Marquis: I was dressed just as I am at present.

Policeman: Your coat is now buttoned up; it was not so when I took you in

charge. You said, when I took you, you would defy your brother to drive

your horse.

Marquis: I might have said so because none of my brothers are in town.

But the horse is only four years old, has never had a collar on before,

and I'll defy any man to drive him the length of this street.

Mr. Dyer: It was the more imprudent on your lordship's part to bring such

an unsafe animal into the public streets, especially at the present time,

when the streets are more than usually thronged. Have you any witnesses?

Marquis: Yes, I can bring them, but I had rather not.

Mr. Dyer: If they can allege anything in contradiction of the charge of

wilful driving on the footpath, I am willing to hear it.

Marquis: No. It will be a fine, I suppose, and I had rather pay it than

trouble my friends to come forward. I'll call my horse, if your Worship

thinks proper.

Mr. Dyer then inflicted a fine of 40s.

The Marquis paid the money, and, turning to the policeman, made some

unhandsome remarks on his evidence.

Mr. Dyer said the policeman bore an excellent character, and, as far as

the magistrates could judge, had always done his duty fairly and

respectably.

The Marquis took the arm of his friend, the Earl of Waldegrave, and left

the office.

We hear of him again very shortly afterwards, for on 31 July, at Derby

assizes, came on an indictment charging the Marquis of Waterford, Sir F.

Johnstone, Hon. A. C. H. Villiers, and E. H. Reynard, Esq., with a riot

and assault. On the 5th April were the Croxton Park races, about five

miles distance from Melton Mowbray. The four defendants had been dining

out at Melton on the evening of that day; and about two in the morning of

the following day, the watchmen on duty, hearing a noise, proceeded to

the Market Place, and near Lord Rosebery's house saw several gentlemen

attempting to overturn a caravan, a man being inside; the watchmen

succeeded in preventing this, when the Marquis of Waterford challenged

one of them to fight, which the watchmen declined. Subsequently, hearing

a noise in the direction of the toll bar, they proceeded thither, and

found the gate keeper had been screwed up in his house, and he had been

calling out "Murder!"

On coming up with the gentlemen a second time, it was observed that they

had a pot of red paint with them, while one carried a paint brush, which

one of the constables wrested from the hand of the person who held it;

but, subsequently, they surrounded the man, threw him on his back, and

painted his face and neck with red paint. They then continued their

games, painting the doors and windows of different persons; and, when one

of their companions (Mr. Reynard) was put in the lock up, they forced the

constable to give up the keys, and succeeded in getting him out. The

jury found the defendants (who were all identified as having taken part

in the affray) guilty of the common assault, and they were sentenced to

pay a fine of 100 pounds each, and to be imprisoned till such fine be

paid.

Motor cars are not the modern invention we are apt to imagine them,

except as regards the power used--which, until lately, was always steam.

As far back as 1769, a Frenchman, named Cugnot, made a steam carriage

which carried four people, and attained a speed of two and a quarter

miles an hour! But it was unfortunate to its inventor--for it came to

grief in a street in Paris, and the unhappy man was imprisoned. In

England our engineers exercised their inventive power in making steam

carriages--Murdock in 1782, Watt in 1784, Symington in 1786--and others

made models, but the first which actually ran in England was made by

Trevithick and Vivian in 1803, and this, in the streets of London (which

were very far from being as good as they are now), attained a speed of

eight or nine miles an hour. Between the years 1827-34 there were

numerous steam carriages built and tried, proving more or less

successful. One made by Sir Goldsworthy Gurney ran for three months in

1831 with passengers between Cheltenham and Gloucester, while Hancock's

steam omnibuses (carrying 14 to 16 passengers) ran in London pretty

constantly during the years 1833-36, and often at a speed of 10 or 12

miles an hour; some of his coaches ran long journeys, such as from London

to Brighton, and he was the most successful of all inventors in this

line, unless we except Scott Russell, who, in 1834, ran six steam coaches

between Glasgow and Paisley.

We read in the _Standard_ of 21 June, 1838, that "Yesterday afternoon,

Hyde Park presented a more than usually gay appearance, in consequence of

a crowd of fashionables being assembled to witness the trial of a

newly-constructed steam cab. Among the many splendid equipages were

observed those of the Dowager Duchess of Sutherland, the Marquis of

Salisbury, the Marquis of Northampton, the Earl of Winchilsea, Lord

Howick, Lord Holland, and many other distinguished personages. About 3

o'clock the object of attraction moved forward at a slow pace from the

old Foot Guard Barracks, Knightsbridge, and threaded its way through the

various vehicles into the Park, passing through the centre gate of the

triumphal arch, and making, in the open space opposite the statue,

several turns within its own length. The vehicle after the date hereof,

will render themselves liable to be hours round the Park, and, from the

slight noise it made, the horses passing did not appear to be frightened.

The average speed of the cab was about twelve miles an hour. The vehicle

was guided by Mr. Hancock, the inventor."

But, if mechanical science had advanced as far as motor cars, we were, in

other ways, still as backward as Belgium and Germany are at the present,

in using dogs as draught animals. This practice had increased to such an

extent that it was found necessary to placard the walls of the metropolis

with the following notice. "Notice is hereby given, that all persons

using dogs under carts or trucks, as beasts of burden, after the date

hereof, will render themselves liable to be prosecuted, and fined 2

pounds, according to the provisions of an obsolete Act lately discovered.

London, 18 Aug., 1838." This scandal did not last long, for in "an Act

for further improving the Police in and near the Metropolis," 2 and 3

Vict., c. 47 [17 Aug., 1839], we find that Section LVI. says, "And be it

enacted, That after the First Day of _January_ next, every person who,

within the Metropolitan Police District, shall use any Dog for the

purpose of drawing, or helping to draw any Cart, Carriage, Truck, or

Barrow, shall be liable to a penalty of not more than Forty Shillings for

the first offence, and not more than Five Pounds for the Second, or any

following offence." This act was extended to all parts of the Kingdom by

the 17 and 18 Vict., c. 60.

On the 13th July the Corporation of the City of London gave a grand

banquet, at the Guildhall, to the foreign Princes, Ambassadors

extraordinary, and _Corps Diplomatique_, then in the metropolis, in

honour of the Queen's Coronation; and in order to completely divest the

occasion of anything like a political aspect, care was taken to invite,

besides the Ministers, an equal number of the _elite_ of both parties in

the State. The principal guests went in their state carriages, and the

streets were crowded with sightseers who especially welcomed the Duke of

Wellington and Marshal Soult. The arrangements and decorations in the

Hall were almost the same as those used for the Royal banquet in the

previous November, the tables and sideboards were ablaze with plate lent

by the various City Companies, and the General Bill of Fare was as

follows:

One hundred and twenty tureens of turtle soup, of five pints each; 17

dishes of fish, consisting of salmon, turbot, whitings, tench and eels;

40 haunches of venison; 80 dishes of fowls, capons and pullets; 40

cherry, gooseberry and currant tarts; 30 strawberry tarts; 40 dishes of

potatos; 60 dishes of French beans; 30 French pies; 30 pigeon pies; 30

hams; 30 tongues; 2 barons of beef; 37 Chantilly baskets; 30 dishes of

peas; 10 sirloins, ribs and rumps of beef; 45 dishes of shell fish; 30

ribs, chines and legs of lamb; 40 dishes of ducklings; 20 turkey poults;

80 jellies; 20 creams; 40 salads and cucumbers; 20 dishes of

cauliflowers. DESSERT.--Seventy-five pine apples of 2lbs each; 100

dishes of hothouse grapes; 20 melons; 30 dishes of cherries; 100 dishes

of strawberries; 40 dishes of currants and gooseberries; 120 cream and

water ices, various; 40 dishes of dried fruit; 35 ornamented Savoy cakes;

30 dishes of preserves, biscuits and olives.

Marshal Soult stopped for some time in England, and visited many of the

manufacturing towns.

CHAPTER VII.

Genesis of "The Charter" - L. & N. W. Railway opened to

Birmingham--Overland route to India--A bold smuggler--Bull

baiting--Visitors to the Queen--"The Boy Jones."

Probably nearly all my readers have heard of the "Chartists," but it is

equally probable that few know when the agitation commenced, and the

reason for its existence. The "Charter," as it was called, was the

Radical outcome of the Reform Bill of 1832. For a time, after the

passing of that Bill, the land had peace, for all reasonable reforms had

been granted, but the demagogues were not going to be quietly

annihilated, and an agitation for more trenchant reform was got up, and a

mass meeting in its favour was held at Birmingham, on the 6th of August,

and at it were inaugurated the principles of "The People's Charter," as

it was called. It is currently reported that this "Charter" was drawn up

by William Lovett, a carpenter and cabinet maker, who took an active part

in getting rid of the stamp tax upon newspapers; and it is very likely

that it was so, for he drew up most of the petitions and addresses for

the movement, and, in connection with it, he, the following year,

suffered 12 months' imprisonment. He died Aug. 1877. The demands of

this "Charter" were six, and they were familiarly known as the six

points. They were:

Universal Suffrage.

Vote by Ballot.

Annual Parliaments.

Payment of the Members.

Abolition of the Property Qualification.

Equal Electoral Districts.

The meeting was got up by T. Atwood, Esq., M.P., and the site chosen for

it was a large vacant piece of ground, at Birmingham, on the north-west

side of the town, and there drinking booths galore were erected. The

morning began very wet, and the different divisions from the neighbouring

country marched bemired and bedraggled to the rendezous. There they soon

filled the drinking booths, in which they abode; hence, probably, the

very diverse statements as to the numbers present at the meeting, which

vary from 10,000 to 200,000. The ground chosen was a natural

amphitheatre, and, if the weather had been finer, it would have been a

pretty sight, enlivened by the bright banners of the different Trades'

Societies. However, Mr. Atwood read the Petition, which embodied the

above six points, and moved its adoption. Feargus O'Connor, a well-known

firebrand, seconded it in a violent speech, in which occurred the

following balderdash.

"On with your green standard rearing,

Go, flesh every sword to the hilt;

On our side is Virtue and Erin,

On yours is the _parson_ and guilt."

Of course the Motion was enthusiastically carried, and then a very heavy

shower of rain terminated the proceedings. The petition was afterwards

presented to Parliament by Mr. Atwood on the 14th of June, 1839.

On 17th Sept the London and North Western Railway (then called the London

and Birmingham Rly.) was opened throughout to Birmingham; the first

train, containing Directors and their friends, leaving Euston at 7.15

a.m. The times of this train are useful for comparing with the present

time. "The train left Euston at 15 minutes past 7, but did not take on

locomotive until 20 minutes past. It arrived at Tring station at 25

minutes past 8, where there was five minutes' delay. Arrived at

Wolverton at 6 minutes past 9, where the directors alighted and changed

engines. The train arrived at Rugby at 11 o'clock, where the Duke of

Sussex and his suite alighted, and proceeded by carriage to the place of

his destination. The directors remained at Rugby 10 minutes, and arrived

at Birmingham 3 minutes past 12, having performed the whole journey,

including stoppages, in 4 hours 48 minutes, and, exclusive of stoppages,

in 4 hours 14 minutes. This is, unquestionably, the shortest time in

which the journey from London to Birmingham has ever been performed,

being upwards of two hours less than the time occupied by Marshal Soult

and attendants a few weeks ago."

"The fare for one person from London to Birmingham, or back, by the 'four

inside' carriages, by day, or the first class, 'six inside' by night,

will be 1 pound 12s. 6d; by the second-class carriages, open by day,

which is the cheapest, it will be 1 pound. The intermediate fares will

be 1 pound 10s. and 1 pound 5s."

It is not generally known that the two lodges at the entrance of Euston

Station, were the original ticket office and waiting room.

People were beginning to wake from the torpor in which they had hitherto

slumbered, with regard to locomotion, and on 12th October an influential

meeting of merchants and others was held at the Jerusalem Coffee House to

hear a Captain Barber unfold his scheme for a quicker communication with

India. This was that passengers and goods should be taken by steam to

Cairo, and thence, by omnibuses and vans to Suez--as was afterwards done

by Waghorn, who was already forming an Overland Mail (see _Times_, 29

Nov., 1838).

With the very heavy duties on foreign goods, of course smuggling was very

rife, and the Inland Revenue was defrauded on every possible occasion by

the sharp wits opposed to it; and the difficulty of conviction, unless

the smuggler was caught red-handed, was very considerable. The following

is a case in point, and for sheer impudence, it bears the palm. 17 Oct.:

MANSION HOUSE.--A Scotchwoman, named Frances Bodmore, the wife of a

Frenchman, who has been engaged in smuggling, appeared to answer for

her husband, on a charge of having two two-gallon bottles of French

brandy in his possession, without having paid the duty thereon.

Child, the constable, said he went into the house of the Frenchman,

in Sugarloaf Court; and, while searching for other things, found the

bottles under the pillows of the bed.

The Lord Mayor: Why don't your husband attend?

Woman: Why, because he knows nothing at all about the business. I

think he'd be a great fool to come here without knowing for what.

The Lord Mayor: How do you get your living?

Woman: Why, as well as I can. I don't get it without running some

risk for it, you may depend.

The Lord Mayor: We know you to be a consummate smuggler.

Woman: Whatever my business may be, I generally get through it like a

trump. There's no nonsense about me.

The Lord Mayor (to the Revenue officer): She is constantly backward

and forward between this and France, I daresay.

Woman: Yes, my Lord, I travel a good deal for the benefit of my

health, and I always come back stouter than I go. (Laughter.)

Officer: She's perfectly well known, my Lord, as one of a number that

are commissioned by parties in London. They are all very clever, and

elude us in every possible way, and the steamers afford them great

facilities.

The Lord Mayor: I can't send this woman to prison, and she knows it

well, but I shall punish every experienced smuggler I catch as

severely as I can. They cheat the fair trader, they endanger the

vessel in which they come over, and they cheat the Government.

Woman: Ay, my Lord, that's the cleverest thing of all. Only think of

cheating the Government! Well, well, I wonder where the villainy of

man will end! (Laughter.)

The Lord Mayor: Take care of yourself. You think you are secure.

You may go now.

Woman: Good morning, my Lord. Although you are so kind, I hope I

shall never have the pleasure of seeing your face again.

The Lord Mayor was informed that great quantities of lace were

brought over by women. Some had been found stitched up in the skins

of wildfowl, and there was scarcely an article, dead or alive, that

was not suspected of being a depository of contraband goods. It was

but a short time ago, that a wretched-looking object was discovered

to be the carrier of a large stock of lace. He had an old bedstead,

which, in his trips to Boulogne, he used to take with him. At last,

somebody on board expressed his surprise, why a ricketty piece of

furniture, which looked as if it was the tenement of living animals,

should be so frequent a passenger. Upon close examination, it was

found that the several pieces of the bedstead had been hollowed and

stuffed with lace.

The cruel old English sport of bull baiting was still continued at

Stamford, in Lincolnshire, where it is said to have existed since the

year 1209, in the reign of King John. The story goes that, in that year,

William, Earl Warren, lord of the town, standing on the walls of his

castle, saw two bulls fighting for a cow, in the castle meadow, till all

the butchers dogs pursued one of the bulls (maddened by the noise and

multitude) clean through the town. This sight so pleased the Earl, that

he gave the castle meadow, where the bulls' duel began, for a common, to

the butchers of the town, after the first grass was mown, on condition

that they should find a mad bull the day six weeks before Christmas

Day--for the continuation of that sport, for ever.

But the time had come for putting an end to this barbarous practice, and

it was this year put down by direct interference of the Secretary of

State. At Stamford, and elsewhere, it was believed that this bull

baiting was legal, being established by custom; but the Society for the

Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, with a view of setting the question at

rest by the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench, caused an indictment

to be preferred against several of the ringleaders. The indictment was

tried at Lincoln, before Mr. Justice Park and a special jury, when

several of them were found guilty; and, upon their being brought up for

judgment in the Court of Queen's Bench, the Court unanimously declared

the practice to be illegal; the Chief Justice, in particular, said: "It

was supposed there was some matter of law--at first, there was a supposed

old Charter--for the future, it must be considered as an illegal

practice."

In consequence of this decision, a troop of the 14th Dragoons, together

with 12 Metropolitan policemen, were sent into the town of Stamford.

Placards, apprising the public of the illegality of the bull baiting,

were posted in the town and neighbourhood, and the threatened and

attempted repetition of this barbarous scene was prevented without any

loss of life or serious injury. The _bullards_ (as they were called)

mustered in strong numbers. They had provided two fierce bulls to be

hunted and tormented; but the bulls were seized and pounded by the

police; and, although the ruffian mob remained in considerable numbers,

no serious breach of the peace took place. But they were determined not

to be altogether baulked of their _sport_; for a bull calf, enclosed in a

cart, and followed by its lowing mother, entered the town, and was

immediately seized on as a substitute for a bull. It was taken out, and

hunted through the town for some time, until rescued by the police.

Every lunatic seems to have wanted to say something to the young Queen,

and visitors to Buckingham Palace were very frequent, although the object

of their wishes was never attained. To show the nuisance involved by

these fools let me give one paragraph out of the _Times_, 19 Dec.:

VISITORS TO HER MAJESTY.--On Saturday night, about 9 o'clock, a very

respectably dressed young man rang the bell at the tradesmen's

entrance of the new Palace, and, upon being asked the nature of his

business, he said he had come for the direction of his house, as he

was tired, and wished to go home. Upon being asked to explain

himself, he said he had just come from Sydney, and had been desired

to call at the Palace by the Queen, who told him he should have a

house to live in, and 150 pounds a year, for some very important

spiritual communication he had made to her. The young man, whose

every action showed he was a lunatic, was then told the Queen was not

in town, when he turned away, observing that he would go immediately

to Lord Hill, and lay his case before him. Visits of the preceding

kind are very frequent at the Palace, and the tales told by the

visitants are of the very strangest nature. It is only a few weeks

since, an elderly man, having the appearance of a farmer, called at

the Palace, and handing to the porter the certificate of his birth,

requested him to let Her Majesty sign it. From inquiries made

concerning this man, it was discovered that he was a respectable

farmer in the neighbourhood of Exeter, from which distant place he

had wandered on so strange an errand.

But of all visitors to the Royal Palace, THE BOY JONES was the most

frequent and successful. Who, in this generation, knows anything about

THE BOY JONES? Yet his escapades were very daring and his story is very

true--but so strange is it that, in order to be believed, I must, at

least, in part, give the chapter and verse for it:

_The Times_, 15 Dec.:

QUEEN SQUARE.--Yesterday, a lad about 15 years of age, who gave his

name as Edward Cotton, whose dress was that of a sweep, but who was

stated to be the son of a respectable tradesman in Hertfordshire, was

charged with being found in the Marble hall of Buckingham Palace,

under circumstances of an extraordinary nature. It should be stated

that Buckingham Palace, even during the absence of the Queen, is

guarded by the gentlemen porters of the establishment, two inspectors

of the A division of police, and sentries from the Foot Guards. In

spite of this, a number of cases have lately occurred at this office,

where persons have been found in the interior of the Palace under

unaccountable circumstances.

George Cox, one of the porters, having been sworn, said, that at five

o'clock yesterday morning he saw the prisoner in the Marble hall.

The latter endeavoured to make his escape into the lobby, but he

pursued him, and he then took a contrary direction, across the lawn

at the back of the Palace. Witness called for the sentry at the

gate, and a policeman of the B Division who was on duty in James

Street, caught the lad, after a long chase over the lawn. Mr. Cox

added, that he found, in the lobby, a regimental sword, a quantity of

linen, and other articles, all of which had been purloined from the

Palace. The sword was the property of the Hon. Augustus Murray, a

gentleman attached to the Queen's establishment. Witness went into

that gentleman's bedroom, and the bedding was covered with soot. The

prisoner had, evidently, endeavoured to get up the chimney, in order

to effect his escape; there was a valuable likeness of Her Majesty,

in the Marble hall, which was broken, and covered with soot; and it

was supposed that the lad, in the first instance, had descended from

the top of the building, and had endeavoured to make his way back

again in the same manner.

James Stone, 31 B, deposed that he was called upon by the last

witness to secure the prisoner. There were marks of soot in several

of the bedchambers, as well as in one of the corridors of the Palace,

and the Grand (or Marble) hall. He found upon him two letters, one

addressed to Her Majesty, and the other to the Hon. Mr. Murray.

These letters had been placed underneath Her Majesty's portrait, and

had, no doubt, been taken by the prisoner at the time the picture was

destroyed. Part of the scabbard of the sword was discovered in one

of the beds, and a quantity of bear's grease, part of which he had

placed upon his flesh, was taken from him--it belonged to one of the

servants of the Palace. Upon being taken to the station house, he

said he came from Hertfordshire, and that his father was a

respectable man.

Mr. White, the sitting magistrate, observed that it was a most

extraordinary thing that persons could get into the Palace under such

circumstances.

Several persons belonging to the Palace said that every inquiry had

been made, but it could not be accounted for.

Mr. White (to the prisoner): Where do you come from?

Prisoner: I came from Hertfordshire 12 months ago, and I met with a

man in a fustian jacket, who asked me to go with him to Buckingham

House. I went, and have been there ever since. I got my victuals in

the kitchen, and I thought myself very well off, because I came to

London to better myself.

Mr. White: Well, you could not go to a higher place.

Prisoner: I declare it to be the case, and I lived very well. To be

sure, I was obliged to wash my shirt now and then.

Mr. White: You fared, then, altogether, pretty well?

Prisoner: Very well indeed, Sir, and I was always placed, when the

Queen had a meeting with the Ministers, behind a piece of furniture

in the room; but I, certainly, did live well.

Mr. White: Indeed! And which was your favourite apartment?

Prisoner: The room in front of the gardens; but I was always in the

secret when the Ministers came.

Mr. White: Do you mean to tell me that you have lived in the Palace

upwards of 11 months, and been concealed when Her Majesty held a

Council?

Prisoner: I do.

Mr. White: Were you hid behind a chair?

Prisoner: No. But the tables and other furniture concealed me.

Mr. White: Then you could hear all Her Majesty said?

Prisoner: Oh, yes! and her Ministers too.

The prisoner's answers to the questions of the magistrate were given

in the most shrewd manner possible, and he evidently appeared to be a

lad of some education, but nothing further could be elicited from

him.

Mr. White said it was a most singular affair, and that it should be

strictly inquired into. For the present, he should remand the

prisoner until Wednesday next. The magistrate also told Cox that, as

he should be sitting there every day, he should be glad to receive

any information upon the subject.

The letters found upon the prisoner were directed to be sent to the

Palace, under seal of the Office, the prisoner having broken them

open.

The case excited great interest, and, in the first instance, was sent to

Bow Street; but Sir Frederick Roe being out of town, it was ordered to be

heard at this office.

_The Times_, 20 Dec.--Yesterday, the lad found in Buckingham Palace,

who had given his name as Edward Cotton, and described himself as the

son of a respectable tradesman living in the town of Hertford, was

brought before Messrs. White and Gregorie for final examination. It

will be recollected that he had purloined, amongst other articles,

two letters, which were immediately sealed up, and sent back to the

Palace. The prisoner turns out to be the son of an industrious

tailor, named Jones, residing in York Street, Westminster; and, it

appears, had frequently expressed his intention to enter the Palace,

under any circumstances. He had often stated that he wished to see

the grand staircase, in order to take a sketch of it, and had often

expressed his determination to see the Queen, and to hear her

sentiments when Her Majesty and her Ministers were assembled in

Council.

Frederick Blume now deposed that he was valet to the Hon. Mr. Murray,

and that a sword, a quantity of linen and other articles, had been

stolen from that gentleman's apartments in the Palace.

Mr. White: When were they stolen?

Witness: I can't recollect.

Mr. White: Was it a week, a month, or three or four months ago?

Witness: I cannot say.

Mr. White: Where was your master's sword at the time you saw it last?

Witness: When I went to Windsor.

Mr. White: When was that?

Witness: I cannot exactly recollect, and then he added, that about a

week since, he had sent from Windsor to the Palace, a portmanteau

containing his linen, and three pairs of trousers, four of stockings,

and three cravats were missing. The padlock of the portmanteau had

been forced by the sword having been applied to it. The sword had

broken in the attempt. He had also lost five 10 sous pieces, which

had been found upon the prisoner.

Mr. White: What is the value of the articles you have lost?

Witness: I don't know; but I should like to give three guineas to get

them back.

Mr. White: Can you swear to the French coin found upon the prisoner

as being yours?

The witness was then shown the coin, and he said that he certainly

could. They had been taken from his bedroom.

* * * * *

Mr. White: Can any information be given as to the manner in which the

prisoner gained access to the Palace? Cox, one of the porters to the

Palace, said that the principal entrance door was always locked, and

the key in his possession. At 5 o'clock on Saturday morning, just as

he was about to get out of bed, the prisoner opened the door of his

room, as witness considered, to obtain the key; his face and hands

were disguised with soot and bear's grease, and he was asked whether

he came to sweep a chimney: he did not make any answer, but

endeavoured to escape.

Inspector Steed, A division, said that upon examining the gates of

the principal entrance of the Palace, he found that, at the Marble

Arch, there was a vacuum sufficient to admit a boy into the Palace,

without any inconvenience.

Mr. White: And is there no sentry at this gate?

Witness: There are two.

The inspector said that he had examined the boy's boots, and the

gravel upon them corresponded with that lately laid down close to the

Marble Arch. The boots had been taken off by the prisoner, and left

in one of the apartments appropriated to the use of the porters of

the Palace.

Mr. Griffiths, builder, Coventry Street, said that the lad had been

in his employment for a few months; he had always expressed his

intention to get into the interior of the Palace by some means or

other; he was a clever lad, and had made a sketch of the exterior,

and a view of the enclosure fronting the Palace. He had left his

service two days since, and witness was very much distressed, as were

his parents, to know what had become of him. Upon reading the

accounts in the newspapers, he immediately went to Tothill Fields,

and identified him, much to the gratification of his father, who

supposed that he had drowned himself, the latter having, on account

of his son's bad conduct, turned him out of doors.

The Magistrate, after telling the boy that he would, most likely, be

committed for trial, asked him what he could say in his defence.

Prisoner: I wished to see the Palace, and I went in with a man in a

fustian jacket. I had the whole range of the Palace for a day or

two, but the money found upon me I picked up in one of the rooms.

Mr. White: Tell me the truth, for I am about to send you for trial.

Prisoner: Oh, very well; with all my heart.

He was fully committed to the Westminster Sessions, and all parties

bound over to prosecute.

He was tried on 28 Dec., and was most ably defended by his Counsel, Mr.

Prendergast, who turned everything to ridicule, and the jury returned a

verdict of Not Guilty, regarding the escapade in the light of a youthful

folly, and being, also, mindful of the fact that the boy did not enter

the Palace for the purpose of theft.

But we shall hear of THE BOY JONES again.

CHAPTER VIII.

Death of Lord Norbury--Birth of photography--Experimental street

pavements--Forecast of the Queen's marriage--Sad story of Lady Flora

Hastings--Story of a climbing boy--Van Amburgh--Embanking the

Thames--Victoria Park--Robbery of gold dust.

In a book, professedly of Gossip, politics should be strictly kept in the

background--but at this time Ireland was seething with sedition. Still I

should hardly have adverted to it, had not the deliberate and brutal

murder of the Earl of Norbury, on 1 Jan., set all tongues wagging. His

Lordship was walking in the shrubbery, near his own house at Kilbeggan,

in the county of Meath, talking to his steward, and pointing out to him

some trees he wished to have cut down, when some miscreant, behind a

hedge, fired a blunder-buss loaded with swan shot at him, and he fell,

mortally wounded. He lived for 43 hours afterwards--but his assassin ran

away and escaped; nor, in spite of large rewards offered, was he ever

discovered.

Photography may be said to have been practically born early in this year,

for, on 7 Jan., the French Academy reported on the invention of M.

Daguerre, by which the pictures of the camera lucida were rendered

permanent. All former attempts may be regarded as scientific

dilletanteism and nothing more. The earliest known pictures caused by

light on a sensitive surface were made by Thomas Wedgwood (a son of

Josiah, the famous potter), whose researches were published in 1802 in

the _Journal of the Royal Institution_, under the title: "An account of a

Method of copying Paintings upon Glass, and making Profiles by the agency

of Light upon Nitrate of Silver: with Observations by H. Davy."

Afterwards, came Nicephore Niepce, of Chalon sur Saone, who produced

permanent light pictures in 1814, and he and Daguerre went into

partnership in this matter, in 1829. Fox Talbot was the first to invent

a negative photograph, and he read a paper on "Photogenic Drawings"

before the Royal Society, on 31 Jan., this year; and that scientific

investigation of the new wonder excited the attention, even of amateurs,

is shown by a letter in the _Times_ of 21 Feb.:

"SIR,--Seeing in a newspaper, last week, that a German had found out M.

Daguerre's secret, I was so impressed with that testimony to the

possibility of _seizing a shadow_, that I thought over all the little I

knew of light, colours and chymistry. The next day, I took a piece of

writing paper, hastily prepared by myself, placed it behind the lens of a

_camera obscura_, made on the spur of the moment, and obtained a

satisfactory result; for the trees, in front of my house, were produced,

but not the parts agitated by the wind. Since that, I have obtained,

progressively improving, several landscapes, which may be called, most

appositely, 'lucigraphs.' I mention my humble effort as corroborative of

the reality, or feasibility of M. Daguerre's beautiful discovery; and I

can readily conceive that, in a very short time, the traveller's

portmanteau will not be complete without the very portable means of

procuring a lucigraph at pleasure.--Yours, etc., CLERICUS, Welney,

Wisbeach." This gentleman's prophecy has, long since, been verified, as

the "Kodakers" all over the world can testify. But the first public

experiment in England (if we exclude Wedgwood's) was made, on Sept. 13,

1839, when M. St. Croix exhibited the whole process of Daguerreotype, in

presence of a select party of scientific men and artists. He also

succeeded in producing a picture of the place of meeting; No. 7,

Piccadilly.

* * * * *

People were beginning to wake up as to social improvements, and the

better paving of, at least, the most public thoroughfares, was loudly

called for. Hitherto people had been content with the old cobble stones,

and wide kennels, or gutters--but henceforth there was to be inaugurated

a newer and better _regime_, as we learn from the _Observer_ of 6 Jan.:

"EXPERIMENTAL PAVEMENT OF OXFORD STREET.--This, doubtless, the most

extraordinary and novel undertaking which has ever been attempted in

the annals of road making, is, to the gratification, not only to the

respectable inhabitants of Oxford Street, but to a curious public, at

last, completed. On Friday (4 Jan.) at 2 o'clock, the line of this

great thoroughfare, occupied by the various specimens of paving,

extending from Charles Street to Tottenham Court Road, presented a

most animated spectacle, being thronged by thousands of spectators

anxious to witness its opening to the public. Shortly after 2

o'clock, the Paving Committee appointed by the Marylebone Vestry to

superintend the arrangement of this work of art, headed by the parish

beadles, in full uniform, with their maces; and accompanied by the

respective projectors and the parochial authorities, arrived on the

spot in procession, and passed over the ground, followed by 21

omnibuses, after which, the road was thrown open to the public. From

time to time, during the progress of the work, many erroneous

statements have gone the rounds of our daily contemporaries, with

respect to the extent of ground allotted to the experiments, and on

other matters connected with the arrangements. The following,

however, being obtained from an official source, may be fully relied

upon as correct: The whole space between Charles Street and Tottenham

Court Road is occupied by 12 different specimens, which are completed

in the following order, commencing at Charles Street: viz.--40 feet

of Robinson's Parisian bitumen--24 feet laid in straight courses, and

16 feet diagonally; 74 feet of parish stone paving, 54 feet of which

is laid in straight courses, the stones 9 inches deep, and the

interstices filled up with Claridge's asphalte; the remaining 20 feet

consisting of stones only 4.5 inches deep, but laid diagonally, and

filled up with the same composition; 60 feet of the Bastenne and

Gaujac bitumen, partly laid in straight courses, and partly

diagonally: 135 feet of parish stone paving, divided into three

sections, in the following order--1st, 70 feet of dressed Aberdeen

granite, with concrete bottom, and the joints grouted with lime and

sand; 2nd, 40 feet of the same, laid diagonally; and 3rd, 25 feet of

dressed Aberdeen granite, without concrete bottom, the joints filled

in with fine gravel; this is followed by 50 feet of the Scotch

asphaltum, which is entirely the produce of this country, laid down

in straight courses: 60 feet of Mr. Stead's pavement, of wooden

blocks, of a sexagonal form, 12 inches deep, divided into three

compartments, one prepared with Kyan's patent, part dipped in, and

joints run with asphalte, and part without any preparation whatever:

the last specimen, at Tottenham Court Road, is 60 feet of the Val de

Travers bitumen, a portion of which consists of square blocks, laid

in straight courses, and the remainder consisting of a layer of clean

Guernsey chippings cemented together by boiling asphalte, run among

them nearly to the surface, and a face made with asphalte, merely

showing the chippings, here and there, in patches. The whole work

presents a most even and beautiful road, and, yesterday, during the

day, attracted the notice of many hundreds of persons. The portion,

however, it is but justice to add, to which attention was more

particularly directed, was that of the wooden blocks, the noiseless

tendency of which, made the vehicles passing along, appear to be

rolling over a thick carpet or rug. The time allowed by the Vestry

of St. Marylebone for the test of these experiments, is until the

last Saturday of June next, when the official report of the surveyors

will be laid before that body, and upon which the fate of Oxford

Street depends."

People began to feel that it was high time that the Queen should

marry--but, as yet, no signs of such a thing, and no speculations, as far

as I can see, were hazarded as to who her future consort should be. At

length, one newspaper, the _Sun_, seems to have been inspired, by

authority, and is thus quoted in the _Times_ of 24 Jan.:--"'MARRIAGE OF

HER MAJESTY.--The country will learn with delight that the most

interesting part of the speech from the throne {81a} to both Houses of

Parliament, and the country at large, will be the announcement of Her

Majesty's intended marriage. The happy object of Queen Victoria's choice

is Prince Albert, son of the reigning Duke of Saxe Coburg, and cousin of

Her Majesty. Prince Albert is handsome, and about 22 years of age. He

has resided, for some time, in this country, on a visit to his Royal

relatives. How soon the happy event is to take place, we are not

prepared to say, but our readers may depend upon the authenticity of our

information.'--_The Sun_. Has not some wag been hoaxing the editor? We

suspect so, though, at the same time, we do not profess to have any

knowledge on the subject."

* * * * *

Indeed, it was about time that the Queen married, and got out of the

leading strings of the women folk who surrounded her. Had she been

married, we should, probably, have never heard of the sad episode of Lady

Flora Hastings.

This lady, who was highly accomplished, and the authoress of some pretty

poems, {81b} which were published after her death, was the eldest

daughter of Francis, Marquis of Hastings, and Flora, Countess of Loudon,

and was lady of the bedchamber to the Duchess of Kent. Two old

busybodies, the Ladies Portman and Tavistock, spread the vile and

unfounded rumour that the unfortunate lady was _enceinte_, and the Queen

forbade Lady Flora to appear at Court until she had submitted to the

indignity of a medical examination. The case called forth some very

strong feeling--and a vast quantity of correspondence was published on

the subject, especially the indignant letters of the poor lady's mother

to the Queen; but, perhaps, the most temperate account of the whole

affair, is in a letter from Lady Flora's uncle, Mr. Hamilton Fitzgerald,

which was published in the _Examiner_ of Sunday, 24th of March, and,

afterwards, copied into all the daily papers.

"SIR,--Many false and contradictory reports of the deplorable insult

which has been lately offered to my niece, Lady Flora Hastings, at

Buckingham Palace, having appeared in the public papers, I, as her

ladyship's nearest connection, feel it my duty to request of you to

publish the following account of the transaction, for the correctness

of which I vouch.

"Lady Flora arrived, some weeks since, from Scotland, very unwell.

She immediately consulted Sir James Clark, the physician to both Her

Majesty and the Duchess of Kent. One symptom of her complaint was a

swelling of the stomach. By dint of exercise and medical treatment,

she was getting better; the swelling had considerably subsided, and

she had every hope of a speedy recovery; when, on or about the 1st of

March, Sir James Clark went to her room, and announced to her the

conviction of the ladies of the Palace that she was pregnant. In

answer to all his exhortations to confession, 'as the only means of

saving her character,' Lady Flora returned an indignant, but steady

denial that there was anything to confess. Upon which, Sir James

Clark told her, 'that nothing but her submitting to a medical

examination would ever satisfy them, or remove the stigma from her

name.' Lady Flora found that the subject had been brought before the

Queen's notice, and that all this had been discussed, arranged and

denounced to her, without one word having been said on the subject to

her own mistress, the Duchess of Kent; who had no suspicion of what

was going on, and whose sanction was not sought for the humiliating

proposition which had been made to Lady Flora. On leaving Lady

Flora's room, Sir James Clark went to the Duchess of Kent, and

announced his conviction that Lady Flora was with child; and was

followed by Lady Portman, who conveyed a message from Her Majesty to

her mother, that the Queen would not permit Lady Flora to appear till

the examination had taken place. Lady Portman (who, with Lady

Tavistock, are mentioned as most active against Lady Flora) expressed

to the Duchess of Kent, her conviction of Lady Flora's guilt.

"'Her beloved mistress' never, for a moment, doubted Lady Flora's

innocence. She said that she knew her, her principles, and her

family too well to listen to such a charge. However, the edict was

given; and, the next day, Lady Flora having obtained the Duchess of

Kent's very reluctant consent--'for Her Royal Highness could not bear

the idea of her being exposed to such a humiliation'--but, Lady

Flora, 'feeling it her duty to Her Royal Highness, to herself, and to

her family, that a point blank refutation should be instantly given

to the lie,' submitted herself to the most rigid examination; and now

possesses a certificate, signed by Sir James Clark, and also by Sir

Charles Clark, stating, as strongly as language can state it, that

there are no grounds for believing that pregnancy does exist, or ever

has existed. Lord Hastings, though, at the time very ill from

influenza, went to London immediately, and demanded, and obtained,

from Lord Melbourne, a distinct disavowal of his participation in the

affair; and demanded, and obtained, an audience of Her Majesty, in

which, while he disclaimed all idea that the Queen had any wish to

injure his sister, he plainly, though respectfully, stated his

opinion of those who had counselled her, and his resolution to find

out the originator of the slander, and bring him, or her, to

punishment. Lady Flora is convinced that the Queen was surprised

into the order which was given, and that Her Majesty did not

understand what she was betrayed into; for, ever since the horrid

event, Her Majesty has shown her regret by the most gracious kindness

to Lady Flora, and expressed it warmly, with 'tears in her eyes.'

"The Duchess of Kent's conduct was perfect; 'a mother could not have

been kinder.' 'She immediately dismissed Sir James Clark from her

service, and refused to see Lady Portman'; and has crowned her

goodness by a most beautiful letter she has written to the Dowager

Lady Hastings, from whom the accounts were kept, till all hope of

avoiding publicity was impossible."

Her brother, the Marquis of Hastings, was indefatigable in trying to

unearth the promoters of the scandal, but, from the published letters,

without much result; but the unfortunate affair involved the whole Court,

for a time, in unpopularity--Lady Loudon, her mother, demanded from the

Queen, Sir James Clark's dismissal, but was not successful. Meantime,

the object of all this agitation, after resuming, for a time, the duties

of her situation, grew gradually worse, and, at length, expired, on the

5th July, at the age of 33. By the desire of Lord Hastings, a _post

mortem_ examination of the body took place, the particulars of which,

attested by five of the most eminent surgeons of the metropolis, were

published in the papers, and fully established the unfortunate lady's

complete innocence of the charge brought against her, the cause of death

being clearly shown to be enlargement of the liver.

Lady Flora's remains were removed from the palace, at an early hour in

the morning, to be conveyed, by steamboat, to Scotland. Even as early as

two o'clock, a considerable number of spectators were assembled, which

increased in every street through which the procession passed. Four

Royal carriages, including those of the Queen and the Queen Dowager, and

many belonging to the nobility, accompanied the hearse. Lady Flora's

body was interred, on the 15th of July, in the family vault at Loudon,

Ayrshire.

There were many books and pamphlets published with regard to this affair,

among which were her mother's letters to the Queen: "The Lady Flora

Hastings, a Brief Sketch"--"A Warning to the Baroness Lehzen, {84}

etc."--"The Palace Martyr, a Satire"--"The Dangers of Evil Council,

etc."--"A Dirge on the Death of Lady Flora Hastings"--"The late Lady

Flora Hastings: Statements of the Marquis of Hastings, etc."--"The Victim

of Scandal."

* * * * *

At the time of which I write, climbing boys were still employed to sweep

chimneys, and as a sample of the manner in which they were treated by

their masters, I give the following police case. 25 Jan.:

MARLBOROUGH STREET.--Henry Riddle, foreman to Robert Towser, a

chimney sweep, appeared before the magistrates on a summons charging

him under the 4 & 5 Wil. IV., c. 35, with the following act of

cruelty towards James Arnold, a boy about 12 years of age, and who,

for some time past, had been in Towser's employ.

Mr. Rice, a baker, of 31, Up. Seymour St., Portman Sq., deposed that,

on the afternoon of the 18th instant, his kitchen chimney, by some

accident, caught fire; and, in consequence of information thereof

being communicated to the defendant Riddle, he, soon afterwards, came

to the house, bringing with him the boy Arnold, whom he, at once,

desired to ascend, notwithstanding that the lighted soot was, at the

time, coming down into the grate in large flakes.

Mr. Rawlinson: Did you remonstrate with Riddle upon the inhumanity of

his conduct?

Complainant: I did, and begged of him not to send the boy up, as he

would, inevitably, be suffocated; to which he replied, "Oh, d---n it,

I've many a time been up a chimney ten times worse than that, myself,

and why can't he do it?" At this period, I had occasion to go

upstairs, and made my way on to the roof, just as a friend of mine

was about to pour down a quantity of water, when I begged of him not

to do so, as I fancied I heard the voice of someone within a short

distance of the top of the chimney; we both listened, and heard

someone faintly say, "For God's sake, take the chimney pot off, or I

shall be suffocated." With some difficulty we tore away the mortar,

and, having removed the pot, we beheld the poor boy Arnold, who kept

crying out, "Oh! pull me up, pull me up!" My friend then thrust down

his arm, and, laying hold of the little sufferer, succeeded in

extricating him from his perilous situation.

Mr. Rawlinson: Was the chimney, at the time, still on fire?

Complainant: It was, Sir.

Mr. Rawlinson: In what condition did the boy seem when lifted out of

the chimney?

Complainant: He seemed almost in a lifeless state, and when carrying

him in my arms downstairs, I was fearful he would not recover. After

the lapse of a little time, I gave him a small quantity of brandy,

and he, in a great measure, revived; Riddle then took hold of him,

and leading him to the roof of the house, insisted upon his

descending from the top to the bottom of the chimney, which he did,

and he and Riddle then left the place.

Mr. Rawlinson (to Riddle): What answer have you to make for

ill-treating this poor boy in so shameful a manner?

Riddle: The boy is not an apprentice, and he was not sent up the

chimney until a quantity of water had been thrown down.

Mr. Rawlinson, after remarking upon the atrocious nature of the

offence, ordered Riddle to find bail to answer the charge at the

Sessions; at the same time expressing a hope that a severe example

would be made of him.

From 1838 to 1841, there was exhibiting in London a famous lion tamer

named Van Amburgh, and, in January, 1839, the Queen went to Drury Lane

Theatre to witness his performance, with which she was so pleased, that

she commissioned Sir Edwin Landseer to paint a picture of Van Amburgh and

his lions, which was exhibited in 1839, and is now in the Royal

Collection at Osborne. If I am not very much mistaken there is another,

by the same artist, of the same subject, in the Duke of Wellington's town

mansion, at Apsley House.

We can see how long it takes to carry out well-known and wanted

improvements--take the Thames Embankment for example. Originally

suggested by Wren after the great fire of London in 1666, and afterwards

by William Paterson, the founder of the Bank of England, about 1694, the

matter slumbered until 1767, when the Corporation of the City of London

embanked one mile of the river. The question arose spasmodically until

1838, when the Corporation consulted with the Government as to the

advisability of embanking the Thames all the way between London and

Vauxhall Bridges, and, in Jan., 1839, the Government sanctioned surveys

being made and estimates prepared; the whole correspondence concerning

which may be found in the _Times_ of 2 Feb., 1839. But no practical

steps were taken in the matter until 1860, when the Metropolitan Board of

Works memorialised the House of Commons, and a Committee was appointed

which sat for the first time on 30 Ap., 1861. An Act for carrying out

the scheme was passed on 7 Aug., 1862, and the work was commenced in Nov.

of the same year. The northern (Victoria) embankment, which terminated

at Whitehall Stairs, was opened (as far as the footway went) to the

public on 30 July, 1868.

Victoria Park took a shorter time to mature. The first mention of it,

that I can find, is in the _Times_ of March, 1839: "The inhabitants of

St. Mary, Whitechapel, are bestirring themselves to obtain the formation

of a Royal Park in their neighbourhood, and the Vestry of the parish are

about to bring the matter before the public." And they did so with such

good effect that an Act was passed on 21 June, 1841 (4 & 5 Vic., c. 27),

"To enable Her Majesty's Commissioners of Works to complete the Contract

for the Sale of York House, and to purchase certain lands for a Royal

Park." York House was sold to the Duke of Sutherland, and with the

whole, or part, of the purchase money, the Commissioners were to purchase

certain lands or hereditaments containing about 290 acres, which "shall

for ever, thereafter, be taken and be a Royal Park, by the name of

'Victoria Park.'" The Park was completed, and opened to the public, in

1845.

On Monday, 25 March, occurred a most daring robbery of gold dust valued

at 4,600 pounds, which, at the time, created a great sensation. It seems

that two boxes of gold dust were brought to this country from Mexico, in

the Sea Gull Packet, consigned to the Brazilian Mining Co., and were

landed at Falmouth. They were, subsequently, transshipped on board the

City of Limerick steamer, which arrived at Dublin on Sunday afternoon.

The boxes were not landed at the wharf until Monday morning, and, at noon

on that day, the stranger who obtained possession of them drove up to the

wharf in a cab which he had hired in the city. The letter which he

presented to the wharfinger for the delivery of the boxes was in the same

handwriting as one which the wharfinger had received from Falmouth, and

which bore the postmark of that place, in the morning. It gave

particular directions respecting the boxes, and that they were only to be

delivered to a gentleman who would call in the course of the day, and

present a letter in the same handwriting for their delivery. The person

who obtained the boxes accurately described their contents, the marks on

them, and the time they were landed at Falmouth. The wharfinger, as

might be expected, was completely put off his guard by the ingenuity and

cunning of the thief, and delivered them over to him.

On 3 April, two Jews, Ellis and Lewis Caspar, father and son, were

brought up at Lambeth Street Police Station for being concerned in the

robbery; afterwards, two other prisoners, Emanuel Moses and his daughter,

Alice Abrahams, were arrested, and all were committed for trial, the

Caspars for stealing the gold, the other two for feloniously receiving

the same, well knowing it to be stolen. They were tried at the Central

Criminal Court on 24 June, the trial lasting eight days. The jury found

them all guilty, but recommended Alice Abrahams to mercy, believing that

she acted under the advice and influence of her father. Judgment was not

pronounced on them until 3 Feb., 1840, when the three male prisoners were

sentenced to fourteen years' transportation, and the female to four

months' hard labour. The Jewish community tried all their influence to

get these sentences modified, but the convicts sailed for Sydney in the

following October. The expenses of the prosecutor in connection with the

trial amounted to 2,900 pounds!

CHAPTER IX.

Queen Elizabeth's Statue--The Ladies of the Bedchamber--The Queen hissed

at Ascot Races--Land at Melbourne--Sunday Trading--New way of paying

Church Rates.

_Times_, 25 Ap.--"The workmen engaged some time since in taking down an

old public house adjoining St. Dunstan's Church, in Fleet St., discovered

in one of the cellars the ancient stone statue of Queen Elizabeth, which

formerly stood in the nave of the old church. The parochial authorities

have resolved to place it on the east end of the church, fronting Fleet

Street." An unfortunate position, for many raw, unlettered Irishmen, or

women, have mistaken it, owing to its environment, to be a statue of the

Virgin Mary, and have devoutly crossed themselves, and said their "Aves."

About this time occurred a political complication which afforded great

scope for gossip, and which showed that it was about time that the Queen

was freed from her female _entourage_, and had the protective advice of a

husband. On the 7th May, Lord Melbourne, having been beaten, by a small

majority, on the Bill concerning the Suspension of the Constitution in

Jamaica, resigned, and Sir Robert Peel was commissioned by the Queen to

form a new Ministry. He did so, but, for valid reasons, he required the

resignation, as was, and is, usual, of the ladies of the household. In

order that there shall be no bias on this divergence of opinion between

the Sovereign and her Minister, I quote a portion of Sir Robert Peel's

speech in the House of Commons, on 13 May, taking it from the authorised

version of _Hansard_. Sir Robert said that there was but one subject of

disunion between himself and Her Majesty.

"The difficulty arose with respect to certain portions of that part of

the establishment which is filled by the Ladies of the household. Sir, I

think it infinitely better, on this point--the one on which the

difficulty arose--I think it infinitely better, after mature

consideration--that I should not enter--in the first instance, at least,

nor unless invited by the noble Lord (John Russell)--into any statement

whatever of impressions on my own mind with respect to what took

place--but that I should refer exclusively to the letters which passed on

the subject; because if I were to state, here, impressions of my own, I

must detail verbal communications that passed, where two parties only

were present; and myself one of the party, being alone in this House to

offer explanations of what occurred. I approach, then, that point with

respect to which the difficulty, on this occasion, arose; and, for the

purpose of enabling the House to form a judgment with respect to the

nature of that difficulty, I shall confine myself, altogether, to the

written documents which passed on the occasion, in which are conveyed the

impressions on the mind of Her Majesty, and the impressions on my own

mind, with regard to the purport and effect of the communications which

passed between Her Majesty and myself, in respect to certain appointments

in the household, which are held by Ladies. Now, whatever blame may

attach on account of imperfect explanations, I am content to bear it;

whatever consequences may result from misconception, let them be visited

on me; but, as to my intentions in regard to the Ladies of the household,

I must not only state them, but I must prove them by most unequivocable

testimony.

"On the Wednesday evening--that is, the day before I saw Her Majesty on

this particular point--I had an opportunity of conferring with all those

whom I proposed to submit to Her Majesty as Ministers. I saw them on

Wednesday night, at my own house, about ten o'clock. I then stated to

them--and there are four of them now present, who heard the

communication, and can give their evidence upon it--I stated to them, and

to the peers whom I have before named, the course which I meant to pursue

with respect to the household, and had very little considered the matter

(I am speaking of the female part of it); I, really, scarcely knew of

whom it consisted. I took the 'Red Book' into my hand, and saw there the

different appointments of the household. I said to those who were

intended to be my future colleagues, that, with respect to all the

subordinate appointments--meaning every appointment, without exception,

below the rank of a Lady of the Bedchamber--I should propose to Her

Majesty no change whatever with respect to those. With respect to the

superior classes, I stated, that those Ladies who held offices of that

class, and who were immediate relatives of _our_ political opponents,

would, I took it for granted, relieve us from any difficulty by, at once,

relinquishing their offices. But, I stated, at the same time, that I did

think it of great importance, as conveying an indication of Her Majesty's

entire support and confidence, that certain offices in the household, of

the higher rank, if not voluntarily relinquished by the Ladies holding

them, should be submitted to some change Even with respect to the higher

offices, namely, the Ladies of the Bedchamber, I did state, however, that

there were some instances, in which, from the absence of any strong

party, or political, connection, I thought it would be wholly unnecessary

to propose a change. My noble and Right Hon. friends will confirm what I

assert. This passed on the evening of Wednesday; and I mention it only

in complete proof of my intentions, being perfectly willing, as I have

before observed, to have transferred, exclusively to me, whatever blame

may be attached to the imperfect explanation of my views.

"I saw Her Majesty on Thursday, and verbal communications took place on

this subject. As I stated before, into the nature of those

communications I shall not now enter in the slightest degree. I shall

merely read the two letters which passed; one conveying the impressions

of Her Majesty, and the other my own. The letter which I had the honour

of receiving from Her Majesty is dated May the 10th, 1839. I received it

at an early hour on Friday morning, and it is as follows:

"'Buckingham Palace.--May 10, 1839.

"'The Queen, having considered the proposal made to her, yesterday,

by Sir Robert Peel, to remove the Ladies of her Bedchamber, cannot

consent to adopt a course which she conceives to be contrary to

usage, and which is repugnant to her feelings.'

"Immediately--that is, in two or three hours after having received the

letter from Her Majesty, I addressed to Her Majesty a letter, of which

this is a copy:

"'Whitehall.--May 10, 1839.

"'Sir Robert Peel presents his humble duty to your Majesty, and has

had the honour of receiving your Majesty's note of this morning.

"'In respectfully submitting to your Majesty's pleasure, and humbly

returning into your Majesty's hands the important trust which your

Majesty had graciously pleased to commit to him, Sir Robert Peel

trusts that your Majesty will permit him to state to your Majesty his

impression with respect to the circumstances which have led to the

termination of his attempt to form an Administration for the conduct

of your Majesty's service.

"'In the interview with which your Majesty honoured Sir Robert Peel,

yesterday morning, after he had submitted to your Majesty the names

of those whom he proposed to recommend to your Majesty for the

principal executive appointments, he mentioned to your Majesty his

earnest wish, to be enabled, with your Majesty's sanction, so to

constitute your Majesty's household, that your Majesty's confidential

servants might have the advantage of a public demonstration of your

Majesty's full support and confidence; and that, at the same time, as

far as possible, consistently with that demonstration, each

individual appointment in the household should be entirely acceptable

to your Majesty's personal feelings.

"'On your Majesty's expressing a desire that the Earl of Liverpool

should hold an office in the household, Sir Robert Peel requested

your Majesty's permission at once to offer to Lord Liverpool the

office of Lord Steward, or any other which he might prefer.

"'Sir Robert Peel then observed, that he should have every wish to

apply a similar principle to the chief appointments which are filled

by the Ladies of your Majesty's household; upon which your Majesty

was pleased to remark, that you must reserve the whole of those

appointments, and that it was your Majesty's pleasure, that the whole

should continue as at present, without any change.

"The Duke of Wellington, in the interview to which your Majesty

subsequently admitted him, understood, also, that this was your

Majesty's determination, and concurred with Sir Robert Peel in

opinion that, considering the great difficulties of the present

crisis, and the expediency of making every effort, in the first

instance, to conduct the public business of the country with the aid

of the present Parliament, it was essential to the success of the

commission with which your Majesty had honoured Sir Robert Peel, that

he should have that public proof of your Majesty's entire support and

confidence, which would be afforded by the permission to make some

changes in that part of your Majesty's household, which your Majesty

resolved on maintaining entirely without change.

"Having had the opportunity, through your Majesty's gracious

consideration, of reflecting upon this point, he humbly submits to

your Majesty that he is reluctantly compelled, by a sense of public

duty, and in interest of your Majesty's service, to adhere to the

opinion which he ventured to express to your Majesty."

In a later portion of his speech, Sir Robert remarks:

"I, upon that very question of Ireland, should have begun in a

minority of upwards of twenty members. A majority of twenty-two had

decided in favour of the policy of the Irish Government. The chief

members of the Irish Government, whose policy was so approved of,

were the Marquis of Normanby and Lord Morpeth. By whom are the two

chief offices in the household at this moment held? By the sister of

Lord Morpeth, and the wife of Lord Normanby. Let me not, for a

moment, be supposed to say a word not fraught with respect towards

those two ladies, who cast a lustre on the society in which they

move, less by their rank than their accomplishments and virtues; but

still, they stand in the situation of the nearest relatives of the

two Members of the Government, whose policy was approved by this

House, and disapproved by me. Now, I ask any man in the House,

whether it is possible that I could, with propriety and honour,

undertake the conduct of an Administration, and the management of

Irish affairs in this House, consenting previously, as an express

preliminary stipulation, that the two ladies 1 have named, together

with all others, should be retained in their appointments about the

court and person of the Sovereign? Sir, the policy of these things

depends not upon precedent--not upon what has been done in former

times; it mainly depends upon a consideration of the present. The

household has been allowed to assume a completely political

character, and that on account of the nature of the appointments

which have been made by Her Majesty's present Government I do not

complain of it--it may have been a wise policy to place in the chief

offices of the household, ladies closely connected with the Members

of the Administration; but, remember that this policy does seriously

to the public embarrassment of their successors, if ladies, being the

nearest relatives of the retired Ministers, are to continue in their

offices about the person of the Sovereign."

So Lord Melbourne, returned to power.

[Picture: Child's play. Chorus:--"Can't get out!"--"Can't get out." 14

June, 1939]

The genial Caricaturist John Doyle, as there were no illustrated comic

papers in those days, illustrated this incident in his H. B. Sketches.

No. 591 is "A Scene from the farce of _The Invincibles_, as lately

performed in the Queen's Theatre"--in which the Duke of Wellington and

Sir Robert Peel are being expelled at the point of the bayonet, by ladies

clad as soldiers. Sir Robert says: "These Household Troops charge in a

most disorderly manner, but they are too many for us." While the Duke

observes: "Our position is no longer tenable; draw off in good order,

while I cover the retreat." No. 592 is "The Balance of Power. The

figure proposed to displace the old one of Justice at the top of

Constitution Hill." It shows a statue of the Queen, as Justice, holding

a pair of scales, in which "Private Friendship," typified by two ladies

of the household, weighs down "Public Service" full of Ministers. I have

here reproduced No. 597, "Child's Play," in which figure the Queen, the

Duchess of Sutherland, the Marchioness of Normanby, and other ladies of

the household. No. 599 is a "Curious instance of (Ministerial)

'Resuscitation,' effected by distinguished members of the _Royal_ Humane

Society." Lord Melbourne is lying on a couch, attended by the Queen and

ladies of the household. The Queen holds a smelling bottle to his nose,

and says: "Ah, there's a dear, now do revive."

Whether it was owing to this affair, or not, I know not, but at Ascot

races this year the Queen was absolutely hissed at by some one, or more

persons--and the _Times_ of 25 June quotes from the _Morning Post_ thus:

"At the last Ascot races, we have reason to believe that the Duchess

of Montrose and Lady Sarah Ingestre received an intimation that Her

Majesty was impressed with the idea that they were among the persons

who had hissed at a moment when no sounds but those of applause,

gratulation and loyalty ought to have been heard. It was, we

believe, further intimated to the noble ladies we have mentioned,

that the Royal ear had been abused, to the effect already stated, by

Lady Lichfield. The ladies, who had reason to think that they had

been thus unjustly and ridiculously accused, applied immediately to

their supposed accuser, who denied that she had made any such

communication. On being urged to give this denial in writing, she

declined to do so without first consulting her lord. But, on the

application being renewed at a subsequent period, her ladyship, as we

understand, explicitly, and in writing, denied that she had given

utterance to the calumny in question. Here the matter stood, until,

from some incidents connected with the late ball at Buckingham

Palace, the two ladies, thus impeached, saw reason to believe that

the erroneous impression communicated to Her Majesty at Ascot had not

been entirely removed. It was an impression, however, which they

could not permit to remain without employing every means of removing

it; and, accordingly, the Duchess of Montrose went to Buckingham

Palace, and requested an audience of Her Majesty. After waiting for

a considerable period (two hours, as we have been informed), her

Grace was informed by the Earl of Uxbridge, that she could not be

admitted to an audience, as none but Peers and Peeresses in their own

right could demand that privilege. Her Grace then insisted upon Lord

Uxbridge taking down in writing what she had to say, and promising

her that the communication should immediately be laid before Her

Majesty. In this state, we believe, the matter remains,

substantially, at the present moment, although it has taken a new

form, the Duke of Montrose having, we understand, thought it

necessary to open a correspondence upon the subject with Lord

Melbourne."

There was only a partial denial given to the above, which appeared in the

_Times_ of 5 July. "We are authorised to give the most positive denial

to a report which has been inserted in most of the public papers, that

the Countess of Lichfield informed the Queen that the Duchess of Montrose

and Lady Sarah Ingestre hissed Her Majesty on the racecourse at Ascot.

Lady Lichfield never insinuated, or countenanced any such report, and

there could have been no foundation for so unjust an accusation."

Melbourne, in Australia (named, of course, after the Premier), was

founded 1 June, 1837, and I mention the fact to shew the prosperity of

the infant city--for in two years' time, on this its second anniversary,

certain lots of land had advanced in price from 7 to 600 pounds, and from

27 to 930 pounds.

I cannot help chronicling an amusing story anent Sunday trading. For

some time the parish authorities of Islington had been rigidly

prosecuting shopkeepers for keeping open their shops on Sunday, for the

sale of their goods, such not being "a work of necessity, or mercy," and

numerous convictions were recorded. Most of the persons convicted were

poor, and with large families, who sold tobacco, fruit, cakes and sweets,

in a very humble way of business, and considerable discontent and

indignation was manifested in the parish in consequence of such

prosecutions; the outcry was raised that there was one law for the rich

and another for the poor, and a party that strongly opposed the

proceedings on the part of the parish, resolved to try the legality and

justice of the question, by instituting proceedings against the vicar's

coachman, for "exercising his worldly calling on the Sabbath day," by

driving his reverend master to church, that not being a work of

necessity, or mercy, as the reverend gentleman was able both to walk and

preach on the same day. For this purpose a party proceeded to the

neighbourhood of the vicar's stables one Sunday, and watched the

proceedings of the coachman, whom they saw harness his horses, put them

to the carriage, go to the vicar's house, take him up, and drive him to

church, where he entered the pulpit, and preached his sermon. One day,

the following week, they attended Hatton Garden Police Office and applied

to Mr. Benett for a summons against the coachman. The magistrate, on

hearing the nature of the application, told them it was a doubtful case,

and the clerk suggested that if they laid their information the

magistrate might receive it, and decide on the legal merits of the case.

This was done, the summons was granted, and a day appointed for hearing

the case.

This took place on June 14, when John Wells, coachman to the vicar of

Islington, appeared to answer the complaint of Frederick Hill, a

tobacconist, for exercising his worldly calling on the Sabbath day.

John Hanbury, grocer, of 3, Pulteney Street, being sworn, stated that, on

Sunday, the 9th inst, about 1 o'clock, he saw the defendant, who is

coachman to the vicar of Islington, drive his coach to the Church of St.

Mary, Islington, where he took up the vicar and his lady, and drove them

to their residence in Barnsbury Park.

Mr. Benett: Are you sure it was the vicar?

Witness: I heard him preach.

John Jones, of Felix Terrace, Islington, corroborated this evidence.

Mr. Benett said, that the Act of Parliament laid down that no tradesman,

labourer, or other person shall exercise his worldly calling on the

Lord's day, it not being a work of necessity or charity. He would ask

whether it was not a work of necessity for the vicar to proceed to church

to preach. A dissenter might say it was not a work of necessity. The

coachman was not an artificer who was paid by the hour or the day, but he

was engaged by the year, or the quarter, and was not to be viewed in the

light of a grocer, or tradesman, who opened his shop for the sale of his

goods on the Sabbath day. After explaining the law upon the subject, he

said that he was of opinion that the defendant driving the vicar to

church on Sundays, to perform his religious duties, was an act of

necessity, and did not come within the meaning of the law, and he

dismissed the case.

The clergy did not seem to be much in favour with their flocks, for I

read in the _Annual Register_, 1 Aug., of "A NEW WAY OF PAYING CHURCH

RATES.--Mr. Osborne, a dissenter, of Tewkesbury, having declined to pay

Church Rates, declaring that he could not conscientiously do so, a

sergeant and two officers of the police went to his house for the purpose

of levying under a distress warrant to the amount due from him. The

officers were asked to sit down, which they did, and Mr. Osborne went

into his garden, procured a hive of bees, and threw it into the middle of

the chamber. The officers were, of course, obliged to retreat, but they

secured enough of the property to pay the rate, and the costs of the

levy, besides which, they obtained a warrant against Mr. Osborne, who

would, most likely, pay dearly for his new and _conscientious_ method of

settling Church Rate accounts."

CHAPTER X.

The Eglinton Tournament--Sale of Armour, &c.--The Queen of Beauty and her

Cook--Newspapers and their Sales.

The Earl of Eglinton had a "bee in his bonnet," which was none other than

reviving the tournaments of the Age of Chivalry, with real armour, horses

and properties; and he inoculated with his craze most of the young

aristocracy, and induced them to join him in carrying it out. The

preliminary rehearsals took place in the grounds of the Eyre Arms Tavern,

Kilburn. The last of these came off on 13 July, in the presence of some

6,000 spectators, mostly composed of the aristocracy. The following is a

portion of the account which appeared in the _Times_ of 15 July:

"At 4 o'clock the business of the day commenced. There might be seen

men in complete steel, riding with light lances at the ring,

attacking the 'quintain,' and manoeuvering their steeds in every

variety of capricole. Indeed, the show of horses was one of the best

parts of the sight. Trumpeters were calling the jousters to horse,

and the wooden figure, encased in iron panoply, was prepared for the

attack. A succession of chevaliers, _sans peur et sans reproche_,

rode at their hardy and unflinching antagonist, who was propelled to

the combat by the strength of several stout serving-men, in the

costume of the olden time, and made his helmet and breastplate rattle

beneath their strokes, but the wooden

. . . Knight

Was mickle of might,

And stiff in Stower did stand,

grinning defiance through the barred aventaile of his headpiece. It

was a sight that might have roused the spirit of old Froissart, or

the ghost of Hotspur. The Knight had, certainly, no easy task to

perform; the weight of armour was rather heavier than the usual

trappings of a modern dandy, and the heat of the sun appeared to be

baking the bones of some of the competitors. Be this as it may,

there was no flinching. The last part of the tournament consisted of

the Knights tilting at each other. The Earl of Eglinton, in a

splendid suit of brass armour, with _garde de reins_ of plated chain

mail, and bearing on his casque a plume of ostrich feathers, was

assailed by Lord Cranstoun, in a suit of polished steel, which

covered him from top to toe, the steel shoes, or sollarets, being of

the immense square-toed fashion of the time of Henry VIII. The

lances of these two champions were repeatedly shivered in the attack,

but neither was unhorsed; fresh lances were supplied by the esquires,

and the sport grew 'fast and furious.' Lord Glenlyon and another

knight, whose armour prevented him from being recognized, next tilted

at each other, but their horses were not sufficiently trained to

render the combat as it ought to have been, and swerved continually

from the barrier. It was nearly eight o'clock before the whole of

the sports were concluded and the company withdrawn. We believe no

accident happened, though several gentlemen who essayed to 'witch the

world with noble horsemanship' were thrown, amidst the laughter of

the spectators. Captain Maynard proved himself a superior rider, by

the splendid style at which he leaped his horse, at speed, repeatedly

over the barrier, and the admirable manner in which he performed the

modern lance exercise, and made a very beautiful charger curvet round

and round his lance placed upright on the ground. The whole of the

arrangements were under the direction of Mr. Pratt, to whose

discretion the ordering of the tilting, the armour and arming, and

all the appliances for the tournament have been entrusted.

"Considering that the business of Saturday was but a rehearsal, and,

putting entirely out of the question the folly, or wisdom, of the

whole thing, it must be acknowledged that it has been well got up.

Some of the heralds' and pursuivants' costumes are very splendid.

There is an immense store of armour of all sorts, pennons, lances,

trappings, and all the details of the wars of the middle ages. The

display in Scotland will, certainly, be a gorgeous pageant, and a

most extraordinary, if not most rational, piece of pastime."

The three days' jousting and hospitality at Eglinton Castle, Ayrshire,

which commenced on the 28th, and ended on the 30th, August, are said to

have cost the Earl of Eglinton the sum of 40,000 pounds. He invited the

flower of the aristocracy to attend--all the armour was choice and old,

and the costumes were splendid. Every accessory was perfect in its way;

and so it should have been, for it was two years in preparation. The

Marquis of Londonderry was King of the Tourney, and Lady Seymour, a

grand-daughter of _the_ Sheridan, was the "Queen of Love and Beauty."

By the evening of the 27th, Eglinton Castle was not only filled from

cellar to garret, but the surrounding towns and villages were crammed

full, and people had to rough it. Accommodation for man, or beast, rose

from 500 to 1,000 per cent.; houses in the neighbourhood, according to

their dimensions, were let from 10 to 30 pounds for the time; and single

beds, in the second best apartments of a weaver's cabin, fetched from

10/- to 20/- a night, while the master and mistress of the household,

with their little ones, coiled themselves up in any out of the way

corner, as best they might. Stables, byres, and sheds were in

requisition for the horses, and, with every available atom of space of

this description, it was found all too little, as people flocked from all

parts of the country.

The invitation given by the Earl was universal. Those who applied for

tickets of admission to the stands were requested to appear in ancient

costume, fancy dresses, or uniforms, and farmers and others were asked to

appear in bonnets and kilts, and many--very many--did so; but although

all the bonnet makers in Kilmarnock, and all the plaid manufacturers in

Scotland, had been employed from the time of the announcement, onwards,

they could not provide for the wants of the immense crowd, and many had

to go in their ordinary dress.

Unfortunately, on the opening day, the weather utterly spoilt the show.

Before one o'clock, the rain commenced, and continued, with very little

intermission, until the evening. This, necessarily, made it very

uncomfortable for all, especially the spectators. Many thousands left

the field, and the enjoyment of those who remained was, in a great

measure, destroyed. The Grand Stand, alone, was covered in, and neither

plaid, umbrella, nor great-coat could prevail against a deluge so heavy

and unintermitting; thousands were thoroughly drenched to the skin; but

the mass only squeezed the closer together, and the excitement of the

moment overcame all external annoyances, although the men became sodden,

and the finery of the ladies sadly bedraggled.

It had been arranged that the procession should start from the Castle at

one o'clock, but the state of the weather was so unfavourable, that it

did not issue forth till about half-past two, and the weather compelled

some modifications; for instance, the Queen of Beauty should have shown

herself "in a rich costume, on a horse richly caparisoned, a silk canopy

borne over her by attendants in costume," but both she, and her attendant

ladies, who were also to have been on horseback, did not so appear, but

were in closed carriages, whilst their beautifully caparisoned

palfreys--riderless--were led by their pages.

There were 15 Knights, besides the "Lord of the Tournament," the Earl of

Eglinton, and much as I should like to give their description and

following, I must refrain, merely giving two as a sample--

"Retainers of the

Lord of the

Tournament.

Halberdiers of the

Lord, in Liveries of

his Colours.

Man at Arms The GONFALON, Man at Arms

in half armour. Borne by a Man at in half armour.

Arms.

THE LORD OF THE

TOURNAMENT.

EARL OF EGLINGTON.

Groom. In a suit of Gilt Groom.

Armour, richly

chased,

on a barded

Charger--caparisons,

&c.,

of blue and gold.

THE BANNER.

Borne by LORD A.

SEYMOUR

Esquire. Esquire. Esquire.

G. DUNDAS. F. CAVENDISH, Esq. G. M'DONAL, Esq.

Retainers of the

Lord, as before.

_Halberdiers of the

Knight of the

Griffin_,

in Liveries of his

Colours.

Man at Arms THE GONFALON, Man at Arms

in half armour. Borne by a man at in half armour.

Arms.

_The Knight of the

Griffin_.

THE EARL OF CRAVEN,

Groom. In a suit of engraved Groom.

Milanese Armour

inlaid with gold, on

a barded charger.

Caparisons, &c., of

Scarlet, White and

Gold.

Esquire. THE BANNER, Esquire.

The HON. F. CRAVEN. Borne by a man at The HON. F.

Arms in MACDONALD.

Half Armour.

Retainers--"

The other Knights were:--_The Knight of the Dragon_, MARQUIS OF

WATERFORD; _Knight of the Black Lion_, VISCOUNT ALFORD; _Knight of Gael_,

VISCOUNT GLENLYON; _Knight of the Dolphin_, EARL OF CASSILIS; _Knight of

the Crane_, LORD CRANSTOUN; _Knight of the Ram_, HON. CAPT. GAGE; _The

Black Knight_, JOHN CAMPBELL, ESQ., of Saddell; _Knight of the Swan_,

HON. MR. JERNINGHAM; _Knight of the Golden Lion_, CAPT. J. O. FAIRLIE;

_Knight of the White Rose_, CHARLES LAMB, ESQ.; _Knight of the Stag's

Head_, CAPT. BERESFORD; _The Knight of the Border_, SIR F. JOHNSTONE;

_Knight of the Burning Tower_, SIR F. HOPKINS; _The Knight of the Red

Rose_, R. J. LECHMERE, ESQ.; _Knight of the Lion's Paw_, CECIL BOOTHBY,

ESQ.

There were, besides, Knights Visitors, Swordsmen, Bowmen, the Seneschal

of the Castle, Marshals and Deputy Marshals, Chamberlains of the

household, servitors of the Castle, a Herald and two Pursuivants, a Judge

of Peace, and a Jester--besides a horde of small fry.

The first tilt was between the Knights of the Swan and the Red Rose, but

it was uninteresting, the Knights passing each other twice, without

touching, and, on the third course, the Knight of the Swan lost his

lance.

Then came the tilt of the day, when the Earl of Eglinton met the Marquis

of Waterford. The latter was particularly remarked, as the splendour of

his brazen armour, the beauty of his charger, and his superior skill in

the management of the animal, as well as in the bearing of his lance,

attracted general observation. But, alas! victory was not to be his,

for, in the first tilt, the Earl of Eglinton shivered his lance on his

opponent's shield, and was duly cheered by all. In the second, both

Knights missed; but, in the third, the Earl again broke his lance on his

opponent's armour; at which there was renewed applause from the

multitude; and, amidst the cheering and music, the noble Earl rode up to

the Grand Stand, and bowed to the Queen of Beauty.

There were three more tilts, and a combat of two-handed swords, which

finished the outdoor amusements of the day, and, when the deluged guests

found their way to the Banqueting Hall, they found that, and its sister

tent, the Ballroom, utterly untenantable through the rain; so they had to

improvise a meal within the Castle, and the Ball was postponed.

Next day was wild with wind and rain, and nothing could be attempted out

of doors, as the armour was all wet and rusty, and every article of dress

that had been worn the preceding day completely soaked through, and the

Dining Hall and the Great Pavilion required a thorough drying. The

former was given up to the cleansing of armour, etc., and, in the latter,

there were various tilting matches on foot, the combatants being clothed

in armour. There was also fencing, both with sticks and broadsword,

among the performers being Prince Louis Bonaparte, afterwards Napoleon

III. His opponent with the singlesticks was a very young gentleman, Mr.

Charteris, and the Prince came off second best in the encounter, as he

did, afterwards, in some bouts with broadswords with Mr. Charles Lamb.

Luckily, in this latter contest, both fought in complete mail, with

visors down, for had it not been so, and had the combat been for life or

death, the Prince would have had no chance with his opponent.

On the third day the weather was fine, and the procession was a success.

There was tilting between eight couples of Knights, and tilting at the

ring, and the tourney wound up with the Knights being halved, and started

from either end of the lists, striking at each other with their swords in

passing. Only one or two cuts were given, but the Marquis of Waterford

and Lord Alford fought seriously, and in right good earnest, until

stopped by the Knight Marshal, Sir Charles Lamb.

In the evening, a banquet was given to 300 guests; and, afterwards, a

ball, in which 1,000 participated. As the weather, next day, was so

especially stormy, the party broke up, and the experimental revival has

never again been attempted, except a Tourney on a much smaller scale,

which was held on 31 Oct., 1839, at Irvine, by a party from Eglinton

Castle; but this only lasted one day.

I regret that I have been unable to find any authentic engravings of this

celebrated tournament, but I reproduce a semi-comic contemporaneous

etching from the _Satirical Prints_, _Brit. Mus._

The armour and arms used in this tournament were shown in Feb., 1840, at

the Gallery of Ancient Armour in Grosvenor Street, and they were

subsequently sold by Auction on July 17 and 18 of that year. They

fetched ridiculously low prices, as the following example will show:

A suit of polished steel _cap a pied_ armour, richly engraved and gilt,

being the armour prepared for the Knight of the Lion's Paw, with tilting

shield, lance, plume and crest _en suite_, 32 guineas.

The emblazoned banner and shield of the Knight of the Burning Tower, with

the suit of polished steel, _cap-a-pied_ armour, with skirt of chain

mail, 35 guineas.

The splendid suit of armour worn by the Knight of the Ram, with crest and

plume, 24 guineas.

The magnificent suit of polished steel armour, worn by the Knight of the

Swan, with the emblazoned tilting apparel, horse armour, and caparison,

tilting saddle, lances to correspond, and a splendid modelled horse of

life size, carved and painted after nature, 36 pounds.

[Picture: The Eglinton Tournament]

The armour worn as a Knight Visitor by Prince Louis Napoleon, with an

elaborate visored headpiece, and other appurtenances complete, 9 guineas.

The two beautifully-fashioned _melee_ swords, used in the combat between

Prince Louis and the Knight of the White Rose, seven shillings.

On the second day's sale some of the suits fetched better prices. The

splendid suit of fluted mail, worn by the Marquis of Waterford, was the

gem of the collection. It was in the finest preservation, elaborately

worked, and beautifully bright. It was considered one of the most

perfect and complete suits in existence, and was bought at 240 guineas

for the Tower of London. Lord Alford's and Mr. Lechmere's suits both

went for 100 guineas each.

The spirit of the Tournament seems even to have affected the ladies, for

we read of a passage of arms between Lady Seymour, the Queen of Beauty,

and Lady Shuckburgh. It originally appeared in the _Observer_ of 8 Feb.,

1840, but was copied into the _Times_ and other papers.

(Copy 1). "Lady Seymour presents her compliments to Lady Shuckburgh,

and would be obliged to her for the character of Mary Stedman, who

states that she has lived twelve months, and still is, in Lady

Shuckburgh's establishment. Can Mary Stedman cook plain dishes well?

make bread? and is she honest, good tempered, sober, willing and

cleanly? Lady Seymour would also like to know the reason why she

leaves Lady Shuckburgh's service. Direct, under cover, to Lord

Seymour, Maiden Bradley."

(Copy 2.) "Lady Shuckburgh presents her compliments to Lady Seymour.

Her Ladyship's note, dated Oct. 28, only reached her yesterday, Nov.

3. Lady Shuckburgh was unacquainted with the name of the

kitchenmaid, until mentioned by Lady Seymour, as it is her custom

neither to apply for, or give characters to any of the under

servants, this being always done by the housekeeper, Mrs. Couch, and

this was well known to the young woman; therefore Lady Shuckburgh is

surprised at her referring any lady to her for a character. Lady

Shuckburgh having a professed cook, as well as a housekeeper, in her

establishment, it is not very likely she, herself, should know

anything about the ability or merits of the under-servants; therefore

she is unable to answer Lady Seymour's note. Lady Shuckburgh cannot

imagine Mary Stedman to be capable of cooking for any, except the

servants' hall table. Nov. 4, Pavilion, Hans Place."

(Copy 3.) "Lady Seymour presents her compliments to Lady Shuckburgh,

and begs she will order her housekeeper, Mrs. Pouch, to send the

girl's character without delay; otherwise, another young woman will

be sought for elsewhere, as Lady Seymour's children cannot remain

without their dinners, because Lady Shuckburgh, keeping 'a proffessed

cook and a housekeeper,' thinks a knowledge of the details of her

establishment beneath her notice. Lady Seymour understood from

Stedman that, in addition to her other talents, she was actually

capable of dressing food for the little Shuckburghs to partake of,

when hungry."

[To this note was appended a clever pen-and-ink vignette, by the Queen of

Beauty, representing the three little Shuckburghs, with large,

turnip-looking heads and cauliflower wigs, sitting at a round table, and

voraciously scrambling for mutton chops, dressed by Mary Stedman, who is

seen looking on with supreme satisfaction, while Lady Shuckburgh appears

in the distance, in evident dismay.]

(Copy 4.) "MADAM,--Lady Shuckburgh has directed me to acquaint you

that she declines answering your note, the vulgarity of which is

beneath contempt; and, although it may be the characteristic of the

Sheridans to be vulgar, coarse and witty, it is not that of 'a lady,'

unless she happens to be born in a garret and bred in a kitchen.

Mary Stedman informs me that your Ladyship does not keep either a

cook, or a housekeeper, and that you only require a girl who can cook

a mutton chop. If so, I apprehend that Mary Stedman, or any other

scullion, will be found fully equal to cook for, or manage the

establishment of, the Queen of Beauty.

"I am, your Ladyship's etc.--ELIZABETH COUCH (not Pouch.)"

Even in those days, Newspapers were somewhat given to vaunt themselves as

to their circulation, but they had no need to call in the aid of the

chartered accountant, as they could get their facts from the number of

stamps supplied--the stamp then being of the value of three halfpence per

newspaper, an impost which was not removed until 15 June, 1855, by the

Act 18 and 19 Vict., c. 27. The _Times_ of 5 Aug., 1839, gives us

"A return of the number of Newspaper Stamps issued to the several

Newspapers in London, from 1 Ap. to 29 June, 1839, inclusive;

specifying each Newspaper by name, and the number of Stamps issued

each month during that period to each Newspaper."

April. May. June.

Morning Chronicle 180,000 210,000 140,000

Morning Post 85,000 90,000 80,000

Morning Herald 140,000 175,000 140,000

Times 330,000 330,000 430,000

Courier 29,000 33,000 27,000

Globe 72,000 90,000 72,000

Standard 83,000 80,000 101,000

Sun 111,000 105,000 105,000

Evening Chronicle 30,000 20,000 10,000

Evening Mail 25,000 50,000 35,000

St. James's Chronicle 52,000 58,000 66,000

CHAPTER XI.

The Chartists--Their going to church--Dissolution of the

Convention--Approaching marriage of the Queen--The Queen and

lunatics--Raid on a Gaming House--Act of Penance.

This year Chartism was rampant and very militant. On 1 April there were

riots at Devizes, on 3 May, seven men were arrested at Manchester for

drilling, and, on the 25th of that month a great meeting was held on

Kersall Moor, four miles from Manchester. On 4th July there were very

serious riots at Birmingham, and again on the 15th. On the same date

between 3,000 and 4,000 Chartists met on Clerkenwell Green to condemn the

action of the authorities at Birmingham, and, towards the end of the

month, numerous meetings were held in the North of England, and there

were riots at Newcastle and Stockport. In August there was great unrest

in the North, and some trials took place at Birmingham and Manchester for

rioting and sedition.

A new, and somewhat unexpected method of agitation, was, about this time,

adopted by the Chartists. They betook themselves, suddenly, to

attendance in a body at public worship, taking early possession on the

Sundays of the various cathedrals and parish churches, to the exclusion

of the more regular attendants. On the afternoon of Sunday, 11 Aug., a

party of them, about 500 in number, met together in West Smithfield, and

walked in procession to St. Paul's Cathedral. On arriving there, many of

them refused to take off their hats; but, after some remonstrance from

the Vergers, they submitted. The majority of them wore a little piece of

red ribbon in their button holes, and conducted themselves quite

peaceably. On the Sunday following, their brethren at Norwich pursued a

similar course at the Cathedral of that city, which was crowded almost to

suffocation. The Bishop, who preached, took the opportunity to deliver

an impressive remonstrance on the folly and danger of their proceedings.

The Chartists behaved well in the Cathedral; but, at St. Stephen's Church

in the evening, they made a disturbance. The Chartists at Manchester,

following the advice of Feargus O'Connor, attended the Old Church (now

the Cathedral) in great numbers. The authorities, having been previously

advised of their intention, had the military in readiness to act, should

the Chartists behave in a disorderly manner: but they conducted

themselves with great decorum. It is said that, previous to Divine

Service, they handed the clergyman a Chartist text to preach from, but he

selected as his text, "My house is the house of prayer, but ye have made

it a den of thieves"; on announcing which, the Chartists rose, and

quitted the church. The same tactics were followed in the principal

towns all over the country, but, either from the success of them not

being very apparent, or from the distastefulness of the method employed,

the practice was not followed up for long--nor with any great regularity.

On the 14th Sep. the Chartist National Convention was dissolved; and, on

the 20th Feargus O'Connor was arrested for sedition, on a Judge's

Warrant, at Manchester, and things were fairly quiet during the remainder

of the year, with the exception of a serious Chartist riot, on 4 Nov., at

Newport, in Monmouthshire, where many rioters were killed.

We have seen how, in the beginning of the year, the _Sun_ had prophesied

the marriage of the Queen and Prince Albert, for which it was duly

pooh-poohed by the _Times_--but on 22 Aug., the _Morning Post_ had the

dreadful temerity to announce the same--and the _Court Circular_ of 11

Oct. tells us, that "The Hereditary Prince (Ernest) and Prince Albert of

Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, landed at the Tower, at 4 o'clock yesterday afternoon,

from the Continent. Their Serene Highnesses were conveyed in two of the

Royal landaus to the Royal Mews at Pimlico, and, shortly afterwards, left

town with their suite in two carriages and four, for Windsor Castle, on a

visit to the Queen."

On the 14th Oct., the Queen informed Lord Melbourne of her intention to

marry Prince Albert, which met with the Premier's warm approbation. Next

day she told the Prince that she wished to marry him. He had been out

early, with his brother, hunting, but returned at twelve, and

half-an-hour afterwards, the Queen sent for him, and he found her alone

in her room. That it was a love match on both sides is well known, and,

until the untimely death of the Prince Consort, they were models of

conjugal love and felicity.

On 14 Nov. the Prince and his brother left Windsor--and departed for the

Continent, via Dover; and, at a Privy Council held at Buckingham Palace

on 23rd of that month, the Queen communicated her intention of marriage.

The declaration was as follows:

"I have caused you to be summoned at the present time, in order that

I may acquaint you with my resolution in a matter which deeply

concerns the welfare of my people, and the happiness of my future

life.

"It is my intention to ally myself in marriage with the Prince Albert

of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. Deeply impressed with the solemnity of the

engagement which I am about to contract, I have not come to this

decision without mature consideration, nor without feeling a strong

assurance that, with the blessing of Almighty God, it will at once

secure my domestic felicity, and serve the interests of my country.

"I have thought fit to make this resolution known to you, at the

earliest period, in order that you may be fully apprised of a matter

so highly important to me and to my Kingdom, and which, I persuade

myself, will be most acceptable to all my loving subjects."

Upon this announcement, all the Privy Councillors present made it their

humble request that Her Majesty's most gracious declaration to them might

be made public; which Her Majesty was pleased to order accordingly.

The Queen suffered severely from lunatics. In June a man got into the

gardens of Buckingham Palace, and, when arrested, declared he had come

there for the sole purpose of killing Her Majesty, and was duly committed

to Tothill Bridewell. Within a day or two of his release, in the middle

of October, he went to Windsor and broke three or four panes of glass in

the Castle. He was afterwards apprehended, but what became of him, I do

not know; in all probability he was sent to a lunatic asylum.

In the paper which gives the account of the above, I read, "James Bryan,

the Queen's Scotch suitor, was in Windsor the whole of yesterday (Sunday,

13 Oct.). In the morning, he was waiting, for a considerable period, at

the door of St. George's Chapel, leading to the Cloisters, to have a view

of the Queen, as Her Majesty and the two Princes of Saxe-Coburg, and the

Duchess of Kent left the Chapel. In the afternoon, he walked on the

Terrace, and conducted himself in his usual manner, very respectfully

bowing to the Queen, as Her Majesty passed him on the New Terrace."--By

the above, he must have been well known.

On 29 Nov., a respectably-dressed man got over the high iron gates

leading to the Castle, a place at which there were no sentries, and

walked across the Park, to the grand entrance to the Castle. Upon seeing

the porter in attendance at the lodge, he said: "I demand entrance into

the Castle as King of England"; to which the porter replied: "Very well,

your Majesty, but be pleased to wait until I get my hat," and then taking

him to the Castle, handed him over to the police. He turned out to be a

man named Stockledge, who was partner in an extensive wholesale business

in Manchester. He had been in two lunatic asylums, and when questioned

by the Mayor of Windsor, as to the object of his visit, said that: "he

was like all other men who wanted wives--he was looking after one,"

evidently alluding to Her Majesty. On being further questioned, he said

"he was the King of England, and was impelled by the Spirit." He

afterwards said that "an unknown power had done it," and that "it was the

Spirit which helped him over the gates." Of course he _was_ mad.

There was yet another fool this year, but, this time, he was not a

maniac--only a Post Office Clerk, who wanted to have an interview with

Her Majesty. On the afternoon of the 8th Dec., a carriage and four drove

up to Windsor Castle, and, from it, alighted a personage wearing a

foraging cap, a fur boa round his neck, and fur gloves, who announced

himself as the bearer of important despatches which he must deliver into

the Queen's own hands. This, of course, was not complied with, and as he

would not part with the documents, he was handed over to the police, and

taken to the station, where he made a sturdy resistance when they were

taken from him. He turned out to be a junior clerk in the Foreign Post

Office, named William Saunders, who, being on duty when the Foreign Mails

arrived, found some letters and papers addressed to the Queen, and put

them into his pocket with the intention of delivering them himself. He

was suspended from his duties, but I do not know his ultimate fate.

Gambling houses were still in existence, although the Police Act of this

year (2 & 3 Vict., c. 47, s. 48) gave the police great and additional

power towards suppressing them. Here is a sample raid as reported in the

_Observer_ of 15 Dec.:

"Superintendent Baker, C, succeeded on Saturday night week, in breaking

his way into a gambling house, 60 Jermyn Street (commonly called the

Cottage), and some persons, therein found, were fined, on Monday, at

Marlborough Street Office. In all, seven persons were captured, of whom,

two were connected with the management of the gambling house; the others

were gentlemen players. They were taken to the Station house in Vine

Street; and, as we know it to be the anxious desire of the police

authorities to suppress the nuisance of gaming houses, we feel that we

are but lending our humble aid towards effecting that object in now

publishing the real names of those gentlemen who were captured, and who

passed themselves off to the police and the magistrate as being 'Jones,'

'Smith,' and other conventional misnomers. (Here follow the names.) Our

Correspondent has told us of a certain noble lord, who was running here

and there, on the night of the capture of his friends, striving, in the

first instance, to get them bailed out, and, failing in that, to provide

for them creature comforts in their cells. We cannot avoid mentioning

one or two little incidents connected with this affair. The admission of

spirits to prisoners in a station house is strictly forbidden, but, on

this occasion, their friends outside succeeded in introducing eight soda

water bottles filled with excellent pale brandy, so regularly corked and

wired, as to deceive even the sharp eyes of the Inspector.

"Next day (Sunday), at 12 o'clock, they were bailed out, but, on the

following morning at Marlborough Street Office, a sad mishap had all but

blown up the misnomers; for, when the name of 'Jones' was called from the

police sheet, the gentleman who had honoured that name by assuming it,

quite forgot his condescension, until one of his companions in trouble

nudged him in the side, saying, 'D---n it, that's you.' By the way, the

croupier escaped through the skylight, with the bank, amounting, it is

supposed, to, at least, 500 pounds. He, and a boy who escaped with him,

had but a minute or two the start of the police. As it was, the croupier

met with a most severe accident, having cut his thigh so deeply as to

cause a most serious hemorrhage. The gutter was flooded with his blood."

I wind up the year by chronicling an event which, I fancy, will never

occur again, one of the most singular circumstances connected with it

being, that the penitent was a Jewess. It occurs in a letter in the

_Times_ of 19 Dec.:

"ACT OF PENANCE, ST. JOHN'S, CLERKENWELL.

"Sir.--Understanding that many stories are afloat concerning the above

act, performed on Sunday last (15 Dec.) by a young woman of the Jewish

persuasion, named Deborah Cohen, I thought the particulars might be

acceptable. This affair appears to have arisen from some family quarrel,

the action in the Ecclesiastical Court, having been brought against her

by her brother, for having made use to her sister-in-law, Rosetta Cohen,

of a term contrary as well to this part of our laws, as to the usages of

society. To avoid expenses she had no means to meet, and the

consequences thereof, her solicitor advised her to admit her fault, and

abide the award of the Court. This having got wind, the unpretending

church of St. John's was beset, early on Sunday last, by great crowds,

amongst whom it required great exertion of the parish officers and the

police to preserve a proper decorum. The crowds were, however,

disappointed in seeing this young woman exposed in the open church, with

the covering of a white sheet, etc., the order from the Ecclesiastical

Court only having enjoined her to appear in the vestry room of this

church, on Sunday morning last, after service and a sermon, and before

the minister, churchwardens, and five or six of the plaintiff's friends

(some of whom attended), to recite, after the minister, her regret, etc.,

in the words laid down in the order. This was carried into effect,

accordingly, the crowds in the church and St. John's Square remaining

long after the ceremony had been performed, and the parties had left the

vestry.

"W."

CHAPTER XII.

Commencement of Penny Post--Postage Stamps--Prince Albert's

allowance--The _Times_ comments on the Marriage--Royal Wedding

Cake--Louis Napoleon's duel--Nelson Column--Noblemen's servants--Uproar

at the Italian Opera House.

The most important event in the beginning of this year was the

inauguration of the Penny Post on Jan. 10. At the end of 1839, an

uniform postage rate of 4d. per letter was tried on Dec. 5, which was so

successful that the present penny postage was established, one feature of

which, the prepayment of letters, was much appreciated by the public.

The number of letters despatched by the Mails from the Metropolis, on the

10th, was much greater than was expected, amounting to 112,000, the daily

average for January, 1839, having been about 30,000 only. Out of the

112,000 letters there were only 13,000 or 14,000 unpaid, and this was

probably owing to the fact that people could not get out of their old

habits all at once.

The Postage Stamps, however, were not ready, for we read in the _Times_

of 17 Jan.: "The construction of the stamps is advancing with all speed,

the several artists to whom they are intrusted being actively engaged

upon them. In the stamp for letter paper and the adhesive stamp, a

profile of the Queen is the principal ornament. The letter paper stamp

is being engraved by Mr. Wyon, R.A., medallist to the Mint. Charles

Heath is engraving the drawing taken from Wyon's City medal, by H.

Corbould, intended for the adhesive stamp. W. Mulready, R.A., has

furnished the design for the cover and envelope, which is in the hands of

John Thompson for engraving."

And, now, until the Queen was married, all the talk was of that event.

First of all Prince Albert must be made a naturalised Englishman, and a

bill to that effect was read for the third time in the House of Lords on

21 Jan., in the Commons on the 22nd, and received the Royal Assent on the

24th. {119a} On the 23rd he was invested with the Order of the Garter at

Gotha. The second reading of the Act for his naturalization was heard in

the House of Lords on the 27th, but owing to some dispute as to the

question of his precedence, it was adjourned until the 31st, when it was

read, and on 3 Feb. it was read a third time, and it received the Royal

Assent on 7 Feb. But there was another thing yet to be done, which was

to supply His Serene Highness with Funds, and on Jan. 22 Lord John

Russell proposed the sum of 50,000 pounds per annum. The discussion

thereon was adjourned until the 24th, and re-adjourned until the 27th,

when Mr. Hume moved a reduction to 21,000 pounds, which was lost by a

majority of 267. Col. Sibthorp then proposed a sum of 30,000 pounds,

which was agreed to, and the Act received the Royal Assent on 7 Feb.

The feeling of the country on the subject of the Royal Marriage is, to my

thinking, very fairly summarised in a leading article in the _Times_ of

10 Feb., portions of which I transcribe: "It has followed from this

policy, {119b} that an English monarch should, _coeteris paribus_, rather

avoid than court an alliance with one of the first-rate powers of Europe,

but should prefer security to aggrandizement, satisfied with a consort

selected from a less prominent, and, therefore, less exposed, position.

If there be safety, therefore, in comparative weakness and

insignificance, we know not that, on such a ground, any other princely

house throughout Europe, could offer inducements preferable to those

possessed by those of Saxe-Coburg. Objections against this individual

member of the family might, perhaps, present themselves to reflecting

minds, on the score of his close consanguinity to Queen Victoria, a

circumstance not usually looked upon as propitious to the hope of a

flourishing offspring.

"Another argument might be urged against the match, from the undoubted

fact that the name of Saxe-Coburg is not popular in this country, a

misfortune for which we do not undertake to account; nor shall we longer

dwell upon either of the above considerations, which we have hinted at,

merely to shew that they have not wholly escaped our notice. . . .

"Prince Albert has now become one of us. He is, actually, now an English

subject. He is tied to us by law and self-interest. Let us bind him to

us by gratitude and affection. The happiness of our youthful Queen is

now in his hands. He has the means of so directing and assisting her

future footsteps, as to retrieve for Her Majesty (we speak with

frankness, but with all respect) all she has forfeited in the hearts of

the most loyal, enlightened and virtuous of her subjects, through her

unhappy bias towards persons and principles which are hourly undermining

the deep foundations of her Throne.

"We have said that it devolves upon Prince Albert to counteract a host of

'evil influences,' and to aid his Royal Consort in repairing 'many very

grievous errors' into which selfish and treacherous counsellors have

betrayed her, and which her constant separation (contrived by them) from

all but one section, or coterie of her subjects, has served to render

extremely difficult of correction.

"Queen Victoria has scarcely been permitted to see the general aspect of

the British aristocracy, or to become acquainted with their sentiments,

their characters, or their manners. The petty, artificial world framed

and got up for her deception, is no more capable of suggesting to her

mind the vast moral and social creation beyond its narrow boundaries,

than one or two leaves of a _hortus siccus_ exemplify the productions of

a noble forest, or a varied and inimitable landscape. . . .

"Are the heads of the nation to be discovered at the Queen of England's

Court? Has the worth, or wisdom, or eminence of the nation any access to

the society of the Sovereign? Have the clergy of England, or any of

them--have their representatives--bishops, priests, or deacons, the

opportunity of communicating personally with the temporal head of the

Church of England? Are they, or any of them, ever seated at the Royal

table, or received into the Royal presence, or favoured with the Royal

smile? No; such associations comport not with the policy of her

ministers; the ear of the Sovereign is whispered from the choicest of her

subjects--the palace doors are locked inexorably against all but a

certain clique."