“Colonel Somerset has been out to-day in the direction of Stock’s Kraal.

About an hour after he left we heard heavy firing, which lasted for two

or three hours. It appears that they were challenged by a lot of Caffres

in the bush; they went in after them and gave them a regular mauling,

shot a great number of them, and coming out on the flat when they had

polished these gentlemen off, they fell in with a body of about five

hundred to six hundred, whom they also charged, and shot like so many

dogs. I believe, at the lowest computation, three hundred and fifty

were left dead on the field. This last body that they fell in with

were Pato’s Caffres, who heard the firing at Stock’s Kraal, and were

hastening to his assistance, when, luckily for us, they were caught upon

the open flat, and the 7th Dragoons and Cape Corps charged them, and

literally rode over them. I trust that this affair, coupled with the

attack on Peddie, will cool their courage considerably. One corporal

of the Cape Mounted Rifles was shot dead, and Sir Harry Darell, Captain

Walpole, Royal Engineers, and Bunbury, together with some men of the

7th, are slightly wounded: I think four of them slightly, and one very

dangerously. Colonel Somerset seems the only man that can bring them

to their senses. They were all going down to attack supply waggons that

were to come up from Trompetter’s to-morrow morning, but I fancy, after

to-day, they will not attempt it. I must now give you an account of the

slaughter that took place shortly after. We were all very tired, having

been on our legs from nine o’clock last night to midday to-day, with

hardly any refreshment; we therefore hastened to the camp; however, we

were disappointed in having refreshment. We saw the colonel’s division

a mile or two ahead, marching quietly on. Presently we saw a party ride

ahead, and soon after a race. Then firing commenced. I rode up as fast

as I could to the ridge; a spectacle was then presented to my view which

I shall not forget. A large party of Caffres had collected near the

Kieskamma, intending to move to-day towards the Fish River to intercept

the waggons, and stop the communication. This party heard the firing and

thought that the waggons were attacked. They hastened to help, but what

was their astonishment when they found a large force in front of them.

Fortunately, there was no bush to shelter them; they fired one volley

and dismounted from their horses—about three hundred mounted and seven

hundred foot. The Dragoons then charged them, and killed many; a panic

seized them—they ran off, and were shot like sheep—dragoons, Cape

Corps, Boers, all firing at them, following them up full six miles.

They became completely exhausted—they could not run. The slaughter was

awful! They were followed up to near the Kieskamma. The slaughter was

on the Gwanga, near Mr. Tainton’s late place. The lowest estimate is, I

believe, three hundred killed; very few were seen to get away. We took

three prisoners—one at Hmpa-kati, belonging to Creili. He said the

intention of the Caffres was to drive the Umlunguinto the sea. We asked

how it was to-day. He said it was all finished to-day. Pato has crossed

the Kieskamma. Umhala and Seyolo were with this command. How they fared

we cannot tell. It is supposed that Stock was this day killed.”

After this Colonel Somerset followed up his success. Many skirmishes,

much plunder, and considerable loss of life occurred, but, in the end,

the British forces remained victors. The Caffres, however, were not

prevented from reorganising themselves for fresh forays.

STATE OF NEW ZEALAND.—SUPPRESSION OF THE NATIVE REVOLT.

It was not at the Cape only that our troops had to contend with savages

of a superior race: the year began with a conflict in New Zealand.

Captain Grey, the governor, having in vain endeavoured to conciliate

the disaffected chiefs, proceeded, at the head of eleven hundred

men—sailors, marines, and soldiers—to attack the principal pal,

which was defended by stockades, so skilfully constructed, that it was

necessary to erect works, and mount cannon and mortars, to dislodge

their occupants. The subjugation of the place was effected after severe

loss on the part of the enemy, and, unhappily, considerable loss on the

part of her majesty’s force. The capture of the pal led to the surrender

of the chiefs, and before the month of January expired, peace was

restored to the colony.

BORNEO.

The proceedings of the Borneo pirates having led the British Rajah

Brooke to demand assistance, Captain Mundy, under the direction of

Admiral Sir Thomas Cochrane, operated during the month of July in

command of an effective maritime force. The squadron sailed up the river

to Brune, the capital of the country, which was defended by several

strong forts, and a heavy battery, _à fleur d’eau_, of eight brass and

two iron guns, sixty-eight pounders. All; these defences were carried by

the British sailors and marines, and terrible destruction inflicted upon

the pirates. After effecting what appeared to be a complete subjugation

of these hordes of sea robbers infesting these coasts, the squadron

retired.

OUR NORTH AMERICAN COLONIES.

_Canada._—The relations between Great Britain and the United States

were so unsatisfactory at the beginning of this year that considerable

uneasiness existed in Canada lest war should break out, and that colony

become the chief theatre of contest. A militia bill passed the Canadian

legislature, which was calculated to give confidence to the imperial

government, and which placed the colony in an armed attitude towards her

great neighbour.

The free-trade measures proposed to the British parliament caused

even more disquietude than the differences with the United States. The

Canadian producers were very jealous of these states as a competitor in

supplying the English market, the legislature passed strong resolutions

expressive of their alarm, and addressed the crown, representing that

free trade in corn between the neighbouring states and the mother

country would be productive of the heaviest injuries to the colony.

This address was one of the most sturdy pronouncements of protectionist

opinion which the discussions of the day brought forth. The Canadians

were happily disappointed. The imperial legislature was not checked in

the enactment of its free-trade measures by this memorial; good was done

to Canada in spite of herself; the legislators of the parent country

understood the interests of Canada better than her own provincial

parliament did, and the great prosperity of that country may be said to

have begun with free trade. The year was one of alarm and discontent

in both the upper and lower provinces. A dreadful fire in Quebec, which

nearly destroyed the city, added to the other causes of disquietude.

_Nova Scotia._—This colony also suffered some commercial depression,

and endured apprehension of a war upon the North American continent. The

fisheries were comparatively unproductive, and the potato crop failed.

Happily the corn crops prospered, relieving considerably the pressure

upon the resources of the people. A militia bill, occasioned by the

apparently hostile policy of the United States government, provided

for the defence of the province. Certain differences arose between the

legislature and the crown, in connection with the crown revenues and

the civil list, but the year closed upon the colony in peace, and with a

fair measure of prosperity.

_Newfoundland._—The affairs of this colony were characterised by

nothing remarkable during the year, in a political point of view, but a

great social calamity attracted the attention of the American colonies

and of the mother-country. A conflagration broke out at St. John’s, which

laid nearly the whole city in ashes. The fire happened on the 9th of

June, and as the houses of the town were mostly built of wood, it

soon spread beyond the power of any efforts which the population

could command to restrain it. The Custom-house, Roman Catholic Church,

Protestant Episcopal Cathedral, Court-house, jail, ordnance store, all

the newspaper and printing-offices, the banks, the Hall of Legislature,

post-office, and police-office, were all burnt clown, together with

two whole streets, each more than a mile long, leaving 12,000 persons

without a habitation. The shipping, near the wharves also caught fire,

and some of the vessels were destroyed. The loss of property exceeded a

million sterling.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

_The United States._—On another page sufficient reference has been

made to the circumstances attending the chief subject of dispute between

Great Britain and the North American Union. The Oregon boundary was

adjusted, and all fear of war between the two countries removed. The

propositions made by the Earl of Aberdeen, the English foreign minister,

were so unfavourable to his own country, and so completely a concession

to America, that the president and senate at once accepted them. Had the

navy of the United States driven our fleets from the Pacific, President

Polk could hardly have expected terms more favourable to his nation.

Indeed, the only energy which the noble earl displayed in his management

of foreign affairs was in conceding what his queen and country had a

good right to claim.

SOUTH AMERICA.

_Brazil and La Plata._—On the southern part of the American continent

events also occurred of some interest to England. During the previous

year a united British and French force operated successfully against the

dictator Rosas, who, in spite of the remonstrances of England, France,

and Brazil, persisted in hostile operations against the republic of

Monte Video. Notwithstanding the chastisement inflicted by the European

navies, Rosas continued his hostility to Monte Video during the year.

The measures taken against the tyrant by the governments of England and

France were half measures. The Earl of Aberdeen and M. Guizot seemed to

be associated in wondrous harmony of action, or rather inaction, when

the joint interests of the two powers were concerned.

Differences arose between Great Britain and the Brazils in connexion

with the slave-trade. A convention had existed between the two countries

for its suppression on the coasts of Brazil; the period for which the

convention existed expired early in the year, and the government of

the Brazilian emperor notified to that of her Britannic majesty that it

should not be renewed. This gave great umbrage to the latter government,

which saw that the design of the Brazilians was to continue the

infamous traffic. The British parliament consequently passed an act for

subjecting Brazilian vessels, suspected of being engaged in the trade,

to the jurisdiction of the English tribunals. Against this the Brazilian

government protested, and sent a circular note conveying a copy of the

protest to all other powers. On the 3rd of May the emperor delivered

an address to the representatives of the nation, stating that he would

support the dignity of his crown against the interference of Great

Britain, and calling upon the assembly to support him. He at the same

time, however, declared that he would be faithful to his engagements

in putting an end to the trade in Africans. This was so vaguely

expressed, and the desire of the Brazilian government was so evidently

to foster that illicit commerce, and, if possible, involve England in

a quarrel with some of the other maritime powers, that the English

government was much incensed, and resolved upon stringent measures. In

this they were opposed by the Manchester party, even by some among them

who had taken a most active part in anti-slavery movements. The persons

thus inconsistent were chiefly among the Society of Friends, who, while

on the one hand they hated oppression, on the other hated war, even

when waged to succour the oppressed. The chief movers in the Manchester

agitation against the government policy towards Brazil, were, however,

neither anti-slavery men, nor members of the Peace Society, but certain

merchants engaged largely in the Brazilian trade, and whose political

principles were very accommodating, always, somehow, being on the side

of their interests, or supposed interests, in commercial matters. No war

ensued, but the firm attitude taken by the English government prevented

the renewal of the slave-trade by Brazilian merchants.

RELATIONS WITH CONTINENTAL EUROPE.

_France_.—The year 1846 was one of much discussion between England and

France. Louis Philippe proved himself as insincere and selfish as

the Bourbons always were, to whatever branch of that faithless family

belonging. M. Guizot, the chief minister of the king, was as little

candid as his master. The same treachery which sullied the reminiscences

of Ghent, characterised the procedure of the minister towards England

in 1846. There were various subjects of difference between the two

countries; but that which most occupied the attention of Europe was the

Spanish marriages. Louis Philippe had a numerous family, was avaricious

to the last degree, and allowed avarice and nepotism to govern his

policy, rather than the honour and interests of the great kingdom over

which he presided. He was desirous that one of his sons should marry

the Queen of Spain, and that another should be united to her sister.

The queen-mother favoured this idea, as did also the chief minister,

Narvaez. On the other hand, it was alleged that the English government

was intriguing for a prince of the house of Cobourg. This was not the

case—at all events, when the Whigs came into power. Lord Palmerston, on

behalf of his court and government, disclaimed it, and demanded that

the royal family of Spain should be left free to follow their own

inclinations, excepting only as regarded members of the royal family

of France, against a union with which the English whig foreign minister

protested, as a breach of the treaty of Utrecht. Mr. Disraeli, and

others of the conservative party, were of opinion with M. Guizot, that

such marriages as the French ministry contemplated would not infringe

that treaty, which guaranteed that the throne of France and Spain

should not be filled by the same person, but made no provision against

marriages upon which such an event might appear to be contingent.

The British government was firm in regarding the proceedings of Louis

Philippe as directed by an unprincipled ambition, in defiance of

treaties, and of the alliance between Great Britain and France then

subsisting. The English government did not encourage a member of the

house of Cobourg, but advocated the pretensions to her majesty’s hand of

a Spanish prince, Don Enrique, the Queen of Spain’s own cousin. To this

the French government was opposed, because Don Enrique was of liberal

political opinions, and it was the policy of Louis Philippe and his

_alter ego_, M. Guizot, to keep down liberal aspirations in Spain. The

reaction policy of the French king and his minister was now in full

operation, and this was, unfortunately, more felt at Madrid than at

Paris. The King of the French wished, he alleged, to see the choice of

the Spanish princess fall within the Bourbon circle; but a ban was laid

on Don Enrique, because of his constitutionalism, or, as Guizot was

pleased to designate it, his revolutionary opinions. The intrigue of

the French government was successful, so far that the Queen of Spain

was married to a Spanish Bourbon, brother to Don Enrique, a man whom

the queen personally hated, a bigoted devotee and reactionary, whose

fanaticism against liberty was morbid, and who was an avowed Carlist,

openly denying the right of the Queen of Spain to the throne. Whatever

could be supposed as likely to influence the fortunes of the young queen

and of the Spanish nation, unfavourably, in connection with a royal

marriage, was associated with this; but Louis Philippe and M.

Guizot cared for none of these things, so as their own project was

accomplished. At the same time the sister of the queen was married to

the Duc de Montpensier, a son of Louis Philippe. The two marriages were

celebrated together with great pomp and ceremony. The Spanish government

did not much care whether the royal lady married an Orleans or a

Cobourg, so as France or England were engaged on its side against the

apprehension of a republican or Carlist revolt; and, on the whole,

France was supposed more likely to interfere for such a purpose than

Great Britain.

The singular dishonesty of M. Guizot and his master startled the

politicians of Europe. The French government had pledged itself to the

English not to take any step to secure the hand of either of the royal

ladies of Spain for a French prince. M. Guizot afterwards justified his

conduct by alleging that the English government was secretly abetting

the interests of a Cobourg. He admitted that he could not prove this,

but justified his acting upon such a strong suspicion as he entertained.

When, in 1847, M. Thiers brought on certain stormy discussions in the

French chambers on this subject, the admission was wrung from the

French foreign minister that the conduct of England had been loyal and

honourable—that no efforts had been made to press a Cobourg upon

the attention of the Spanish court; this too celebrated person thus

convicting himself of premeditated bad faith, and of resorting to

accusations and falsehood to vindicate a policy which he had falsely and

wilfully initiated, or, at all events, pursued, when initiated by his

royal master.

One feature of the infidelity of the French court and minister to their

engagements excited the indignation of all honourable minds acquainted

with it. When the English government detected the intention of Louis

Philippe to break his engagements and to prosecute the Montpensier

marriage, that government urged that, at all events, it was desirable,

if the treaty of Utrecht was to be observed, that the Queen of Spain

should have an heir to the throne before the marriage of her sister took

place. The French minister promised that the marriages should not take

place _at the same time_. When the English government remonstrated upon

the disregard of this engagement, shown in the actual fact that the two

marriages had their celebration together, M. Guizot justified himself

by alleging that, inasmuch as the queen was married first, although her

sister was married immediately after, the ceremonial was not celebrated

at the same time! This audacious departure from every decent observance

of truth and honesty was perpetrated by a man who is lauded by the

_savons_ of France to this day as one of their illustrious number. His

Memoir of Sir Robert Peel is popular in England, and he has since been

received with favour in London! The whole administration of M. Guizot,

foreign and domestic, was a dishonour and a curse to France, and

supplies one of the dark pages of her history.

It was on the 10th of October that Louis Philippe and M. Guizot

consummated their treachery to England, and their selfish policy towards

Spain, and laid the foundation for an alienation between the French and

English governments, which continued until the hypocrite king was hurled

from the throne of France.

_Spain_.—The policy of the King of the French to Spain was not regarded

with any interest by the mass of the Spanish people. The English

government and citizens supposed that the Spanish marriages would bring

about a revolution, but the people looked coldly on. The French king

understood the Spanish nation better than it was understood in England.

There was, however, a large party in Spain which regarded the designs

of the French king with an enlightened and politic alarm. Thus, when the

Spanish government selected him as mediator with the pope, to effect a

reconciliation between the courts of Rome and Madrid, the language of

suspicion uttered by Senor Leijas Lozano expressed the real views of

most men of cultivated minds in Spain:—“For my part, I admit that I

had much suspicion, mingled with fear, when it was determined to select

France as our mediator with Rome, and these fears I have not yet got

rid of. The question is, are the offers of service made by France to the

Spanish government sufficiently frank?—are they sincere? I fear

they are not. _Her interests are not identified with ours_. I may be

mistaken, but my firm belief is that it is the interests of France

that we shall remain as isolated as possible until the great events she

desires be effected.”

A strong conviction was entertained by many eminent men in Spain, that

Sir Robert Peel and the Earl of Aberdeen had complicated the question

of the Spanish marriages; that, although the Whigs repudiated with

sincerity all interference, these two statesmen had coquetted with the

question of a Cobourg alliance for the Spanish queen, and that in doing

so they were only carrying out the wishes of the English court; that

the knowledge obtained of these facts by the secret agents of the French

king, and of the queen-mother of Spain, made both less scrupulous, and

hastened the perfection of a plot which, but for such discoveries, the

royal intriguants would not have had the boldness to prosecute.

Ministerial changes were frequent in Spain throughout the year. The

Narvaez ministry was broken up, and that of Senor Isturitz followed;

that too was destroyed. Narvaez was successful in his intrigues,

supported by the queen-mother and the King of the French. England

looked on with jealousy; and it was supposed in Spain that, but for

the disasters and conflicts which occurred within the bounds of her own

empire, she would have interfered in a more tangible manner. French gold

was freely spent in Spain to facilitate French policy; and so corrupt

were the public men of that country, that, as Louis Philippe well knew,

money, applied skilfully, could change ministers and effect revolutions

with a facility unknown to any other country in the world.

_Portugal_.—The Portuguese government gave satisfactory assurances,

in answer to the demands of England, that the anti-slavery stipulations

between the two countries should be carried into effect more

efficaciously than heretofore; the intercourse between the two nations

was therefore peaceful and satisfactory. The intrigues of the French

court were, however, extended to that part of the Iberian peninsula

also. The court of Portugal was invited to reactionary measures by

the French minister, and French political agents were busy in Lisbon,

Oporto, Coimbra, and elsewhere. The Cabrai government became unpopular;

Castro Cabrai was supposed to exercise an undue influence; and José

Cabrai, his brother, the minister of justice, was unpopular everywhere,

but especially at Oporto, from which city he had to flee for his life.

The Cabrai government was ultimately driven from office and from the

capital: these events occurred in May. The queen now committed affairs

to the Marquis de Palmella, and issued proclamations restoring liberty

of the press, and remitting the exorbitant burial fees demanded by

the priests, which had been enforced by the government: these measures

restored peace. The French court incessantly intrigued against this

government also, and in four months after its formation it was abruptly

dismissed; the result was civil war. Two distinct insurrections went

on together—a republican or radical one in the south, and a Miguellite

revolt in the north. It was generally supposed by the Portuguese that

the faction of the court was in favour with the court of England, as

Colonel Wylde, equerry to Prince Albert, attended the camp of the royal

commander-inchief. The colonel, however, acted as commissioner of the

British government, which felt a deep interest in the distresses of

Portugal—peculiar treaties binding the two countries. The year 1846

closed over the Iberian peninsula in discord, turbulence, and woe.

_The Papal States_.—According to the constitution, England held no

diplomatic connection with the court of Rome. The proceedings of that

court, however, had an important influence upon the British empire, as

four-fifths of the Irish population were Roman Catholics, and in Eastern

Canada, Newfoundland, and other British colonies or dependencies, many

of the people were of the same religion. The events of the year at Rome

were the death of Pope Gregory XVI., and the election of Cardinal Mastei

to the pontifical chair, who assumed the title of Pius IX. One of his

first acts was to publish an amnesty for political offenders, which

gave great satisfaction to the inhabitants of the Roman States. This

was speedily followed by a tariff reform, based upon sound views of

the interests of the Roman people. Throughout the year, his civil

and sacerdotal administration were alike popular within the states,

throughout Italy, and all over Europe. The French, Austrian, Neapolitan,

Spanish, and Portuguese governments were all, however, incensed at the

liberal tendencies of the new pope. The Roman Catholic subjects of the

Queen of Great Britain and Ireland received the announcements of the

pontifical liberality with favour; it was thought that by these means

the objections of Protestants would be softened, and a way opened for

the reconciliation of many, especially liberal churchmen, to Rome.

_Poland_.—The sympathies of England were aroused by events in Poland,

which extinguished the last spark of Polish liberty. Throughout all the

provinces, a desire existed to make one effort more for freedom. The

hope of disenthralling their native land animated every heart. An

ill-concerted insurrection, was the inevitable consequence of this

strong feeling; and as Cracow was a free city, under the guarantee of

the treaty of Vienna, the insurgents believed that they could use it as

a _point d’appui_. In the month of February, the circle of Tarnow rose

in arms. The peasantry of Silesia, armed with scythes, attacked the

Austrian troops under General Collin, and drove them out of Cracow. A

provisional government was instituted there; Poland was called upon

to rise at once; and all nations, especially France and England, were

appealed to in passionate terms for aid. After various successes by

the revolters, they were at last encountered by superior forces,

and repeatedly defeated: Cracow was taken by the Austrians, and its

independence extinguished. The English and French ministers protested

against this as a violation of the treaty of Vienna. Russia and Prussia

supported the policy of Austria, who replied to the Western diplomatists

that the proceedings of the Poles was a violation of the treaty of

Vienna, and that it was necessary to the integrity and peace of the

Austrian empire that Cracow should be no longer a focus of rebellion.

The Western governments satisfied themselves with protests, and the last

green spot of Polish independence had its life stamped out by the foot

of Austrian despotism.

Such were the general relations of England during the year 1846.

Colonial revolt was suppressed; a powerful invader was driven back from

her oriental territory; and she maintained with honour her European

policy, and peace with neighbouring nations, under circumstances of

great provocation; her star shone with more lustre in the eyes of

foreign nations when the year terminated than when it opened.

HOME.

The parliamentary events of the year have already been narrated. There

were many home incidents which were not comprised in the records of

parliament. In the month of January, Wales was visited with disastrous

inundations, which destroyed a vast amount of property, and caused much

distress. More liberal arrangements were made about this time for the

reward and promotion of deserving privates and non-commissioned officers

of the army. In the month of February, Captain Rous, the member

for Westminster, having accepted office under Sir Robert Peel’s

administration, a new election became necessary. The captain was opposed

by Lieutenant-general Sir de Lacy Evans, one of the most chivalrous and

accomplished soldiers in the British army. The result was in favour of

the gallant general by nearly one thousand. Sir de Lacy, being returned

as a thoroughly liberal politician, this event was “a heavy blow, and

great discouragement” to the administration of Sir Robert Peel. In South

Nottinghamshire an election also occurred, in which Lord Lincoln, a

political _protégé_ of Sir Robert’s, was defeated by Mr. Hildyard, a

protectionist, by a very large majority. These events were supposed

to foreshadow the speedy demise of the Peel administration. In the

following month, Lord Lincoln was defeated at North Nottingham, polling

only two hundred and seventeen votes against one thousand seven hundred

and forty-two, polled by Lord H. Bentinck. During the early part of the

year, a serious revulsion took place in railway speculation; the rate

of money became high; a panic seized the speculators and adventurers in

such undertakings: in this way many incurred serious loss. The public

were startled in various parts of Great Britain by shocking railway

accidents, generally the result of carelessness on the part of the

officials, or deficient inspection and control on the part of directors.

On the 25th of May, her: majesty was safely delivered of a daughter.

Much interest was excited in June by a visit from Ibrahim Pasha, the

celebrated Egyptian prince and soldier. His highness inspected the

dock-yards and public places, paid his respects to the court, and was

feted and entertained by public men, especially of the navy and army.

A public dinner was given to the postage reformer, Mr. Rowland Hill, on

the 17th of June, and a testimonial presented to him on the part of the

merchants of London, which (including a first instalment handed to him

in 1845) amounted to £13,360 19s. 5d.

On the 25th, the infant princess was baptised: the name given to her

was Helena Augusta Victoria. The sponsors were her Royal Highness the

Duchess of Kent, proxy for the Duchess of Orleans; his Royal Highness

the Hereditary Grand-duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz; her Royal Highness

the Duchess of Cambridge.

Prince Albert visited the town and port of Liverpool, on the 30th, for

the purpose of opening the Albert Dock, and of laying the first stone of

the Sailors’ Home. The reception of his royal highness was worthy of the

great commercial community by which he was invited.

August was ushered in by one of the most terrible hailstorms ever

witnessed in London. It lasted for more than three hours, and created

great devastation. Inundations spread, and the windows of the public

buildings were extensively shattered. The glass in the roof of the

picture-gallery at Buckingham Palace was totally destroyed; the damage

was estimated at £2000. In the Houses of Parliament and Westminster

Hall, seven thousand panes of glass were broken; in the head office

of police, Scotland Yard, three hundred; in Burford’s panorama, ten

thousand. A Citizen steamer on the river was struck by lightning

off Battersea. The suburbs of London suffered from floods, hail, and

lightning, and the royal parks were much damaged, especially that at

Windsor.

Much interest was excited by the marine excursions taken by her majesty

during that summer to the Channel Islands, and various places on the

southern coast of England.

On the 29th of September, an event occurred in London which attracted

much attention. The equestrian statue of the Duke of Wellington, by

Wyatt, was removed from the artist’s studio, in the Harrow Road, to the

Triumphal Arch, at Hyde Park Corner, where it was set upon the pedestal

prepared for it. The illustrious spectators in Apsley House were almost

as much objects of interest to the multitude below, as the colossal

statue erected to the honour of the hero of Waterloo.

The failure of the harvest throughout the British Isles caused in

England a profound sensation. Prayers set apart to be used in a time

of scarcity were offered up, and subscriptions for the poor were most

generously bestowed by those whose means were ample, and by many from

limited resources: British benevolence had been seldom seen to such

advantage. During the month of November tempestuous weather prevailed

along the coasts, causing many wrecks and much loss of life. Early in

December, the severity of winter fell upon the British Isles. On the

10th, the mercury was fourteen degrees below the freezing-point in

London. This severe weather added to the sufferings of the people,

already pressed by scarcity of food. In the Highlands of Scotland, and

in Ireland, stern destitution was experienced by the whole peasantry.

During the year many eminent persons died whose names shed a lustre on

British history. In January, the Eight Honourable John Hookham Frère,

M.A., expired, who had been ambassador to Spain at the beginning of the

century. His representations had much influence in inducing the English

government to set on foot the expedition to the peninsula, which shed

so much glory on the arms of Britain. Earl Granville, whose name is so

closely associated with English political and diplomatic history, also

died within the month. During the following month, the antiquary,

Gaily Knight, and General Sir Henry Clinton, G.C.B., were among the

celebrities who passed away. In the month of March, the decease of Mr.

Liston, the comedian, attracted public notice. In June, Haydon, the

celebrated painter, died by his own hand, impelled by want. He had

frequently been indebted to the generous-hearted liberality of Sir

Robert and Lady Peel for aid, and the last assistance he ever received

was from these compassionate benefactors, the friends of so many artists

and literary men, as well as of poor Haydon. The genius of this artist,

as well as the record of his misfortunes, will go down to posterity.

Soon after Haydon’s melancholy death, in the month of July, “Charlotte

Elizabeth,” the writer of so many beautiful religious books, was called

to her happy home. The same month, the Eight Honourable Sir George

Murray, the friend and companion of Wellington, in both his military and

political career, died in London. August witnessed the decease of the

veteran anti-reformer, Sir Charles Wetherell. In September Lord Metcalfe

died, regretted much by the political world; and Thomas Clarkson, the

philanthropist, to whose exertions in the first instance humanity was

indebted for the abolition of the slave-trade, also passed into rest. In

the last month of the year the Eight Honourable Thomas Grenville died

in his ninety-first year, after a political and diplomatic life very

eventful.

The year 1846 was replete with transactions of great historical

importance; at its close England stood with a crown of many victories

upon her brow, but with many cares and anxieties; the chief of these was

the distress in England, and wide-spread starvation in the Highlands of

Scotland and in Ireland. Another chapter will reveal how evils of such

magnitude were encountered.

CHAPTER LIX.

{VICTORIA. 1847}

Colonial Affairs..... Foreign Relations..... State of

Ireland: Progress of Famine and Disease; Political

Agitation; Prevalence of Crime..... Death of O’Connell.....

Old Ireland and Young Ireland Parties..... General State of

Affairs in Great Britain..... Naval and Military Events.....

Home Incidents..... Decease of Remarkable Persons.....

Parliamentary Proceedings.

COLONIAL AFFAIRS.

{A.D. 1847}

It is convenient to notice first in order the colonial and foreign

relations of the country, as home events derived their character from

these; parliamentary and party proceedings, more especially, turned

often, in a great measure, upon the prospects and condition of our

colonies, and the relations which we bore to foreign powers. This was

less the case in 1846 and 1847 than in most other periods, because the

failure of the harvests, the consequent overwhelming distress through

out the British Isles, and the disaffection in Ireland, demanded the

most earnest attention of parliament and the ministry.

_India_.—The state of India, throughout this year, was one of

prosperity and peace. The Punjaub, however, created some disquietude,

and there were border disturbances within the acquired territory of

Scinde.

It will be recollected that in the last chapter the appointment of a

council of regency at Lahore was recorded. This body excited the ranee’s

jealousy, whose disposition for intrigue was once more evoked; she

endeavoured to neutralise the action of the council. Representations

concerning this state of things were made to the governor-general, who

signified his approbation of the policy proposed by the council for

her exile from the capital. She was accordingly seized, and sent under

escort to a distance, where she’ was detained, and Lahore and the

Punjaub were exempt from troubles throughout the year.

In Scinde the border tribes were restless, and made frequent predatory

incursions upon the British territory. On one occasion, a body of seven

hunded infantry and a troop of horse, headed by several chiefs, made

a foray. Lieutenant Merewether, of “the Scinde Irregular Horse,” was

sent, at the head of about one hundred and thirty men, to observe, and,

if possible, disperse them. This gallant young officer came up with the

marauders in a locality unfavourable for immediate action; they were

moving in a direction which would have afforded them the protection

of some sand hills and jungle. Mr. Merewether rode along their front

without charging them, in order to gain their flank, and compel them to

keep the open plain, in a situation more favourable for the action

of cavalry. They did not understand this manouvre, and supposed it to

signify that the lieutenant did not deem it prudent to assail them.

Encouraged by this idea they attacked him, coming on with great

exultation. This gave the skilful and intrepid young officer the

advantage he desired; he wheeled to the left, formed his men in

an instant, charged, and cut up the enemy fearfully. The infantry

endeavoured to retreat; such of the horsemen as were left galloped away.

Mr. Merewether allowed their infantry no opportunity to retire to a

position where they might receive cavalry advantageously; but still

acting upon their flank, and keeping them in the open plain, he again

and again charged, each time cutting them down as the mower cuts the

ripe hay. They were offered quarter, but with great bravery stood to

their arms, until not one-fourth of their original number remained; they

then laid down their weapons. Of the whole body, except the few horsemen

who became fugitives after the first charge, not one escaped destruction

or captivity. Lieutenant Merewether lost very few men; he himself

had miraculous escapes, for he was foremost in every charge, exposing

himself with the utmost audacity. This gallant little action drew

upon the young soldier the attention and commendation not only of

his superiors in authority, but of the army of India. The exploit was

recorded in the papers at home, and was the theme of every news-room and

club. The English people are always more quick to appreciate and reward

valour than their government.

Sir Charles Napier, after conquering Scinde by the highest military

daring and skill, ruled it with a rare political sagacity. His attempts

at military reform brought upon him the ill-will of the Indian military

authorities, and the directors at home. The reforms introduced by the

gallant general bore the impress of his genius and his indomitable will.

His prophetic predictions concerning the evils that would certainly

result from the state of discipline in which he found the Sepoy armies,

were, unfortunately, all fulfilled. In the memoir of this gallant

general, written by his brother, Lieutenant-general Sir William Napier,

the merits of the case are amply, although it must be admitted, not

dispassionately discussed. The material is, however, afforded for a

just judgment upon the controversy. It can hardly be doubted the gallant

general was insubordinate; that he assumed authority to which he was not

entitled, and ruled with a glorious and intellectual tyranny, which was

not the less a tyranny because of the genius by which it was directed.

The general’s faults were, however, overlooked by his country, which was

served by him through an eventful life, with much honour to himself; it

is sad to say that his services as well as his errors were overlooked by

the government.

The public appreciation of him was just; they regarded him as a hero,

and a bold and skilful governor. His brother justly described the public

opinion of England when he wrote—“His fame has been accepted by the

British people as belonging to the glory of the nation.”

Lord Hardinge did not long continue to govern India after Sir Charles

resigned the government of Scinde. Upon his resignation Lord Dalhousie

was appointed, through the especial influence of the Duke of Wellington.

This appointment has been described as the only job which the

illustrious duke ever perpetrated, and reasons were assigned for this

unsuited to the pages of this history. Lord Dalhousie possessed many

qualifications for his high office, but he was pedantic, had too jealous

a sense of the dignity of his office, and often refused to listen to

the advice of officers, well qualified to offer it, on military matters,

which, whatever might be the noble lord’s opinions of his own parts,

were rather beyond his knowledge. He entered upon his government under

auspicious circumstances. The celebrated Akhbar Khan, the malignant

enemy of the English during the unfortunate affair at Cabul, died this

year, and made one less to the many opponents of British rule among the

chiefs of India and the contiguous countries.

_The Cape of Good Hope_.—The disturbances of the previous year were not

wholly quelled at the Cape. The Caffres continued to make forays within

the colony, and to plunder cattle. They were pursued and punished,

and considerable herds were recaptured. The feelings of all the Caffre

tribes were utterly hostile, and peace was only attainable by the

exercise of indisputable force.

_Our American Colonies_.—Peace and prosperity characterised the history

of our American colonial possessions during this year. The failure of

the potato crop caused some inconvenience and distress, but the general

agricultural and commercial success compensated for this disadvantage.

Security was also felt, as apprehension of a war with the United States

had entirely passed away. In the legislatures of Canada and Nova Scotia

there was, however, discontent with the measures of the governors of

these colonies, and the imperial administration and legislature. This

discontent found vent in orations, and through the columns of the press,

but did not disturb colonial tranquillity nor interrupt the progress of

government: those free countries were gradually laying the foundation

for a future and a glorious period of wealth and greatness.

_Borneo_.—It was again necessary to chastise the Borneo pirates. On the

30th the British steam frigate _Nemesis_ engaged a fleet of Soluprahus,

off Labuam The ship was crossing over to Labuan from Brune, with the

rajah of Sarawak on board. When off the island of Moora the _Nemesis_

came suddenly upon a fleet of eleven pirate boats, pursuing a trading

prahu. The _Nemesis_ chased the pirates to the shore, who drew up in

line along the beach. The pirates first opened the combat. For about two

hours the cannonade lasted; when the fire of the prahus was subdued, the

marines and sailors proceeded in boats to finish the destruction of the

pirate craft. Five of these war prahus were destroyed, and about eighty

pirates killed, and perhaps as many wounded. The rest and their crews

escaped, but the boats were much disabled. From the guns and other

material captured, it was plain that a Dutch merchant ship of

considerable value had fallen into the pirates’ hands. Some operations

on shore speedily followed, from which the robbers suffered severely.

One British seaman was killed, and seven wounded.

FOREIGN RELATIONS.

The conduct of the Chinese, ever since the peace executed by Sir Henry

Pottinger, had been such as to show that the treaty was not intended to

be kept by the authorities any longer than force constrained, and that

with the people all intercourse with foreigners on equal terms was

unpopular. During 1846 unoffending Europeans at Canton were frequently

attacked, and on one occasion the factories were stormed, and only

after a protracted conflict did the Europeans and Americans succeed in

expelling the assailants. The government of Canton always affected to

deprecate this violence on the part of the Cantonese, and as far as

proclamations went there was a magnificent display of justice. Several

Englishmen and other foreigners were murdered, and certain innocent

Chinese were seized and executed by the mandarins, while the murderers

were notoriously at large. In 1847 the merchants, who had often in vain

called for protection and redress from the British government, drew up a

memorial of their wrongs, which induced Sir John Davis, the governor

of Hong-Kong, to interfere on their behalf. Sir Robert Peel and Lord

Aberdeen seemed to adopt the policy of submitting to any indignities

the Chinese government or people might offer, rather than interrupt

commercial relations, or create any embarrassment at home. Possibly the

state of parties and the general distress at home may have influenced

the premier and the foreign minister to adopt this course, but its

result was injurious to British interests and to humanity; it entailed a

still greater interruption of commerce, and involved a larger sacrifice

of human life.

The demands of the merchants were:—1. A distinct recognition of their

rights to go such distance into the surrounding country as could be

traversed, either by land or water, in one day out and home; and full

protection during such period from attack or insult.—2. A space of

ground of about fifty acres at Honan, or in some other convenient part

of the suburbs, for the erection of warehouses and dwelling-houses.—3.

A site for a church and church-yard* for British residents.

* By a “church yard” was meant a burial-ground attached to

the church, for Europeans only.

—4. A burial-ground for the Parsee community, either on Dares or French

Island, of forty thousand square feet.—5. A bridge to be thrown over

the passage of Hog Lane, to connect the two factory gardens.—6. A

cook-house for Lascars in Hog Lane.—7. The railing in of Lower China

Street and the lower part of Hog Lane, and the garden walls to be kept

free from Chinese buildings, excepting the military and police stations

already erected.—8. Removal of the stationary boats which at present

encumber the avenue to the factory gardens at the river-side.

Sir John Davis determined upon seeking redress for the various insults

and outrages which had been inflicted, whatever might be the propriety

of requesting the concession of such advantages as the merchants sought.

In the opinion of Sir John, who knew the Chinese well, no demand would

meet with attention which was not backed with military force. Orientals

comprehend only that argument which Europeans regard as the _dernier

resort_. The Chinese authorities were taken by surprise, or they would

have prepared for resistance, and met the military demonstration of the

English governor with defiance or stratagem. Major-general D’Aguilar

commanded the British troops. As soon as he received the directions of

the plenipotentiary, he consulted with Captain M’Dougall in command of

her majesty’s ship _Vulture_. These officers agreed that the force at

their disposal was inadequate to the enterprise, but that, as audacity

and promptitude were the best weapons with oriental nations, it would

be well to act at once with such forces as they could employ. General

D’Aguilar considered it also important to impress practically upon the

mind of the Chinese authorities the possibility of the garrison and the

naval force at Hong-Kong being sufficient, without aid from India

or England, to chastise any affronts or injuries offered to British

persons, honour, or interests. It had been well if, in subsequent

events, similar views had been entertained by British officers and

British governments. The promptitude of the general’s action harmonised

with the wisdom and boldness of his opinion. By midnight of the day

on which he received his orders, the troops were embarked; and at nine

o’clock the following morning the squadron arrived at the Bocca Tigris.

The _Vulture_ then lowered her boats, into which the general ordered two

detachments, the one under Lieutenant-colonel Brereton, the other under

his own immediate orders. On landing, all the batteries were seized,

the guns spiked, the ammunition destroyed, and the garrisons sent,

unmolested, away. This bold measure was necessary to the safety of the

general’s small force, for had he left these batteries in his rear, his

return would have been endangered. At six o’clock, the squadron arrived

at Whampoa. As the _Vulture_ was of too large a draught to proceed

higher, the troops were placed on board the steamers _Pluto_ and

_Corsair_. Sir John Davis accompanied the general in the _Pluto_. At

eleven o’clock the squadron arrived before several forts, which were

attacked. Lieutenant-colonel Brereton, landing, took two of them by

a _coup de main_, blowing in the gates with gunpowder, and instantly

seizing and spiking the guns. General D’Aguilar and his party were

received by the other two forts with round and case shot, but the

boats pushed in, blew open the gates, and spiked the guns, the garrison

retreating by the rear. The expedition then proceeded to the French

Folly Fort, a stronger place than any of those already captured, and

situated on one of the narrowest bends of the river. The British swooped

down upon this place as an eagle upon its prey, and their rapidity was

rewarded by its immediate capture, for a few minutes delay and the

guns of the work would have given our troops a reception more warm than

welcome. Four other batteries were taken and spiked on their way up

river by the general and commodore, and by six o’clock in the evening

the troops were landed in the factories. Eight hundred and seventy-nine

pieces of Chinese cannon had been spiked, to the amazement of the

enemy, who had no time to recover from the panic into which so sudden an

incursion threw them. The general, upon landing, placed the factories

in a state of efficient defence by barricades, and such other means as

were at his immediate command. The Chinese commissioner, Keying, now

waited upon Sir John Davis, but refused to comply with his demands; the

next day, however, the high commissioner requested another day’s delay.

This was granted, and the terms demanded were ultimately agreed to

by the commissioner. General D’Aguilar withdrew the troops, except a

company of sappers, and the light company of the 18th royal regiment of

the line. These were ordered to remain until what was promised should be

fully executed. This feat of the English general’s was one of the most

dashing ever executed with so small a body of men. The whole military

force did not amount to one thousand men, and the naval force could only

afford a few hundred sailors and marines for land operations. Audacity

and rapidity carried the day—the grand secret of success in Asiatic

warfare.

The Chinese, however, had no intention of observing the treaty; and

when all appeared to be adjusted, six British subjects, who made a

short excursion, in agreement with one of its clauses, were barbarously

murdered. They were attacked by the whole population of the place

which they visited. The Englishmen, when at last compelled to defend

themselves, slew one and wounded several of their assailants. It

required much negotiation to secure the punishment of some of the

murderers, four of whom were decapitated, and a few others received

minor punishments.

Whenever the French found that the British displayed vigour towards the

Chinese, they made out a grievance, and sent an armed force to demand

redress somewhere. Their object seemed to be to show that France also

was a great nation, and could enforce respect. Two French ships of war

appeared in the Bay of Touron during this year, to demand redress

from the government of Cochin China, for injuries alleged to have been

inflicted upon French Roman Catholic priests. Their demand not having

been at once complied with, and some treachery on the part of the

natives having been detected, the French ships opened fire upon the

war-junks, sinking and destroying many, and slaying more than a thousand

men.

The conduct of the Chinese to Europeans generally, during the year 1847,

kept them, the British more especially, in a constant sense of danger.

Applications were made for reinforcements, but, notwithstanding the

prodigious armaments of England in India, and her resources elsewhere,

it was with extreme difficulty that any additional force could be

obtained. The following parliamentary papers show the perilous routine

necessary on every occasion when our officers require even the most

paltry reinforcement. General D’Aguilar applied to Major-general Smelt,

the officer commanding at Ceylon, for two guns and a few artillerymen.

In a month after, General Smelt wrote to Lord Fitzroy Somerset, the

military secretary at the Horse-Guards, informing him that if

he (General Smelt) _heard again_ from General D’Aguilar that the

reinforcement was necessary, he would send it! but that, in doing so, he

should leave Ceylon all but utterly unprotected, so far as artillery

was concerned. Lord Torrington, the governor of Ceylon, at the same

time communicated this “great fact”—that two guns and a few men were

wanting at Hong-Kong—to Earl Grey, the colonial minister, who, at the

latter end of November, sent a despatch to General D’Aguilar, telling

him not to do anything against the Chinese without authority from

home! The discretionary power in the hands of Sir John Davis, and the

promptitude, energy, and enterprise of the general, obtained, with less

bloodshed than frequently occurred in a street riot in Canton, redress

of grievances, a recognition of rights, and a series of important

concessions. If it had been necessary to refer these disputes to the

Colonial Office at home, everything would have been frustrated. Possibly

a grand expedition, at an enormous expense, would have gone out in a

year or so afterwards, and an expenditure of British as well as

Chinese life on a large scale have resulted. In spheres so distant, men

thoroughly competent to act ought, in both civil and military matters,

to be appointed, and the honour of the country should be committed to

their hands. With a small force, complete in itself, at the disposal

of such men, more could be effected at the moment for the honour and

interests of the country than by long and roundabout despatches, passing

through so many hands that one fool in authority nullifies all, as a bad

link in an otherwise good chain renders the whole useless. Omitting

the other portions of the correspondence, the following letter

from Major-general D’Aguilar, dated Hong-Kong, August 21, 1847, to

Major-general Smelt, reveals sufficiently the incompetent arrangements

for British interests in China, in 1847:—

“Although I have not the pleasure of your personal acquaintance, your

character and services are so well known to me, that I venture to

address you without form or ceremony. I have every reason to hope that

things will settle down here peaceably, but I have no positive assurance

of it; and if circumstances should occur to oblige me to go to Canton

again, I am but badly off for artillery. I can never hope to surprise

the Chinese defences a second time; and whatever I do must be done in

form, and with reference to the altered position of things.

“Under these circumstances, I write to ask if you can spare me half a

company of artillery, with their proportionate number of field-guns

and ammunition complete. I should only want them for six weeks, and I

promise you to send them faithfully back the moment the service is over.

“Should the contingency—the possibility of which is on the

cards—occur, I shall endeavour to avoid taking the field before the end

of November, when the cool weather will add strength to our exertions;

and I will take care to give you the earliest notice of my intention. In

the meantime, perhaps, you would kindly prepare Lord Torrington for this

request on my part, and afford me your interest in giving effect to it,

should circumstances render it necessary.

“A couple of 9–pounders, with the half-company of artillery, would be

the best; but if they are not to be had, then anything your people are

supplied with.”

On receipt of the above, Major-general Smelt wrote as follows to

Lieutenant-general Lord Fitzroy Somerset.

The letter was dated Colombo, Ceylon, September 22nd, 1847:—

“I have the honour to inform your lordship that I received, two days

ago, a letter from Major-general D’Aguilar, commanding in China,

informing me that it is likely that he would require a reinforcement of

artillery in the event of operations being carried on at Canton towards

the end? of this year, and requesting me, if I could spare it, and

circumstances rendered it necessary, to afford him a half company of

artillery, with two 9–pounder guns complete, with ammunition, &c.

“I shall therefore be prepared, should I hear again from General

D’Aguilar that their services would actually be required, to send such

force as, in the present strength of artillery in this command, would

be in my power. But your lordship is aware that the whole amount of

artillery throughout this island only consists of two weak companies,

reduced in their number of Europeans in consequence of a proportion

of gun-lascars; and the only ordnance that I could spare, at present

equipped for service, are 4 ⅖ inch howitzer guns, having neither

9–pounder nor 6–pounder guns, excepting two of the latter, which have no

carriages.

“Under these circumstances, and with the recommendation of his

excellency the governor, I should be able to afford a detachment of one

officer and twenty-five gunners, with a proportion of non-commissioned

officers and the two howitzers above mentioned. I am informed by General

D’Aguilar, who will give me the earliest notice of his plans, that he

would only require this force for six weeks, and that it should be sent

back to me immediately the service is over; in the meantime, as this

draft would reduce my strength of European artillerymen in this island

by about one-third, I shall, in order to repair the deficiency, cause a

portion of the soldiers from the line regiment, equal to about five men

per company, to be trained and exercised at the gun drill.

“I have to add that a draft of one hundred and twenty men of the Ceylon

Rifle Regiment are under orders, and will probably sail the end of this

month for Hong-Kong, to complete the six companies at present serving

there to their full complement of one hundred rank and file; these

companies having been sent to China so much under their establishment

with a view to their being completed by recruits sent from Singapore,

but the uncertain state of things there rendering it quite necessary now

that trained soldiers should be sent from this place, which I trust will

meet with the approbation of his grace the commander-inchief.”

The foregoing offer of assistance was finally countermanded by Earl

Grey, in a despatch to Major-general D’Aguilar, dated Colonial Office,

November the 24th, 1847:—

“The governor of Ceylon has communicated to me an application which you

have made to the major-general commanding her majesty’s troops in that

island, for a reinforcement of half a company of artillery, with two

guns, and a proportionate supply of ammunition, to be held in readiness

to be forwarded to Hong-Kong, should circumstances render it necessary

to undertake any further military operations at Canton.

“I have desired the governor of Ceylon not to send to Hong-Kong the

detachment for which you have made application; and I have further to

signify to you that her majesty’s government peremptorily forbid you to

undertake any further offensive operations against the Chinese without

their previous sanction. Her majesty’s government are satisfied that,

although the late operations in the Canton River were attended with

immediate success, the risk of a second attempt of the same kind would

far overbalance any advantage to be derived from such a step. If the

conduct of the Chinese authorities should, unfortunately, render another

appeal to arms inevitable, it will be necessary that it should be made

after due preparation, and with the employment of such an amount of

force as may afford just grounds for expecting that the objects which

may be proposed by such a measure will be effectually accomplished

without unnecessary loss.”

Lord Grey was right, that a similar expedition, if made with the same

force, would probably fail. General D’Aguilar knew that rather better

than Lord Grey, and did not need a pompous despatch from the Colonial

Office to inform him of it. But the general did not mean to attempt

the same thing with the same force, and therefore sent for aid where he

might naturally have expected to derive the little he sought. There

can be no doubt that if matters had been left to the general’s own

discretion, and his forces been adequately strengthened, he would

have performed what was proper to the occasion, and, perhaps, all that

English safety and interests required, and thereby have averted future

conflict, as well as the humiliations which Englishmen had to endure,

and to punish at a great cost of treasure and immense sacrifice of

blood.

_France_.—The Spanish marriages caused stormy debates in the French

chambers, which reflected much moral discredit upon the King of the

French, his minister Guizot, his ambassador M. Bresson, the queen and

queen-mother of Spain, and Narvaez, the chief abettor and tool of the

faction of Christina. The eloquent denunciations of M. Thiers

against Guizot and his policy told upon the French mind, and led to

modifications in the cabinet; but this clever invective was purely in

the spirit of party: the honour of France and the love of truth were as

little considered by the one leader as the other. The British government

maintained an attitude of coldness to that of France, but it was not

possible to act independently of it: in many of the affairs of other

countries to which England stood related, and in every instance, the

influence of the French king was prejudicial to the interests and moral

influence of England. On the completion of the Spanish marriages M.

Bresson returned to Paris, and had the impudence to demand, as his

reward for his share in that transaction, the embassy to London. This

was refused, on the ground that the relations of France to Great Britain

were too delicate to be committed to the minister who had the chief part

in producing the coldness which existed. He then demanded the embassy to

St. Petersburg, but this post required higher qualifications than were

conceded to M. Bresson by his government. He was nominated to the

French ministry at Naples, and proceeded to his destination reluctantly,

considering the appointment a slight after sustaining French affairs

with the government of a superior country. Soon after he arrived at

Naples, perceiving the evil consequences of the Spanish marriages, his

chagrin was so increased that he put an end to his own existence.

_Spain and Portugal_.—Spain passed a year of disorder and bad

government, but, excepting as regarded the affairs of Portugal,

England had no especial connection with the proceedings of the Spanish

government. The state of Portugal was desperate. The Miguellites and

liberals continued to maintain the civil war against the queen. The

former were repeatedly defeated. Their leader, M’Donnell, perceiving

that all hope of inducing the party to adopt measures sufficiently bold

were at an end, collected around him a chosen band, and precipitating

himself upon the queen’s cavalry, fell fighting sword in hand. The

radical or constitutional party made their head-quarters at Oporto,

where they set at defiance the queen’s government. Meanwhile the French

and Spanish governments were desirous to interfere on behalf of the

queen, whose opinions and sympathies were despotic, and in harmony

with those of the French king and the Spanish queen. To prevent such

an interference the English government reluctantly consented to a joint

interference of England and Spain only. Accordingly, the British navy

co-operated with a Spanish army for the purpose of putting down all

armed opposition to the queen’s government, at the same time obtaining

indemnification for all in arms against her majesty, and a guarantee on

the part of her majesty, by her solemn promise and the dismission of her

reactionary ministry, that she would respect the constitutional rights

of her people. This was effected, and Louis Philippe was balked of his

desire to interfere in Portugal to promote a reactionary policy. The

queen, however, did not keep faith with her allies; she did not dismiss

her government until the English minister made such demands as compelled

compliance. Peace was by these measures restored to Portugal; but no

party within or beyond the bounds of her kingdom had any confidence in

the good faith, good sense, or good feeling of the queen.

Lord Palmerston was much censured as the originator of the British

policy in Portugal, but an impartial examination of the course he took

will show that it was politic, and that by it he enforced upon Portugal

the only plan possible to secure her independence of foreign despotic

interference, and her release from internecine war. Portugal was

saved for the time, and the designs of Louis Philippe were permanently

baffled.

STATE OF IRELAND.—PROGRESS OF FAMINE AND DISEASE.

The year 1847 opened upon Ireland in many respects as gloomily as that

which preceded. During the early months of the year the weather was very

severe, and this added materially to the miseries of an already famine

and disease-stricken people. The most heart-rending events connected

with these disasters occurred everywhere throughout the country. The

government continued its efforts for the mitigation of the prevailing

evils; but the plans put forth for this object were not always wise, and

the conduct of the people, high and low, baffled the projects of relief.

All the mischievous proceedings of a social nature narrated in the

previous chapter continued, and many of them were aggravated. The result

was that great numbers perished in all parts of the country, especially

in the south and west; and philanthropic men in Europe, in America,

and throughout the whole world where civilised man dwelt, perused the

records of Ireland’s sufferings and infatuation with horror and awe.

This state of matters continued even to the harvest, and although there

was then the prospect of abundant crops, that circumstance neither

revived the hopes, nor assuaged the political rancour, of the people.

Late in the month of June a clergyman addressed a letter to a Dublin

newspaper, describing the condition of the peasantry in his locality,

and it but too faithfully depicts the sufferings prevalent in most other

places. It was as follows:—“The population of the district for which I

would plead amounted at the last census to eight thousand seven hundred

souls, but, owing to the dreadful ravages of famine and disease, it is

generally considered that two thousand have perished during the

past brief season of unexampled horror. Notwithstanding the relief

administered through the medium of public works, and the subsequent

distribution of rations, many instances have recently occurred of horses

being stolen and destroyed for human food, and great distress still

extensively prevails. During previous years, every available spot of

land was alternately cultivated with potatoes and wheat or oats; but

this year, owing to the utter destitution of the farmers, generally

speaking, it is computed that one-third of the land last year under

the potato crop still lies waste, while almost all the stubble ground

remains untouched. If then, after the harvest of last year, when all the

existing tillage was cultivated, and some proportion of the potato crop,

such as it was, was available for food, such wholesale destruction of

human life has taken place in this district, under circumstances of

such a character that their mere recital fills the mind with horror and

dismay—if, after two thousand have been swept away by the devastating

power of famine and disease, four thousand eight hundred and twenty-nine

of the survivors are at this moment kept from impending death by the

daily distribution of rations,—what are we reasonably to anticipate for

the time to come, unless prompt and energetic measures are adopted to

provide means for sustaining those who may be spared?”

CONTINUED POLITICAL AGITATION.—DREADFUL PREVALENCE OF CRIME.

Unfortunately, the progress of crime and outrage kept pace with that of

famine and pestilence, until the moral condition of the people seemed to

be worse than their physical. Men were murdered in the open day, in the

presence of numbers who made no effort to stop the deed of blood, and

who would make no revelations to the officers of justice calculated to

bring punishment upon the coldblooded assassins. The motives for these

sanguinary outrages were various: sometimes it was purely agrarian;

sometimes for the purpose of plundering food or money. Some were

murdered from purely political hostility, and others on account of

their prominence in religious movements distasteful to the people.

Intolerance, contempt for law, a sense of wrong under the influence of

the laws of landlord and tenant then in existence, and despair caused by

their sufferings, constituted the incentives to atrocities which threw a

hue of blood and gloom over the pages of Irish history.

The political differences which had long rent the country were

exasperated, although men of all sects and parties united with equal

zeal for the relief of the poor. No charities seemed to soften the heart

of the Irish peasant towards those who entered strongly into political

or religious combinations to which he was averse.

The new political disputes gathered strength; the different sections

of repealers waged not only a wordy war with one another, as in the

previous year, but the “Old Irelanders” frequently committed outrages

upon the “Young Irelanders,” characterised by insolent intolerance and

ferocity.

Foreign nations saw, with admiration, the magnitude of the scale upon

which government extended relief. By an act of parliament a loan of

eight millions sterling was contracted by government for the purpose

of mitigating the wants of Ireland. On the first of March it was

adjudicated; Messrs. Barings and Rothschilds having coalesced, they

were declared the contractors. The loan was in 8 per cent. Consols; the

bidding was 89 ½. The total amount of stock created by the transaction

was £8,938,548. The annual charge for the dividend was £268,156 8s.

10d. The scrip, which opened at 2 premium, rapidly fell to discount, and

gradually declined, showing the feeling of the monied interest regarding

the monetary prospects of the period as affected by Ireland. The

commercial distress in Ireland, partly consequent upon the famine and

partly upon the general causes then operating in England, was extensive

and profound. Heavy failures, in connection with houses of much

reputation, shook the general credit, and aggravated the other existing

influences by which suffering was originated or increased.

A new form of lawlessness appeared along the Irish coasts. Piracy had

not been known there for a great length of time: the coast-guards and

revenue cutters prevented that crime, as well as smuggling; but, early

in the spring, formidable piratical attempts were made along an extended

line of coast. Generally such attempts were frustrated when any weapons

of offence were possessed by the attacked; for these enterprises,

although furtive and made by considerable numbers, were seldom conducted

or maintained with spirit. Thus, in April, the _Christian_, while on

her passage from Liverpool to Westport, with a cargo of Indian corn, was

suddenly boarded, seven or eight miles off Broadhaven, by three boats’

crews, who broke up the hatches, and carried away thirty-three bags of

corn. On the following day they again approached, but the circumstance

of the master presenting a gun was sufficient to deter them from any

attempt to board. The men effecting these robberies seem to have been

actuated by distress; they seldom committed violence, and bore all the

aspect of famine and despair.

DEATH OF O’CONNELL.

The political events of the year were much influenced in every way by

the absence of Mr. O’Connell from public life, and by his death. Early

in the year his powers of mind and body became so much enfeebled, that

his physicians insisted upon his leaving London, and upon his excluding

all intelligence concerning Ireland. In obedience to these directions,

he took up his abode at Hastings; but, although some intervals of

apparent recovery occurred, he sank gradually until the imminency of his

danger became evident to his friends and to himself. He had a wish to

live, probably that he might continue the struggle for the great object

of his life—the ascendancy of his religion, and the greater political

power of his country. As the spring advanced, his friends were of

opinion that a journey to Italy might benefit him; he, believing that

his illness was fatal, wished to go to Rome, that he might die there

with the blessing of the pope to sanctify the closing scene. His illness

increased so rapidly that he was not able to reach Rome, and died

at Genoa. A _post mortem_ examination revealed that his brain was

extensively diseased, accounting for the melancholy which pervaded his

illness. Old age, the failure of his hopes, prophecies, and schemes

after the Emancipation Act, and deep mental anxieties about the distress

of his country, the divisions in the repeal party, and the hopelessness

of his agitation, caused his death. He had attained a good old age

(seventy-four), and departed this life on the 15th of May. His latest

anxieties were lest he should be buried alive, and he gave to his

confessor, physician, and servant, constant and peculiar directions

to guard against such a casualty. His heart he bequeathed to Rome! The

tidings of his death reached Dublin on the 25th. Immediately placards

were issued from Conciliation Hall, and were posted in town and country,

announcing the event. The people gathered in crowds wherever a placard

was seen, and perused it with deep sorrow, the men moving silently away,

or gathering in groups to talk earnestly concerning the deceased and

the prospects of their country—the women in many cases uttering loud

lamentations. The bells of the Roman Catholic chapels tolled mournfully,

and arrangements were made to offer public prayers for the soul of the

deceased. Probably there was not a Roman Catholic in Ireland that

did not privately offer such petitions upon the reception of the

intelligence. The Repeal Association summoned an especial meeting to

prepare an address to the people of Ireland suitable to the occasion.

The corporation met and adjourned for three weeks as a mark of respect.

The Roman Catholics of Ireland, and such Protestants as were considered

liberal, made every manifestation of respect for the memory of the great

leader. Ireland, in the midst of her starvation and sickness, felt a

still deeper sorrow—the whole land appeared in mourning.

The mortal remains of the great popular chief were conveyed to Dublin,

and on the 5th of August they were interred in the Glassnevin Cemetery.

The day preceding the Reverend Dr. Miley preached his funeral sermon at

the Metropolitan Chapel, Marlborough Street. It was an eloquent eulogy

upon the character of the departed; his errors, personal and political,

were passed over, and the idea pervaded the discourse that the departed

was a martyr and saint.

The funeral procession was one of the most remarkable which had ever

been witnessed in Ireland,—when the character of the deceased, his

influence upon public affairs, the national feeling, the intense

curiosity excited, and the conduct of the ceremonial, were considered.

At twelve o’clock the corpse was removed from the Metropolitan Chapel.

The procession was a mile and a half (Irish) in length, composed of the

Trades’ Unions on foot, followed by the triumphal car which had been

used to convey him from Richmond Penitentiary to his house in Merrion

Square, when his acquittal of the charge upon which he had been

incarcerated was pronounced by the House of Lords. The coffin was placed

on a large open hearse, constructed with very little regard to taste.

The hearse was covered with rich Genoa velvet. It was immediately

followed by the family of the deceased, his personal and political

friends, and a large assembly of the Roman Catholic bishops and clergy.

All along the route to Glassnevin, multitudes were assembled in the

streets and windows, and even upon the house-tops. Persons came from

very great distances in the country to be present at the interment,

or take some part in the ceremonial. At the cemetery the services

appropriate to the Roman Catholic religion were conducted, and the

coffin was consigned to a vault prepared for its reception. The site

selected for the place of sepulture was the best which the cemetery

afforded, and the whole scene was solemn and impressive. It was a public

funeral, worthy of a great man, by a people whom he had zealously,

faithfully, and disinterestedly served. It was computed that one hundred

thousand persons were present. There was a deep gloom upon the people

when the ceremony was over. The religious ceremonies prescribed by the

Roman Catholic Church for eminent persons deceased, were continued for a

considerable time.

Thus passed away a man whose name will long remain upon the pages of his

country’s history, and whose influence upon the whole empire of Great

Britain was greater than was publicly recognised at the time, and than

historians have since recorded.

The fate of the reform bill very much depended upon the support accorded

to it by Daniel O’Connell. It is probable that the bill would have been

lost without the support of the Irish liberals, led by the agitator. To

the repeal of the corn laws he also rendered effective aid, although his

oratory in favour of that measure appeared to be less hearty than that

on behalf of the reform bill. The impression prevailed very extensively

among the great body of the free-traders that, while O’Connell agreed

with their theory, and deemed it politic to co-operate with them, he

did not regard it as immediately beneficial to Ireland, and did not

feel personally cordial to the movement. On many local church questions,

also, and to a very great extent, on colonial matters, the influence of

the Irish leader was felt in parliament by the parties most interested,

and by the governments. For a time the scale of office was held in his

hand; he made and unmade ministers. He was not corrupt, or place, power,

and pension might have been obtained by him and his. After his death

some members of his family did receive government situations, and even

before his death connexions of his obtained such advantages; but they

were in all cases fit for the posts to which they were appointed, and

filled them with honour—nor was the emolument much, in any case. On the

whole, the Whigs did not treat the family of O’Connell with gratitude.

He had more than once put them into power, and frequently, when the

certainty of their losing office without his aid occurred, he gave them

the requisite assistance. He was often—indeed, always—in some measure

their opponent; but this rather strengthened them in Great Britain,

while on great party divisions “the tail” was always to be relied upon

by the Whig cabinet. Never had a public man such opportunity of raising

himself to the most elevated offices, and securing emolument for himself

and his family—never were these temptations more faithfully resisted.

Yet O’Connell did not disdain office, and he especially valued promotion

and honours in his own profession: but these things were nothing to

him in comparison with what he regarded to be his mission. He was fully

convinced that God had raised him up for the especial purpose of serving

the Roman Catholic religion, and, in connection with that of serving his

country, he pursued this object with unswerving fidelity. If he could

have obtained high office, and thereby have inflicted no injury upon the

cause which he espoused, he would have eagerly sought a position in

the cabinet or on the bench; he would have been as much opposed to the

repeal of the union as Mr. Lucas, the editor of the _Tablet_, and other

English Roman Catholics, if he had believed that it would injure the

Roman Catholic religion. Many supposed that he was never sincere in

prosecuting repeal; while others, whose opportunities of judging were

ample, believed that he was most honest in that agitation: in fact,

both were right. As an Irishman, he had a desire that his country should

cease to be a province, and he probably believed that her resources,

moral, intellectual, and material, were sufficient to maintain the

dignity and power of a nation; it was also his conviction that the

repeal of the union would be a means of improving the government and

social condition of Ireland, but he chiefly regarded it as an instrument

for the aggrandisement of his religion. It would enable the Roman

Catholic party to suppress the distribution of Protestant tracts

and bibles, to silence Protestant controversialists, and to treat

bible-readers and circuit-preachers as vagabonds and disturbers of the

peace. O’Connell’s speeches abound with expressions of opinion, that

it was the duty of the British government to do all these things in

deference to the wishes of the Roman Catholics, they being a majority.

He invariably held up all attempts to “proselyte the people” as a crime

which ought to be punishable by law; and where the government failed “to

protect the people from the bible men, saints, soupers, and fanatics”

(the names which he generally applied to earnest Protestants in his

abusive and bigoted polemical speeches), then the people should use

all means within the law—a sort of qualification never intended to be

accepted by those to whom it was addressed—“to put down” all persons

obnoxious to the religious hostility of the priests. In the earlier part

of his career he was accustomed, with the assistance of Brick, O’Dwyer,

and others of his followers, to disturb the religious public meetings

called by Protestants, especially associations for the distribution

of the bible. O’Connell and his colleagues would intrude upon such

meetings, often attended by a violent rabble, whose language and

behaviour on these occasions were coarse and brutal. The intruders would

propose amendments to the resolutions submitted to the members of these

societies, and make violent speeches at the meetings, full of ridicule

and abuse, which were loudly applauded by the mob, who forced their way

in to support these proceedings. When the advocates of the resolutions

attempted to reply, they were met by hootings, and sometimes by

violence. There was always a perfect understanding between the mob who

intruded below, and the gentlemen who made their way or were invited to

the platform. The latter affected to protest against the tumult while it

went on, but afterwards extenuated or denied it in the newspapers, or in

speeches elsewhere, averring that the clergymen and laymen, who convened

the meeting, were unable to answer the arguments of the Catholic

champions. In many of these meetings free discussion was secured,

and faithful reports of the arguments on both sides were published in

newspapers and pamphlets, with the result of shaking the faith of many

Roman Catholics in various parts of the country: the agitators, under

O’Connell’s advice, then gave up this mode of procedure, and shunned all

such meetings. O’Connell also perceived that he had created a prejudice

against himself, his country, and his creed in England, by the violence

he connived at, and the bigotry which he uttered.

Repeal of the union, besides enabling him to accomplish the class of

religious objects thus described, would also have given him power

to transfer the funds of the Irish Established Church to the Roman

Catholic. He and most of his followers having loudly professed “the

voluntary principle,” it may seem to readers, cognisant of that fact,

and unacquainted with the modes of procedure adopted by the Irish

popular party, as unlikely that those who composed it, or, at all

events, he who led it, would ever desire the establishment of the Roman

Catholic Church in Ireland. The truth is, that most of the men who

declaimed in favour of the voluntary principle were chiefly actuated,

like O’Connell himself, in their political agitation, by the desire and

hope of Roman Catholic ascendancy. The great repeal leader proved

at last that he was utterly insincere in these protestations of

voluntarism, for afterwards, during the English agitation concerning the

Maynooth grant, he turned “the voluntaries” and their principle into

open ridicule. He had served his turn of them, and then held them and

the principles he pretended in common with them to support, in derision.

Yet O’Connell was not a dishonest politician, apart from his religious

mission. He was a man to be trusted in political engagements; few public

men of the day would act with such truth and honour to party, and in any

purely political contest or interest. When the promotion of his Church

was concerned, his conduct proved that he believed a doctrine which he

often repudiated—that the end sanctified the means. He was educated

a Jesuit, was one in spirit, was allied with them in the purposes and

objects of his private life, and his public policy. If any considerable

amount of Romish influence could have been introduced to the British

cabinet, with the hope that it would become a permanent element in the

government of England, O’Connell would have been the deadliest enemy of

repeal: the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland would have put down repeal

as injurious to it. The Young Irelanders would have still agitated for

Irish independence; but they would have been mobbed, or assassinated, or

otherwise soon crushed as a party. The Protestants would then have been

the repealers. The argument of Mr. Lucas, that repeal would weaken

the Irish Roman Catholic body, through the influence of the English

government upon the colonies and foreign states, was that which

prevailed with so many Romanists of respectability in Ireland, and with

the English Roman Catholic party, in keeping them aloof from the repeal

agitation, and inducing them even to oppose it; nor was O’Connell

himself free from the effect of such a consideration. His professions of

the supreme value of repeal were based upon the conviction that it was

hopeless to overcome the religious hostility of the British people to

any increased influence of Romanism in the government; yet he lingered

on, hoping against this conviction, and feeling the difficulty, if not

desperation, of the task he imposed upon himself, declaring still that

he would only turn to repeal as the _dernier ressort_, and that his

first cry was “Justice to Ireland.” Had everything been conceded which

was claimed, “Justice to Ireland” would still have been, the cry, on

the ground that, being an integral part of the United Kingdom, she was

entitled to see her religion established in a fair proportion of the

colonies, or placed on a par with the English Church in them all. With

O’Connell and with Ireland the grievances were religious; the social

evils of Ireland were abetted by many who were repealers: yet there was

a sense of political injustice, and a patriotic desire on the part of

O’Connell and the people for the glory of Ireland, so far as it was

not necessary to merge that in the glory of Rome. Civil and religious

liberty for Ireland and for the world were not desired by either the

Irish Roman Catholic party or their political champion. The spirit

of the speeches at Conciliation Hall, of the Irish press in that

interest,—even of the Irish press in the Whig service, which was

conducted by Romanists, and the tone of confidential conversation

among Irish Roman Catholics at that period, all proved this allegation.

Foreign despotisms, if Protestant, were abused and denounced; if Romish,

they were treated with respect, and sympathy in case of any disturbance

in their dominions; or if it were not for the moment politic to abet

their proceedings, their misdeeds were passed over in silence. All

the social wrongs and civil tyrannies practised at Rome were upheld as

warmly in Ireland, and especially in Conciliation Hall, as they could

have been in the conclave of cardinals. One of the favourite topics

of the day among the Roman Catholics of Ireland, even amidst their

sufferings, during 1847, (and subsequently still more so), was the

prospect of the Roman Catholic religion becoming the established

religion of the United States, through the instrumentality of the Irish

and German Roman Catholics of the immigration. While they cried aloud

for religious equality for themselves, they carried on in Ireland a

fierce and brutal religious persecution, which was only restrained by

the influence of the more enlightened and liberal laymen of their own

communion, and by fear of the law; the impolicy of such a cause was not

sufficient to check the raging zealotry which so extensively prevailed.

All this O’Connell sanctioned and fostered, and, except when doing so

would hamper his policy or political relations in England, he invited

it.

Intellectually, O’Connell was a giant. His grasp of mind was

comprehensive and tenacious; and he was capable of reasoning clearly

whenever his religious bias allowed of his doing so dispassionately.

His perception was quick, keen, and discriminating, especially where

character was concerned. His knowledge of human nature was profound,

although he had not been a successful student of metaphysics. His

eloquence was more varied than that of any other man of his times; and

he possessed the faculty of adapting himself to his audience, and to the

changing feelings of an audience, to a degree which few men ever attain.

In a moment he could melt a popular audience to tears or convulse it

with laughter. He could be plain or ornate, coarse or courteous. The

eloquence of invective and vituperation was carried by O’Connell to a

very inglorious perfection. His eulogies were as dextrous and expressive

as they were, nevertheless, morally repugnant to honest minds. The

writer of these lines has heard him address a mob of peasants in the

county of Waterford on repeal, and an assembly of Quakers, Methodists,

and “other sectaries,” as he would himself call them, in the city of

Cork, on an anti-slavery occasion, with equal effect. His broad-brimmed

and sedate audience were as much delighted with his elegant and pathetic

eloquence in favour of humanity and natural rights, as his peasant mob

were while he discoursed to them upon the certainty and glory of repeal,

and declared that “they were the finest peasantry in the world.” On the

one occasion his action was graceful, and at times expressive even

to sublimity; on the other, it was bold and broadly natural, nor less

expressive of the passion he felt or simulated, and endeavoured to

excite. He possessed the oratory necessary for an Irish tribune, and

that which was adapted to the English senator: In his profession he

held a high place. Having given up his life to politics and polemics, he

could not have become a first authority in law, but he was unsurpassed

as a counsel, especially in criminal cases. Most men thought that he had

not the mental and moral qualities necessary for the bench, while he

was pre-eminently the man of the bar. This, however, is hardly a fair

estimate of him. He possessed in a remarkable degree all those qualities

in an advocate which entitle him to cherish the ambition of becoming

a judge. From the judgment-seat, when his bigotry did not blind him,

O’Connell would have given charges as luminous and just as his speeches

in court were powerful specimens of effective advocacy. His general

attainments were very considerable. The writer of this history once took

part in a conversation where O’Connell displayed a knowledge of Biblical

criticism, and a capacity to apply what knowledge of that description

which he possessed, which was very astonishing. On the same occasion

he brought forth stores of ecclesiastical history, which proved that,

although his studies had been confined to a particular school on

that subject, his reading within the limits of that school were very

extensive, and his memory altogether extraordinary. He had the faculty

of attaching men strongly to him, not only as a party-leader, but as a

man and a friend. Many thought him jealous of the fame of other orators

of his time; but there is no just ground for this. No man approached him

in reputation except Richard Lalor Shiel. O’Connell did not betray

in public any jealousy of this great oratorical rival; but he often

indicated, where he did not profess it, a distrust of his good faith—

and the suspicions of the leader were not ill founded: Shiel was never

in earnest in his arguments for the separation of the Irish from the

English parliament, but preferred the policy of infusing Roman Catholic

influence: he also preferred a high imperial position to that of a

provincial demagogue. This, in the opinion of the Irish popular party,

was treason to Ireland; and no doubt O’Connell sympathised with that

feeling, and suspected that the man second only in power to himself

was neither so ardent an Irishman or Roman Catholic as his countrymen

desired him to be. This feeling on O’Connell’s part will account for

many acts towards Shiel which were set down to personal jealousy. Dr.

Michelsen is very unjust to O’Connell in the following critique upon his

character:—“His greatest fault was no doubt his egotism; he could not

endure a rival at his side, and would not have hesitated to annihilate

any one who did not follow him with implicit obedience.” O’Connell would

have hailed with delight any accession of eloquence or personal power

to Conciliation Hall; but a particular policy had been arranged between

O’Connell and the priests—they intrusted their cause to him, and when

men started up and questioned, or attempted to modify this policy,

O’Connell regarded it as rebellion, not merely against his leadership,

but his party, and the church itself; hence, it was necessary for him to

put down the disturber; and he was backed by clergy and people in doing

so, which would not have been the case had not the understanding between

him and the Roman Catholic hierarchy of Ireland been complete. Dr.

Michelsen again says:—“It is a mistake to suppose that O’Connell

entertained an irreconcilable hatred to England; he had never ceased to

regard her as his second fatherland, as the land of his glory, of his

intellectual activity. His partiality for England was only surpassed by

his excessive love for his native home, and many apparent contradictions

in his life can only be reconciled by this double sympathy in his

character.”*

* “England since the Accession of Queen Victoria,” by Edward

H. Michellen, Ph.D.

It is obvious that the writer of this paragraph has neither studied

O’Connell, his country, or the party which he led. One of the grand

causes of O’Connell’s failure in many things was his rancorous hatred

to England. Thomas Gaspey, Esq., in his “History of England,” views this

matter correctly in writing of O’Connell’s death, and the feeling in

England concerning him:—“In England his departure was regarded with

indifference. The hostility and scorn he frequently expressed for the

Saxons, and his disparaging remarks on English women, had precluded him

from gaining any of the popularity he had enjoyed in Ireland.”

The hatred of O’Connell to England was threefold—that of race, of

nation, and of creed. He regarded England as the chief abettor of heresy

in the world, and therefore would have rejoiced over her downfall;

this was the common feeling of his party. So far as his animosity was

connected with race and nationality, it was not unprovoked. The English

people cherished deep prejudices against Ireland and the whole Celtic

race; and the English newspapers frequently discussed the universal

claims of the Anglo-Saxon to dominancy, and every social and national

virtue, thereby creating a feeling of resentment in all countries where

these articles were reprinted. The chief invidiousness, however, was

to the Celt, and among Celts to the Irishman. This circumstance made

repealers of numbers of Irishmen who were neither Celtic in race nor

Roman in creed.

MR. JOHN O’CONNELL ASSUMES THE PRESIDENCY OF THE REPEAL

ASSOCIATION—INFLUENCE OF THE REPEAL AGITATION UPON THE GENERAL

ELECTIONS IN IRELAND.

The death of Mr. O’Connell, it was generally supposed in England, would

allow agitation in Ireland to die of itself. Others supposed that it

would now assume a worse form, in consequence of the absence of those

restraints which the superior sagacity of the arch agitator laid upon

the more fiery and imprudent ringleaders. The latter opinion was the

correct one, and the people of England were astonished to find that Mr.

O’Connell’s son John not only became the chairman at Conciliation Hall,

but the recognised leader of the agitation. The priests gave him their

confidence, and, at first, the people very generally; but he was not

possessed of those qualities which enabled him to hold the reins of

power. As Richard Cromwell to the deceased Oliver, so John O’Connell

exhibited a contrast to his father, which soon caused the people to fall

off from his leadership: his name, and the influence of the priests,

were the means of retaining it for him for a time. After the death

of his father, the temporary inheritor of his position indicated

much energy and activity, although, even in this respect, none of the

agitators approached their late chief: O’Connell’s powers of physical

endurance and toil had been prodigious.

A general election, the policy of which will be noticed on another

page, called out the leadership of John O’Connell, and the action of the

committee at Conciliation Hall, in a manner to test whether the people

were disposed to follow them. The general impression in England was,

that the popular fervour had ebbed, and that the repeal members would

not generally be returned: the English press made confident predictions

to that effect. John O’Connell and the clique at Conciliation Hall

accepted the ordeal, and were backed by priests and people in their

policy. An extraordinary meeting was convened, and an address to the

electors of Ireland resolved upon. It was a document which ought to

be retained upon the page of history, for it discloses the spirit and

temper of the repeal party, and of the Roman Catholic electors who

responded practically to such an appeal. The repealers, as has been

already shown, were not confined to Roman Catholics, nor were all

that communion repealers; but, on the whole, the religious division of

Protestant and Romanist defined the boundary between anti-repealers and

repealers.

The following is copied from _Saunders’ News Letter_ of the 12th of

June:—

_Address of the Loyal National Repeal Association to the Electors of

Ireland._

“‘God prosper the cause!—oh! it cannot but thrive, While the pulse of

one patriot heart is alive. How sainted by sorrow its martyrs have died!

Far, far, from the footprint of coward or slave, The young spirit of

freedom shall shelter their grave!’

“On you—fellow-countrymen—electors—at this moment devolves the good

and holy task of protecting the graves of the sorrow-sainted martyrs of

Ireland from the polluting tread of coward or of slave. None such will

be found amongst you—none such will dare to show themselves if you be

true.

“In this year of death, our country still survives! Weeping, fainting,

bleeding, yet she lives; and lives to claim, aye, and to have—the

services of her true children.

“Yes! although from him whose life’s devotion to Ireland was repaid by

her confidence and her love, and from those without whose potent aid his

labours had been vain—the beloved clergy of the people—down throughout

all ranks and orders of the national organisation, Death has been busy,

still enough remain of devoted, determined, patriot hearts, to carry out

the good work he began, and to make it, with the blessing of a merciful

God, speedily triumphant!

“Rally, then—rally, electors of Ireland—your country calls! Your dead

brethren, even from their graves, invoke you. Drive from your hustings

the men who shall have dared to think you cowards—who shall dare to ask

you to continue slaves! And there are those who will so dare;—mark

you not the exulting tone of Whig and Tory, and every other class of

panderers to English passions and prejudices:—‘Repeal,’ they say, ‘is

gone!’ ‘Ireland is at last subdued—she begs for bread, and is fearful

to demand her rights lest we withhold our alms!’ It is false; how foully

false you know, and at the elections you will prove. Deep as is the

baseness of those who build their party hopes upon a nation’s

misery, deeper still would be our baseness if ever, even amid all the

heart-crushing calamities of the time, we shrunk in aught from our high

purposes, and from our vows for Ireland’s regeneration.

“Nay, if but the hope of relief from our present distress were to

animate us, even so should we cry out for that home parliament which

alone can bring back wealth and abundance to the land—alone can guard

her from recurring season after season of want, of pestilence, of death!

“Be ready then in time, fellow-countrymen, the elections are at hand;

give us repealers—true and trusty repealers—men pledged to the safe,

peaceful, constitutional principles you have been taught by him whom

you followed so devotedly, and whom you mourn so affectionately and

sincerely!

“On you—on each one and all of you together, and on none but you, the

task now lies of helping Ireland at this fearful crisis of her fortunes.

Yours, and yours alone, will be the glories of success, or the shame

of not having sought it. Your distress has left the Repeal Association

without funds to aid your contest, and we can do no more than to exhort

and to advise. Let not the wily enemies of your freedom delude you. The

duty is upon you; the means are in your hands, not in ours; if the

duty be not done, poor Ireland will suffer the disastrous and ruinous

consequences; but the blame of them, and the shame, will be upon you.

Fellow-countrymen, this must not be—nay, this will not be. We answer

for you. Unaided, undirected, as you are, you will bestir yourselves—on

yourselves will depend, and you will achieve the victory. Meet in your

committees; encourage the timid, cheer up the desponding; turn away

with contempt from the whig or tory dependent, who would counsel you to

dishonour, and vote for none but a staunch repealer—for one who will

maintain the peace principles of the association, and aid it to work out

and re-establish the inalienable and imperishable right of Ireland to

legislate for herself.

“Had our own parliament ruled us, the landlords would not have had their

tyrannies sanctioned and increased in license till the suffering people

were reduced down to the lumper potato for a wretched, and, alas! a

fatally precarious subsistence. Our manufactures would yet exist, giving

comfort to our skilful artizans, and offering refuge to the peasant,

unable to obtain a maintenance upon the land. In every village

neighbourhood, the money raised by the hard toil of the labourer would

be finding its way back, and briskly circulating there, by reason of

the thousand sources of employment that would arise around the restored

residence of the large proprietor. Irish money would thus stay at home

to create and increase Irish wealth, and to support Irish poverty; and

the grudging doles of an alien parliament would never more be needed in

the land.

“Fellow-countrymen, for such results the association has been

struggling—for such objects you are now called upon to work. By all

that this wretched land has yet endured from English misrule,—by the

accumulated and aggravated suffering of the last disastrous forty-seven

years, with their fell climax in this year of death,—by the myriads

of fresh graves, the fearful husbandry of death, that are ridging your

fields and even your humble homesteads,—by the holy and most adorable

name of the Deity, who chasteneth whom He loveth,—we entreat, we

implore, we exhort, we adjure you to stand true to Ireland at these

elections; to spurn Whig and Tory, and to prove yourselves worthy of

your rights by returning none but those who will unflinchingly assert

them;—and foremost amongst those rights, before all and above all, the

right to make your own laws in your own parliament at home.”

The elections issued in a triumph for which the Repeal Committee itself

was hardly prepared. There was a great increase in “repeal members.”

This arose from a variety of causes. The Conservatives had lost heart

in connection with the expenses which the famine had imposed upon

their estates. The people universally attributed their distress to the

government, and to their connection with heretic England. The priests

made great exertions throughout the country. Fearful scenes of violence

took place, “the moral-force repealers,” lay and clerical, inciting

the people to these outrages by the most inflammatory appeals to their

fanaticism, and by examples which were calculated to encourage them.

The most awful denunciations were heaped upon the heads of “all bad

Catholics who should vote against their religion and country.” These

denunciations came from sacerdotal lips, and from the altar as well as

the pulpit. The popular press rivalled the priests in anathemas against

all who were not willing “to vote for Ireland against the Saxon.” Public

placards might be seen in town and country, headed, like the address

of the Repeal Committee to the electors, with inflammatory poetry: a

favourite couplet on these occasions was—

“On our side is virtue and Erin,

On theirs is the Saxon and guilt.”

The context of these lines was judiciously omitted from the placards,

but not from the speeches of the electioneering agents and orators—

“Then onward—our green banner rearing—

Go, flesh every sword to the hilt.”

If this injunction was not obeyed to the letter, it was nearly so, and

at all events it was carried out in spirit.

Of green banners there was abundance, and if the sword gave place to

the brickbat and the bludgeon, the consequences were pretty much the

same—“Green Erin” gained a great victory over Erin of the Orange

preferences, and over the Saxon in general. The spirit in which this

result was received at Conciliation Hall, and its effect upon the hopes

and aspirations of the people, may be gathered most readily from the

address of the General Election Committee of the Repealers to the people

of Ireland, when the elections had closed.

“_Fellow-countrymen_,—Even in this hour of triumph—even now, when

you have so nobly vindicated at the elections the glorious cause of

repeal—our congratulations must, in sad accordance with the unvarying

fate of Ireland ever since Englishmen have controlled her fortunes,

be mingled with considerations of mournfulness and peril! It is not

merely—and, alas! that such a calamity should have to be treated as of

secondary magnitude—it is not merely that the niggard state charity of

England is now at once to cease and be entirely withdrawn, but we have

to contemplate a still more fearful and far wider-spreading misery at

the end of autumn and in the early winter.

“All-bounteous Heaven has blessed our fields with abundance; but

Ireland’s poverty—the unholy doing of man—must cause the produce of

her harvest to be exported away from her starving people, and sold

at the rich markets of England, to meet the enormous rents of cruel

absentees. Five millions of your money go annually to those absentees;

and so many have lately fled from the sight of the calamities their

carelessness for their country had allowed England to inflict, that more

than an additional million must be drained away this year!

“What is there to save our people? The potato has not been sown in

one-third of the extent of former years. The substitute crops, though

promising, will be fearfully short of the deficiency caused by the loss

of the potato; and those crops would be taken from us by the high prices

in England, even if we had not to send them there to get money for

the absentees. Food gone, and money gone, what is to become of us?

The stinted relief that England gave us is out. The means voted with

grudging and insult are expended and gone. Her representatives are

pledged to give us no more, and not only to refuse if the government

should propose a further advance, but to call upon the minister to

insist strictly and speedily on repayment of that which has been given.

We therefore have no hope of money from England! Have we then any money

at home? Alas! it is but as the dribblings of the mountain stream when

the winter floods have passed, and the summer heats are exhausting and

absorbing its waters; and had we tenfold what little remains, how are

the rates to be paid, when, according to even the starvation scale of

the government soup-kitchens, the cost of maintaining our poor will

exceed by nearly double the whole rated value of the property in

Ireland! No Whig nor Tory can tell us of the means of meeting the coming

disaster. The members of the ministry have not touched upon it at any

of their elections. The press of England is mute, save when it gives

utterance to calumnies and insults. Ireland is not in the thoughts

of any of our English fellow-subjects. Their own interests, their own

monetary perils, their own necessities, absorb their whole attention.

“Should we not then take counsel from ourselves? Should not our

newly-elected members agree to come together here in Dublin, and consult

for the safety of the country, and decide upon the matters they will

urge upon the reluctant ear of the English parliament? Should they

not meet, if only to concert how best to recall the absentees to their

long-neglected duties at home; how best to compel all the monies of the

country to be spent at home; and thus to give a chance of saving

our unhappy people from being swept off the face of the earth by

widely-desolating famine, or the yet more desolating and dreadful agency

of a bloody, a bootless, a criminal, and all-destroying civil war?

“Again we shall address you, when the time is near that parliament is

to assemble, and ask of you to announce to your representatives your

opinions. We shall carefully make use of the intervening time to collect

and concentrate the expression of your sentiments respecting each

particular point of policy that should be pressed upon your members’

attention, as well as respecting the great leading principles of the

national movement. Thus shall the ‘Council of National Distress and

National Safety’ come to its labours with materials prepared and

suitably digested, and thus be enabled all the readier and speedier to

take, boldly and explicitly, its decisions and resolves, and maintain

them firmly, undauntedly, and perseveringly in the British House of

Commons. Thus shall the Irish members best show themselves to be worthy

of the high trust with which they have been honoured, and of the far

higher and prouder distinction of being again, and at no distant time,

deputed to represent their beloved country in her restored native

parliament.”

The representation that the relief England had given to the people was

stinted, was a vile calumny, showing the utter want of principle of

the party from which it emanated. The intimation that it was not the

intention of government to do more; that the “stinted relief” which

England gave was “out;” and that nothing but ruin remained, although

rich England was at hand to save, if she were only charitable and

just,—was well calculated to keep up disaffection in the public mind.

The success of the repealers at the elections might be supposed as

tending to quiet the country, as it afforded a constitutional medium

of expressing their views. But it had not that effect: the desire to

procure arms which showed itself in 1846 continued through 1847, and

notwithstanding the great distress so generally felt, the expenditure

of money upon aggressive weapons was in some parts of the country larger

than in the previous year.

BITTER DISPUTES BETWEEN “OLD IRELAND” AND “YOUNG IRELAND.”

The Young Irelanders were encouraged by the death of O’Connell to

believe that they could take the lead in public affairs among the Roman

Catholics, and they supposed that the Protestant population were more

likely to listen to arguments in favour of an effort to achieve national

independence, coming from them, than they were to hearken to the

old repeal arguments from the Old Irelanders. In this they were

disappointed; notwithstanding that several of the leaders were

Protestants, no considerable number of that persuasion followed the

new faction. The true tendency of that agitation was seen by the

Protestants, who rather prepared to resist both the Old Ireland and

Young Ireland parties, in the struggle which might be brought about by a

coalition of these parties. Such a coalition was the policy of the Young

Ireland party; but they made the doctrine of physical force a _sine

qua non_ in the creed of the coalesced parties; and the Old Irelanders,

still clinging to the policy of their deceased chief, refused the terms.

John O’Connell and his adherents were then made the objects of unsparing

ridicule by the _literati_ of the new party, and the lampoons and

caricatures of which the chairman and committee of Conciliation Hall

were the victims, told upon the people, and gradually insinuated a

contempt for the weak and vacillating policy, as it was described, by

which they were guided. The party of John O’Connell, as when under the

guidance of his father, was not slow to resort to physical violence,

whenever there was a chance of doing so with impunity, while they

continued to proclaim the sanctity and permanent obligation of the

O’Connell doctrine of moral force. The Young Irelanders endeavoured to

reunite Irishmen to lift the arm of a manly and brave revolt against

English connection. The Old Irelanders had no objection to kill

scripture-readers, break church windows, waylay Protestants, and

maltreat them at market or fair, and riotously disperse the assemblages

of Young Irelanders, while they preached passive resistance as alone

justifiable to the government. Of course the leaders of Old Ireland

denounced all breakers of the laws; but when outrages were committed,

especially on Young Irelanders or Protestants, they palliated them, or

denied them in the face of evidence which was conclusive. John O’Connell

found himself in a hurricane of political passion, which he could not

quell, and through which he had neither power nor skill to direct his

course. By the end of the year he found the reins of authority slipping

through his hands; Smith O’Brien and his compeers were rampant; and

Ireland, stained with blood, blackened with pestilence, exhausted by

famine, raged with impotent fury against the imperial government and

Great Britain: in all the folly of domestic faction, she was pitied and

scorned by Great Britain when she supposed herself feared. There were

no men amongst the leaders of the disaffected in Ireland to command the

respect of England, in that sense which a dominant nation respects the

power of a rival, or of an insurgent province. The wish became

very extensive in Great Britain that all Irish grievances should be

redressed, and that in every respect Ireland should be placed on a

footing with the other portions of the United Kingdom, if in any a sense

of injustice were experienced; but to the honest menaces of the Young

Irelanders, and the hypocritical reliance on moral persuasion of

Conciliation Hall, the people of Great Britain only gave their ear from

curiosity, perfectly regardless of any power which any faction or union

of factions might put forth. Great Britain awaited the outburst of

passion which was in Ireland so rapidly coming to a crisis,’ as unmoved

as the crag abides the eddies of the current which bubble and burst

against it.

GENERAL STATE OF AFFAIRS IN GREAT BRITAIN.

This year was one which, in many respects, tested the power and

resources of Great Britain. In her colonies she had conflicts to wage

of great magnitude. Ireland was smitten with famine and disease, and

turbulent. In the Highlands of Scotland the hardy peasantry suffered

from the scarcity of provisions caused by the failure of the potato and

other crops during 1846.

The commercial embarrassments of the year were felt from the beginning,

and continued, with more or less pressure, to the close. From the

operations of various causes, money was dear both on the European and

American continents. Early in January, so severely was this circumstance

felt in Paris, that the Bank of France applied to that of England for

aid, which was granted; but the consequence, of course, was a rapid rise

in the rate of interest in Great Britain and Ireland. This continued

until all speculative transactions were paralysed. The timely increase

in the price of accommodation by the Bank of England did much to

mitigate the evils of the crisis. These were produced by recent bad

harvests, and the failure of the potato crop. The great extent to which

railway transactions had been carried, and the consequent drainage of

capital; the wild speculations which began to prevail in France, and

were so marvellously developed in England, also conduced to the monetary

disturbance. Besides the operation of all these causes, there was an

uneasy feeling on the continent connected with political affairs, which

communicated itself to England, and made capitalists timid.