reformers, and had themselves divided into two sections; for
their nominal leader, Feargus O'Connor, was at bitter enmity
with more thoroughgoing and earnest leaders such as O'Brien
and Cooper. O'Connor had not proved a very efficient guide. He
had entered into a land scheme of a somewhat doubtful
character. ... He had also injudiciously taken up a position
of active hostility to the free-traders, and while thus
appearing as the champion of a falling cause had alienated
many of his supporters. Yet the Parliament elected in 1846
contained several representatives of the Chartist principles,
and O'Connor himself had been returned for Nottingham by a
large majority over Hobhouse, a member of the new Ministry.
The revolution in France gave a sudden and enormous impulse to
the agitation. The country was filled with meetings at which
violent speeches were uttered and hints, not obscure, dropped
of the forcible establishment of a republic in England. A new
Convention was summoned for the 6th of April, a vast petition
was prepared, and a meeting, at which it was believed that
half a million of people would have been present, was summoned
to meet on Kennington Common on the 10th of April for the
purpose of carrying the petition to the House in procession.
The alarm felt in London was very great. It was thought
necessary to swear in special constables, and the wealthier
classes came forward in vast numbers to be enrolled. There are
said to have been no less than 170,000 special constables. The
military arrangements were entrusted to the Duke of
Wellington; the public offices were guarded and fortified;
public vehicles were forbidden to pass the streets lest they
should be employed for barricades; and measures were taken to
prevent the procession from crossing the bridges. ... Such a
display of determination seemed almost ridiculous when
compared with what actually occurred. But it was in fact the
cause of the harmless nature of the meeting. Instead of half a
million, about 30,000 men assembled on Kennington Common.
Feargus O'Connor was there; Mr. Maine, the Commissioner of
Police, called him aside, told him he might hold his meeting,
but that the procession would be stopped, and that he would be
held personally responsible for any disorder that might occur.
His heart had already begun to fail him, and he ... used all
his influence to put an end to the procession. His prudent
advice was followed, and no disturbance of any importance took
place. ... The air of ridicule thrown over the Chartist movement
by the abortive close of a demonstration which had been
heralded with so much violent talk was increased by the
disclosures attending the presentation of the petition." There
were found to be only 2,000,000 names appended to the
document, instead of 5,000,000 as claimed, and great numbers
of them were manifestly spurious. "This failure proved a
deathblow to Chartism."
_J. F. Bright,
History of England,
period 4, pages 176-178._
ALSO IN:
_S. Walpole,
History of England from 1815,
chapter 20 (volume 4)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1848-1849.
Second war with the Sikhs.
Conquest and annexation of the Punjab.
See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1849.
Repeal of the Navigation Laws.
See NAVIGATION LAWS: A. D. 1849.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1849-1850.
The Don Pacifico Affair.
Lord Palmerston's speech.
The little difficulty with Greece which came to a crisis in
the last weeks of 1849 and the first, of 1850 (see GREECE: A.
D. 1846-1850), and which was commonly called the Don Pacifico
Affair, gave occasion for a memorable speech in Parliament by
Lord Palmerston, defending his foreign policy against attacks.
{964}
The speech (June 24, 1850), which occupied five hours, "from
the dusk of one day till the dawn of another," was greatly
admired, and proved immensely effective in raising the
speaker's reputation. "The Don Pacifico debate was
unquestionably an important landmark in the life of Lord
Palmerston. Hitherto his merits had been known only to a
select few; for the British public does not read Blue Books,
and as a rule troubles itself very little about foreign
politics at all. ... But the Pacifico speech caught the ear of
the nation, and was received with a universal verdict of
approval. From that hour Lord Palmerston became the man of the
people, and his rise to the premiership only a question of
time."
_L. C. Sanders,
Life of Viscount Palmerston,
chapter 8._
ALSO IN:
_Marquis of Lorne,
Viscount Palmerston,
chapter 7._
_J. McCarthy,
History of Our Own Times,
chapter 19 (volume 2)._
_J. Morley,
Life of Cobden,
volume 2, chapter 3._
_T. Martin,
Life of the Prince Consort,
chapter 38 (volume 2)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1850.
The so-called Clayton-Bulwer Treaty with the United States,
establishing a joint protectorate over the projected Nicaragua
Canal.
See NICARAGUA: A. D. 1850.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1850.
Restoration of the Roman Episcopate.
The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1850.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1850-1852.
The London protocol and treaty on the Schleswig-Holstein
Question.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (DENMARK): A. D. 1848-1862.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1851.
The Great Exhibition.
"The first of May, 1851, will always be memorable as the day
on which the Great Exhibition was opened in Hyde Park. ...
Many exhibitions of a similar kind have taken place since.
Some of these far surpassed that of Hyde Park in the splendour
and variety of the collections brought together. Two of them
at least--those of Paris in 1867 and 1878--were infinitely
superior in the array and display of the products, the
dresses, the inhabitants of far-divided countries. But the
impression which the Hyde Park Exhibition made upon the
ordinary mind was like that of the boy's first visit to the
play--an impression never to be equalled. ... It was the first
organised to gather all the representatives of the world's
industry into one great fair. ... The Hyde Park Exhibition was
often described as the festival to open the long reign of
Peace. It might, as a mere matter of chronology, be called
without any impropriety the festival to celebrate the close of
the short reign of Peace. From that year, 1851, it may be said
fairly enough that the world has hardly known a week of peace.
... The first idea of the Exhibition was conceived by Prince
Albert; and it was his energy and influence which succeeded in
carrying the idea into practical execution. ... Many persons
were disposed to sneer at it; many were sceptical about its
doing any good; not a few still regarded Prince Albert as a
foreigner and a pedant, and were slow to believe that anything
really practical was likely to be developed under his impulse
and protection. ... There was a great deal of difficulty in
selecting a plan for the building. ... Happily, a sudden
inspiration struck Mr. (afterward Sir Joseph) Paxton, who was
then in charge of the Duke of Devonshire's superb grounds at
Chatsworth. Why not try glass and iron? he asked himself. ...
Mr. Paxton sketched out his plan hastily, and the idea was
eagerly accepted by the Royal Commissioners. He made many
improvements afterwards in his design; but the palace of glass
and iron arose within the specified time on the green turf of
Hyde Park."
_J. McCarthy,
History of Our Own Times,
chapter 21 (volume 2)._
ALSO IN:
_T. Martin,
Life of the Prince Consort,
chapters 33-36, 39, 42-43 (volume 2)._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1851-1852.
The Coup d'Etat in France and Lord Palmerston's dismissal from
the Cabinet.
Defeat and resignation of Lord John Russell.
The first Derby
Disraeli Ministry and the Aberdeen coalition Ministry.
The "coup d'etat" of December 2nd, 1851, by which Louis
Napoleon made himself master of France (see FRANCE: A. D.
1851) brought about the dismissal of Lord Palmerston from the
British Ministry, followed quickly by the overthrow of the
Ministry which expelled him. "Lord Palmerston not only
expressed privately to Count Walewski [the French ambassador]
his approval of the 'coup d'etat,' but on the 16th of December
wrote a despatch to Lord Normanby, our representative in
Paris, expressing in strong terms his satisfaction at the
success of the French President's arbitrary action. This
despatch was not submitted either to the Prime Minister or to
the Queen, and of course the offence was of too serious a
character to be passed over. A great deal of correspondence
ensued, and as Palmerston's explanations were not deemed
satisfactory, and he had clearly broken the undertaking he
gave some time previously, he was dismissed from office. ...
There were some who thought him irretrievably crushed from
this time forward; but a very short time only elapsed before
he retrieved his fortunes and was as powerful as ever. In
February 1852 Lord John Russell brought in a Militia Bill
which was intended to develop a local militia for the defence
of the country. Lord Palmerston strongly disapproved of the
scope of the measure, and in committee moved an amendment to
omit the word 'local,' so as to constitute a regular militia,
which should be legally transportable all over the kingdom,
and thus be always ready for any emergency. The Government
were defeated by eleven votes, and as the Administration had
been very weak for some time, Lord John resigned. Lord Derby
formed a Ministry, and invited the cooperation of Palmerston,
but the offer was declined, as the two statesmen differed on
the question of imposing a duty on the importation of corn,
and other matters.'
_G. B. Smith,
The Prime Ministers of Queen Victoria,
pages 264-265._
"The new Ministry [in which Mr. Disraeli became Chancellor of
the Exchequer] took their seats on the 27th of February, but
it was understood that a dissolution of Parliament would take
place in the summer, by which the fate of the new Government
would be decided, and that in the meantime the Opposition
should hold its hand. The raw troops [of the Tory Party in the
House of Commons], notwithstanding their inexperience,
acquitted themselves with credit, and some good Bills were
passed, the Militia Bill among the number, while a
considerable addition to the strength of the Navy was effected
by the Duke of Northumberland. No doubt, when the general
election began, the party had raised itself considerably in
public estimation. But for one consideration the country would
probably have been quite willing to entrust its destinies to
their hands.
{965}
But that one consideration was all important. ... The
Government was obliged to go to the country, to some extent,
on Protectionist principles. It was known that a Derbyite
majority meant a moderate import duty; and the consequence was
that Lord Derby just lost the battle, though by a very narrow
majority. When Parliament met in November, Lord Derby and Mr.
Disraeli had a very difficult game to play. ... Negotiations
were again opened with Palmerston and the Peelites, and on
this occasion Gladstone and Mr. Sidney Herbert were willing to
join if Lord Palmerston might lead in the House of Commons.
But the Queen put her veto on this arrangement, which
accordingly fell to the ground; and Lord Derby had to meet the
Opposition attack without any reinforcements. ... On the 16th
of December, ... being defeated on the Budget by a majority of
19, Lord Derby at once resigned."
_T. E. Kebbel,
Life of the Earl of Derby,
chapter 6._
"The new Government [which succeeded that of Derby] was a
coalition of Whigs and Peelites, with Sir William Molesworth
thrown in to represent the Radicals. Lord Aberdeen became
Prime Minister, and Mr. Gladstone Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The other Peelites in the Cabinet were the Duke of Newcastle,
Sir James Graham, and Mr. Sidney Herbert."
_G. W. E. Russell,
The Rt. Hon. William Ewart Gladstone,
chapter 5._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1852.
Second Burmese War.
Annexation of Pegu.
See INDIA: A. D. 1852.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1852-1853.
Abandonment of Protection by the Conservatives.
Further progress in Free Trade.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (ENGLAND): A. D. 1846-1879.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1853-1855.
Civil-Service Reform.
See CIVIL-SERVICE REFORM IN ENGLAND.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1853-1856.
The Crimean War.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1853-1854, to 1854-1856.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1855.
Popular discontent with the management of the war.
Fall of the Aberdeen Ministry.
Palmerston's first premiership.
A brightening of prospects.
"Our army system entirely broke down [in the Crimea], and Lord
Aberdeen and the Duke of Newcastle were made the scapegoats of
the popular indignation. ... But England was not only
suffering from unpreparedness and want of administrative power
in the War department; there were dissensions in the Cabinet.
... Lord John Russell gave so much trouble, that Lord
Aberdeen, after one of the numerous quarrels and
reconciliations which occurred at this juncture, wrote to the
Queen that nothing but a sense of public duty and the
necessity for avoiding the scandal of a rupture kept him at
his post. ... At a little later stage ... the difficulties
were renewed. Mr. Roebuck gave notice of his motion for the
appointment of a select committee to inquire into the
condition of the army before Sebastopol, and Lord John
definitively resigned. The Ministry remained in office to
await the fate of Mr. Roebuck's motion, which was carried
against them by the very large majority of 157. Lord Aberdeen
now placed the resignation of the Cabinet in the hands of the
Queen [January 31, 1855]. ... Thus fell the Coalition Cabinet
of Lord Aberdeen. In talent and parliamentary influence it was
apparently one of the strongest Governments ever seen, but it
suffered from a fatal want of cohesion."
_G. B. Smith,
Prime Ministers of Queen Victoria,
pages 227-230._
"Lord Palmerston had passed his 70th year when the Premiership
came to him for the first time. On the fall of the Coalition
Government the Queen sent for Lord Derby, and upon his failure
for Lord John Russell. Palmerston was willing at the express
request of her Majesty to serve once more under his old chief,
but Clarendon and many of the Whigs not unnaturally positively
refused to do so. Palmerston finally undertook and
successfully achieved the task of forming a Government out of
the somewhat heterogeneous elements at his command. Lord
Clarendon continued at the Foreign Office, and Gladstone was
still Chancellor of the Exchequer. The War Department was
reorganised, the office of Secretary at War disappearing, and
being finally merged in that of Secretary of State for War.
Although Palmerston objected to Roebuck's Committee, he was
practically compelled to accept it, and this led to the
resignation of Gladstone, Graham and Herbert; their places
being taken by Sir G. C. Lewis, Sir Charles Wood, and Lord
John Russell."
_Marquis of Lorne,
Viscount Palmerston,
chapter 10._
"It was a dark hour in the history of the nation when Lord
Palmerston essayed the task which had been abandoned by the
tried wisdom of Derby, Lansdowne, and John Russell. Far away
in the Crimea the war was dragging on without much hope of a
creditable solution, though the winter of discontent and
mismanagement was happily over. The existence of the European
concert was merely nominal. The Allies had discovered, many
months previously, that, though Austria was staunch, Prussia
was a faithless friend. ... Between the belligerent powers the
cloud of suspicion and distrust grew thicker; for
Abd-el-Medjid was known to be freely squandering his war loans
on seraglios and palaces while Kars was starving; and though
there was no reason for distrusting the present good faith of
the Emperor of the French, his policy was straight-forward
only as long as he kept himself free from the influence of the
gang of stock-jobbers and adventurers who composed his Ministry.
Nor was the horizon much brighter on the side of England. A
series of weak cabinets, and the absence of questions of
organic reform, had completely relaxed the bonds of Party. If
there was no regular Opposition, still less was there a
regular majority. ... And the hand that was to restore order
out of chaos was not so steady as of yore. ... Lord Palmerston
was not himself during the first weeks of his leadership. But
the prospect speedily brightened. Though Palmerston was
considerably over seventy, he still retained a wonderful
vigour of constitution. He was soon restored to health, and
was always to be found at his post. ... His generalship
secured ample majorities for the Government in every division
during the session. Of the energy which Lord Palmerston
inspired into the operations against Sebastopol, there can
hardly be two opinions."
_L. C. Sanders,
Life of Viscount Palmerston,
chapter 10._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1855.
Mr. Gladstone's Commission to the Ionian Islands.
See IONIAN ISLANDS: A. D. 1815-1862.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1856-1860.
War with China.
French alliance in the war.
Capture of Canton.
Entrance into Pekin.
Destruction of the Summer Palace.
See CHINA: A. D. 1856-1860.
{966}
ENGLAND: A. D. 1857-1858.
The Sepoy Mutiny in India.
See INDIA: A. D. 1857, to 1857-1858 (JULY-JUNE).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1858.
Assumption of the government of India by the Crown.
End of the rule of the East India Co.
See INDIA: A. D. 1858.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1858-1859.
The Conspiracy Bill.
Fall of Palmerston's government.
Second Ministry of Derby and Disraeli.
Lord Palmerston again Premier.
"On January 14, 1858, an attempt was made to assassinate
Napoleon III. by a gang of desperadoes, headed by Orsini,
whose head-quarters had previously been in London. Not without
some reason it was felt in France that such men ought not to
be able to find shelter in this country, and the French
Minister was ordered to make representations to that effect.
Lord Palmerston, always anxious to cultivate the good feeling
of the French nation, desired to pass a measure which should
give to the British Government the power to banish from
England any foreigner conspiring in Britain against the life
of a foreign sovereign. ... An unfortunate outburst of
vituperation against England in the French press, and the
repetition of such language by officers of the French army who
were received by the Emperor when they waited on him as a
deputation, aroused very angry English feeling. Lord
Palmerston had already introduced the Bill he desired to pass,
and it had been read the first time by a majority of 200. But the
foolish action of the French papers changed entirely the
current of popular opinion. Lord Derby saw his advantage. An
amendment to the second reading, which was practically a vote
of censure, was carried against Lord Palmerston, and to his
own surprise no less than to that of the country, he was
obliged to resign. Lord Derby succeeded to Palmerston's vacant
office. ... Lord Derby's second Ministry was wrecked upon the
fatal rock of Reform early in 1859, and at once appealed to
the country. ... The election of 1859 failed to give the
Conservatives a majority, and soon after the opening of the
session they were defeated upon a vote of want of confidence
moved by Lord Hartington. Earl Granville was commissioned by
the Queen to form a Ministry, because her Majesty felt that
'to make so marked a distinction as is implied in the choice
of one or other as Prime Minister of two statesmen so full of
years and honour as Lord Palmerston and Lord John Russell
would be a very invidious and unwelcome task.' Each of these
veterans was willing to serve under the other, but neither
would follow the lead of a third. And so Granville failed, and
to Palmerston was entrusted the task. He succeeded in forming
what was considered the strongest Ministry of modern times, so
far as the individual ability of its members was concerned.
Russell went to the Foreign Office and Gladstone to the
Exchequer."
_Marquis of Lorne,
Viscount Palmerston,
chapters 10-11._
ALSO IN:
_T. Martin,
Life of the Prince Consort,
chapters 82-84, 91-92,
and 94 (volume 4)._
_T. E. Kebbel,
Life of the Earl of Derby,
chapter 7._
ENGLAND: A. D. 1860.
The Cobden-Chevalier commercial treaty with France.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (FRANCE): A. D. 1853-1860.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1861 (May).
The Queen's Proclamation of Neutrality with reference
to the American Civil War.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (APRIL-MAY).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1861 (October).
The allied intervention in Mexico.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1861-1867.
ENGLAND: A. D. 1861 (November).
The Trent Affair.
Seizure of Mason and Slidell.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (NOVEMBER).
ENGLAND: A. D. 1861-1865.
The Cotton Famine.