“This speech was received with unanimous cries of ‘Vive la République!’

and M. Louis Buonaparte, having descended the tribune, went up to the

seat of General Cavaignac, and cordially shook him by the hand. The new

president was then met by M. Odilon Barrot and his friends of the right,

who escorted him out of the hall. In leaving the hall the president was

accompanied by a great number of the members of the assembly, and passed

between a double line of soldiers and national guards, which extended

through the Salle des Pas Perdus to the gate upon the quay facing the

Place de la Concorde. There was no manifestation of enthusiasm at this

moment. A carriage waited for the president at the gate, in which he

left for the palace of the Elysée Bourbon, escorted by a squadron of

dragoons and lancers. The cannon of the Invalides were discharged as a

salute at the moment. General Changarnier attended on the occasion, and

directed the proceedings. It was remarked that, on the occasion of

this solemnity, all the enthusiasm of the assembly was shown to General

Cavaignac, and the utmost coldness towards Prince Louis.

“M. Marrast next announced that M. Odilon Barrot was charged with

the construction of the new cabinet, which would be communicated by a

message to the assembly. The house afterwards adjourned.”

Such were the great events in France during the year 1818, events which

too nearly affected the connection of England with that country to be

given here in less detail.

During the progress of these transactions the relations of Great

Britain and France became delicate and critical; but the wisdom of the

provisional government on the one hand, and of the British government

on the other, prevented any collision. Diplomatic relations were

necessarily interrupted for a time by the revolution, and the flight

of the king; but her Britannic majesty, in her speech proroguing

parliament, expressed her satisfaction that she had been enabled to

resume the usual intercourse between the two governments. Several

occasions arose when even a slight deviation from international equity

on the part of the French provisional government might have involved the

two countries in war. In England the Chartists continued the agitations

already recorded, and made a grand demonstration, which will be related

in another section of this chapter. While they were preparing to put

forth this exhibition of strength, a correspondence was kept up by many

of their leaders with those of the French Communists, and the excitement

of the latter was intense as the hour approached for the grand

_denouement_. Indeed, all classes of the French, except the most

intelligent, especially in Paris, regarded a revolution in England as

inevitable. They were under the delusion that Fergus O’Connor and his

colleagues and followers were, politically speaking, the English people.

The following account of this impression was given by a gentleman then

resident in Paris:—“Never, during the many years I have resided in

Paris, did any event in England excite such universal interest among all

classes of the French as the great chartist demonstration has done. For

days and days it was a leading topic in the newspapers, and for days the

general subject of conversation. Both newspapers and talkers, relying

on the big swagger of the Chartists, and the undisguised alarm of the

government, confidently expected a stern and terrible straggle, with

barricades, and bayonets, and pikes, and deluges of blood, and awful

slaughter. To this expectation many added the hope of seeing a complete

revolution effected—a revolution which would overthrow throne,

aristocracy, and middle class, leaving the people and the republic

triumphant. So deeply had this hope taken possession of the more

sanguine, that they could not bear to hear the slightest doubt of its

realisation expressed.”

Strange as it may seem to English readers, the chartist proceedings in

England, and those of the Irish repeal party, had considerable influence

not only in sustaining unreasonable expectation among the French

workmen, but even on their modes of procedure. It was not until the

speeches of O’Connor and other Chartists claiming “the land for the

people,” and the articles of Mitchell and others in Ireland demanding

for the farmers a right in the soil, were circulated in Paris, that

the workmen there began an agitation against rent. This they maintained

until the restoration of order restored to the house-owners the means

of asserting the rights of property. The following graphic and

lively description of the agitation, incited and fostered under such

circumstances, is no exaggeration:—“The past week has been the

calmest which we have had since the revolution. We have had no forced

illuminations, no planting of trees of liberty, no physical-force

demonstrations, no great display of any kind; in fact, we have been

decidedly dull. But in some parts of the city, our sovereign lord and

master, the Mob, has been graciously pleased to afford us a little

interesting excitement by bullying the landlords into giving receipts

for their rents, without the usual preliminary ceremony of fingering

the cash. ‘Base is the slave that pays his rent’ is now the motto of

the mob, and his mobship chalks it up along with ‘liberty, equality,

fraternity!’ To show, however, that he is really a good fellow at heart,

the said mob no sooner swindles (I am afraid it amounts to swindling in

English) the landlord out of his rent, than he invests a small portion

of the coin in the purchase of a tricolor flag, with which he decorates

the landlord’s house. And such is the worthy fellow’s moderation, that

even when the landlord has refused to be victimised, the mob has not

inflicted summary vengeance on him; he has only stuck a black flag

before the offender’s door, or playfully made his effigy dangle by the

neck from the nearest lamp-post.”

In Ireland the progress of sedition afforded a much more favourable

opportunity for displaying the equity and prudence of the French

provisional government. An address was voted to the republic of France

by the Young Irelanders, who styled themselves the people of Ireland,

although they well knew that millions of Irishmen, numbering among them

her most intelligent and influential citizens, repudiated the principles

and proceedings of the party. A deputation, consisting of Mr. Smith

O’Brien and several other gentlemen, were sent to Paris to express the

sympathy and congratulation of the Irish people on the new-born liberty

of the citizens of France. It was well understood in England, and much

better understood in Ireland, that the deputation were expected to sound

the French government as to any hope of assistance in case of a rising

in Ireland; and also to stir up the minds of the French people generally

to more decided interest for Ireland, and a greater willingness to

identify the French republic with Irish hopes and aspirations. On

the 3rd of April the young Ireland deputation was received by the

provisional government at the Hôtel de Ville, and there presented an

address in the spirit of their mission. The following reply was read by

Lamartine:—

“_Citizens of Ireland_,—If we required a fresh proof of the pacific

influence of the proclamation of the great democratic principle,—this

new Christianity, bursting forth at the opportune moment, and dividing

the world, as formerly, into a Pagan and Christian community,—we should

assuredly discern this proof of the omnipotent action of an idea, in

the visits spontaneously paid in this city to republican France, and

the principles which animate her, by the nations, or by fractions of the

nations, of Europe.

“We are not astonished to see to-day a deputation from Ireland. Ireland

knows how deeply her destinies, her sufferings, and her successive

advances in the path of religious liberty, of unity, and of

constitutional equality with the other parts of the United Kingdom, have

at all times moved the heart of Europe. We said as much, a few days ago,

to another deputation of your fellow-citizens. We said as much to all

the children of that glorious Isle of Erin, which the natural genius of

its inhabitants, and the striking events of its history, render equally

symbolical of the poetry and the heroism of the nations of the north.

Rest assured, therefore, that you will find in France, under the

republic, a response to all the sentiments which you express towards it.

“Tell your fellow-citizens that the name of Ireland is synonymous with

the name of liberty courageously defended against privilege—that it is

one common name to every French citizen. Tell them that this reciprocity

which they invoke—that this hospitality of which they are not

oblivious—the republic will be proud to remember and to practise

invariably towards the Irish. Tell them, above all, that the French

republic is not, and never will be, an aristocratic republic, in which

liberty is merely abused as the mask of privilege; but a republic

embracing the entire community, and securing to all the same rights and

the same benefits. As regards other encouragements, it would be neither

expedient for us to hold them out, nor for you to receive them. I have

already expressed the same opinion with reference to Germany, Belgium,

and Italy; and I repeat it with reference to every nation which is

involved in internal disputes—which is either divided against itself

or at variance with its government. When there is a difference of

race—when nations are aliens in blood—intervention is not allowable.

We belong to no party in Ireland or elsewhere, except to that which

contends for justice, for liberty, and for the happiness of the Irish

people. No other part would be acceptable to us, in the time of peace,

in the interests and the passions of foreign nations. France is desirous

of reserving herself free for the maintenance of the rights of all.

“We are at peace, and we are desirous of remaining on good terms of

equality, not with this or that part of Great Britain, but with Great

Britain entire. We believe this peace to be useful and honourable, not

only to Great Britain and the French republic, but to the human race. We

will not commit an act—we will not utter a word—we will not breathe

an insinuation at variance with the principles of the reciprocal

inviolability of nations which we have proclaimed, and of which the

continent of Europe is already gathering the fruits. The fallen monarchy

had treaties and diplomatists. Our diplomatists are nations, our

treaties are sympathies. We should be insane were we openly to exchange

such a diplomacy for unmeaning and partial alliances with even the

most legitimate parties in the countries which surround us. We are not

competent either to judge them or to prefer some of them to others; by

announcing our partizanship on the one side, we should declare ourselves

the enemies of the other. We do not wish to be the enemies of any

of your fellow-countrymen. We wish, on the contrary, by a faithful

observance of the republican pledges, to remove all the prejudices which

may mutually exist between our neighbours and ourselves. This course,

however painful it may be, is imposed on us by the law of nations, as

well as by our historical remembrances.

“Do you know what it was which most served to irritate France and

estrange her from England during the first republic? It was the civil

war in a portion of our territory, supported, subsidised, and assisted

by Mr. Pitt. It was the encouragement and the arms given to Frenchmen,

as heroical as yourselves, but Frenchmen fighting against their

fellow-citizens. This was not honourable warfare; it was a royalist

propagandism waged with French blood against the republic. This policy

is not yet, in spite of all our efforts, entirely effaced from the

memory of the nation. Well, this cause of dissension between Great

Britain and us, we will never renew by taking any similar course. We

accept with gratitude expressions of friendship from the different

nationalities included in the British empire. We ardently wish that

justice may found and strengthen the friendship of races; that equity

may become more and more its basis; but while proclaiming with you,

with her (England), and with all, the holy dogma of fraternity, we will

perform only acts of brotherhood, in conformity with our principles and

our feelings towards the Irish nation.”

At the conclusion of this reply some present exclaimed, “Vive la

République!” others “Vive le Gouvernement Provisore!” and a few

cried out, “Vive Lamartine!” but the general impression was one of

dissatisfaction. Smith O’Brien and his companions retired discomfited.

The British government and people received the intelligence of this

reply with the greatest satisfaction, and their confidence in the

provisional government, and in Lamartine, more especially, was much

increased. There was already more reliance upon the friendly policy of

the republic than there had been upon the monarchy and the monarchial

ministry of Louis Philippe. In Ireland the reply of Lamartine gave

satisfaction also to the Protestants, and such of the Roman Catholic

citizens as were opposed to the O’Brien movement; but the Young

Irelanders, and most of the Old Irelanders, were exasperated, and

in their speeches and newspapers denounced Lamartine as the enemy

of liberty, the sycophant of England, and the incubus of the French

provisional government. It was said that he had married an English lady,

and was more English at heart than French—that he would betray the

republic to England or to monarchy. Those persons who had been foremost

in holding him up as a demi-god, now abused him not only as a traitor,

but as weak in purpose, policy, and intellectual grasp. John Mitchell

denounced him as the great obstruction to the development of

European freedom, which no doubt he was to such freedom as Mitchell

advocated—the plunder and tyranny of a modified communism; for while

essentially holding that theory, he in some way, not very intelligible

to others, repudiated it. Lamartine began his career of power by

emancipating the negro race; Mitchell commenced his career as a free

exile in America, some years after, by the most violent advocacy of the

fetter and the whip for the coloured population of that country. The

_Nation_ newspaper, week after week, informed its readers that Lamartine

was an idle dreamer, a mere theoretical politician; that his mind was

only constituted for the regions of romance; and that his opinion on the

affairs of Ireland, England, France, or Europe was worthless. A week or

two before the same paper held him up as the very Achilles of freedom,

and the hope of Ireland—for it was the habit of both the parties

claiming nationality in Ireland, to hope for liberty from the courage

and efforts of others rather than from their own. The reply of Lamartine

caused as much despondency in Ireland among the seditious, as it

inspired confidence among the loyal, and among all the intelligent

citizens in Great Britain. Throughout the year the conduct of the French

government was internationally just and courteous, and England had no

cause for complaint, but every reason to be thankful that Louis Philippe

and Guizot had given place to such men as Lamartine and Cavaignac.

The revolution in France was of more importance to England than the

revolutions which took place in Italy and Germany—they require,

therefore, only a comparatively brief notice.

ITALY.

All Italy felt the shock of the French revolution, although, in point

of time, the revolutionary feeling developed itself in Italy before it

burst forth in France. Throughout the year 1847 all Switzerland, and

Austrian and Papal Italy, were uneasy; and in January, six weeks before

the dethronement of Louis Philippe, there were disturbances in Milan.

Indeed, from the moment Pius IX. ascended the papal throne, a change

came over the people of Italy: it was supposed that the pope was a

patriot, and would favour the struggle for Italian liberty, and this

delusion was not dispelled until after the battle of Novara. It was then

found that the pope and the kasir were allies, even while the troops of

the former were marching forth ostensibly to do battle for Italy.

When the tidings of the revolt in Paris reached Italy, the people flew

to arms. General Radetzsky and his Austrian troops were driven from

Milan; a provisional government was formed, and all Italy was called

upon to arm. The King of Sardinia, who had proclaimed a most liberal

constitution for his own kingdom, marched an army into Lombardy; Venice

revolted; and Radetzsky retired upon Verona. The Austrian lines along

the Mincio were forced, and the position of Radetzsky’s forces was

dangerous. Two circumstances, however, favoured him—the supineness of

the papal troops, and the junction of Nugent, an Irish marshal in the

Austrian service, with the troops under his command. After various

fortunes, the allied Italians were beaten; Lombardy and Venice were

entirely subjected to the Austrian arms; and but for English and

French diplomacy, Sardinia also would have fallen before the victorious

Austrian. The English government was desirous to see Italy freed from

Austrian domination, and would not have submitted to see Sardinia

overthrown by an invasion of the kasir’s army. France, also, regarded

events there with views similar to those entertained by England, but

it did not suit the policy of either country to interfere beyond the

diplomatic interposition by which Sardinia was saved. Probably they were

also influenced by the suspicion that the royal house of Sardinia was

more actuated by ambition than by a desire for the liberties of Italy.

The fact of the king having granted a constitution did not altogether

prevent such suspicions, because that was his only hope of gaining

ascendancy in Italy; and the general tone of the Sardinian court and

cabinet gave a colour to the impression that their policy was not

entirely disinterested. His majesty was glad to consent to an armistice

with Radetzsky, and to fall back behind the shields of France and

England for safety. The king, however, was obliged to abdicate; shame,

the defeat of his armies, the failure of his policy, and the certainty

that if he remained upon the throne, the kasir would seize the first

opportunity to make war upon him, determined him to abdicate.

THE PAPAL STATES.

Early in the year the pope published a new plan for the organisation of

the executive government of his dominions, which gave satisfaction to

the liberal friends of the popedom. On the 14th of March he proclaimed

a new constitution. The resistance offered to the national will, in the

case of Austria, caused him to become unpopular. On the 29th of April

he addressed the cardinals in conclave, disavowing the act of the papal

troops proceeding against the Austrian armies in Italy. This caused

a popular tumult; the next day the people took possession of the

post-office and the offices of state, and discovered that the pope and

cardinals had been intriguing with Austria. The result was the entire

sacrifice of the pontiff’s popularity; all confidence in his honour,

and that of his cardinals, was erased from the Roman mind. Under the

pressure of the public demand, he, on the 1st of May, proclaimed war

against Austria, but never intended to adopt such measures as would

carry the declaration into effect. He intended to deceive the people,

seeing that they were determined on war; and he knew that this could be

better done by retaining his authority over the troops, than by allowing

the war to be carried out by a popular and lay administration, which

would be in earnest. Early in May a new ministry of a liberal character

was formed, but the pope’s private advisers counteracted their policy.

The result was a revolution—not against the pope’s ecclesiastical,

but solely against his temporal, authority. Scenes of the most dreadful

nature followed, all of which might have been averted by an honest

course on the part of the pontiff, and the college of cardinals.

The pope was really willing to concede much; but the demand that the

temporal government of the people should be by and for the people,

he was not willing to admit; and by covertly attempting to destroy or

counteract all that he publicly and ostensibly admitted, he filled the

people with incurable resentment against those who surrounded him,

and to whom they attributed, rather than to himself, the faithless and

despotic policy in secret pursued. A chamber of deputies was convoked,

to whom the pope formally surrendered his government, declining to take

any part in their doings, or to afford any sanction. Several of the

high ecclesiastics and lay authorities, by whose agency he sought to

counteract the efforts for constitutional liberty which the people

made, were slain, and others driven from Rome. At last, on the 24th of

November, he disguised himself as a livery servant in attendance upon

the Bavarian ambassador, and mounting the box of that gentleman’s

carriage, beside his coachman, was driven to the house of the Bavarian

embassy; thence, disguised as the chaplain to the embassy, he succeeded

in escaping to Gaeta, a town within the Neapolitan territory. The flight

of the pope was followed by a protest on his part against the liberalism

of his people, who organised a regular government on liberal principles;

their efforts were counteracted by the spies and agents of the pope,

and the embassies of all the Roman Catholic powers: among the foreign

representatives, none was more hostile to the incipient liberties of

Rome than the ambassador of the French republic.

The pope, the kasir, the king of Naples, and the despots of the smaller

Italian states, considered that England was the chief fomenter of

Italian disturbance. This arose from one of those whig _mal àpropos_

movements for which their party had of late years earned a bad

reputation. Lord Minto was dispatched to Italy in a semi-official

capacity; the real object of his mission was to open diplomatic

relations with the pope, who, although very desirous to respond to the

wishes of the English Whigs, thought it a good opportunity to extort

some concessions as to the interests of the Roman Catholic religion in

British territory. The Whigs, knowing that they dare not face the public

opinion of Great Britain, if they made such concessions as the pope’s

demands and their own wishes would prompt, were baulked in their

undertaking. They succeeded, however, in obtaining a certain amount of

influence upon the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland, restraining

the latter from favouring the revolutionary designs existing in that

country. It was remarkable that while the Irish Roman Catholics were

abusing Lamartine and the French provisional government, for not

assisting by arms revolution in Ireland,—that is, a revolution of a

portion of the Irish who followed certain leaders,—they were equally

abusive of the people of Rome for daring, against the will of the pope,

to assert any measure of civil or religious liberty, however modest.

Impudent threats were made of sending an Irish army to the pope’s

assistance, at the very time that the persons so vaunting were afraid of

the Dublin police!

The close of the year saw the pope a fugitive and the people free.

NAPLES AND SICILY.

These countries did not escape the revolutionary contagion. Sicily flew

to arms, and the revolt succeeded. The English government was desirous

to see Sicily separated from Naples; and their emissary, Lord Minto, so

betrayed this feeling to the king of the two Sicilies as to inspire him

with intense hatred to England, and to confirm him in the opinion that

English agency was busy in creating or sustaining the confusion of the

continente, Lord Minto had the preposterous folly to suggest to the

king that Sicily should only be garrisoned by Sicilian troops! This, of

course, was indignantly rejected by both the king and cabinet.

The Sicilians published a manifesto of their free and moderate opinions,

which was very excellent. The document was very deceptive, and designed

to gain support in England and France. One of the false promises of the

manifesto was the entire freedom of religion; one of the first acts of

the Sicilians in their short-lived power was a rigorous establishment

of the Roman Catholic religion, and this was enacted in terms which

disclosed the bigoted feelings of the nation. Sicily wanted to be

independent of Naples, but it had not the same wish to be separated from

the despotic principle. An independent nation, without a free people,

was the highest aspiration of revolted Sicily. England and France left

her to her fate, except so far as Lord Minto’s meddling complicated

her condition. The temporarily vanquished Neapolitans returned to the

contest, and the revolution was ingloriously suppressed.

In Naples the victory of the constitution was as short as the

independence, of Sicily. The king acted without sincerity, and the

deputies without prudence. The king found an opportunity of resistance,

for which he had well prepared himself. He was surrounded by Swiss

guards, recruited from the bigoted Roman Catholic cantons of the

Sonderbund, or what had been so termed before its tyranny was crushed

the previous year. The king had also the lazzaroni on his side; some

thirty thousand thieves, assassins, street beggars, and burglars were

in his majesty’s royal pay and royal favour. They were enthusiastic for

king, church, and plunder. It was alleged that the royal promise was

held out to them that if they conquered the citizens they would be

permitted to sack the city. The event seemed as if such allegation were

true; the united Swiss and lazzaroni conquered, and the city was sacked.

The king permitted, and his minions encouraged, the most infamous

proceedings: riot, robbery, and debauch filled every street and almost

every house, while blood, the blood of the best citizens of Naples,

flowed in torrents. There is no knowing to what extent these horrors

might have been carried by the “faithful lazzaroni,” had not the French

admiral in the bay declared that he would act against the king if these

inhumanities were not at once stopped. The lazzaroni must have been

at the king’s beck, for the moment he was alarmed by threats of the

interference of a French squadron, he called in his bloodhounds, and

held the leash until the threatened danger passed.

BELGIUM.

Much concern was felt in England as to the part which Belgium would take

in the terrible continental tragedy. The king being her majesty’s uncle,

and also the uncle of her consort, the safety of his throne was regarded

anxiously by the English court. As he had by his second marriage

connected himself with the family of Louis Philippe, the French

republicans looked upon him as a very suspicious neighbour; but the

prudent policy of Lamartine prevented any collision, and checked the

propagandism which both sections of French republicans desired to

bring to bear upon Belgium. The “Reds,” perceiving that the provisional

government was not disposed to embroil itself with foreign powers,

organised an _émeute_ in Belgium with a sort of filibustering expedition

of their own. Several hundred socialists made their way into Belgium,

and used every effort to induce the people to join them, but in vain,—a

few only, who like themselves, held extreme and impracticable views of

democracy, made any insurrectionary movement; and the affair exploded as

harmlessly as Smith O’Brien’s abortive attempt at revolution in Ireland.

Had any success, short of a complete revolution, attended the efforts of

the French “sympathisers,” the armed intervention of England might have

been necessitated, and another long war with France have spread its

terrors, havoc, and ruin in Belgium.

GERMANY.

The people of Germany were ripe for revolt when the tidings of the

French revolution came suddenly as a flash along the electric wire. No

people had ever been more basely deceived by princes than the Germans.

Constitutions were promised, and the promises shamefully violated,

sometimes ostensibly conceded, but really never acted upon. The oaths

of kings were synonymous for falsehood throughout the great fatherland.

Schiller has sung—

“The human being:

May not be trusted with self-government;”

but the poet and philosopher must have understood that the human

being is as worthy to be trusted with self-government as with the

irresponsible government of other men, no way his inferiors—perhaps,

morally and intellectually, superior to him. The Prussian people could

have governed themselves with as much ability as the king governed them.

The Hanoverians could have managed their own affairs as morally as the

English Duke of Cumberland, or his son George conducted them. Nor did

the wisdom of the Austrian emperor, for matters of government, exceed

the intelligence of the educated citizens of Vienna.

The first vibration of the great French earthquake was felt in the grand

Duchy of Baden. The people, as one man, demanded liberty; the demand was

too unanimously made to be resisted; the victory was won without a shot.

On the 3rd of March the Rhenish provinces of Prussia felt the shock, and

Cologne was in arms; on the 4th, Wisbaden; on the 5th, Dusseldorf; on

the 8th, the Hessians of Cassel barricaded the streets, and flew to

arms—their victory was won without blood. Early in March the people of

Munich demanded their rights, which none but slaves consented to forego;

they were refused; the people responded to the first cry “to arms” that

was raised; the troops would not charge the people, but mingled in the

shouts of “a republic! a republic!” The alarmed king conceded, tampered

with his own concessions, and at last abdicated. His son and successor

made a great flourish of proclamations and promises, throwing himself

upon the popular sympathy until time enabled him to forswear himself.

The credulous people who believed the oaths of kings, generally paid

afterwards the penalty of their credulity in blood or fetters.

In Saxony there was no harmony between the court and people; the former

were Roman Catholic, and the latter Protestant. The prudence of the

monarch, however, prevailed over the solicitations of his court to treat

his people with disdain, and he saved his throne and his honour.

The King of Hanover was less honest, as well as less compliant, but even

he had to recognise, for the time being, a constitution.

Prussia proper was affected, as well as her less homogeneous provinces,

by the grand convulsion. After a series of conflicts in the streets of

Berlin, order was at last restored, and the constitution modified so as

to satisfy a large portion of the people. The Poles in Posen revolted,

and perpetrated the utmost atrocities, but were put down by the Prussian

troops without obtaining any of the objects for which they so wildly

fought, and so vaguely demanded. The people of Posen had been

practised upon by their own nobles, and incited by their priests.

Their insurrection was one of fanaticism, not of freedom; the revolters

carried the symbols and images of their creed, not the banners of

nationhood before them,—they deserved to fail. Their chief oppressors

were the privileged classes of their own countrymen, from whom the

Prussian government derived no aid in its efforts to meliorate the

condition of the province. Education was resisted, industry discouraged,

and the religious rights of minorities assailed by ignorant and

fanatical mobs. The freedom required in Posen was an emancipation of the

people from their own passions and prejudices.

THE AUSTRIAN EMPIRE.

The revolutionary history of the Austrian empire during the year

1848 was instructive, and full of the most eventful changes and great

results. On another page the progress of affairs in Austrian Italy was

sketched, and the relation of the kasir’s interests there to contiguous

Italian states pointed out. The whole empire was, however, convulsed,

and the throes of every part communicated its vibrations to the whole.

The revolt in Hungary constituted the most interesting and important

part of the great transactions which occurred within the limits of the

empire. The government of the kasir succeeded, by exciting the jealousy

of Magyar and German, Croat and Hungarian, metropolitan and provincial,

in holding the difficult balance, and in preserving the empire in its

integrity from the flood which flowed over it with such disintegrating

force.

The revolution in Hungary was completely successful, and Vienna itself

was menaced by a Hungarian army. The heroism of an Englishman, General

Guyon, rendered the greatest military services; and the eloquence and

wisdom of a civilian, Louis Kossuth, guided the aspirations and resolves

of armed Hungary. Ultimately, indeed, by the aid of Russian armies,

the Austrian was enabled once more to tread out the fire of Hungarian

liberty; but 1848 saw the gallant Magyars victorious.

The Viennese, notwithstanding their contiguity to the court and their

close dependence upon the kasir, rose in arms, and obtained an extensive

recognition of those rights which the people everywhere claimed. Those

who by extreme measures and views marred the cause of freedom elsewhere,

did so at Vienna. The socialist element was the ruin of the revolution.

The thinking and the morally sound portions of the citizens were

detached from the popular cause, in and out of Vienna, and the arms of

the emperor finally triumphed over the barricades of the capital.

THE GERMAN CONFEDERATION.

Representatives from all the German states, where successful revolutions

had been effected, assembled in Frankfort to form a closer confederacy

of the German states. The ambition of Prussia and Austria found scope in

this new sphere of action. The Prussian king was desirous to be elected

emperor of Germany, and supposed that the Frankfort parliament would

subserve his purpose. Never did an assembly of men utter finer, noble

principles, than that, nor did any display such utter impracticability.

They occupied the time in visionary schemes, which ought to have

been devoted to secure the liberty of each individual state, and they

sacrificed the interests of nations to the German invidiousness of race.

The socialist party tried to force their own especial objects upon the

assembly, and when unsuccessful, deluged Frankfort with blood. They

followed the policy and conduct of their prototypes, the red republicans

of Paris, in their resistance to the provisional government. The

irreconcilable differences of opinion between the advocates of change

gave kings advantage in the reactionary policy which they meditated

before the year was out.

DENMARK.—SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN.

The inhabitants of the duchies revolted against the king of Denmark;

this arose partly from that hatred to all other races characteristic of

the German. The Schleswig-Holsteiners could not endure amalgamation,

or even close alliance with the Scandinavian race, much less with the

Sclaves, should the Emperor of Russia inherit the throne of Denmark. The

people of the duchies were desirous to be identified more with Germany,

and this was, notwithstanding other pretences, the main-spring of the

revolt. The King of Prussia, never true to his engagements, violated

treaties, and marched his troops into the duchies. This dispute was one

with which England might have been involved, as she had certain treaty

obligations which rendered the possibility of such a result the subject

of speculation.

RUSSIA.

The empire of the autocrat was undisturbed, but the revolutionary

feeling seemed ready to invade it on all its European frontier. Large

bodies of troops were gathered in Southern Russia for the purpose of

entering the Turkish Danubian provinces, in order to suppress the spirit

of revolution which there manifested itself, and found vent in a fervent

political agitation. In Poland, also, the czar concentrated a great

army. Warsaw bristled with bayonets; and a diplomatic message was sent

to the court of Berlin, assuring it of the czar’s friendly feeling, but

warning it that, in case of any disturbances on the Polish frontier

of Russia, if they were not very promptly suppressed, the Russian

government would take measures to effect the security of its own

frontier. The message amounted to a hint that if a Russian army were

needed by the Prussian monarch, the czar was not unwilling to lend it,

or, if need should exist, he would find a reason, without being asked

for his aid, to cross the frontier, and put down democracy.

The following arrogant presumption of divine right was put forth by the

czar:—

“After the benefits of a long peace, the west of Europe finds itself

at this moment suddenly given over to perturbations which threaten

with ruin and overthrow all legal powers and the whole social system.

Insurrection and anarchy, the offspring of France, soon crossed the

German frontier, and have spread themselves in every direction with an

audacity which has gained new force in proportion to the concessions of

the governments. This devastating plague has at last attacked our allies

the empire of Austria and the kingdom of Prussia, and to-day in its

blind fury menaces even our Russia—that Russia which God has confided

to our care. But Heaven forbid that this should be! Faithful to the

example handed down from our ancestors, having first invoked the aid of

the Omnipotent, we are ready to encounter our enemies from whatever side

they may present themselves, and without sparing our own person we will

know how, indissolubly united to our holy country, to defend the honour

of the Russian name, and the inviolability of our territory. We are

convinced that every Russian, that every one of our faithful subjects,

will respond with joy to the call of his sovereign. Our ancient war-cry,

‘For our faith, our sovereign, and our country!’ will once again lead us

on the path of victory: and then, with sentiments of humble gratitude,

as now with feelings of holy hope, we will all cry with one voice, ‘God

is on our side: understand this, ye peoples, and submit, for God is on

our side.’”

On the whole, England preserved peace with all foreign states during the

rage of this political tempest. Her attitude was morally sublime. The

waves rose, and the hurricane raged around her, but she towered above

the billow and the tempest, her crown bright with the glory which the

sun of liberty shed upon it. The stranger who found a refuge and a home

within her borders, might well offer to her the tribute which the poet

Moore so gracefully inscribed upon the pedestal of her freedom and her

power:—

“Hail to thee, Albion! that meetest the commotion

Of Europe, as calm as thy cliffs meet the foam;

With no bond but the law, and no bound but the ocean,

Hail, temple of liberty! thou art my home.”

IRELAND.

_Famine and Pestilence_.—Frightful as was the state of Ireland in 1847,

it was still worse in the year 1848. Commercial affairs were embarrassed

by so many disturbing circumstances, that public confidence was not

restored throughout the year. The potato disease, agrarian outrage,

Ribbonism, the repeal agitation, and an insurrectionary combination, all

combined to restrict commerce.

The destitution of the people was terrible. It is unnecessary to go

into the details of the horrid story: numbers perished of famine, and

pestilence went forth with devastating fury where hunger had stricken.

The “famine fever” carried away multitudes to an untimely grave. This

disease extended also to the Irish in England. Many in London died of

it, and great numbers in Manchester, but the affliction fell still more

heavily upon Liverpool. Several Roman Catholic clergymen in those towns

fell victims, nor did medical men escape. Efforts continued to be made

by the government, and by voluntary charity, to mitigate the calamities

which befel the country, but their variety and magnitude set at defiance

all the noble efforts that were made, and the exhaustless compassions of

the noble hearts that made them.

_Continuance of Crime and Outrage_.—The story of the two previous years

was the same of this: crime raged everywhere; the hand of the assassin

was constantly uplifted; and woe to the landlord who expelled a tenant

for whatsoever violation of contract, and to the zealous Protestant, lay

or clerical, who claimed a right to discuss his religious opinions, even

in self-defence, or to circulate there, even in the most inoffensive

manner.

Much of the crime of Ireland was to be attributed to a secret society

which the government never made any adequate efforts to suppress, and

which was commonly called the “Ribbon Society.” No means were taken by

the respectable Roman Catholics to break up this exclusively Romanist

confederacy, the chief object of which was the extermination of

Protestants, and it was in 1848 that, in this respect, little was to

be then expected from them. No public protest against the worst and the

wildest of the ultramontane proceedings of previous years had been made

by Roman Catholics, clerical or lay, English or Irish, or of any rank

in life; and the “liberal Roman Catholics,” as they liked to be called,

could not be surprised if Protestants began to put no faith in their

liberal professions. Yet this section of the Roman Catholics had gained

much confidence and respect with liberal Protestants in both countries.

It was chiefly on their representations that the once formidable Orange

societies were suppressed, and although these societies changed their

constitution in compliance with the law, yet they never acquired public

confidence after: through the instrumentality of Mr. Hume’s exposure

of the dangerous tendency of the confederacy, the law was put in

force against them. The liberal Romanists were accustomed to say that

Ribbonism was, so to say, but the complement of Orangeism; that if

the latter were made illegal, the other would die of itself. This was

believed by the whig and radical parties of the day; and after a

feeble resistance on the part of the Tories, Orangeism was at last

discountenanced by the state, and literally turned out of doors, after

having been used and misused, petted and pampered, for half a century.

Instead, however, of Ribbonism taking a voluntary departure, as lay and

priestly liberal spouters of the popular Roman Catholic party presumed,

it increased in extent, numbers, and virus. Portions of Ireland where

it had previously no footing became the high places of its power;

every town in England where Irish Roman Catholics lived had affiliated

societies formed; London, Manchester, Liverpool, and Lancashire

generally, counted their tens of thousands of sworn enemies to the

English government and name, and to the toleration and even existence

of Protestants. The oaths of the members were again and again revised,

becoming more relentless and bloodthirsty, just as every concession was

made to Roman Catholic demands. As the system of Ribbonism was in 1848,

nothing more bloody and diabolical was ever conceived by lost human

minds. Nothing like it _could_ exist except amongst a people in whose

hearts bigotry had so uprooted all tolerance and charity, that their

ferocity of zealotism would vie with that which an Irish Romanist

described of others:—

“Men of the saintly murderous brood.

To carnage and the Koran given,

Who think, through unbeliever’s blood,

Lies the directest path to heaven.”

_Political Agitation_.—The Repeal Association continued its meetings,

and notwithstanding the prevailing distress, considerable sums were

subscribed; some weeks as much as £80 was received. Mr. John O’Connell

presided at those meetings, which were barren of all utility for the

party, and destitute of the eloquence which in the days of O’Connell and

Shiel enlivened and gave importance to public meetings.

The young Ireland party was all activity, and although few of its

orators were really eloquent, there were many of them good speakers,

several who rose to the rank of superior platform address, and one (Mr.

Meagher) of surpassing eloquence. The Young Irelanders, on the whole,

wrote better than they spoke, and very able articles appeared from

their pens in the press, not only in Dublin, but throughout Ireland. The

_Nation_ newspaper, conducted by Charles Gavan Duffy, a man of wonderful

energy and courage, of discriminating literary taste and fine talents,

was perhaps the most ably managed newspaper in the British Isles, so

far as literary claims were concerned. The most passionate and exciting

ballads, full of poetical and patriotic fervour, the most elaborate and

elegantly written dissertations on Ireland, her history, music, poetry,

language, and people, and popularly written and able articles on

politics, filled its columns. Their influence upon the mind of the young

men of Ireland who were of the Roman Catholic persuasion, and of many

Protestants who were too liberal in sentiment to suspect their Roman

Catholic fellow-countrymen of desiring religious ascendancy, was great.

When John Mitchell considered that the _Nation_ had too little sympathy

with red republicanism, he set up a paper called the _Irishman_, which

he made the vehicle of the most outrageous doctrines, political and

social. The leading articles of the _Irishman_ were written by Mr.

Mitchell himself, with a nervous power, eloquence, boldness of thought,

and audacity, which were very extraordinary. These articles were amongst

the ablest specimens of newspaper writing which had ever been known in

Ireland. Their effect was electric; they maddened the young men of the

movement with a fierce spirit of nationality. The clubs read them with

ecstasy, and John Mitchell was the idol and hero of all men of extreme

opinions. His defiance of government, his incitements to rebellion,

were so open and intrepid, that they seized upon the imagination of the

people, and much disturbed the government. Pikes and side-arms were

manufactured in every part of the country, and John Mitchell wrote

various articles on the proper pattern of a pike, on the best way

of using that “queen of weapons,” as he termed it, and to prove how

hopeless it would be for either cavalry or infantry, disciplined on the

ordinary system, to face corps of Irish pikemen disciplined on his plan.

These military articles were eminently absurd, and excited the ridicule

of military men; but the style in which they were written was so

admirably adapted to the taste and tone of thought of those whom they

were designed to influence, that they told wonderfully, and inspired

confidence in the clubs and in the country, that means were at last

found by which the trained troops of England could be encountered with a

superior weapon.

Meanwhile the lord-lieutenant of Ireland, the Earl of Clarendon, proved

himself a most vigorous governor. He entered into negotiations with the

Orangemen, who were true to the throne to a man. One hundred and fifty

thousand men of that confederacy, and of the Protestants who held their

principles and sympathised with their party, although not enrolled in

the lodges, were ready to take up arms on the side of the government,

and many stand of arms were to be distributed should necessity arise. A

very large distribution was made, and the Orangemen, and vast number

of other Protestants, were ready to turn out at a moment’s notice. The

number at the call of the government were quite sufficient, with a small

body of troops as a point of support, to put down any force the disloyal

could bring into the field. How such men as Mitchell, Meagher, O’Brien,

and Duffey could fail to see that, was extraordinary. They still went

on, talking of Ireland as about to “arise in her majesty and shake

off the English yoke,” at a time when a million and a half of Irish

Protestants would have preferred any yoke under heaven to that of their

own Roman Catholic countrymen; and while some of the most papal of the

Roman Catholics themselves had no hope in the movement, no confidence in

the leaders, and a strong conviction that any effort against England was

impracticable, and would lead only to a waste of blood. His excellency

displayed such vigour that, early in the spring, two hundred and eighty

thousand persons, comprising the wealth and intelligence of the country,

signed a document expressive of their confidence. His lordship was

keenly alive, also, to the influence of the press, and subsidised

various papers to oppose the Young Irelanders. He did not display as

much caution in this department of his policy as he did vigour and

sagacity in other directions. He hired a man named Birch, who edited a

paper called the _World_, which was very ably conducted. The terms on

which his excellency put himself with Mr. Birch were discreditable to

the government, and the spirit in which he wrote and acted was insulting

to the country, and when his connection with the Castle became known,

the hands of government were weakened by the circumstance.

The negotiations with Rome were productive of more effect than giving

subsidies to the press, for both sections of the anti-union agitation

did their utmost to gain the priests over to their cause. The priesthood

was, however, suspicious of the Young Irelanders, from the conviction

that they were generally indifferent to religion. This impression was

also received at Rome; and the English government, by its secret agency,

did its best to strengthen that opinion. The pope had sufficient reason

to dread any tendency to red republicanism in any part of the

world where his disciples or subjects might be influenced by it. He

accordingly issued a rescript, which created a powerful sensation

in Ireland. The _Nation_ newspaper, and the press generally which

sympathised with it, denounced the English government, and the English

Roman Catholics, with having, by false representations, induced the pope

to issue this document. The censures fell with especial weight upon the

English Roman Catholic aristocracy, who were believed to have a peculiar

prejudice against Ireland, and in this case to have allowed their

antipathies of race and nationality to interfere with the good of their

religion; for it was alleged that the promotion of agitation, and even

revolution, in Ireland by the priesthood, was the surest way to make

England concessive to the Roman Catholic clergy and people. It was also

maintained that the severance of Ireland from England would give a wider

scope to the influence of the church, and rescue one of her fairest

provinces from the sceptre of a heretic sovereign. These different

grounds were taken up by various organs of the press, according to their

degrees of prudence, or the especial light in which they regarded the

transaction. At all events, it was felt that the rescript would baulk

the efforts of the Young Irelanders to engage any portion of the

priesthood on their side, and greatly lessen the chances of their

success. The Protestants of Ireland, ignorant of the true nature of

the mission of Lord Minto to Italy, which the government organs

systematically misrepresented, and ignorant also of the progress which

the English government had made at Rome, through certain Roman Catholics

of influence, considered the rescript as a _ruse_ on the part of the

pope, acting in concert with the Irish episcopacy, to throw the English

government off its guard. The Protestants were therefore stirred up to

more vigorous preparation to resist the approaching insurrection, while,

at the same time, the hopes of the opposite party were damaged, and

depression was necessarily communicated to their exertions.

The following is a copy of the papal rescript, addressed to the Roman

Catholic prelates of Ireland:—

“_Most Illustrious and Reverend Lord_,—The reports now for nine

months circulated by the English newspapers concerning the political

party-strifes in which some ecclesiatics have allowed themselves to be

carried away, and the desecration made of some of the Irish churches for

the purpose of aiding and promoting secular concerns—nay, more, the

reports which have reached us relative to the murders which we are

informed are so frequent, and by reason of which the clergy have been

stigmatised, and some of them charged with imprudence, and as giving

indirect provocation from the pulpit, or, at least, extenuating the

guilt of these murders—these reports must surely awaken the solicitude

of the sacred congregation.

“This sacred congregation cannot bring itself to believe that such

reports, so extensively raised abroad, can be true; nor can it believe

that ecclesiastics have forgotten that the church of God should be

the house of prayer, not of secular concerns, or the meeting-place

of politicians; neither can the sacred congregation believe that

ecclesiastics have ceased to recollect that they are the ministers of

peace, dispensers of the mysteries of God—men who should not involve

themselves in worldly concerns—in a word, men who should abhor blood

and vengeance. Nevertheless, this sacred congregation deems it its duty

to require certain and satisfactory explanation on all these matters,

that it may know what importance to attach to the above-mentioned

damnatory reports. Wherefore, at the suggestion of his holiness, I have

deemed it my duty to forward this letter to your lordship, praying you

to satisfy this most reasonable solicitude of the congregation; and,

meantime, it exhorts you to admonish the clergy, that seeking the things

which are of Jesus Christ, they sedulously apply themselves to watch

over the spiritual interests of the people, and in nowise mix themselves

up with worldly affairs, in order that their ministry may not be brought

into disrepute, and those who are against them may not have wherewith to

charge them.

“I pray God long to preserve your lordship.

“J. Ph. Cardinal Fransoni.

“Rome. From the Congregation of the Faith,

“January 3rd, 1848.”

Early in the year the legislature passed stringent laws to suppress

crime and outrage in Ireland, and to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Proceedings were also taken of various kinds against several of the more

prominent promoters of sedition.

On the 15th of May, William Smith O’Brien was tried before Lord Chief

Justice Blackburn and a special jury, upon an _ex officio_ information,

charging him with having delivered a speech, on the 15th of March, in

the parish of St. Thomas, Dublin, for the purpose of exciting contempt

and hatred against the queen in Ireland, and inducing the people to rise

in rebellion. The traverser pleaded not guilty. There could be no doubt

that in point of fact and law he was guilty, for it would be difficult

to cull language from a seditious speech more pertinent to the charge

than that quoted by the attorney-general from the speech of Mr. O’Brien

on the 15th of March. He was ably defended by Mr. Butt, an eloquent

queen’s counsel. The jury could not agree, and by the consent of the

attorney-general they were discharged. It was not expected that the

jury would agree in a verdict; there was a determination among the

disaffected that when summoned as jurors they would not give verdicts

in charges of this nature. The government were determined to procure

convictions, if possible, and the trial of Mr. O’Brien was followed by

an indictment of T. E. Meagher. He was also arraigned on an _ex officio_

information for a seditious speech delivered on the same occasion as

that which furnished O’Brien with an opportunity for his delinquent

oratory. When the jury returned into court they were asked if they had

agreed in their verdict; the foreman replied, “We are not, my lord.” Mr.

Favel, one of the jurors, remarked, “We are all agreed but one, and he

is a Roman Catholic.” The report of this trial produced a very great

sensation in England. Men everywhere remarked, “If a single Roman

Catholic on a jury prevents the course of justice, a remedy must be

found for such a state of things; there must be power accorded to the

crown.” It was not generally understood in England that a Roman Catholic

had often little reason to hope for justice when high party Protestants

composed the jury.

In the Commission Court, before Mr. Baron Lefroy, and Mr. Justice Moore,

John Mitchell, proprietor of the _United Irishman_ newspaper, was

placed upon his trial. He had been arrested under the act passed in

the beginning of the year to meet such cases, entitled, “An act for the

better security of the crown and government.” True bills were found

by the grand jury against him for felony. To each he handed in a plea

praying that the indictment might be quashed, on the ground that one

of the members of the jury was also a member of the town-council of the

borough of Dublin, and as such disqualified. These pleas were put in

merely to gain time, which led the attorney-general to enter a _nolle

prosequi_ to each, and to file ex officio information against Mr.

Mitchell. After various other artifices to obtain delay, the prisoner

was compelled to plead, and he pleaded “not guilty.” The terms of the

indictment were, that the traverser endeavoured to take away the style,

honour, and royal name of our sovereign lady the queen, and to make war

against her majesty, her heirs, and successors. The trial was chiefly

remarkable for the bold and manly tone of Mr. Holmes, the prisoner’s

counsel. Never did an advocate more fearlessly do his duty to his client

and his country. The judge charged against the prisoner, and the jury,

after three hours and a half’s deliberation, returned with a verdict of

guilty. The sentence was transportation for fourteen years. The bearing

of the prisoner was manly and dignified throughout. He was known to be

a man of strong domestic affections, and of warm friendship, and the

sentence was received with intense dissatisfaction throughout Ireland.

The violent opinions and proceedings of Mr. Mitchell in his public

capacity could not destroy the popular partialities for him as a brave,

generous, and amiable man; it was allowed on all hands that the time

had arrived for stopping his political career, but it was hoped that

a temporary imprisonment would have satisfied the ends of justice. The

public sympathy for his amiable wife and his little children was very

strong, and it was desired by all classes that at the earliest possible

occasion which would give the government an opportunity to exercise

clemency, his sentence might be greatly mitigated.

It was allowed on all hands that the government were compelled to

prosecute. In the pages of the _United Irishman_ he had uttered the

most vehement defiance to the government, and to the lord-lieutenant

of Ireland especially. He had invoked a prosecution, and in one furious

article in the _United Irishman_ had told the vice-regal government that

if it did not pack a jury and prosecute him, it was restrained only by

cowardice. What the motives of Mr. Mitchell were in thus wishing to be

made a victim it is impossible to affirm. Many believed that he wrote

in the confidence that no Irish jury, however packed, would find him

guilty; others supposed that he calculated upon a packed jury finding a

verdict against him, but that he felt sure of a popular revolt for his

rescue, and thus desired to precipitate the insurrection. A large

class of persons who did not sympathise with his doctrines and efforts,

alleged that, foreseeing the utter hopelessness of the cause upon which

he had embarked, he desired to bring matters as regarded himself at

once to a conclusion, and as he could not withdraw with honour from the

course he had espoused, he was anxious to incur the lesser penalty for

sedition, than to risk encounter with the queen’s forces as the leader

of a bootless insurrection. His sentence was rapidly carried out, the

populace making no effort to save him. The leaders found various excuses

for not at once rising, and Mitchell was carried ignominiously away,

and departed before their eyes, not an arm raised, not a blow struck by

those who vehemently cheered him in his career of folly, and promised to

follow him to the death.

During and immediately previous to these transactions, the Repeal

Association and the Young Irelanders made a great parade, after their

own fashion, for their own ostensible objects. The Young Irelanders

called a convention of three hundred representatives or delegates

from every part of the country; these were, in fact, to be the

representatives of the insurrectionary clubs, ostensibly of the people.

Smith O’Brien, the last time he appeared in the English House of

Commons, had the temerity and absurdity to advise the premier to put

himself in communication with this council of three hundred, and

be guided in his measures by them. This was after the visit of the

honourable member to Paris, to induce the French government to espouse

the cause of insurrection in Ireland. His recommendation was received

with shouts of derisive laughter, and his treason was chastised by the

premier reminding him that he had taken the oath of allegiance, and at

the same time was encompassing the dishonour of the queen’s throne.

At a meeting of the Old Irelanders in April, in Conciliation Hall, a Mr.

Aikins in the chair, the following business was transacted, which will

show the position which that party desired publicly to take both to the

Young Irelanders and to the government:—

“Mr. Maurice O’Connell proposed, and Mr. T. Galway seconded, the

following resolutions, which were unanimously adopted:—‘That we, this

association, view with disgust and indignation the bill brought in by

the ministers, entitled, A bill for the better security of the crown and

government of the United Kingdom. That we consider such bill, instead

of answering its professed purposes, to be of such a character as the

odious six acts of Lord Castlereagh’s ministry, with the aggravation

that the latter were only legal and temporary, while this is intended as

general and perpetual. That we consider such bill as in fact a bill to

encourage the odious spy system, and prevent all discussion of the wants

of the people, whether by the press or at meetings. That we therefore

express our detestation of this measure, and call upon the repeal

members of parliament to oppose the passing of such bill by all

constitutional means.’

“Mr. O’Connell next proposed, and Mr. Galway seconded, a resolution, that

it be referred to the committee to have a case prepared for counsel

upon the construction of the convention act, 33 George HI., cap. 29. Mr.

O’Connell observed that although his father had not matured the project

of assembling three hundred delegates in Dublin, he had never abandoned

it up to the period of his death. (Cheers.) ‘The liberator’ had

frequently consulted lawyers of great celebrity, to fortify his own

opinion, but the result of his consultation with others was that he had

grave and fearful doubts as to its legality. The project was accordingly

suffered to remain in abeyance. They were determined never to advise

or sanction any rash or precipitate act; they would act only within the

law, and were anxious to ascertain whether the delegates could assemble

legally in Dublin. This was the object of obtaining counsel’s opinion

upon the subject; and if the step could be taken with safety, and within

the bounds of law, in the name of God they would take it. (Cheers.)

“Mr. O’Connell called the attention of the association to a resolution

adopted at the last meeting of the Confederation, admitting ‘to

membership all enrolled members of the Conciliation Hall, on the same

ternis as members of the Confederation.’ It was also intimated that

seats would be reserved at the meeting of the Confederation for

the accommodation of the members of Conciliation Hall. Now he (Mr.

O’Connell) wished to warn every member of the association against

accepting that invitation, or making use of the privileges (if

privileges they were) thus offered by the Confederation. (Hear, hear.)

The safety of the association consisted entirely in keeping strictly

within the letter of the law, and he hoped none of its members would

directly or indirectly sanction or identify themselves with any of the

proceedings of the Confederation.”

The Orangemen, as a body, also took active measures. They addressed a

memorial to the lord-lieutenant, protesting their loyalty, and offering

their support.. Their assistance was accepted, arms were distributed

to them, and there is no doubt they would have been bravely used on the

side of the government. A knowledge that the Orangemen were arming in

support of the crown, tended very much to depress the hopes and check

the actions of the seditious. The rifle clubs adopted ball-practice, it

is true, but they confined their shooting to the precincts of the clubs.

When a petty insurrection did break forth, not a shot was fired by the

clubs, after so much preparation on their part, and so much expenditure

of eloquence in boasting of their bravery, and eagerness for the field.

The transportation of John Mitchell did not extinguish the zeal of the

insurgent press. The _United Irishman_ was suppressed, to resume a

new life under the title of the _Felon_, which was as true to its

designation as treason could make it. A paper called the _Irish

Tribune_ vied with the _Felon_ and the _Nation_, in open incentives to

insurrection.

It was the policy of the leaders to wait until the harvest was gathered,

and this was openly proclaimed by them, which enabled the government

more effectually to frustrate their schemes. The editor of the _Felon_

counselled the people, however, to resist if their leaders were

arrested, even if the harvest were not reaped. “After harvest if we may;

before harvest if we must,” was the counsel of this authority, and the

general tenour of the advice given by all the chiefs. The government,

upon these indications, took vigorous measures to enable the

lord-lieutenant by extraordinary power to suppress or prevent any

revolt; the _Habeas Corpus_ Act was suspended, and it was left to the

discretion of his lordship to call out the Protestant yeomanry of the

north of Ireland.

The House of Commons having assembled on Saturday, the 22nd of July, for

a sitting at noon, Lord John Russell rose, amidst profound silence, and

proposed a motion of the most important character: a relation of the

circumstance is introduced here, rather than in the parliamentary

history of the year, because it places in a clearer view the progress of

the Irish insurrection, and the government policy in respect to it. His

lordship, after a pause in which he betrayed considerable emotion, moved

for leave to bring in a bill to empower the lord-lieutenant, or other

chief governor or governors of Ireland, to apprehend and detain,

until the first of March, 1849, such persons as he should suspect of

conspiring against her majesty’s person and government. The noble lord

having expressed his deep regret at being compelled to suspend the

constitutional liberties of Ireland, and declared that, in his opinion,

such a measure was absolutely necessary for the preservation of life and

property in Ireland, for the prevention of the effusion of blood, and

for the stopping of insurrection, proceeded to state the grounds upon

which he rested his proposition. He considered it would be necessary for

him to prove three things:—First that the present state of things in

Ireland was fraught with evil; that it threatened danger; that we were

on the eve of an outbreak, if not timely prevented. Secondly, that there

were means sufficient to produce great evils and dangers unless some

measures should be adopted to counteract them. Thirdly, that the measure

he proposed was the most appropriate for its purpose. He did not propose

to rest his case on any secret information known only to the government;

but he would rest it on facts patent, notorious, and palpable. He then

traced the history of the Irish Confederation, establishing, from the

manifestoes published in the _Felon_ and _Nation_ newspapers, that the

determination of these confederates was to entirely abolish the imperial

government; to take away from the queen all authority in Ireland; to

annihilate all the rights of property; to hold up the hope of plunder to

those who would break their oaths of allegiance and join in rebellion;

and to hold up the threat of depriving all those of their property

who would remain fast to their allegiance, and refuse to assist in the

insurrection. One of these manifestoes, entitled, “The Value of the

Irish Harvest,” set forth that there was growing on the Irish soil

eighty millions of produce, and declared that it would be for the new

Irish Council of Three Hundred to decide how this produce should be

apportioned: thus showing that, by one sweeping confiscation, the

masters of this red republic were prepared to disregard all existing

social rules, and to reduce everything to anarchy. The noble lord then

described the means of effecting their treasonable objects possessed by

the confederates. All the intelligence received by the government proved

that the organisation of the clubs was formidable, that it was rapidly

progressing, and that in many parts of the country the plans of the

associates were ripe for execution. He adduced the accounts obtained

from Tipperary, Meath, Louth, Cork, Waterford, and other counties, as

evidence of the formidable nature of the organisation of the insurgents;

the information received from all quarters, and the opinions obtained

from various persons, being to the one effect, that though persons of

property and the clergy of all denominations were decidedly against an

outbreak, no influence would have any effect in deterring many thousands

of the younger men, especially of the farmer class, from joining in the

proposed insurrection; in fact, nothing was now wanting but the naming

of the day and hour, to be fixed by the leaders, for carrying into

effect this fatal revolution. The noble lord quoted a letter received

that day from Lord Clarendon, in which the lord-lieutenant stated

that the aspect of things was growing worse, and that the increasing

disloyalty, on the part of the Irish people, was most rapid within the

last few days. It might be necessary, he said, to introduce a measure

for the prevention of the organisation of clubs, but the first, the most

direct, the immediate and efficacious remedy for the existing evil would

be the suspension of the _Habeas Corpus_ Act—a power to be given to the

lord-lieutenant of at once securing the persons of those suspected of

high treason. The government might have been justified in demanding

this power at an earlier period, but they delayed it as long as it was

possible. He implored the house, if their conviction was this measure

should pass, to lose no time in arming the lord-lieutenant with the

power requisite. Without it, rebellion could undoubtedly be put down,

but it would be at the expense of blood—at the cost of much misery and

ruin. No man could say what the consequence of withholding these powers

even for a day would be. The government undertook the responsibility,

however odious it might be, of proposing this measure; and they

confidently asked the house to accept their responsibility, mindful of

the blessings they would preserve, and aware of the risks they might

incur.

A petition was presented to the house from the mayor and leading

merchants of Liverpool, expressing gratitude for this measure, and

declaring the apprehensions entertained from the active communications

passing between the disaffected in Ireland and the large Irish

population in Liverpool. In all the great towns of Lancashire sympathy

with Ireland was expressed, and threats were made of firing the

manufactories and the merchants’ stores, to prevent the dispatch of

troops to that country. A Mr. MacManus, a trader in Liverpool, was the

most prominent person among the disaffected in Lancashire. This person

procured a beautiful uniform of green and gold, and proceeded to

Ireland, expecting to appear on the field of action as an extempore

commander. The police were on his track, and he was arrested, with

all his military finery, and committed to prison, without even having

signalised himself in command of a corporal’s guard of pikemen. Mr.

MacManus was an honest man to the cause to which his whole heart was

given. The night before he left for Ireland, he slept at the house of

a merchant in Manchester, named Porteus; that gentleman used all his

influence to dissuade his friend from so mad an exploit, but in vain.

The embryo chief left a considerable store of pistols in the custody of

Mr. Porteus, which were delivered to the chief constable of Manchester.

The vigorous proceedings of the executive, both in England and Ireland,

compelled the Irish leaders, without waiting for the harvest, to

decide upon a course of action. Their first project was to seize the

metropolis. It was garrisoned by about twelve thousand men—a small

force, had there been unanimity and determination on the part of the

Irish people; but the leaders were obliged to fly to the provinces, or

conceal themselves, in order to avoid arrest; and, in fact, they felt

that the fortitude of the clubs could not be relied upon for so bold an

enterprise. After all their preparations and their boasting, the

members of the clubs—their chief reliance—were too few in number, and

inadequately armed for such an exploit.

The project was then adopted for the leaders to repair to those parts of

the country where the clubs were most numerous, and supposed to be most

resolute, and there proceed with their organisation until the government

attempted to arrest them, when the clubs were to rise for their rescue.

It was supposed that the excitement produced by the arrest of the

leaders was necessary to inflame the enthusiasm of the populace. How

little did they know the real feelings of the multitude upon whose

generosity and manhood they thus adventurously threw themselves!

On the 26th, the _Habeas Corpus_ Suspension Act arrived in Dublin, and

warrants were issued for the arrest of all the club leaders. Troops were

moved upon the principal points where it was desirable, for strategetic

and political purposes, to concentrate them. Extraordinary precautions

were taken for the capital. Sir Charles Napier was placed in command

of a powerful steam squadron on the southern coast, Cork and Waterford

being especially menaced by the guns’ of the ships. A proclamation was

issued by the viceroy declaring the clubs illegal, and “commanding all

persons to withdraw from and abandon the same.” On the last day of July,

the privy council held a sitting at Dublin Castle, when it was resolved

to place a number of baronies and counties under the Prevention of Crime

and Outrage Act. By this means opportunity would be most easily taken

to disarm the rebels. The districts put under the stern surveillance of

this law were the counties of Kerry, Wexford, Carlow, Queen’s County,

counties of Galway, Kildare, Wicklow, Westmeath, Louth; seven baronies

of the county Cork, eight baronies in the King’s county, four baronies

in the county of Cavan, two baronies in the county Armagh, and the

barony of Newry, county Down. Proclamations of reward were also offered

for the arrest of Smith O’Brien, £500; for Francis T. Meagher, John B.

Dillon, and Michael Doheny, “each or either,” £300. The ground assigned

for the arrest was “having taken up arms against her majesty.”

The _Hue and Cry_ gave the following descriptions of the personal

appearance, ages, &c, of the leaders:—“William Smith O’Brien, no

occupation, forty-six years of age, six feet in height, sandy hair,

dark eyes, sallow long face, has a sneering smile constantly upon his

countenance, full whiskers, sandy, a little grey. A well set man,

walks erect, and dresses well.—Thomas Francis Meagher, no occupation,

twenty-five years of age, five feet nine inches, dark, nearly black

hair, light blue eyes, pale face, high cheek bones, peculiar expression

about the eyes, cocked nose, no whiskers, well dressed.—John B. Dillon,

barrister, thirty-two years of age, five feet eleven inches in height,

dark hair, dark eyes, thin sallow face, rather thin black whiskers,

dressed respectably, has a bilious look.—Michael Doheny, barrister,

forty years of age, five feet eight inches in height, sandy hair, grey

eyes, coarse, red face, like a man given to drink, high cheek bones,

wants several of his teeth, very vulgar appearance, peculiar coarse,

unpleasant voice, dress respectable, small short red whiskers.—Richard

O’Gorman, junior, barrister, thirty years of age, five feet eleven

inches in height, very dark hair, dark eyes, thin long face, large dark

whiskers, well-made and active, walks upright, dress black frock

coat, tweed trowsers.—Thomas Davy M’Ghee, connected with the _Nation_

newspaper, twenty-three years of age, five feet three inches in height,

black hair, dark face, delicate, pale, thin man; generally dresses in

black shooting coat, plaid trowsers, and thin vest.—Thomas Devin Keily,

sub-editor of the _Felon_ newspaper, twenty-four years of age, five feet

seven inches in height, sandy, coarse hair, grey eyes, round freckled

face, head remarkably broad at the top, broad shoulders, well set,

dresses well.”

The peculiar personal appearance of the men who comprised, with a few

others, those who fomented the insurgent feeling in Ireland is of some

interest for the page of history, especially of contemporaneous

history. The delineation was faithful, and aided very much in rendering

concealment difficult, for it prevented the timid from affording shelter

to the chiefs as soon as they became fugitives. For the masses, this

minute description had an alarming appearance, as if government were

well informed of its enemies.

At last the period arrived for the struggle, if ever it was to be made,

and contemporaneous with the projected outbursts, movements were made

by the Irish residents in Great Britain, the Chartists sympathising

with them. The last week of July was especially an anxious period in

Lancashire. The chief danger was apprehended in Manchester, but the only

occurrence was a demonstration of the clubs, which was made on Tuesday

evening, the 26th:—“The members of the several confederate clubs met in

their respective club-rooms, and proceeded thence, about nine o’clock,

in military order, to a large space of vacant ground adjoining the new

Roman Catholic chapel, on the Cheetham Hill Boad. The number present

was very great. No speech was delivered, but three cheers were given

for ‘the cause,’ immediately after which the assembly dispersed.

The intention of holding the meeting having been made known to the

authorities, steps were taken to prevent any disorder.”

In Liverpool, and on the opposite side of the Mersey at Birkenhead, it

was necessary to resort to very extraordinary precautions. The following

extracts from letters written from these places at that time, describe a

state of considerable apprehension in the public mind, and the necessity

of great exertions to intimidate the Irish population:—“There being

reason to apprehend a movement in Liverpool, to act as a diversion

in favour of the insurgents, should a rising take place in Ireland,

preparations are accordingly being made by our local authorities to

guard against a surprise. From the Liverpool papers of Tuesday we learn

that twenty thousand special constables have been sworn in in the several

wards of that town. Steps have also been taken to organise the corps and

to appoint leaders. A place of rendezvous has been taken in each ward,

and there a guard is placed night and day, to give the alarm, should the

necessity for so doing arise. About one thousand men belonging to

the dock works have been sworn in, and amply provided with formidable

weapons, and all the public buildings in the town are guarded day and

night. There can be no doubt, it is stated, that confederate clubs are

being formed in Liverpool, for the avowed purpose of aiding the people

of Ireland in any insurrectionary movements which may be originated.

The idea is, that by rising in Liverpool, Glasgow, and other places,

whenever a rebellion breaks out in Ireland, troops, instead of being

sent across the water, will be kept at home to put down disturbances,

and thus the forces of the government in Ireland will be considerably

weakened. It is stated that clubs to the number of fifty have been

established in the former town—that they number one hundred men each.

The subscription of each member is 1s. a-week. The money is spent in the

purchase of fire-arms, the general price being about 12s. 6d. a-piece.

Every night for the payment of subscriptions, a raffle takes place

for the muskets, which the members are enabled to procure with the

subscriptions. Several arrests have taken place; and it is hoped that

the bold front displayed by the authorities will have the effect of

preventing the contemplated outbreak. It may be stated here, as a

circumstance showing how much on the alert are those who are endeavouring

to repress the rebellious movements of the disaffected, that information

was received yesterday morning by the authorities, that two sons of

Hyland, the notorious pike-maker of Dublin, arrived from that city in

Liverpool on Monday last. The magistrates of Birkenhead have requested

the inhabitants of that town ‘to act as special constables for six

months.’ A summons, signed by four magistrates—Colonel Gregg, Mr.

W. Hall, Mr. J. W. Harden, and Mr. J. S. Jackson—was served to every

householder, requiring them to attend on Monday at the Town Hall

and take the necessary oath, and by half-past ten every respectable

inhabitant was sworn. Accompanying the summons was a notice, signed by

Messrs. Townsend and Kent, clerics to the magistrates, informing the

parties that ‘by disobedience to the precept a penalty of £5 would be

incurred.’”

On the 27th the London _Times_ contained the following startling

telegraphic communication, which caused the funds to fall, and created

alarm throughout the provinces:—

“The whole of the south of Ireland is in rebellion.

“The station at Thurles is on fire, the rails for several miles torn up,

and the mob intend detaining the engines as they arrive.

“At Clonmel the fighting is dreadful. The people arrived in masses. The

Dublin club leaders are there. The troops were speedily overpowered;

many refused to act.

“The military at Carrick have shown disaffection, and have been driven

back, and their quarters fired.

“At Kilkenny the contest is proceeding, and here the mob are also said

to be successful.

“No news from Waterford or Cork.”

The writer of this History was in Dublin at that time, and remembers the

city being thrown into a state of great excitement by the foregoing

intelligence. The alarm was, however, of short duration, as the citizens

of the Irish capital were better acquainted with the disposition of the

people, and the probability of their sustaining a close contest with the

troops. Besides, there existed confidence in the loyalty of the police,

whether Roman Catholic or Protestant. An incident occurred in Dublin

which greatly strengthened that confidence; it was thus related in the

papers of the day:—“A policeman who attempted to arrest three of the

club-men, who were armed, was stabbed in several places, and now lies

dangerously wounded at Mercer’s hospital. The brave fellow never let go

his grasp of two of the fellows, and they and a third are in custody,

and will, no doubt, be indicted capitally at the next commission. The

unfortunate constable (Byrne) at first, on being submitted to medical

treatment, continued for some time to improve, but fever having set in,

it was deemed advisable for him to make a declaration, and the

magistrate on Thursday repaired to the hospital for that purpose.”

Happily the telegraphic communication was found to be false; it was

managed by persons in the interest of the insurrection, in order to

spread alarm, to magnify the undertaking, and drive many of the Irish

people, both in Ireland and Great Britain, to join the confederacy. But

while the startling tidings of the telegraph were false, other news,

authentic and very alarming, reached London concerning the movements of

the insurrectionary chiefs, and the reception which they met with from

the people. The following piece of correct intelligence influenced

the funds, and produced a considerable degree of anxiety in the public

mind:—

“On Sunday evening, July 23rd, Smith O’Brien and Thomas Francis Meagher

reached Carrick-on-Suir at half-past five in the evening from Kilkenny.

On their route, at Gallan, they addressed thousands, and told them

for the present not to interfere with the police or soldiery, as they

performed their duties, but when the word should be given, not to spare

any who opposed them. Monday being fair-day at Carrick, the town was

filled with country people, and Messrs. Meagher and O’Brien addressed

the people in a more violent and determined strain than heretofore,

stating their determination not to be arrested under the provisions

of the new act. Both gentlemen were armed with pistols, which they are

determined to use in the event of an attempt being made to capture them;

they stated that they had spent their fortunes in the people’s cause,

and would hazard their lives for their service, and would now throw

themselves on the protection of the people. A number of Waterford men,

who were at Carrick doing business at the fair, begged of Mr. Meagher to

come to Waterford, alleging that his fellow-citizens would protect him

from arrest; but Mr. Smith O’Brien would not listen to that proposal,

and brought off Mr. Meagher to Cashel, or, as others said, to Tipperary.

Whilst this scene was enacting, two hundred of the 3rd Buffs marched in

from the camp at Besborough, and took up their position in the barracks.

Few of either party slept during the night; the Young Irelanders,

however, did not do anything to disturb the peace of the town, but

business is totally at a stand-still, and all in and about the town are

resting on their arms, waiting for the battle hour. In Waterford the

clubs are described as being well organised, and armed, and ready to

act when called upon. The people seemed reckless from poverty; groups

of workingmen might be seen in the streets by day and night, discussing

politics and retailing the news of the hour. The queen’s forces

in Waterford were about one thousand strong. The _Rhadamanthus_

steam-vessel was in the river, and it was proposed to form two camps

on the hills which command the town. In the country the peasants were

arming; at Coolnamuck so much timber had been cut down for pike-handles,

that the clubs would not allow any more to be taken thence, in

compassion to the proprietor. At Mount Bolton the owner had it cut and

left outside the wood for the people, to prevent further waste; at Lord

Waterford’s demesne more ash-trees had been cut down, and the useless

parts left behind. All the anvils in the country ring with pike-forging,

and every weapon is put in order for the fray.”

The effect upon the government, the legislature, and the country, of

the electric telegraph and other communications, false and true, may be

judged of by the readers of these pages from the following speech by

Sir George Grey, the home-secretary in the House of Commons, on Thursday

evening, the 27th. Sir George had been questioned on this subject, and

thus replied:—

“I have great satisfaction in stating that I have every reason to

believe that the alarming accounts which have appeared in the later

editions of the morning papers, and which were transmitted this

morning from Liverpool by the electric telegraph, to the effect that

insurrection had actually broken out in the south of Ireland, are

totally destitute of truth. Sir, on receiving the copy of the paper

containing the intelligence said to have been sent from Liverpool

this morning, I dispatched a letter to the honourable member for

Stoke-upon-Trent, to induce him to forward a communication by the

electric telegraph to the mayor of Liverpool, requesting to know from

him what information had been received in Liverpool from Ireland, and

I received a despatch from that functionary, by the electric telegraph,

stating that the information published this morning was accompanied from

Ireland by a letter, dated Dublin, Wednesday evening, which represented

that Mr. Conway, of the _Dublin Evening Post_, had received from the

Castle a most dreadful rumour, which he was about to publish in a second

edition of that paper. The writer then went on to say, that he took

advantage of our queen’s messenger going off at the moment for London,

to forward the intelligence in a parcel to Messrs. Willmer and Smith,

of Liverpool, who, no doubt, would transmit it to London by the electric

telegraph. The mayor of Liverpool, about an hour after this, further

communicated to me that he is perfectly satisfied that the Irish

intelligence, contained in the paragraph published in the morning

papers, is utterly untrue, unless government have received a despatch

from Lord Clarendon, confirming it. He also states that a queen’s

messenger certainly had arrived from Dublin by a steamer this morning,

and he left Liverpool by the half-past six express train. Now, it is

perfectly true that a queen’s messenger was dispatched from Dublin last

night. I had sent him over with a despatch, stating that the bill for

suspending the Habeas Corpus Act had received the royal assent, and he

left Dublin with a despatch from the lord-lieutenant yesterday evening,

and arrived in London by the express train this morning by half-past one

o’clock. This despatch certainly describes the state of the country in

the neighbourhood of Clonmel, Carrick, and Thurles to be dreadful, but

in relation to any actual outbreak it is perfectly silent, and makes no

mention whatever. I have seen the messenger, and he states that he

left Dublin at three o’clock yesterday afternoon, but he assures me he

brought no parcel or letter for any party whatever. The messenger is

stated to have come over by a special steamer from Kingston yesterday,

that he started at three o’clock by the steamer which was reported to

have had the queen’s messenger on board. Now, no queen’s messenger

came over in that steamer; but I have received letters from the

lord-lieutenant, written after the departure of the queen’s messenger

yesterday afternoon, which contain no allusion to those frightful

accounts. I am also assured by an hon. member that the hon. gentleman

the member for Totness left Dublin yesterday by the steamer which leaves

at seven o’clock, and that everything was tranquil when he left—that no

rumour of the kind had reached his ears when the steamer left the port.

I will only add that I certainly shall endeavour to trace the wilful

originator of the report. I have now given all the information in my

power, and it enables me to concur with the honourable gentleman that

these reports were fabricated for a wicked and malicious purpose. With

respect to the state of Ireland, I may only add, that by the letters

which I have received from the lord-lieutenant, it appears that Sir

Charles Napier had arrived at Cork with his squadron, with an able and

ample body of troops, who, I am sure, are always ready to discharge

their duty with unflinching bravery, and who are, therefore, entirely

free from the imputations which the reports circulated this day have

unfoundedly cast upon them.”

Lord Lansdowne was also questioned in the House of Lords, and made

a similar reply, when the Marquis of Londonderry, in a very spirited

maimer and amidst the applause of the house, inculpated the government

for allowing the agitation in Ireland to rise to such a head, arguing

that had the seditious writing, speaking, and acting of the confederates

been timely prevented, the law would have been vindicated, public peace

and order undisturbed, and many thousands of poor deluded men would have

been saved from wandering after the _ignis fatuus_ of the Confederation.

This philippic was well deserved by the government; had they really

desired that the pear should ripen before they plucked it, they could

not have proceeded otherwise than they did. The insurrection might have

been crushed in the bud had the government exercised proper wisdom

and firmness. It will scarcely be believed that during these exciting

transactions, any member of the legislature would have the folly to

introduce measures for repealing the union or holding parliaments in

Ireland. There were, however, such persons: Fergus O’Connor and John

O’Connell repeatedly advocated repeal, and Mr. R. M. Fox gave notice

of a motion for holding a parliament in Ireland, which, on the 26th,

he withdrew, amidst the derisive laughter of the house, the honourable

member assuring it that he deprecated the union of repealers and

republicans in Ireland. The government and the legislature were very

much strengthened by the support which the executive received from

Sir Robert Peel. In one of the debates upon the political condition of

Ireland during that memorable week, Sir Robert, with great warmth and

energy of manner, said, “He was prepared to give his unqualified support

to the government. He trusted in the veracity of the ministers when

they stated that the conspiracy was wide-spread and imminent, and he

was ready to take his part with the crown against those mock kings of

Munster of whom they had heard, and against those conspirators who

were working to substitute for the mild sway of her majesty a cruel

and sanguinary despotism. There was now no excuse for further delay in

coping with the Irish traitors, and he for one was prepared to consent

to the suspension of all the forms of the house in order to the speedy

passing of this bill; and if additional powers should be required, he

trusted the government would not hesitate a moment in bringing them

forward. Having referred to the results of revolution on the continent,

the right honourable gentleman concluded by reiterating his conviction

that the throne of this country was firmer than ever fixed in the hearts

and affections of the people.”

The Roman Catholic clergy were never favourable to the Young Ireland

party. They desired the repeal of the union, and even the entire

separation of the two countries; but they had no confidence in the

ringleaders of the Confederation, because, in their opinion, some

were sceptics, and some heretics, and all men of a judgment below the

undertaking: of this a considerable body of the clergymen of the Romish

church in Ireland were well competent to judge; they knew the feelings

of the people better than any other class of men did, and in their own

ranks were numbered a great many men of high attainments and superior

intellect. Some of the very old clergymen in the south, who remembered

the great insurrection at the close of the last century, and the

sufferings which the people experienced, spared no efforts of persuasion

and moral influence to prevent a like occurrence, while some of the

younger and more active clergymen literally horsewhipped the people to

their homes who had turned out. But for these efforts of the priests,

there would have been an insurrection of some force; and had the priests

given it active encouragement, a wide-spread and sanguinary rebellion

must have ensued. Lord Glengall declared in his place in the House of

Lords that the country was much indebted to the Roman Catholic priests

for the preservation of the peace. The general discontent of the people,

and their disloyalty to the throne, had been, however, much perverted by

the bigoted spirit and inflammatory harangues of their teachers.

After vain attempts to rouse the people to turn out, Mr. O’Brien, with

persistence and courage worthy of any cause, placed himself at the

head of a mob of a few hundred peasants and labourers, and without any

well-poised aim or determinate plan of action, proclaimed open revolt

against the queen’s government. On the 29th of July he appeared as the

leader of this hopeless corps, to make war against the mightiest empire

in the world. He was, however, compelled to resort to some decisive

measure by the proclamations of reward offered for his arrest, and by

the efforts which were put forth immediately upon the proclamations

having been posted up. Kilkenny was one of the principal _foci_ of the

strength of the confederates, and O’Brien seems to have relied mainly

upon the men of Kilkenny and Tipperary.

While O’Brien, Meagher, and a few others were mustering their poor

forces, others of the leaders appear not to have taken very much

precaution against arrest. Charles Gavan Duffy was taken early in July,

so was Doheny, and several more of the most boisterous of the club

chiefs. Mr. Blake, the county inspector of constabulary in Kilkenny,

arriving at Harley Park, discovered that O’Brien and his forces were

quartered among the colliers of Boulagh, within a mile of Ballingarry.

He immediately sent to Callan, where the constabulary of the district

had been concentrated for some days, to avoid being attacked in small

parties by the populace. Nearly sixty men left Callan, under Inspector

Trant. Mr. Blake sent to Kilkenny, and other military positions, for

troops, which were dispatched so as to surround the neighbourhood where

the confederates had mustered. The country people soon communicated to

Smith O’Brien and his followers these facts; and Mr. O’Brien thereupon

reviewed his force, consisting of colliers and peasants, variously

armed. They all promised faithfully to stand by him. While thus engaged,

Inspector Trant and his police detachment were seen approaching from

Ballingarry, and the insurgents, numbering twenty to one, dashed forward

to meet them. The police perceiving the disparity of force, made for a

farm-house known as the widow M’Cormack’s. The mob broke their array,

and rushed also to seize the house; but the police were first there,

and barricaded it with the furniture and such other materials as were

at hand. Mr. O’Brien parleyed with the police, shaking hands with them

through the lower windows, and used every persuasion to induce them to

deliver up their arms, which of course they refused. The peasants and

colliers then directed showers of stones against the doors and windows,

and also opened a fire of small arms from an outhouse. This was replied

to by the police, who killed several and wounded many others. O’Brien

was perfectly incompetent to give any useful direction, and his men

began to retire before the sharp practice from the fire-arms of the

police, when at last the latter, advancing under cover of some low walls

and haystacks, drove the crowd from the neighbourhood, O’Brien escaping

on the inspector’s horse. Neither skill nor courage was shown by the

assailants. O’Brien’s conduct has been criticised with much severity on

this occasion; but it is false to represent him as having acted without

spirit; he, of course, in giving directions to his party, placed himself

where he might best do so, and avoid the aim of the police; but if he or

his followers had been fit for the work they had undertaken, they would

either have stormed the house or retired in order; and, possessing so

intimate a knowledge of the country, they might have evaded the armed

parties in pursuit, until, with increased numbers, they had fallen upon

some place of arms which they would have made their _point d’appui_. As

it was, their proceedings were ludicrous, and afforded subject-matter

for _Punch_, which contained a caricature representing an army of Irish

rebels scared by the shadow of a policeman. There can be no doubt that

O’Brien would have dared anything which a sense of duty and honour

dictated, and which opportunity afforded; but to lead an insurrection

was a task utterly beyond his capacity. It is difficult to believe that

the more crafty of the confederates were sincere in the language they

employed in inciting him to the preposterous acts in which he took part.

For instance, a letter written by Charles Gavan Duffy was found in Smith

O’Brien’s portmanteau after his arrest, which contained the following

absurdly eulogistic incitement to place himself in the foreground of the

revolt:—

“There is no halfway house for you. You will be the head of the

movement, loyally obeyed, and the revolution will be conducted with

order and clemency; or the mere anarchists will prevail with the

people, and our revolution will be a bloody chaos. You have at present

Lafayette’s place, so graphically painted by Lamartine; and I believe

have fallen into Lafayette’s error—that of not using it to all its

extent, and in all its resources. I am perfectly well aware that you

don’t desire to lead or influence others; but I believe, with Lamartine,

that that feeling which is a high personal and civic virtue, is a vice

in revolutions. If I were Smith O’Brien, I would strike out in my

own mind, or with such counsel as I valued, a definite course for the

revolution, and labour incessantly to develop it in that way.”

Had Mr. Duffy desired to precipitate a weak man—the leader of other

weak men—into certain ruin, these extracts, and the letter from which

they are taken, would be perfectly consistent and intelligible. Had

Mr. Duffy himself been quite sure of escape, by some means, from the

consequences of insurrection, and had he desired to aid the government

in bringing the disaffection existing into actual maturity, such a mode

of addressing the proud, brave, and honest man to whom he wrote, would

be rational; but with the clergy and gentry of all sects in Ireland

adverse to any such movement, and with a fourth at least of all

the other classes in Ireland, except the mere peasantry, equally

hostile,—while many of those favourable to the Confederation were

afraid to move hand or foot in its behalf,—such a letter, written by

a man who ought from his position to have known Ireland well, is one of

the most extraordinary episodes in the history of the eminently foolish

transactions of the party.

After the wild affair at Boulagh Common, Smith O’Brien became a

fugitive. There was no more preparedness or spirit to rise in his behalf

than there had been for Mitchell; and indeed so destitute were leaders

and people of any military knowledge or resources, that in any effort

against the soldiery, the insurgents would have gone forth as sheep to

the slaughter.

On the 5th of August O’Brien was arrested at the Thurles railway

station, having taken a ticket at that place for Limerick. He was

recognised by Hulme, a guard on the Great Southern and Western Railway,

and the police and military were promptly summoned to Hulme’s aid.

General M’Donald treated the prisoner with all possible courtesy, and

sent him to Dublin. The courtesies of the gallant general were rather

disdainfully repelled. Mr. O’Brien requested his portmanteau to be sent

for, as it contained various necessaries. This request was granted, but

all papers which it contained were abstracted by the Irish secretary,

and several documents and letters from the other leaders, of a

treasonable nature, were discovered. Nine years after this event,

when Mr. O’Brien as a pardoned convict was permitted to return to his

country, he had the puerility to complain of this act in a letter to the

public. The man who could fail to see the justice and propriety of

such a step on the part of the government, was so far beyond reason on

political matters, that all astonishment at the impracticability of his

insurrectionary attempts during the autumn of 1848 ceases.

On the 28th of September Mr. O’Brien was put upon his trial at Clonmel.

The trial lasted until the 9th of October, when a verdict of guilty was

returned, and a strong recommendation for mercy, the jury stating that,

on many grounds, they were of opinion that Mr. O’Brien’s life should

be spared. Probably every impartial person in the kingdom snared their

views. The judges, however, recorded sentence of death.

The trials of MacManus, Meagher, and O’Donoghue resulted in verdicts of

guilty, and sentence of death was recorded in each case. When they were

brought to the court for that purpose, and asked what they had to say

why sentence of death should not be passed upon them, Mr. MacManus

delivered a manly and sensible speech, in a tone and with a manner

so frank and direct, as to produce a strong impression in his favour

throughout the court, as it did throughout the country, by all who

perused it. The speech of Meagher was an eloquent failure; it appeared

as if he had kept the noble and unfortunate Emmet before him as a model.

He addressed the judges as if he were about to expiate his error upon

the scaffold, whereas he knew, as all Ireland knew, that it was not the

intention of government to put the sentence of the law in force. This

circumstance gave an air of display and bombast to a speech that, if the

realities of the speaker’s position had corresponded with it, would have

been thrillingly effective.

Soon after these events, a number of other participants in the revolt

were put upon their trial for their connection with it, or for seditious

writings. The following notices, under the head of “State Trials,”

appeared in the papers of the day, and will sufficiently exemplify the

general character of such proceedings and their results:—“The trial

of Mr. Williams was closed on Friday se’nnight, by the acquittal of the

accused. It appeared that he could not be fixed upon as the author of

any of the articles indicted. Those which were most violent had been

published during a period when he was confined to his room, and could

not, and did not, take part in conducting the _Tribune_. Mr. O’Doherty,

the part-proprietor of the _Tribune_, less fortunate than Mr. Williams,

has been sentenced to ten years’ transportation. In Dublin the sentence

on Mr. O’Doherty was not expected to be so severe. He is a young man,

not more than twenty-two, and his high character for humanity, and the

recommendation of the jury, induced the public to believe that, though

the sentence would be severe, the punishment would not so nearly

approach that of those who preceded him in his career. With his

sentence, and the discharge of Mr. Williams, the commission terminated.

Mr. Duffy still remains in the custody of the gaoler of Newgate.”

The sentence of death upon the prisoners at Clonmel was afterwards

commuted to transportation, and this was carried into effect. The people

of Ireland felt that the crown had acted with justice and clemency; and

all regretted the necessity of visiting with so severe a punishment men

whose conduct arose from fervent patriotism and honest purpose.

The case of Charles Gavan Duffy was the most remarkable of any which was

brought before the Irish law courts in connection with the insurrection.

Certainly, the charges brought against him were as clearly proved as

were those against any other of the party leaders. Yet the trial was so

managed, and juries were found so obstinate, that notwithstanding the

appearance of the most pertinacious prosecution on the part of the

crown, a conviction could not be obtained. The following extract from a

journal published Saturday, the 23rd of December, exhibits the general

character of the proceedings against Mr. Duffy, and the questions which

were raised to postpone his trial and embarrass the prosecution:—

“On Friday (se’nnight) the important trial of Mr. Duffy commenced,

before Baron Richards and Mr. Justice Perrin, and the first two days

were consumed in arguments for and against the quashing of a former

indictment found in the county of Dublin against the prisoner. On Monday

the court decided the point. The motion of the prisoner’s counsel was,

that Mr. Duffy be not called upon to plead to the indictment found

against him by the grand jury of the county of the city of Dublin,

because another and a similar indictment was put in against him in the

county of Dublin; and as it would be an injustice to him to be called

upon to plead to one indictment during the subsistence of another in

which the crime laid was the same.

“The judgment of the court was, that the whole of the cases previous to

the passing of the act 6 Geo. IV., cap. 51, were against the case made

on behalf of Mr. Duffy, and that there was nothing in the act to take it

out of the operation of those decisions. The act did not directly apply

to the present case at all, and the court could not imply anything to

disqualify the crown from taking whatever course it should think fit to

take in furtherance of the administration of justice.

“The counsel for the prisoner, however, had not stated all their

objections; and on Mr. Duffy being called on to plead to the indictment,

his counsel handed in on his behalf a plea of abatement, on the ground

of the disqualification (by reason of non-residence, or not being

householders) of two of the grand jury who found the bill. The counsel

for the crown retired, and, ultimately, the further consideration of the

plea was postponed to the next day.

“The court intimated that in the decision they had come to on the motion

before them in the morning, they by no means desired or intended to

leave Mr. Duffy open to the indictment found in the county along with

that found in the city. Before he pleaded to the latter, the crown

should declare what course would be adopted—whether a _nolle prosequi_

should not be entered on the other.

“Application having been made to rescind the order of the court made on

Saturday, prohibiting the proceedings at the trial to be published in

the newspapers until the trial had been concluded, the court refused to

accede to the request.

“On Tuesday, the arguments on the plea, handed in on the previous day,

engaged the court the whole day. Their lordships took time to consult

the various authorities cited, before giving judgment. Before rising,

the court refused to hear Mr. Duffy, who applied to have the order

against the publication of the proceedings at the trial in the

newspapers rescinded, and directed the application to be made by

counsel; stating at the same time that the order must remain in force,

unless it could be shown that the prisoner would sustain damage from the

non-publication.

“On Thursday morning, Mr. Holmes inquired at what time their lordships

would deliver judgment as to the validity of the plea in abatement?

Mr. Justice Perrin replied that they hoped to be able to give judgment

to-morrow (Friday). It was clear that, no matter what that decision might

be, the trial could not be commenced until after Christmas.”

After many and intricate legal questions had been disposed of, Mr. Duffy

finally escaped the meshes of the law, and resumed his avocations

as proprietor and editor of the _Nation_ newspaper, which journal he

conducted for a time with more moderation, although the government still

allowed him an extraordinary degree of license.

_Irish Agitation fob Rotatory Parliaments_.—The extinction of the Irish

insurrection did not suppress agitation. The moral-force Repealers kept

up a certain amount of clamour: said much, but not to any purpose, and

did nothing.

A considerable number of noblemen and gentlemen, more remarkable for

their high position and character than for intellectual power, formed

an association for the purpose of promoting what they called Rotatory

Parliaments, which would lead to the frequent holding of legislative

sessions in Dublin. On the 18th of December, a meeting for this purpose

was held in Dublin, at the Northumberland Buildings, Lord William

Fitzgerald in the chair. The meeting was but thinly attended, probably

on account of the extreme wet which prevailed all day. Mr. Sharman

Crawford proposed the first resolution—“That the present mode of

legislation for Ireland is at the root of all the difficulties under

which this country labours.” Mr. Crawford referred all the evils under

which Ireland laboured to English misrule and Irish landlords. Dr.

Carmichael moved the next resolution:—“That amongst the many striking

instances of the neglect which Irish affairs, even of vital importance,

usually meet with in the imperial parliament, may be stated the failure

of all attempts by the Irish members to improve the laws relating to

medical charities.” The next resolution was as follows:—“That the

present mode of legislation for Ireland tends to alienate the affections

of her people; to prevent their industry and self-reliance, and would be

impolitic even in a recently conquered country.” The fourth resolution

stated:—“That the waste lands of Ireland offer a vast field of

remunerative employment for her unemployed population, while the many

abortive attempts that have been made to legislate on the subject in the

imperial parliament sitting at Westminster, furnishes another argument

for a meeting of the imperial parliament in Dublin.” All the resolutions

were passed unanimously. Lord Massarene was then called to the chair;

and a vote of thanks having been passed to Lord W. Fitzgerald, the

meeting separated.

This agitation, which enlisted the attention of so many respectable

persons, was never supported by the people. Had the priests, and

their lay agents, and organs of the press favoured it, it would in all

probability have attained to some degree of importance. The people began

to lose faith in all associations, and the programme of this was not

sufficiently _piquant_ for the political taste of the violent and

bigoted sections of the community. The association met with some favour

in high quarters in England, but not with so much as its promoters

believed would be the case.

_Religious Feuds.—Conflicts between Landlords and Tenants_.—The social

and agrarian warfare continued when the political fires were quenched.

Men were waylaid and murdered on account of their religious opinions

being too prominently expressed for the bigotry of their assassins, and

the utmost religious animosity raged through the land. Landlords who

were active in proselytising, or who in any way showed religious zeal or

earnestness, were subject to insult and injury in every form.

The conduct of the owners of land was not generally forbearing and

praiseworthy, while the laws were all designed to operate in their

favour. The tenantry were not more just than the owners of the soil;

and altogether the relations of landlord and tenant in Ireland were most

unhappy. A letter written from Ireland at the close of the year, thus

depicted the state of affairs:—“The evictions and house-levelling do

not cease in activity. At Ardnacrusha, a little hamlet about two miles

from Limerick, twenty houses were levelled on Monday. Thousands of the

fertile acres of Tipperary are waste, and these are increased each day

by further evictions. The case is the same in Limerick and in Clare. We

find daily announcements of large farmers running away, and sweeping

all with them. They grow alarmed lest their turn may soon come, and they

evade the fate of others by leaving the land naked on the landlord’s

hands. A few days since, in a district of Clare, while the farmers were

at market with their produce, the landlord’s agents descended on the

farmers, with a large body of armed followers, and without legal process

or authority of any kind, it is said, swept away all the stock on the

land to satisfy the landlord’s claims. On the other side of the picture

we find that a tenant, holding ninety-seven acres of land, had sold

off everything, and, with the whole of the produce in his pocket, had

reached Limerick, to emigrate, when he was arrested at the suit of his

landlord and other creditors.”

_Advent of Cholera_.—Many as were the social and political evils of

Ireland during the sorrowful year of 1848, there was a providential

visitation which added to her miseries. Cholera made its appearance in

several places during the autumn; the cases were not very numerous, but

were in general fatal, and excited great apprehension as to the progress

of the pestilence, which, in the following year committed fearful

ravages. It was observable that the famine fever disappeared as this

still more deadly enemy approached.

Such was the history of Ireland during one of the most eventful years in

the annals of the world. She had passed through a terrible ordeal,

and although not wholly uninstructed by it, yet any lessons it was

calculated to teach were reluctantly received and imperfectly learned.

ENGLAND.

_Political Events_.—On former pages we sketched the violent political

convulsions of continental Europe, and the relation which England bore

to the changes which so rapidly took place: within her own confines

there was much uneasiness, and some danger, but law and order triumphed

over their adversaries.

The chartist confederacy put forth all its force, and its leader, Fergus

O’Connor, assumed unwonted boldness, both in and out of parliament.

Meetings were held in various parts of the country, in which the

government was denounced for not employing the people; and the virtue

(as it appeared to these assemblages) of appropriating the property of

the landholders and manufacturers, was loudly insisted upon.