discussion, which quickly became only second to that of
parliamentary reform. In transplanting the parliament of
College Green to St. Stephen's, Pitt had transplanted the
questions which were there debated; and, of these, none had
been more important than the demand of the Catholics to be
admitted to the common rights of citizens. Pitt, whose Toryism
was rather the imperiousness of a haughty master, than the
cautious cowardice of the miser of power, thought their
complaints were just. In his private negotiations with the
Irish popular leaders he probably promised that emancipation
should be the sequel to the union. In his place in parliament
he certainly gave an intimation, which from the mouth of a
minister could receive no second interpretation. Pitt was not
a minister who governed by petty stratagems, by ambiguous
professions, and by skilful shuffles: he was at least an
honourable enemy. He prepared to fulfil the pledge he had
given, and to admit the Catholics within the pale of the
constitution. It had been better for the character of George
III. had he imitated the candour of his minister; had he told
him that he had made a promise he would not be suffered to
fulfil, before he had obtained the advantage to gain which
that promise had been made. When Pitt proposed Catholic
emancipation as one of the topics of the king's speech, for
the session of 1801, the royal negative was at once
interposed, and when Dundas persisted in his attempt to
overcome his master's objections, the king abruptly terminated
the conference, saying, 'Scotch metaphysics cannot destroy
religious obligations.' Pitt immediately tendered his
resignation. ... All that was brilliant in Toryism passed from
the cabinet with the late minister: When Pitt and Canning were
withdrawn, with their satellites, nothing remained of the Tory
party but the mere courtiers who lived upon the favour of the
king, and the insipid lees of the party; men who voted upon
every subject in accordance with their one ruling idea--the
certain ruin, which must follow the first particle of
innovation. Yet from these relicts the king was obliged to
form a new cabinet, for application to the Whigs was out of
the question. These were more strenuous for emancipation than
Pitt. Henry Addington, Pitt's speaker of the house of commons,
was the person upon whom the king's choice fell; and he
succeeded, with the assistance of the late premier, in filling
up the offices at his disposal. ... The peace of Amiens was
the great work of this feeble administration [see FRANCE: A.
D. 1801-1802], and formed a severe commentary upon the
boastings of the Tories. 'Unless the monarchy of France be
restored,' Pitt had said, eight years before, 'the monarchy of
England is lost forever.' Eight years of warfare had succeeded,
yet the monarchy of France was not restored, and the crusade
was stayed. England had surrendered her conquests, France
retained hers; the landmarks of Europe had been in some degree
restored; England, alone, remained burdened with the enduring
consequences of the ruinous and useless strife. The peace was
approved by the Whigs, who were glad of any respite from such
a war, and by Pitt, who gave his support to the Addington
administration. But he could not control his adherents. ... As
the instability of the peace grew manifest, the incompetency
of the administration became generally acknowledged: with Pitt
sometimes chiding, Windham and Canning, and Lords Spencer and
Grenville continually attacking, and Fox and the Whigs only
refraining from violent opposition from a knowledge that if
Addington went out Pitt would be his successor, the conduct of
the government was by no means an easy or a grateful task to a
man destitute of commanding talents. When to these
parliamentary difficulties were added a recommencement of the
war, and a popular panic at Bonaparte's threatened invasion,
Addington's embarrassments became inextricable. He had
performed the business which Pitt had assigned him; he had
made an experimental peace, and had saved Pitt's honour with
the Roman Catholics. The object of his appointment he had
unconsciously completed, and no sooner did his predecessor
manifest an intention of returning to office, than the
ministerial majorities began to diminish, and Addington found
himself without support. On the 12th of April it was announced
that Mr. Addington had resigned, and Pitt appeared to resume
his station as a matter of course. During his temporary
retirement, Pitt had, however, lost one section of his
supporters. The Grenville party and the Whigs had gradually
approximated, and the former now refused to come into the new
arrangements unless Fox was introduced into the cabinet. To
this Pitt offered no objection, but the king was firm--or
obstinate. ... In the following year, Addington himself, now
created Viscount Sidmouth, returned to office with the
subordinate appointment of president of the council. The
conflagration had again spread through Europe. ... Pitt had
the mortification to see his grand continental coalition, the
produce of such immense expense and the object of such hope,
shattered in one campaign. At home, Lord Melville, his most
faithful political supporter, was attacked by a charge from
which he could not defend him, and underwent the impeachment
of the commons for malpractices in his office as treasurer of
the navy. Lord Sidmouth and several others seceded from the
cabinet, and Pitt, broken in health, and dispirited by
reverses, had lost much of his wonted energy. Thus passed away
the year 1805. On the 23d of January, 1806, Pitt expired. ...
The death of Pitt was the dissolution of his administration.
The Tory party was scattered in divisions and subdivisions
innumerable. Canning now recognised no political leader, but
retained his old contempt for Sidmouth and his friends, and
his hostility to the Grenvilles for their breach with Pitt.
Castlereagh, William Dundas, Hawkesbury, or Barham, although
sufficiently effective when Pitt was present to direct and to
defend, would have made a hopeless figure without him in face
of such an opposition as the house of commons now afforded.
{946}
The administration, which was ironically designated by its
opponents as 'All the Talents,' succeeded. Lord Grenville was
first lord of the treasury. Fox chose the office of secretary
for foreign affairs with the hope of putting an end to the
war. Windham was colonial secretary. Earl Spencer had the
seals of the home department. Erskine was lord chancellor. Mr.
Grey was first lord of the admiralty. Sheridan, treasurer of
the navy. Lord Sidmouth was privy seal. Lord Henry Petty, who,
although now only in his 26th year, had already acquired
considerable distinction as an eloquent Whig speaker, was
advanced to the post of chancellor of the exchequer, the
vacant chair of Pitt. Such were the men who now assumed the
reins under circumstances of unparalleled difficulty."
_G. W. Cooke,
History of Party,
volume 3, chapters 17-18._
ALSO IN:
_Earl Stanhope (Lord Mahon),
Life of Pitt,
chapters 29-44 (volumes 3-4)._
_A. G. Stapleton,
George Canning and His Times,
chapters 6-8._
_Earl Russell,
Life and Times of Charles James Fox,
chapters 58-69 (volume 3)._
_G. Pellew,
Life and Correspondence of Henry Addington,
1st Viscount Sidmouth,
chapters 10-26 (volumes 1-2)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1802 (OCTOBER).
Protest against Bonaparte's interference in Switzerland.
His extraordinary reply.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1803.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1802-1803.
Bonaparte's complaints and demands.
The Peltier trial.
The First Consul's rage.
Declaration of war.
Napoleon's seizure of Hanover.
Cruel detention of all English people in France, Italy,
Switzerland and the Netherlands.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1802-1803.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1804-1809.
Difficulties with the United States.
Questions of neutral rights.
Right of Search and Impressment.
The American Embargo.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1809, and 1808.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1805 (JANUARY-APRIL).
Third Coalition against France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (JANUARY-APRIL).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1805.
Napoleon's threatened invasion.
Nelson's long pursuit of the French fleet.
His victory and death at Trafalgar.
The crushing of the Coalition at Austerlitz.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (MARCH-DECEMBER).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Final seizure of Cape Colony from the Dutch.
See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1486-1806.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Cession of Hanover to Prussia by Napoleon.
War with Prussia.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-AUGUST).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Attempted reinstatement of the dethroned King of Naples.
The Battle of Maida.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1805-1806 (DECEMBER-SEPTEMBER).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806.
Death of Pitt.
Peace negotiations with Napoleon.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-OCTOBER).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1807.
Expedition against Buenos Ayres.
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1806-1820.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1810.
Commercial warfare with Napoleon.
Orders in Council.
Berlin and Milan Decrees.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1806-1810.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1812.
The ministry of "All the Talents."
Abolition of the Slave Trade.
The Portland and the Perceval ministries.
Confirmed insanity of George III.
Beginning of the regency of the Prince of Wales.
Assassination of Mr. Perceval.
The "Ministry of All the Talents" is "remarkable solely for
its mistakes, and is to be remembered chiefly for the death of
Fox [September 13, 1806] and the abolition of the slave-trade.
Fox was now destined at the close of his career to be
disillusioned with regard to Napoleon. He at last thoroughly
realized the insincerity of his hero. ... The second great
object of Fox's life he succeeded in attaining before his
death;--this was the abolition of the slave-trade. For more
than thirty years the question had been before the country,
and a vigorous agitation had been conducted by Clarkson,
Wilberforce, and Fox. . Pitt was quite at one with them on
this question, and had brought forward motions on the subject.
The House of Lords, however, rejected all measures of this
description during the Revolutionary War, under the influence
of the Anti-Jacobin feeling. It was reserved for Fox to
succeed in carrying a Bill inflicting heavy pecuniary
punishments on the traffic in slaves. And yet this
measure--the sole fruit of Fox's statesmanship--was wholly
inadequate; nor was it till the slave-trade was made felony in
1811 that its final extinction was secured. The remaining acts
of the Ministry were blunders. ... Their financial system was
a failure. They carried on the war so as to alienate their
allies and to cover themselves with humiliation. Finally, they
insisted on bringing forward a measure for the relief of the
Catholics, though there was not the slightest hope of carrying
it, and it could only cause a disruption of the Government.
... The king and the Pittites were determined to oppose it,
and so the Ministry agreed to drop the question under protest.
George insisted on their withdrawing the protest, and as this was
refused he dismissed them. ... This then was the final triumph
of George III. He had successfully dismissed this Ministry; he
had maintained the principle that every Ministry is bound to
withdraw any project displeasing to the king. These principles
were totally inconsistent with Constitutional Government, and
they indirectly precipitated Reform by rendering it absolutely
necessary in order to curb the royal influence. ... The Duke
of Portland's sole claims to form a Ministry were his high
rank, and the length of his previous services. His talents
were never very great, and they were weakened by age and
disease. The real leader was Mr. Perceval, the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, a dexterous debater and a patriotic statesman.
This Government, being formed on the closest Tory basis and on
the king's influence, was pledged to pursue a retrograde
policy and to oppose all measures of Reform. The one really
high-minded statesman in the Cabinet was Canning, the Foreign
Minister. His advanced views, however, continually brought him
into collision with Castlereagh, the War Minister, a man of
much inferior talents and the narrowest Tory views. Quarrels
inevitably arose between the two, and there was no real Prime
Minister to hold them strongly under control. ... At last the
ill-feeling ended in a duel, which was followed by a mutual
resignation on the ground that neither could serve with the
other. This was followed by the resignation of Portland, who
felt himself wholly unequal to the arduous task of managing
the Ministry any longer.
{947}
The leadership now devolved on Perceval, who found himself in
an apparently hopeless condition. His only supporters were
Lords Liverpool, Eldon, Palmerston, and Wellesley. Neither
Canning, Castlereagh, nor Sidmouth (Addington) would join him.
The miserable expedition to Walcheren had just ended in
ignominy. The campaign in the Peninsula was regarded as a
chimerical enterprise, got up mainly for the benefit of a Tory
commander. Certainly the most capable man in the Cabinet was
Lord Wellesley, the Foreign Minister, but he was continually
thwarted by the incapable men he had to deal with. However, as
long as he remained at the Foreign Office, he supported the
Peninsular War with vigour, and enabled his brother to carry
out more effectually his plans with regard to the defence of
Portugal. In November, 1810, the king was again seized with
insanity, nor did he ever recover the use of his faculties
during the rest of his life. The Ministry determined to bring
forward Pitt's old Bill of 1788 in a somewhat more modified
form, February, 1811. The Prince of Wales requested Grey and
Grenville to criticize this, but, regarding their reply as
lukewarm, he began to entertain an ill-will for them. At this
moment the judicious flattery of his family brought him over
from the Whigs, and he decided to continue Perceval in office.
Wellesley, however, took the opportunity to resign, and was
succeeded by Castlereagh, February, 1812. In May Perceval was
assassinated by Mr. Bellingham, a lunatic, and his Ministry at
once fell to pieces."
_B. C. Skottowe,
Our Hanoverian Kings,
book 10, chapter 3._
ALSO IN:
_F. H. Hill,
George Canning,
chapters 13-17._
_S. Walpole,
Life of Spencer Perceval,
volume 2._
_R. I. and S. Wilberforce,
Life of William Wilberforce,
chapter 20 (volume 3)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1807.
Act for the Abolition of the Slave-Trade.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1792-1807.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (FEBRUARY-SEPTEMBER).
Operations in support of the Russians against the Turks and
French.
Bold naval attack on Constantinople and humiliating failure.
Disastrous expedition to Egypt.
See TURKS: A. D. 1806-1807.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY).
Alliance formed at Tilsit between Napoleon and Alexander I. of
Russia.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).
Bombardment of Copenhagen and seizure of the Danish fleet.
War with Russia and Denmark.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1807-1810.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1807 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
Submission of Portugal to Napoleon under English advice.
Flight of the house of Braganza to Brazil.
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1807.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1808 (MAY).
Ineffectual attempt to aid Sweden.
Expedition of Sir John Moore.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1807-1810.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1808 (JULY).
Peace and alliance with the Spanish people against the new
Napoleonic monarchy.
Opening of the Peninsular War.
See SPAIN: A. D.1808 (MAY-SEPTEMBER).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1808.
Expulsion of English forces from Capri.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D.1808-1809.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1808-1809.
Wellington's first campaign in the Peninsula.
Convention of Cintra.
Evacuation of Portugal by the French.
Sir John Moore's advance into Spain and his retreat.
His death at Corunna.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1808-1809 (AUGUST-JANUARY).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
Wellington sent to the Peninsula.
The passage of the Douro and the Battle of Talavera.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JULY).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (JULY-DECEMBER).
The Walcheren Expedition.
"Three times before, during the war, it had occurred to one or
another, connected with the government, that it would be a
good thing to hold Antwerp, and command the Scheldt, seize the
French ships in the river, and get possession of their
arsenals and dockyards. On each occasion, men of military
science and experience had been consulted; and invariably they
had pronounced against the scheme. Now, however, what Mr. Pitt
had considered impracticable, Lord Castlereagh, with the
rashness of incapacity, resolved should be done: and, in order
not to be hindered, he avoided consulting with those who would
have objected to the enterprise. Though the scene of action
was to be the swamps at the mouths of the Scheldt, he
consulted no physician. Having himself neither naval,
military, nor medical knowledge, he assumed the
responsibility--except such as the King and the Duke of York
chose to share. ... It was May, 1809, before any stir was
apparent which could lead men outside the Cabinet to infer
that an expedition for the Scheldt was in contemplation; but
so early as the beginning of April (it is now known), Mr.
Canning signified that he could not share in the
responsibility of an enterprise which must so involve his own
office. ... The fleet that rode in the channel consisted of 39
ships of the line, and 36 frigates, and a due proportion of
small vessels: in all, 245 vessels of war: and 400 transports
carried 40,000 soldiers. Only one hospital ship was provided
for the whole expedition, though the Surgeon General implored
the grant of two more. He gave his reasons, but was refused.
... The naval commander was Sir Richard J. Strachan, whose
title to the responsibility no one could perceive, while many
who had more experience were unemployed. The military command
was given (as the selection of the present Cabinet bad been)
to Lord Chatham, for no better reason than that he was a
favourite with the King and Queen, who liked his gentle and
courtly manners, and his easy and amiable temper. ... The
fatal mistake was made of not defining the respective
authorities of the two commanders; and both being
inexperienced or apathetic, each relied upon the other first,
and cast the blame of failure upon him afterwards. In the
autumn, an epigram of unknown origin was in every body's
mouth, all over England:
'Lord Chatham, with his sword undrawn,
Stood waiting for Sir Richard Strachan;
Sir Richard, longing to be at 'em,
Stood waiting for the Earl of Chatham.'
The fleet set sail on the 28th of July, and was on the coast
of Holland the next day. The first discovery was that there
were not boats enough to land the troops and the ordnance. The
next was that no plan had been formed about how to proceed.
The most experienced officers were for pushing on to Antwerp,
45 miles off, and taking it before it could be prepared for
defence; but the commanders determined to take Flushing first.
They set about it so slowly that a fortnight was consumed in
preparations.
{948}
In two days more, the 15th of August, Flushing was taken.
After this, Lord Chatham paused to consider what he should do
next; and it was the 21st before be began to propose to go on
to Antwerp. Then came the next discovery, that, by this time
two intermediate places had been so strengthened that there
must be some fighting on the way. So he did nothing more but
take possession of two small islands near Flushing. Not
another blow was struck; not another league was traversed by
this magnificent expedition. But the most important discovery
of all now disclosed itself. The army had been brought into
the swamps at the beginning of the sickly season. Fever sprang
up under their feet, and 3,000 men were in hospital in a few
days, just when it became necessary to reduce the rations,
because provisions were falling short. On the 27th of August,
Lord Chatham led a council of war to resolve that 'it was not
advisable to pursue further operations.' But, if they could
not proceed, neither could they remain where they were. The
enemy had more spirit than their invaders. On the 30th and
31st, such a fire was opened from both banks of the river,
that the ships were obliged to retire. Flushing was given up,
and everything else except the island of Walcheren, which it
was fatal to hold at this season. On the 4th of September,
most of the ships were at home again; and Lord Chatham
appeared on the 14th. Eleven thousand men were by that time in
the fever, and he brought home as many as he could. Sir Eyre
Coote, whom he left in command, was dismayed to see all the
rest sinking down in disease at the rate of hundreds in a day.
Though the men had been working in the swamps, up to the waist
in marsh water, and the roofs of their sleeping places had
been carried off by bombardment, so that they slept under a
canopy of autumn fog, it was supposed that a supply of Thames
water to drink would stop the sickness; and a supply of 500
tons per week was transmitted. At last, at the end of October,
a hundred English bricklayers, with tools, bricks, and mortar,
were sent over to mend the roofs; but they immediately dropped
into the hospitals. Then the patients were to be accommodated
in the towns; but to spare the inhabitants, the soldiers were
laid down in damp churches; and their bedding had from the
beginning been insufficient for their need. At last,
government desired the chief officers of the army Medical
Board to repair to Walcheren, and see what was the precise
nature of the fever, and what could be done. The
Surgeon-General and the Physician-General threw the duty upon
each other. Government appointed it to the Physician-General,
Sir Lucas Pepys; but he refused to go. Both officers were
dismissed, and the medical department of the army was
reorganized and greatly improved. The deaths were at this time
from 200 to 300 a week. When Walcheren was evacuated, on the
23rd of December, nearly half the force sent out five months
before were dead or missing; and of those who returned, 35,000
were admitted into the hospitals of England before the next 1st
of June. Twenty millions sterling were spent on this
expedition. It was the purchase money of tens of thousands of
deaths, and of ineffaceable national disgrace."
_H. Martineau,
History of England, 1800-1815,
book 2, chapter 2._
ALSO IN:
_C. Knight,
Popular History of England,
volume 7, chapter 20._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-DECEMBER).
Difficulties of Wellington's campaign in the Peninsula.
His retreat into Portugal.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-DECEMBER).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1810.
Capture of the Mauritius.
See INDIA: A. D. 1805-1816.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1810-1812.
The War in the Peninsula.
Wellington's Lines of Torres Vedras.
French recoil from them.
English advance into Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1800-1810 (OCTOBER-SEPTEMBER),
and 1810-1812.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1811.
Capture of Java from the Dutch.
See INDIA: A. D. 1805-1816.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1811-1812.
Desertion of Napoleon's Continental System by Russia and Sweden.
Reopening of their ports to British commerce.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1810-1812.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1812 (JANUARY).
Building of the first passenger Steam-boat.
See STEAM NAVIGATION: THE BEGINNINGS.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-AUGUST).
The Peninsular War.
Wellington's victory at Salamanca and advance to Madrid.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-AUGUST).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1812-1813.
The Liverpool Ministry.
Business depression and bad harvests.
Distress and rioting.
The Luddites.
"Again there was much negotiation, and an attempt to introduce
Lord Wellesley and Mr. Canning to the ministry. Of course they
could not serve with Castlereagh; they were then asked to form
a ministry with Grenville and Grey, but these Lords objected
to the Peninsular War, to which Wellesley was pledged.
Grenville and Grey then attempted a ministry of their own but
quarrelled with Lord Moira on the appointments to the
Household; and as an American war was threatening, and the
ministry had already given up their Orders in Council (one of
the chief causes of their unpopularity), the Regent rather
than remain longer without a ministry, intrusted Lord
Liverpool with the Premiership, with Castlereagh as his
Foreign Secretary, and the old ministry remained in office.
Before the day of triumph of this ministry arrived, while
Napoleon was still at the height of his power, and the success
of Wellington as yet uncertain, England had drifted into war
with America. It is difficult to believe that this useless war
might not have been avoided had the ministers been men of
ability. It arose from the obstinate manner in which the
Government clung to the execution of their retaliatory
measures against France, regardless of the practical injury
they were inflicting upon all neutrals. ... The same motive of
class aggrandizement which detracts from the virtue of the
foreign policy of this ministry underlay the whole
administration of home affairs. There was an incapacity to
look at public affairs from any but a class or aristocratic
point of view. The natural consequence was a constantly
increasing mass of discontent among the lower orders, only
kept in restraint by an overmastering fear felt by all those
higher in rank of the possible revolutionary tendencies of any
attempt at change. Much of the discontent was of course the
inevitable consequence of the circumstances in which England
was placed, and for which the Government was only answerable
in so far as it created those circumstances. At the same time
it is impossible not to blame the complacent manner in which
the misery was ignored and the occasional success of
individual merchants and contractors regarded as evidences of
national prosperity. ...
{949}
A plentiful harvest in 1813, and the opening of many
continental ports, did much to revive both trade and
manufactures; but it was accompanied by a fall in the price of
corn from 171s. to 75s. The consequence was widespread
distress among the agriculturists, which involved the country
banks, so that in the two following years 240 of them stopped
payment. So great a crash could not fail to affect the
manufacturing interest also; apparently, for the instant, the
very restoration of peace brought widespread ruin. ... Before
the end of the year 1811, wages had sunk to 7s. 6d. a week.
The manufacturing operatives were therefore in a state of
absolute misery. Petitions signed by 40,000 or 50,000 men
urged upon Parliament that they were starving; but there was
another class which fared still worse. Machinery had by no
means superseded hand-work. In thousands of hamlets and
cottages handlooms still existed. The work was neither so good
nor so rapid as work done by machinery; even at the best of
times used chiefly as an auxiliary to agriculture, this hand
labour could now scarcely find employment at all. Not
unnaturally, without work and without food, these hand workers
were very ready to believe that it was the machinery which
caused their ruin, and so in fact it was; the change, though
on the whole beneficial, had brought much individual misery.
The people were not wise enough to see this. They rose in
riots in many parts of England, chiefly about Nottingham,
calling themselves Luddites (from the name of a certain idiot
lad who some 30 years before, had broken stocking-frames),
gathered round them many of the disbanded soldiery with whom
the country was thronged, and with a very perfect secret
organization, carried out their object of machine-breaking.
The unexpected thronging of the village at nightfall, a crowd
of men with blackened faces, armed sentinels holding every
approach, silence on all sides, the village inhabitants
cowering behind closed doors, an hour or two's work of
smashing and burning, and the disappearance of the crowd as
rapidly as it had arrived--such were the incidents of the
night riots."
_J. F. Bright,
History of England, period 3,
pages 1325-1332._
ALSO IN:
_C. Knight,
Popular History of England,
volume 7, chapter 30._
_Pictorial History of England,
volume 8, chapter 4
(Reign of George III., volume 4)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1812-1815.
War with the United States.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1809;
1808; and 1810-1812, to 1815 (JANUARY).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1813 (JUNE).
Joined with the new European Coalition against Napoleon.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (MAY-AUGUST).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1813-1814.
Wellington's victorious and final campaigns
in the Peninsular War.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1812-1814.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1813-1816.
War with the Ghorkas of Nepal.
See INDIA: A. D..1805-1816.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1814.
The allies in France and in possession of Paris.
Fall of Napoleon.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH),
and (MARCH-APRIL).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1814 (May-June).
Treaty of Paris.
Acquisition of Malta, the Isle of France
and the Cape of Good Hope.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (APRIL-JUNE).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1814 (DECEMBER).
The Treaty of Ghent, terminating war with the United States.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1814 (DECEMBER).