by owners, magistrates, and judicial courts, against the slaves in our
colonies, were brought before the parliament, and eloquently exposed. At
the close of 1823, and the early part of 1824, a plan of an insurrection
among the slaves on certain plantations in Jamaica had been discovered;
and eight negroes had been executed as implicated in the conspiracy.
The papers connected with these trials had been laid on the table of the
house in 1825; and Mr. Denman now brought the legality and justice
of these proceedings under discussion, by moving a resolution to the
effect, that the house having taken into consideration the trials which
took place at Jamaica for rebellion, conspiracy, and other offences, in
the years 1823 and 1824, deem it their duty to express their sorrow and
regret at the violation of law which took place upon the said trials;
that they lament the manner in which the sentence of death was passed
and executed; and recommend some alteration in the mode of administering
the code of criminal justice affecting the slaves in the said colony.
This motion was prefaced by a speech of great eloquence, analyzing the
evidence upon which the accused had been convicted, demonstrating its
contradictions, its insufficiency, its absurdity, and arriving at the
conclusion that such atrocities, perpetrated under the mask of justice,
and the law of evidence which permitted them, required the abolition of
the system which placed a negro for trial before interested masters for
his judges and jury; and in giving him an appeal to the council, merely
gave him an appeal to another body of masters equally prejudiced. Having
detailed the trials at length, Mr. Denman said he proposed the above
resolutions, that the commons of England might have an opportunity of
raising their voice against such acts of crying injustice and barbarity.
He was ably seconded by Mr. Brougham, who, in the course of his
speech, declared that if the circumstances of undefended justice passed
unreproved, it would go out to the West Indies that the same error,
injustice, or cruelty might be committed again and again with impunity,
so long as the present system continued; and if the house negatived
the motion, it would set the seal of its sanction on a great and crying
injustice, and do more than it would be able speedily to undo towards
perpetuating the existing system in our colonies. On the other hand, it
was maintained by Mr. Wilmot Horton that the courts had only applied
the law which they were bound to apply; and that they had applied it
according to the forms required by that law, and in circumstances which
fairly called for the interference of the legal authorities. He moved
an amendment, that the house sees in the proceedings brought under their
consideration a further proof of the evils attendant upon slavery, and
derives from them an increased conviction of the propriety of resorting
to the measures recommended by government in the order of council; but
does not deem it necessary, however desirable a change of the law may
be, to impeach the sentences passed according to law by a competent
trial, and convicted by a jury sworn to give a verdict according to
the evidence. This amendment was supported by the attorney-general and
solicitor-general, both of whom, however, frankly admitted the vices
of the system of law under which the proceedings in question had taken
place. It was impossible, said the attorney-general, to look at the
case, arising as it did out of the vice of the system, without wishing
for a change. If the white man upon his trial had an opportunity
afforded him of knowing the charge, and thereby preparing his defence,
why should not the black slave have the same advantage? An act of the
legislature had lately passed to compel the charge to be delivered in
writing. This act was brought into the colonial legislature of Jamaica;
but it was accompanied by a proviso that no objection should ever be
made on a point of form. Men were prone to confound substance and form
to be permitted this latitude. An instance of this was supplied in the
present case. The prisoners were accused of being guilty of a rebellious
conspiracy, and other charges; thus the prosecutor could adduce whatever
evidence he chose under a charge so very broad. Here was a conspiracy
charged; but with whom? No individuals were mentioned. Any overt act
specified? Time? No time certified. Place? No circumstance or place.
When the Slave Evidence Bill was introduced into the colonial assembly
of Jamaica, it was rejected on the ground that the slave was too low in
the scale of moral beings; that he had no character, no distinct notion
of morality, no notion of religion, or of the distinction between truth
and falsehood. But when the slave was to be tried, other slaves were
admitted as witnesses; and that, too, on their bare word, and an
exhortation from the judge not to speak falsely. It was a known rule
in this country—and the common law of England was in force in the West
Indies—that hearsay evidence should not be received; yet the whole
course of these proceedings showed manifold departures from this
important rule: while it was an acknowledged law in regard to the
whites, it had no application in regard to the blacks. But while the law
was acknowledged to be bad, it was argued, that it was another thing to
pass a vote of censure for the observance of it, however defective it
might be. The house ought, it was said, to separate the defects-of the
law from the alleged delinquency of the parties, and reject a motion
which went, not to denounce the system of slavery or to censure the
law, but to condemn individuals who had no power to alter the one, or
to abolish the other. On a division the amendment was carried by one
hundred and three against sixty-three. During this session, however,
delay and remedial measures were suggested by Lord Liverpool in the
upper house, and by Mr. Canning in the commons, for the extinction of
slavery. Mr. Canning declared that if immediate and hasty steps were
not taken, our West Indian possessions would be abandoned to a state
of savage desolation, of which wild speculators had not the slightest
notion. At the same time he was obliged to confess that in most of our
colonies the exhortations sent by government, for the amelioration of
the condition of their slaves, had been treated with intolerable neglect
and contempt. In the lords the resolutions were objected to, on the
ground that they were too feeble for the nature of the subject; that
though adopted they would produce no practical effect; and that the
three years which had elapsed since they were voted by the house
of commons—for they had been adopted in May, 1823—had furnished
irrefragable evidence of their futility. Lord Calthorpe expressed his
deep regret that the commons had not passed resolutions more conformable
to the light in which slavery ought to be regarded by a Christian
community, and that their lordships were now called upon to concur in
opinions better suited to their own dignity. There were not ‘wanting
members in the commons who were equally desirous of legislating in the
spirit of Christianity, equally with his lordship. It was maintained
there with great eloquence that slavery was inconsistent with
Christianity and the constitution. Occasion was given for the expression
of these sentiments in the commons, by a motion made by Mr. Brougham on
the 19th of May, to the effect that “the house has observed with extreme
regret that nothing had been effected by the colonial legislature, in
compliance with the declared wishes of government and the resolutions
of the house of the 15th of May, 1823, for ameliorating the condition of
the slaves in the West Indian colonies; and that this house, therefore,
pledges itself, early in the next session of parliament, to take into
its most serious consideration such measures as may be best calculated
to carry into effect the recommendation of the government and the
house.” This motion was supported by Dr. Lushington and Mr. Denman; but
opposed by Messrs. Canning, Ellis, and Horton. Mr. Canning, however,
asserted that government only wished to retard a little the attainment
of the object, in order that they might arrive at it with greater
security. Sir T. Ackland said, that he did not wish directly to negative
the motion; but as he thought the adoption of it would retard the good
effects to be looked for from the resolutions of 1823, he moved the
previous question, which was carried by a large majority. In the upper
house, on the 17th of April, Lord Suffield brought forward a motion to
prohibit persons in official situations in the West Indies from being
proprietors of slaves; a motion which, he said, had no connexion with
the emancipation of the negroes; and was directed not so much to the
conceding of civil rights, as to the preventing of criminal wrong. The
same topic was brought before the commons by Mr. W. Smith on the 20th of
April; but the resolutions thereon were negatived in both houses. At
the close of the session, indeed, the colonial legislatures were allowed
further opportunity of showing how far they were inclined by timely
concessions and purposes of good faith to avert the direct interference
of the mother country in their internal regulations.
MODE FOR AMENDING THE REPRESENTATION OF EDINBURGH, ETC.
During this session Mr. Abercromby moved leave to bring in a bill to
alter and amend the representation of the city of Edinburgh, which, he
said, contained a population of more than 100,000 inhabitants, while the
elective franchise was in the hands of a town-council of thirty-three
members, self-elected, and what were called the vested rights of that
body were generally the principal obstacles thrown in the way of a
better system. This motion was strongly opposed by the members for the
town and county of Edinburgh, on the ground that no corruption had been
charged against the corporation of Edinburgh; and by Mr. Canning, who
considered it was intended to undermine the barriers which resisted the
inroads of a more wide and sweeping innovation. Mr. Canning also brought
forward the unexampled prosperity of Edinburgh, and the contentment
which pervaded its population, as a convincing proof of the excellence
of the old system. After expatiating on the advantages connected with
the Scotch representation, he remarked that his objection to the present
motion was its application, as a single instance of reform in a borough,
to the general question. It was not unusual, he said, to bring forward
an attack on a single borough by an allegation of the prevalence of
abuses; but it was quite new to institute a charge against it because
its elective was not in proportion to its actual population. This
principle, if once admitted, would let in the general question of
reform, which would lead to endless squabbles. At the same time he
expressed a hope, that the motion might be repeated annually; but it
was to this end, for the innocent gratification of Lord John Russell and
those who advocated reform! On a division the motion was lost. About the
same time that this question was discussed, Sir John Newport moved for
leave to bring in a bill for the repeal of the Irish act, 21 Geo. 2nd.,
c. 10, relating to the elective franchise. By that statute it had been
enacted, that, in consequence of the difficulty of finding a sufficient
number of resident Protestant freemen, sufficiently wealthy and
sufficiently educated to exercise the elective franchise, non-resident
freemen should be entitled to vote. Sir J. Newport argued that the
cause which produced these enactments had ceased to operate, and that
therefore the act itself ought to be removed from the statute-book. On
the other hand it was argued by Mr. Plunkett that the country had gone
on for seventy years with the principle of non-residence applied to
boroughs and corporate towns, and that the effect of the measure would
be to affect vested rights, and disturb persons actually in possession.
If that act were repealed, he said, the election of every officer of
a corporation would be impeachable. The house should especially pause
before it assented to such a proposition on the eve of a general
election, a proposition, the effects of which upon existing rights,
could not be measured. The motion was negatived by seventy-six against
thirty-eight.
RESOLUTION FOR THE REGULATION OF PRIVATE COMMITTEES.
On the 19th of April, Mr. Littleton brought forward a series of
resolutions for the better regulation of private committees on private
bills, especially those relating to joint-stock companies. Great
complaints had been made of the conduct of these committees; but Mr.
Littleton observed that he believed they were generally ill-founded.
It was certain, however, he continued, that the present constitution of
committees rendered improper conduct perfectly possible; but this, the
plan he had in view would prevent. The grand features of this plan were
to remodel the list for the counties; to secure impartiality by taking
only one half of the committee from the county in which the bill
originated; to make attendance compulsory, and to prevent the chance
of abuse by creating a standing committee of appeal. His scheme was
embodied in eight resolutions which were adopted with the general
approbation of the house. The only one on which a division took place
was that which provided that every petition complaining of the decision
of a private committee should be referred to a committee of appeal; and
this was carried by a majority of forty-four against thirty-three.
MOTION TO HOLD PARLIAMENT OCCASIONALLY IN DUBLIN AND EDINBURGH.
On the same day that Mr. Littleton brought forward the resolutions
alluded to, Mr. Pelham, made one of most extraordinary motions that ever
was proposed within the walls of Saint Stephen’s. After adverting to the
great increase of wealth and population in the principal towns of the
kingdom, their distance from the seat of legislation, and the expense of
sending witnesses and deputies to London whenever their interests
were at stake, he gravely moved, “That it is expedient the imperial
parliament should be occasionally holden in Dublin and Edinburgh.” The
very idea of such a change was justly scouted by the house as unworthy
their attention, and no one was found bold enough to second the motion:
so St. Stephen’s was not yet to be deserted.
RESTORATION OF FORFEITED SCOTCH PEERAGES.
Acts were passed during this session for the restoration of five Scotch
peerages which had been forfeited by rebellion in the last century.
These were the peerages of the Earl of Carnwath, Earl of Airlee, Lord
Duff, Lord Elcho, and the Baron of Threipland of Fingarll. The only
person who opposed this measure was Lord Minto, and he avowed that his
opposition was founded upon political sentiments. He asked, why should
not a bill be brought in for the restoration of titles against all acts
of attainder passed under the present and preceding dynasties? Why make
a selection of forfeitures incurred for treason, not against the crown,
but against the liberties of the subject? Why, for instance, was not the
Duke of Buccleugh restored to the dukedom of Monmouth? He confessed that
the selection which had been made was most unfortunate; and he was sorry
that he had not stated his objections when the bills made their first
appearance in the house. Mr. Peel replied by the simple statement that
these reversals of attainders had commenced with that of Lord Edward
Fitzgerald, and that he himself had made the motion that the descendants
of Lord Strafford should be restored to their family dignities.
MOTION TO DISJOIN THE PRESIDENCY OF THE BOARD OF TRADE FROM THE
TREASURERSHIP OF THE NAVY.
On the 7th of April, the chancellor of the exchequer moved, in a
committee of supply, to disjoin the presidency of the board of trade
and the treasurership of the navy. Mr. Huskisson filled these two
offices at a salary of £3,000, and it was now proposed that he should
become president of the board of trade alone, with a salary of £5,000.
The most willing homage was paid to the great talents of Mr. Huskisson
by all parties in the house, together with the high value of his public
services; but the proposal was met by a decided opposition, on the
ground that the disjunction of the two offices was unnecessary, as
no active duty was attached to the treasurership of the navy. At
all events, it was urged, its duties might without inconvenience be
transferred to the paymaster, the real officer in that department;
that by adding £2,000 to the present salary of the treasurer, or giving
£2,000 additional as the salary of the presidency of the board of
trade., the same amount of remuneration to the individual holding
both offices would be made up at a smaller cost to the public. It was
insinuated that the scheme of disjoining the offices was merely a cloak
for the introduction of a new placeman into the house. On the other hand
it was contended by Mr. Huskisson and others that considerable anxiety
and hardship arose; out of the union of the two offices; and that
it was; altogether erroneous to suppose that the occupation of the
treasurer of the navy was merely to pay money. Opposition, however, was
so strong against the measure that in a discussion, when the report was
brought up, Mr. Canning said that he did not feel himself called upon to
press it. He viewed with regret the small support which had been given
to it; and though as a matter of principle he was ready to defend it,
yet he would abandon it on the ground of expediency.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION, ETC.
The question of Catholic emancipation, although not formally stirred
in either house during this session, was nevertheless kept alive
by petitions from different districts and bodies in Ireland. These
petitions were now especially directed to a disclaimer of the imputation
of owing a divided allegiance; manifestly on account of the weight
which the argument of the anti-Catholics on this point had carried with
it in the debate of the preceding session. The speeches delivered on
the presentation of them also characterized the imputation of a divided
allegiance as a false pretence, because the Catholics in all their
petitions declared, that, in the oaths which they took and were ready
to take, they swore allegiance to his majesty alone. But Lord Liverpool
rightly answered, that although he never doubted the sincerity of the
Catholics in disclaiming civil allegiance to any foreign power, the fact
could not affect the argument: he contended that spiritual subjection
to a foreign power was inconsistent with civil obedience to our own
sovereign.
While the claims of the Catholics were merely the subject of incidental
remarks, the condition of the Protestant church in Ireland, became the
subject of more direct discussion. Lord Kingston moved in the upper
house for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the state of
the Protestant church in the province of Munster. His motion was founded
upon the evils which he stated to have arisen from the union of livings,
and the consequent want of churches for Protestant worship. It was not
uncommon, he said, to unite five, six, or even seven livings in one
person; and in many parishes, if the Protestant inhabitants wished
spiritual consolation, or to have the benefit of religious worship, the
nearest clergyman who could advise them, and the nearest church in which
service was performed was probably at a great distance. It was answered
that as the returns on the table of the house, furnished by the lords’
committee to inquire into the state of Ireland last session, showed all
the parishes that existed in Ireland, and the authority by which they
had been made, the motion was unnecessary: it was withdrawn. The want
of churches, which it was the object of this motion to supply, was
connected with the administration of the fund formed of the first-fruits
of all ecclesiastical benefices. These revenues, or the first year’s
income of every benefice, had been originally payable to the pope; but
on the Reformation they were vested in the crown, and they had been
appropriated by an act of Queen Anne, in part at least, to the building
of churches. Sir John Newport brought the management of this fund, and
the insufficiency of the system according to which the contributions of
the clergy to it were regulated, under the notice of the commons, by a
series of resolutions declaratory of its nature and history, and by a
motion for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into its
condition and administration. He justified his motion by the fact that
the first-fruits, where they were paid at all, continued to be paid
upon the rate of valuation, for which there was no authority, and that
consequently the greater portion of the fund sacrificed by the crown
was allowed to remain in the hands of the clergy, while new burdens were
laid upon parishioners to effect those very objects for which the fund
had been created. This motion was opposed as a covert and most dangerous
attack upon the property of the Irish church, and through it upon the
property, not only of the church of England, but of all bodies in the
state; and as being derived from a fallacious interpretation of the law,
warranted neither by history, authority, nor expediency, On a division
it was rejected by a majority of forty-eight to twenty-one. The mover,
Sir John Newport, was subsequently more successful in endeavouring to
institute an inquiry into abuses said to exist in the administration of
the parochial rates levied in Ireland for the religious service of the
Protestant establishment. He moved resolutions pledging the house to
adopt measures for their removal, and on a division the motion was
carried. Measures of greater importance were carried by government
itself, namely, for promoting the education and moral improvement of the
great mass of the Irish people. Grants for these important purposes were
voted, though not without opposition from many members, on the grounds
of the abuses and oppressions in the management of the schools in
Ireland as detailed in the report of the preceding year; and that
proselytism was made a part of the system of education pursued therein.
In these discussions government manifested no desire to perpetuate
abuses, nor any disinclination to cautious and practicable amendment.
The same spirit was carried into other departments more strictly
connected with the civil administration of Ireland. A committee on the
state of the country had presented a report in 1825, recommending the
adoption of various measures; and during this session several of those
measures were carried into effect. Thus an act was passed consolidating
the laws for the regulation and management of prisons; better
regulations were enacted for the administration of justice in towns
corporate; provision was made to remedy the inequalities of local
assessments, by introducing an uniform valuation of baronies, parishes,
and other divisions of counties; an act was passed which made provision
for a more convenient and abundant distribution of lunatic asylums; and
the law of Ireland was amended respecting the assignment and subletting
of lands and tenements, by which some check was put to that infinite
division, not of property but the use of property which had so
impoverished and degraded the Irish peasantry. On the recommendation
of the select committee of 1825, also, a motion for an address to his
majesty was carried, praying him to order a commission for inquiry into
the tolls and customs collected in fairs, markets, and sea-ports
in Ireland. These tolls and customs had been granted to particular
individuals and corporations, and great evils existed in the levying of
them, whence the motion for inquiry. It was opposed both on the general
merits of the measure, and on the inefficiency of the particular mode
of inquiry proposed; but the motion was carried, and a select committee
accordingly appointed.
INDIA JURY BILL, ETC.
An important alteration was introduced this session into the
administration of justice in India, by a bill brought in by Mr. Wynn,
for the regulation of juries within the territories of the East India
Company. The existing law admitted all British subjects to serve upon
juries; but the right had never been extended to all persons born within
the British dominions. During late years a large population had sprung
up in India, known by the name of “half-caste,” one of their parents
having been a native, and the other an European. This class, though
born in wedlock, as well as another numerous class, consisting of
the illegitimate children of European fathers by Indian mothers, were
disqualified from serving upon juries, under the idea that they were not
British subjects; and Mr. Wynn moved that this disqualification should
be removed, which motion was adopted. A bill was also passed this
session allowing the East India Company to appoint any person to a
writership who should produce testimonials of character, and undergo
such an examination as might be fixed by the court of directors and the
Indian board. By an act, passed in 1813, no person was eligible to be
a writer in the Company’s service who had not passed four terms in
the East Indian college; and in consequence of the extension of the
Company’s territories, and the establishment, of new courts in Bengal,
much inconvenience had arisen from the restriction, as the college could
not supply a sufficient number of young men fit for office.
NATURALIZATION ACT, ETC.
During this session the law of naturalization was extended in Canada. By
the act, 179 no person could be summoned to the legislative council, or
elect, or be elected, to the legislative assembly of these provinces,
unless he was either a natural born subject of Great Britain, or a
subject become so by the conquest and cession of the Canadas, or had
been naturalized by an act of the British parliament. A bill was now
passed giving to a naturalizing act of the Canadian legislature the same
effect as to one of the legislature in England; providing, however, that
such act should be null and void, unless ratified by his majesty within
two years after being presented to him for that purpose. The only other
measure regarding our relations with foreign states, besides these
already noticed, which occupied the attention of parliament, was the
expiry of the Alien Act. This session it died a natural death; and a
milder set of regulations, conferring no power of sending aliens out of
the country, were adopted in its stead. In relinquishing that power, Mr.
Peel said that he had the gratifying consciousness that in no instance
had it been abused. The only case in which it had been used was one
which had not the slightest shade of a political aspect attached to it.
It was that of a person who had menaced a foreign ambassador, and who,
it was believed, would have carried his threats into execution had he
not been brought before the privy-council and dealt with according to
that act.
PROROGATION AND DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT.
The session of parliament was shortened by the approach of its
dissolution. The session was terminated on the 31st of May by
commission. The speech, which was delivered by the lord chancellor,
mentioned his majesty’s intention of dissolving the present parliament,
and directing the issue of writs for the calling of a new one. A leading
topic in the speech was the success of the British arms in the Burmese
empire, success which had led to the signature on honourable terms of a
preliminary treaty with the Burmese monarch, which his majesty had
every reason to expect would be the foundation of a secure and permanent
peace. Parliament was dissolved on the 2nd of June; and writs were
issued for a new election, which were to be returnable on the 25th of
July.
GENERAL ELECTION.
The elections which followed immediately the dissolution of parliament
presented several scenes of active and vigorous individual combat; but
they did not possess the interest which attaches to them when their
issue is to decide the fate of contending parties. The chief topics
on which candidates were tested were the corn-laws and Catholic
emancipation. As the lower classes were under the impression that bread
was high, because of the corn-laws, and that they existed to enrich the
landholders, an expressed opinion in favour of their abolition was sure
to gain cheers at a popular election. But the most prominent question
on the hustings, even in England, was Catholic emancipation. The Duke
of York’s speech, and the violence exhibited in Ireland, had created
a strong feeling against the Catholics; and as it was known that their
claims would be one of the earliest subjects of discussion in the new
parliament, the success of a candidate generally depended as to whether
he was, or was not in favour of Catholic emancipation. It was in
Ireland, however, that the giving or refusing of a vote mostly depended
on the answer received to the question, Will you vote for emancipation?
The demagogues of the Catholic Association gave themselves up to the
carrying of this one point; and they were aided by that powerful band
of agitators, the Irish priests. The contest on the Irish hustings was,
indeed, converted into an award of eternal damnation: the consolations
of the church here, and the joys of heaven hereafter, were promised
those who voted for an emancipation candidate; but the darkness of
excommunication in this life, and the gloom of purgatory first, and
then the pains of hell, were denounced against those who voted for
an anti-Catholic. The associated barrister and the political priest
travelled the country together in order to propagate the common creed;
the one by threats of damnation, and the other by the more temporal
considerations of civil and religious power; and this tyrannical sway
of the artful and designing was irresistible among the forty-shilling
freeholders—it procured the large majority pledged to support the
claims of Catholic emancipation. The great influence which the priests
had over the ignorant multitude was seen in a remarkable manner by the
issue of the election for the county of Waterford. Mr. O’Connell and the
Rev. Mr. Sheehan traversed that county to rouse it against the family
of Beresford; and every tie of respect and civil influence which had
hitherto united the Catholic tenant to his Protestant landlord gave
way before the power of the church, The electors were wielded by the
priesthood; and Lord George Beresford was compelled by his own tenantry
to give tip the contest. At a meeting held in Clonmel to celebrate this
triumph, Mr. Sheehan, the priest, remarked, “We said to the people,
‘Here are the natural enemies of your country, and here are your priests
who wait on the bed of your sickness, and are your friends alike
in prosperity or in woe: follow us or them.’” Such an appeal to the
feelings of a superstitious multitude was sure to prevail: there is
more might in superstition than in any of the lawful weapons in argument
which man can use.
THE BURMESE WAR.
{GEORGE IV. 1826—1827}
There was no faith manifested by the court of Ava in the armistice which
had been concluded in September, 1825, and so the war continued. During
the negociations which followed, the Burmese monarch had made vigorous
preparations for its continuance; and when the armistice had nearly
expired, in reply to the proposals made for peace by the British
commanders, this haughty and laconic answer was given, “If you wish for
peace, you may go away; but if you wish either money or territory, no
friendship can exist between us. This is Burmese custom.” The reply was
seconded by the advance of 60,000 Burmese troops along the banks of the
Irrawaddy against the British and native Indian troops at Prome. The
right division, consisting of 15,000 men, under the command of Sadda
Woon, moved along the western bank of the river; the centre, of about
30,000, commanded by the Kee Wongee, or head minister, marched along the
eastern bank, with numerous war-boats and stores; and the left, 15,000
strong, under Maha Nemiow, moved by a route about ten miles distant from
the river, and separated from it by an extensive forest. Besides these
there was a reserve of 10,000 men, under Prince Memiaboo, occupying a
strongly fortified position at Melloone; another force ready to oppose
any movement from Arracan; and Sykia Wongee was still carrying on a
desultory warfare in the vicinity of Pegu, and threatening Rangoon.
The British force consisted only of 5,000 men, besides a garrison to
maintain Prome, and some native troops opposed to Sykia Wongee, and in
garrison at Rangoon. A rencontre took place between our advanced guard
and Maha Nemiow’s division on the 10th of November, in which the British
suffered severely; their commander, Colonel M’Dowall, was slain, and the
troops were obliged to retreat. Encouraged by this success, Maha Nemiow
marched directly on Prome, close to which he took up his position. About
8,000 of his men were slain whose confidence had not been shaken by
contact with our troops; and these levies were accompanied by three
young and beautiful women of high rank, who pretended to have the gift
of prophecy, and to be possessed of power to turn aside a musket-ball.
The Shans were led to believe, indeed, that they were invincible; but
they soon discovered that they were unable to compete with the British.
Being surrounded by danger on every side, Sir A. Campbell resolved at
once to become the assailant; and on the 30th of November arrangements
were made to attack the enemy’s forces on the following morning;
Commodore Sir James Brisbane with the flotilla being directed to
cannonade their posts on both sides of the river at daylight, while
a body of native infantry made a feigned attack on the centre as the
columns were marching out for the real attack on the Burmese left,
at Simbike. For this purpose the principal force was formed into two
columns: one under Brigadier-general Cotton, which marched by the direct
road; and the other, led by the commander-in-chief, which crossed the
Nawine river and moved along its right bank, in order to come round
to the Burmese rear, and to cut off all retreat. The attack everywhere
succeeded; the Shans themselves, though they fought with fury, were
obliged to take refuge in flight. Every division of the Burmese numerous
force was routed with great slaughter; and many of the chiefs,
among whom was Maha Nemiow, perished in the fight. One of the fair
prophetesses also received a bullet in her breast, and being carried to
a cottage in the rear expired. Sir A. Campbell now determined to advance
on Ava; and nothing was wanting in the troops, or forgotten by their
commander, to ensure success. But the enemy did not yet despair. The
stockades at Meaday were made as strong as art could make them; and at
Melloone, on the west bank of the Irrawaddy, the reserve under Prince
Memiaboo was augmented to 15,000 men. The British troops arrived at
Meaday on the 19th of December; and they found it just evacuated by the
rear-guard of the enemy, the Burmese having retired to Melloone, where
they had received orders again to concentrate. The neighbourhood of
Meaday presented to the British a scene of horror and desolation. Within
and around the stockades the ground was covered with the dead and the
dying; the victims of wounds, disease, and want. The beach and the
surrounding jungles were filled with dogs and vultures, collected to
consume the loathsome prey. Round about the stockades gibbets were
erected, each bearing the mouldering remains of three or four victims,
who were thus crucified for, perhaps, no greater crime than that of
wandering from their posts in search of food, or of following the
examples of their chiefs in flying from the foe. The same horrors
presented themselves to the British for fifty miles up the river; and in
some places the soldiers could not find a place for their tents without
removing dead bodies. The pursuit was continued by forced marches; and
on arriving within five miles of Patanagoh, a town opposite to Melloone,
it was discovered that the whole of the enemy’s force had crossed to the
Melloone side of the river, and occupied with some 12,000 men a series
of fortified heights, and a formidable stockade, having in front a rapid
stream six hundred yards broad. While the British force was preparing
to attack this formidable position, a flag of truce was sent in, with
a notice that a commissioner had arrived with full powers to conclude a
treaty of peace. This led to a discussion, but without effect; for
the Burmese leaders again betrayed a want of faith, and the new envoy
hazarded the most glaring falsehoods. Operations again commenced. The
British troops having been carried across the Irrawaddy, under the
protection of Captain Chads, an attack was made on the fortifications at
Melloone; their defenders were driven in utter confusion from the place:
and Memiaboo’s treasures, to the amount of 30,000 rupees, with all his
stud, fell into our hands. The army again moved forward on the 25th
of January; and on the 31st it was met in its advance by Dr. Price, an
American missionary, and Mr. Sandford, an assistant surgeon of the army,
taken prisoners some months before, whom fear had induced the Burmese
monarch to restore to liberty, and despatch as messengers of peace. They
brought proposals for a short truce, which was readily granted; and
they returned in full confidence that they should be sent back to ratify
terms of peace. This hope, however, proved fallacious: by high bounties,
by grants of important privileges, and by the most earnest appeals,
40,000 men had been collected, and the Burmese monarch resolved to
continue the war. This new army was styled, Gong to doo, or, “Retrievers
of the king’s glory;” and it was placed under the command of a
savage warrior, called Nee-Woon Breen, which has been variously
translated,—“Prince of Darkness,” “King of Hell,” and “Prince of the
Setting Sun.” The certainty of another contest became evident to the
British on the 8th of February; and the next day, as they debouched from
the forests into the open country, they discovered the Burmese drawn up
in an inverted crescent. The British force amounted to about 2,000
men; but undismayed by the number of the enemy and strength of
their position, Sir A. Campbell pushed boldly on. The enemy was soon
overthrown; their centre was broken, and they were closely pursued
in their works, where they were routed with great slaughter; hundreds
perished by jumping into the river; and, with the exception of about
3,000 men, the whole army was dispersed. The road to Ava was now opened,
and our troops pushed on to within forty-five miles of that city. There
was now no longer time for disguise, deceit, or treachery; peace must be
made, or Ava would be captured. On the evening of the 24th of February,
therefore, Mr. Price, with two ministers of state, arrived at the camp
at Yandaboo, to announce that the king and the court would come to
terms. A treaty was ratified; the Burmese government engaging to furnish
boats for the conveyance of a great part of our force to Rangoon. The
articles of peace were, that the four provinces of Arracan, and the
provinces of Mergui, Tavoy, and Zea, should be ceded in perpetuity to
the East India Company; that the Burmese government should pay one
crore of rupees by instalments; that the provinces or kingdoms of Assam,
Cachar Zeatung, and Munnipore, should be placed under princes to be
named by the British government, residents with an escort of fifty men
to be appointed at each court; that British ships should be admitted
into Burmese ports to land their cargoes free of duty, not to unship
their rudders, or land their guns; that Burmese ships should have the
same privileges in British ports; that no persons should be molested for
their opinions or conduct during the war; and that the Siamese nation
should be included in the treaty. This war was thus brought to a
close; a small band, composed of British warriors and their Indian
fellow-subjects, stood as conquerors in the centre of the great Burmese
empire. After peace had been concluded a party of officers from the
army visited Ava, and were received by the humbled monarch with all due
honour. Soon after the conclusion of peace the British troops who had
maintained this unequal contest commenced their return to Rangoon; and,
subsequently, our Indian government sent an embassy to Ava, at the head
of which was Mr. J. Crawford, who finally settled points relative to
the frontiers, and concluded a treaty of commerce very favourable to
the Company. The conduct of Sir A. Campbell advanced his character for
enterprise and prudence, as well as military talent, to high renown. In
the year 1831 he was created a baronet, and proceeded to New Brunswick
as Lieutenant-governor of that province.
Contemporaneously with the exploits of Sir A. Campbell in the heart
of the Burmese empire, an important service was rendered to our Indian
empire by the commander-in-chief. Lord Combermere. The late Rajah of
Bhurtpoor had died in strict alliance with our government; and by the
terms of the treaty each party was bound to assist the other against all
enemies. Apprehensive of the consequences which might follow his death,
the rajah had during his lifetime declared his son, Bulwart Singh, his
successor, and included him in the treaty of alliance with the Company.
On the death of the rajah, however, his nephew, Doorjun Sal, having
gained a party in the army, raised a successful revolt, gained
possession of Bhurtpoor itself, and seated himself on the ground. The
expelled prince applied for aid to Sir David Ochterlony, the Company’s
resident at Delhi, and that officer embraced his cause. At first Lord
Amherst, governor-general of India, disavowed the conduct of Sir
David; but on receiving further information he confirmed it; and
Lord Combermere was directed to march with an army for the purpose of
expelling the usurper. His lordship took the field with 25,000 European
and native troops, and he directed his first attempt at Bhurtpoor. The
fortifications of that place were such, that it might have been supposed
they were erected in those days when unlimited command over life and
labour produced those stupendous monuments of human art, the pyramids.
The wall of the city was of mud, sixty feet in thickness, and of great
height, with a very wide and deep ditch. The circumference of the whole
was about seven miles; and the walls were flanked with bastions at short
intervals, on which were mounted a numerous artillery. The preparations
for the attack, however, were made on a scale commensurate with the
difficulties; and on the 10th of December Lord Combermere appeared
before the city with more than one hundred pieces of artillery. During
the night the enemy had cut the embankments of a lake to the northward,
for the purpose of filling the broad and deep ditch, a measure of
precaution which had been very serviceable in 1805, when the British had
vainly attacked the place. In the present instance, however, our troops
arrived in time to repair the breach before the water had flowed into
the fosse sufficiently to render it impassable. After this a few-days
were spent in reconnoitring the works, and fixing on the best points of
attack, until the whole battering train with its appurtenances should
arrive. In the meantime, from a desire to save the women and children
from the effects of the terrible bombardment about to take place, Lord
Combermere addressed a letter to Doorjun Sal, requesting him to send
them out to him, and promising them safe conduct. This request, however,
was barbarously refused; and on the 23rd of December the besiegers
commenced their first parallel, under a heavy fire, about eight hundred
yards from the north-east angle of the works. On the following morning
three batteries opened on the town, and continued, with several others
afterwards erected, so vigorous a fire that scarcely a roof in the town
was left uninjured. The mud walls, however, still stood erect, so that,
on the 3rd of January, it was deemed expedient to employ miners. Several
attempts failed; but on the 16th two mines were blown up under one of
the bastions; and, with the aid of a day’s cannonade, effected such a
breach that the result of the enterprise appeared no longer doubtful.
The final assault was made on the 18th. Troops destined to rush into the
city established themselves in the advanced trenches unperceived by the
enemy; and the explosion of a mine, loaded with 12,000 pounds of powder,
was to be the signal of attack. At eight o’clock this mine was fired,
and the effect was terrific; the ground trembled as if agitated by an
earthquake, and after it had heaved up with several convulsive throes,
the volcanoes burst forth. The whole of the salient angle and the stone
cavalier in its rear were lifted into the air, and, after the smoke and
clouds of dust had passed away, the bastion with three hundred men were
seen precipitated below. The two grand divisions of the army now rushed
up to the breaches, and the foremost of the opposing foe were soon
laid low by the British bayonets, and the rest were chased along the
ramparts; in two hours the whole of the rampart was in our possession,
and early in the afternoon the citadel surrendered. Doorjun Sal, who
attempted to escape, was captured, together with his wife and two sons.
The garrison consisted of 36,000 troops, near 10,000 of whom are said
to have been slain during the siege. On the side of the British the
loss was about 1200 men, many of whom were killed by the explosion of
the great mine. After the capture of Bhurtpoor its fortifications
were demolished, and all the other fortresses in the rajah’s dominions
surrendered. The rightful prince was reinstated in his authority,
and the inhabitants returned to their abodes and allegiance. For this
achievement Lord Combermere was raised to the rank of viscount, and the
governor-general, on account of the general success of the British arms,
was raised to the dignities of Viscount Holmsdale, and Earl Amherst of
Arracan.
MEETING OF THE NEW PARLIAMENT.
The new parliament met on the 14th of November. It was opened by
commission; and the speech, which was delivered by the lord chancellor,
expressed great satisfaction at the termination of war in India. It
spoke, also, of the distress which still prevailed in the commercial and
manufacturing districts; but expressed a hope that the time was not far
distant when, under the blessings of Divine Providence, the commerce
and industry of the United Kingdom would resume their wonted activity.
Another leading topic in the speech was the admission of foreign grain
into the ports of the United Kingdom, not then admissible by law. His
majesty said that he had called parliament together for the special
purpose of communicating to them the measures which he had deemed
necessary to take in this particular, and that he had directed a copy
of the order in council, issued on that subject, to be laid before them,
trusting that they would see sufficient reason for giving their sanction
to the provisions of that order, and for carrying them into effect. The
address was opposed in the upper house by Lord King, and in the commons
by Mr. Brougham, both of whom complained that the speech consisted of
nothing but blanks. Amendments were moved in both houses; but they were
lost by overwhelming majorities. The grand error pointed out by
the opposition in the speech was the omission of the subject of the
corn-laws, and much discussion was entered into thereupon. When the
report on the address was brought up, indeed, Mr. Western moved another
amendment, pressing the consideration of this subject on the house;
but it was negatived without a division. In the debates, however, Lord
Liverpool in the upper house, and Mr. Canning in the commons declared
that ministers were prepared to propose a general measure regarding the
corn-laws; but that it would be unfair towards the country and towards
parliament to bring it forward before the Christmas recess. Under these
circumstances the bill of indemnity, which was rendered necessary by the
order of the council for the admission of certain grain into the ports
of the United Kingdom, a measure demanded by the late scanty harvest,
was passed without opposition.
MOTION FOR A SELECT COMMITTEE ON JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES, ETC.
On the 5th of December Alderman Waithman moved for the appointment of
a select committee upon the joint-stock speculation of the last three
years. In his speech he showed that during the time mentioned there
had been no less than six hundred companies formed, requiring for the
execution of their intended operations, a capital of many millions. He
complained of the dishonest views with which many of these were set on
foot; the knavery by which a fictitious value was given to shares
which had cost nothing; and of the misery produced by this systematic
swindling. He remarked, that if a man purchased in the lottery, he knew
something of what he was doing, that he was giving a certain sum for
a very unlikely chance, and that in doing so he was conferring some
benefit on government. But the joint-stock gambling was of a much more
atrocious kind: it was gambling with false dice. The loss itself on the
whole speculation was an evil, but the great and signal grievance was,
that the holders of the shares, now worth nothing, were not the losers.
The original swindlers worked up the market to the point which they had
expected it to attain: then down went the shares, and when they were
down the original swindlers again bought them up, and were now the
holders. He instanced the Arigna Mining Company as a proof of this
nefarious practice. In that company, he said, there were three thousand
shares, and the first deposit was £5. In one day the premium rose upon
those shares from 8 ½ to 24, then it got to 26. and then it dropped to
24. Whether this was or was not a trick he would leave it to the house
to determine. How such proceedings were brought about, he said, he would
leave to any one to form an opinion. Afterwards, however, he boldly told
the house how the proceedings originated. This Arigna Mining Company,
he said, were seeking to obtain an act of parliament, and it was first
intended that the sum of £15,000 should be divided between four or five
individuals. This, however, was not considered safe, and it was agreed
to divide the spoil more extensively. One gentleman put into his pocket
£2,500 of this money, and afterwards £1,500 as profit upon shares,
although he had not paid for those shares, but still owed £375 for them.
That individual, he continued, was Sir William Congreve, a member
of parliament: and was not, he asked, parliament called upon to do
something towards an inquiry into conduct so dishonourable? Never had
there been a fouler stain upon the house. After some remarks on the
Equitable Loan Company, the alderman moved, “that a select committee be
appointed to inquire into the origin, the management, and the present
state of the joint-stock companies formed during the years 1824, 1825,
and 1826, and to report on the same, together with any special matter
touching any member of that house.” Mr. Canning, in reply, objected to
the inquiry on account of its extent, asserting that for inquiry to be
useful it must be limited and precise. Enough had been said to show that
there was strong ground for suspicion, that in the affairs of some few
companies there was matter deserving inquiry; but the motion as it stood
involved many companies against the utility and management of which
no charge had been brought. He moved an amendment, therefore, that the
inquiry of the committee should be limited to the management and history
of the Arigna Company. He was supported by Mr. Huskisson, who, in
his speech, denounced the idea that joint-stock companies of every
description were public evils. He was astonished, he said, to hear men
of business talk of mining carried on by joint-stock companies as a
thing of recent date. No mine worked in this country had ever been so,
except by means of joint-stock companies. Without the formation of such
companies, those mines, indeed, would not have been explored. It
ought to be, he added, the policy of the law to encourage joint-stock
companies; for when embarked in properly and fairly, they are beneficial
to the public interests, and fraught with great public advantages. At
the same time, he was ready to admit, that those who had been concerned
in the speculations and bubbles of the last two years had disgraced
themselves; especially if they knew at the time they engaged in them
that they were not likely to lead to the public benefit. Mr. Canning’s
amendment was agreed to without a division, and the committee appointed.
KING’S MESSAGE RESPECTING THE CONDUCT OF SPAIN TOWARDS PORTUGAL.
On the 11th of December, Lord Bathurst in the upper house and Mr.
Canning in the commons, unexpectedly delivered a message from the king
recounting the hostile and faithless conduct of Spain towards Portugal,
and requesting that parliament would enable his majesty to fulfil his
obligations towards the oldest of his allies. The message stated that
his majesty had for some time past, in conjunction with the King of
France, endeavoured to prevent the hostile aggression from Spain, and
had repeatedly assured the court of Madrid that such aggression would
not be tolerated by England; but that notwithstanding these assurances,
hostile inroads into the territory of Portugal had been concerted in
Spain, and had been executed under the eyes of the Spanish authorities
by Portuguese regiments, which had deserted into Spain, and which the
Spanish government had repeatedly engaged to disarm and disperse.
The facts of the aggression complained of were briefly these. On the
death of John IV., King of Portugal, he was succeeded by his son, Don
Pedro, of Brazil. As the constitution of Brazil had provided that its
crown should never be united on the same head with that of the mother
country, Don Pedro preferring his transatlantic sceptre, resigned his
European crown to his infant daughter, and appointed a regency to govern
during her minority. At the same time he remodelled the old political
institutions of Portugal, and gave it a constitution in the form of a
representative government. There was, however, a large party in Portugal
hostile to this constitution, and a conspiracy broke out against it and
the regency; Don Miguel, the emperor’s brother, being proclaimed king,
and having sworn to maintain his rights. Miguel was supported by
some regiments of the Portuguese army, and a war ensued between his
supporters and the troops in favour of the constitution. For the most
part Don Miguel was unsuccessful; and whenever his troops were compelled
by want or by his opponents to cross the frontiers, they were not only
received and protected by the Spanish authorities, but again organized
at the expense of the Spanish government, and sent forth to the
invasion of Portugal. The British and Portuguese ministers at Madrid
remonstrated; but the cabinet of Spain answered by lying disavowals,
or hollow promises; and every day its conduct became more and more
perfidious. The invasion was, to all political intents and purposes,
an invasion by Spain; and as the danger increased, the Portuguese
ambassador at London made a formal application to our government for
the military assistance which the treaties between the two countries
stipulated. Ministers waited a few days till the conduct of Spain had
been placed beyond a doubt, and then advised his majesty to send the
above message to the commons.
In proposing an address to the throne on this occasion, Mr. Canning
vindicated our interference in the affairs of the Peninsula and fully
developed the principles of his foreign policy. Disclaiming every
purpose of interference in the internal dissensions of Portugal or
influencing the settlement of her domestic institutions, he considered
England as merely called upon to defend her from an invasion organized
by foreign aid. In order to prove this position he detailed the
provisions of subsisting treaties; after which he called the attention
of parliament to the present relative state of Portugal and Spain,
asserting that he asked for a vote merely for the defence of Portugal,
and not for aggression against Spain. There is still a road open to
Spain, he said, for retraction and redress; and this would be
greatly promoted by the presence of a British army on the Portuguese
territories. Concerning the new constitution he remarked:—“As to the
merits of the new constitution of Portugal, I do not think I have any
right to offer any opinion. Personally I may have formed one; but as an
English minister all I have to say is, May God prosper this attempt at
the establishment of constitutional liberty in Portugal! and may that
nation be found as fit to enjoy and to cherish its new-born privileges,
as it has often proved itself capable of discharging its duties among
the nations of the world!” Mr. Canning next went into a detail of the
aggressions of Spain, as well as her motives: expressing an earnest
hope, that, on hearing of the step we were about to take, that power
would act so as to render hostilities unnecessary. He dreaded war; but
he begged to be understood not as dreading war in a good cause, from any
distrust of our strength and resources; on the contrary, he feared it
because this country possessed the power to push any war in which she
might engage to consequences the bare notion of which made him shudder.
Our position at this time was not one of mere neutrality between
contending nations, it was a position preserving the balance of power
necessary for the safety of Europe. “Nearly four years of experience,”
he remarked, “have confirmed that opinion; and it is to be feared that
the next contest in Europe, if it should extend beyond the narrow limits
of Portugal and Spain, will be a war of the most tremendous nature,
because it will be a war of conflicting opinions. And although this
country may enter into it with a desire to mitigate and control its
horrors, yet she cannot help seeing under her banners all those who are
restless and dissatisfied, with or without cause, in every nation with
which she may be placed at variance. The consciousness of the fact, the
knowledge that we possess such tremendous power, forces me to feel as I
now feel. But it is one thing to have a giant’s strength, and another to
use it like a giant. The consciousness that we have this power keeps us
safe: our business is not to seek opportunities of displaying it; but to
keep it, that hereafter the world may see we knew its proper use, while
we shrunk from converting the empire into an oppressor. The consequences
of letting loose those passions which are chained up, may be such as
will lead to a scene of desolation which no one can contemplate without
horror; and such as I could never lie easy on my couch, if I was
conscious of having by one hour precipitated. I would fear much and
forbear long; I would almost put up with anything that did not touch our
national faith and national honour rather than let slip the furies of
war, when we know not whom they may reach, and where the devastation
may end. Such is the love of peace which the British government
acknowledges, and such the duties of peace which the circumstances of
the world inculcate. In obedience to this conviction, and with the hope
of avoiding extremities, I will push no further the topics of this part
of the address. Let us defend Portugal whoever may be the assailants,
because it is a work of duty; and let us end where that duty ends. We go
to Portugal, not to rule, not to dictate, not to prescribe laws. We go
only to plant there the standard of England, and where that standard is
planted foreign dominion shall not come.” The speech of Mr. Canning had
a most powerful effect upon the house: loud cheers resounded from all
sides as he sat down, much exhausted. Yet there were dissentients to the
proposed measure. Mr. Hume opposed the address, on the ground that this
country was not in a situation to enter upon, and to maintain for any
length of period a war on a great scale. He moved an amendment that
“the house be called over this day week,” which motion was supported by
Messrs. Wood and Bankes. On the other hand the motion for an address
was supported by Sir Robert Wilson, and Messrs. Baring and Brougham.
The latter, in adverting to the ground on which the amendment was
principally supported, remarked that its supporters must recollect, and
the house and the country must bear in mind that the question is not at
present, whether, even at the expense of your character for good faith,
you will consent to bear hereafter among mankind a stained reputation
and forfeited honour; but whether for a little season of miserable,
insecure, precarious, dishonourable, unbearable truce, whether for this
precarious, disgusting, and intolerable postponement of hostilities,
you will be content hereafter to have recourse to war when war can be
no longer avoided, and when its horrors will fall upon you, degraded and
ruined in character in the eyes of all the nations of Europe; and,
what is ten thousand times worse degraded and ruined in your own. He
contended that the burdens of the country, however oppressive, would be
borne cheerfully through the impending struggle, if war should be the
result, inasmuch as we were governed on wise, liberal, and truly English
principles. Mr. Canning’s reply to those who opposed the address was
even more eloquent than his opening speech. Government was censured for
allowing France to usurp and retain the occupation of Spain. In answer
to this, Mr. Canning remarked, that when the French army entered Spain,
we might if we chose have visited that measure by a war. But we were
not then bound to interfere on behalf of Spain, as we now are bound to
interfere on behalf of Portugal, by the obligation of treaty. And such a
war would not in these days have been the proper method of restoring the
balance of power, which varies as civilization advances and new nations
spring up. To take a leaf from the book of European policy in the times
of William III., or of Queen Anne, for supporting the balance now,
would be to slight the march of events, and to regulate our policy by
a confusion of facts. He continued:—“I admit that the entrance of a
French army into Spain was a measure of disparagement to Great Britain;
that it was a severe blow to the feelings of this country. One of the
modes of redress lay in a direct attack on France through a war on
the soil of Spain: the other was to make the possession of the Spanish
territory harmless in rival hands; to make it worse than harmless, to
make it injurious to be the possessor—the latter mode I have adopted.
Do you think that for the disparagement of England we have not been
compensated? Do you think that for the blockade of Cadiz England has
not received a full recompense? I looked at Spain by another name than
Spain: I looked on that power as Spain and the Indies; and so looking
at the Indies, I have there called a new world into existence, and
regulated the balance of power; thus redeeming the movement of France,
and leaving her own act on her unmitigated and unredressed, so that she
would now thankfully get rid of her responsibility, and shake off a
burden too heavy to be borne without complaint. France would now be
glad if England would assist her in dispensing with this burden; and the
only way of riveting France to the possession of Spain, would be to
make that possession a point of honour. I repeat it, the object of the
present expedition is not war, but to take the last chance of peace. If
England does not go promptly to the aid of Portugal, Portugal will be
trampled on, England will be disgraced, and then war will come; come,
too, in the train of degradation. If we wait until Spain has courage to
ripen her secret machinations into open hostility, we shall have war;
shall have the war of pacificators: and who can tell when that war shall
end?” Mr. Canning’s eloquence prevailed. Mr. Hume’s amendment received
the support of only three or four members; and the original question
was carried with only that number of dissentients. A similar address was
moved by Lord Bathurst in the upper house, and was carried with the
same unanimity. The measure was, indeed, a popular one, not only in the
walls of St. Stephen, but throughout the country. The prompt decision
of government quickly effected the purpose intended. It was on the 11th
that the king’s message was delivered; and on the 14th 5,000 troops,
under the command of Sir William Clinton, began to march towards the
coast; and by the 25th the first detachment appeared in the Tagus. Their
appearance in Portugal was sufficient. The treachery and dissimulation
of Ferdinand gave way to his fears; the French government recalled the
diplomatic instrument of its intrigues, and the independence of Portugal
with its constitution was for a time preserved.
RESOLUTIONS AGAINST BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.
By the dissolution of parliament the resolutions of Lord John Russell
for detecting bribery at elections, which had been carried on the last
day of the session, had expired. Under these circumstances they were
moved anew by Lord Althorp, in doing which he said that he hoped the
new house of commons would not now, by rejecting them, afford a singular
contrast between the last session of an old parliament and the first
session of a new one. In reply, Mr. Peel said, that if this new
jurisdiction was to be created at all, it had better be created by a
bill than by resolutions; if there were to be any interference, it would
be wiser to make that interference effective, than to adopt a measure so
imperfect and inoperative as these resolutions presented. Was it not, he
asked, a serious consideration that the committee forming the tribunal
before which this offence was to be tried, was without the power of
administering an oath? Here was an imperfection and an evil for which
the resolutions made no provision; and it was vain to hope that any
measure could be salutary or effective in its operations if deficient in
so important a point. Mr. Wynn also objected to the resolutions, deeming
them, with Mr. Peel, insufficient for the purpose designed. Mr. Scarlett
observed, that the resolutions might possibly not meet the difficulties
which it was desirable should be overcome; but at the same time he
thought the right honourable secretary had taken a partial view of the
question. The resolutions, he said, were not altogether unexceptionable;
but he was persuaded that they might be so far modified as to remedy the
evil without going the length of inflicting a penalty or imposing costs,
as Mr. Peel suggested, and which could be accomplished only by means
of a bill. He added, that he thought they might be withdrawn, and
reintroduced in an amended form; and Lord Althorp adopted, this
suggestion, and withdrew the resolutions for the present. Subsequently
Mr. Littleton again proposed the resolutions for the regulation
of committees on private bills which had been passed by the late
parliament, and they were all adopted.