Sidenote: Revolt of the Tyrolese.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Wagram. July 6, 1809.]

[Sidenote: Peace of Vienna. Oct. 14, 1809.]

His position was indeed precarious. The secret societies had shown themselves, and a partisan insurrection had broken out under Colonel Schill and the Duke of Brunswick in Saxony and Westphalia. It was premature, and without much difficulty suppressed. The Tyrolese too, headed by Andrew Hofer, an inn-keeper of the valley of Passeyr, had burst into revolt; 25,000 Bavarians which marched to suppress them had been beaten back. Again and again in the mountain passes they encountered and defeated both the French and Bavarian troops. The revolt was unsuppressed, when Napoleon determined to break from his difficult position. In July, while pretending to build a massive bridge across the river, he brought his army rapidly across it on a temporary structure. The Archduke, who had expected to attack the French while crossing, had now to fight another pitched battle, and two vast armies, numbering together between 300,000 and 400,000 men, encountered each other upon the tableland of Wagram. The French gained a hard-won victory. The Archduke was pursued to Zmaim, in Moravia, and there an armistice was made which ripened subsequently into the Peace of Vienna, signed on the 14th of October, by which fresh territory was torn from Austria for the advantage of Bavaria, France, and Russia; the kingdom of Spain was recognized; the insurgents of the Tyrol deserted, and a further pledge for the maintenance of the Continental System given. The close of the year was marked by a still further act of wickedness on the part of Napoleon, and a stronger proof of how completely he had deserted the principles of the Revolution. On the 6th of December he divorced his wife Josephine, and entered into negotiations, which were completed the following year, for his marriage with Maria Louisa, an Austrian princess.

[Sidenote: The Walcheren expedition. July 1809.]

[Sidenote: Flushing taken. Aug. 15.]

The armistice of Zmaim was entered into on the 12th of July. On the 27th of that month, the very day on which the news of the armistice reached England, a great expedition left for the mouth of the Scheldt, for the English ministry had not deceived the hopes of the Austrians, and were determined to undertake what they hoped would prove a diversion in their favour. For this purpose all the strength of England was to be employed. 40,000 soldiers were to be carried across in 400 transports under the charge of no less than 245 ships of war. Yet, great as was the effort, the commonest precautions were neglected. Although it was well known that the climate of the islands at the mouth of the Scheldt was pestiferous, the medical officers were not consulted, none of the proper medicines were sent, and the force was accompanied, in spite of the protest of the surgeon-general, by only one hospital ship. Moreover, the pomp and publicity with which the expedition, which was intended to be secret, was prepared deprived it of much of its value; and lastly, Court and ministerial favour secured the command for Lord Chatham, Master-General of the Ordnance, a man wholly unfitted for an important command. At length, after much delay caused by the want of harmony between the two branches of the service, the fleet set sail. It was the opinion of the best officers of the army that Antwerp might have been at once secured by a coup de main, yet it was determined to proceed more regularly and with deliberation; and Flushing (which, as the dykes had been cut, was regarded as impregnable) was taken in two days after the arrangements for the attack had been completed. It was not till the 21st of August that Lord Chatham began to think of moving towards Antwerp. But, as by that time the enemy's squadron had been withdrawn up the river to the city, and the intermediate fortresses had been so strengthened as to render the advance difficult, absolutely nothing further was even attempted. The army was kept lying in the plague-stricken swamps of Walcheren. Fever began to make fearful ravages. On the 29th Chatham wrote home that he could do no more--that already 3000 of the troops were sick. By September 11,000 men were stricken, and the great bulk of the army was ordered home. Lord Chatham, taking with him as many of the sick as he could, accompanied it. 15,000 men were left to occupy the island. Though the fever still spread with fearful rapidity, the only remedy supplied was a quantity of Thames water, which was constantly sent out. The roofs of the huts had fallen in, the men were removed to the churches, and the churches proved damp and worse than the roofless huts. At last 100 bricklayers were sent from England to repair the huts; the bricklayers were speedily themselves in hospital. The death rate was now 200 or 300 a week; and so terrible was the effect of the fever, that before the next June, of the 40,000 troops sent out 35,000 had been in hospital. Nor did this great folly produce the smallest effect on the general war. Even had the expedition not been so delayed that the Austrian armistice was already signed when it sailed, it could have done no good. Napoleon himself wrote of it, "Before six weeks, of the 15,000 troops which are in the Isle of Walcheren not 1500 will be left, the rest will be in hospital. The expedition has been undertaken under false expectations and planned in ignorance."

[Sidenote: Wellesley victorious in Portugal.]

While wasting their strength in this idle display, the ministry were being taught, had they been willing to learn, where English forces might have been wisely employed. In Portugal, Wellesley, on taking the command, had marched against Soult in the north, had brought his army across the Douro in face of the French, who were occupying Oporto, had recaptured that city, and driven Soult to a desperate retreat. By extraordinary vigour and good fortune, Soult, though there were traitors in his camp, contrived to extricate his army, but Portugal was free. And Wellesley, victorious in the north, and deceived by the constant false information of the Spaniards as to the weakness of his enemies, determined to turn his arms against the other French army which was threatening Portugal in the valley of the Tagus. He was there to act with the Spanish army under Cuesta, an old man of crabbed temper and of great self-conceit. Victor's army fell back before the advancing English from Talavera behind the Alberche river.

[Sidenote: Wellesley marches towards Madrid.]

By this march Madrid was threatened, and Joseph collected for its defence the troops of Victor, Sebastiani, and his own guard, amounting to about 50,000 men. As Wellesley had with him less than 20,000 English troops, and as he could place no reliance upon the Spaniards of Cuesta though they were nearly 40,000 in number, it was a bold resolve to march against Victor. But Wellesley was ignorant of the extreme danger of his movement. Constantly misinformed by the Spaniards, he believed Soult's army in Castile and the plain of the Douro to consist of about 15,000 men; in reality it was more than 50,000 strong. With these it was possible, collecting them at Salamanca, to cross the mountains separating the plains of the Douro and the Tagus, to pass between Wellesley's troops and Portugal, and thus placing him between two armies, each virtually superior to his own, entirely ruin him. Ignorant as yet of the character of the Spaniards, Wellesley could not believe that he should be kept uninformed, nor could he believe that the Spanish troops supplied to occupy the passes of the mountains, and restrain, or at least check, Soult's movements, would give ground without striking a blow; nor, before entering on his enterprise, could he have conceived that his army would have been systematically kept without food. It is nevertheless true that the greatest difficulty was found in procuring rations, which often consisted merely of a few handfuls of grain, while the Spanish troops were very fairly fed. Victor and the King had taken up a position beyond the Alberche stream, a little river flowing from the north into the Tagus above Talavera. Beyond that stream, Wellesley, when he found how he was treated, positively refused to move. Beginning to appreciate the character of the Spanish troops, he urged Cuesta not to venture on a forward movement without him; but the obstinate old man persisting in passing the Alberche, was roughly handled by Victor, and only saved from the consequences of his rashness by English assistance.

[Sidenote: Battle of Talavera. July 28, 1809.]

Soult had informed Joseph of his great plan. All the King had to do was to remain quiet, and check the advance of the English till Wellesley was caught in the trap. But there was a second Spanish army apparently threatening Madrid from the south. It might well be that before Soult's arrival the capital would be lost, although, if Soult's plan answered, it would be immediately regained. The King could not bring himself to bear even the temporary loss of his capital, especially as the hospitals and supplies for his army were there. He therefore rashly listened to the advice of Victor, which was contrary to that of Jourdan, his proper military adviser, and determined to attack the English. The position of Talavera is about two miles in length, crossing the plain from the river Tagus to a small range of hills which bounds the valley; beyond this range is a second valley of about half a mile in extent, and then come the mountains. The key of the position is the highest of the secondary hills, and this Wellesley occupied. The Spaniards he placed behind entrenchments in Talavera. Victor made a second error in making two preliminary attacks upon the key hill. Though these attacks failed, he still believed he could carry the position, and Joseph yielded to his desire for a general engagement. This was fought on the 28th of July. The advance of the French light dragoons so frightened the Spaniards that many regiments at once turned and fled, carrying the news down the valley that the English army was destroyed. Such as remained in their strong position proved sufficient to hold it, and were not seriously molested. The whole brunt of the battle fell upon the English in the centre and left wing. At one moment the centre was broken through, and disaster might have followed had not Wellesley at once seen what was wanted, and sent the 48th regiment down from the hill, though the fighting there was severe, and re-established the battle in the centre. An extraordinary and reckless charge of the 23rd light dragoons across an apparently impassable ravine, though carried out with the loss of almost half their number, had the effect of paralyzing a whole division of the French army, which was attempting to turn the English left by the valley between the hills and the mountains. When the evening closed the French had been defeated at all points, and the English remained masters of their position.

But by that time Soult had come almost unopposed through the mountains from Salamanca to Placentia and the direct road to Portugal was closed. All hopes of rendering the victory useful were therefore gone, and Wellesley was compelled to cross to the south of the Tagus, and take refuge among the mountains. After considerable loss and much suffering from the abominable usage he endured from the hands of the Spaniards, he came to a fixed determination that he would never again act in concert with them, that henceforward his first duty lay in saving Portugal, from which, if events favoured him, he might ultimately advance with an English and Portuguese army, and do for the Spaniards what they were totally unable to do for themselves.

[Sidenote: Effect of the victory in England.]

The victory of Talavera was a great one, and the English ministry recognized it as such by raising Wellesley to the Peerage as Viscount Wellington. Nevertheless it was open to the cavils of the Opposition, for it could be truly urged that it had not produced any permanent advantage, and had been followed by a somewhat disastrous retreat. In Parliament some Opposition speakers even went so far as to urge that the name of the commander should be omitted from the vote of thanks to be given to the army. But it was in fact the weak war administration in England which rendered it useless. Our resources had been wasted in the pompous and ridiculous Walcheren expedition, and in a second expedition, almost as useless, which was despatched to Italy, where it was unable to effect anything, and had to withdraw to Sicily.

[Sidenote: French victories. Nov. 1809.]

When Wellington withdrew from Talavera, after waiting some time on the Guadiana, he took up his position in the more northern part of Portugal, near Almeida, preparing for the defence of the country. During his inactivity there the advance of the French was nearly unchecked. They marched into Aragon and Catalonia, and defeated an army of 50,000 Spaniards at Ocana (Nov. 20), thus throwing open the province of La Mancha, and obtaining an opportunity for further advance into Andalusia. This province was also overrun, with the exception of Cadiz, which was saved by General Albuquerque. The invasion thus formed itself into three defined divisions; an army for the invasion of Portugal, an army for the completion of the conquest of Andalusia, and an army in Catalonia, while the King and his Imperial Guards formed an army in the centre. Having thus borne down all opposition in Spain, Napoleon's intention was to overrun Portugal in the following year. His army for the purpose was placed under the command of Massena, while Soult was intrusted with the operations next in importance, and directed against Cadiz.

[Sidenote: Wellington fortifies the Lisbon promontory. 1810.]

The assault which Wellington had been long preparing to resist was now to come. The ministers in England--in part despairing of his success, in part unable to comprehend the greatness of his schemes--distinctly told him that he must rely upon himself. But, with extraordinary steadfastness and courage, he undertook the task. Ever since the October of the preceding year he had foreseen what would happen; he had known that in all probability his troops would be outnumbered, and that he should be unable to make head against the vast armies which Napoleon might set at motion against him. He had therefore designed a great defensive scheme, so that if the worst came to the worst he might still have some place to which to retire and avoid the necessity of evacuating Lisbon. He had therefore turned the promontory between the Tagus and the sea into a vast fortification. During the time of his delay on the Guadiana, and while wintering near Almeida, thousands of Portuguese workmen were turning the hills into impregnable fortresses. This great work, known as the lines of Torres Vedras, was threefold. The outer line, twenty-nine miles in length, extended from Alhandra on the Tagus to the mouth of the little river Zizandra close to Torres Vedras. The second, twenty-four miles in length, and which was intended originally to be the strongest of the two, was from six to ten miles in rear of the first, reaching from the Tagus at Quintella to the mouth of the St. Lorenza. In addition to this, a small fortification was erected to cover an embarkation in case the other two lines were forced. It enclosed an entrenched camp and Fort St. Julian, and was two marches in rear of the first line. Time had allowed Wellington so to strengthen the first line that it subsequently proved sufficient for all purposes. The General's great cares during the winter had been,--first, to instruct the Portuguese authorities to insist upon the inhabitants destroying all villages, mills, and crops in the course of the invading force when it should appear; secondly, to get the half-trained militia of the country over which he held command employed in such a manner as to oblige the French to act in a mass and prevent detailed fighting; and thirdly, so to arrange his troops that while spread abroad, for greater ease in procuring provisions, they should yet be within easy distance for concentration. He thus waited, fully prepared to carry out his great scheme when Massena should think fit to strike the first blow. So determined was he to adopt a waiting policy, that he even allowed the great fortress of Ciudad Rodrigo, the key of that part of Spain, to be taken before his eyes. Meanwhile he had to listen calmly to the assertions of the Opposition in Parliament, that no British soldier would leave the Peninsula but as a prisoner, and to see the City of London addressing the throne to inquire into his conduct, and protesting against conferring honours and distinctions on a general who had exhibited nothing but useless valour.

[Sidenote: Massena advances against him. Sept. 1810.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Busaco. Sept. 29, 1810.]

[Sidenote: Massena retreats. Nov.]

Ciudad Rodrigo fell on the 11th of July. It was not till September that the great attack began. Then Massena, with an army of 65,000 men, set forward towards Lisbon by the valley of the Mondego, having been informed by friendly Portuguese that the road was easy, and that there was no important position between him and Coimbra, where he believed he could forestall Wellington. An accident lost the English commander the advantage that any opposition from the fortress of Almeida might have given him. The explosion of a magazine rendered the capitulation of the fortress necessary almost immediately. In spite of Massena's attempts to deceive him as to the road he intended to pursue, in spite of the distance at which some of the English troops were stationed, Wellington contrived to collect his army and to place it between Massena and Coimbra. Down the valley of the Mondego the march was continued. The orders for the destruction of the property were carried out as far as possible, and crowds of wretched fugitive peasants accompanied the army. A panic began to spread in Portugal. The intriguing regency did not carry out the orders for destruction with sufficient activity. There was yet enough food left between Mondego and the lines to supply the French during the ensuing winter. To raise the temper of the country, and to excite the people to the voluntary destruction of their property, Wellington was compelled (in entire opposition to his original plans) to fight a great battle with the advancing French. He selected the ridge of Busaco, which almost closes the valley of the Mondego, just north of Coimbra, as his battlefield. The English and Portuguese there stood at bay, and the French were completely defeated. The moral effect was all that could be desired--the Portuguese troops thenceforward became fitting comrades for the English, and the waning trust of the people was restored; but as a military operation it effected nothing. Massena found a pass through the hills upon his right, through which he withdrew with his beaten forces, and Wellington, not attempting to attack him, fell back, giving orders to the Portuguese militia to close upon the French rear. Thus harassed in his progress, Massena arrived before the famous lines (of the existence of which he had only heard five days before), only to find them thoroughly occupied by the English troops. Against the works he could do nothing; his operations were in fact reduced to a blockade. Massena's object, therefore, was to feed his army till reinforcements arrived, Wellington's, by closing up the Portuguese militia behind the French army, rapidly to reduce it to starvation. The expected reinforcements did not come, and on the 14th of November Massena, who had lost upwards of 30,000 men since he had entered Portugal, was obliged to draw off his army and begin a regular retreat. He moved leisurely, hoping to strike another blow before he finally withdrew, but when reinforcements arrived for the English he proceeded with some haste to Almeida and Ciudad Rodrigo. The operations were closed by the combat of Sabugal (April 3, 1811), where Massena was again worsted, and after which he finally withdrew from Portugal.

While Massena was attacking Portugal, Soult had been vigorously prosecuting the siege of Cadiz, and had there made dispositions which would probably have ended in its capture, when he was ordered to assist Massena, for the Emperor was more anxious to put an end to the regular warfare in Portugal than to complete his conquests in Spain. Portugal is assailable either by the northern line from Salamanca, which Massena had already followed, a line covered by the fortress of Ciudad Rodrigo, or by a line south of the Tagus through Estremadura and Alemtejo, which is covered by Badajos and Elvas. In this latter direction Soult had marched; the fruit of his operations were the victory of Gebora (Feb. 19), where the Spaniards were completely defeated, and the capture of Badajos. The two great frontier fortresses between Spain and Portugal were thus in the hands of France. But the departure of Soult from Cadiz encouraged Graham, who commanded the English in that fortress, to attempt to drive Victor, who was left in command, from his lines. A combined force of about 12,000 men sailed from Cadiz southward, intending to march upon the back of the French lines. Victor, marching out to defend them, was defeated at Barosa (March 5) by the vigour and generalship of Graham, La Peña, the Spanish commander, as usual, adding nothing to the victory, and failing when the victory was won to put it to any use. The battle was however so severe a threat that Soult, not wishing to lose all the fruit of his former arrangements, withdrew from his attack on Portugal. Yet, as both Badajos and Ciudad Rodrigo were in the hands of the French, in the following campaign there were two scenes of operation of which those fortresses were the centres.

[Sidenote: Wellington's great plans.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Albuera. May 16, 1811.]

The ministry in England had at last begun to feel some confidence in their general, but they would have been content with the successful defence of Portugal. Not so Wellington; his mind was full of great projects for the relief of Spain. The two points on which the French pressure was strongest were Catalonia and Cadiz; and Wellington, believing that Massena, although his troops had been again raised to 50,000 men, would not be in a fit state for immediate action, had it now in his mind either to invest Almeida and Ciudad Rodrigo, betake himself with much of his army to Badajos, unite with the English and Portuguese troops there, and assault Soult in Andalusia; or to engage in a still more magnificent plan,--to march his army right across Spain, taking Madrid on the way, which would cut off the resources of Soult's army and oblige it to withdraw, and then upon the eastern coast to enter into communications with the English troops at that time in Sicily, and, working from a new base of operations, to attack the French in Catalonia. In either case the capture of Badajos was necessary, as its possession by the French was a constant threat to the Spaniards in Cadiz and to the southern provinces of Portugal. Wellington therefore, leaving the blockade of Almeida in the hands of Spencer, went to Elvas to arrange with Marshal Beresford, who commanded the troops in that direction, for the siege of Badajos. Before his arrangements were completed he was hastily summoned again to the north, where Massena had unexpectedly shown signs of activity, and was moving to relieve Almeida. Wellington was in time to check him at the hard-fought battle of Fuentes Onoro (May 5), which was followed by the evacuation of the fortress. He then returned to superintend the more important operation of the siege of Badajos. But before he arrived the operations had been interrupted. Soult had advanced to succour his late prize, and Beresford had thought it necessary to fight a battle with him at Albuera. This battle, one of the bloodiest ever fought, took place on the 16th of May. The English and their allies had about 30,000 infantry and 2000 cavalry, but of these only 7000 were English, and the Spaniards were not to be trusted. Soult had with him only 19,000 good infantry and 4000 cavalry, but Beresford's faulty arrangements almost neutralized the superiority in forces. The English position was a ridge, in front of which ran the Albuera river. In the centre were the village and bridge of Albuera, through which ran the road to Valverde over the ridge. This road being Beresford's only line of retreat, he regarded a hill in the centre which defended it as the key of his position, and there put his best troops, intrusting the right to the Spaniards under Blake. He also neglected to place any troops across the river, and the enemy's movements were entirely hidden by the wooded heights on that side. For a direct attack Beresford's dispositions were correct, but upon his right a tableland stretched so far back as to command the Valverde road and to look along the back of the English position. Soult saw that by mastering this height he would cut off the English from retreat, oblige them to form a wholly new front, and in all probability destroy them. He therefore secretly, under cover of the hills, massed his troops upon his own left, and while a sufficiently important assault was made upon the bridge to attract Beresford's attention, the bulk of the French army rapidly proceeded to place itself at right angles to the English position upon the tableland. The main point of the battle was in the struggle for the possession of this vantage-ground. In vain Beresford entreated Blake to change his front and cover the right. The Spanish general insisted that the real attack was upon the village. Beresford himself took the command of the Spanish troops, the change of front was effected, but even then they could scarcely be induced to move. At length the English second division moved from the centre and mounted the hill. But, brought too recklessly into action, they suffered much. Scarcely a third of the regiments remained standing, and Beresford was already thinking of retreat when Colonel Hardinge induced Cole with the fourth division, and Abercrombie with the third brigade of the second division, neither of whom had been much engaged, to advance to the rescue. At the head of 6000 men Hardinge advanced to cover the hill. The crowded formation of the French, who were in column, impeded their movements, and the advance of the English was so irresistible, that at length, unable to open out, they gave ground, and in the words of Napier, "slowly and with a horrid carnage were pushed by the incessant vigour of the attack to the furthest edge of the hill," and at length "the mighty mass, breaking off like a loosened cliff, went headlong down the steep; the rain flowed in streams discoloured with blood, and 1800 unwounded men, the remnant of 6000 unconquerable British soldiers, stood triumphant on the fatal hill." In four hours nearly 7000 of the allies and 8000 French were struck down. The victory was however won, and after occupying a threatening position during the 17th, on the 18th Soult marched away. The advantages of this bloody battle were little or none.

[Sidenote: Critical position of the French.]

Yet though the battles of Fuentes Onoro and Albuera produced little result, although the French continued their successes in Catalonia, and Spain seemed entirely at their disposal, their position was by no means wholly prosperous. The broken armies of the Spanish had formed themselves into guerilla bands, their useless generals were superseded by daring partisan commanders, and troops wholly untrustworthy in pitched battles proved masters of the art of wild irregular warfare. It was only in large masses that the French were safe; yet, as Napoleon always acted on the principle that war should support war, and allowed only £80,000 for the maintenance of his armies in Spain, which at that time amounted to more than 300,000 men, the dispersion of the forces was an absolute necessity in order that food might be procured. No courier could be despatched except under escort; letters to Paris were guarded at first by 1400 dragoons, subsequently by 3000. Moreover, Joseph, and the Emperor were not at one. The Spanish King did not wish to rule only as the agent of his brother in a conquered country, and at length the vexatious tyranny of Napoleon pressed so heavily upon him, that he went to Paris and resigned his crown. He was induced to take it back again, but the mere fact of his visit, coupled with Wellington's success and the late victories, which were complete if not decisive, raised the spirits of the patriots and increased the energy and number of the guerillas. Moreover, affairs in Europe were beginning to take a turn which compelled Napoleon to act with less vigour in the Peninsula. His marriage with the Austrian archduchess was a deadly insult to the Czar, for a princess of whose house he had previously been negotiating; the Continental System was becoming almost unbearable, coupled as it was with the French occupation of the northern ports of Germany; and the addition of territory to the Duchy of Warsaw seemed to threaten a restoration of the Polish kingdom, and to be a violation of the Treaty of Tilsitt. The estrangement of the Czar was becoming so evident that Napoleon's mind began to turn more and more towards an expedition against Russia. The number of troops in Spain was lessened, and first-rate soldiers withdrawn to give place to new conscripts.

[Sidenote: Position of Wellington.]

[Sidenote: The French refuse the battle at Caya. June, 1811.]

But, in spite of this relaxation, this year forms in the opinion of the great historian of the war its most critical period. For Wellington was miserably supplied from home, and sickness was rife among his troops, so that he could not bring more than 8000 men into the field, while the Portuguese Government, quarrelling with him, frequently refused supplies, and so starved their own troops, that instead of 40,000 soldiers who had been available on Massena's advance, only 19,000 badly-fed men were now with the army, and against this weakened force a new combination of the French had been arranged. The battle of Albuera had been followed by a renewal of the siege of Badajos. Want of proper material rendered the progress of the siege slow, and Marmont, who had succeeded Massena in command of the army of Portugal, was ordered to co-operate with Soult coming from the south to relieve it. Their junction was effected and the siege was raised. To all appearance therefore the battle of Albuera had been a French victory, and two armies instead of one appeared to threaten Portugal by the southern line. Wellington had brought his troops down and offered the combined generals battle upon the Caya. But, ignorant of the weakness of the English, and imposed upon by the confident front which Wellington with astonishing boldness showed them, the battle, which might easily have been decisive of the fate of the Peninsula, was refused by the French generals, and Soult moved southward, while Marmont returned to occupy the valley of the Tagus.

This critical year of 1811 was a bitter disappointment to Wellington. He had hoped that his period of inactivity was over, that the defensive might have been changed to an offensive warfare. The blunders of his subordinates, the wretched jealousies of the Portuguese regency, and the poor support he received from home, had rendered his efforts futile. He still found himself when the year closed obliged to be contented with preserving his defensive attitude in Portugal. It was even worse than this. The French had succeeded in completing the conquest of the east of Spain, and the army of Suchet had advanced as far as Valencia; while in the north Asturias and Galicia had again fallen into their hands. Some gleam of success had indeed been visible in the south, where Hill had checked Drouet in Estremadura, and where Soult had been beaten off in his attack upon the little fortress of Tarifa. But the reorganization of the French army (especially of the great army of the centre), and the threatened reappearance of Napoleon upon the scene, rendered the close of the year one of gloom and despair.

[Sidenote: Threatened war between France and Russia.]

Yet events were occurring in Europe which allowed Wellington still to hope. Already, as early as the beginning of 1810, the appropriation by Napoleon of the estates of the Duke of Oldenburg, a relative of Alexander, had induced the Czar to declare his freedom from the Continental System. It had become evident to him that, sooner or later, war would be forced upon him, and he had entered into open preparations. Under one pretext or another Napoleon had also been strengthening his troops upon the eastern frontier of his dominions, and though the forms of friendship were still kept up, it was plain that before long the two empires would be plunged into hostilities. During the whole of 1811 remonstrances and recriminations had passed between the courts. Alexander had at first intended to re-establish the kingdom of Poland, where the influence of Napoleon was still great, and to begin offensive movements. The success of Wellington at Torres Vedras is said to have suggested to him and to his counsellors the more prudent method of attracting the French into the heart of Russia, and of allowing the weather and the natural difficulties of the country to have their full force as his allies. He knew that, in spite of the marriage of the Austrian archduchess with Napoleon, he could rely upon the friendship of the Court of Vienna should any opportunity arise of successful opposition to France. Prussia likewise, since the battle of Jena, had undergone a complete though silent revolution; feudalism had been almost destroyed, the peasants given a share in the property of the land, and bourgeois and peasant alike endowed with self-government; the people and the government were absolutely at one. While ostensibly restricted to the treaty number of 42,000, the army had been practically increased to 150,000 men; and, by an extraordinary effort of patience and good administration, the broken nation had been re-established. There, too, it was certain that any successful effort to check Napoleon would be hailed with delight. But Napoleon, observing that Russia did not take the initiative, and seeing that both Austria and Prussia were to all appearance still at his service, forgetting the lesson which he should have learnt from Spain, that the enmity of the people is more to be feared than the enmity of the government, seemed irresistibly led to the war which was to complete his ruin. In August 1811 there took place another of those scenes which had so frequently preluded war. At a public meeting of ministers in the Tuileries the Russian ambassador had to undergo a violent attack from the Emperor. From that moment all Europe knew that the war with Russia was determined on. It was upon the certainty of the approach of this event and the nature of the French warfare in Spain that Wellington rested his hopes.

[Sidenote: Wellington's plan for the campaign of 1812.]

[Sidenote: Capture of Rodrigo and Badajos.]

Marmont's army had been moved for the sake of procuring food into the valley of the Tagus, which was thus called upon to support two armies, that of the centre and that of Portugal. Wellington did not believe that it could do this for long, but while the armies were there barring the valley of the Tagus offensive movements of any importance were impossible, as Soult and Drouet occupied the south, and the northern army in Asturias, capable of being reinforced by Marmont, prevented action in the valley of the Douro. But meanwhile Ciudad Rodrigo was not itself within immediate reach of the covering army; a sudden attack and capture of this fortress would almost certainly bring Marmont northward to save the neighbouring country and to relieve the valley of the Tagus. Even a weak army covered by the fortress would probably be able to make good its position, while Wellington himself marching southward might also capture Badajos, and thence defeat Soult and Drouet in Andalusia. With infinite pains to avoid discovery he ripened his plan; preparations were secretly made at Almeida and at Elvas for the two sieges, and the first rapid blow was successfully struck, and Ciudad Rodrigo captured (Jan. 19). It had the effect expected; Marmont collected his troops at Salamanca, the scattered detachments of the French were everywhere drawn in, Hill's southern army was moved towards the north, and Wellington was sufficiently strong to fight a battle if necessary. Marmont for the present resigned the fortress and again distributed his troops. Wellington then proceeded to strike his second blow. Leaving one division behind him, with some Spanish troops and Portuguese militia, he moved southward, and at length succeeded in storming Badajos also, though with fearful loss (April 6). He acted with unusual skill, and the charge against him of having foolishly wasted life in the siege proves upon examination to be utterly groundless; for it was the extreme rapidity with which the fortress was captured which prevented Soult from coming to its relief. But again the fruits of his success were snatched from him; he was unable to follow out his plan of driving Soult from Estremadura, for he was badly seconded by the troops he had left in the north; Marmont, though somewhat slowly, had begun to carry out Napoleon's orders to regain Ciudad Rodrigo and to invade Portugal, and Wellington had to make all haste back to re-establish his affairs there. His rapid appearance from the south on Marmont's flank compelled that general to retreat, but the opportunity of a southern war was over, and the English army was again spread along the whole line of Portugal, but with this important advantage that the two key fortresses of Spain were now in its hands.

[Sidenote: Wellington's attack on the northern army.]

It was as yet only the spring, Wellington had to choose in which direction he would arrange the ensuing campaign. He determined to make his attack on the northern line; a victory over Marmont would throw open the road to Madrid, and Soult would either have to retire from the south or be cut off from his communications. A portion of his army might indeed be sent to assist Marmont; but the harvest in the valley of the Douro is considerably later than in the south, and it was impossible that a large additional number of troops should be subsisted for at least a fortnight to come. Thus for a while he could act against Marmont alone. Further to secure his position, he strengthened the army under Hill in the south, planned and executed an extraordinary capture of the French lines of communication at Almaraz, thus rendering the intercourse between the two armies lengthy, and at the same time re-established the bridge of Alcantara, close to the Portuguese frontier, by which his own communications with Hill were rendered ten days nearer. It was thus against an army of about equal numbers with his own, but isolated for the present at all events from reinforcements, that Wellington advanced. Salamanca and its forts were captured, and Marmont fell back before him.

[Sidenote: Battle of Salamanca. July 22, 1812.]

But his advance was not all triumphant, Marmont succeeded in turn in obtaining the ascendant. By a series of clever movements he compelled Wellington to retire, and moving towards the right flank of the English, seemed to threaten the communications between Salamanca and Ciudad Rodrigo, while he kept himself in communication with the central army under the king. Wellington saw that retreat was necessary, and he intended to return to Portugal. But Marmont was not contented with this success. He was eager to fight before his junction with the king, and brought on a battle beyond the Tormes, just south of Salamanca. The English occupied a sort of basin in a loop of the river; about the centre was a hill called the Arapiles; round the southern edge was a ridge which led to the point where the road by which the English must retreat ran. Marmont, hoping to envelop the English, sent forward his left along the ridge. Wellington saw the advantage thus offered. Holding the Arapiles with his left, he fell on the flank of the advancing column, while Pakenham faced it upon the ridge. The French left was thus entirely destroyed, their attacks upon the central hill were unsuccessful, their confusion was increased by the loss of their commander, who was wounded early in the day, and it was only because a Spanish garrison which should have cut off their retreat across the Tormes at Alba had been withdrawn without Wellington's knowledge that their army escaped destruction. As it was, Clausel, who had succeeded Marmont, was able to bring off the greater part of his troops in safety.

[Sidenote: Wellington enters Madrid. Aug. 12, 1812.]

The arrival of reinforcements under Sir Home Popham on the north of Spain had drawn a certain portion of the French troops in that direction, and against a weakened and defeated army Wellington proceeded in his triumphant advance toward Madrid. Joseph again left the city and retreated to Valencia, and with all the signs of wild rejoicing the conqueror was received in the capital of Spain. The effect of the late battle was exactly such as had been anticipated--King Joseph, acting as commander-in-chief, ordered Soult to evacuate Andalusia and the south. It was in vain that that general pointed out the possibility of holding his position there, and intreated the king to come with the other armies to his rescue: the orders were peremptory, and much against his will Soult withdrew and effected a junction with Joseph and Suchet in Valencia. The south and centre of Spain thus seemed clear of enemies, but the hold of the French was as yet shaken only, not broken; for in fact though Wellington's march had forced his enemies in two directions (Clausel, with the remainder of Marmont's army, having retired north, while the king withdrew south-east), such were their numbers that each division became the centre of an army as powerful as his own. Indeed, the very effect of his victory in drawing Soult from Andalusia had concentrated a vast power in Joseph's hands. Wellington was, however, aided by two circumstances. An expedition had been sent to Sicily under Sir William Bentinck; a portion of it under Maitland was landed at Alicante, and kept Suchet and the Catalonian army in play, while Sir Home Popham did the like for the army of the north.

[Sidenote: His great plans thwarted.]

[Sidenote: He retreats to Portugal.]

Of the two armies against which Wellington had to contend by far the largest was the army of Soult and the king, on the south-east. On the other hand, Clausel's forces were beaten and retreating, so that it appeared to the general better to leave a detachment under Hill to cover Madrid, while he himself repaired with the bulk of his army to strike a final blow at Clausel by the capture of Burgos, intending to return at once and with his whole combined forces fight a great battle with Soult and the king before the capital. Again events occurred, upon which he could scarcely have calculated, which thwarted his purpose. The Spanish army, which had been intrusted with the duty of guarding his communications with Salamanca and of completing the capture of the fortresses of the Douro, and some English forces which had been left to assist it, were so badly handled that the retreating army was in fact left unmolested, while extreme want of money and political difficulties hampered Wellington's own march. Clausel, too, proved a general of great ability; his retreat up the valley of the Arlanzon towards Burgos was a masterpiece; while, to crown all, the resistance offered by Burgos and the deficiency of proper artillery proved greater obstacles than had been expected. The delay thus caused allowed the French to recover; the crisis was met with energy, fresh troops were poured across the frontier; Souham, who took the chief command, found himself at the head of a force almost double that of Wellington; and as Soult began to draw towards Madrid from Valencia, thus threatening the safety of Hill, there was no course left but to summon that general northward, and to make a combined retreat towards Salamanca and Portugal. It was not the most glorious passage of our arms. Want of pay and some other causes had somewhat slackened the discipline of the troops, and though no disaster occurred, and though the French were more than once checked, there were scenes of wild disorder and insubordination which called forth stern reprimands from the general.

[Sidenote: Improvement in his position.]

This was the last of Wellington's retreats. Events in Europe lessened the power of his enemies; while fighting for his very existence on the main continent of Europe, Napoleon could not but regard the war in Spain as a very secondary concern, and a great many old and valuable soldiers were withdrawn. The jealousy which existed between Joseph and the generals, and the dislike of the great generals to take upon themselves the Spanish war, threw it into inferior hands for some little while, and there is little more to chronicle than a succession of hard-won victories. Moreover, Wellington's position was in other ways much strengthened; he had received from the Brazils full power of action in Portugal, at Burgos he had been made commander-in-chief of the Spanish army, while the changes in the ministry at home, though they had deprived him of his brother's assistance, had yet been on the whole favourable to him; his greatness and success had become the chief support of the ministry. He had, moreover, by his personal authority established discipline in the Portuguese army, had used his power and influence to supply the commissariat and other trains, and even the Spanish troops which had been placed at his disposal had been brought into something like order. The whole active force of the French had been reduced to 197,000 men, while Wellington had contrived to prepare 200,000 allied troops for the campaign, although it was chiefly upon the 70,000 Anglo-Portuguese that he relied. The English fleets covered the coast, and every port thus became a little centre of action. A vigorous insurrection had arisen all along the northern provinces; and it was this more than anything else which decided Wellington's course of action. While leaving troops to occupy the attention of the French in the valley of the Tagus, he intended to march by his own left (thus avoiding the difficulties offered by the Douro and the Carrion rivers), connect himself with the northern insurgents, and directly threaten the communications with France, either fighting for or turning every position in which the king might try to intercept him.

[Sidenote: Battle of Vittoria. June 21, 1813.]

His movements, which had to be effected with considerable secresy, were well carried out; the various divisions of his army met at Toro on the Douro. As he had expected, the French had to fall back before him; he compelled them to evacuate Burgos and attempt to defend the Ebro. Their position there was turned, and they had again to fall back into the basin of Vittoria. This is the plain of the river Zadora, which forms in its course almost a right angle at the south-west corner of the plain, which it thus surrounds on two sides. Across the plain and through Vittoria runs the high road to France, the only one in the neighbourhood sufficiently large to allow of the retreat of the French army, encumbered with all its stores and baggage, and the accumulated wealth of some years of occupation of Spain. While Wellington forced the passage of the river in front south of the great bend, and drove the enemy back to the town of Vittoria, Graham beyond the town closed this road. The beaten enemy had to retreat as best he could towards Salvatierra, leaving behind all the artillery, stores, baggage, and equipments.

[Sidenote: Battles of the Pyrenees. 1813.]

The offensive armies of France had now to assume the defensive and to guard their own frontier. Before advancing to attack them in the mountains, Wellington undertook the blockade of Pampeluna and the siege of St. Sebastian. It was impossible for the French any longer to regard diplomatic or dynastic niceties. Joseph was superseded, and the defence of France intrusted to Soult, with whom the king had hopelessly quarrelled. He proved himself worthy of the charge. A series of terrible battles was fought in the Pyrenees, but one by one his positions were forced. With fearful bloodshed, St. Sebastian was taken, the Bidasoa was crossed (Oct. 7), the battle of the Nivelle fought and won (Nov. 10), and at length, in January, Soult was driven even from the Adour and forced to surrender Bayonne.

[Sidenote: Battle of Toulouse. April 10, 1814.]

But by this time events on the other side of France had changed the appearance of the war. Napoleon's threatened invasion of Russia had taken place; the defensive plan adopted by the Russians proved successful. The Emperor had himself hastened back to Paris after the conflagration of Moscow, while his ruined and broken army struggled home through the terrible suffering of the Russian winter. As Alexander had foreseen, the reverse of the French had been followed by the defection at first of Prussia and shortly afterwards of Austria. The powers of Europe were thus again formed in a coalition. With such troops as he could collect, Napoleon had hurried, in the summer of 1813, to the very furthest confines of Germany, and fought the great battles of Lutzen and Bautzen. But the flower of his troops had been lost in Russia, his armies were no longer what they had been. His enemies in vast numbers began to gather round him. Though victorious at the gigantic battle of Dresden (Aug. 24, 1813), he was unable to make a final stand against the vast armaments of the coalition. Several of his lieutenants were defeated, and at length, on the 19th of October, the battle of Leipsic was fought, which ended in his complete defeat. It is said that on the two sides the killed and wounded amounted to 110,000 men. The victorious allies swept onwards, and just at the close of the year 1813 entered France. The spring of the following year was occupied by the brilliant campaign in which Napoleon exerted all his genius in vain to check the huge masses of the invaders. While Wellington was making good his position in the south of France, in spite of the ability which he displayed, Napoleon was being constantly driven backward upon the east. The effect could not but be felt by the southern army, and Soult deserves great credit for the skill with which he still held at bay the victorious English. He was however defeated at Orthes (Feb. 27), lost Bordeaux (March 8), and was finally driven eastward towards Toulouse, intending to act in union with Suchet, whose army in Catalonia was as yet unbeaten. On the heights upon the east of Toulouse, for Wellington had brought his army across the Garonne, was fought, with somewhat doubtful result, the great battle of Toulouse. The victory has been claimed by both parties; the aim of the English general was however won, the Garonne was passed, the French position taken, Toulouse evacuated and occupied by the victors. The triumph such as it was had cost the victors 7000 or 8000 men, a loss of life which might have been spared, for Napoleon had already abdicated, and the battle was entirely useless. This was the last action of the Peninsula War, in which, after years of steadfast resistance, the English had at length triumphantly swept the French from the Peninsula, and done their full share in the great events which temporarily closed the career of Napoleon.

[Sidenote: Long tenure of power of the Tory party.]

[Sidenote: Policy of Canning.]

[Sidenote: Canning's quarrel with Castlereagh.]

[Sidenote: Reconstruction of the ministry. Oct. 1809.]

[Sidenote: Continuation of the same ministry till 1827.]

The negotiations which had terminated in the abdication of Napoleon had, as far as England was concerned, been carried on by the same ministry which had had the duty of conducting the war. The Tory party which the French Revolution and the policy of Pitt had called into existence, robbed of the better and more liberal elements which the presence of Pitt himself and his friends had introduced into it, had succeeded in spite of its defects and of various opportunities for a change in continuing its hold upon the Government. There was at first one important member of it who kept up something of the views of Pitt. This was Canning, the Foreign Minister. But the presence of so incongruous an element tended rather to the weakness than to the strength of the administration; nor is it certain that in the present crisis of Europe his views were such as to render him the most efficient minister. Castlereagh, a man of narrower views and of much inferior talent, acted as War Minister. Between him and Canning a strong antagonism arose. Canning's errors were those of a liberal and noble mind. He was anxious to see the Spaniards carry out their insurrection as much as possible by their own means, and the wish led him to believe the false tales of their patriotism and resources with which the braggart spirit of the Spaniards supplied him. This credulity was strengthened by the reports of Mr. Frere, whom he had sent to the Peninsula as ambassador, and he was thus induced to misapply the wealth of England, and to misuse the opportunities which his position as Foreign Minister gave him, so as seriously to weaken the hands of Wellington. His desire for the political regeneration of Spain blinded him somewhat to the military necessities of the time, which required that our general should be invested with almost absolute authority, and the arrangement of political matters postponed till after the favourable conclusion of the war. But though he thus not unfrequently threw obstacles in Wellington's way, Canning by no means approved of the inefficient administration of Castlereagh, and the constant starvation of the military side of the Peninsula War. So far had the quarrel with the War Minister extended that Canning had contrived, not perhaps so openly and straightforwardly as could be wished, to extort from the Prime Minister a promise that Lord Castlereagh should be removed from his responsible situation, failing which he declared that he would himself withdraw. His support was so necessary to the Prime Minister that he had persuaded him to remain in office. But Canning had throughout privately expressed the strongest disapprobation of the Walcheren expedition, and when its failure became known, and when inquiries upon the subject brought to light the fact that, while sitting in the same Cabinet with Castlereagh, he had been in fact intriguing for his dismissal, the quarrel came to a point. Sharp words were exchanged between the ministers, and the consequence was a duel (Sept. 22), in which Canning was slightly wounded. It was of course impossible for the antagonists to serve longer in the same ministry. They both resigned, and their example was followed by the Duke of Portland, whose failing health had from the first rendered him unfit for his position, and whose weakness was exhibited in allowing so grave a quarrel to spring up within the limits of his Cabinet. It became necessary to reconstitute the ministry, and after a fruitless negotiation with Lords Grey and Grenville--with so little reality in it that Grey did not think it worth his while to come to London on the subject--Perceval, who had long been the most important person in the Cabinet, assumed the nominal direction, and Lord Wellesley, who had lately been serving as ambassador in Spain, where he had superseded Mr. Frere, was induced to accept the ministry of foreign affairs. Lord Castlereagh was succeeded by Lord Liverpool at the War Office, with Lord Palmerston as under secretary. The reconstruction of the ministry made no difference in its general tendencies. The introduction of Lord Wellesley was indeed a slight improvement; he entered the ministry chiefly for the purpose of supporting his brother's views in the Peninsula. This to the best of his abilities he did, but he was constantly thwarted by the mediocre men with whom he was joined, and with whom he was never able to work comfortably. By far the ablest and best writer in the Cabinet, his despatches were constantly criticised and altered. His colleagues could not understand the greatness of the openings afforded in the Peninsula, and after two years of office he withdrew (Feb. 19, 1812). The opportunity occurred in a great ministerial crisis caused by the renewed insanity of the King, which it was believed must have produced a change of ministry. The Regent, however, retained Mr. Perceval in office, and upon his death Lord Liverpool was called to succeed him, and continued in office till 1827, so that in fact from the fall of the Grenville ministry to that date, though with some change in the personnel, there was a continuance of the Tory rule.

[Sidenote: Illness of the King. Nov. 1810.]

[Sidenote: The Regency Bill. Feb. 1811.]

[Sidenote: The Perceval ministry continued.]

[Sidenote: Assassination of Mr. Perceval. May 1812.]

In November 1810 the King, who had never thoroughly got over the failure of the Walcheren expedition, and the disgrace of Lord Chatham and the Duke of York, was still further shaken by the death of the Princess Amelia, and before long it appeared that he had become hopelessly insane. After several prorogations it was resolved (December 20) that it was the duty of Parliament to supply the existing defect in the organization of Government. A precedent for the action of the ministry was drawn from Pitt's conduct under similar circumstances in 1788. It was determined to reproduce, though in a somewhat modified form, the restrictions then laid upon the power of the Regent. But the Prince of Wales was by no means disposed to submit to these restrictions, and induced his brothers to join in a protest against them. Nor did the Opposition fail to see the probable advantage which would accrue to them from a more unlimited regency; they regarded it as certain that Grenville and Grey would be called to office, and they had no wish to curtail the power of the Crown when wielded by men ready to rectify the mismanagement under which they thought the country was suffering. But their hopes were destined to be speedily extinguished. In spite of his protest the Bill restricting the Regent was passed (Feb. 5), and the Prince took the oaths before the Privy Council. He had already made up his mind that it would be better to continue the present ministry, for a personal quarrel had arisen between him and his Whig friends. He had requested Grenville and Grey to draw up a reply to addresses from the two Houses which had been presented to him in January. They had found considerable difficulty in complying with his request, for Grenville had been a member of Pitt's ministry when he restricted the regency in 1788, while Grey then as now was a member of the Opposition; but by careful suppression of the difficulties, a reply was drawn out and submitted to the Prince. Such a compromise was not what he had expected; he summoned his friend Sheridan to assist him in criticising the reply. The paper was returned with pungent and witty marginal remarks, and a wholly different form of reply suggested. The Whig Lords took umbrage at the levity and rudeness of the Prince, and did not refrain from expressing their anger, a line of conduct which, as might have been expected, in the case of a man of such selfish and merely personal politics as the Prince, was warmly resented. Moreover, the flattery of the Queen, and the adhesion to him of his brothers, who wished for the continuation of the Perceval ministry, together with the falsely hopeful reports of the physicians, which led him to think that his regency would be a short one, induced him to accept the situation; and immediately after having taken the oaths he declared his intention to retain Mr. Perceval. Although at first expressing his dislike to his ministers, before long entirely won over by their courtly language, he began to speak of his old friends as "the wicked politicians." The regency was at first fixed for one year only. At the end of that time, that is, in February 1812, after a few more overtures to the Whig Lords to form a coalition with his present ministry, which he must have known was impossible, the Prince allowed the ministry to continue as before, Castlereagh being readmitted to office, and Lord Sidmouth becoming President of the Council. The joy of Mr. Perceval at the happy issue of the affair was proportionate to the fear he had felt at the thought of losing office; but it was destined to be shortlived, for on the 11th of May, as he entered the House of Commons, he was assassinated by a lunatic of the name of Bellingham.

[Sidenote: Lord Liverpool made Premier.]

Again there was much negotiation, and an attempt to introduce Lord Wellesley and Mr. Canning to the ministry. Of course they could not serve with Castlereagh; they were then asked to form a ministry with Grenville and Grey, but these Lords objected to the Peninsula War, to which Wellesley was pledged. Grenville and Grey then attempted a ministry of their own, but quarrelled with Lord Moira on the appointments to the Household; and as an American war was threatening, and the ministry had already given up their Orders in Council (one of the chief causes of their unpopularity), the Regent, rather than remain longer without a ministry, intrusted Lord Liverpool with the premiership, with Castlereagh as his Foreign Secretary, and the old ministry remained in office.

[Sidenote: War with America. May 1812.]

Before the day of triumph of this ministry arrived, while Napoleon was still at the height of his power, and the success of Wellington as yet uncertain, England had drifted into war with America. It is difficult to believe that this useless war might not have been avoided had the ministers been men of ability. It arose from the obstinate manner in which the Government clung to the execution of their retaliatory measures against France, regardless of the practical injury they were inflicting upon all neutrals. The causes of irritation have already been mentioned. America, adopting the policy of England, had proceeded to retaliate; an embargo was laid upon trade both with England and France, and commercial relations with Europe practically broken off. An attempted arrangement between the two countries in 1809 had produced but little result. But though foreign trade had diminished, the demand for home manufactures in America had largely increased; the populations of the Northern and Eastern States were therefore satisfied with the existing state of things and decidedly averse to war, with its certain expenditure and probable injury to their manufactures. In the South the case was different. Without manufactures to supply the loss sustained by the restricted export of their tobacco and sugar, not in immediate contact with English territory, as were the Northern States, and led by an aristocratic and slave-owning race, the Whites of the South were inclined to war. The Presidents were Virginians, the Southerners had a superiority in Congress, and in May of 1812 it became plain that war must result unless the Orders in Council were repealed. But England was in confusion owing to the assassination of Perceval, and it was not till the middle of June, when war had been already declared, that Brougham's motion for the withdrawal of the Orders was carried. The concession, awkwardly made in the face of the American threats, came too late. The Americans had already made up their minds, and planned an invasion of Canada.

[Sidenote: Character of the war.]

It was a war without great events. The attempts of the Americans upon Canada failed. Here and there a slight success attended the English arms, and the deep anger of our enemies was moved by the irksome blockade of their coast, and the employment of the savage Indian tribes as our allies. But if fairly successful on land, the English were to their great astonishment thoroughly worsted upon the sea. Ship after ship was taken by the American frigates. Nor was it till our commanders consented to recognise the fact that the classification of the two navies was wholly different, and that an American frigate was in tonnage and weight of metal a match for an English fifty-gun ship, that these disasters were brought to an end. It was an additional blow to the pride of England that the sailors by whom her ships were defeated were largely drawn from her own people. From the wretchedness prevalent in England, from high taxes, commercial difficulties, and the severe laws of impressment, men fled for refuge to America; and it is said that as many as 16,000 Englishmen were serving on board the American fleet.

[Sidenote: Attempted negotiations.]

[Sidenote: Capture of Washington.]

The war was really so causeless and so prejudicial to the success of the allies in Europe, that the Emperor of Russia attempted, in 1813, to bring it to a close by mediation, and although his offer was declined, a negotiation was entered into at Ghent which ultimately proved successful. But before the negotiators advanced far in their labours the war threatened to assume a more serious character. On the cessation of hostilities in the south of France, a considerable number of the English troops were embarked at Bordeaux direct for America, without even being allowed to return home, and increased energy began to show itself in all directions. A large fleet under Rear-Admiral Cockburn, and a body of troops under General Ross, were despatched to the Chesapeake, and a combined attack by land and water was made upon Washington, the Federal capital. The success of the expedition, which was complete, was stained by the destruction of all public property, offices, and buildings in the city. An outcry was raised, not only in America but in Europe, at what was regarded as an act of vandalism. It is said that the English Government had ordered it as a retaliation for the barbarities of the Americans on the Canadian frontier, and as it is confessed that private property was scrupulously spared, it may well be a question whether in fact such a destruction of national property is not a better manner of exhibiting the severity of war than the destruction of private property which so constantly attends it.

The capture of Washington was followed by other expeditions of a like nature with less satisfactory results. Large and systematic operations against a continent are at all times difficult, and certainly they were beyond the capacity of the English ministry as then constituted. They relapsed into all the old errors of the American War, and the military operations were reduced to mere piratical excursions. An effort was indeed made upon the only side where a base of operations existed, but on so small a scale and so badly directed as to be entirely useless. A combined attack by land and water was arranged against Plattsburg upon Lake Champlain. The dilatoriness of the commander, Sir George Prevost, allowed the flotilla to begin the fight unaided; it was completely beaten, and its destruction putting an end to all hope of success, the army withdrew. An attack on Baltimore met with no better fate, but the greater part of the province of Maine was taken and occupied. The arrival of the Peninsula troops, no longer well commanded, had produced but little effect; the negotiations at Ghent were gradually drawing to a conclusion. The Convention was signed on the 24th of December. It was, as might be expected from the temper of the two nations, little more than a compromise. The real points at issue were scarcely touched, the boundaries were left for future negotiation. Such as it was it came too late to save England from one more disaster. An expedition similar in character to those already mentioned had been directed against New Orleans. The place was vigorously defended by General Jackson. Natural difficulties and mismanagement met the English at every turn. The earth was too sandy to allow of redoubts; while the Americans used cotton bales, which answered admirably as defences, the English found nothing better than barrels of sugar and molasses. When the storming parties reached the enemy's lines they found that their fascines and scaling-ladders had been neglected; the assault became impracticable. As the approach of the town had been completely exposed to the fire of the enemy, very heavy loss had been sustained, three English generals, and among them Sir Edmund Pakenham, had been killed, and Lambert, who had succeeded to the command, thought it better to withdraw the army.

[Sidenote: Abdication of Napoleon.]

The American War was thus still at its height when the ministry had been called upon to arrange the fate of the late Conqueror of Europe. When the allies, in their advance towards France, had assembled at Frankfort, not yet certain of success, and conscious that their work would be easy could they separate Napoleon's interests from those of the nation, they had offered to negotiate at a general Congress upon the fixed condition that France should abandon Italy, Holland, Germany and Spain, and confine itself to its natural boundaries. Napoleon, suspecting not without reason their intentions in accepting the Congress, had refused the conditions. His refusal had been followed by a very able proclamation of the allies, separating the interests of the ruler from that of the people, and promising that France should retain its just weight in the balance of nations. Conscious of the effect of this declaration, which exactly suited the feelings of the majority of Frenchmen, Napoleon hastened to accept the conditions. But he was told it was too late. Traitors had already informed the allied sovereigns that they were strong enough to avoid compromise. The great campaign which followed had shown how much could yet be done by the Emperor's genius. Again negotiations were opened at Châtillon; Napoleon expressed the utmost readiness to accept the terms of Frankfort. But the ultimatum of the allies had now risen, the Rhine boundary was no longer to be conceded. Napoleon could not make up his mind to allow France to issue from the war less than when he had first taken possession of the Government. The Treaty of Châtillon was broken off and war was again resumed; and as though to express the completeness of their determination, the allied sovereigns entered into a treaty at Chaumont (March 1), by which they bound themselves together for twenty years, promised each to supply 150,000 men, to which England was to add a subsidy of £5,000,000. The knowledge of this treaty made Napoleon feel that some desperate stroke alone could save him. He passed with his forces into the rear of the allies; he was nearer, as he himself said, to Vienna than they were to Paris. The movement put them in great perplexity. To leave so formidable a person upon their communications seemed too dangerous a step. Again treason served them in good stead. Their friends in Paris, at the head of whom was Talleyrand, urged them at once to move upon the capital. Joseph Bonaparte, who had been left in charge there, with Marmont and Mortier, fought a last battle before the very walls. Joseph lost heart, and ordered the marshals to capitulate, the army was withdrawn behind the city, and Paris was in the hands of the allies. This was fatal to all Napoleon's hopes. He came to Fontainebleau, there found himself gradually deserted, heard how his marshals one after the other had joined the victorious allies, and on the 4th of April signed his abdication, consenting to withdraw to the Isle of Elba, which was to be constituted into a principality for his convenience. He was to be allowed 400 soldiers, his wife and child were to be placed in possession of Placentia and Parma, and he was to retain the title of Emperor. In the settlement of the affairs of France and Europe he was to have no voice. The last stroke of ill-fortune seemed to have come upon him when his Austrian wife, overpersuaded by her relations, deserted him, and set off with his young son to Vienna. During his ten months' residence in the Isle of Elba the settlement of Europe was being carried on by the diplomatists of all the powers assembled at Vienna.

[Sidenote: General sketch of the Tory policy.]

Thus the Tory ministry seemed at last to have reaped the fruit of their lengthened efforts, and to have justified their long retention of office. But we shall look in vain for any merit in their policy but one, and that is steadfastness. The accidental discovery, for it was little more, of a general of surpassing genius had enabled them to hide under his greatness their own mediocrity; his skill had covered their constantly-repeated blunders, and fortune had supplied them with an enemy whose enthusiastic self-confidence, arbitrary temper, and insatiable ambition, had neutralized his transcendent genius, had forced upon them allies whom their own skill could not have secured, and had even alienated the people whose natural representative he was. With these advantages they had been able to obtain that success which a fixed line of policy even when itself erroneous not unfrequently secures. They had raised England to a position of the highest importance, the success of Europe against Napoleon was indisputably due to her. Yet it cannot be said that they were urged by patriotic motives. Throughout their conduct had been dictated by the interests of their class. They had recognized in Napoleon the great subverter of old institutions, the arch-enemy of the aristocratic order. It was in this capacity chiefly that they had pursued him with such firm and undeviating hostility. Of the events which took place during their ministry, of the successful skill and bravery of soldiers and sailors, of the establishment of national independence whether in England or on the Continent, all Englishmen may be proud. Those who, reading history by the light of subsequent events, still hold that a strong aristocratic element is a necessary ingredient of constitutional liberty will admire their motives. But to those who feel that growth and advance is the essential principle of the life of a nation, and that those only are good governors who are capable of understanding and of carrying out the necessities of advancing civilization, their sole claim to respect (and that is after all no small one) will be that they knew their own minds, and in spite of all difficulties realized their object.

[Sidenote: Home government.]

The same motive of class aggrandizement which detracts from the virtue of the foreign policy of this ministry underlay the whole administration of home affairs. There was an incapacity to look at public affairs from any but a class or aristocratic point of view. The natural consequence was a constantly increasing mass of discontent among the lower orders, only kept in restraint by an overmastering fear felt by all those higher in rank of the possible revolutionary tendencies of any attempt at change. Much of the discontent was of course the inevitable consequence of the circumstances in which England was placed, and for which the Government was only answerable in so far as it created those circumstances. At the same time it is impossible not to blame the complacent manner in which the misery was ignored and the occasional success of individual merchants and contractors regarded as evidences of national prosperity. At the beginning of the year 1810, Perceval, who in the interest of the Government had been preventing as far as possible all inquiry into the Walcheren failure, was bold enough at the opening of the session to take credit to himself for that expedition, and to declare that the national prosperity was great, and that public works had been carried out as successfully as in the times of profound peace. Such assertions could not have been made without some slight foundation. While the Continental System and the Orders in Council had together almost closed the European trade, certain other irregular doors had been opened; the removal of the Portuguese court to the Brazils had given hopes of an enlarged South American trade, and the two islands of Heligoland and Anholt had been fortified and turned into smuggling centres with some success. Certain public works, as the Waterloo and Vauxhall bridges, had been opened. But before the year was over the condition of the country surely proved that the prosperity boasted of was a mere phantom. The American trade proved ruinous to those who had rushed into it; the British goods on the Baltic had been seized and confiscated; the public works had been carried on by a lavish issue of paper money, which was now rapidly depreciating. A bad harvest came to increase the difficulties of the time. Early in the spring wheat was already at 102s. a quarter: though £7,000,000 worth was imported, it rose in August to 116s. But then, under the influence of a good harvest, it suddenly dropped to 94s.--thus the agricultural interest was also involved in ruin.

[Sidenote: Depression of trade.]

Under all these influences there was a collapse of credit. There were 273 stoppages of payment instead of the ordinary average of 100, and before the year was out no less than 2314 commissions of bankruptcy were issued. This misery and depression lasted till the end of the war. Indeed, in the following years, 1811 and 1812, it was constantly increasing. The depression of commerce was so great and the collapse of credit so general that an advance of £6,000,000 to the merchants on due security was authorized by Parliament. The withdrawal of Russia from the Continental System, and its apparent inclination to throw off Napoleon's influence, slightly revived business. But this improvement was neutralized by the fearful winter and spring, which destroyed much of the harvest, and again raised the price of wheat. The apparent opposition between the interests of the manufacturing and agricultural classes was very curiously marked. A plentiful harvest in 1813, and the opening of many continental ports, did much to revive both trade and manufactures; but it was accompanied by a fall in the price of corn from 17ls. to 75s. The consequence was widespread distress among the agriculturists, which involved the country banks, so that in the two following years 240 of them stopped payment. So great a crash could not fail to affect the manufacturing interest also; apparently for the instant the very restoration of peace brought widespread ruin.

[Sidenote: Misery of the lower classes.]

[Sidenote: The Luddite riots.]

But whether for the moment it was the agriculturists or the merchants who suffered most, the lower classes were quite sure to suffer. Not only did the Continental System injure the great branches of English industry, the foreign corn ports were also closed. The increase of population since the large introduction of machinery in the last century had gone beyond the resources of home production. The high price of wheat has been already mentioned. Meat also went up from 4d. or 5d. to 10d. a pound. Considering the enormous rate of the price of corn, it was impossible to give wages sufficient to keep the operatives alive. Before the end of the year 1811, wages had sunk to 7s. 6d. a week. The manufacturing operatives were therefore in a state of absolute misery. Petitions signed by 40,000 or 50,000 men urged upon Parliament that they were starving; but there was another class which fared still worse. Machinery had by no means superseded hand-work. In thousands of hamlets and cottages handlooms still existed. The work was neither so good nor so rapid as work done by machinery; even at the best of times used chiefly as an auxiliary to agriculture, this hand labour could now scarcely find employment at all. Not unnaturally, without work and without food, these handworkers were very ready to believe that it was the machinery which caused their ruin, and so in fact it was; the change, though on the whole beneficial, had brought much individual misery. The people were not wise enough to see this. They rose in riot in many parts of England, chiefly about Nottingham, calling themselves Luddites (from the name of a certain idiot lad who some thirty years before had broken stocking-frames), gathered round them many of the disbanded soldiery with whom the country was thronged, and with a very perfect secret organization, carried out their object of machine-breaking. The unexpected thronging of the village at nightfall, a crowd of men with blackened faces, armed sentinels holding every approach, silence on all sides, the village inhabitants cowering behind their closed doors, an hour or two's work of smashing and burning, and the disappearance of the crowd as rapidly as it had arrived--such were the incidents of the night riots.

[Sidenote: Misery of the agricultural labourer.]

Perhaps, however, the agricultural labourer was still worse off. While farmers were selling their corn at 112s., or even at 170s., the quarter--while it paid to take in bits of open down land, get three crops off it without manuring, and then pass on to the next piece,--the wretched labourers were told that prices were so high that but little could be given them for their wages. The misery was therefore exceedingly great among them; and even worse than this, the Poor Law stepped in and destroyed their characters. For the wages were so low that they could not live on them, and they were forced to come upon the parish; and the old Poor Law, in the hands of the farmer guardians, enabled those very employers who kept the wages low to levy a rate upon their parishes to support those people whom they were starving, and to give outdoor relief in aid of wages. In other words, the employer had the right to compel the country to give him the money to pay his labourers enough to keep them alive. Selfish views, too, were mixed with false political economy. Many labourers made cheap labour; many hands, it was thought, made a strong country. So this strange grant in aid of wages came to be apportioned according to the number of the family of the recipient; and when the whole state of the nation pointed to the necessity of a curtailed population, a premium was given for its increase.

[Sidenote: Difficulties attending the settlement of Europe.]

The termination of a war so new in its character, and so universal as that which for the last eleven years had been wasting Europe, brought with it great difficulties. On the one hand arose the question of the position to be taken up by the allies with regard to France; on the other, the reconstitution of Europe, completely dislocated by the policy of Napoleon. Both questions were rendered difficult of solution by the various interests and mutual jealousies of the powers of the victorious coalition. But,--while those European powers who had suffered most severely from the French arms, and especially Prussia, on which the vengeance of Napoleon had fallen most heavily, were desirous to treat France as a conquered nation, so to curtail its dimensions as to render it harmless for the future, and to lay such burdens upon it as might in some degree recompense them for their losses,--England, which had never felt the sword of the conqueror, and Russia, ruled by a Czar much influenced by notions of chivalry and magnanimity, had already determined upon an opposite course. Following the opinion of the founder of their party, the Tory Government which had succeeded Pitt declared its intention of acting towards France as towards a friendly power, and of allowing it to retain the same frontiers as in 1790. There was not much magnanimity in such conduct; the Tory party, the champions of legitimacy, could scarcely avoid restoring the Bourbons; their view of the balance of Europe rendered a powerful France almost a necessity; they could look for no continental acquisitions for England, and took care to secure the advantages they required for their maritime and commercial superiority in other directions. But, while restoring the Bourbons, the English Government found itself compelled by the temper of the time, the course of circumstances, and the liberal views of the Emperor of Russia, to restore them only upon conditions. A constitutional government was granted to France, ratified by a charter securing the chief personal and political rights of the people, such as the maintenance of the public sales during the Revolution, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press.

[Sidenote: Treaty of Paris. May 1814.]

A France thus reconstituted, and holding friendly relations with the other powers of Europe, would naturally claim its share in the arrangements of the forthcoming Congress. It would probably have been wiser had the French Government postponed all definite settlements as to its future limits till that Congress met; the jealousies which existed between the allies and their conflicting claims would have afforded opportunity for securing favourable terms, for by the Convention, by which France had surrendered the territories held by her armies in Europe, her troops had been allowed to withdraw unmolested, and a powerful army could have been rapidly reconstituted. But the allies, guided by Metternich, the Austrian minister, and determined to keep as far as possible the management of the Congress in their own hands, insisted on the immediate conclusion of the treaty with France. Eager to gain popularity by the establishment of peace, the French Government yielded, and in May the Treaty of Paris was concluded. It was upon the whole more favourable than France, as a conquered nation, could have expected. The frontier of 1790 was even slightly increased: towards the north and towards the Rhine it was advanced so as to include several important fortresses, especially the strong place of Landau, and towards the Alps about half of Savoy was also included. The demands of Prussia for a contribution towards the expenses of the war were rejected by the influence of Austria and England, and the treasures of art collected by Napoleon's armies were allowed to remain in Paris. The one great loss sustained was the Isle of France. It was upon the sea and among the colonies that England looked for its reward; it retained Malta, to secure its influence in the Mediterranean, the Cape of Good Hope, which it had won from the Dutch, and now, to complete its naval stations on the road to India, it insisted on the surrender of the Isle of France. The bases for the forthcoming Treaty of Vienna were also roughly laid by this peace. The published articles declared the independence of the States of Germany, the augmentation of Holland under the rule of the Prince of Orange, the independence of Switzerland and of the Italian States outside the limits of the Austrian possessions. Secret articles explained what these loose expressions meant. Belgium was to form the promised increase of Holland, and thus form with it a kingdom absolutely in the interest of England; the left bank of the Rhine was to supply compensations for the German princes (which meant that it was to be given to Bavaria in exchange for the Tyrol); the Po, the Ticino, and Lago Maggiore were to form the boundaries of Austrian Italy, which thus included the territory of Venice; and Sardinia was to receive Genoa in exchange for the portion of Savoy ceded to France.

[Sidenote: Visit of the monarchs to England. Aug. 1814.]

The difficulties which were sure to attend the forthcoming Congress were already felt, and it was thought that the solution would be rendered easier by the establishment of personal relations between the powers of the coalition. The great monarchs of Eastern Europe were therefore invited to visit the Prince Regent in England. The Emperor of Austria declined to come, but the Czar and the King of Prussia accepted the invitation, and were received with great pomp and enthusiasm. Several weeks were passed in universal gaiety, but the political object of the visit was not attained. The Czar seemed more than ever to occupy the first place among crowned heads; and the dread of Russian influence, and the determination to oppose its claims in the Congress, were thus only rendered stronger.

[Sidenote: Congress at Vienna. Sept. 1814.]

The meetings at Vienna, at first appointed for August, had been postponed to September, and thither, after their visit to England, the monarchs themselves, and the ministers who represented the various countries of the Congress, betook themselves. The interests of England were intrusted to Lord Castlereagh, a man of considerable firmness, but of mediocre ability, without accurate knowledge or broad views of the politics of Europe, and deficient in the conciliatory deportment so necessary for a successful diplomatist. The negotiators approached their difficult work in a spirit which promised no very good results. Almost of necessity the character of the Congress, and of the treaty it produced, belonged rather to the past than to the future. It was rendered necessary by the changes created by the French Revolution, and was in the hands of a coalition called into existence to oppose the Revolution, and consisting chiefly of monarchs whose views were both absolutist and dynastic. The Czar alone had certain liberal tendencies, but they were so mixed with personal ambition as to excite mistrust instead of co-operation among the assembled negotiators. The Congress therefore assumed the form of an old European congress. It was occupied with the personal and peculiar interest of each sovereign, the increase of territory and influence of each nation, instead of attempting a settlement of Europe in accordance with any enlarged or general theory suitable to the great change and growth of ideas which had been at once the cause and effect of the Revolution.

[Sidenote: The interests of the various countries at the Congress.]

As far as England was concerned, its interests had already been chiefly secured by the Treaty of Paris. The new kingdom of the Netherlands, it was thought, would be strong enough to hold the mouths of the great rivers of that country, and thus prevent any revival of the Continental System; the road to India was rendered safe by the possession of the Cape of Good Hope and the Mauritius, while Malta guarded English influence in the Mediterranean. The maintenance of the old European balance was therefore the chief object which Castlereagh had now in view, endangered chiefly by the overwhelming power of Russia, threatening alike the countries of Europe and our own Asiatic dominions. The haste with which the Treaty of Paris had been concluded tied the hands of France, which was represented by Talleyrand; and the very moderate ambition of Louis XVIII. limited the claims of that country to the completion of the downfall of the Napoleonic system by the removal of Murat from the kingdom of Naples, and the establishment of the Spanish Princess, the Queen of Etruria, in the Duchy of Parma, which had been promised to Maria Louisa, Napoleon's wife. Louis was also anxious to save if possible the kingdom of Saxony from annihilation. The really important questions at issue regarded the settlement of the East of Europe and the fate of Poland and Saxony, which appeared indissolubly connected, so closely were the Courts of Russia and Prussia united. The Emperor of Russia was a man of enthusiastic temperament and liberal theories, and at the same time of great ambition. He found satisfaction for both sides of his character in a plan for the reconstitution of the kingdom of Poland, with a liberal constitution, either under his own rule as king or under some prince of his house acknowledging his supremacy. To complete this project he required the possession of the whole of Poland, a reward which the overweening value he set on his own services to the coalition induced him to regard as by no means more than his due. Both Prussia and Austria would have been called upon to restore certain portions of Poland which had fallen to their lot in the different partition treaties, but he supposed that his own resignation of certain portions would counterbalance these sacrifices, while Austria would be well rewarded by the possession of Lombardy and Venice, and Prussia by the whole of Saxony. The adhesion of the Saxon king to Napoleon was thought to justify the sovereigns of the coalition in confiscating his country, which, with the approbation of Russia, was claimed in its entirety by the Prussian Government. It is plain that the claims of Russia and Prussia could not but be in the last degree objectionable to Austria. Absolutist in its tendencies, it cared nothing for the freedom of Poland, while the possession of territory conterminous with the hereditary states of Austria would render Russia a most dangerous rival. At the same time, Prussia, the constant object of Austrian jealousy, if Saxony passed into its hands, would at once lose that broken and dislocated shape which had hitherto been its weakness, and would acquire a position in Germany which Austria could scarcely hope to equal. The policy of Austria was therefore clearly marked.

[Sidenote: The policy of England at the Congress.]

The position of England was not so obvious. It is possible to say now, guided by the light of subsequent events, and led by the spirit of freedom and nationality which has made such vast strides of late years, that the Government of England, the home of free institutions and avowedly the champion of national liberty, should have come forward even then in that capacity, should have rejoiced at the reconstitution of Poland, and have sought the unification of Germany by supporting the power of Prussia, and should have objected to the establishment of Austria in Italy, a country where her rule was certain to be disliked by the population. But the English Government at the time was a Tory Government, bent rather upon restraining than increasing popular tendencies, and under the dominion of three overmastering influences--the desire to secure England from any possibility of a renewal of the Continental System, an extreme jealousy of the pretensions and power of the Russian Emperor, and the wish to establish for some years at all events the peace of Europe. Its policy was therefore inconsistent and shortsighted, but sensible and practical; the fear of the advance of Russia made the English ministry blind to its duties towards Poland; the satisfaction and friendship of France were more important than the rights of Genoa; the immediate balance of the powers of Germany was more important than the national aspirations either of Italy or of Germany.

[Sidenote: The policy of France.]

It so happened that the views of France were at this instant similar to those of England. Before the formal opening of the Congress an attempt had been made by the four great powers to get the management of it entirely into their own hands. France would thus have been excluded from the settlement of Europe; but Talleyrand was not a man to hear quietly such an exclusion; he appeared as the champion of the smaller states, and succeeded in thwarting the efforts of the great powers. This, with other less important causes, had embroiled him with the Emperor of Russia, whose objects he was thus bent on thwarting. The King of Saxony was a friend and relative of Louis XVIII.; to save him and his country from destruction was a part of the French programme. It therefore suited Talleyrand to adopt the views of Castlereagh.

[Sidenote: Division of the Congress.]

[Sidenote: Compromise agreed to.]

Thus Austria, France, and England, in conjunction with the smaller German powers, who looked with great dislike to the annihilation of one of the chief among them, were thrown upon one side, in opposition to Russia and Prussia. The arrogant and high-handed manner in which those two powers proceeded to take temporary possession of the countries which they claimed still further excited the anger of their opponents. So severe did the dispute grow, so indissoluble did the knot appear, that war between the powers themselves seemed threatening. The Treaty of Ghent and the conclusion of the English war with America allowed Castlereagh to act with more vigour, and in January a secret treaty was entered into between France, Austria, and England, by which each country agreed to supply troops to compel, if necessary, the adoption of their combined policy. Although this treaty was kept a secret, the firm attitude and the combination of the three powers were so evident that, as neither party really wished for war, a compromise was discovered. About half of Saxony, with a third of its population, was taken from the King and given to Prussia, while the Czar, withdrawing from his extreme demand with regard to Poland, allowed the Duchy of Posen to remain in the hands of the Prussians, and a considerable portion of Gallicia, together with the district of Tarnopol, to be retained by Austria, while Krakow was to become a free and neutral republic. Poland was thus in part reconstituted, but entirely in the hands of Russia. These great questions being settled, the arrangements upon the minor points proceeded with some rapidity; the left bank of the Rhine was given to Bavaria; Genoa passed into the hands of Sardinia; the two houses of Hesse were re-established; Luxemburg was given to the Low Countries; Mayence became a Federal fortress; the Tyrol was restored to Austria; Switzerland was reorganized chiefly in accordance with the arrangements France had made there; the conduct of Murat, who began to show a tendency towards Napoleonism, facilitated the restoration of the Bourbons in Naples; Parma was given to Maria Louisa for her life; and the Congress completed its work by two great declarations of principle, one securing the freedom of the navigation of rivers, the other expressing, what was very dear to Englishmen at the time, a universal disapprobation of the slave trade.

[Sidenote: Escape of Napoleon from Elba.]

Before the conclusion of these questions Castlereagh had been compelled by the meeting of Parliament to return to England, and the Duke of Wellington had taken his place at Vienna. His work there was not completed when the news arrived that Napoleon had broken loose from Elba, and the Duke was wanted to take command of the allied army in Belgium. The renewal of the common danger produced a temporary harmony among the negotiators at Vienna. The chief questions were rapidly settled, and a joint proclamation, issued by the eight powers which had signed the Peace of Paris, declared Napoleon the public enemy of Europe. The Congress continued its sittings, but military preparations for the time absorbed all attention.

[Sidenote: Military preparations against Napoleon.]

It was agreed to act in accordance with the Treaty of Chaumont, each of the four great powers supplying its quota of troops, or in the case of England an equivalent in money. While the Prussians and the English with their allies were to advance into France and the Netherlands, the other powers were to pass the Rhine and join in a great advance upon Paris. It was hoped that by the end of April 500,000 men would be ready for the great movement. The French Court had taken refuge in the Netherlands, and as the people of that country were already half inclined to join the French, it seemed certain that that country would be the chief seat of operations; the war there was intrusted to the Anglo-allies under Wellington, and the Prussians under Prince Blücher. The hope of speedy action was quickly seen to be vain. Since the peace many countries had disbanded their troops, many of the best English regiments had been sent to America, and in spite of its long experience, the English Government showed its usual weakness in the war administration. Wellington was convinced of the necessity of postponing the opening of the campaign till June or July.

[Sidenote: Napoleon enters Belgium.]

This delay gave Napoleon an opportunity of striking the first blow, and although he could immediately dispose of not more than 125,000 men, and although the English and Prussian armies amounted to 220,000, the arrangement of the allied troops gave him much hope of a successful campaign. Bent upon covering Brussels, uncertain where the blow which he felt sure would soon be struck would fall and in order to facilitate the subsistence of his troops, Wellington had spread his army over a long line of frontier, from the neighbourhood of Charleroi to Antwerp and Ostend. In like manner the Prussian corps were spread eastward from Charleroi to Liège. Trusting to the wide dissemination of the allied troops to render concentration difficult, Napoleon thought to push between the English and Prussian armies, and to crush them one after the other. With all his old skill, he rapidly collected his army on the Sambre, issued on the 14th June a stirring general order, and on the 15th attacked the Prussians at Charleroi, passed the Sambre, and drove them back along the Namur road to a position near Sombreffe, which Blücher had already appointed as a point of concentration should he be attacked from Charleroi. At the same time the left of the French army under Ney was sent directly northward along the road to Brussels, to clear it of English and prevent the junction of the allies.

[Sidenote: Battle of Ligny.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Quatre Bras.]

[Sidenote: Retreat of Blücher's army.]

Up to this point Napoleon's plans seemed thoroughly successful. He had already rendered any immediate junction of the armies difficult, if not impossible; with one part of his army he had already reached the chosen ground of the Prussians, and found it occupied by one only out of their four corps; with his left he had advanced to the position of Quatre Bras against the English, where as yet no considerable portion of the allies had arrived. But a strange slowness marks his course in this campaign. Instead of bringing up all his troops for an attack in both directions, in the early morning of the 16th, he allowed his main body to pass the night on the Sambre, while there was an interval of twelve miles between Ney's position and that of his rear. Consequently all the morning was passed in bringing up these troops, and it was past noon before either at Quatre Bras or Ligny any formidable attacks were made on the enemy. During that time two more Prussian corps had arrived at Ligny, and Wellington's troops were hastening to support the small force at Quatre Bras. Napoleon therefore, instead of being able to destroy a single Prussian corps, found himself involved in a bloody and hard-contested battle. He was indeed victorious, but the victory was not of that crushing and decisive character which his precarious position rendered necessary for him. At Quatre Bras, instead of a brief skirmish which would have enabled him to give assistance to Napoleon at Ligny, Ney found it necessary to fight a battle, and that not a successful one. The Allies, who in the morning were scarcely 8000 strong, made good their position till reinforcements arrived. When evening closed their preponderance was such that Ney was compelled to withdraw his troops to Frasnes. So hard had he been pressed that he had found it necessary to summon to his aid the corps of D'Erlon, which almost at the same time received orders from Napoleon to fall on the Prussian right flank, and thus complete the victory of Ligny. Confused by these contradictory orders, D'Erlon's corps of 20,000 men passed the day, without striking a blow, between the two battlefields, in either of which his presence might have had a decisive effect. As it was, Napoleon overrated the success against the Prussians, and fell into a fatal error with regard to the line of their retreat. Convinced that they would fall back towards Namur and Liège, he detached Marshal Grouchy with 30,000 men to follow them in that direction, while he himself brought his main body to join Ney, with the intention of following and destroying the English, who were compelled by Blücher's defeat to fall back towards Brussels. But the Prussian generals, Blücher and Gneisenau, the chief of his staff, were not so easily shaken off. Determined still to afford assistance to their allies, they withdrew northwards towards Wavre, while Grouchy and his troops were in vain seeking them towards the east. From Wavre, which was reached late in the evening of the 17th, Blücher was enabled to assure Wellington of his approach, and to promise the assistance not of two divisions only, for which the English general had asked, but of his whole army. Relying on this promise, Wellington determined to fight.

[Sidenote: Position of Waterloo.]

To give time for the arrival of the Prussians it was necessary that his battle should be a defensive one. The position, which he had long before studied and selected, was admirably adapted for the purpose. Nearly two miles south of Waterloo is the village of St. Jean, where the highroads from Charleroi and Nivelle towards Brussels join. Just south of this the undulating country forms a somewhat continuous ridge, lying east and west, crossed at right angles by the Charleroi road. Along the south of the ridge lies a rich and cultivated valley, which in about a mile swells again into a corresponding range of elevated ground. Three or four farmhouses lie on the foot or on the southern slope of the northern line of hills, so that the position resembles, as Wellington said, a wall of a bastion with advancing angles. The English troops were placed along the ridge, and occupied the farmhouses. The centre was placed between the two highroads, having in front the farm of La Haye Sainte standing on the western side of the Charleroi road. The right was covered by the château of Hougomont, with stone buildings and enclosures, while the left stretched to the farms of Papelotte and La Haye. Wavre is about seven miles from St. Jean, directly to the east, and expecting the arrival of Blücher, Wellington allowed his left to be the weakest part of his line. His care for his right was indeed exaggerated; he thought it possible that an attempt might be made to reach Brussels by outflanking him in that direction, and before all things desirous of preserving the capital, he detached a body of 17,000 men to Hal (eight miles to the west of his position), and thus seriously and uselessly weakened his line of battle. The French position corresponded to the English. Its centre also lay on the Charleroi road and the range of heights parallel to those occupied by the English, on which is the farmhouse of La Belle Alliance. Its right extended to Frischermont, opposite to La Haye, having somewhat in its rear the village of Planchenoit; the left reached beyond Hougomont. In number the armies were not unequally matched. Wellington commanded about 68,000 men, Napoleon 70,000, but the English army consisted of troops of various nations, some of whom were thoroughly untrustworthy, and was inferior in cavalry by at least 3000 men, and in artillery by upwards of 100 guns.

[Sidenote: Battle of Waterloo.]

By eight o'clock on the morning of the 18th the English were under arms, but Napoleon, ignorant of the movements of the Prussians, and anxious probably to excite the temper of his own troops, and display his power to those of the allies who were already wavering in their allegiance, delayed his attack till nearly mid-day, and employed the morning in a great review of his troops. The weather also on the 17th had been very stormy, the ground was saturated and heavy; and though this difficulty would likewise have affected his opponents, firm ground was no doubt more important for the attack than for the defence. It is probable that those wasted hours saved the English army, for the same condition of the ground told with terrible force upon the advance of the Prussians, who had to make their way through swampy defiles, where the artillery could scarcely be moved. Their advance was very slow, and nothing but the firm determination of their leaders to keep their word to Wellington would have enabled them to overcome the obstacles in their way. The battle began about half-past eleven by an assault upon Hougomont, which Napoleon intended to carry, and thus mask his real great attack upon the centre and left of the English. The firm resistance of the garrison, consisting of a portion of the English Guards and the troops of Nassau and Hanover, frustrated this first move. The capture of the château, which should have been a mere preliminary step in the great plan, became an object in itself; fresh troops were constantly brought against it, it was as constantly reinforced from the English line, and throughout the whole day its defence neutralized a considerable portion of the French infantry. It was not till five o'clock that Napoleon brought a couple of howitzers to bear upon it. Though the buildings were speedily in flames, the defence was continued, and it remained throughout the day uncaptured. During the first attack upon Hougomont skirmishing and firing had been going on along the whole line preparatory to the great movement against the left. That movement was rather hastened than postponed by a discovery which was made about one o'clock. About that time troops were seen moving near a wood to the north-east of the English position between Wavre and Ohain. At first Napoleon took them for the troops of Grouchy, to whom he had sent information of the true direction of the Prussian retreat. They proved however to be the foremost troops of Bülow's Prussian corps. But the Emperor, still believing that Grouchy would at all events prevent the arrival of the main body of the Prussians, determined if possible to complete the destruction of the English before taking notice of the approaching troops. At half-past one, under a furious cannonade, the first corps, D'Erlon's, marched against the English left between Papelotte and La Haye Sainte. Although their peculiar formation, in great closely-packed masses, exposed them fearfully to the fire of the English artillery, they pressed forward up the English slope, threw the first line, consisting of allies, into confusion, and were not repulsed till Picton brought up the main body of the English left, who charged them with the bayonet and drove them backward. As they were already shaken, the English heavy cavalry, the Household Brigade, and what is known as the Union Brigade, consisting of the Scotch Greys, the Enniskillen Dragoons, and Royals, charged with fearful effect. Carried away by their energy, they rode right up the French slope to the battery of La Belle Alliance; scattered and exhausted by their charge, they were fallen upon and very roughly handled by the French Lancers, and only saved from destruction by the advance of the English light cavalry. However, the first great attack of the French had been triumphantly repulsed, though with terrible loss. Both Picton and Ponsonby, who commanded the cavalry, were killed. It was not long before a second attack was made. Apparently about four o'clock, Ney was ordered to assault the centre and right centre of the English to the west of the Charleroi road. The attack was made chiefly with cavalry. Much of the infantry were indeed employed round Hougomont and in the attack of La Haye Sainte, which never ceased. For two hours the cavalry charges continued; they were opposed by the allied troops thrown into square, the squares being placed checkerwise behind the crest of the ridge. It is uncertain whether any squares were broken; it is certain at all events that though the line on the whole held firm, reinforcements had to be brought from the right, and that there was a moment between five and six o'clock when the centre was in the greatest danger. After an heroic defence La Haye Sainte had been abandoned for want of ammunition. The French held therefore a position close to the English ridge, and the infantry of Donzelot's division were gradually making their way to the line which the cavalry charge had shattered. But to complete the lodgment effected in the line on the ridge more infantry were absolutely necessary, and these were not forthcoming. When Ney sent to demand them of the Emperor, his messenger was met with the reply, "Does he want me to make them?" In fact, since about half-past four o'clock the advance of the Prussians had made itself clearly felt. General Lobau had been sent to check them, and with him some battalions of the Imperial Guard. But the numbers of the Prussians constantly increased; it was in vain that they were more than once driven out of Planchenois by the Guard, at six o'clock they had established themselves there, threatening even the rear of the French and the Charleroi road, their line of retreat; and by seven o'clock Ziethen's corps, which had pushed directly westward, had joined the left of the English army, so that the French troops in Papelotte occupied an advanced angle, surrounded both in front and flank by the enemy. It was thus that reinforcements could not be sent to Ney, and the second great effort of the French was rendered useless. But Napoleon did not yet give up all for lost. He knew that the English must be much exhausted, and determined to try one great effort more with that portion of the Imperial Guard which had still been kept in reserve. It was a general assault along the whole line, but the most important part of it was the advance of the Guard upon the English centre. To oppose them the English brigade of Guards under Maitland had been brought forward. As the French columns topped the ridge the Guards sprang to their feet, and at a distance of fifty paces poured in a fire which shook the advancing masses, and charged them with the bayonet. The columns of the Guard rolled backward to the valley. At the same time a second column had met with the same fate; the 52nd regiment under Colborne had advanced so as to form an angle with the main line; as the French column passed them they poured in a destructive fire, and charged directly upon their flank. The course of that charge was unchecked, the 52nd regiment continued to follow the flying French right across the valley. Almost at the same time, the French in the angle at Papelotte had also been driven back by the Prussians; and the English light cavalry under Vandelour and Vivian had likewise charged, overthrowing the troops opposed to them; thus in three parts of the field the French were in flight. A general order to advance was given, and after a short but broken resistance, the whole mass of the French army fled in complete rout. About nine o'clock Wellington and Blücher met at the farmhouse of La Belle Alliance, lately the French headquarters. The pursuit was intrusted to the Prussians, less exhausted than their English allies, and was followed up by Gneisenau along the Charleroi road as far as Frasnes. The loss in this great battle was very heavy on all sides; that of England is put at 13,000, that of Prussia at 7000, and of France between 23,000 and 30,000. It was however decisive.

[Sidenote: The allies in Paris.]

[Sidenote: Napoleon banished to St. Helena.]

The advance of the allies into France was unchecked, and on the 7th of July Paris was again occupied. The entrance of the allies upon the country of France at once exhibited the different feelings by which they were actuated; while Blücher and the Prussians thought of nothing but vengeance, Wellington, true to the constant policy of England, insisted upon regarding France as a friendly country to which he was restoring its legitimate sovereign. He succeeded in restraining his violent colleague, who wished to put Napoleon to death, to lay a large contribution on Paris, and to blow up the bridge of Jena over the Seine, the name of which he considered an insult to Prussia. Wellington had no instructions how to act with regard to Napoleon, he therefore allowed him to follow his own course. The Emperor, embarking in an English frigate, the Bellerophon, attempted in his usual theatrical manner to claim the hospitality of the Prince Regent, but the dread of his name and ambition, and the proved danger of allowing him to remain in Europe, prevented the English Government from entertaining any such ideas, and Napoleon was sent to end his days as a prisoner in St. Helena.

[Sidenote: Second Treaty of Paris. Nov. 20, 1815.]

The influence of England, naturally increased by the great part it had played in the war in Belgium, was sufficient to give the direction to the negotiations which followed the second restoration of the Bourbons. The Government succeeded in procuring that the Treaty of Vienna completed on June 9th and the first Treaty of Paris (May 1814) should be upon the whole maintained, but it could not refuse to allow some punishment to fall on France for the events of "the hundred days." The country was vigorously confined to its limits in 1790, losing all the additions which the first Treaty of Paris had given it; it was compelled to bear much of the expenses of the war; while its immediate good conduct was secured by an army of occupation, which was for five years to hold the northern fortresses under the command of the Duke of Wellington. The war contribution was to consist of 700,000,000 francs, a sum which was to be paid in five years, during which time the northern fortresses were held as guarantee. This treaty was signed on the 20th of November.

[Sidenote: Battle of Algiers. Aug. 27, 1816.]

England had one more piece of work to do before laying down her arms. The attention of the Congress of Vienna had been called to the condition of the Mediterranean, where commerce was interrupted, and the liberty of Christians imperilled by the piratical fleets of the slave-holding states of the Barbary coasts. A general co-operation against the pirates had been proposed, but no definite resolution was arrived at. To England, unquestioned mistress of the sea, and herself, by her new position in the Ionian Isles, a Mediterranean power, fell the duty of suppressing the evil. Early in 1816, therefore, Lord Exmouth, in command of the Mediterranean squadron, was instructed to visit the Mahomedan states; he was to insist upon the release of Ionian slaves, and to negotiate a peace with the Mahomedans in the interests of Sardinia and Naples. From Algiers alone could opposition be expected. But the Government there made no objections to the admiral's demands; the Ionian slaves were released freely, those of Naples and Sardinia upon the payment of a ransom. At Tunis, the next port visited, an accident changed the aspect of affairs. Lord Exmouth, took advantage of a mistake of his interpreter to declare that it was not the wish only but the fixed determination of the Prince Regent that slavery should cease altogether. Tripoli and Tunis submitted, and set free their slaves; but Algiers, a stronger power, demanded time to refer the matter to Constantinople, promising to deal directly with the English Government. Meanwhile in Parliament the principle of ransoming the slaves had been strongly censured, and a general feeling that force should be used had arisen. A barbarous attack by Algerine soldiers upon the crews of some coral-ships at Bona allowed the Government to take advantage of this feeling, by despatching Lord Exmouth to complete his work. On the 27th of August, having been joined at Gibraltar by a small Dutch squadron, Lord Exmouth approached Algiers. After waiting two hours for a reply to his terms he placed his ships alongside the batteries in positions carefully marked out beforehand. The work of destruction was complete, the forts were reduced to ruins, the fleet that lay within the mole was burnt. For nine hours the battle raged, then when the ammunition was nearly expended the ships withdrew from their somewhat dangerous position. Their work had been effective: on the following morning the English terms were accepted, and on the 31st, 1200 slaves were embarked in the fleet, making in all more than 3000 whom Lord Exmouth had delivered.

[Sidenote: Opposition in the Parliament. Feb. 1, 1816.]

[Sidenote: The Holy Alliance. Sept. 1815.]

The completion of the settlement of Europe had been carried out during the recess of Parliament. From July 1815 to February 1, 1816, the Government had been able to act entirely unchecked. On that day Parliament reopened, and Castlereagh resumed his seat in all the triumph of his completed negotiations. But with the conclusion of the war came the hour of trial for the Tory ministry. The mediocrity of their talent, the reactionary character of their political views, had been forgotten, or even regarded as favourable points in their administration, while they stood forth firmly and energetically to express and give effect to the great wish of the nation, the destruction of the Napoleonic rule. With the return of peace the great questions of home politics were again becoming of importance, and the tendencies of the party fostered by their successful warfare were to call into existence an opposition not only in Parliament but among the nation at large. Already voices were raised against the late negotiations; though, no doubt, the real magnanimity shown towards France, the advantages gained for England on the sea, and the security for some years of peace which the elaborate system of balance was thought to give, were fully in accordance with the wishes of the majority of the nation. There were men who, undazzled by the glories of the late war, saw that the policy of England had in fact favoured absolutism,--that, for the sake of the balance of power, countries had been handed over quite irrespective of the wishes of the people to sovereigns for whom they felt no natural affection,--that a dynasty disliked by a large section of the people had been forced upon France, and was upheld by English bayonets, and that in spite of the efforts of England the influence of Russia had been increased. It appeared to them that the intercourse with foreign powers had rendered our negotiators absolutists. Their conduct with regard to the Holy Alliance showed that this was not in fact the case. The Holy Alliance, or Convention of September, by which the enthusiastic and sentimental Emperor of Russia joined with his brother sovereigns of Prussia and Austria to declare that henceforward their policy should be ruled on Christian principles alone, had been rejected by the English Government, which saw danger in this brotherly and religious bond between absolute monarchs, and declared through the Duke of Wellington that the English Parliament would require "something more precise." In fact, though in no way wishing to disturb the English Constitution, the Tory Government had been led into a course of policy which was not in accordance with English traditions. The conclusion of a war the burden of which had been upon the whole patiently borne, should have brought with it the real blessings of peace; but these were not found in the declaration of the Government that it intended to keep up the war taxes, and to keep on foot an army of 150,000, an intention which, when taken in conjunction with the close alliances entered into with foreign powers, seemed to mean that England was henceforward to attempt to take its place as one of the great military powers of the Continent.

[Sidenote: Extravagance of the Government.]

It was upon the two points of taxation and economy that the Government first met with opposition. Mr. Vansittart, Chancellor of the Exchequer, declared his intention of continuing half the income and property tax, which from the first had been avowedly a war tax. The Opposition to this measure was headed in the Commons by Brougham. By a skilful use of parliamentary tactics, he succeeded in gaining time, which he employed in procuring a flood of petitions exhibiting the feeling of the country so strongly that the Government was beaten. Apparently in dudgeon at his defeat, the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that as he had lost the income tax he should also throw over the malt tax, a step which Castlereagh explained by saying that Government was going to contract a loan, and £2,000,000 or £3,000,000 more or less would make no difference. The recklessness of this assertion points to one of the evils which the late war had produced;--an unbounded and lavish supply of money, and the habit of spending almost without question if success could be obtained, had destroyed all idea of economy in the minds of the ministers. The angry feeling excited in the people by this carelessness of the public money was not diminished by the extravagances of the Court, and the constant demands for money to supply the deficiencies of the Civil List. Although £800,000 was the sum granted in exchange for the hereditary revenues, the average of late years had been considerably above a million; in 1815 it had reached nearly a million and a half. On this point the ministers were themselves obliged to take the initiative, and a Bill was passed for the better regulation of the Civil List. But while the demand for economy, for the reduction of the war expenditure, and the return of England to its usual independent position with regard to the Continent, afforded themes for the Opposition in Parliament, an agitation of far more importance had sprung into existence outside its walls.

[Sidenote: Agricultural depression.]

At the opening of the session the Prince Regent's speech had congratulated the country upon the prosperity of agriculture, and of all branches of trade and manufacture. But it was, in fact, a time of unexampled distress. The principle of protection which had found favour with the mercantile world in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries had been extended to agriculture. In 1670, a period of great plenty having reduced the price of corn, it was thought necessary to impose heavy dues on its importation. Up to 53s. 4d. a duty of 16s. a quarter was imposed, between that and 80s., a duty of 8s. a quarter. The price at which importation, free or at a nominal duty, was allowed had been more than once changed. In 1804 it had been set at 66s. During the latter years of the war there had been constantly deficient harvests. In 1812 and 1813 the quarter of wheat had risen to 171s. The average price during six years, from 1808 to 1813, had been 108s. During several of those years the Continental System had virtually excluded foreign competition. The effect of the high prices was most disastrous upon agriculture; while the suffering of the labourer had, as has been explained, been very great, the class of farmer had changed, the careful small cultivator had given place to ostentatious spendthrifts. To secure great returns land wholly unfitted for the purpose had been brought under the plough, crop after crop of corn had been grown to the exhaustion of the soil, and many advantageous and necessary forms of agriculture had been thrown aside for the cultivation of corn. The year 1813 was one of extraordinary plenty, the surplus crop was enough to continue that plenty during the two following years; the effect was a very rapid fall in prices. Such a fall naturally entailed the restoration of a better system of husbandry, and the ruin of many of those who had embarked on the false course. Peace added still further to this distress. Violent efforts were made in Parliament by the landed interest, which was very strong, to bolster up the evil system. It was proposed in 1813 that importation should be subject to a prohibitory duty till the price of wheat reached 105s. the quarter. This demand was reduced to 84s. in 1814. Circumstances prevented its being carried then, but in 1815, when the foreign markets were again opened, the terror of approaching cheapness enabled farmers and landlords to combine and hurry through the House a Corn Law, fixing the price at which corn might be imported at 80s. In spite of this, however, the distress continued. In fact, the false inflation of late years was giving way, and agriculture entering upon a more natural course. The agricultural interests still complained, and still asserted the necessity of relief, but as, in order to win their support, the Government had already given up the malt tax, there was really scarcely anything left to give them, and their complaints remained unanswered; and as the distress, although it was caused chiefly by the fault of the agriculturalists, and was but a fair counterpoise to the enormous profits they had lately been making, was a terrible reality, the poorer classes continued to suffer.

[Sidenote: Commercial depression.]

The depression was not confined to the agricultural interest. The removal of the restrictions caused by the Continental System excited lively hopes among the trading community. During the war our exports had chiefly depended upon an organized contraband trade. Even so, in 1811, shipments had been made to the Continent to the value of £11,000,000. It was supposed that, without restrictions, the sum might be doubled. Everybody wished for a share in the golden harvest, and much money was transferred from legitimate and lucrative trade to the purchase of colonial produce for exportation. But what is called effective demand for any commodity depends not on the desire of the purchaser, but upon his power of purchase. The exhausting wars of late years so limited that power of purchase that the exports of England either lay in the ports unsold or were got rid of at less than the cost price. Nor did our restrictive commercial policy allow a ready interchange of commodities, which might have tended to render the disaster less. Peace with America had produced somewhat the same effects. Thus, both in agriculture and in commerce, widespread suffering and distress existed.

[Sidenote: Riots and political meetings.]

The difficulties were increased at the time by a considerable reduction in the circulating medium. The fall in agricultural profits had ruined many banks in agricultural districts, and induced others to restrict their issue of paper money. A severe winter, a deficient harvest, and the rise of the price of wheat before the close of the year (1815) again to 103s., came to complete the general misery. The effect was a widespread series of riots; rick-burning and machine-breaking were constant, especially in the east of England. At Littleport, in the isle of Ely, the town was for two days in the hands of the mob (May 22), and the tumult was only suppressed after the military had been called out. In the coal and iron districts, though the people on the whole behaved well, great meetings of unemployed operatives took place; while in Nottingham and the neighbourhood the Luddite disturbances broke out with fresh vehemence. The discontent and unhappiness of the people before long assumed the shape of a political movement. The change must be attributed to the writings of Cobbett more than to any other single cause. For some years he had published a Liberal periodical called "The Weekly Political Register," in which, with remarkable clearness of style and simple power of argument, he had constantly attacked the Government. In 1816, he changed the price of his paper from a shilling to twopence, and it at once became the oracle of the working classes. His view was, that all the evils of the time might be cured by reform of Parliament. He indeed went far beyond what the nation was then fit for, demanding universal suffrage and annual Parliaments. But his work was the beginning of the great agitation which continued till the passing of the Reform Bill of 1832.

[Sidenote: Meeting in Spa Fields. Dec. 2, 1816.]

Against this new sort of opposition without the walls of Parliament the Government set to work with violent measures of repression. The Hampden Clubs, which had sprung up in all directions for purposes of parliamentary reform, no doubt had fallen in many cases into the hands of dangerous demagogues. In London they appear to have become connected with a body of men known as Spencean philanthropists, after Spence, who, at the beginning of the century, had made himself notorious by his socialistic plans. To this society belonged Thistlewood, the two Watsons, and a man of the name of Preston. Castle, a spy of the police, crept in among them, and probably urged them to more reckless action than they would otherwise have taken. According to his account, a great plot was on foot for taking the Tower, seizing the Government, and establishing a Committee of Public Safety. A meeting in Spa Fields in connection with this plot was held upon the 2nd of December. It was to be addressed by Mr. Hunt, a vain and empty demagogue, but before he arrived the Spenceans had begun to act upon their own authority. Young Watson had led a number of men to Snow Hill to ransack a gunsmith's shop, and had there shot a gentleman who had remonstrated with him. The crowd then marched to the Royal Exchange, where they were met by the Lord Mayor, who courageously withstanding them, with only seven assistants, easily dispersed them. Preston appears also singlehanded to have climbed the wall of the Tower, and have summoned the guard to surrender. Beyond this nothing formidable was done.

[Sidenote: Petition from the Corporation of London.]

While hunger and misery, the depression of trade, and the influence of a few able demagogues, were driving the poorer classes to acts of violence, and a dangerous union was being established between social and political discontent, the middle classes were gradually arriving at the same conclusion as their inferiors with regard to the necessity of a thorough change in the constitution of Parliament. In December, only a few weeks after the uproar in Spa Fields, the Corporation of London, of late the firm supporters of the policy of Government, addressed a petition to the Prince Regent, which throws a striking light upon the feelings which the conduct of Government since the war had excited. After a rapid summary "of the distress and misery, no longer limited to one portion of the Empire, and under the irresistible pressure of which the commercial, agricultural, and manufacturing interests are equally sinking," the address goes on to say: "Our grievances are the natural effect of rash and ruinous wars, unjustly commenced and pertinaciously persisted in, where no rational object was to be attained; of immense subsidies to foreign powers to defend their own territories or to commit aggressions on those of our neighbours; of a delusive paper currency; of an unconstitutional and unprecedented military force in time of peace; of the unexampled and increasing magnitude of the Civil List; of the enormous sums paid for unmerited pensions and sinecures; and of a long course of the most lavish and improvident expenditure of the public money throughout every branch of the Government, all arising from the corrupt and inadequate state of the representation of the people in Parliament, whereby all constitutional control over the servants of the Crown has been lost, and Parliaments have become subservient to the will of Ministers."

[Sidenote: Incapacity of the Tory party.]

It began to be evident that, as the great common interest of the war disappeared, and the popularity and influence derived from its successful termination wore itself out, the Tory party, with its repressive and reactionary doctrines, would find itself wholly unable to handle with success the domestic questions which inevitably arose. For some years longer it successfully held its position. Circumstances enabled it again to separate the middle and lower classes, and full time was allowed it to exhibit its repressive principles of home government.

[Sidenote: Attack on the Regent. June 28, 1817.]

[Sidenote: Repressive measures of the Government. March.]

The success of the Government was due to the excesses of the mob, and to the exaggerated fear which it was found possible to excite among the propertied classes. The Regent had scarcely opened Parliament, with an assurance that he was well convinced of the loyalty of the great body of his Majesty's subjects, but was determined to omit no precautions for preserving public peace, when, as he was returning from the House, he was ill-received by the people, and a missile thrown from the crowd even broke one of the windows of his carriage. This outrage encouraged the Government to take vigorous measures. It was not difficult to represent the whole project of reform as being indissolubly mixed with the extreme doctrines of Cobbett and the Spenceans. A secret committee of both Houses was appointed to inquire into the public disaffection; that of the Lords reported the existence of a great network of societies and clubs, which, under pretence of parliamentary reform, were attempting to infect the minds of all classes with a spirit of disaffection, and contempt of law, religion, and morality, while no endeavours were omitted to prepare the people to take up arms on the first signal of the accomplishment of their design. The Commons committee declared (Feb. 19) that the Hampden Clubs aimed at nothing short of revolution. Armed with these reports, which were no doubt extraordinarily exaggerated, Government introduced and carried Bills for preventing attempts to seduce soldiers and sailors from their allegiance, to give to the Prince Regent all the safeguards of an actual sovereign, to prevent seditious meetings, and lastly (March 3), for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act till the 1st of the ensuing July.

[Sidenote: Secret political meetings.]

[Sidenote: The Derby insurrection. June 10.]

The effect of these Acts was at once to give a certain reality to the dangers on the false apprehension of which they had been based. Public meetings being impossible, secret meetings, with all the dangers which invariably attend them, sprang into existence. The worse affected and more dangerous leaders of the people began to acquire influence, and desperate designs, fomented and betrayed by spies in the employment of Government, began to be entertained. It is impossible to suspect benevolent gentlemen such as Lord Sidmouth of wilfully entrapping ignorant artisans to their own destruction; but it is certain that use was constantly made of spies who found it to their own advantage to concoct and betray treasonable and atrocious conspiracies. The most notorious of these spies was a man of the name of Oliver, who, giving himself out as a delegate of London reforming societies, succeeded in giving a new impulse to the plots in various parts of the manufacturing districts of Yorkshire, Lancashire and Derbyshire. The violent suppression by the military and constables of a peaceable meeting, known as the meeting of blanketeers, at Manchester on the 29th of March, made the people more ready to listen to his suggestions. The meeting was a peaceful one, and acquired its name from the blankets or coats which many of those assembled had strapped upon their backs. A few of them set out upon a foolish march, intending to petition the Prince Regent in person; but their intentions appear to have been quite peaceful, and though many were apprehended, they were all discharged before trial. It seems probable that what is known as the Derby insurrection was one of the consequences of Oliver's representations. A man of the name of Brandreth, known as "the Captain," went from house to house near Pentridge, spreading such assertions as that England, Ireland, and France were all to rise that night at ten o'clock, and that the "northern clouds," or men from the north, would come down and sweep all before them. A few men collected in arms at his summons. They do not seem ever to have numbered much more than an hundred, and were without difficulty dispersed, and many of them taken prisoners by the military at a short distance from Nottingham. Such disturbances as these were held to justify a second suspension of the Habeas Corpus.

[Sidenote: Suppression of seditious writings.]

[Sidenote: Mr. Hone's trial. Dec. 18, 1817.]

But it was not only against seditious actions that Lord Sidmouth determined to proceed, but against seditious writings also. On the 27th of March he wrote a circular to the Lords Lieutenant of counties, in which he declared that in the opinion of the law officer the justices of the peace might issue a warrant to apprehend any person charged before them on oath with the publication of blasphemous or seditious libels, and compel him to give bail to answer to the charge. Considering the jealousy with which any political interference with the liberty of the press was regarded, and that by Fox's Libel Bill even the judges were held unfit to decide on the character of a libel, which was to be left to the decision of the jury, it is difficult to conceive a more high-handed interference with what was generally regarded as a constitutional privilege. Considerable use was made of the instructions, yet on the whole with so little success that the Government procured but a single conviction. The most important of these trials was that of Mr. Hone, which must have showed the Government, if nothing else could, how odious and useless their attempts to stifle the free expression of opinion was. Hone was a quiet and inoffensive publisher, a great collector and reader of old books. He had published certain political parodies, of which the subject can be pretty well understood from the titles they bore, "The Sinecurist's Creed," "The Litany, or General Supplication." It was against their alleged blasphemous character that proceedings were taken. Each parody was the subject of a separate trial, and the whole proceedings occupied three days. On the first day Mr. Justice Abbott, on the second and third Lord Chief-Justice Ellenborough occupied the bench. Hone defended himself, basing his argument on the essential difference between parodies intended to throw scorn upon the work parodied and those in which well-known writings were travestied for the purpose of ridiculing some other subject, and supporting himself by innumerable instances of political parodies couched in biblical forms coming from the pens of well-known and respected writers. His erudition enabled him to continue for many hours on each day producing instances of this kind. With astonishing firmness he refused to be browbeaten by Lord Ellenborough, and upon the third day even attacked his judge for the partisan spirit in which he had charged the jury the preceding evening. In all three trials, after a brief consideration, the jury acquitted him. The persistency with which the charges against Hone were pressed after his first acquittal entirely discredited the grounds of public morality on which the Government was professedly acting, and had all the appearance of a vindictive desire for revenge on the part of men smarting under deserved political satire.

[Sidenote: The Alien Act. May 5, 1818.]

[Sidenote: The Indemnity Bill. March 13.]

The system pursued by the Tories, though for the time it was successful in keeping up a general dread of popular violence, and thus temporarily hushed the agitation for reform, was gradually alienating from Government all classes but the one immediately connected with it, and forcing the nation at large to look upon Government itself as its natural enemy, and to fix its hopes more and more upon some constitutional change. Indeed, though its large majority in the House enabled the Government to reject all liberal measures, and to pass those which it itself produced, a powerful Opposition began to show itself within the walls of the House, which the conduct of the Administration did not tend to conciliate. The extension of the Alien Act, which reserved to the Government the power of removing aliens who were objects of suspicion, and which had already been twice renewed since the peace, for a further period of two years, was regarded as an attack upon the English right of asylum in favour of the Continental despotisms. It was warmly opposed, and a flaw found in it which secured its rejection. By the Act of Union, shareholders in the Bank of Scotland became naturalized subjects. An alien, by taking shares in the Bank, could therefore evade that Act. A clause was introduced to check this means of evading the Act; but as naturalized subjects had certain exemptions with regard to the payment of duties, the Lower House held that the introduction of the clause was an infringement of their privilege, as being in fact the introduction of a money clause. It had therefore to be dropped and a new Bill introduced. Even an attempt on the part of Government to gain popularity turned to its discredit. A show was made of destroying numerous sinecures; but as this destruction was coupled with a Pension List of an amount almost equal to that of the sinecures destroyed, the trick excited more anger than gratitude among the public. But the great contest of the time was on the subject of the indemnity demanded by the ministry to cover acts done during the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. A sealed bag of papers was laid upon the table of the House, which the Government demanded should be referred to a committee of secresy. The committee was to be appointed by ballot, but lists were circulated among the ministerial majority of the members for whom they should vote; in fact, therefore, the committee was nominated by the Government itself. The report declared that the suspension was necessary, and that the Government had used the powers given them well. But the demand for an indemnity, while the grounds for that indemnity were kept studiously secret and examined only by the Government nominees, for the avowed purpose of keeping from the public the names of the witnesses who had given secret information, increased still further the bad impression which the employment of men like Oliver had already created.

[Sidenote: Condition of the royal family.]

Under other circumstances loyalty for the Crown might have served to lessen the growing division between the Government and the people; the state of the royal family, and the character of most of its members, was now such as to weaken all such feeling. For the old King and Queen there was doubtless respect and pitying affection; but it was known that both the afflicted monarch himself and his faithful wife and guardian might at any moment die. As it was, they lived retired from the public view. The Prince Regent, the ostensible sovereign of the country, was understood to be little more than a selfish voluptuary. His reception on the opening of Parliament of 1817 shows how much he had lost the affections of the people. His unhappy domestic relations, shortly to become the ground of a keen party struggle, not only afforded a perpetual subject of scandal, but seemed to forbid the possibility of a direct male heir to the throne. The people's hopes were centred on the Princess Charlotte, the Regent's only daughter, but lately married to Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, and the blow was felt to be heavy when she died in 1817, immediately after giving birth to a child which did not live. It seemed for the instant highly probable that the large and strong family of the old King would come to an end in the first generation. Before the close of the following year this probability was lessened. No less than four members of the royal family were then married--Princess Elizabeth, the Duke of Clarence, the Duke of Cambridge, and the Duke of Kent, who married respectively the Landgrave of Hesse Homburg, the Princess Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, the Princess Augusta of Hesse, and Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg Saalfield, the widow of the Prince of Leiningen and sister of Prince Leopold. Had the family been at all popular such events, under the circumstances, would certainly have afforded joy to the nation. As it was, they only afforded an opportunity for the expression of a deeply fixed belief in the extravagance and wastefulness of the royal family. Of all the marriages that of the Duke of Kent with a sister of Prince Leopold was alone well received. The demand for an increase of income on behalf of the other princes was strongly resisted in Parliament; the sum proposed for the Duke of Clarence was reduced by nearly half, and a grant of £6000 for the Duke of Cumberland, who had been married three years previously, was absolutely rejected by a majority of six members, a result which was received with loud cheers.

[Sidenote: The ministers' insecurity with the present Parliament.]

The insecurity felt by Government, in spite of its large majority, in the present Parliament betrayed it into conduct which still further increased its unpopularity. The Parliament was now in its sixth session, and therefore approaching its time of dissolution. But several circumstances might call it again into existence. A clause in the Regency Act provided that Parliament should be summoned on the death of the Queen. The ministry had lately got the clause repealed; but the death either of the King or Regent, if happening before the day appointed for the assembling of the new Parliament, would have caused the reassembling of the old. Both King and Queen might die at any moment; nor was the Regent's health good. The dissolution was therefore hurried on in a manner which caused much anger. On the 10th of June Parliament was prorogued and dissolved at the same time, a form of proceeding unprecedented since the days of Charles II. The temper of the country was not improved by this step, and the elections were attended with the bitterest party strife. In Westminster Sir George Murray, who stood on the Tory interest to replace if possible Lord Cochrane, who had withdrawn to take command of the navies of Chili, was so ill-used that his life was thought to be in danger. Several Radical candidates offered themselves, among others Hunt the orator; but the more respectable inhabitants contrived to save themselves from the disgrace of such representatives by bringing in Romilly, without any expense of his own, at the head of the poll. The other member was Sir Francis Burdett. In the same way the City of London elected four Liberals, rejecting three old ministerial representatives. This clearly showed the rising temper of the middle classes. But as the representation was then arranged no great change was possible, and the ministers found themselves still in possession of a large majority (July).

[Sidenote: Evacuation of France by the allies. Nov. 30, 1818.]

Before the assembling of the new Parliament (Jan. 14, 1819) one piece of foreign history deserves notice. A congress was held at Aix-la-Chapelle (Oct. 2, 1818), at which the final evacuation of France by the allies, although only three of the five years stipulated were accomplished, was agreed upon. This wise and just act seems to have been chiefly due to the Duke of Wellington, in opposition to some of the extreme Tories of the Cabinet.

[Sidenote: Resumption of cash payments. May 1819.]

In spite of their parliamentary majority, the ministry did not feel very secure upon their seats, and it was perhaps more with a view of re-establishing their credit with the country than from increased wisdom that the Cabinet so far changed its views with regard to the currency question as to accept the truth of the doctrines which Francis Horner had some years (1811) before laid down, and introduced a measure in accordance with the plans of Ricardo, the political economist, for the resumption of cash payments. The Bank had already issued a considerable quantity of gold. Since 1817 as much as £6,000,000 had been put into circulation, but as the paper money still continued, as a matter of course this partial action produced no good effect; the gold had found its way out of the country, chiefly to France. It was now ordered that this voluntary payment in gold should cease. An examination of the affairs of the Bank proved that it was in excellent condition, and a series of resolutions were passed and subsequently embodied in Bills by Mr. Peel. By these, from the 1st of February 1820, the Bank was obliged to exchange its notes for gold ingots, in not less quantity than sixty ounces, at the rate of 81s. the ounce; in October of the same year the rate was to be reduced to 79s. 6d. the ounce; on the 1st of May 1822 the rate was reduced to the regular mint price of £3, 17s. 10½d.; and in May 1823 all notes were to be paid on demand in legal coin. As a fact, on the 1st of May 1821 the Bank resumed complete payment in cash.

[Sidenote: Foreign Enlistment Bill.]

[Sidenote: Catholic emancipation rejected. May 3.]

[Sidenote: Reform of Scotch burghs. May 6.]

Several divisions in Parliament clearly showed the growing weakness of Government. The Foreign Enlistment Bill, to prevent English subjects from serving in a foreign service or fitting out ships of war for foreign countries, was carried by a majority of thirteen only, the ground of opposition being that the Bill was in fact directed to the injury of the revolted colonies of Spain in America, in whose ranks many Englishmen were serving. Like the Alien Act of the preceding session, the Bill was considered as a proof of that legitimist and absolute tendency of which the Government was accused. Again, in the great question of Catholic emancipation, which was brought forward by Grattan in the best speech he ever made in the House, the Government were victorious by a majority of two only in a very full House; while it was actually defeated by a majority of five on the question of the reform of Scotch burghs, which it had got rid of in the last session. The system in those burghs had been in existence ever since the fifteenth century, and so acted as to perpetuate the administration in the hands of one party, often of one family only, as the retiring members of the corporation had the right of electing their own successors. For years the burghs had been bent upon ridding themselves of this exclusive government; as in the case of other reforms, their efforts had passed out of sight during the tumult of the French wars, again to be called into existence on the resumption of peace. In 1817 certain irregularities of form in the burgh of Montrose had caused the elections to be set aside by the law courts. The Crown had been compelled to give a new charter, in which a certain popular element was admitted. Other burghs at once began to clamour for similar changes. To their petitions, however, the Government turned a deaf ear. When the elections in Aberdeen were quashed by the law courts, as those at Montrose had been, the old constitution had been re-established, and Lord Archibald Hamilton now took up the cause of the burghs. He demanded a copy of the new warrant, and was defeated by five only. Pressing his success, he demanded that the petitions of the burghs should be referred to a select committee. A large majority of the burghs themselves were loudly calling for reform. The population of those who desired it amounted to 420,000, as opposed to 60,000, the population of those who had not petitioned. The proof of the wish of the people most interested was too strong for the House; in spite of the Government opposition, Lord Archibald's motion was carried in a House of nearly 300 by a majority of five. As the ground of opposition had been avowedly that a change in the burghs was but the beginning of parliamentary reform, this victory shows how the opposition to that measure was gradually breaking down.

[Sidenote: Chronic sufferings of the poor.]

In spite of these signs of weakness, the ministers were upon the whole well satisfied with the session. They believed in the success of their repressive measures in the year 1817, and thought that the state of the country was both quieter and more prosperous than it had been. Complaints of the depression of agriculture, and poverty and suffering among the agricultural poor, were indeed chronic; they depended upon causes over which the immediate action of Government had little control. Exaggerated rents were seeking their natural level; over-cultivation, especially of corn, was giving place to more rational agriculture, and the enormous prosperity enjoyed by the agriculturists during the war was shrinking to modest and hard-won profits; the change could not but be attended with some depression and many painful contrasts. At the same time the action of the Poor Law as then administered, the injudicious fostering of the population which had gone on during the war, and the law of settlement which prevented free competition of labour, of necessity caused misery among the labourers. It was when the manufacturing and mercantile interests were also touched, when, under the action of restrictive corn laws, prices rose, while work was not to be had, that the social dangers of the country became from time to time great.

[Sidenote: Political meetings.]

[Sidenote: The Manchester Massacre. Aug. 16, 1819.]

The prosperity of the year 1818 had been rather apparent than real; there had been much over-trading; a more healthy spirit appears to have arisen in the beginning of 1819, but the effects of the preceding folly were now to be felt. In the first half of the year the number of bankruptcies were almost double the average, the price of corn was still as high as 75s., work was scarce, and wages fell, and before the year was over the ministry found upon their hand difficulties even greater than those they had experienced in the gloomy year of 1817. For again the political question was ready to start to life, again leaders of a higher class were ready to take advantage of the sufferings of the people, and men of more extreme views among themselves were eager to lead them into desperate and revolutionary designs. There had been great meetings near Leeds, Glasgow, and at Ashton-under-Lyne, in June. On the 28th of that month, Sir Charles Wolseley and the Rev. Joseph Harrison had made violent speeches at a great assembly at Stockport, and Sir Charles had been elected the "legislatorial representative" for Birmingham. At the same time the reformers were found to be engaged in drilling. No arms were seen, and it is asserted by one of their leaders that the only object of their drilling was to secure order and regularity and the better appearance at a forthcoming great meeting at Manchester. On the other hand, it was held by those who dreaded popular movements that the drilling had been long and secretly continued, and was a part of a great plan for an exhibition of physical force. The object of the Manchester meeting, which was to be held on the 9th of August, was to choose a representative as Birmingham had already done. The meeting was declared illegal; a requisition was therefore sent to the proper officials, begging them to call it legally. On their refusal, it was determined to hold it, legal or not, on the 16th, in St. Peter's Field. Thither, on the day appointed, large bodies of men, well dressed and without arms, but in something like military array, marched from all the neighbouring towns, and collected round a hustings, from which Hunt was to address them. Their number perhaps amounted to about 80,000, all pressed together in a space of not more than three acres. The magistrates had formed no very definite notion of what to do. They had assembled a considerable military force, of which a troop of Manchester yeomen about forty strong and six troops of the 15th Hussars formed a part. A warrant was out against Hunt, and with extreme imprudence it was determined to execute it while he was on the hustings, as had been done in the case of Harrison on a previous occasion. Just as Hunt was beginning to speak, a strange pressure made itself visible to the crowd. The magistrates had come to a house overlooking the field; they had intrusted their warrant to the chief constable; he had declared he could not execute it without military aid, and the yeomen had pressed into the crowded space. As was natural, they had been separated and brought to a complete standstill. Upon this the magistrates seem to have lost their presence of mind, to have believed that the yeomanry were in danger, and to have ordered the 15th Hussars to extricate them. The consequence was a fearful charge, which swept everything before it, and, as one of the officers says, "by the time they had reached the other side of the field the fugitives were literally piled up to a considerable elevation above the level of the ground." The effect of the panic on so closely-packed a multitude, among whom the soldiers were using the sword, sometimes the flat and sometimes the edge, was fearful; about thirty wounded persons were carried to the infirmary, and forty more found their own way there in the course of the day. The actual wounds given by the soldiers do not appear to have been very many. Hunt and some of his followers were apprehended; the charge of high treason against them was subsequently dropped, and they were obliged to find bail to stand their trial for misdemeanour.

[Sidenote: Culpability of the Government.]

[Sidenote: The Six Acts.]

The Manchester Massacre, as it was called, was the result of accident and the bad management of the magistrates, but the Government seemed to make the act entirely their own when they lavished approbation on the conduct of the authorities, and when they induced the Prince Regent himself to write an approving letter. As usual in England, the employment of the military except in the very last necessity excited the anger of very many even of the wealthier classes. Among those who had suffered from it its effect was simply to exasperate; for the time the temper of the people seems to have been really dangerous. The point, on the other hand, which struck the ministerialists was the weakness of the existing laws for the suppression of sedition, and in accordance with their view it was thought necessary to hold an autumnal session, which met on the 23rd of November, and which passed by large majorities a series of enactments known as "The Six Acts." These were respectively entitled, "An Act to prevent delay in the administration of justice in cases of misdemeanour;" "An Act to prevent the training of persons in the use of arms and the practice of military evolutions;" "An Act for the prevention and punishment of blasphemous and seditious libels;" "An Act to authorize justices of the peace, in certain disturbed counties, to seize and detain arms;" "An Act to subject certain publications to the duties of stamps upon newspapers, and to make other regulations for restraining the abuses arising from the publication of blasphemous and seditious libels;" and "An Act for preventing the assembling of seditious assemblies." Having passed these repressive measures, the Parliament was again prorogued (Dec. 29) till February 1820. In the interval, on the 29th of January, the old King died, in his eighty-second year.

GEORGE IV.

1820-1830.

Born 1762 = Caroline of Brunswick, 1795. | Charlotte = Leopold of Saxe-Coburg. Born 1796. Died 1817.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

France. | Austria. | Spain. Louis XVIII., 1814 | Francis II., 1792. | Ferdinand VII., 1813. Charles X., 1824. | |

Prussia. | Russia. Frederick William III., 1797. | Alexander I., 1801. | Nicholas, 1825.

Denmark. | Sweden. Frederick VI., 1808. | Charles XIV., 1818.

POPES.--Pius VII., 1800. Leo XII., 1823. Pius VIII., 1829.

Lord Chancellors. | First Lords of the Treasury. April 1807. Eldon. | Jan. 1812. Liverpool. April 1827. Lyndhurst. | April 1827. Canning. | Aug. 1827. Goderich. | Jan. 1828. Wellington.

Chancellors of the Exchequer. Jan. 1812. Vansittart. Jan. 1823. Robinson. April 1827. Canning. Aug. 1827. Herries. Jan. 1828. Goulburn.

Secretaries (Foreign and Home). June 1812 { Castlereagh. { Sidmouth.

Jan. 1822 { Castlereagh. { Peel.

Sept. 1822 { Canning. { Peel.

April 1827 { Dudley. { Sturges-Bourne.

Aug. 1827 { Dudley. { Lansdowne.

Jan. 1828 { Dudley. { Peel.

May 1828 { Aberdeen. { Peel.

[Sidenote: Precarious position of the ministry.]

It was no longer as Regent but as King that George, the new monarch, met the Parliament on its reassembling. He had so long acted virtually as sovereign that scarcely any visible effect was produced by the change. Yet during the first days there was considerable probability that the change of reign would be marked by a change of ministry, for there were two questions on which the ministers felt it their duty to oppose the new King--the one an increase of his private revenue, the other the divorce of his unfortunate wife. On the latter point, unfortunately for themselves, they were induced to make a compromise, believing that they were acting safely. Extremely anxious to avoid a public scandal, they refused at first to move in the matter of the divorce as long as the Queen remained quietly abroad, but promised to gratify the King's wishes should she make her appearance in England. On these terms they remained in office.

[Sidenote: Cato Street conspiracy. Feb. 23, 1820.]

But, at the very time that their position as ministers was in danger, their lives were threatened by a conspiracy which in its atrocity and feebleness gives a fair measure of the power and intentions of the worst part of those engaged in the agitations of the day. As in the case of the Derby insurrection, it is impossible to acquit the authorities of the guilt of having employed spies who, though probably without Government authority, did in fact aggravate the crime of the conspirators. Information was given as early as November by a man named Edwards of a plot against the lives of the ministers, and from that time till the day of the explosion of the Cato Street conspiracy he continued to play the double part of conspirator and police agent. The form the plot ultimately assumed was the murder of all the ministers in a body at a Cabinet dinner, which Edwards informed the conspirators was to be held at Lord Harrowby's on the 23rd of February. The assassination was to be followed up by an attempt to fire the barracks, and to rouse the people to an assault upon the Bank and the Tower. As the ministry were well informed of the plot, the dinner was of course postponed. The guests arriving at the house of the Archbishop of Canterbury, who was giving a dinner-party that day, and who lived next door to Lord Harrowby, prevented the conspirators from discovering the postponement of the ministerial meeting; and they were arming themselves in a stable in Cato Street, near Edgeware Road, when the police came upon them. The capture was badly managed; the first officer who entered the room was stabbed, and in the confusion Thistlewood (already mentioned as the confederate of the Watsons), who was the soul of the present conspiracy, with fourteen others, contrived to escape; the rest, nine in number, were apprehended when the soldiers, who should have accompanied the police, arrived. Early the next morning, however, Thistlewood was captured. He and four others were executed, and five more transported for life. The terror excited throughout England was strangely exaggerated; the design appears to have been confined entirely to a few desperate men, and to have been scouted by all the more earnest Radicals to whom it had been suggested. About the same time the other prisoners, Hunt and his friends from Manchester (April), Wolseley and Harrison from Stockport (July), were tried, and sentenced to various periods of imprisonment. One advantage at least came from the trials; the true character of Hunt was discovered, his friends and companions learnt the worthlessness and egregious vanity of the man, and his influence was entirely destroyed.

[Sidenote: Importance of the Queen's trial.]

The Parliament had assembled, according to law, upon the demise of the King, and after going through the necessary business, was dissolved. In April the new Parliament met. But any interest which might otherwise have attended its labours disappeared before the absorbing interest of the year, the trial of the Queen. Though in itself wholly unconnected with politics, no event produced a stronger influence on the course of political growth. The loyalty of the country, and respect for authority and for the established powers, received a rude shock. It could not be otherwise when the people saw a ministry, many of whose severest and most unpopular measures had been based on the specious ground of the desire to maintain morality, forcing into public notice scandalous details, which the papers spread to every corner of the country for the satisfaction of prurient curiosity; when they saw the sovereign having recourse to all the foul and mean resources of the private inquiry office, which fill right-minded men with disgust even in the cases of private individuals, and the Government lending the whole weight of its authority to the vindictive prosecution of an unfortunate and ill-used woman. The effect was a complete severance between the Government and the more liberal-minded of the middle classes, whom fear of popular extravagances had hitherto united with it, and from the close of this trial may be dated the serious determination of the people at large to insist upon some great measure of reform.

[Sidenote: Position of the Queen.]

[Sidenote: Trial of the Queen. Aug. 17.]

Whatever may have been her folly or her guilt, no one can question the misfortune of the Queen. Giddy by nature and badly educated, she had been forced (1795) against her will upon a man whose immoral and selfish character wholly unfitted him for the difficult position of a husband of a frivolous and unwise wife. His distaste had been exhibited at their very first meeting, and he could only force himself to assume a gracious demeanour by having recourse to wine or spirits. From the very first he seems to have designed to part from her; she was early sent into a sort of banishment at Blackheath, a watch was set upon her conduct, an investigation before the Lords was set on foot, and though declared innocent of any grave offence, disgusted at such treatment, she unwisely withdrew abroad in 1814. She was followed in her retirement, by the advice of Sir John Leach, by emissaries to collect evidence against her, unknown to herself. It would have been wise had she remained abroad, but the treatment she had received rendered her desperate; she had been excluded from foreign courts, and when her husband came to the throne her name was omitted from the Liturgy. It seems to have been this last insult which roused her to action. In June she came to England, and was received with enthusiasm by the people, who regarded her as a persecuted woman. She thus placed the ministers in the awkward position of being obliged to fulfil the compromise under which they had retained office and to proceed to extremities against her. On the 6th of June the King sent a message to the Lords, ordering them to institute an inquiry into the Queen's conduct, and proofs were laid on the table. On the following day, Mr. Brougham, who undertook the management of her case as her Attorney-General, read a letter to the Commons demanding a public inquiry. Some efforts were made to effect a compromise, but as the King refused to demand her reception abroad or to insert her name in the Liturgy, all negotiations failed. The secret committee of the Lords therefore proceeded to make its report, declaring that a solemn inquiry was necessary; and Lord Liverpool shocked public feeling by introducing, for the purpose of producing such an inquiry, a Bill of pains and penalties to deprive her Majesty of her position as Queen, and to dissolve the King's marriage. The trial in fact came on with the second reading of the Bill, when the charges against the Queen were stated before the Lords; and for nearly a month the House was occupied in hearing witness. By this time the feeling in England was strongly excited. The ministers were insulted whenever they appeared abroad, and every opportunity was taken by the crowd of showing their sympathy with the Queen. The question had become in fact a political one, and the Queen lent herself only too readily to a somewhat ostentatious display of her sufferings. In October the defence commenced, and at length, on the 6th of November, the second reading of the Bill was passed by a majority of twenty-eight. Two days afterwards, on the third reading, there was a majority of only nine. As this was in the House of Lords, where the ministers were strongest, they saw it was useless to persevere, and Lord Liverpool declared that the Bill was abandoned. A burst of joy was heard throughout the country, for three nights London was illuminated, even Prince Leopold joining in the rejoicings. Declining all offers from the Government, the Queen placed her cause in the hands of the Commons. An annuity of £50,000 was given her the following session. But she was determined upon some more public announcement of her innocence; she still tried, though in vain, to secure the introduction of her name in the Liturgy, and was foolish enough on the occasion of the coronation in July of 1810 the following year to attempt to force her way into the Abbey. She had already begun to lose the sympathy of the people when, in August, she died.

[Sidenote: Consequent alienation between the ministry and people.]

However right it may have been to raise the question of the Queen's guilt, there was a general feeling that the ministers had at all events mismanaged the question, and after exciting strongly the temper of the people, had dropped their Bill without excuse or apology. Advantage was taken of the popular anger, excited by what was thought an act of oppression, to give currency to all sorts of charges against the ministry, and to impute to them unconstitutional principles, and connivance or even approbation of scandalous conspiracies against the Queen's character, of which they were certainly guiltless. But, before all, the late events had given a popular rallying-point for all sections of the Opposition, and had demonstrated how deep was the alienation between the ministry and the body of the people. It is from this time that we find serious and sometimes successful efforts made to begin the work of reform, which it was believed would render such an alienation impossible. Although, as was to be expected in a House elected under the old system, any wide measure, such as that produced by Lambton (subsequently Lord Durham, April 1821), recommending equal electoral districts, was sure to be defeated by a large majority, Lord John Russell succeeded in procuring the disfranchisement of Grampound, a notoriously corrupt borough in Cornwall (May 30). He and his friends were wise enough to accept this small beginning, even though his Bill was changed in the Upper House, where the vacant seat was transferred, not to one of the great unrepresented cities, as would have been just, but to the county of York. In the same way the great question of Catholic disabilities was brought forward with renewed strength. Those who were in favour of their removal were successful in the Lower House, and the Bill was only lost after passing through most of its stages in the Lords.

[Sidenote: Peel joins the ministry.]

[Sidenote: Death of Castlereagh. Canning Secretary of State. Sept. 11, 1822.]

So shaken indeed was the predominance of the extreme Tory party, that in the year 1821 they found it necessary to strengthen themselves by a coalition with the Conservative section of the Opposition, hoping by this means to give a more broad and liberal appearance to the administration. Lord Grenville himself declined office, but several of his followers were admitted to the ministry, while a still further improvement was made by the retirement of Lord Sidmouth, who had played so prominent a part in all the late repressive measures, and the substitution in his place of Mr. Peel, as yet Tory in his views, but capable, as was subsequently proved, of constant advance, and of an intellect so clear and sensible as to be able to learn, as his predecessor never could, the growing requirements of the time. At the same time Lord Wellesley was sent as Lord-Lieutenant to Ireland, with Mr. Plunkett as his Attorney-General, both of them supporters of the Catholic claims; and although Wellesley's statesmanlike character and moderation excited the anger of extreme men on both sides, the mere fact of such a man being placed at the head of the Irish Government was a clear mark of the relaxation of the principles of the Tory system. These new appointments were but the beginning, to be followed in a few months by other changes far more important, which were to effect an entire alteration in the position which England occupied in Europe, and in the principles which governed her financial policy. These changes were the admission, in 1822 and 1823, of Mr. Canning and Mr. Huskisson to the ministry. Throughout the trial of Queen Caroline, Canning had held himself studiously aloof. He had been early one of the Queen's advisers, had declared from the first his intention to avoid any participation in her trial, and had in fact remained abroad during its continuance. On his return in December, thinking it impossible for a minister to be entirely absent from his duties, but determined to take no part in the discussions on the trial which were inevitable, he insisted on resigning his place at the Board of Trade. He was therefore at first excluded from the new ministerial arrangements. The India Company indeed had decided upon sending him as Governor-General to India. His preparations for taking the post were being made, and he was at Liverpool on a farewell visit to his constituents, when a piece of news was heard which caused a profound movement both at home and abroad,--Lord Castlereagh, now become Lord Londonderry, had committed suicide. The man who was regarded as the real soul of the Tory party, as the type of the arbitrary and absolutist temper which distinguished it, had passed away. Honourable and amiable in his private life, he had contrived to render himself so unpopular that the news of his death was received with unseemly rejoicings, and his coffin was followed to the Abbey with shouts of gladness from his enemies. Europe was in a critical condition. Lord Londonderry had been in the act of going to an European Congress held at Verona. Canning appeared to be the only man fitted to supply his place. When asked to join the ministry as Secretary of State for foreign affairs, after some consideration, he threw up the great post for which he was at the moment destined, and accepted the office.

[Sidenote: Retrospect of the affairs of Europe.]

[Sidenote: Position of England abroad.]

To understand the importance of this change it is necessary to say a few words on what had passed in Europe since the Peace. The hopes of the liberal party in Europe had received a heavy blow at the Congress of Vienna. England had so constantly put herself forward as the champion of freedom, and her influence had been so preponderating in the late events of the war, that she was expected to have taken up strong ground in the settlement of Europe, and to have demanded and secured some sort of popular rights in the countries to which her assistance had been given. The nation had shown itself so full of resources, and had been so exceptional in the success of its opposition to Napoleon, that a general belief had arisen that there was something peculiarly excellent in the character of its constitution. So strong was this feeling, that many of the sovereigns of Europe promised constitutions to their people. It was forgotten that the freedom for which England had been fighting meant deliverance from external conquest, and had no connection with the internal freedom of national constitutions, that, on the contrary, the war against France had been originally undertaken, if not ostensibly yet really, to oppose the revolutionary temper of France. It was a severe disappointment when the English minister was seen joining with Talleyrand in upholding legitimacy, and for the sake of that principle, and to preserve in its old lines the balance of European power, himself demanding the destruction of the liberty of Belgium and of Genoa, and calmly acquiescing in the absorption of much of Saxony, the final division of Poland, and the destruction of Norway. Even the one constitutional effort which was made, the establishment of a limited monarchy in France, was rendered nugatory by the fact, that the privileges were given as a grant and charter from the crown, and the first principle of the English Constitution--that power is from the people--ignored.

[Sidenote: Effect of Castlereagh's policy.]

But though in the general triumph of the moment his foreign policy was accepted and even approved, it will be remembered that even Castlereagh felt himself compelled to respect public opinion at home and to hold aloof from the Holy Alliance, which seemed to assert the unity of interests of the crowned heads and their sole right, as of divine origin, to be the governors of the world. It was the extension of the principles of the Holy Alliance which had produced the present critical state of Europe, with which his moderate abilities, his natural tendency towards repressive government, aggravated by domestic affairs, and the entanglements in which his policy at the Vienna Treaty had involved him, rendered Castlereagh unable to cope. It was no use to ignore the fact that the French Revolution had given a great impulse to the ideas of constitutional freedom. Even the conquests of Napoleon, followed as they always were by democratic changes, had fostered these ideas in the very countries which had suffered most from them; and when it appeared that all hopes and promises of freedom were entirely illusory, insurrections of the deceived people burst out in several parts of Europe, and where the strength of the government rendered such outbreaks impossible, secret societies, more dangerous and extravagant because they were secret, sprang everywhere into existence.

[Sidenote: Insurrection in Spain. 1820.]

[Sidenote: Insurrection in Portugal.]

[Sidenote: Insurrection in Naples.]

The first outbreak was in Spain, where Ferdinand had entirely refused the constitution to which he was pledged, and had shown his character by directing his vengeance chiefly against those very men who had been most prominent in saving his kingdom from the French. During the occupation of Spain by the French, when the central authority of the mother country was virtually destroyed, the South American colonies had, one after the other, thrown off their allegiance, and were still engaged in making good their independence. It was an army collected at Cadiz for the purpose of reducing the victorious colonies which set the example of insurrection. It mutinied in the beginning of the year 1820, and was so successful that the King was compelled, on the 7th of March, to accept the constitution of 1812, which had been drawn up under the influence of Napoleonic and American ideas. In August the constitutional spirit passed to Portugal. Since the departure of the royal family from Lisbon in 1808, the King had not returned to his European dominions. Brazil became the seat of government, the restrictions formerly put upon its trade were removed, it was elevated nominally to the rank of a kingdom, and Portugal seemed to occupy the position of a colony of its former dependency. The discontent which had thus been fostered displayed itself in August, when national Juntas were established both in Oporto and Lisbon; subsequently, on the 1st of October, the provincial assembly coalesced with that of the capital, and the regency was compelled to resign its functions. When at length in the following spring the King set out for his continental dominions, it was a question whether he would arrive in time to save them. Almost at the same time similar events took place in Naples. Ferdinand IV. could not entirely disregard popular wishes and rule despotically, as his nephew in Spain had done, for the longer and more complete hold which Murat, Napoleon's nominee, had obtained upon the throne had given time for ideas of constitutional government to become prevalent, and the army was full of Napoleonic soldiers. But in spite of the comparative liberality of his government, Ferdinand's army was full of discontented soldiers, and the secret and revolutionary societies of the Carbonari undermined society. At the same time, in the island of Sicily a constitution had been established under the influence of Lord William Bentinck, and had been swept away on the restoration. In July the garrison at Nola mutinied, and before a week was over the King was obliged to accept the Spanish constitution, which had become the formula of the Liberal party, although there was actually no copy of that document to be found, and no one in fact knew anything about it. Sicily soon followed Naples; but recollections of its old independence prevented it at first from joining the revolutionary government of the mainland, and its complete acquiescence in the movement had to be secured by force of arms.

[Sidenote: Arbitrary action of the Holy Alliance.]

[Sidenote: England refuses to join.]

[Sidenote: Popular anger at Castlereagh's weak policy. 1821.]

It was in presence of these disturbances that the true principles of the Holy Alliance began to show themselves. The three Eastern powers seemed to consider themselves authorized to introduce into Europe a new form of international law. Regarding themselves as the only legitimate and divinely appointed powers, and holding themselves pledged to mutual support against their enemies, and having declared their intention to act as a brotherhood in international questions, they appear to have believed that the enemies against whom their mutual assistance was required were all those who resisted established authority, and that any disturbances thus arising ought to be regulated by European congresses. In other words, they arrogated to themselves, for the sake of suppressing what they considered revolutionary movements, the right of federative action in the cause of legitimacy and absolutism. Already, at Vienna and Aix-la-Chapelle, they had acted more or less on this principle, and now they summoned a similar Congress at Troppau (1820). It was impossible for an English minister to accede to this new doctrine, however much he may have had at heart the cause which the allied sovereigns were supporting, and Lord Castlereagh, as early as April, declared that the alliance to which England was a party existed for particular cases only, and was not to be generalized as the Eastern sovereigns appeared to wish to generalize it. It shows how the position of England had sunk under Castlereagh's management, that the monarchs determined to act without England, and it shows the weakness of Castlereagh's mode of action that he allowed, under these circumstances, an English minister to be present at the meeting, not to take part in the discussions, but merely to report their progress to his Government. The Holy Alliance proceeded to act upon its own principles. In November the English minister learnt that the three powers intended to join and to act in common for the restoration of Ferdinand of Naples, whom they had invited to meet them at Laibach, whither the Congress was adjourned. Early in December 1820 a circular to that effect was issued in the name of the three sovereigns, which, in spite of what Castlereagh had said, proceeded to declare that, as what they were now doing was in accordance with the late treaties, they felt no doubt of the adhesion of France and England. On the 19th of that month, without knowledge of this circular, Castlereagh wrote an explicit declaration that England would not join in any united action. Had he openly declared this intention and withdrawn the English ambassador he would not have acted otherwise than as became an English minister. But on the 19th of January 1821 a letter of Castlereagh's, purporting to be an answer to the circular of December 8th, which had been published by some indiscretion in the public prints, while reasserting the position he had taken up in his previous declaration, went on to confess that the Government had looked with the strongest disapproval on the insurrection in Naples. This weak document, coming as it did just before the meeting of Parliament, after the popular temper had been roused by the knowledge of the arrogant circular of December, and taken in connection with the facts that diplomatic relations had not been renewed with the constitutional Government of Naples, and that an English fleet was cruising off the coast, seemed to show that the minister's heart was really with the sovereigns, and that his letter was only written to suit party purposes in England. At the opening of Parliament (Jan. 23, 1821) the Government had to withstand the most bitter assaults from the Opposition, headed by Lords Grey and Holland in the Lords, by Mackintosh, Brougham, and Tierney in the Lower House, and although a public vote of censure, considering the constitution of the House, was out of the question, it was plain that the feeling of all parties was strong against the action of the Holy Alliance. The attacks on the minister were still continuing when the uselessness of English interference was demonstrated by the entrance of an Austrian army into Italy, by which the revolution was summarily suppressed.

[Sidenote: Insurrection in Greece. March 1821.]

It was not only in the West of Europe that difficulties arose. The Christian populations under the power of the Ottoman Porte rose in insurrection. They naturally looked, as they have always looked, to the Czar for protection. Their method of proceeding was closely analogous to that of the revolutionists in the rest of Europe; and in Greece, as in Italy, secret societies were organized against the existing powers. It has always been a part of Russian policy to secure as much influence in Turkey as possible. On the other hand, it was impossible for the English, at that time in constant diplomatic rivalry with Russia, to wish to see that power in possession of Constantinople or the Black Sea. In the affairs of Greece therefore a complete inversion of the principles which had been predominant at the Congress of Troppau was visible. The interests of Russia demanded that she should assist a revolutionary movement backed up by secret societies and directed against a legitimate sovereign, while England felt itself compelled to allege the doctrines of legitimacy and to call to its aid old alliances in order to shelter Turkey. The difficulty was so great that it was determined that this question also should be referred to a Congress, which was held first at Vienna, and subsequently moved to Verona.

[Sidenote: Complications between France and Spain. 1821.]

[Sidenote: Congress at Verona. Sept. 1822.]

But meanwhile fresh complications had arisen in the West. A terrible visitation of the yellow fever had come upon Spain. Under pretext of excluding the infection from their own country, the French had massed troops along the borders; but it soon became evident that something beyond sanitary precautions had inspired this movement. When the illness disappeared there was still an army of 100,000 men lying within reach of the Pyrenees. In fact, the Legitimists of France had seen with extreme dislike the revolution in Spain; it was political infection they were chiefly anxious to avoid, and the more advanced members of that party, which had a large majority in the French Houses, were thinking of the invasion of Spain, and the re-establishment by force of arms of the absolutist rule of Ferdinand. Lord Londonderry was preparing to attend the Congress at Verona when his health and reason gave way and he committed suicide. In his place the Duke of Wellington attended the Congress, and was somewhat surprised to find that, instead of the Greek question, the real point at issue was the demand of France for a joint action on the part of the Legitimist Courts of Europe to suppress the revolution in Spain.

[Sidenote: Object of Canning's policy.]

It was to the management of this difficult affair that Canning was called. It cannot be said that he introduced a new system into our diplomacy. He had been a party to some of the declarations of his predecessor, and had accepted the responsibility of them. In fact, as has been seen in his public despatches, Castlereagh had already declared the impossibility of English co-operation in any general scheme of repressive action on the Continent, and his dislike to the government of Europe by congresses. It is the way in which Canning acted up to and rendered practical those declarations which makes it possible to say that his accession to office was an era in English politics. His instructions to Wellington were clear and precise. If a declaration of any such determination--that is, of joint action--should be made at Verona, come what might the Duke was to refuse the King's consent to become a party to it, even though the dissolution of the alliance should be the consequence of his refusal. Canning's object was to secure European peace and to allow nations freedom of choice as to their own government--to re-establish, in fact, in England and throughout Europe a policy based upon national grounds, as distinguished from that system of united and general policy by means of European congresses under which Europe since the peace had been labouring.

[Sidenote: Partial success of Canning's diplomacy in Spain.]

In the first of his objects Canning was partially successful. The distinct refusal of Wellington to join in united action, and his subsequent withdrawal from the Congress, prevented a general European attack upon Spain. He could not entirely prevent the war, but he succeeded in reducing it to the dimensions of a national war. He used his best endeavours to persuade France not to attack Spain. He declared that the free institutions of the Spanish people could not, as the French King had asserted, be only held legitimately from the spontaneous gift of the sovereign; the Spanish nation could not be expected to subscribe to that principle, nor could any British statesman uphold or defend it; it was in fact a principle that struck at the root of the British Constitution. In his eagerness to avert hostilities he even entreated the Spaniards to make changes in their constitution. His efforts on both sides were vain. The French invaded Spain; on the 2nd of May 1823 they entered Madrid; on the 1st of October Cadiz was surrendered, and Ferdinand and his absolute government were re-established. But in the matter of English interests Canning declared himself plainly. Portugal might be involved, and an effort might be made by Spain, with the assistance of France, to reconquer her colonies. Should Portugal join with Spain voluntarily, England would take no notice; but if that country were invaded, England would of necessity come to the assistance of her old ally. With regard to the colonies he took a similar ground. They were virtually independent; during the contest, true to his principle of neutrality, he had abetted Government in preventing Englishmen from joining the insurgents; but the trade with the colonies being now open, the interests of England were so involved with their independence that he would not allow any foreign nation to join in reconquering them; if Spain was itself unable to subdue them, no foreign country, he declared, should subdue them for her. He followed up this policy by declaring that he would send English consuls to protect British trade, and their appointment was in fact the recognition of the independence of the colonies.

The new minister's conduct at the negotiations at Verona was subjected to warm discussion at the beginning of the year 1823. The firm attitude of neutrality which he had taken up did not satisfy the aspirations of those who looked upon his accession to office as the triumph of the Whig party. But his vindication was so complete that, upon the division, the opinion of the House appeared to be quite unanimous. The Opposition was only twenty in a House of 372, and of those twenty some were professed ministerialists, who had been shut out from voting by the crowd of their own adherents.

[Sidenote: Change in commercial policy effected by Huskisson.]

But it was not only in our foreign policy that a change of spirit now became obvious. In the winter of 1823, a few months after the accession of Canning to office, further changes took place in the ministry. Mr. Vansittart resigned the place of Chancellor of the Exchequer, for which he was very unfit, and went into the Upper House as Lord Bexley. Mr. Robinson (afterwards Lord Goderich) succeeded him, and, much more important, Mr. Huskisson was in January made President of the Board of Trade, and with him a complete alteration came over our commercial policy, and the reign of restriction began to give way and yield place to free trade. The questions at issue had not yet become party tests, as they subsequently were, and Huskisson, as member of a Tory ministry, was able by his comprehension of the true principles of trade to set on foot a new system without separating from his colleagues.

[Sidenote: Financial condition of England.]

The expenses of the war had been enormous, perhaps inevitably so, and the taxes were proportionately heavy. During the last year of the war in taxes and loans upwards of £170,000,000 had been raised. The National Debt amounted to nearly £800,000,000, and to meet the necessities of the moment this had been raised by very expensive methods, so that the nominal sum on which interest was paid was considerably higher than the actual money which had passed into Government hands. Mr. Vansittart, who had had the management of the finances, had no real knowledge of financial principles, and had acted on the simple plan of increasing taxes when more money was necessary, and supplying the deficit by loans contracted in an extravagant fashion, or taken from the sinking fund. He did not see that doubling a tax by no means doubled the returns from it, as it inevitably compelled some people, and those the most numerous and poorest, to surrender the taxed article; and in common with many people at the time, he believed in the magical effect of the sinking fund, although the sum yearly paid to it was derived from loans contracted at considerably higher interest than the fund itself bore. The sinking fund indeed had, in the hands of the present Government, almost lost its original object, and was openly declared both by Vansittart and Castlereagh to be chiefly useful for supplying the ministry with an easy means of getting money to meet emergencies, instead of a sacred deposit to be used only for the extinction of debt. The ease with which all money demands of Government were granted during the war had also engendered a spirit of extravagance, and economy had been one of the earliest cries of the Opposition on the resumption of peace. At first the support of the large standing army which still remained on foot, and other expenses which were regarded as necessary, had apparently prevented any relaxation of taxes, but by degrees the universal discontent excited by their pressure had compelled Government to grant some relief, and a certain number of taxes had been taken off or reduced.

[Sidenote: The resources of the country restricted by protective laws.]

But all this time the real resources of England, the development of which would have largely increased the revenue, and at the same time have admitted of large decrease of taxation, had been restricted by unwise commercial legislation, having its origin in distant times and in a different state of society. The interests of the landowners and agriculturists were so closely connected with the predominance of the Tory party, and they had played so large a part in the conduct of England of late years, that the agriculturists had succeeded in making good the advantages of their class to the detriment of all others. They claimed nothing less than the exclusive right of supplying the whole nation with food, and by their clamour and influence in the House of Commons had succeeded in procuring corn laws which went far to secure them that monopoly. But meanwhile, within the last fifty years, the manufacturing interest, principally through the introduction of machinery, had relatively enormously increased. In the twenty years between 1811 and 1831, while the agricultural population increased but 2½ per cent., the manufacturing population had increased 31½ per cent. The time was rapidly approaching when the growing and increasing manufacturing and commercial element would of necessity claim its due position in opposition to the landed aristocracy. But at present the manufacturers themselves, ignorant of the true principles of political economy, were constantly seeking the benefit of their own class as distinguished from that of the general public, and restrictive, or, as they were called, protective, laws were extended over nearly every branch of industry.

[Sidenote: Changes effected by Robinson and Huskisson.]

Robinson, an exceedingly well-meaning man, had succeeded Vansittart as Chancellor of the Exchequer. But his plans and resources extended but little beyond those of his predecessor. He accepted and kept in operation some of his most unwise financial measures, and, without any change of general view, continued, what was no doubt a good thing in its way, to remit occasionally various small taxes. But he had beside him Huskisson as President of the Board of Trade, who acted in a very different spirit. Like his friend Canning, who gave him his full support, he was a self-made man, and belonging to none of the prominent ruling classes, was able to look at matters in a broader and more national light. And though, like his friend, he was constantly spoken of as an adventurer, and in consequence had to undergo much opposition, he was able by the reasonableness of his views, and by the success which attended their execution, to launch England upon a new course of commercial policy, as Canning had been able to do with regard to foreign affairs. As yet free trade as a whole was not to be thought of, but Huskisson took every advantage of the demands of various classes of industrialists to introduce small reforms. In his first year of office, though he indicated the tendency of his policy, he was not able to affect much except with regard to the navigation laws. The three great industries of England were wool, silk, and cotton. Of these cotton alone had been left unrestricted, and there alone had a very remarkable increase been seen. In the wool trade considerable depression having been felt, numerous petitions from manufacturers were presented begging for the free importation of foreign wool, but at the same time asking that the export of British wool should be forbidden; in other words, claiming to buy the raw material of their manufacture at a price artificially lowered. Government replied that the import tax was a valuable source of revenue, but that it should be willingly foregone if free export was allowed also. As the manufacturers declined this, the movement for the present dropped. In the same way an attempt was made to free the Spitalfields silk manufacture from restrictions, such as the settlement of their wages by the magistrates. It was plain that as long as wages were not allowed to change with the varying requirements of the trade, the manufacturers were under disadvantages as compared with their rivals elsewhere. But 11,000 of the journeymen petitioned against this change, and although the Bill passed the Lower House by small majorities, it was so altered by amendments in the Upper House that Huskisson thought fit to drop it.

[Sidenote: Change of the Navigation Act. June 1823.]

In dealing with the Navigation Act he was more successful. This law, passed in Cromwell's time, and completed in the 12th of Charles II., allowed the produce of Asia, Africa, and America to be brought to England in English ships only, and European goods only in English ships or in ships of the country producing the goods. The close of the American War had given the first blow to this system. American shipping, now become the shipping of a foreign country, was subject to the restrictions of the Act. The Americans retaliated, and the ships of both countries had to perform one half of the voyage empty; the consumers therefore paid double freight. This absurdity continued till the Treaty of Ghent in 1814, when the Governments agreed to drop their restrictions. The course which had been successful with America was subsequently adopted by the mercantile states of Europe. Portugal, the Netherlands, and Prussia, all raised the dues on British vessels, and Huskisson, on the 6th of June 1823, took the opportunity of introducing the Bill known by the name of the Reciprocity of Duties Bill, by which the ships of British and foreign powers were put upon an equal footing, the right being retained to keep up restrictive duties upon the ships of nations who rejected the reciprocal equality of trade thus offered. The outcry against this change was very great, especially among the shipowners, whose business was trammelled by the heavy duty on Baltic timber. Huskisson expressed a hope that this duty might shortly be remitted, and meanwhile offered to return to shipbuilders all the duties paid on their materials. The offer was declined, and the grumbling continued, nevertheless the increase of British ships was enormous; in the last nineteen years of the restrictive duties the tonnage had increased ten per cent.; in twenty-one years after their abolition it increased forty-five per cent.

[Sidenote: Improvement in the silk trade. March 1824.]

The first failure of his plans did not dishearten Huskisson, and the prosperity of the year 1824 enabled him to carry Bills for the relief both of the wool and silk trades. The silk trade had been principally established in England by the persecuted Protestants in 1685, and to support it laws had been passed excluding from England foreign silks, which had previously been admitted free. Early in the eighteenth century the spinning of silk in the Italian method had been introduced by two brothers of the name of Lombe; to protect them heavy duties were laid upon foreign-spun silk. The material for the manufacture of silk goods was thus raised in price, and the manufacture had languished for many years, especially after the introduction of cotton. The production of spun silk in India, whence it was very plentifully supplied, had lately improved this state of things; it was believed that at this time 400,000 people were employed in the manufacture of silk goods. But there was a distinct preference for silks of French manufacture, and the smuggling of such goods into England was a serious damage both to the trade and to the revenue. The silk manufacturers, especially those about London, had immediately, upon Huskisson's accession to office, petitioned for the removal of duties on spun silk, but at the same time, with true class feeling, were eager to exclude foreign manufactured silks. In the same way the silk spinners were eager for the removal of duties upon raw silk, but bitterly opposed to the introduction of spun silk, while the journeymen believed that ruin stared them in the face if foreign manufactured silks were introduced. Between these varying interests Huskisson had to steer his course. The duty on raw silk was immediately reduced to threepence from five and sevenpence halfpenny the pound. The clamour was too great to allow of a similar reduction in the duties on spun silk, which were lowered about half, from fourteen and eightpence to seven and sixpence; and similarly, though Mr. Huskisson wished for an immediate change, the admission of foreign manufactured silks was postponed for two years, when they were to be admitted at an ad valorem duty of thirty per cent. The outcry against the change was great; the workmen thanked the House for the temporary postponement of the day of their destruction; the manufacturers expressed a hope that they should get out of the trade before the fatal day arrived. But the event thoroughly proved the wisdom of Huskisson's plans, and the truth of his prophecy that competition only was wanted to enable English manufacturers to rival the French; ten years after the passing of the Bill England exported to France £60,000 worth of manufactured silk.

[Sidenote: Improvement in the wool trade.]

The duties on wool, which came next into consideration, were of newer creation. In 1803 it had been subjected to a tax of a halfpenny a pound, raised by Mr. Vansittart in 1819 to sixpence. The same variety of interests was here at work as in the silk trade. The agriculturists and wool-growers wished for the retention of duties to secure a monopoly of the supply of wool, the manufacturers, to whom foreign wool for certain purposes is an absolute necessity, wished for free importation, but for the retention of an export duty to keep the price of English wool low. With perfect justice Mr. Huskisson determined to relieve both classes. Foreign wool was admitted, according to its excellence, at a penny or a halfpenny a pound; English wool might be exported at a similar rate. Again the effect justified his view. The fear of a large exportation of English wool proved so completely groundless that by 1826 only 100,000 pounds weight had been exported, while 40,000,000 pounds of foreign wool had been introduced. The low price of wool of which the growers had complained had been caused by the increase of the article in England and the general slackness of the trade; the large introduction of foreign wool had enabled the British producers to sell all their stock at remunerative prices to be worked up with it.

[Sidenote: Reintroduction of the question of slavery.]

[Sidenote: Effect of Canning's circular in Jamaica.]

[Sidenote: Persecution of Mr. Smith.]

As befitted the dawning liberality of the English legislation, the question of the slave trade now again came prominently forward. It was indeed the late changes in commercial legislation which again brought it into notice. Since the opening of the Indian trade in April 1814 a complete alteration had taken place in the character of our commerce with that country. Originally restricted to Indian produce paid for in bullion, it had lately become much extended; India received from England woollen goods to the value of a million and a half, and strangely enough even cotton goods, originally an Indian production, to the value of upwards of a million. But as the duties on East India sugar were higher than those charged on West India sugar, India was practically unable to pay for the goods thus imported with its sugar. It was urged in Parliament, that as the power of India to receive English goods was limited only by what it could give in exchange, one great source of purchasing power was thus denied it, and that an equality of duties should be established. Of course the West India interests were violent in opposition, but while objecting to the change at present, Huskisson allowed that the production of slave labour was more costly than that of free labour, and that slavery was not only a crime but a commercial mistake. This confession called the abolitionists again into activity. They had already succeeded in getting the trade condemned by most civilized nations, and the slave who touched English ground was free; but the institution continued in all its severity in our own colonies. Sir Fowell Buxton, who now became the prominent supporter of abolition, brought in a resolution (May 15, 1823) declaring that slavery should be gradually abolished throughout the British colonies. Gradual abolition presents great difficulties. It is not logical, as slavery is either right or wrong; it is difficult to carry out, because slaves still left unenfranchized, while others are freed, are naturally discontented. Canning therefore distinctly objected to the motion; he declared that no half measures were possible, and that as for immediate abolition the Constitution of England was against it. At the same time he proposed resolutions declaring the expediency of improving the condition of the slaves preparatory to freedom. This was followed up in a circular issued on the 24th of May 1823, ordering the cessation of the use of the whip in the field and of the flogging of women. The circular excited great anger among the planters, the House of Assembly in Jamaica began to talk of independence and of addressing the King to remove Lord Bathurst, the Colonial Secretary. In Barbadoes the mean whites, that is, those who possessed no slaves and who were the outcasts of society, rose in riot, and razed to the ground the chapel of a missionary who had spoken of them as an ignorant and depraved class. In Demerara the purport of the circular and the way in which it was spoken of by the planters came to the ears of the negroes, and caused a rising (Aug. 18), which was only kept from becoming a dangerous insurrection by the influence of an Independent missionary of the name of Smith. In two days the riot was quelled, with considerable bloodshed and nearly fifty executions of negroes. But the importance of the affair lies chiefly in the conduct of the whites and the Government of the island towards Mr. Smith. There had already been some efforts made to injure the influence of the dissenting missionaries, who had been most active in instructing the negroes, and although a clergyman of the Episcopalian Church who was in Demerara gave full testimony of Mr. Smith's excellence, he was apprehended, kept in a disgraceful prison for two months, and then died of his hardships (Feb. 6, 1824). Before he died he had been sentenced to death, as having been aware of the intended rising. The sentence of the court-martial was quashed in England, but before the news arrived he was dead. The treatment of Smith in his imprisonment, and of his widow, who was not even allowed to be present at his funeral, was marked by great cruelty, and his death was followed by a meeting of slave-owners, who petitioned that all missionaries should be expelled from the colony, and prohibited from coming there for the future. In fact, they declared that any attempt to improve the moral or intellectual condition of the slaves was undesirable and a crime against the planters. The shock given by this violent action to the public feeling in England virtually secured the predominance of abolitionist views.

[Sidenote: Misery caused by wild speculation. 1825.]

The years 1823 and 1824 were thus marked by a distinct advance in liberality on the part of the English Government. But the beneficent action of Huskisson's legislation was postponed during the following year by a period of unexampled distress. During the past year there had been much hope of increased prosperity. The opening of new markets in South America had excited the hope of speedy profits, and introduced a spirit of rash speculation which has more than once disastrously affected British commerce. The consequence was the very rapid formation of a vast number of joint-stock companies, with their attendant symptoms of unprincipled stock-jobbing and dishonesty on the part of financial agents and promoters of companies. It is impossible not to be reminded of the similar excitement in the time of the South Sea Bubble,--again acts of fabulous folly were performed; it is said that in their eagerness to get a sale for British goods both warming-pans and skates were exported in considerable numbers to the Tropics; while a company of Scotch milk-maids was formed and transferred to Buenos Ayres, where, after conquering the preliminary difficulty of milking wild cattle, it was found that the inhabitants would not eat butter, and preferred the oil of their own country. Though many schemes to be carried on in foreign parts did not even take the trouble to secure charters, 286 private Bills were passed in the session of 1825. The speculation was assisted by a great apparent profusion of money, and by the careless action of both the Bank of England and the private provincial banks. In spite of signs that gold and silver were leaving the country, the Bank of England continued to increase its issue of notes, and the provincial banks followed its example; there was far too much paper money in the country; between June 1824 and October 1825 ten millions of coin and bullion were exported. At the same time the Bank of England lowered its rate of interest. Money was thus exceedingly easily obtained, and prices rose suddenly and very rapidly. The readiness of all the banks to discount bills even at long dates enabled speculators to buy up and hold back goods, thus still further raising the prices. There was naturally soon an end of this fictitious state of things. As the goods which had been bought up were brought into the market their prices necessarily fell; foreign speculations could not produce very rapid returns; the insecure bills, or those which had been discounted at very long dates, could not be realized, consequently the banks found it difficult to meet the demands upon them; the Bank of England then took alarm, raised the rate at which it discounted bills, and contracted the issue of bank notes. In all ways therefore money began to get exceedingly scarce; firms and companies began to break, credit was shaken, a run on the banks was the consequence. At length even the London houses were affected, and on the 5th of December the great banking-house of Pole & Company, on which as many as forty-four country banks depended, broke. In six weeks between sixty to seventy banks had stopped payment, of which six or seven were London houses.

[Sidenote: Success of the healing measures of the Government.]

The misery attendant on these disasters was so great that the Government thought it necessary to interfere. The bank and the mint set hard to work to supply notes and coin; 150,000 sovereigns a day were turned out, but even thus, the story is told that the credit of the Bank was only saved by the accidental discovery of a forgotten chest with 700,000 one-pound notes. By the end of the year the worst of the panic was over, but during 1826 bankruptcies continued with fearful rapidity. In the opinion of the Government some part of the late misfortune was to be attributed to bad legislation, and might be altered, but the greater part arose from a spirit of over-speculation, over which no legislative enactments could have any power. The healing measures proposed were the prohibition of the issue of one and two pound notes; for it began to be generally acknowledged that unrestricted paper currency could not exist with coin, that in times of prosperity the paper would be preferred, gold and silver would seek other markets, and in times of necessity would be unprocurable. Many of the banks had paid for the privilege of issuing notes, but the Government risked the infringement on their rights, acknowledging it, and confessing that an Act of indemnity would be necessary. Secondly, they induced the Bank directors to give up one of their privileges, by which private banking-houses were restricted to six partners. Beyond a radius of sixty-five miles from London, the number of partners was henceforward unlimited, and much greater security was thus obtained. At the same time, for the instant relief of commerce, the ministers, unwilling to issue Exchequer bills, because they thought that commerce had better on the whole be left to right itself, succeeded in persuading the Bank to advance £3,000,000 to merchants upon the security of their goods. The effect of these measures was a restoration of credit and the gradual subsidence of the alarm.

[Sidenote: Riots and machine breaking. April 1826.]

[Sidenote: Temporary change in the corn laws. May 26, 1826.]

But the misfortunes of the preceding years had of necessity been attended by extreme suffering among the poorer classes, and although they had on the whole borne their privations remarkably well, it was impossible, considering the excited temper of the times, to avoid riots. These were as usual directed principally against machinery, which was still ignorantly regarded by the artisans as the chief cause of their misery. The riots were very widely spread, every power-loom in Blackburn was smashed, the operatives in Manchester held stormy meetings, and in Carlisle, Staffordshire, and Norfolk uproars took place. To the miseries caused by depression of trade were added those of an unfavourable season; the summer of 1826 was marked by a very severe drought. On all grounds, therefore, the ministers thought it their duty to introduce some measures which should tend to the lowering of the price of corn; it was ordered that corn in bond in the warehouses, waiting till prices should rise to the level which allowed importation, should be released at once and sent into the market, and that Government should be authorized to import, within a space of two months, 500,000 quarters more. Bills to this effect were passed through the House, having been earnestly pressed forward because the Parliament was on the point of dissolution, and had the ministers been obliged to open the ports without leave, their conduct would have been unconstitutional and would have required an Act of indemnity. But, after all, their efforts were unavailing; prices rose, so that on the 1st of September the legal price was reached; but as it was only when the average price was above a certain point that corn was admitted, and a month must elapse before that average could be taken, it was thought desirable to forestall the time and open them at once. The new Parliament assembled in November, and remained a short time in session for the purpose of giving the required indemnity.

[Sidenote: Canning's vigorous policy in Portugal. Dec. 1826.]

The attention of Parliament was called to one other important topic, which may be regarded as the finishing stroke to Canning's foreign policy. It will be remembered that he had always declared that any attack on Portugal would be regarded as a sufficient cause for the entrance of England into the war. The French troops still occupied Spain, and in the civil war which was continued in that country the royalists had been joined by several regiments of the Portuguese army. In spite of urgent demands and repeated promises that these deserting troops should be disbanded, they were allowed, if not encouraged, by the Spanish royalists to make inroads into constitutional Portugal. The Princess Regent applied to England for assistance; Canning at once acted vigorously according to his principles. At first the information given was not accurate, but on Friday the 8th of December precise information arrived, and Canning could triumphantly assert in the House--"On Saturday his Majesty's confidential servants came to a decision, on Sunday that decision received the sanction of his Majesty, on Monday it was submitted to both Houses of Parliament, and this day (Tuesday) on which I have the honour of addressing you the troops are on their march for embarkation." It was plain to all men that the honour of England was safe in such hands, and proof was afforded to all Europe that England had distinctly broken from her old connections; and that her sympathies were on the side of political freedom and national independence.

[Sidenote: Division in the ministry.]

[Sidenote: Illness of Lord Liverpool. Feb. 1827.]

It is not to be supposed that the changes worked by Canning and by Huskisson, and the decided preponderance of the more liberal-minded members of the Cabinet, were regarded with favour by all their colleagues. Personally distasteful to many of them because of their want of aristocratic connection, the innovating character of their policy, and their views, which were closely assimilated on most points to those of the Whigs separated them entirely from the representatives of the old Tory party. They seem to have had but one point in common--their opposition to parliamentary reform. Lord Liverpool's Government had from the first been one of compromise. One of the greatest questions of the day, which had already caused the fall of more than one ministry, had been allowed to fall from the list of Cabinet questions, and it had been agreed that Catholic emancipation should stand entirely upon its own merits. But this was a point on which men felt very keenly, and there had thus arisen a complete division in the ministry; on the one side were ranked the followers of Canning, including such men as Huskisson, Wellesley; Robinson, Sturges-Bourne, and Lord Palmerston; and on the other the high Tory or Protestant party, at the head of which was Liverpool himself, Lord Eldon, and the Duke of Wellington, and, although he was regarded as less bigoted, Peel. How great the split between the parties was is made plain not only by the strong if decorous language to be found in Lord Eldon's correspondence, but by the more outspoken expressions of Palmerston in his private letters. In the election of 1826, though himself a member of the ministry, Palmerston had been opposed at Cambridge by Goulbourn (also one of the administration), and all the influence of the Tory section had been used against him. In a letter describing the effects of that election, he says, "As to the commonplace balance between Opposition and Government, the election will have little effect upon it. The Government are as strong as any government can wish to be, as far as regards those who sit facing them; but in truth the real Opposition of the present day sit behind the Treasury bench. It is by the stupid old Tory party, who bawl out the memory and praises of Pitt, while they are opposing all the measures and principles which he held most important, it is by these that the progress of the Government in every improvement which they are attempting is thwarted and opposed. On the Catholic question, on the principles of commerce, on the corn laws, on the settlement of the currency, on the laws regulating the trade in money, on colonial slavery, on the game laws, which are intimately connected with the moral habits of the people; on all these questions, and everything like them, the Government find support from the Whigs and resistance from their self-denominated friends." While again, speaking of the foolish obstruction to the Catholic claims, he writes of his colleagues in most unmeasured terms: "I can forgive old women like the Chancellor, spoonies like Liverpool, ignoramuses like Westmoreland, old stumped-up Tories like Bathurst, but how such a man as Peel, liberal, enlightened, and fresh-minded, should find himself running in such a pack is hardly intelligible." It is plain that a Government thinking so differently on the most important topics of the day must have been near its dissolution. It was held together in fact only by the tact and personal influence of Lord Liverpool; and when, on the 17th February, the Premier was found struck with an apoplectic fit it was certain that a ministerial crisis must arise.

[Sidenote: Difficulties attending the formation of a new ministry.]

[Sidenote: Necessity of a change in the corn laws.]

The difficulty in the formation of a new permanent Government was likely to be increased by the two great questions which were expected to occupy the session. One of these was a change in the corn laws, and an attempt to bring them more into harmony with the new commercial views of Huskisson and his friends; the other the Catholic emancipation, on which already the existing Cabinet was so much divided. The constant repetition of temporary measures required by the existing state of the law, the fluctuation of prices, and the consequent suffering of the poor, proved to those who were not pledged to the interests of the landowning and agricultural party that some alteration in the arrangements with regard to corn was necessary. With much care Canning and Huskisson, although both were too ill to allow of personal communication, had arranged a joint measure, by which foreign corn might be imported free of duty, to be warehoused and admitted to the market for home consumption, regardless of the price of corn, on the payment of duties varying in accordance with a certain scale; when wheat was at seventy shillings the duty was to be one shilling, and to increase two shillings with every decrease of one shilling in price. The Bill was passed on the 12th of April, during the interval it was thought decent to allow for the possible restoration of Lord Liverpool's health. It did not come on in the Upper House till after the new Government was formed, but it was there thrown out in favour of an amendment produced by the Duke of Wellington, declaring that foreign corn should not be taken out of bond till corn had reached sixty-six shillings. The object of the Bill, which was to supply foreign corn whenever the sale of it was remunerative, was thus entirely frustrated and the Bill abandoned.

[Sidenote: Increasing importance of the Catholic question.]

It was during the same period, while the Government was in abeyance, that the Roman Catholic question was brought on. The settlement of this question in one way or other had become almost a necessity. It has been seen how Pitt was compelled, by fear of the old King's health, to give up a cause which he undoubtedly regarded as just, and how the obstinacy of George III. upon the same point had ruined Lord Grenville's ministry. During Mr. Perceval's ministry, which was formed on the avowed principle of withstanding the claims of the Catholics, the dangers attendant upon the war afforded sufficient excuse for alleging that the time was inconvenient to move so critical a question; but during the whole of that period they had, by means of an organization and the establishment of a central Catholic committee, kept their claims before the world, waiting till a favourable time should come. Lord Liverpool had found it impossible, as already stated, to form a ministry unanimous on the point, and year after year, as Bills in favour of the Catholics were introduced in the House, Castlereagh and Canning had been seen supporting them in opposition to most of their colleagues.

[Sidenote: Disturbances in Ireland.]

[Sidenote: Failure of Wellesley's administration. 1822.]

[Sidenote: Formation of the Catholic Association. 1823.]

In Ireland, meanwhile, the question had naturally become the watchword of parties, and, like every other political question in that country, had assumed a national form and was leading to a division of races. Both the Protestant Orange Lodges and the Catholic Associations of White Boys had again sprung into existence, and so great was the disorder that in 1822 the Habeas Corpus Act had been suspended. At the same time, in agreement with the uncertain and half-hearted policy of Lord Liverpool's Government, Lord Wellesley, a favourer of the Catholic claims, was made Lord-Lieutenant, and Plunkett (in whose hands the chief management of Catholic parliamentary affairs was) Attorney-General, but yoked to Mr Goulbourn, who was a strong anti-Catholic, as Chief Secretary. The hopes of the Irish, not unreasonably raised by these appointments, were disappointed. Received upon his arrival with every sign of admiration and attachment, before long Wellesley was publicly assaulted and pelted in the theatres. He had attempted, in the midst of the wild excitement of the passionate Irishmen of both parties, to follow a cool and impartial policy. His chief object was to suppress secret societies and to compel all parties to submit quietly to the law. By the use of very stringent measures, by the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and by the Insurrection Act, which allowed him to establish where necessary something nearly equivalent to martial law, he had succeeded in weakening the secret societies and in lessening the amount of crime; he thus earned for himself the hearty dislike of the extreme Catholics. At the same time the restraint which he put upon the Orange societies and Protestant demonstrations roused the extreme Protestants to fury, so that riots took place in Dublin which could only be checked by the military. He thus laid himself open to the charges brought against him by the ultra-Protestants of England, who urged, with a show of truth, that he had proved himself inefficient, and that it was plain that lenity and conciliatory measures would not produce the expected effect. And now, seeing that their hopes in their Lord-Lieutenant were not realized, and wishing to gain favour with classes to whom secret societies were abhorrent, the Catholic party of Ireland, under the leadership of O'Connell, set on foot the great organization known as the Catholic Association, which, while it held aloof from secret societies, and kept itself as far as possible within the limits of the law, was inspired as completely with fanaticism as any of its predecessors had been. Its avowed object was the preparation of petitions to Parliament; but it held regular sessions, had its committee of grievances, ordered a census of the population, and exacted a tax known as the Catholic rent. The effect of this Association was for a time to alienate the Catholics of England, and to make the question a more distinctly national one, and by 1825 the Association had become so formidable that, by a large majority, a Bill was passed rendering it illegal and attempting to dissolve it. The Bill declared that political associations were incapable of adjournment for more than fourteen days, incapable of having corresponding societies, of levying contributions, or of requiring oaths. The dissolution of the Association was only nominal, a new Association was immediately formed, and the Catholic body were advised to proceed by all political and legal means.

[Sidenote: Rejection of the Catholic Relief Bill. 1826.]

[Sidenote: Rejection of Burdett's resolution. March 5, 1827.]

The Catholics had in fact gained a very important step in compelling Parliament to recognize the existence of the Association. It was no longer possible to postpone the consideration of their claims, and in March 1826, Sir Francis Burdett brought in what was called a Relief Bill, of which O'Connell, entirely falsely, claimed to be the chief author. Besides the Bill for the relief of disabilities there were two subsidiary Bills, the one raising the Catholic franchise to £10 instead of £2, which was thought to be a sop to the Protestants, the other to supply a State provision for the Catholic clergy, by which it was thought the other party might be pleased. Freed from the dread of the Association, the English partisans of the Catholic claims used all their influence and eloquence in favour of the Bill, and it passed the Commons by a considerable majority. Its fate in the House of Lords was different. It there encountered an opposition verging upon the unconstitutional; the Duke of York, the heir to the crown, adopting all his father's old scruples, declared, in distinct allusion to his probable succession to the throne, that under no circumstances and in no position would he assent to such a Bill. He succeeded in obtaining its rejection by a majority of forty-eight. The Duke's action was highly popular; it seems pretty certain that the feeling of the majority of Englishmen was against the Catholics. The plea that the Coronation Oath stood in the way of the royal assent to such a Bill no longer found defenders except with the extremest Tories, but the feeling of race which had been excited, the fear, not wholly ungrounded, that a measure so anxiously desired by the priests must hide some considerable advantage to the Roman Church, and the occasional rash declaration of some furious partisan that obedience to the Papal See was superior to any earthly obedience, made the majority of those who were not guided by reason and principle desire to retain the disabilities which still existed. The effect of their defeat in the House of Lords was not to dishearten the Catholics, on the contrary, they took courage at their success in the Commons, and were only eager if possible to complete their triumph before the accession of the bigoted Duke of York should throw a fresh obstacle in their way. A Catholic petition was therefore prepared, which Sir Francis Burdett presented during the illness of Lord Liverpool, proposing at the same time a resolution that the affairs of Ireland required immediate and earnest attention. But an election had taken place since the last Bill had been introduced, and the anti-Catholic feeling had apparently gained ground in the new Parliament; in spite of all the support which Canning could give it, the resolution was rejected. It was the last defeat the champions of emancipation were destined to meet.

[Sidenote: Canning Prime Minister. April 10, 1827.]

[Sidenote: Canning's new ministry. 1827.]

[Sidenote: Death of Canning. Aug. 8, 1827.]

While Canning was thus defeated on the two questions he had most at heart,--the improvement of the corn laws and the Catholic emancipation,--he found himself called upon to undertake the duties of Prime Minister. There was indeed no one in the existing ministry who could well compete with him, and the popular voice at once nominated him as Lord Liverpool's successor. Yet from the first it was clear that his appointment implied a complete change of ministry. It was not to be expected that his opponents in the Cabinet, whether on aristocratic and personal or on political grounds, would consent to serve under him. The King, who had lately been drawing more towards the anti-Catholic party, himself hesitated, but when a cabal of Tory Lords threatened him with the loss of their support should he appoint Canning, his mind was at once made up to resent the affront, and Canning was sent for. His appointment was followed by the resignation of all the most important members of the ministry; Wellington, Melville, Eldon, Bathurst, Westmoreland, Bexley, and Peel, chiefly on account of the obligations under which he felt as member for the Protestant University of Oxford, with several less important ministers, withdrew. As Canning was willing to consent that the Catholic question should still remain open, this great defection seems to show how clearly defined his general liberal tendencies had become. From among his own friends, and such of the Tories as would still serve with him, by the 27th of April a new Government was formed. The Duke of Clarence, since the death of the Duke of York (Jan. 5, 1827) heir-presumptive, was made Lord High Admiral, Copley, made Lord Lyndhurst, became Chancellor, Lord Dudley, a very able though eccentric man, went to the Foreign Office, Mr. Robinson became Lord Goderich, and led the party in the Upper House as Secretary for the Colonies, Sturges-Bourne went to the Home Office, Mr. Huskisson remaining at the Board of Trade. These first appointments were however provisional; so also was Canning's own acceptance of the place of Chancellor of the Exchequer. The new Prime Minister, after the secession of his colleagues, was received with such marked approbation by the Whigs, that it was not difficult to see that his coalition with them would be only a matter of time; and as they would require their fair share in the administration, it was necessary to keep some of the high places in hand, or only provisionally filled. As far as the support of parties in the House went, the union between the Canningites and the Whigs was accomplished; Brougham, Burdett, and Tierney sat on the Government side of the house; but, although Lord Lansdowne had already a seat in the Cabinet, Canning did not live long enough to complete the fusion of parties in the ministry. After the Easter holidays, during which the ministry were got together, little business of public importance was transacted, and the session was spent in a series of vehement attacks and personalities directed against Canning by his old friends. The only fact of importance was the failure of the Corn Bill in the Upper House, which has been already mentioned. In July, to the relief of all parties--for the bitter feelings lately excited had rendered the session an unusually disagreeable one--Parliament was prorogued. On the 8th of the next month Canning died of an illness caught at the funeral of the Duke of York, and rendered worse by the effects of the constant attacks to which he had been subjected acting upon his sensitive nature. Thus was prematurely terminated a change in the position of parties which, by uniting the moderate Tories and the Whigs, and placing the united forces under the command of so able a leader as Canning, seemed full of promise for the constitutional advance of England.

[Sidenote: Character and policy of Canning.]

The death of Canning was felt to be a national loss. In spite of every effort to render his funeral private, vast crowds attended, and Whigs and Tories joined in doing him honour. It was only the exclusive clique which, like Chatham, he had broken through which retained its enmity and regarded him to the end as a renegade adventurer. His title to greatness can scarcely be questioned. Adorned with the richest gifts of body and mind, a noble and attractive presence, overflowing wit, and a majestic eloquence, he showed himself an essentially practical statesman. On most subjects his views were large and liberal; by his assistance his friend Huskisson was enabled to launch England upon a fresh course of commercial prosperity, and by so doing to alleviate the miseries under which the people were groaning. As a foreign minister he enabled the country to assume a great place among nations. Two principles formed the bases of his policy--peace, and the greatness of his native country, which he regarded as indissolubly connected with its national individuality. He thus broke from the trammels of the Holy Alliance, and set on foot the policy of non-intervention, which, though its misuse has much destroyed its credit, is, when the dignity of the country is properly supported, the true policy to be pursued by a people at once desirous to secure peace and to allow to other nations the opportunity of working out their own development, and of securing that national freedom of action which it claims for itself. There were undoubtedly inconsistencies in his political views. Like his successor, Peel, he belonged to a transition time, and had a mind capable of growth. Several remnants of his early political creed hung about him to the last. He was always a firm opponent to parliamentary reform; while supporting continually the claims of the Catholics, he would listen to no arguments in favour of the relaxation of the Test and Corporation Acts; and he always upheld the repressive measures of Lord Sidmouth. It is to be remembered that his youth had been passed in the midst of the French Revolution, against which all the weapons of his wit had been directed, and that he was the favourite disciple of Pitt at the time when that minister's energies were chiefly directed to the suppression of revolutionary and Jacobinical tendencies; while, in his prime, temperate reform had become so connected with the exaggerated views of the radical reformers, that it is not to be wondered at that a statesman trained as Canning had been should object to measures which might open a door to the admission of so violent a flood of change.

[Sidenote: Goderich's ministry.]

Though its chief was gone, it was determined to continue the ministry which Canning had formed on the same principle of compromise on the subject of Catholic reform. The King could not make up his mind to take any decided step one way or the other, and fixed upon Lord Goderich, a colourless man, as best fitted to carry on the system. The changes necessary were few, but some of them important for the future. Lord Goderich's own place was taken by Huskisson; Lord Lansdowne accepted, at the King's personal request, the Home Office; the Chancellorship of the Exchequer, which Canning had held, was, with some want of wisdom, considering the connection of the Canningites and Whigs, given to Mr. Herries, a Tory, an appointment which at once shook the administration. Another important nomination was that of the Duke of Wellington, who, immediately upon Canning's death, was without difficulty persuaded to resume the command of the army, showing how far personal enmity had been the cause of his previous resignation. The accession of these two Tories was at the time regarded as a sure augury for the early break up of the Cabinet. "Before six months are over," said Lord Anglesey, who had been the agent in securing Wellington's adhesion, "he will trip up all your heels." These forebodings were speedily fulfilled. A quarrel broke out about the appointment of a chairman to a Finance Committee which was to be formed at the opening of the session. The position naturally belonged to Mr. Herries, but Tierney and Huskisson appear to have secured the appointment of Lord Althorp without Mr. Herries' knowledge (Nov. 29). Both Huskisson and Herries sent in their resignation; it seemed impossible to keep them both, and Lord Goderich, unable to take a firm course in the matter, sent in his own resignation, which, after he had once weakly withdrawn it, was finally accepted (Jan. 8, 1828). After seven months of useless life the abortive ministry expired.

[Sidenote: Wellington made Prime Minister. Jan. 1828.]

There was great difficulty in finding a successor for Goderich. Lord Harrowby declined the position. Huskisson, who was thought of, was supposed unable to lead the Commons, and the King, weary of compromise, determined to have recourse to the Tories, and, at the advice of Lord Lyndhurst, applied to the Duke of Wellington, whose supposed firmness of character inspired him with confidence. But even yet George attempted to postpone the final settlement of the Catholic question; the conditions he laid on Wellington were only to avoid a union with Lord Grey and to establish a lasting Government. The Duke therefore, in spite of his late conduct, asked and received the adhesion of Dudley, Palmerston, Huskisson, and some others. The Whigs of the late Government naturally retired, and in their place the Tories of Lord Liverpool's Government resumed office. In fact the attempt was made to reconstitute the Liverpool Cabinet. Mr. Huskisson declared to his constituents at Liverpool that the presence of so many Canningites was a guarantee that that minister's policy would be continued, but it was generally understood that the accession of Wellington to the premiership was in fact a Tory triumph, and such it speedily proved. In a very few months an opportunity, arising from a slight difference of opinion, enabled the Duke to insist upon the resignation of Mr. Huskisson; with him the rest of Canning's party left the ministry, and the Government was constituted entirely on a Tory basis (May).

[Sidenote: Difficulty of the Turkish question.]

[Sidenote: Canning's diplomacy on the subject.]

[Sidenote: Protocol between England and Russia. April 1826.]

The continuation of Canning's policy in some way or other was indeed almost a necessity, but the way in which his plans were completed by Wellington would hardly have satisfied Canning. He had died, leaving unfinished in the hands of his successors one of the most difficult diplomatic questions which he had undertaken. For six years a war, marked by extreme barbarity, had been carried on between the Turks and their Greek subjects. It will be remembered that on this point the Czar, who regarded himself as the natural protector of the Greeks, and who nourished the traditional desire of conquest on the side of Turkey, had found himself at variance with his own principles. His mind was divided between a wish to seize the opportunity offered of extending his influence over Turkey, and his love of legitimacy, which, as chief of the Holy Alliance, he constantly upheld, and which seemed to forbid him to take the part of insurgents against their legitimate sovereign. Lengthened conferences between the representatives of the sovereigns of Europe had been held at St. Petersburg, where France and Austria, bitterly opposed to the English policy, both with regard to the constitutionalists of Spain, and the acknowledgment of the independence of the South American colonies, had shown themselves eager upon the side of legitimacy, and where Austria especially had expressed a constant wish that the Greeks should be treated merely as insurgents. Supported therefore by the advice of Austria, and trusting to the well-known feeling in favour of the Mahomedan rule in Turkey which existed among the Tories in England, the Porte had refused to listen to any offers of mediation. Nor did it seem possible that the English ministry, anxious at once to prevent Russia from attacking Turkey and yet to save the Greeks, could intervene with any hope of honourable success. At last, in 1824, an opening occurred, and the hope was raised in Canning's mind that these two apparently contrary objects might be obtained. The provisional government in Greece in its despair made a formal appeal to the English, and showed itself quite as fearful of the warlike views of Russia as Turkey itself, in the belief that the outbreak of a war with Turkey would ensure its own immediate destruction. The English minister now thought it possible to bring the conferences, from which he had hitherto held quite aloof, under his own hand in London. The course of events tended to assist his plan. In 1825 the conferences at St. Petersburg broke up without action, the other powers having refused to join Russia in mediation. It was the conduct of Metternich, who dreaded before all things any tampering with the principles of legitimate sovereignty, and constantly abetted the obstinacy of the Porte, which had rendered the mediation futile. Thus thwarted in his plans, and feeling that his failure was due to Metternich, the Czar found a point of union with Canning in their dislike to the Austrian minister. England was represented at Constantinople by Sir Stratford Canning, and by his skilful management the ambassadors of the two courts there began to draw together; and at last, in November 1825, Canning had a triumphant proof of the success of his policy and of the importance of England, when all the ministers of the great powers in London confessed that they saw no way out of their difficulty but by English intervention. This favourable state of things was for the moment crossed by the death of Alexander (Dec. 1, 1825). The view which his successor Nicholas would take became in the last degree important; Canning, with great wisdom, chose Wellington--opposed indeed to his policy, but personally acceptable to the Russian Czar--as his special ambassador to take the royal congratulations upon the new Emperor's accession, and to continue the negotiations if possible. The appointment met with universal approbation; even Metternich believed that in the hands of Wellington the question must be settled in accordance with his views. It was with much surprise and anger that the Turks and Austrians heard that, on the 4th of April, an arrangement had been arrived at between the Courts of England and Russia. Taking advantage of the very moderate claims of the Greeks, who demanded no more than to be placed on the same footing as the Danubian Principalities, remaining as self-governing but dependent vassals of the Turkish Government, the English minister had succeeded in procuring the signature of a protocol embodying a plan for peaceful intervention.

[Sidenote: Enthusiasm for Greek independence in England.]

[Sidenote: Turkey refuses the armistice demanded by the allies. April 1827.]

[Sidenote: The Treaty of London consequently signed.]

The cause of Greek independence had already excited enthusiasm in England, many volunteers had joined the armies, and money had been subscribed for them. In this enthusiasm Canning in his heart fully joined; from early youth one of his favourite dreams had been the independence of that race to which as an ardent lover of the classics he felt he owed so much. But, true to his principles, and determined to maintain the strict neutrality of England, he had done his best to check any active assistance to the insurgents. According to his view it was necessary that England should intervene with clean hands, and as the friend of both parties. He was also in constant dread of the watchfulness of his Tory enemies, fearing lest any sign of too great favour to Russia should enable them entirely to thwart his plans. Nevertheless the knowledge of the approaching intervention gave a great impetus to the feeling in favour of Greece in England, and men and money were poured in considerable quantities into the peninsula. Lord Cochrane, the most dashing and adventurous of English sailors, had joined the insurgents with an American frigate, General Churchill took command of their armies, yet their destruction seemed imminent. The Egyptians, under Ibrahim Pasha, had come to the assistance of their enemies; their fleet, which was little better than a body of pirates, was swept from the sea; Missalonghi was for the third time taken, and in spite of General Churchill's efforts, Athens and the Acropolis had fallen. If the protocol was to be of any use the time for acting upon it had arrived. The allies received a great accession of strength when, after a visit of Canning to Paris in the spring of 1826, the French Government and the King himself entered heartily into their plans. It was plain that for the second time Canning had struck a severe blow at the principles of the Holy Alliance. In April 1827 the three powers proceeded to act with renewed strength. They demanded an immediate armistice, pointed out that the war did not seem to be approaching its conclusion, that it caused interference with the traffic of the world, and that in the interests of Europe it must cease. Almost of course the Turks, still trusting to Austria, and still unable to believe in the changed posture of England, rejected this demand. Therefore, in accordance with the expressed wish of the French, which no doubt agreed with Canning's own wishes, the protocol was changed into a treaty known as the Treaty of London, signed on the 6th of July by Lord Dudley, Count Lieven, and the Prince of Polignac. In strict accordance with the terms of the protocol, it set forth the necessity of European action, it stated the terms which must be given to Greece, and which went no further than establishing its self-government under Turkish supremacy and saddled with a tribute to the Porte, and declared that none of the parties to the treaty sought territorial increase or commercial advantages. Fear of Russian aggrandizement was thus withdrawn, the intervention was at first to be purely friendly; but secret articles went on to say that, if the intervention were rejected, more stringent means must be used to oblige its acceptance both by one party and by the other, and that it would be necessary to show countenance to Greece, by acknowledging her as a belligerent power, and establishing consuls at her ports. It was not expressly stated what the further means of coercion were to be. A month was given to the Porte for consideration of the terms offered. If no answer, or an unfavourable answer came, the secret articles were to be put into execution. If the armistice was refused by the Turks, the allied squadrons then in the Mediterranean were to unite, to enter into friendly relations with the Greeks, and to intercept all ships freighted with men and arms destined to act against the Greeks, whether from Turkey or from Egypt. At the same time they were carefully to avoid hostilities. It is doubtful whether Canning could have succeeded in carrying out this his last measure of peace policy and non-intervention without having recourse to war. When the affair had reached this point he died, and the completion of his work fell into weaker and less competent hands.

[Sidenote: Attempt of the allies to compel the armistice.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Navarino. Oct. 20, 1827.]

In August, a joint note having been again sent, and all satisfactory answer having been entirely refused by Reis Effendi, the Turkish minister, consuls were appointed according to the treaty, and the fleets ordered to compel the armistice. The execution of this delicate duty was intrusted to Admiral Codrington on the part of the English, to the French Admiral de Rigny, and to Count Heyden, who commanded the Russian fleet. Twenty-eight Turkish and Egyptian ships of war lay in Navarino Bay awaiting fresh reinforcements from Egypt. Had the union taken place, the combined fleets of Turkey and Egypt would have entirely destroyed the Greek Government then in the Ionian Islands, and have swept away what remained of the Greek fleet. The allies appeared before Navarino, explained to Ibrahim Pasha, who was in command, the negotiations which were proceeding, and declared that the Turkish fleet should not sail. Ibrahim, nothing daunted, while asserting that he would take orders from his own sovereign only, pledged himself, on the 25th of September, that the fleet should remain quiet for twenty days to enable him to receive an answer from Constantinople. In spite of this promise, Codrington, who had withdrawn, heard on the 1st of October that the fleet had left harbour. He at once went to meet it, and turned back the first squadron he encountered. On the 13th the combined fleets were in front of Navarino. Then Ibrahim in anger let loose his troops on the wretched people, and before the eyes of the allies terrible scenes of barbarity were enacted. Codrington, though with difficulty, kept himself in restraint, but on the 20th his fleet sailed into the harbour, to say that they would convoy the Turkish ships to Turkey, the Egyptian ships to Egypt. They found the Turks and Egyptians drawn up in the form of a horseshoe and ready for battle. Strict orders were given not to fire unless the enemy proceeded to hostilities, and Codrington, bringing his ship close to that of the Turkish admiral, opened communications with him. Meanwhile, a boat from the Dartmouth was fired upon, and a cannon shot was fired against the French flagship. In spite of this Codrington went on parleying till his pilot was shot by his side and a broadside fired upon his ship. The battle then began in earnest, and in four hours the hostile fleet was entirely destroyed.

[Sidenote: Goderich's inaction renders the victory nugatory.]

[Sidenote: Wellington retains his alliance with Turkey. 1828.]

The news of the victory was received with delight in France and Russia, and at first with triumph in England, where at the instant Sir Edward Codrington met with the full approval of the Government. None the less did it present to the weak and tottering Cabinet of Lord Goderich difficulties of the gravest kind. The peaceful policy of their late chief had ended in a fierce and destructive battle; they hardly knew whether to accept the whole responsibility of it or not. At all events they did not follow up the blow or act with any vigour under the circumstances. The effect of this delay was to strengthen in Constantinople the belief that the union between the three powers was not hearty, and to encourage the Turks in their obstinacy. The foreign merchants in Constantinople were apprehended, the Porte determined on war, demanding that the allies should refrain entirely from interfering on the Greek question, pay the fleet, and indemnify the Sultan for his losses. In spite of the efforts of the ambassadors, before they had left Constantinople, which they did upon the 8th of December, nothing could be gained beyond an offer of a general amnesty to the Greeks. Had the allied fleets proceeded at once to Constantinople, which was the wish both of Sir Stratford Canning and of Codrington, it is probable that they might have put an end to the war with Greece, and have succeeded in carrying out at least one part of the London Treaty, by saving Turkey from the invasion of Russia, which now became inevitable. As it was, England had in fact only handed the country up, weakened by the loss of its fleet, to the hands of that power. The weakness of the Goderich Government prevented such efficient action, and the accession of Wellington to office rendered it still more impossible. True to his Tory traditions, while pretending to continue the policy of Canning, he fell back upon the words of the London Treaty, which were no doubt intended to be pacific. The speech at the opening of Parliament, on the 29th of January 1828, mentioned the battle of Navarino in somewhat disparaging terms as "the untoward event," which it was hoped would not be followed by further hostilities, and the Duke himself declared that the preservation of the Ottoman Porte as an independent and powerful state was necessary to the wellbeing of this country. In fact, he suffered the matter again to fall back into negotiations. England kept out of war, and Russia was allowed to overrun Turkey, to take Adrianople (Aug. 20, 1828), and from thence to dictate terms which left the Porte for ten years at least defenceless in their hands. Among the terms demanded by Russia was necessarily the independence of Greece. The limits were arranged by the three powers in London. Neither Turkey nor Greece were allowed a voice in the matter; the frontiers were fixed, and a monarchical form of government established; the crown for a while went begging; it was declined by the Saxon Prince John, and by Prince Leopold (May 1830), subsequently King of the Belgians, nor was it till the year 1832 that Otho of Bavaria, a lad of eighteen, was found to undertake a post which offered almost insuperable difficulties and but very little honour.

[Sidenote: Character of Wellington's Government.]

[Sidenote: Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. May 1828.]

The Duke of Wellington had been no doubt first called to the Premiership for the purpose of continuing as far as possible the system of the Tories. His conduct as head of the Government was so peculiar that it would scarcely have been tolerated in a less influential man. He regarded his office as he would have regarded a military command,--a trust not lightly to be laid down. He fought till his opponents became irresistible and then suddenly retreated, without thinking it necessary to resign office on account of his defeat. This view of his duty had the same practical results as the most determined place-hunting, and reduced his Government to that most dangerous form of weakness which consists in driving opposition to irresistible extremes, and then suddenly yielding to pressure. This peculiar tendency to give up his opinion and yet retain office was visible at the very outset. He had taken the Premiership, although a few months before he had declared himself wholly unfit for it; he had formed a mixed Government, though his views and those of the King were in favour of a united one. His next concession was upon the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts. In the first session of 1828, Lord John Russell moved for a Committee upon those Acts. Canning had always withstood their repeal; the Duke and Mr. Peel were known to share the late minister's opinion. But when a majority of forty-four in a full House decided in favour of Lord John Russell's Committee, the leaders of the Government accepted their decision, and declared themselves satisfied with the substitution of a declaration that the incoming office-holder would do nothing to injure the Church, instead of the old sacramental test. After a lengthened and bitter opposition, led by Lord Eldon in the Upper House, the Bill was carried. The old Chancellor's view of the conduct of Government was very unfavourable. "They began in the Commons," he said, "by opposition, and then ran away like a parcel of cowards."

[Sidenote: The Corn Bill passed.]

The second important Bill of the session was the Corn Bill, to be substituted for that which Wellington had himself succeeded in throwing out in the preceding session. Here again he yielded to circumstances. Entirely leaving his previous standing-ground, the Premier now supported the Bill on exactly the same principle of duties on a graduated scale as that he had previously thwarted. The fixed point in the scale was a few shillings higher, but in principle the Bill was identical.

[Sidenote: The resignation of Huskisson and his friends. May 1828.]

No doubt the necessity for such concessions was very irksome to the Duke, and, as before mentioned, an opportunity soon occurred for ridding himself of the more liberal members of his Cabinet, whose pressure he had been unable to resist. On a trivial question as to the disposition of the seats of two disfranchised boroughs Huskisson had thought it his duty to vote against his colleagues. It had been before settled that the question should not be a Cabinet one; but Huskisson, while still under excitement, thought it right to send the Duke a letter offering to retire should the Premier wish it. The Duke seized his opportunity, treated the letter as an absolute resignation, would listen to no explanation, and obliged Huskisson to resign. With him went Palmerston, Dudley, Lamb, and Grant; their places were filled with Tories, and the Government seemed at length thoroughly homogeneous.

[Sidenote: The Catholic Emancipation question.]

Yet the establishment of this Tory Cabinet was followed almost immediately by a far greater concession than any of the preceding ones, in the passage of the Catholic Emancipation Bill. The Government had been constituted as far as possible on a Protestant basis. It was known that the King was strong in his anti-Catholic propensities. Although a small majority in the Commons had, on the 8th of May, declared in favour of bringing the question to a settlement, and although both the Chancellor and the Prime Minister had confessed, while opposing the motion successfully in the Lords, that they saw no way at present out of the great difficulty, thereby apparently implying a wish for a settlement, the declarations both of Wellington and of Peel gave little hope of any relaxation of the disabilities. But meanwhile events were occurring which rendered some settlement obviously necessary. There was indeed a general and growing feeling that a question which in the last thirty-five years had ruined more than one Cabinet, which was in fact uppermost in all men's minds at the time of every new ministerial arrangement, and which had kept Ireland permanently uneasy, could no longer be left uncertain. Events were now occurring in Ireland which would have rendered the further postponement of the settlement little short of madness.

[Sidenote: Renewed agitation in Ireland.]

[Sidenote: Election of O'Connell for Clare. June 1828.]

The agitation in that country, which had almost subsided during the administration of Canning, a well-known supporter of the Catholic claims, and which had only slightly revived during Goderich's administration, broke out again in full force when the hostile ministry of Wellington came into office. The law for the suppression of the Association would expire in the coming July, and meanwhile, keeping within the limits of the law, for all practical purposes the organization remained alive. The last general election had opened the eyes of the leaders of the Association to a new and irresistible source of power; it had proved that the power of the priests was in some cases stronger than that of the landlords. In their eagerness to secure their parliamentary influence, the landlords had followed the disastrous plan of breaking up their estates into small forty shilling freeholds, taking advantage of the low franchise which existed in Ireland. Several instances had occurred in which the tenantry had broken loose from their landlords, and at Waterford, among other places, they had proved themselves too strong even for the great Beresford interest. What had then been done in a few instances it was the intention of the Association to carry out in a large scale, and great efforts were made to secure the votes of those who were known as the Irish "forties" in the coming general election. The anger of the proprietors thus assaulted in their strongholds was very great, and class animosity reached a terrible pitch. The power of the Association was soon brought to the test. With the rest of the Canningites, Grant, President of the Board of Trade, had resigned; his place had been given to Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald, member for Clare, whose re-election thus became necessary. Aware that, even if they succeeded in excluding the Government candidate, the election of a Protestant representative would be of no great value to them, the Association determined to strike a great blow, and to bring forward O'Connell himself to dispute Mr. Fitzgerald's seat. His triumph was complete; after a few days' polling Mr. Fitzgerald withdrew. But more wonderful and more terrible than his mere success was the admirable discipline and order with which it was obtained. Lord Palmerston thus narrates the event:--"The event was dramatic and somewhat sublime. The Prime Minister of England tells the Catholics in his speech in the House of Lords that if they will only be perfectly quiet for a few years, cease to urge their claims, and let people forget the question entirely, then after a few years perhaps something may be done for them. They reply to this advice, within a few weeks after it is given, by raising the population of a whole province like one man, keeping them within the strictest obedience to the law, and by strictly legal and constitutional means hurling from his seat in the representation one of the Cabinet ministers of the King. There were 30,000 Irish peasants in and about Ennis in sultry July, and not a drunken man among them, or only one, and he an Englishman and a Protestant, O'Connell's own coachman, whom O'Connell had committed upon his own deposition for a breach of the peace. No Irishman ever stirs a mile from his house without a stick, but not a stick was to be seen at the election. One hundred and forty priests were brought from other places to harangue the people from morning to night, and to go round to the several parishes to exhort and bring up voters.... All passed off quietly. The population of the adjoining counties was on the move, and large bodies had actually advanced in echelon, as it were, closing in upon Ennis, the people of one village going on to the next, and those of that next advancing to a nearer station, and so on." The sheriff and his assessor declared that the election was legal, the only obstacle to O'Connell's appearance in the House being the oaths he would have to take on his admittance. It was determined to follow up the success. O'Connell declared that Catholic representatives must be elected for all the counties of Ireland. The funds of the Association, which assumed its old form in July on the expiration of the suppression law, were partially devoted to the support of those on whom the vengeance of the landlords fell; and not content with declaring the necessity of the election of Catholic members, the Association drew up certain pledges to be required of all future Catholic candidates. These consisted in a promise to be the determined opponents of the ministry of Wellington and Peel till it granted Catholic emancipation, to support religious and civil liberty, to procure a repeal of the Subletting Act (which was an attempt to restrain the minute subdivision of property), and to support a reform of Parliament.

[Sidenote: Influence of the Association.]

[Sidenote: Resignation of Lord Anglesey. Jan. 1829.]

The power the Association had already exhibited, and its determination to have those representatives whom it should elect thus closely bound to pursue the line of conduct it dictated, much increased the dread with which it was regarded. Symptoms were already visible of the influence it might exert; only ten days after the establishment of the pledges (Aug. 2), Mr. Dawson, Peel's brother-in-law, and himself in the Administration, after a lively picture of the enormous power of the Association, concluded with the unexpected assertion, that as this power could not be crushed it ought to be conciliated. Coming from such a source the assertion was received as a certain proof that the cause of the Catholics was winning its way. Consequently the efforts of the Association were pressed forward with redoubled zeal. Parochial clubs were established, and great aggregate meetings held in various parts of Ireland. Mr. Shiel, one of its most ardent supporters, thus describes the condition of Ireland under its influence:--"Does not a tremendous organization extend over the whole island? Have not all the natural bonds by which men are tied together been broken and burst asunder? Are not all the relations of society which exist elsewhere gone? Has not property lost its influence? Has not rank been stripped of the respect which should belong to it? Has not an internal government grown up, which, gradually superseding the legitimate authorities, has armed itself with a complete domination? Is it nothing that the whole body of the clergy are alienated from the State, and that the Catholic gentry and peasantry and priesthood are all combined in one vast confederacy?" His description was true; the Association was omnipotent, and in nothing did it show its power so much as in the complete restraint it held over the excitable people. Faction and faction fights disappeared; crime of a graver sort almost vanished; and though the people were drilled and brought into something resembling military organization, although they were eager to know against whom they were to fight, the influence of the Association restrained them from all demonstrations likely to provoke hostilities, and on one occasion a few words from O'Connell at once broke up and dispersed a body of 50,000 men. This was the more admirable as the temper of the Protestants had naturally been roused, and Brunswick clubs had sprung up, to take the place of the Orange organization, which do not seem to have been as self-restrained as the Catholics. During the whole of this time the Duke was painfully making up his mind to his retreat. The peculiarity of his action was that he became absolutely silent; so complete was his silence, that Mr. Shiel thus describes the situation:--"The minister folds his arms as if he were a mere indifferent observer, and the terrific contest between Protestant and Catholic only afforded him a spectacle for the amusement of his official leisure; he sits as if two gladiators were crossing their swords for his gratification: the Cabinet seems to be little better than a box in a theatre from which his Majesty's ministers may survey the business of blood." Indeed, so strangely reticent was the Duke, that he ceased to correspond at all with his Lord Lieutenant, the Marquis of Anglesey. Uninstructed from home, Lord Anglesey, who was a Liberal, and inclined to the emancipation, naturally followed the dictates of his own opinions, and rendered the conduct of the Government almost treacherous from the indirect support he gave to the Liberals, while his chief in London was supporting the opposite party. The inevitable consequence was that he shortly committed an indiscretion which necessitated his recall. His place was taken by the Duke of Northumberland, a strong Tory.

[Sidenote: Peel and Wellington see the urgency of the Catholic question.]

Peel, the most influential member of the ministry next to the Premier, had already, since the Clare election, arrived at the conclusion that the solution of the question could no longer be postponed, and that only one form of solution was possible. The election of Catholics, while still unable to sit in Parliament, would deprive Ireland of its representation. So important an event as O'Connell's election could not possibly pass unnoticed and the question be left unmoved. With the present House a high-handed repression of the Association was impossible; were it attempted by a new House a civil war was inevitable: there remained but a third course--to give way. Early in August 1828, Peel had stated this opinion forcibly to the Duke, and told him that he considered that an attempt to settle the Catholic question was a lesser evil than to continue to leave it open; at the same time he wished himself to resign, and to leave the bringing in of the measure to other hands. Although aware of the penalty he should be called upon to pay for this change of opinion, the attacks to which he should be subject, and the loss of friends, he was at length persuaded by Wellington, who felt it impossible to carry on the Government without him, to retain his place. Peel's representations had had their effect upon the Duke's mind, and he was by degrees becoming convinced that further obstruction was impossible. During the autumn he learned to see that his choice lay between the reconquest of Ireland, the repeal of the Union, or the emancipation of the Catholics. He could not hesitate which of the three to choose. But though his own mind and that of his colleague were made up, great difficulties lay in the way of the execution of their plans, the chief of which was the temper of the King, who had now begun to declare that he, like his father, was troubled with conscientious scruples. At length, in January, the King consented that the question should be brought before the Cabinet. The two ministers found little or no opposition, and it was determined to take in hand the final settlement of the question. Accordingly, in the royal speech at the opening of Parliament (Feb. 5), it was stated that measures must first of all be taken to establish authority by the destruction of the Association, and that then the whole condition of Ireland should be taken into consideration, with a view to altering the laws so as to remove civil disabilities from his Majesty's Catholic subjects. The speech came as an unexpected blow to the high Tories, but immediate discussion was postponed at the request of the ministry till the actual Bill could be introduced in its completed form. Meanwhile the preliminary measure for the destruction of the Association was brought in. Its necessity was however forestalled by the clever tactics of the Irish, who dissolved their Association before the Bill obtained the force of law. Having declared his change of opinion, Peel, who throughout acted as honourably as circumstances would allow, thought it incumbent on him to resign his seat for Oxford, which he no doubt owed chiefly to his supposed anti-Catholic views. The events of the election proved that he was right, the seat was contested by Sir Robert Inglis, who was elected by a considerable majority. Peel found a seat at Westbury.

[Sidenote: Opposition of the King.]

[Sidenote: Introduction of the Bill. March 5, 1829.]

[Sidenote: The Bill passed. April 1829.]

The coast seemed now clear for the great measure, but the King made a final stand. The very day before the Bill was to be introduced (March 4), he sent unexpectedly for Wellington, Lyndhurst, and Peel, declared he had been misunderstood, withdrew his sanction, and asked what they now intended to do about Ireland. In fact he had been incessantly worked on by the Tory Lords who had access to him; and, weak and miserable, apparently thought that the fear of offending him might even yet postpone the measure. Peel at once declared that nothing remained for him but to resign. The Duke and the Chancellor expressed the same intention, and they left the presence of the King, who bade them a most friendly farewell, in the belief that the ministry was at an end. Late at night Wellington received a letter, in which the King said that he was convinced of the impossibility of forming another ministry, and begged them to remain. Knowing his weak character, it was only on receiving express leave to declare that the measure was brought in with his consent that they agreed to remain, and it was with the assertion that he was acting in full accordance with the King's wishes that Peel began his speech. The proposed Bill was of a sweeping but simple character. It substituted a new form of oath for the old oaths of supremacy, allegiance, and abjuration; thus, if a Catholic bound himself to support the State and not injure the Church, he could sit in either House of Parliament, had a perfect equality with his Protestant neighbours, and was eligible for all offices, civil, military, or municipal, with the exception of the office of Regent, of Lord Chancellor, of Viceroy of Ireland, or royal commissioner of the General Assembly of Scotland. From offices connected with the Church, or participation in Church patronage, he was naturally excluded. The second point of the Bill was the position to be occupied by the Roman Church. It was to be left as a dissenting community, unendowed and unrestricted, but the use of episcopal titles, the increase of monks, and the introduction of more Jesuits, were forbidden. This Bill for the remission of all restrictions was to be coupled with another for the establishment of certain securities, the chief of which consisted in the raising of the franchise to £10. In a long and careful speech Peel explained his views, and vindicated his change of policy. The same course was pursued by Wellington in the Upper House, where he alleged that the chief grounds for his present conduct was his horror of civil war, which he regarded as inevitable. "I am one of those who have probably passed a longer period of my life engaged in war than most men, and principally, I may say, in civil war, and I must say this, that if I could avoid by any sacrifice whatever even one month of civil war in the country to which I am attached, I would sacrifice my life in order to do it. There is nothing which disturbs property and wellbeing so much, which so deteriorates character as civil war, and that, my Lords, would have been the event to which we must have looked, that the means to which we must have had recourse." As was natural, there was a strong opposition, but in both Houses Canningites, Whigs, and Ministerialists combined to swell the majority; on the first reading it numbered 188, on the second 180. Not one amendment was carried in Committee, and the Bill finally passed by a majority of 178 in a House of 452. In the House of Lords it was as favourably received, and on the 10th of April it was passed on the third reading by 213 to 209. There was yet one more struggle, in which the King played a pitiful part. Lord Eldon relates two interviews he had with him, in which George seemed inclined to deny that he had ever authorized his ministers to bring in the Bill, and to represent himself as forced to consent by repeated threats of resignation. Lord Eldon was honest enough to say, after he had seen written evidence of the fact, that the King's consent had been given, and that it could not now be withdrawn, and the interview closed in the midst of petulant and childish exclamations of anger on the part of the King. Lord Eldon probably hoped that in spite of what he had said there might be still some delay, but the royal assent was at once given, and the Bill became law on the 14th of April.

[Sidenote: O'Connell agitates for the repeal of the Union.]

The Bill for the disfranchisement of the forty shilling freeholders passed at the same time as the Catholic Emancipation Bill, and received the royal assent with it. The conduct of O'Connell, who quietly allowed the passing of this Bill, caused much surprise. "The forties" had been his best supporters, he had pledged himself in the strongest language to support their claims, but he quietly allowed them to be disfranchised. It was strange how little commotion so sweeping a measure produced. A few of the more advanced reformers of England regarded it as an enormous price paid for a still greater advantage. But in fact the quarrel had been rapidly assuming the form of a division of races, and the English Catholics, without whom the measure could not have been carried, were far more anxious for the equality of their Church than for the enlargement of Irish liberty. To O'Connell the question assumed a different shape. Although he repeatedly declared that the passing of the Bill would quiet Ireland, he by no means intended that such should be the case. With him the question was far more Irish than Catholic, as was soon made evident by his conduct. He presented himself to take his seat in Parliament (May 15), and offered to take the new oath, but as he had been elected while the old law was in force, it was held that he was still under its requirements. With excellent temper and ability he argued his case, which was however given against him, and a new writ for Clare was issued. His return was unopposed (July 30), yet he allowed himself the utmost freedom of language, abused with all the powers of his invective the English Government, and gave it clearly to be understood that he meant to continue the struggle till it should end in the repeal of the Union. These preliminary operations took so much time that it was not till the next session that he could take his seat. From this time onwards it is impossible to regard him as the champion of a good cause; he sank into the position of a demagogue, exciting the people for an impracticable object, which he must have known no English statesman or English Parliament could possibly grant.

[Sidenote: Wellington's foreign policy.]

The interest of this Catholic Bill had been so absorbing that little else had been thought of, but when that obstacle was once cleared away, there was room to consider what was equally important, the foreign policy of the Government, in which there was much to excite the anger of the Liberal party, and to raise a belief that where Wellington could act without pressure his sympathies were in accordance with the system of Castlereagh rather than with that of Canning. While holding strictly to the principle of non-intervention, he appeared to use it so as to throw its advantages almost entirely upon the side of arbitrary power. It was the affairs of Portugal, of Greece, and of France which chiefly required his attention.

[Sidenote: Affairs of Portugal.]

[Sidenote: Miguel usurps the throne. May 1828.]

[Sidenote: Queen Maria acknowledged in England. Sept. 1828.]

John VI. had at length come back from South America to attempt to establish his power in Portugal in 1821. During his absence Brazil declared itself independent, and put Don Pedro, John's son, upon the throne with the title of Emperor. On the death of John in 1826, Don Pedro was called to the throne of Portugal also. He had to choose between his South American and his European dominions. He preferred to remain in Brazil. He therefore gave a constitution to his Portuguese subjects, and then abdicated in favour of his young daughter Maria. For a while his sister acted as Regent, but in February 1828 Don Pedro thought it better to quiet his ambitious brother Miguel by appointing him Regent, and guardian of his niece, to whom he was to be ultimately married. Miguel always declared his intention, as was of course his duty, to uphold the constitution, which had been supported by English troops sent, it will be remembered, by orders of Canning, but had been opposed by a strong party of absolutists, and had not produced any marked improvement in the condition of the country. The priests, the nobility, and the soldiery were deeply infected with dislike to the constitution. In January 1828, just after Wellington had assumed the reins of power, Miguel had visited England for the purpose, it was understood, of studying the working of the constitution, and had voluntarily declared that if he violated the constitution in his own country he should be a perjured usurper. After some delay he accepted the constitutional oath, but with circumstances which made it doubtful even then whether he intended to keep it. So obvious were the signs of his intention to usurp the throne, that when Wellington determined to recall the English troops as though their duty was now completed, the English ambassador on his own authority retained them. Their retention was but temporary. On the 2nd of April they were recalled, although the Chamber of Deputies had been suddenly dissolved in the middle of March; for Wellington, clinging to the narrowest interpretation of the principle of non-intervention, held that the troops were sent to guard Portugal against foreign invasion, and not to be used in party quarrels. Their departure was almost immediately followed by open riots in favour of the absolutists. Restrained for a short time by the threat that all the ambassadors would leave his Court, on the 3rd of May Miguel began to throw away disguise. He summoned the three ancient estates of the realm instead of the new constitutional Parliament, and signed the decree as King Miguel I. This act of usurpation was followed by the withdrawal of all the ministers except those of Spain and Rome. A violent reaction set in, the uneducated masses, the aristocracy, and the clergy had it all their own way, and raised a general cry against the Freemasons, as they were pleased to call the Liberal party. While Miguel was planning his usurpation of the throne the act of abdication on the part of Don Pedro was finally completed, and the young Queen set sail for Europe. She was at first intended to visit her uncle the Emperor of Austria; but the news of what had happened in Portugal induced her guardians to bring her to England, where she was received with all the honour due to a queen both by the ministers Wellington and Aberdeen, and by King George himself. Meanwhile the government of the reactionists in Portugal had been marked by much violence and contempt of law. In the beginning of October, in the prisons of Lisbon alone, there were 2400 prisoners, of whom 1600 were confined for political crimes. The total number of prisoners throughout the kingdom amounted to upwards of 15,000, among whom were forty-two members of the Chamber of Peers and seven members of the Chamber of Deputies; and so unrestrained was the wickedness of Miguel that he even attempted the life of his sister, the late Regent, because she refused to give up to him some of her jewels.

[Sidenote: Wellington's adherence to the principle of neutrality.]

The withdrawal of the troops from Lisbon on the one hand, and the recall of the English minister and the acknowledgment of the young Queen on the other, appeared to be in accordance with the strictest rules of neutrality. At the same time it was obvious that that neutrality as yet had been entirely in favour of Don Miguel. The principle had yet to be put to harder trials; a number of Portuguese refugees of the constitutional party were assembled in England, headed by the Marquis Palmella, the Portuguese ambassador, and General Saldanha, late constitutional War Minister. Besides their continental dominions, the Portuguese possessed the islands of the Azores; and although the islands had declared for Donna Maria, and therefore might be supposed to be under the protection of the English, Miguel had been allowed to capture Madeira, and had attempted, though unsuccessfully, a similar attack upon Terceira. In expectation of a repetition of this effort, application was made to the Portuguese in England for assistance. A body of between 3000 and 4000 men, the relics of an insurgent army which had attempted in vain to prevent Miguel's usurpation, had been kept together at Plymouth, but the representations of the usurper had been listened to, and the Duke had ordered that they should be distributed throughout England. Rather than submit to this, Palmella proposed to send them to Brazil; but Wellington, mistrusting their intentions when once they had left England, declared his intention of placing them under the escort of the English fleet. On receiving the application from Terceira, Palmella, seeing an opportunity for employing his countrymen usefully, determined to send them thither, but unarmed, to avoid any breach of the neutrality of England; and, in spite of the avowed intention of Wellington to prevent this step by force, in the beginning of January 1829 the expedition actually sailed under Saldanha. Some English frigates were sent to prevent a landing, and fired upon the leading vessel. Saldanha then retired to Brest. Thus in the eyes of the Liberals not only had the Duke been impartial, but he had fired upon an expedition fitted out in favour of a sovereign acknowledged by and at peace with England, and who intended to make good her possession of an island of which she was at the moment actually Queen. Such an interpretation of the duties of neutrality, especially considering the bitter tyranny under which Portugal was groaning, afforded good grounds for the anger of the English Liberal party.

[Sidenote: Non-intervention in the affairs of Greece.]

In the affairs of Greece the same determination under no circumstances to draw the sword was obvious. While the French sent an army to the Morea and rescued the peninsula from the Turks, and while Russia pursued her victorious course towards Constantinople, the English clung tenaciously to the peaceful side of the Treaty of London. Their negotiations were so far successful that Russia consented not to act as a belligerent in the Mediterranean, but the power of Turkey was none the less annihilated from the north. Meanwhile Wellington seemed chiefly bent in restraining the French from advancing beyond the Morea, and in curtailing as far as possible the limits which the powers intended ultimately to fix for the new kingdom of Greece.

[Sidenote: The Revolution in France.]

[Sidenote: Supposed influence of Wellington in Polignac's appointment.]

In respect to France the effect of the sympathies of the English Government were perhaps rather fancied than real. The reactionary tendencies of Charles X.'s minister, M. de Villèle, and the contest in which he had engaged with the press had excited so much discontent, that the ministry had been compelled to resign in January 1827. There were in France three parties, the moderate royalists, of which Villèle was nominally representative, the ultra-royalists, and the liberals. On Villèle's retirement a colourless and inefficient ministry was called to office, and found itself opposed by a coalition between the liberals and the ultras. At the beginning of 1829 the most important and able of the ministers, De Peyronnet, retired. It was supposed that his resignation would break up the ministry, unless it was much strengthened by the admission of some new element; the arrival from London of Prince Polignac, a friend of Wellington and a strong royalist, was thought to mean that the English minister was using his influence to insist that the required strength should be derived from the introduction of a strong royalist element, and that an attempt should be made to rule France upon more strictly monarchical principles. The ministry however for the moment continued unchanged, but found itself in a complete minority in the Chamber of Deputies, and was defeated in an attempt to reform the departmental and municipal governments. Its plan ostensibly aimed at reducing the power of the prefects, who were government nominees, by the establishment of municipal councils, but in fact it secured the ascendancy of the more aristocratic part of the nation in the local government by rendering a high qualification necessary for the electors to these councils. So obviously inefficient had the ministry proved itself to carry on the business of the state, that immediately on the close of the session it was dismissed. But the King had no idea of replacing it by a more liberal Cabinet; his thoughts turned rather towards repression, and he summoned the ultra-royalists to his ministry. While the new appointments were received with absolute distrust and dislike in France, they met with nothing but praise from the London journals; so clear did the connection between the Cabinets of the two countries appear, that the nickname of the Wellington Ministry was given to Polignac's administration.

[Sidenote: Increasing opposition to the French ministry.]

It was a time of much depression both in trade and agriculture, and general discontent became prevalent. The mistrust with which the ministry was regarded was strengthened by the repeated and not always successful press prosecutions which were undertaken. It was even feared that, as the Chamber of Deputies was certainly hostile to the ministry, some attempt would be made to set aside the charter and to obtain a more favourable Chamber by unconstitutional means. But things had not yet reached that pass. The old Chamber was quietly opened on the 2nd of March with a speech in which the King, in the usual language of a constitutional ruler intending to have recourse to unconstitutional means of repression, after expatiating on the excellent condition of the country, went on to assert that if obstacles to the Government should arise, which he as yet did not foresee, he should find strength to overcome them in the loyalty of his people. The covert threat was not lost upon his audience; the address moved in the Lower House expressed the prevailing mistrust. Concurrence between the sovereign and the interests of his people was, it declared, the necessary condition for the good working of the charter; that sympathy was now broken, the administration had acted, and was continuing to act, as though the people were disaffected. The King was intreated to choose between his faithful Parliament and these evil counsellors. Charles did not refuse to receive the address, but stated in reply to it, that though grieved to hear that sympathy between himself and his people no longer existed, he had no intention of receding from his former view. The next day the Chamber was summarily prorogued, the first instance since the restoration of so strong a measure, and in May dissolved, a new Parliament being summoned for August. The elections went constantly against the Government, in spite of an attempt to rouse the love of glory in the people by an expedition to Algiers, and of a personal address by the King, who begged the electors to rally round him for the support of the royal prerogative. "It is your King who requires this of you, it is as a father he summons you, do your duty and I will do mine," were his closing words.

[Sidenote: Unconstitutional conduct of the French ministry.]

Their ill success in the elections reduced the ministers to a dilemma. They must either resign or again meet a hostile Parliament, or (a third alternative) proceed in some unconstitutional way. To all outward appearance they intended to pursue the second course, and the deputies actually set out on their journey towards Paris. Polignac and his friends had hoped to purchase leave to carry on the Government in their own way by introducing a popular budget, while the eyes of the people were dazzled by the military successes in Algiers. Finding this out of the question, at the last hour they determined upon an unconstitutional act. On the 21st of July, three ordinances were introduced to the Council, with an explanatory memorial. This memorial declared that the charter contained no promise of protection to the periodical press, and that the periodical press had been injurious, especially to the military affairs in Algiers, and that it must therefore be suppressed; while the highest duty of Government (its own preservation) authorized the setting aside of the charter, when all efforts to secure a favourable house had been exhausted in vain. The three ordinances suspended the liberty of the periodical press, dissolved the Chamber of Deputies, and altered, to suit the views of the Court, the structure of the chamber hereafter to be chosen.

[Sidenote: Outbreak of the Revolution.]

[Sidenote: Abdication of Charles X.]

The ordinances were kept a profound secret, and were given to the Moniteur to publish at midnight on the 25th of July. Their effect was an immediate outbreak, headed by the opposition newspaper editors. A protest, signed by forty-four of them, was issued on the 26th, declaring that the Government had forfeited its right to obedience. There was a panic on the Exchange, and all things promised a revolution, the success of which could scarcely be doubtful, as the army was deeply infected with disaffection, and there were not more than 6000 trustworthy troops, under the command of Marmont, himself inclined to constitutional views. However, the ministry seem to have persuaded themselves that the effervescence was temporary, and on the 27th an attempt was made to suppress the protest of the press; the printing offices were closed, and while the police hammered at the doors unaided by the lookers-on, the papers were distributed by thousands from the upper windows. The case even came before one of the courts of law, as one of the printers was sued for breach of contract for refusing to print; the Tribunal of Commerce declared that the ordinance, being against the charter, could not be binding. So highly-strung a state of public feeling could not last long. Some deputies had assembled to discuss how they should act; the electors of Paris sent to them, and begged them to assume the command of the movement, asserting that the insurrection was already begun, the armourers' shops had been cleared, and that other signs of immediate revolution were visible. The deputies postponed their reply till the following morning; by that time the people had taken the law into their own hands. On all sides barricades were being rapidly thrown up; the Hôtel de Ville was seized, the tricolour flag hoisted, and the tocsin rang, while the troops were distributed in various parts of the town. Marmont, who knew the temper of the army, despatched a messenger to the King at St. Cloud to urge upon him the necessity of concession. The ministry was in permanent session in the Tuileries, and a state of siege having been declared, Marmont became head of the Government. With him the populace tried to treat. Himself inclined to peace, he could only answer that his orders were to use force. He however offered to send another messenger to St. Cloud; the reply brought was to concentrate his forces, and to act with masses. The answer, which implied the suppression of the revolt at all hazards, was quite useless--the soldiers had rapidly deserted; those who kept to their allegiance had not been supplied with food, and weary and dispirited, were gradually withdrawn. The uproar continued all night, and fresh barricades were hourly springing up. On the 29th the same scenes continued, the troops constantly fraternizing more and more with the mob, and in the afternoon Marmont found himself obliged to march with all the troops he could collect to St. Cloud to secure the safety of the King. It seems that up to that evening Charles and his courtiers still believed that they had only an émeute to encounter, but the next day, as no good news arrived, the King found himself gradually deserted, and at three in the morning of the last day of July himself drove off. When he heard that Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, had accepted the post of Lieutenant of the kingdom, he made a final effort to save his dynasty by abdicating in favour of his grandson, the Duke of Berri. The step was entirely fruitless; he was recommended to withdraw quietly. He took the advice, repaired to Cherbourg, and arrived at Spithead on the 17th of August. After some residence at Lulworth, Charles accepted the hospitality of the English King, who had offered him the use of Holyrood House.

[Sidenote: Death of George IV.]

In the midst of this revolution, George IV., who had for some years been seriously ill, and who since the trial of his wife had withdrawn himself much from public observation, died. His danger had been hidden from the people, probably at his own request. But on the 26th of June he died, a victim to a complication of diseases which had rendered his later years miserable.

[Sidenote: Review of Wellington's administration.]

[Sidenote: His isolated position.]

Throughout the last session of the reign Wellington had occupied a position which could not long be maintained. There was no doubt that an earnest effort might immediately have driven his administration from office. He had broken with the old high Tories by the Catholic Emancipation and by his financial policy. He had quarrelled with the Canningites by insisting upon the resignation of Huskisson. He had indeed made some approaches towards the Whigs, and admitted both Scarlet and Lord Roslin to office, but his views rendered it impossible that any real union with them should be thought of. He thus stood absolutely alone, allowed to remain in office chiefly because men thought him the only minister fit to deal with the vacillating and unprincipled King, and because a speedy change on George's death was expected. Consequently the session was passed in somewhat meaningless discussions, and in attacks to which the arbitrary and self-confident character of Wellington laid him open. Though the settlement of Greece was finally completed, his foreign policy, as we have seen, which seemed to aim at little else than at keeping things exactly as they were, met with little approbation. Attacks against the press in which he engaged seemed at once somewhat to lower his dignity, and to give openings for the assaults of the Liberals. His financial measures, although he effected a saving of upwards of a million in the payment of the Civil Service, diminished but little the weight of taxation, while continued disturbances in Ireland, and widespread discontent and misery among the working-classes, especially in the silk trade, threw gloom over all the country.

WILLIAM IV.

1830-1837.

Born 1765 = Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, 1818.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

France. | Austria. | Spain. | Portugal. Charles X., 1824. |Francis II., 1792.|Ferdinand VII., 1813.|Miguel, 1828. Louis Philippe, |Ferdinand, 1835. |Isabella II., 1833. |Maria, 1834. 1830.

Prussia. | Russia. | Denmark. | Sweden. Frederick-William | Nicholas, 1825. |Frederick VI., | Charles XIV., III., 1797-1840. | | 1808-1839. | 1818-1844.

POPES.--Pius VIII., 1829. Gregory XVI., 1831.

Lord Chancellors. | First Lords of the Treasury. | April 1827. Lyndhurst. | Jan. 1828. Wellington. Nov. 1830. Brougham. | Nov. 1830. Grey. Nov. 1834. Lyndhurst. | July 1834. Melbourne. April 1835. In Commission. | Nov. 1835. Wellington. Feb. 1836. Cottenham. | Dec. 1834. Peel. | April 1835. Melbourne. | Chancellors of the Exchequer. | Secretaries (Foreign and Home). | Nov. 1830 { Palmerston. Jan. 1828. Goulburn. | { Melbourne. Nov. 1830. Althorp. | July 1834 { Palmerston. Nov. 1834. Wellington. | { Duncannon. Dec. 1834. Peel. | Nov. 1834 { Wellington. April 1835. Spring Rice. | { Wellington. | Dec. 1834 { Wellington. | { Goulburn. | April 1835 { Palmerston. | { Russell.

[Sidenote: Character of William IV.]

It was perhaps fortunate that George IV. was succeeded by a man of very different character, whose simplicity and geniality speedily made him as popular as his brother had been the reverse. The little care with which he preserved the outward forms of dignity shocked the older Tories; the freedom with which he admitted men of both parties to his table and his Court seemed to promise a reign conducted on constitutional principles and without party bias on the part of the Crown. The popularity of the King was at the time of great importance, because the excitement of the days of July in France spread rapidly over Europe, especially in Belgium and Poland, and met with great sympathy in England. Had an unpopular monarch been upon the throne the Crown might easily have been involved in the quarrel with the people.

[Sidenote: Effect of the July Revolution in Belgium and Poland.]

In Belgium the revolutionary spirit assumed the form of a national desire on the part of the French-speaking Belgians to sever themselves from the Dutch kingdom to which they had been attached by the Treaties of Vienna. There was good ground for their discontent. The King of the Netherlands, a clever but injudicious man, had failed to fulfil his engagements, and had ruled entirely in the interests of the Dutch part of his kingdom. The liberty of the press granted by the constitution had been superseded by a royal ordinance, intended to be temporary, but still remaining in force; a judicial system by which the judges were the nominees of the Crown had superseded the enactments of the constitution, by which the judges were elective and irremoveable; the King had twisted the clause recommending to his care the interests of education to mean that education should be entirely in the power of the Crown; the French language had been proscribed in all public acts, and business had to be carried on in Dutch; an undue proportion of the taxes was laid upon Belgium, and Protestants were chiefly employed both in public and educational offices, though absolute equality of religions had been guaranteed. There is no need to explain the grievances of the Poles. Destroyed as a nation, divided recklessly among their powerful neighbours, it was only too natural that they should at once accept any hope of freedom.

[Sidenote: Effect of the July Revolution in England.]

In England the Revolution in France met with universal sympathy and admiration. Among those classes which of late years had been in a constant state of discontent, it was accepted as an example to be at once followed. But the orderly and self-restrained manner in which the change in France had been effected had a far different and more important effect than this. It seemed to show the possibility of great and thorough changes being carried out without the excesses which had hitherto accompanied revolutions, and had frightened the well-to-do middle classes from any co-operation with the more eager and innovating working-men. It seemed possible that the great question, which had been almost crushed by the French wars and by the lengthened tenure of office by the Tories, might be revived and brought to a successful conclusion without opening the flood-gates of social anarchy. Parliamentary reform was at once taken up by the Whigs and by the great middle class of England, who determined to try whether they could not win it in some less objectionable form than it had assumed in the hands of radical demagogues.

[Sidenote: Position of Wellington's ministry.]

In the midst of this renewed excitement both on the Continent and in England, the ministry of Wellington, cut off from its old friends and disowned by those whose policy it had been enforced to adopt, stood as representative of the bygone system. The minister, though he had already so frequently yielded to the pressure of circumstances, was regarded as the friend of Polignac, the fallen French minister. His foreign policy read by this light seemed to be directed entirely to uphold the principles which had actuated the Tory Government at the time of the Vienna Treaty. He was known to be at heart an enemy of all change, and his conduct was therefore watched at this crisis with extreme anxiety. It was felt at the time, and has since been confessed, that his ministry during the last session had existed only by the toleration of its enemies. With the death of the King the chief necessity for retaining the Duke in his position had disappeared, and the time seemed to have arrived for sweeping away the Government, which was merely obstructive and bent at the best in keeping things exactly as they were. The dissolution which necessarily followed the accession of the new King afforded the Duke's enemies the opportunity they required. In the midst of much excitement, for the reformers had already begun to cover the land with associations, the elections took place, with a result disastrous to Government. There was a loss of at least fifty Government seats. While the Liberals made extreme and successful efforts in places where the elections were open, the Tory proprietors of boroughs, in their hatred to Wellington, whom they regarded as their betrayer, brought in anti-ministerial nominees. The temper of the people was shown by the election of Brougham, voluntarily and without expense, to the representation of Yorkshire, by the loss of their seats by two brothers and a brother-in-law of Peel, undoubtedly the most important member of the Government after the Premier, and by the fact that of the eighty-two representatives of English counties not more twenty were ministerial. Such a change no doubt offered much hope for the peaceful and parliamentary character of the constitutional advance which it seemed now impossible to avoid.

[Sidenote: Danger from O'Connell's agitation for repeal,]

[Sidenote: and from rick-burning.]

[Sidenote: Death of Huskisson.]

But there were still great dangers threatening the country. In Ireland O'Connell was spending all his energies in preaching the necessity of repeal, and heaping fierce and unmeaning words of hatred upon the ministry. He had re-established the Association under the name of "The Friends of Ireland," and when the Irish Government declared this illegal, it assumed a new form as the Society of Irish Volunteers. The lower classes were in a state of wild excitement, and their belief in their leader was not checked by the inconsistency with which he now extolled the Revolution in Belgium and in France, though hitherto, in his love of Catholicism, the Catholic and Jesuit-loving Bourbons had been the main subjects of his praise; nor did even the want of courage with which he refused to give satisfaction for the insults he had heaped on Lord Hardinge injure him with his followers. In October it was found necessary in Tipperary to take means for suppressing an outbreak by the use of the soldiery. In England events bearing a strong resemblance to the opening of a revolution began to be visible. The breaking of machines both in manufacturing and agricultural districts, and worse than that, in the South of England rick-burning, became constant. No efforts and no rewards could arrive at a true knowledge of the perpetrators of this crime. The farmers were kept in a constant state of nervous anxiety. A certain number of people were apprehended and hanged on the charge, but any man was still liable to find his ricks, in spite of all his care, suddenly and mysteriously bursting into flames. In London, too, the old demagogues began to make their appearance. Hunt and Cobbett were again haranguing crowds and filling their minds with hopes of social equality. Meanwhile the ministry took no step to declare its intention, and made no advances towards strengthening itself by union with any other party. It seemed indeed possible for a moment that the Duke would again yield, readmit the Canningites to his party, and produce some very moderate reform. If such a plan existed, it disappeared after the death of Huskisson. On the 15th of September a number of guests, among whom were the Minister, were asked to attend the opening of the first great railway in England, running between Manchester and Liverpool. The train, in which the guests were, stopped for water at Parkside. Several gentlemen left their seats, and a mutual friend brought Huskisson to the carriage where Wellington sat to attempt a reconciliation. The door was open as the old friends greeted each other warmly. Suddenly a train came up upon the other line, there was a cry of "Get to your seats;" flurried and unable, apparently, to pass the open door, Huskisson fell across the line, and was so severely injured that he died the same evening. The rest of Canning's followers, although their great leader had been an enemy to reform, at once made it plain that they had joined the Opposition.

[Sidenote: Parliament. Nov. 2, 1830.]

[Sidenote: Resignation of the ministry.]

It was thus, with unusual anxiety as to the conduct to be expected from the ministry, that the opening of Parliament on the 2nd of November was awaited. The worst enemies of the Duke could scarcely have hoped for a more ill-judged production than the King's speech. There was no sign that the very critical state of the country was even acknowledged. The change of dynasty in France was mentioned and accepted, the unpopular policy of the Government with regard to Miguel praised, the civil war in Belgium spoken of in terms of severe reprobation, and a determination expressed to uphold the present political system; the disturbed temper of the people in England and Ireland was mentioned with indignation, and the firm purpose of Government declared to repress it by every means in their power. Of recognition of the necessity of listening to what had now become the expressed wish of the nation there was not a word. If anything could be wanted to strengthen the impression caused by the speech, and to make it clear that the ministry was more conservative than ever, it was afforded by Wellington's words in the debate on the address in answer to Lord Grey's recommendation that some plan of reform should be undertaken. He declared his belief in the perfection of the legislative system. It possessed the full and entire confidence of the country; he was not therefore prepared to bring forward any measure of reform, and might declare at once that "as long as he held any station in the government of the country, he should always feel it his duty to resist such measures when proposed by others." It was a challenge to the reformers which was speedily answered. On the same night Brougham announced his intention of bringing forward a motion for reform on the 16th, and on that night the fate of the ministry must have been decided. In the interval before the critical day the excitement of the people was so great that the King's visit to the City had to be postponed, because Wellington was afraid to accompany him unless under a strong armed escort. But before that day arrived the ministry found an opportunity for resigning. Among the topics of the speech was the reform of the Civil List. On the 15th Sir Henry Parnell brought in a motion for a Select Committee; the ministry opposed it on the ground that no further economy was possible, and being beaten by a majority of twenty-nine, after taking one day to consider, announced on the 16th that their resignation had been accepted, and thus saved themselves from defeat on the more momentous question of reform. During the formation of the new ministry Brougham's motion was postponed, and it was almost immediately known that he had passed into the Upper House as Lord Chancellor, and that the first business of the new Government would be the production of a Reform Bill.

[Sidenote: Formation of Lord Grey's ministry.]

At such a crisis it was impossible that any statesman except Lord Grey should be intrusted with the formation of a Cabinet. Now nearly seventy years of age, he had been the prominent leader in every attempt at parliamentary reform for the last forty years. He found no difficulty in selecting his ministers. As far as talents and debating power went the Liberal party was very strong; it was not yet discovered that the long absence of the party from office, and its consequent ignorance of the routine and traditions of official work had rendered most of its members rather weak administrators. The Chancellorship of the Exchequer was given to Lord Althorp, a most amiable and excellent man, a steady partisan of reform and retrenchment, but of an easy and not very vigorous character. Lord Lansdowne was President of the Council; Lambton, now become Lord Durham, Grey's son-in-law, was Lord Privy Seal; the Secretaryships were supplied from the ranks of the Canningites; Palmerston, Melbourne, and Goderich were respectively Foreign, Home, and Colonial Secretaries. Charles Grant was President of the Board of Control. Holland, Auckland, and Graham were also in the Cabinet. In office, but not of the Cabinet, were Lord John Russell as Paymaster-General, and Mr. Stanley, subsequently Lord Derby, as Secretary for Ireland.

[Sidenote: Difficulties attending reform.]

The duty which this ministry undertook was by no means a light one; for though it was plain that reform in some shape or other could no longer be delayed, its introduction was beset with difficulties, of which the greatest was by no means the opposition to be apprehended from the open opponents of the measure. Any advance towards a fair representation was certain to meet with the strongest opposition from men who regarded any change as revolutionary, and saw a diminution of their own interests in the slightest attacks upon the system of nominee boroughs. But such bigoted and selfish opposition might certainly sooner or later be overcome. A far greater danger was to be found in the exaggerated hopes which had been fostered for many years among the suffering artisans, who had been taught by their leaders and demagogues to ascribe all their miseries to the want of fair representation. No measure which a ministry, aristocratic in its character as the present ministry was, could introduce, no measure which could satisfy the intelligent middle classes, to whom social change was almost as abhorrent as to the Tories, could fail to cause disappointment to the hopes of the lower classes; and when they found how little practical relief they would gain by the measure, there was only too much danger lest the revolution of which the opponents of the measure were so fond of talking might really come into existence. Signs of popular discontent were, as has been already mentioned, clearly to be seen. Rick-burning still continued its course in the South, and trades unions in their most aggravated form, and accompanied by murder, had made their appearance in the manufacturing districts. Extreme measures, such as the issuing of a special commission in the disturbed districts, were urged upon the Government; but Lord Grey replied that he considered the regular powers of the Government, if properly used, were sufficient for all purposes. In fact, the ministry understood that the contest was not an ordinary parliamentary one; it was scarcely to be expected that of its own free will the House of Commons should accept a Bill which must exclude many of its members from their seats; it was as the spokesmen of a great national wish that the ministers regarded themselves, and they intended to rely upon the nation for their support. Not only did they therefore refrain from any exceptional measures for the suppression of disturbance, they also allowed to pass unquestioned the legality of the numerous political unions which, following the example of the Union of Birmingham, of which Mr. Attwood was the president, had sprung into existence all over England, and which aimed at bringing into some sort of harmony the demands of the wealthy and poorer classes. The ministry had in fact determined to use all expressions of the national temper, even when verging upon breaches of the Constitution, to forward what they conceived to be the great healing measure which the evils of the times demanded. The struggle thus assumed a far more dignified form than that of an ordinary political question. In its first stage it was the people, as usual with aristocratic leaders, who demanded and insisted upon their will being heard by the Lower House. When that House had been reconstituted, and become favourable to the popular claims, it was the people speaking by the voice of their constitutionally chosen representatives, supported by an irresistible and probably unconstitutional action from without, which engaged in a life and death struggle with the aristocracy, clinging tenaciously to their ancient privileges.

[Sidenote: Reception of the Reform Bill. March 1, 1831.]

On the 3rd of February, when the Parliament reassembled, the intention of the ministry to produce a measure of parliamentary reform in both Houses was made known. The day for its introduction was fixed for the 1st of March. The interval was passed in Parliament in the ordinary business of the session, and in the introduction of a budget which, betraying as it clearly did a tendency towards the policy of Huskisson in favour of the manufacturing industries, was received with an opposition which showed the temper of the House, and which would probably under ordinary circumstances have caused the fall of the ministry. But it was understood that it was upon reform and upon no other question that the fate of the Government depended. Without the walls of Parliament agitation was vigorously at work. Petition after petition for and against the approaching measure was prepared, and the whole country was upon the tiptoe of expectation when on the appointed day Lord John Russell made his statement as to the character of the Bill. Although it has since been found necessary more than once to enlarge it, at the time the completeness of the Bill surprised even the friends of Government, while it seemed to its opponents little better than an ill-timed jest. As in all Bills for reform of the representation, there were two points to be regarded: in the first place, to secure that the representatives of the people should be really representatives and not nominees; in the second place, to secure by the arrangement of the franchise that they should as far as practicable represent all classes of the nation. On the first of these points the Bill was complete, with very few exceptions rotten boroughs were entirely swept away; it is on the second point that subsequent legislation has been found necessary. The Bill as originally presented destroyed at once sixty rotten boroughs, but with regard to the franchise and the distribution of seats, as will be seen subsequently, it showed considerable favour to the counties, that is to the landed interest and to the middle classes, excluding entirely the artisan class, which, when its members are prosperous and possess property, is one of the most valuable elements in the constitution of the nation. As Lord John Russell read the list of disfranchised boroughs, he was greeted with shouts of laughter and ironical cries of "Hear" from the members who represented them. The debate on the first reading continued for seven nights; the chief objection raised was that the balance of the Constitution would be changed and the power of the House of Lords diminished. It was, however, passed without division, the struggle being deferred to the second reading. Although its deficiencies were obvious enough to the advanced reformers, the importance of securing the one great step in advance which it promised in the annihilation of rotten boroughs caused its general acceptance, and "The Bill and nothing but the Bill" became the watchword of the Liberal party in England. There was considerable disturbance, as was to be expected, throughout the country, and in anticipation of a strong opposition many of the political unions came to the formal determination that, if necessary, they would refrain from paying taxes, and would even march to London; they issued lists showing the numbers on which they could count, and it began to be plain that, if constitutional means failed, the Bill would be carried by unconstitutional pressure.

[Sidenote: The second reading of the Reform Bill. March 21.]

[Sidenote: Dissolution of the Parliament. April 22.]

The second reading at length came on, and in the fullest House ever known, 608 members being present, the ministry secured a majority of one. Precedent would have demanded their resignation, but regarding themselves as charged with a great national duty they kept their places, and all England illuminated at the news. The next process was to pass the Bill through Committee, and there the weakness of the Government at once disclosed itself. They were defeated by a majority of eight on a clause for reducing the whole number of members, and three days afterwards the House refused to go into a question of supply. The ministry, determined to bring matters to a crisis, regarded this, not without some exaggeration, as a refusal of supplies, and declared that they could do nothing but resign; but the King, as yet true to them, refused their resignation, at the same time expressing a very strong wish not to dissolve the House. As the Parliament was now in its first session, this wish of the King was by no means unnatural, yet only by a dissolution could the ministers and the Reform Bill be saved. They themselves subsequently declared their belief that this was the real crisis of the question. The Opposition also felt the importance of the moment, and through their leader, Lord Wharnecliffe, moved an address to the King, remonstrating against the intended dissolution. What the arguments of the ministry had been unable to effect was done at once by this ill-judged piece of violence, which the King considered an attack upon his prerogative. He immediately declared his determination to dissolve the House. The scene of excitement in the Lords has rarely been equalled when he suddenly made his appearance and demanded the presence of the Commons. An equally tumultuous scene had been going forward in the Lower House, the Speaker had himself been unable to obtain a hearing. At the summons of the Usher of the Black Rod, the Commons appeared at the bar of the Upper House, and were at once told by the King, in an unusually cheerful and firm tone, that he had come there for the purpose of proroguing them, with a view to immediate dissolution, in order to ascertain the sense of his people on the question of representation.

[Sidenote: The Bill passes in the Commons. Sept. 23.]

[Sidenote: The Bill rejected in the Lords. Oct. 8.]

The dissolution thus taking place in the midst of the violent and strongly-organized agitation of the nation, virtually secured the passing of the Bill, although a long and dangerous period of contest had yet to be passed. That the mob should break out here and there in riots was inevitable; but it was the firm and determined attitude, not of the rioters, but of the great body of intelligent non-electors, which really influenced the elections. In all directions reformers were successful. Six county members only were opposed to the Bill, and when in July the second reading came on, the ministers found themselves in a majority of 136. Manifestly outnumbered, the opponents to the measure had recourse to an irritating form of warfare. Every single detail was fought over in Committee. There was a hope that, as the summer went on, the patience of members would be tired out, that the session must either be terminated or an accidental victory be snatched from the Government. So weary was the nation of the lengthened delay, that the political unions held a meeting to settle how much longer they would wait, but the question was too important to allow of any laxity on the part of its supporters, and on the 7th of September the report of the Committee was brought up. On the 21st, after another debate of three nights, the Bill passed the Commons by a majority of 109. Its fate now rested with the Peers, and they were not long in showing how they meant to deal with it. On the first reading it was thrown out by a majority of forty-one. The opponents of the measure fondly hoped that its fate and that of the administration were now sealed, but the Lords had not yet secured a victory. Indignant at the rejection of their Bill, the Commons at once passed a vote of confidence in the ministry, and all fear of their resignation was thus removed.

[Sidenote: Consequent riots in the country.]

[Sidenote: Organized action of the political unions.]

But the indignation of the Commons was nothing to that of the people at large, who saw the measure from which they hoped so much snatched from them by the votes of a few wealthy and important men, who in no sense represented them, and whose opposition bore in the popular eye all the appearance of a selfish struggle for an exclusive and injurious privilege. Again the disorderly mobs of London and other large towns broke out into riots, but the number of rioters was usually few, and many of them were known as belonging to the regular criminal and ruffianly class. Of these riots the most important was that which occurred in Bristol on the 29th of October. The occasion was the public entry of Sir Charles Wetherell, a bitter opponent of reform, into the city, of which he was recorder. It afforded another instance of the mismanagement of the local magistracy. A mob, which seems never to have reached a thousand in number, took possession of the town for two days, broke into the mansion-house, and got drunk in the cellars, and then, undisturbed, and after giving full notice of their intention, set fire to Queen's Square, and burnt two sides of it to the ground. The military had been in the town all day; at length they proceeded to act, and re-established order with little difficulty, though with some loss of life. Their commander was Colonel Brereton. The mayor and magistrates had weakly given him but a general authority to act on his discretion, willing no doubt to shift the responsibility to his shoulders. A man of kind heart, he had shrunk from acting without more distinct authority; he had tried his best to calm the crowd by friendly means, which only increased their confidence and encouraged them with hopes of impunity. He was tried by court martial, and, unable to face the prospect of a slur on his professional character, committed suicide. But far more important than these riots was the constantly increasing vigour shown by the organized unions. Hitherto left untouched by the Government, they now proceeded to measures which clearly brought them under the action of the law. The London Radicals held a great meeting on the 31st of October in Lincoln's Inn Fields, presided over by Sir Francis Burdett, when a National Union was established, intended to draw together the various unions of the country, and to form a central directory of delegates. Before the meeting separated, it was plain that some of its members were ready to go much further than the unions had yet gone, and the Metropolitan Union summoned a meeting for the 7th of November, and issued a programme demanding the abolition of all hereditary privileges and distinctions of rank. On this occasion the Government acted quickly and wisely. Lord Melbourne received a deputation of the Union, and persuaded them to postpone their meeting, and shortly afterwards, on the 22nd of November, a proclamation was issued for the suppression of such political clubs.

[Sidenote: Opposition of the King.]

[Sidenote: The Bill passes on the second reading in the Lords. April 14, 1832.]

This proclamation is believed to have been put forward at the instigation of the King, who had been much frightened by the riots at Bristol, and was constantly worked upon by the ladies of the Court, who were strong anti-reformers. His support could be no longer relied on by the ministry, and at this time his help was more especially necessary, as it began to dawn upon men's minds that nothing short of a large creation of Peers could overwhelm the obstinate majority of the Upper House, and secure the passage of the Bill. As the last Bill had been rejected, before the fight in the Upper House could be recommenced the whole work had to be gone through again in the House of Commons. It was not long delayed there. Brought in by Lord John Russell on the 12th of December, it finally passed the Commons by a majority of 116 on the 23rd of March. On the 14th of April the second reading of the Bill in the Lords took place, and it became apparent that a certain number of the Peers had taken fright at the threatened increase to their numbers, and had begun to recognize the danger of their obstructive policy; the ministry succeeded in obtaining a majority of nine.

[Sidenote: Preparations during the recess.]

[Sidenote: The Bill rejected in the Lords. May 7.]

The 7th of May, after the Easter holidays, was the day fixed for the Committee on the Bill. The holidays were well used by the reformers outside Parliament. Monster meetings were everywhere held, and the Political Union of Birmingham, which held the first rank among the popular organizations, appointed a great meeting of all the unions of the counties of Warwick, Worcester, and Stafford for the same day as the opening of Parliament. The recess was not less eagerly employed by the anti-reformers; his Tory friends, his courtiers, his wife, and his sisters, worked upon the King's mind; he was persuaded to refuse the creation of Peers, and to try once more what coercion could do in suppressing the national ferment; the Duke of Wellington was applied to, and orders to keep the troops in readiness were sent to various parts of England, especially to Birmingham. Thus, when the day arrived, while 150,000 men assembled at Newhall Hill in Birmingham were swearing with bare heads and raised hands, "With unbroken faith, through every peril and privation, we here devote ourselves and our children to our country's cause," Lord Lyndhurst, who had been most active in organizing the present opposition, had contrived to secure a majority of thirty-five in the House of Lords for a motion postponing the disfranchising clauses of the Bill.

[Sidenote: The ministry resigns. The Duke of Wellington fails to form a ministry.]

[Sidenote: The old ministry returns to office. May 15.]

[Sidenote: The Bill passes in the Lords. June 4.]

The antagonistic forces seemed to have come to a final issue, from which there was no escape except by the creation of Peers, a measure as repugnant to the aristocratic feeling of Lord Grey as to the King. The Prime Minister, however, explaining the situation, demanded of the King the one necessary step. He was refused, and resigned. His resignation was accepted, and the Duke of Wellington was sent for to attempt to form a Conservative ministry. At the same time things had gone too far for complete repression, and the Duke was instructed to form a ministry which would introduce some extensive measure of reform. The news of the fall of the ministry was received in fierce anger by the whole people. The papers came out in mourning. The National Union decreed that whoever should advise a dissolution was a public enemy. Petitions praying that no supplies should be granted till the Bill was passed were signed in a few hours by many thousands of people, and sent to London, where they were joyfully received by the House of Commons. The great Birmingham Union made preparations to march to London 200,000 strong, and encamp on Hampstead Heath. Two insurmountable difficulties met the Duke of Wellington, and prevented the inevitable ruin which must have followed his success. It became clear to him that the military could not be trusted, that repression by force was out of the question, and he could find no Conservatives sufficiently courageous to join him in the ministry. The King was obliged again to have recourse to his former ministers. It was plain to the Lords that further opposition was useless, and would lead only to a public proof of the powerlessness of their resistance by the creation of new Peers. They therefore wisely attended to a circular letter from the King himself, begging them to withdraw their opposition. Wellington left the House, and was followed by about a hundred other Peers; the Bishops in a body withdrew their opposition, and the Bill was finally carried by a considerable majority.

[Sidenote: Description of the Reform Bill.]

The measure as passed was not and could not be final, but it was a wide, comprehensive and judicious beginning. The chief evil of the representation had been the existence of nomination and rotten boroughs; of these 56, having less than 2000 inhabitants, were disfranchised, and 111 seats left vacant. Thirty boroughs, with less than 4000 inhabitants, were each deprived of one member; Weymouth and Melcombe Regis lost two. There were thus 143 seats to dispose of. Of these 65 went to the counties, an arrangement which showed the still unbroken power of the landed aristocracy, twenty-two large towns received the right of returning two members, and 21 the right of returning one. The remaining 13 were left for Ireland and Scotland. The second evil was the very irregular and restricted franchise. In some towns the freemen alone elected; in others the suffrage was almost universal; the whole number of electors on the roll was very small. A uniform £10 household franchise was now established in boroughs, but, as a concession to the rights of vested interests, freemen of corporate towns who resided within the borough, and who had been created before 1831, were allowed to retain their votes. In the counties copyholders and leaseholders were added to the constituencies, and by a clause introduced by the Marquis of Chandos, and carried in opposition to the Government, tenants at will paying a rent of £50 were also enfranchised. In this point again the landed interest showed its power, as such tenants were only too liable to be influenced by their landlords. At the same time, to decrease the disorders and expenses of elections, the duration of the poll was shortened. The period of fifteen days during which in county elections votes could be taken was restricted to two in England and to five in Ireland. Along with the English Bill, Reform Bills for Scotland and Ireland were also produced and passed. In Scotland the representation had been far more imperfect than in England; it was now wholly remodelled. The county franchise was given to all owners of property, and long leaseholders of the value of £10 a year, and even to tenants for shorter periods paying a rent of £50; in the burghs the same £10 franchise was established as in England. The number of burgh representatives was changed from fifteen to twenty-three. The number of county members remained the same as before, but with some slight difference in distribution. To Ireland four additional boroughs were allowed, the counties there remained the same. But considerable discontent was caused by the adoption of the £10 freehold franchise in the counties, which very much restricted the number of the electors, from whom it will be remembered that till quite lately a 40s. qualification only was required.

[Sidenote: Importance of the measure.]

Thus was completed, after a delay of nearly an hundred and fifty years, the second act of the English Revolution. Incomplete and aristocratic in its character, the movement of 1688 yet established the superiority of Parliament as a whole, and its predominance over the royal power. From that time onwards the Government had been in the hands of the aristocracy, from whichever of the political parties the members of the administration had been drawn. The attempt of George III. to re-establish the power of the Crown had been attended with some success as long as it was supported by the good wishes of the people. Events had allied him with a party bent on the repression of all popular movements and of all constitutional growth. Submissive during the war, the people on the return of peace had been aroused to a sense of the injury under which they suffered by their exclusion from all share in the Government. Events in France had brought their discontent to a climax, and they had now at length gained possession of that part of the Legislature which had long pretended falsely to represent them.

[Sidenote: Introduction of the middle classes to power.]

But although the change effected by the Reform Bill at first sight appears to have been political, it was in fact social. It was the introduction of a wholly new class of society into the duties of Government. The aristocratic classes, which had hitherto had the monopoly of power, were forced to admit to an equality with themselves the middle class, which the progress of society, and the wonderful advance of material improvement during the last half century, had raised to a position so important that its claims could no longer be withstood. Its victory had been secured by a twofold alliance. On the one hand it had taken advantage of the real wants of the classes below it, and of the social ideas which had been called into existence by the French Revolution; it had not scrupled to employ the modern arts of agitation, or to bring what cannot be regarded in any other light than as an unconstitutional pressure to bear upon Parliament. On the other hand it had worked constitutionally by an alliance with one of the governing classes, namely, the Whigs. Long exclusion from office had as usual made this party alive to the existence of abuses, the defensive and obstructive attitude of the Tories had reawakened its desire for constitutional growth, and the philosophy and writings of the time, especially those of Bentham and of the authors of the Edinburgh Review, had taken considerable hold of its leading members. The Whig Government therefore, with complete honesty, and in the midst of considerable danger and difficulty, accepted the alliance which the middle classes offered it, and honourably fulfilled its share of the compact. Now that the great Bill was passed, it remained to be seen how far the Whigs were willing to forego their old aristocratic prejudices, and how far their strength would allow them to oppose the pressure of the extreme Radicals, whose alliance they had been forced to accept along with that of the middle class.

[Sidenote: Anxiety as to the effect of the change.]

It was with the utmost anxiety that the character of the first reformed Parliament was watched. There was a general feeling of terror throughout England. Timid investors began to seek securities for their money in America or Denmark. There was a constant apprehension of a coming revolution which might resemble that in France; a feeling which was not appeased by occasional acts of violence throughout the country, and a fierce and dangerous assault by the London mob upon the Duke of Wellington himself. It is possible that in any other country such a revolution might have resulted; but the practical character of the English mind, which prevents it from being carried away by a passionate desire for ideal benefits, the wide diffusion and extremely strong love of property, the firm and dignified attitude of the nobility, the loyalty with which the really active part of the Tory party accepted the change and determined to make the best of it, secured tranquillity for the country during its passage through the dangerous crisis. It may also be reckoned as no small advantage to the cause of order, that the English Radicals found themselves thrown into the company of O'Connell and the Irish agitators; the clamour for repeal, the lawless violence which showed itself in the sister island, and the unscrupulous character of the demagogue who represented it, gave a strength and unity to the moderate Whig party which it would otherwise have wanted. At the same time the twofold connections and interests of the Government could not but, sooner or later, prove a cause of weakness. Their aristocratic tendencies, which remained unabated, prevented them from throwing themselves heartily into the wishes of their more popular supporters, and laid them open to the constant suspicion of an inclination towards Toryism. Their dependence on the popular party compelled them to take in hand many difficult questions for the solution of which the nation was clamouring. They had therefore to be constantly steering a middle course, and assuming an appearance of weakness which rapidly undermined their popularity, while the two tendencies which they represented, affecting the individual members of the Cabinet in different degrees, speedily led to a division among themselves. It is for these reasons that the work of the first reformed Parliament, great as it was, has an appearance of weakness as compared with the burst of popular reform which might have been expected after so great a change.

[Sidenote: Character of the reformed Parliament. Jan. 29, 1833.]

When Parliament assembled it appeared that the Whigs had on the whole a very large majority; but, besides an active and important body of Tories headed by Sir Robert Peel, there were a considerable number of Radicals, of whom Hume may be regarded as the leader, and the Irish members, for the most part the mere nominees and puppets of O'Connell, from whom opposition might be expected. There were changes both in the appearance and character of the House; the average age of the members was visibly increased, and it was evident that there would be more individual opinion, less distinctly party voting, and a greater necessity for convincing argument to ensure a majority. It was plain, too, that with much less of oratory there would be a far greater quantity of talking; and as the Government, in the King's speech, promised to introduce a number of very important Bills, it was found necessary greatly to lengthen the hours of business. At the same time, as there were no less than three hundred new members in the House, it was thought advisable to reappoint the old Speaker, Manners-Sutton, although he was a Tory in politics, a step which at once excited the displeasure of the more advanced Liberals.

[Sidenote: Critical questions to be settled.]

The questions most generally occupying men's minds, and which it might be supposed would at once become prominent, were the disturbed and wretched condition of the poor, as evidenced by the late riots and constant rick-burning; the position of the Church; slavery; and the national relations to foreign countries, especially Belgium and the Peninsula; but, before all, the condition of Ireland, and the maintenance of the Protestant Church in that country.

[Sidenote: Condition of Ireland.]

It was the Irish question which became at once the most important, and which ultimately caused the fall of the ministry. It was understood that some measures of coercion would be necessary to restore tranquillity in that country, but that they should go hand in hand with measures of reform and relief. As though to render the coming Coercion Bill more palatable, Lord Althorp, on the 12th of February, introduced a Bill for the regulation of the Irish Church. Since the Catholic Emancipation Act the state of Ireland had been becoming constantly worse. Instead of accepting the Act in a conciliatory spirit, O'Connell had used it as a stepping-stone for further demands, and had continued his course of agitation. He had been prosecuted in 1831, had pleaded guilty to holding illegal assemblies, but by the carelessness of the Whig Government he had escaped without punishment. His present demand was repeal, but the outrages which filled Ireland were either agrarian or connected with the tithes; and O'Connell skilfully managed, while by his agitation he continually kept up the discontent, to keep clear himself of any participation in the violence of his countrymen. Of course the repeal of the Union could not be for a moment thought of, but the Government could not deny that the position of the Irish Church and the collection of tithes for its support were real grievances.

[Sidenote: Position of the Irish Church.]

In a country of which the population was somewhat over seven millions, there was established a dominant Protestant Church, the members of which numbered 853,000 only. It had a staff of no less than four archbishops and eighteen bishops, many of them with very large incomes, and a body of clergy supported principally by tithes, exacted not only from its own members, but from the six million and a half Catholics. To make matters worse, the tithe was paid by the tenants, and, as the land was infinitely subdivided, in minute sums which rendered its forcible exaction most irksome and ridiculous. In many instances a man's tithe was a farthing, and in some cases not more than seven parts of a farthing. So vexatious and unjust a tax was certain to cause exasperation. In 1831 the collection of tithes became almost impossible; the collectors were murdered, the police who came to their rescue fired upon, cattle driven off that the tithe might not be paid, and the clergy were consequently reduced to such a miserable plight that some of them were actually brought to the verge of starvation. But in spite of the glaring anomaly of the existence of the Church at all, and of the ill-feeling and violence excited by the exaction of the tithes, neither Lord Grey nor Mr. Stanley, his Secretary for Ireland, could bring themselves to think of any wide measure of reform, so great was their dread of touching property or vested interests, or of in any way injuring the Church. In February 1832 committees were appointed to inquire into the system. They reported that the complete extinction of tithes by a commutation or charge upon the land was absolutely necessary. The Irish took this as an authorization of their proceedings; the outrages increased, and a system of terrorism was established, which precluded the possibility of bringing the assassins and rioters to justice. In June the Government had adopted a plan which in fact made matters worse. They authorized the advance of £60,000 to the Irish clergy, who were unable to collect their tithes, and took upon themselves the duty of collecting former arrears, at the same time promising that the tithe commutation should be undertaken. A Bill to this effect was passed, rendering commutation necessary for a term of twenty-one years. Other Bills providing for the redemption of the tithe were unfortunately allowed to stand over to the next session. But Government had now made itself a tithe collector, and was so inefficient in that capacity that it had subsequently to allow that of £104,000 due £12,000 only had been levied, and that with some loss of life.

[Sidenote: Irish Tithe Composition Bill passed. Aug. 28, 1833.]

In the year 1833 a new arrangement was consequently attempted. The whole amount of arrears for the last three years amounted to about a million. This sum the Government proposed should be advanced by an issue of Exchequer bills, to be repaid gradually by a general land tax. As there seemed only too much probability that the land tax would be refused with as great determination as the tithes, most people regarded this sum as a mere gift to the Irish clergy. The Government was, however, able to pass the Bill. The final settlement of the tithe question was postponed for several years; meanwhile the violence which attended the attempts at collecting the tithes were the chief cause of the necessity of the Coercion Bill.

[Sidenote: Althorp's Irish Church Bill. Feb. 1833.]

But the tithes, though the immediate cause of the disturbances, were only a part of the whole Church system; it was the Church itself which was the primary cause of the evil, and in the measure for the relief which was to accompany the Bill for the repression of disturbance, the ministers addressed themselves to lessen the more glaring defects of that institution; but at the same time they were as little disposed to injure the Church as the Tories themselves, and one of the chief objects of the proposed legislation was the improvement of the position of the clergy. It was thought that while the lessening of the hierarchy and the removal of some of the anomalies exhibited by the Church would be pleasing to the Irish, the Church would itself gain strength by the proposed changes. Besides the payment of tithes, a church cess, for the support of the buildings and expenses of the services, was paid indiscriminately by members of all religions, but managed by Protestant vestries. The annates, or first-fruits of livings, had been originally employed for these purposes, but in process of time had almost disappeared; such benefices as were still subject to them were to be now freed, a graduated tax to be laid upon all livings, and with the produce the Church cess was to be extinguished. This was a direct boon to the Catholics. Another common complaint was the disproportion between the number of bishoprics and the Protestant population; it was now proposed to destroy ten of these bishoprics, or rather, as the ministry was careful to explain, not to destroy but to consolidate them with those which remained. The incomes of some of the larger bishoprics were also curtailed; the surplus money thus arising was to be paid into the hands of ecclesiastical commissioners. Thus far there was not much objectionable in the Bill, though the Tories and High Churchmen of England disliked the destruction of so many sees. But there was a further measure, which opened the door to grave opposition. It was proposed to change the terms on which church lands were let so as to improve the position of the tenant without injuring the clergy. The tenant would be willing to pay for this advantage, and the sum thus gained was calculated at between two and three millions. This money would, as the mover of the Bill expressed it, be available for the purposes of the State. This had all the appearance of an act of confiscation, the property of the Church was to be taken and applied to purposes not ecclesiastical. But the Irish Secretary had as strong a view as the Tories of the sanctity of Church property, and the danger of tampering in ever so small a way with the rights of property. It was therefore found necessary by the supporters of the Bill to invent a theory to secure unanimity in the Cabinet; it was argued that the sum derived from the change of tenure did not exist before, but would be created by the present act of the Legislature, that it was therefore not Church property at all, and might be applied to the purposes of the State. The Bill in this shape was introduced by Lord Althorp on the 12th of February. It at once appeared open to objections on two sides. While O'Connell and the Irish scoffed at the relief, which consisted only in removing the church cess, and the English Radicals declared that instead of twelve bishops one was amply sufficient for the needs of the Irish Protestants, the Tories, refusing to recognize the delicate line between Church property and money gained by the Legislature from Church property, raised the cry that it was but a first step in confiscation, and threatened not the security of Church property only, but that of all other property. It appeared necessary to choose between the views of one or the other of these sets of critics, and in spite of his own views, Lord Althorp consented to be governed by the Conservative element in the Cabinet and to withdraw what was called the Appropriation clause. The removal of this clause, which contained the only important principle in the Bill, the right, namely, of Parliament to apply Church property to the wants of the State, rendered it so like a Tory measure, that with the assistance of that party it passed without difficulty in both Houses (July 30).

[Sidenote: The Coercion Bill introduced Feb. 15, 1833, carried March 29.]

But three days after the introduction of the Irish Church Bill in the House of Commons, Lord Grey introduced into the House of Lords its complement, the Coercion Bill. Here again the absence of broad liberality in the ministry was apparent. It was conceived in the spirit of the most absolute government, and implied a distinct determination to make no attempt at pacification by liberal concessions. It was the work of Mr. Stanley, the Irish Secretary, a man of great ability and vigour, but without much sympathy for the Irish character, and, as his subsequent career proved, at heart a Tory. There was no difficulty in making out a case for the Bill. A narration of a few of the crimes which had of late filled Ireland with horror made it evident that something must be done. In the province of Leinster alone, in the three months July, August, and September, there had been 1279 crimes, in the following three months the number had risen to 1646. During the year the catalogue of Irish crimes contained 172 homicides, 465 robberies, 568 burglaries, 454 acts of houghing cattle, 2095 illegal notices, 425 illegal meetings, 796 malicious injuries to property, 753 attacks on houses, 280 arsons, and 3156 serious assaults: in all upwards of 9000 crimes connected with the disturbed state of the country. Well might Mr. Macaulay say that he "solemnly declared he would rather live in the midst of many civil wars he had read of than in some parts of Ireland at this moment." It was not the number of crimes alone which rendered them terrible; they were carried on upon a system by which such terror had been excited that it was impossible to get juries to convict even after the clearest proof, or witnesses to give evidence as to what they knew. At the same time, the leaders of the people were teaching them, in public meetings and in assemblies of the so-called Association of Volunteers, to regard themselves as the victims of every form of oppression. To meet such a state of things it was proposed to place in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant, in accordance with the Proclamation Act of the 8th of George IV., 1828, power to suppress every meeting or association which he regarded as dangerous to the preservation of peace, under whatever name it might call itself, and further to declare any district to be in a disturbed state, which was then to be regarded as a proclaimed district; its inhabitants were to be confined to their houses from an hour after sunset till sunrise, the right of meeting and petitioning was withdrawn from them without leave of the Lord Lieutenant, and they were placed under martial law. The Bill further gave power to enter houses in search of arms, forbade the distribution of seditious papers, and suspended the Habeas Corpus in the proclaimed districts. The Bill passed without difficulty in the House of Lords, where it was in harmony with the general feeling. In the Lower House it was introduced on the 27th of February by Lord Althorp, who, while corroborating the accounts of the outrages in Ireland, could not help showing his dissatisfaction at the extreme severity of the Bill. Not so Mr. Stanley, who, with the fiery vehemence which characterized him, turned upon O'Connell, and overwhelmed him with a flood of bitter invective, carrying the House completely with him, and securing the passage of the Bill, which was also most ably supported by Sir Robert Peel and his friends. Its effect was immediate and most satisfactory. Within a week of its passage the Marquis of Anglesey, who had returned to his office on Grey's accession to the ministry, had suppressed the Association of Irish Volunteers, the town and county of Kilkenny were then proclaimed, but so effective was the mere dread of the measure, that it was never found necessary to hold a single court-martial in the district, and within two months there was a decrease of two-thirds in the general list of crimes. A rapid rise in the funds showed that the moneyed public at least were pleased with the vigorous measure.

[Sidenote: Changes in the ministry. March 1833.]

Mr. Stanley's share in the Bill, the severity of his views with regard to Ireland, and the personal bitterness between himself and O'Connell, rendered his further tenure of the office of Secretary undesirable. He was moved to the Colonial Office, from which Lord Goderich, now become Earl of Ripon, withdrew to accept the Privy Seal, while Lord Durham, who had hitherto held that office, retired from the ministry (March 12). Mr. Stanley was succeeded by Sir John Cam Hobhouse, who however only held the office for two months, and was in turn succeeded by Mr. Littleton (May). The withdrawal of Lord Durham, although attributed and partly due to ill-health, was probably caused principally by the growing divisions in the Cabinet. The Conservative tendencies of the Prime Minister and the severity of the Irish Act were not in accordance with Lord Durham's advanced liberalism. The shortness of Hobhouse's tenure of office may be traced to somewhat similar causes, or at least to the decrease of the popularity of Government. In company with several others he had at the late elections pledged himself to vote for the repeal of the house and window tax. In April the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Althorp, brought in his budget. By careful economy, the abolition of sinecures, and the reduction of the public expenses, he was able to show a surplus of about a million and a half after replacing the deficit of the former year. This surplus he intended to employ in reducing some taxes which he regarded as particularly heavy, such as those on soap, on marine insurances, and some of the assessed taxes. But he impartially refused to listen either to the outcry of the towns for the abolition of the house and window tax, or to the clamours of the agriculturists against the malt tax; he regarded them both as necessary sources of revenue. The carelessness of Government subjected it to a temporary defeat on a subsequent motion for the reduction of the malt tax to one half. Though the defeat caused great irritation to the ministers it was speedily retrieved. A motion against the house and window tax was also brought in, and Lord Althorp, in opposing it, argued that the removal of either tax alone would be an unfair advantage to one or other of the rival interests, and that the removal of both was impossible; he introduced an amendment to the effect that the reduction of the malt tax and the repeal of the house tax would necessitate a general property and income tax, and a change in our financial system. As this amendment was carried, both the taxes were retained; but the ministers could not but feel that they owed their success to the support of their enemies, and the popular indignation was great. Hobhouse, unable to vote against Government, and thus to redeem his pledge, felt it incumbent on him to resign both his place and seat. On appealing again to his constituents at Westminster he was rejected for Colonel de Lacy Evans, a more advanced Liberal. The same thing happened in the cases of Dr. Lushington and Mr. William Brown in the Tower Hamlets and Southwark. A great indignation meeting, attended with some violence, was held near Coldbath Fields, and several great towns passed resolutions to the effect, that the ministers, by violating the constitution of Ireland, refusing to inquire into the public distress, continuing the house and window tax, and by forcing the whole malt tax, already once repealed, upon the nation, had betrayed the confidence of the people.

[Sidenote: Weakness of the ministry.]

Thus in all directions the power of the Government was decreasing; they were divided among themselves, and gradually losing the popularity of the country. Yet they were still able to carry out successfully some of the duties they had set themselves to perform; before the close of the session they had renewed the Bank charter, settled the affairs of the East India Company, and completed the emancipation of the slaves.

[Sidenote: Renewal of the Bank charter. June.]

The last renewal of the Bank charter had been in 1800; since then events of the greatest importance with regard to currency and credit had taken place,--the resumption of cash payments at the close of the war, and the great commercial crisis of 1825 and 1826. It was felt that the system of the Bank required close examination, and in May 1832 a very influential committee had been appointed to examine it preparatory to the renewal of the charter, which came to an end in August 1833. Upon the information gained by this committee the ministerial propositions were based. On the whole it appeared clear that a single bank of issue was better than several competing banks. The Bank was therefore to retain its monopoly. The principle of the Directors, that a third of the value of their obligations should be kept in hand in specie, was considered sound; but that the public might in future have control of the issue of notes, the Bank was required to publish a weekly account of its notes and deposits, and a quarterly average showing its general condition. No other bank of more than six partners, within sixty-five miles of London, was to be allowed to issue paper, while notes of the Bank of England and its branches were made legal tender, except at the bank from which they were issued. It was hoped by this means that country banks, being able to meet their demands with bank notes, would be saved from the necessity of making large and rapid demands upon the Bank of England, and thus dangerously lessening the supply of gold. The whole sum due from the Government to the Bank, and from which that institution derived its great credit, was fourteen millions. This was regarded as too much; it was to be reduced to eleven millions, twenty-five per cent., being at once repaid to the Bank, while to balance its advantages the Bank was to receive £120,000 a year less than hitherto for the management of the National Debt. On these terms the charter was to be renewed for twenty-one years, but with an option allowed to Government for breaking it off on a year's notice after eleven years. The two points which met with the greatest opposition were the terms which the Government had made with the Bank and the compulsory currency given to bank notes. On the first of these points it seemed almost unanimously felt that the Bank had made too good a bargain; on the second it was hastily urged by many that it was a partial resumption of the inconvertible currency. It was shown without much difficulty that this was not the case, as the Bank of England was bound ultimately to meet its liabilities in gold; but even Sir Robert Peel objected to the measure, avowing his fear that it would cause a depreciation of the paper. Experience has proved that this fear was groundless, and although the arrangements with the Bank had subsequently to be somewhat modified, the Bill passed, and was a distinct advantage.

[Sidenote: Settlement of the East India Company. July.]

But, if it had been thought well to continue the monopoly of the great banking corporation in England, the whole force of the commercial feeling of the time set directly against the perpetuation of the monopoly of the East India Company. The necessity for corporate trading had disappeared. The restrictions it laid upon free trade had become only so many obstacles in the way of extended commerce. Already, in 1813, this had been so clearly felt that the merchants of the great trading centres, Liverpool, Glasgow, Paisley, and Manchester, had succeeded in procuring the admission of traders to the territories of the Company, and to India generally, but the corporation still retained the trade with China. The accounts of the Company after this renewal of its charter rendered it plain that it could not compete with private merchants. It seemed clear that in China, as in India, the destruction of the monopoly would extend commerce. It was therefore determined to destroy the Company as a commercial body, allowing it to keep its territorial position. After April 1834 its commercial property was to be sold. It was, however, to retain the government of India, and to receive for forty years an annuity from the Indian revenue of £630,000, at the close of which period Parliament might redeem it by the payment of £12,000,000. It was further arranged that all restrictions in the way of the settlement of Europeans in the East should be removed, that natives and Europeans should have equal opportunities of employment and office, and should be under one law. The Bill was vehemently opposed by Lord Ellenborough, but was carried by large majorities, and proved to be the means of opening, in accordance with the principles of free trade, an enormous market for English commerce, so that in ten years the Chinese trade had doubled, and British exports to India and Ceylon had increased from two to six millions.

[Sidenote: Emancipation of the slaves. Aug.]

[Sidenote: Condition of trade in the West India Islands.]

But the most important measure of the session was the Bill which was passed on the 30th of August for the emancipation of the slaves. The abolitionists had been successful in 1807 in putting an end to the traffic in slaves, but though raised in value and lessened in number, by means of smuggling and of the natural increase of the race the supply of human cattle had been kept up and slavery had continued. The Resolutions of 1823 had aimed at the gradual extinction of slavery, at alleviating its worst horrors, and raising the slaves to a fitting condition to receive freedom; but they had practically been inoperative: not only had they been continually thwarted by the planters, but the discovery that they had rights, and that those rights were acknowledged, caused a very natural uneasiness among the slaves, and had added greatly to the difficulties under which the planters laboured. Their position was constantly becoming worse. Injudicious protection had been afforded to sugar, their chief production. Enormous duties had been laid on it, with a preference always to the West Indian and slave-grown article. During the war the monopoly of production had fallen chiefly into their hands. They had been able to make enormous profits. As a consequence, just as in the case of corn in England, the cultivation of the sugar-cane had been carried on in the most reckless fashion. Plantations were temporarily occupied only to be exhausted or sold at a heavy loss, and fresh land taken in. In the midst of this false prosperity, a wasteful expenditure and a total want of economy, the natural consequences of easily-gotten wealth, had become prevalent; the planters as a body had become deeply involved. The cessation of the war had admitted other competitors to the market. The commercial crisis in England had seriously affected the planters' credit, and just as the greatest efforts would have been necessary to restore them at all to their old state of prosperity, their supply of slaves was diminished, it became more difficult to work their exhausted land, and the Resolutions of 1823, and subsequent orders in Council, made the employment of slave labour, which economists had long known to be really an extravagant form of labour, more and more difficult. These evils were naturally attributed to the abolitionists in England and to the Government which had even partially listened to them. As long as the unreformed Parliament existed, the West Indian interest was very strong in the House, and the planters, who believed that with some help from England, and with the management of the slaves left in their own hands, they might yet retrieve their position, were not without hopes. The accession of the Grey ministry was a heavy blow to them, for a large section of the supporters of the Government were almost as anxious for the abolition of slavery as for the passage of the Reform Bill, and it was impossible that a ministry of which Lord Brougham was the Chancellor, who had owed his last election chiefly to the abolitionists' votes, should postpone the settlement of the question long.

[Sidenote: Opposition of the planters to the orders in Council. 1831.]

The conduct of the planters forced on the crisis. A new series of orders in Council was issued in 1831 for the better and more merciful management of the slaves, for the limitation of the hours of labour, and for the establishment of official slave-overseers. All the colonies except the Crown colonies, where but little difficulty was met with, resented highly this interference with what they considered their rights and property. The language of their assemblies became disrespectful and almost rebellious. In Trinidad it was determined to stop the payment of taxes till the order was repealed, while on the other side the slaves in Jamaica burst into open rebellion, producing a loss estimated at £1,000,000. In April 1831, a great meeting in London declared that Government was liable for these losses, and claims were sent in to the Colonial Secretary for damages caused by the measures pursued by his Majesty's ministers. It was a sort of declaration of war, which was brought to a point when, on the 17th of April, Lord Harewood presented a petition from the West India interest begging for a full inquiry into the laws, usages, and condition of the West Indian colonies, and the possible future improvements, with due regard always to the rights of private property. This was in the very heat of the discussions on the Reform Bill. Bent upon his great measure, Lord Grey could not afford to risk anything at the moment. He therefore not only at once granted the committee, but allowed a sum of £100,000, which had been voted for the relief of the colonies, to be raised to £1,000,000 on account of a late destructive hurricane. On the 24th of May Sir Fowell Buxton, the leader of the abolitionists, brought the matter before the Lower House, while the Chancellor presented a gigantic petition, followed by many others, in favour of emancipation; for the great crisis was now over, Wellington's efforts to form a Government had proved futile, and the hope of the abolitionists were consequently high. But, somewhat strangely, Lord Althorp could not be induced in the Lower House to give up Canning's idea of gradual emancipation, and moved and carried amendments upon Buxton's motion in favour of the continuance of the policy of 1823. It must be remembered that the House of Commons was still unreformed, and that the great Bill was not yet carried.

[Sidenote: The Emancipation Bill passed. Aug. 30, 1833.]

With the change in the character of the House all prudential reasons for opposition on the part of the ministry disappeared, and the pressure brought to bear upon them had become much stronger. They therefore now undertook the question, and the appointment of Mr. Stanley to the Colonial Office insured the success of the measure. It was not wholly satisfactory to the abolitionists. It still bore traces of the lingering wish for gradual emancipation. All children of slaves born after the passing of the Act, and all children of six years of age and under, were declared free, but the rest of the slaves were to serve a sort of apprenticeship; three-fourths of their time was for a certain number of years to remain at the disposal of the masters, the other fourth was their own, to be paid for at a fixed rate of wages. The complete failure of the Resolutions of 1823 should have taught the Government the impossibility of this scheme. The period of apprenticeship was shortened from twelve to seven years, and subsequently, after a four years' trial, the plan was given up. The second part of the Government scheme was the remuneration of the planters by a loan of £15,000,000; but as Parliament regarded this as much too small a boon, it was subsequently changed for the enormous gift of £20,000,000. The vastness of the sum was held by many as totally disproportionate to the loss of the planters; by others it was thought that, as slavery was in itself contrary to all right, the planters deserved no compensation for the loss of what they should never have possessed. On the whole, however, it was thought better that so great an act of justice should be generously completed, and the great sacrifice was willingly made. Wilberforce, the father of the movement, lived just long enough to bless God that the object of his life had been reached; he heard the success of the second reading of the Bill, and died a few days afterwards, on the 29th of July.

[Sidenote: Weakness of the ministry shown in the Parliament. Feb. 4, 1834.]

Of the great questions of the day there still remained the all-important one, the condition of the labouring classes, but it was to another Prime Minister and to a modified Cabinet that the honour of the introduction of the new Poor Law was to belong. In spite of their large majorities, no single measure of the Government had been passed without important modifications, no scheme had been introduced that did not bear upon it the marks of compromise, and afford a distinct proof of the inherent weakness of a Cabinet divided against itself. The speech from the throne in the opening of the year 1834 did not give any hope of a firmer and more united Government. The Duke of Wellington was not wrong in complaining that there was no definite promise of a single Government Bill, that the foreign policy of the Cabinet had not produced European peace, that in spite of its majorities the Church policy of the Government had failed, and that it had carefully avoided, even while vaunting the success which had attended it, to state whether it intended the Coercion Bill to be renewed in Ireland or not. Nor was it doubted that he was uttering the opinions of some at least of the Cabinet itself when he warned the Lords against the tendency visible in several of the late proceedings of the Government towards tampering with property and the introduction of the beginnings of the policy of confiscation.

[Sidenote: Rejection of repeal, a Government victory.]

[Sidenote: Ministerial difficulty on Mr. Ward's motion on the Irish Church.]

[Sidenote: Resignation of the most conservative ministers.]

In the Lower House both the strength and weakness of the Government were shortly to be displayed. O'Connell, who had talked so long about the repeal of the Union, and had thus kept up the agitation which was so lucrative to himself, was compelled at length to make good his promises and to introduce a substantive motion for repeal. A lengthened debate followed, but terminated in a most complete victory for the Government; the division showing a majority of 485 in favour of an amendment exactly contradicting O'Connell's motion. The central position occupied by the Government enabled it, when it occasionally joined heartily with one side or the other, still to command the House of Commons, but when questions arose of a more doubtful sort its weakness became visible. Measures for the relief of Ireland had been promised, and Mr. Ward, a private member, determined to bring these promises to a test, by introducing a motion (May 27) with regard to the difficult question of the Irish Church, which the ministers would gladly have left quiet. Mr. Ward's resolution stated that the Protestant Episcopal Establishment of Ireland much exceeded the spiritual wants of the Protestant population, that it was the right of the State and of Parliament to distribute Church property, and that the temporal possessions of the Irish Church ought to be reduced. This motion put the Government into the greatest perplexity; to uphold the direct negative was to resign its pretensions to be the party of progress; to accept it was to shock some of its most important members. The ministers determined to adopt a middle course, and appoint a commission of inquiry. They hoped thereby to induce Mr. Ward to withdraw his motion, because the question was already in Government hands, but they seemed at the same time to pledge themselves to act in accordance with the recommendations of the commission. Armed with this compromise, Lord Althorp went to the House to meet Mr. Ward's motion. But the seconder, Mr. Grote, had advanced but a short way in the speech when the Chancellor of the Exchequer rose and said, that since the beginning of the debate information had been brought to him which induced him to beg for a postponement. His personal influence was so great that the House at once granted his request. The news he had received was the resignation of Mr. Stanley, the Colonial minister, and of Sir James Graham, First Lord of the Admiralty, who regarded any interference with Church property with great abhorrence. They were followed by the Duke of Richmond, Postmaster-General, and by Lord Ripon, Privy Seal. The more conservative members of the Cabinet had thus openly retired from it. It might have been expected that Lord Durham, who had previously left it upon opposite grounds, would have now returned to office, and the Government have assumed a more distinctly radical character. He was, however, personally obnoxious to such members of the party of Canning as still remained in office, and his influence was dreaded by Lord Grey, who, though he continued as yet to hold the Premiership in accordance with the generally expressed desire of the Liberal party, sympathized at heart more with the Tories than with the Radicals. He expressed his feelings in his answer to an address which Lord Ebrington got up intreating him to retain his place. "In pursuing," he said, "a course of salutary improvement I feel it indispensable that we shall be allowed to proceed with deliberation and caution; and, above all, that we should not be urged by a constant and active pressure from without to the adoption of any measures the necessity of which has not been fully proved, and which are not strictly regulated by a careful attention to the settled institutions of the country both in Church and State. On no other principle can this or any other administration be conducted with advantage or safety." No difficulty was found in filling the vacant places; Mr. Spring Rice, who had distinguished himself in the debate on the Union, became Secretary for the Colonies, and Lord Auckland succeeded Sir James Graham.

[Sidenote: Difficulties of Grey's position.]

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us