THE REIGN OF VICTORIA (_continued_).
The Queen's Visit to Ireland--The Royal Family at
Balmoral--Movements of the Court--Illness and Death of the Prince
Consort--The National Lamentation--The Laureate's Lines--The
Address in Parliament--A peaceful Session--The Education Code--The
American War in Parliament--The _Nashville_--The Blockade and the
Cotton Famine--The Defences Vote--The Game Act--Palmerston and
Cobden--Prorogation of Parliament--The Garotters--The _Alabama_--Mr.
Adams and Earl Russell--Blunders and Delays--Russell's Excuses--The
_Alabama_ sails--Progress of the War in America--Greece and
the Ionian Islands--The Society of Arts--The Exhibition of
1862--Jealousy of Prussia and France--The Colonial Exhibition--The
Cotton Famine in 1863--Engagement and Marriage of the Prince of
Wales--Mr. Gladstone's Budget--"Essays and Reviews"--Obituary of the
Year--Russell and Gortschakoff--The Six Points--They are ignored by
Russia--The Polish Revolution--Russell and Brazil--The Coercion of
Japan--The American War in 1863--Mexican Affairs--Intervention of
England, France, and Spain--The French Emperor's Designs--Withdrawal
of the British and Spanish Expeditions--The Crown of Mexico offered
to the Archduke Maximilian--Captain Speke in Central Africa.
The year 1861, in the earlier months of which the Queen had been called to
sustain a severe affliction through the death of her mother, the Duchess
of Kent, was destined not to close without bringing her Majesty face to
face with a still more terrible bereavement. But all looked bright and
prosperous for a time. In the summer the Queen paid a visit to Ireland,
the third since she ascended the Throne. In 1849 she made a voyage along
the eastern coast, calling at Cork, Waterford, Dublin, and Belfast. In
1853 she visited the Dublin Exhibition, accompanied by the Prince Consort,
the Prince of Wales, and Prince Alfred. On the 21st of August the Royal
party, including the Queen, the Prince Consort, the Princess Alice, the
Princess Helena, and Prince Arthur, crossed from Holyhead to Kingstown in
the Royal yacht, arriving in the night, and dropping anchor in the middle
of the harbour. The Royal party proceeded to Dublin by train and took up
their residence at the Viceregal Lodge in Phœnix Park. During the day
they drove about Dublin, visiting various public buildings. Afterwards
the Royal party, including the Prince of Wales, started for the Lakes of
Killarney. The Queen was hailed with enthusiasm along the whole line by
the inhabitants, who thronged in multitudes to see her. The Queen took
up her residence in Kenmare House at Killarney--the beautiful mansion of
the Earl of Kenmare. It had been arranged that the Queen should divide
her time equally between the two magnates who owned equally the wondrous
Killarney Lakes--the Earl of Kenmare and Mr. Herbert, whose seat at
Muckross was placed amid scenery surpassing even that about Kenmare House,
and took in the interesting ruins of Muckross Abbey. After several days
spent in this terrestrial paradise, the Queen left Killarney _en route_
for Scotland, by way of Dublin and Holyhead.
The Queen, the Prince Consort, and the Royal Family proceeded at once to
Balmoral on their return from Ireland. The time was spent there in the
usual pursuits and exercises most conducive to health--in driving, riding,
walking, sketching, fishing, deer-stalking, visiting, and rural sports
of various kinds. It is not easy to conceive a picture of greater human
felicity than the Queen and her family presented this year. Her eldest
daughter had been married to the Prince of Prussia, and had given birth
to an heir to the Throne of that country. The Prince of Wales, the Heir
Apparent to the Throne of England, had, in his American tour and in his
residence in Ireland, won the hearts of all with whom he came in contact.
Prince Alfred had entered the naval service and was, if possible, a still
greater favourite with the public. The Princess Alice had been engaged
to his Royal Highness the Prince Louis of Hesse-Darmstadt, who was now
on a visit to Balmoral. The rest of the Royal children were all that the
fondest parents could desire. The Prince Consort was regarded as the
best of husbands and fathers; and if any one could have pointed out an
individual in her Majesty's dominions as singularly blessed in all the
relations of life, and as likely for many years to enjoy his happy lot, he
would have named the husband of the Queen. He enjoyed good health; he was
in the prime of life, only forty-two years of age; and never perhaps had
he enjoyed life with greater zest. But how soon was this bright prospect
overcast! Who could have imagined that before the end of the year that
home would be visited by death, and that the Queen, then so happy, should
become a heartbroken widow--smitten down by a calamity the shadow of
which was to rest upon her spirit throughout the whole of her future life?
[Illustration: QUEEN VICTORIA AT OSBORNE.
AFTER THE PAINTING BY SIR EDWIN LANDSEER, R.A.]
The Queen left Balmoral on the 22nd of October, and slept that night in
the palace of Holyrood. On the following day the Prince Consort laid
the foundation-stone of the new General Post Office in Edinburgh, and
afterwards performed the same ceremonial for the Industrial Museum of
Scotland. On the same evening the Royal party resumed their journey to
England, and arrived at Windsor Castle at half-past eight the following
morning. On the 1st of November the Queen, as Sovereign of the most
exalted Order of the Star of India, held her first investiture in great
state. This Order had been instituted a few months before, to provide a
means for adequately recognising and honouring services rendered to the
British Crown in India, whether by native princes or by British subjects.
It consisted of a Grand Master (who was the Viceroy of India for the time
being), and twenty-five knights, together with such extra and honorary
knights as her Majesty might from time to time see fit to appoint.
Nothing unusual was heard of the Royal Family till the middle of
December; and the heavy toll of the great bell of St. Paul's gave the
first intimation to many of the people of London that the Prince Consort
had been suffering from any dangerous illness. On the previous Saturday
the _Court News_ had announced that the Queen had driven out in an open
carriage, and that the Prince had been confined to his apartments during
the week by a feverish cold, attended with pains in the limbs. On the
following Wednesday a bulletin stated that he was suffering from fever
not attended by unfavourable symptoms, but likely from its nature to
continue for some time. On Saturday, however, rumours were abroad at the
West-End that the Prince was dangerously ill and that he was sinking fast.
Then it was reported that he had rallied and that even at the Castle no
serious alarm existed. When, therefore, the bell of St. Paul's tolled
at midnight over the hushed city, it inspired a feeling of apprehension
which was too sadly realised next morning. The news of the death of the
Prince on the 14th was then flashed along every wire throughout the United
Kingdom and over the Continent of Europe. It being Sunday, it was not till
the people went to church and noticed the omission of the Prince's name
in the Liturgy, that the truth was realised. The grief was universal,
pervading every household, as if each had lost some dear and honoured
relative. The funeral took place on the 23rd of December. At the express
desire of the departed Prince, it was of a private character; but all
the chief men of the State attended the obsequies at the Royal Chapel.
Nature seemed to sympathise with the national feeling of depression and
gloom. The weather was cold and damp, the sky dull and heavy. There was
a procession of State carriages to St. George's Chapel, at the door of
which the Prince of Wales and the other Royal mourners were assembled to
receive the corpse. The grief of the Royal children was very affecting;
little Prince Arthur especially sobbed as if his heart were breaking. When
all was over, and the last of the long, lingering train of mourners had
departed, the attendants descended into the vault with lights, and moved
the bier and coffin along the narrow passage to the royal vault. The day
was observed throughout the realm as one of deep solemnity. The bells of
all the churches were tolled, and in many churches special services were
performed. In the towns the shops were closed, and the window blinds of
private residences were drawn down. A large number of persons appeared in
mourning, and in seaport towns the flags were hoisted half-mast high. The
words of the Poet Laureate were scarcely too strong when he said--
"The shadow of his loss drew like eclipse
Darkening the world. We have lost him: he is gone:
We know him now: all narrow jealousies
Are silent; and we see him as he moved,
How modest, kindly, all-accomplished, wise;
With what sublime repression of himself,
And in what limits, and how tenderly;
Not swaying to this faction or to that:
Not making his high place the lawless perch
Of wing'd ambitions, nor a vantage ground
For pleasure; but thro' all this tract of years
Wearing the white flower of a blameless life,
Before a thousand peering littlenesses,
In that fierce light which beats upon a throne,
And blackens every blot: for where is he
Who dares foreshadow for an only son
A lovelier life, a more unstain'd than his?"
Indeed, were it not that his character lacked variety, and from its
German formalism was sometimes out of harmony with English sentiment, the
Prince was an ideal Sovereign. The loss that the nation had sustained
naturally occupied the attention of Parliament at the opening of the
ensuing Session. In the Royal Speech, which was delivered by commission,
the following allusion was made to this all-engrossing subject:--"We are
commanded by her Majesty to assure you that her Majesty is persuaded that
you will deeply participate in the affliction by which her Majesty has
been overwhelmed, by the calamitous, untimely, and irreparable loss of
her beloved Consort, who has been her comfort and support. It has been,
however, soothing to her Majesty, while suffering most acutely under this
awful dispensation of Providence, to receive from all classes of her
subjects the most cordial assurances of their sympathy with her sorrow,
as well as of their appreciation of the noble character of him, the
greatness of whose loss to her Majesty and to the nation is so justly and
so universally felt and lamented." In the Queen's answer to the Address we
have the mournful key-note of many an utterance that afterwards came from
her widowed heart. Her Majesty said:--"I return you most sincere thanks
for your dutiful and affectionate Address, especially for the manner
in which you have assured me of your feelings on the irreparable loss
sustained by myself and the country, in the afflicting dispensation of
Providence which bows me to the earth."
Parliament had met on the 6th of February. In the Royal Speech the
death of the Prince Consort was naturally the prominent topic. Among
other results of the deep and universal sympathy with the Queen in her
sorrow, was a general determination, rather tacit than expressed, on the
part of statesmen of all parties, that the Session should be a quiet
one. The first question warmly debated this Session related to the new
code of regulations, commonly called "the Revised Code," which had been
promulgated by the Committee of Council for Education in the preceding
summer. Two great defects had gradually become apparent in the working
of the system by which State aid was extended to primary schools. The
nature of the first will be apparent when it is stated that, till now,
every teacher in a school receiving an annual grant, and every pupil
teacher, had been separately recognised and dealt with by the Education
Department; and since the number of such schools had been enormously
increased since the Committee of Council commenced its operations, the
strain on the organisation of the Department had by this time become
nearly intolerable. The other defect of the system of annual grants Mr.
Lowe (then Vice-President of the Council) considered to be this, that,
notwithstanding the check of Government inspection, it did not provide
sufficient security for the economical application of the public money. A
large proportion of the teachers--such was his argument--concentrate their
attention on their highest classes and their cleverest boys; the annual
examination thus becomes an occasion for the display of carefully selected
pupils, and ceases to be a careful scrutiny. It was on the strength of
considerations such as these that Mr. Lowe drew up his Revised Code, which
was at once to relieve the strain on the administrative machinery of the
Department, and to introduce the principle of "payment by results." All
recognition of, and all grants to, teachers and pupil teachers were to
cease, and the Department was henceforward to have dealings with none
but the managers of schools. Secondly, the establishment grants for
fixed sums, which had been hitherto made to teachers and pupil teachers
certified to be efficient by the Government inspector, were to be replaced
by capitation grants, regulated in the following manner:--On the day of
the annual examination, all pupils who during the previous twelve months
had attended school at least one hundred times, might be presented by
the teacher to be examined by the inspector in reading, writing, and
arithmetic. Six "standards," varying in difficulty with the age of the
pupils, were settled in each of these subjects; and a certain small grant
was to be obtainable in respect of any pupil who might pass satisfactorily
in any one of the three. The plan of the Government was severely
criticised by many Conservative members, and met with little favour out
of doors among those who had been most active in the establishment, and
continued most zealous in the support, of primary schools. Especially
the clergy of the Church of England complained of the suddenness of the
change, of the utter disregard shown to the claims and services of the
pupil teachers, of the pecuniary difficulties in which they themselves as
managers would in many cases be involved by it. Mr. Walpole moved, on the
11th of March, a series of resolutions, declaring it to be inexpedient to
adopt the principle of payment by results exclusively and censuring many
other portions of the Code. The House, however, went into Committee; but
shortly before the Easter recess the Government took into its serious
consideration the objections that had been raised to their plan, and
resolved to introduce such modifications as would disarm the opposition of
the more influential and reasonable objectors. The chief concession was
the re-introduction of a small establishment grant, having nothing to do
with "payment by results," to the extent of 4s. per annum for each child
in daily attendance; something also was done for the pupil teachers. The
Opposition was satisfied and Mr. Walpole withdrew his resolutions; and
the scheme for regulating the apportionment of the public grant in aid of
primary schools received the sanction of Parliament.
[Illustration: FUNERAL OF THE PRINCE CONSORT. (_See p._ 327.)]
The progress of the Civil War in America excited a restless feeling
in Britain, which naturally found its expression within the walls of
Parliament. An incident happened in January which brought forcibly home
to the minds of Britons the difficulties and embarrassments of that
neutrality in the American struggle which we had proclaimed, and were
resolved honestly to maintain. An armed steamer, named the _Nashville_,
ran up the Southampton Water and anchored near the town. It soon
transpired that she was a Confederate cruiser, and that, having just
captured at sea a large American merchant ship, the _Harvey Birch_, she
had, after removing her crew and such plunder as was not too bulky, set
fire to and destroyed her. This proceeding was an inevitable consequence
of the British proclamation forbidding either belligerent to bring
prizes into any British port. In a few days the United States steam
frigate _Tuscarora_, her captain and crew boiling over with wrath and the
desire for battle, came up the Southampton Water and anchored within a
short distance of the _Nashville_. To avert a collision, the Admiralty
immediately sent a man-of-war to Southampton. Greatly to his chagrin,
the captain of the _Tuscarora_ found himself compelled to conform to the
provisions of the Foreign Enlistment Act, which enjoined the authorities
of any port in which two vessels belonging to belligerent States might
be present at the same time, to allow to the one that should leave first
a clear interval of twenty-four hours before the other might pursue.
Thanks to this provision, the _Nashville_ (which was no match for the
_Tuscarora_) made her escape; but her career was of no long continuance,
as she was soon afterwards chased into Gibraltar and there sold.
The tidings of sanguinary conflicts occurring along the whole frontier
territory, from the west of Missouri to the shores of Virginia, shook the
mind of Britain to its inmost depths and, according to the preconceived
sympathies of different characters and classes, were variously judged and
interpreted. Merchants, impatient at the cotton famine, found spokesmen
in Parliament to inveigh against the fitfulness and inefficiency of the
blockade of the Southern ports and to urge the Government to interfere.
But since, to say nothing of the strong evidence produced on the other
side proving that the blockade was as effective as was possible in the
circumstances, the very fact that there was a cotton famine established
the point to any reasonable mind without more ado, the advocates of
British interference on this ground gained nothing by their motion.
Mr. Lindsay, the chief representative of that portion of the mercantile
community of Britain which desired the recognition of the Confederacy
as an independent State, proposed a resolution, in July, suggesting the
propriety of offering mediation with a view of terminating the hostilities
between the contending parties. The matter was warmly discussed, but in
the end the counsels of prudence and caution prevailed and the resolution
was rejected. In order to meet the distress in Lancashire occasioned
by the cotton famine, a measure was passed, called the "Union Relief
Aid Bill," for enabling the Unions in that county to borrow money,
when the pressure and burden of pauperism had reached a certain point,
upon the security of the rates. Alarmed by the formidable destructive
efficacy which the Confederate ironclad the _Merrimac_ (or _Virginia_)
had exhibited in her attack upon the wooden ships of the Federals,
the Government proposed, and the House readily sanctioned, a vote of
£1,200,000 for the strengthening and reconstruction of our forts and
arsenals.
Sir Baldwin Leighton's Act, the object of which was to enlist the services
of the county police as assistant gamekeepers to the country gentlemen,
had been originally introduced in the Upper House by Lord Berners, but
failed to pass. The Bill was then adopted by Sir Baldwin Leighton in the
Lower House, and by careful tactics, and arranging that a sufficient
number of its friends should always be within call so as to ensure a
superiority of force at the decisive moment, the country gentlemen
carried it through all its stages and passed it. The Lords then had no
scruple about accepting a Bill that naturally could not but command their
sympathies and the Bill became law. This result was the more singular,
inasmuch as the Government opposed the Bill at every stage. But, owing
to the apathy of the borough members (an apathy proved by the smallness
of the numbers on the division lists), the opposition failed. The Bill
empowered a constable to search a person suspected of being in the
possession of game, and imposed a penalty not exceeding five pounds.
Although in the debates of the Session there had been, according to that
joint understanding with which it was begun, little exhibition of party
heat or rancour, yet the spectacle of a large section of the Tory party
almost openly avowing their sympathy with Lord Palmerston and his policy,
and the evident congeniality between him and them, were not suffered to
pass without observation. Towards the close of the Session, Mr. Cobden,
in a carefully prepared and powerful speech, arraigned the policy of
the Prime Minister as that of a man who was fighting, or pretending
to fight, under a banner not his own, and whose acts were nicely
calculated to gain the approval of his ostensible adversaries and carry
discouragement into the ranks of his nominal adherents. He asked, What had
been the professed principles of the Liberal party? They were economy,
non-intervention, and reform. But the present was the most extravagant
Government that had administered the affairs of the country in time of
peace during the present generation. This assertion he supported by an
elaborate comparison, and proceeded to ascribe the whole of this increased
expenditure to Lord Palmerston, who himself represented a policy that
had cost the country no less a sum than £100,000,000. After adverting
to the wars with China, where Colonel Gordon, who was afterwards to
die at Khartoum, was saving the empire from the anarchy of the Taeping
rebellion, as instances of the departure of the Ministry from the policy
of non-intervention, he turned to the state of great Liberal questions
and of parties in the House, which, he said, was not an honest state.
Lord Palmerston was not governing the country by his own party, but with
the aid of his political opponents, who were then in power without the
responsibility of office. He analysed Lord Palmerston's Liberalism by
his acts. The Ballot, and other questions in which members on that side
of the House took an interest, were going back under the noble lord's
leadership. Rather than continue as they were, he would prefer being in
opposition. Comparing Lord Palmerston with Mr. Disraeli, he thought the
latter would be quite as desirable upon the Treasury bench. The veteran
Premier defended himself against this vehement attack with the skill
and adroitness which his thorough knowledge of Parliament, his tact,
_bonhomie_, and cheerful elasticity of temper, rendered habitual and
natural to him. He urged that if his zeal in the cause of Reform appeared
to have grown somewhat cold, he was therein only reflecting faithfully the
general feeling of the House, while the House no less faithfully reflected
the general feeling in the country. As to economy, he could, of course,
urge the continual rise in the costliness of national armaments, owing to
the invention of new engines of destruction, and maintain that to spend
money on fortifying the points where it was vulnerable to attack, was, in
fact, a nation's best and truest economy. On the delicate question of the
state of parties and Conservative support he said little, and that little
was eminently judicious and discreet.
Parliament was prorogued on the 7th of August, and home affairs went on as
quietly as usual for the remainder of the year. Pauperism increased, owing
to the collapse of industry in Lancashire; nevertheless, the population
was greater by a quarter of a million at the end of the year than it
had been at the beginning of it. But a number of persons equivalent to
about one half of this increase emigrated in the course of the year. In
the autumn the honest and law-abiding citizens of London were alarmed by
the outbreak and rapid increase of a new species of crime, the "garotte
robbery." The villains who introduced it did not observe an absolutely
uniform practice, but the usual _modus operandi_ was this:--The victim
who had been marked out for attack was seized from behind round the
throat by one of the confederates; at the same instant another coming
up in front dealt him a violent blow in the stomach; he was then thrown
violently down on his back, thus being rendered insensible, and in this
position his pockets were rifled, murderous blows and kicks being freely
administered in case of any symptom of returning consciousness. After
many cases of garotte robbery had occurred, in some of which the victims
had died of the injuries received, while in all the constitution and
health were permanently shaken, the garotting of a member of Parliament,
Mr. Pilkington, drew the special attention of the Home Secretary to the
condition of the streets. The police became suddenly active and arrested
a number of known criminals on suspicion; these were tried _en masse_ by
Baron Bramwell, and all who were identified as having been implicated in
garotte robberies were sentenced to heavy terms of penal servitude. The
class of ferocious human wolves to which the condemned persons belonged
was partly dispersed, partly cowed, by this judicious severity.
About this time the _Alabama_ escaped from the Mersey through a want of
vigilance on the part of the British authorities; and, inasmuch as her
evasion led to such momentous consequences, we propose to narrate in some
detail the circumstances connected with that event. There can be no doubt
that, on the part of those who ordered and paid for her, the _Alabama_ was
intended from the first for a Confederate vessel of war. She was built
in the yard of the Messrs. Laird, Birkenhead. Of course, her armament
was not put into her till after she had left the Mersey. But that she
was being built and fitted for a vessel of war no one who knew anything
about naval architecture could doubt. Indeed, the matter was notorious at
Liverpool, where the sympathies of the mercantile community ran strongly
in favour of the Confederates. While she was building much correspondence
passed between the Federal Consul at Liverpool and his Government and the
American Minister in London; but Mr. Adams desired to wait until he could
lay before Earl Russell sufficient evidence to justify him in attaching
the vessel and prosecuting the builders under the Foreign Enlistment Act.
Meanwhile, on the 15th of May, the vessel was launched under the name of
the "290."
On the 23rd of June Mr. Adams thought that he had acquired sufficient
proof. On that day he wrote to Earl Russell, saying that a new and
powerful vessel was being fitted out at Liverpool "for the especial and
manifest object of carrying on hostilities by sea," and soliciting such
action as might "tend either to stop the projected expedition, or to
establish the fact that its purpose is not inimical to the people of the
United States." Before replying, Earl Russell obtained a report on the
subject from the Customs department at Liverpool, which, on the 4th of
July, he enclosed to Mr. Adams. The report stated that there had been
no attempt on the part of the builders of the "290" "to disguise, what
is most apparent, that she is intended for a ship of war." It proceeded
to recommend that the American Consul at Liverpool should submit such
evidence as he could obtain to the collector there, who would thereupon
take such measures as the Foreign Enlistment Act would require, and
concluded by saying that the officers at Liverpool would keep a strict
watch on the vessel. Mr. Adams then instructed the consul to follow the
course indicated in the Customs officials' report. The consul accordingly
submitted a statement on the 9th of July, but the collector replied that
the details given were not, in a legal point of view, sufficient to
justify him in taking upon himself the responsibility of the detention of
the ship. Mr. Dudley (the consul) then directed his utmost endeavours to
obtaining direct legal proof, and in this he at last succeeded, laying it,
in the form of affidavits, before the collector on the 21st of July. The
affidavits were on the same day transmitted by the collector to the Board
of Customs at London, with a request for instructions by telegraph, "as
the ship appeared to be ready for sea and might leave any hour."
Up to this point, if the action of our authorities had not been all that
the Federal Government might have desired, at any rate it had been neither
unfriendly nor inefficient. The collector at Liverpool could not proceed
to detain the vessel without legal evidence; but as soon as such evidence
was supplied, he immediately sent it to the head of his department and,
while requesting instructions, indicated the extreme urgency of the case.
But now there unfortunately occurred an act of gross administrative
_laches_, of which the American Government and people had just reason
to complain. From the Board of Customs at London the affidavits and
the collector's letter were sent to the Treasury. This must have been
done--at any rate, ought to have been done--on the 22nd of July, and the
Treasury, seeing the urgency of the case, should, if unwilling to act
on its own responsibility, have laid the affidavits immediately before
the law officers of the Crown and requested their opinion. Nor was it
by this channel only that the affidavits showing the true character of
the _Alabama_ reached Government. Copies of the most material among them
were sent by Mr. Adams to Earl Russell on the 22nd of July, together with
the opinions of an eminent counsel, Mr. Robert Collier, and again on the
24th. One would have thought that here, again, either immediate action
would have been taken or the opinion of the law officers obtained with all
practicable expedition. But what happened? The affidavits were considered
by the law officers of the Crown _on the 28th of July_, six days after
the letter from Liverpool had reached London, stating that the vessel
might leave any hour. They soon made up their minds and their report was
in Earl Russell's hands on the morning of the 29th. Orders were then
immediately sent to Liverpool to stop the vessel. But it would appear that
in some mysterious manner intelligence of the intention of the Government
to detain the vessel had reached the persons at Liverpool who had charge
of her. The Customs department at Liverpool, on receiving the order for
detention, telegraphed that "the vessel '290' came out of dock last night,
and left the port this morning." Even then she might have been detained
by the British authorities in other ports. Lord Russell advocated this
proceeding in the Cabinet, but none of his colleagues, except the Duke of
Argyll, supported him, and the project was most unfortunately dropped.
In a conversation with Mr. Adams, two days afterwards, at the Foreign
Office, Earl Russell remarked that a delay in determining upon the
case of the "290" "had most unexpectedly been caused by the sudden
development of a malady in the Queen's advocate, Sir John D. Harding,
totally incapacitating him for the transaction of business. This had made
it necessary to call in other parties, whose opinion had at last been
given for the detention of the gunboat, but before the order got down
to Liverpool the vessel was gone." Such an excuse could not be expected
to satisfy the American Government, but neither is it satisfactory from
a British point of view. The matter being known to be urgent, if, on
its being referred to Sir John Harding, that official was found to be
incapacitated by ill health or any other cause, what was done ultimately
should have been done at first--"other parties" should have been called
in. This too easy-going, _laissez aller_ mode of conducting public
business on the part of Government departments in 1862 cost the United
Kingdom three millions sterling in 1873.
[Illustration: HINDOOS BRINGING COTTON THROUGH THE WESTERN GHAUTS. (_See
p._ 336.)]
The _Alabama_ steamed down the Mersey and proceeded to Moelfra Bay, on
the coast of Anglesey, where she lay two days. The American Government
considered, and it is difficult to contravene their opinion, that there
was culpable negligence somewhere in permitting a ship, the seizure of
which had been ordered, to lie unmolested in British waters for two whole
days. From Moelfra Bay the vessel proceeded to the Azores, and remained
at Terceira till the arrival of a vessel from London, having on board six
guns, ammunition, coals, etc., for the new cruiser. Two days afterwards
the screw-steamer _Bahama_ arrived, having on board Commander Raphael
Semmes, of the Confederate navy, and other officers, besides two more
guns. The transfer of the guns and stores having been completed without
hindrance from any one, Captain Semmes hoisted his flag on the 24th of
August, and the _Alabama_, now first known by that name, sailed from
Terceira with twenty-six officers and eighty-five men.
The British Government was all the more unpopular with the North Americans
because the operations of the war were by no means decisive. General
Grant, after a severe battle at Pittsburg, cleared Tennessee of the
Confederates and they slowly lost ground in Arkansas. On the other hand,
the Federal general McLellan was driven out of Virginia by General Lee,
who also routed with great loss the covering army under Pope, and, though
Lee could make no impression upon Maryland, he carried off the honours
of the campaign by driving Burnside from before Richmond. In Kentucky
Bragg foiled the Northerners at every point. The capture of New Orleans
in April by the gallant Farragut was undoubtedly a serious blow to the
Confederates, but one that might have been retrieved had resources been
equal to demands. As the world now knows, they were not; but to close
observers at the time, for instance the Emperor Napoleon, the cause of the
Southerners appeared to be still in the ascendant.
A revolution, more akin to the ridiculous than to the sublime, took place
this year in Greece. In October, while King Otho and his queen were
absent from Athens, the people rose, the troops mutinied, the Bavarian
dynasty was declared to have ceased to reign, and a provisional Government
installed itself in office, with Demetri Bulgari at its head. A plebiscite
was decreed, in humble imitation of the Napoleonic prototype, for the
election of a king of Greece; every Greek above twenty years of age was
to have a vote. The result of the voting was, that Prince Alfred, second
son of Queen Victoria, was chosen king by an overwhelming majority. But it
had been previously agreed between the plenipotentiaries of the protecting
Powers, Britain, France, and Russia, that all members of the reigning
families of these nations should be excluded from the Greek succession.
The election of Prince Alfred was thus nullified. The further progress of
the Greek revolution belongs to a later year; nevertheless, it will be
convenient to give at this place a connected view of the whole series of
transactions, so that it will be unnecessary hereafter to return to the
subject. At the end of December, 1862, Mr. Henry Elliot was commissioned
by the British Government to inform the provisional Government at Athens
that England was disposed to cede the Ionian Islands (over which she had
exercised a protectorate since the Congress of Vienna) to Greece, provided
that the form of government remained monarchical; that Greece abstained
from aggression against neighbouring States; that the king selected were a
prince "against whom no well-founded objection could be raised;" lastly,
that the cession were shown to be in accordance with the unanimous, or
nearly unanimous, wish of the Ionian population. The Greeks and Ionians
accepted the proffered terms with enthusiasm. After long consideration
and discussion, a suitable occupant for the throne was found in Prince
George, son of the King of Denmark, and brother to the Princess of Wales.
A Greek deputation, proceeding to Copenhagen in June, 1863, tendered
the Crown to Prince George, who accepted it and soon afterwards went to
Greece, where he was received with general enthusiasm. Britain, thoroughly
satisfied with this selection, proceeded to carry out her promise. Sir
Henry Storks, the Lord High Commissioner, dissolved the Ionian Parliament
in August, and summoned a new one, on which the express mandate should
devolve of taking into consideration the contemplated re-union of the
islands to Greece. The new Parliament met, and unanimously ratified the
cession. One difficulty, however, still remained. Greece was a weak State:
Corfu possessed a capacious and important harbour and, by the care of the
protecting State, had been converted into a formidable fortress: were
the fortifications handed over intact, it might be apprehended that, in
some future European war, a great Power allying itself to Greece would
employ the fortifications of Corfu for the purpose of strengthening its
own position in the Mediterranean. The British Government, therefore, in
concert with the four other great Powers, decided that the Ionian Islands
should, from the time of their cession to Greece, "enjoy the advantages
of a perpetual neutrality," and that the fortifications that had been
constructed in Corfu, as no longer required after the concession of such
neutrality, should be demolished previously to the evacuation of the
island by the British garrison. This was in November, 1863; the demolition
was at once proceeded with; but it was not till far on in 1864 that the
troops finally quitted the island, and the annexation to Greece was
consummated.
The year 1862, during which the truce of politics continued, was marked
by a second grand display, on a scale of colossal magnitude, of the
products of the material and artistic civilisation of the age, contributed
by the industry of all countries, but especially by that of Britain
and her colonies. The Society of Arts, a body through whose exertions
the Exhibition of 1851 in great measure originated, began, with the
countenance of the Prince Consort, to take preliminary measures in 1858
and 1859 for the purpose of ascertaining whether a sufficiently strong
feeling existed in the country in favour of decennial repetitions of that
great experiment to justify the prosecution of the scheme. The Continental
war of 1859 caused a temporary suspension of proceedings; but on peace
being restored, the Society resumed the consideration of the question,
although at a period too late to allow of the Exhibition being ready by
the year 1861, which was their original desire. The Society obtained
decisive proof of the existence of a general desire for a second Great
Exhibition in the most satisfactory form--namely, the signatures of
upwards of 1,100 individuals for various sums of from £100 to £10,000, and
amounting in the whole to no less than £450,000, to a guarantee deed for
raising the funds needed for the conduct of the Exhibition. The scheme
having thus been started, the Commissioners for the Exhibition of 1851,
in the most liberal spirit, placed at the disposal of the managers of the
new undertaking, free of all charge, a space of nearly seventeen acres on
their Kensington Gore Estate, and afterwards, when the original area was
found insufficient, an additional plot of eight acres, being all the land
that could be made available for the purpose. In this way was the scheme
originated, the cost of the necessary buildings provided for, and an
eligible site obtained.
The contractors for the greater part of the work were Messrs. Kelk and
Lucas, and it could not have been in abler hands. But for the eastern dome
the contract was taken by the Thames Iron Company. This dome was begun
long before that on the western side; but a "generous rivalry" sprang up
between the builders, which resulted in something like a neck-and-neck
race between them at last. The work was commenced in the latter part
of 1861, and the contractors were bound to deliver the shell of the
building, complete, to the Royal Commissioners on the 12th of February,
1862. The contract was kept, and the building handed over on the 12th
of February. Applications for space from exhibitors were then invited,
and the fitting up of the courts and galleries was proceeded with; but
with such numerous and varied interests to adjust, the commissioners
could not ensure the same rapid progress as that made in the erection of
the building; and a large part of the edifice was still in confusion,
heaped up with packing-cases and litter, when the Exhibition was opened
on the 1st of May. Thirty thousand persons witnessed the spectacle. The
procession of the Queen's Commissioners for opening the Exhibition was
formed at Buckingham Palace, and proceeded, fortunately under a bright and
sunny sky, to the entrance of the building in Cromwell Road. As was to be
expected, neither the Queen nor any of her children was present; but the
Royal Family was ably represented by the Duke of Cambridge, supported
by the Crown Prince of Prussia, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and other
august personages. The Lord Mayor of London lent his historical presence
to the ceremonial, coming in great state, with a suite of aldermen,
common-councilmen, and City officers, in seventy carriages.
The Exhibition was like an enormous bazaar, containing everything that the
fancy and the invention of all countries had at any time taxed themselves
to produce for the use and the enjoyment of men. According to the
ground-plan of the Exhibition building, there was an immense area, in the
angle between the southern transept and the nave, reserved for the French
department; and a curious circumstance occurred in connection with this,
which, when one thinks of the later relations between France and Prussia,
is not without interest. The French asked and obtained permission to
enclose their court, and they accordingly erected high wooden partitions
all round it, greatly to the disgust of Prussia, exhibiting in a more
limited space west of the south transept. The French were appealed to to
reduce the height of their partitions; but the representatives of "la
grande nation" would not recede an inch: they agreed with their Emperor
that "when France is satisfied, the world is at rest," at any rate, ought
to be; and as the partitions perfectly answered the purpose of the French
exhibitors, why should they put themselves out of the way for the sake of
the semi-barbarous peoples beyond the Rhine?
A few words now as to the magnificent collection of pictures. England had
an advantage here over foreign countries; for, whereas it was allowable
to exhibit any English picture painted within the century previous to the
opening of the Exhibition--and, in fact, the best part of the collection
did date from the last century--the foreign collection included, with but
trifling exceptions, none but works by living artists. Six thousand works
of art, exclusive of sculpture, were displayed in these galleries. Such a
gathering of the masterpieces of our best artists--Reynolds, Gainsborough,
and Hogarth--was never seen before. The Pre-Raphaelite school, and all
the more eminent living or recently deceased artists, with the exception
of J. M. W. Turner, were well represented. The productions of the British
colonies occupied a considerable area near the eastern dome, and were
exceedingly interesting, especially those from Australia and New Zealand,
in the curiosities from which there was a large native element that gave a
piquant and peculiar character to the display. The Exhibition was closed
on the 1st of November, having been open for the period of six months.
Yet vast as were the multitudes that daily thronged it, the concourse of
visitors did not quite come up to the number in 1851. The total number
was found to have been 6,117,450, about 50,000 under the gross number of
visitors to the Exhibition of 1851.
[Illustration: ABRAHAM LINCOLN.]
The year 1863, on which this history now enters, was one which, so far as
England was concerned, was unmarked by political agitation and unclouded
by the anxieties of war. There was much distress in Lancashire, owing to
the entire or partial stoppage of innumerable looms, till now dependent
on American cotton. The world was hunted through by the agents of the
great cotton industry, in order to find out new sources of supply, or, by
introducing or fostering cotton culture in various suitable localities, to
secure at least an increased supply in the future. In India, every road
leading down the Western Ghauts was traversed by an unwonted string of
country carts, conveying the precious commodity to some port of shipment;
still, notwithstanding all that could be done, the supply of cotton
remained exceedingly limited, and much of what came was of a very inferior
quality. A general subscription, set on foot towards the end of 1862,
produced in the first month of 1863 the sum of £750,000 for the relief of
the distress, and in April £2,735,000. It was observed that the general
trade and industry of the country continued to prosper, notwithstanding
the collapse of this one branch of it. Especially in every branch of
the hardware trade, particularly in the sale of arms and munitions of
war, immense quantities of which were made in Great Britain to the order
of both belligerents, an activity was apparent exceeding all former
experience. The basis upon which, under the régime of Free Trade, the
industry of this country reposed, was proved by this experience to be
far broader and more solid than the most destructive storm, so long as it
affected only one portion of the field, could seriously impair.
[Illustration: MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCE OF WALES. (1863).
FROM THE PAINTING BY G. H. THOMAS IN THE ROYAL COLLECTION.]
Parliament was opened by commission in the first week of February. The
first clause of the Royal Speech informed both Houses of what every one
was aware of, that, since they last met, her Majesty had "declared her
consent to a marriage between his Royal Highness the Prince of Wales and
her Royal Highness the Princess Alexandra, daughter of Prince Christian
of Denmark." The marriage was celebrated in the following month, and the
rejoicings which accompanied it were so genuine and so universal that it
seems worth while to dwell at some length on the circumstances of the
auspicious event. The preliminaries were settled during a visit paid by
the Queen to the Continent in the autumn of 1862, and the Princess became
a guest at Osborne in November. Her father, Prince Christian of the House
of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, was then Heir-Presumptive to
the Crown of Denmark, to which he succeeded in 1865. The yacht _Albert
and Victoria_ received the bride and her suite on board at Antwerp, and
an escorting squadron, among which was the then formidable ironclad the
_Warrior_, attended and welcomed her to the shores of her new country.
The Princess, after a fine passage, landed at Gravesend on the 7th of
March, and travelled to Windsor. Demonstrations of loyal and affectionate
interest were not wanting along any part of the line of route. The
marriage took place on the 10th of March, and the ceremonial employed
on the occasion was brilliant and effective to a degree which public
pageants in England seldom reach. Four processions or _cortèges_ left the
castle in succession. The first, that of the Royal guests, among whom
were the Maharajah Dhuleep Singh, and a crowd of petty German princes not
yet Bismarckised, set out an hour before the time fixed for the wedding.
The second _cortège_, in eleven carriages, conveyed the Royal Family and
the Queen's household. The third _cortège_ was the procession of the
bridegroom, and the fourth the procession of the bride. The marriage
was performed in St. George's Chapel. The Archbishop of Canterbury, of
course, officiated, and the Eton boys cheered lustily as the happy pair
drove away, _en route_ for Osborne. On the same night London and all the
principal towns in England were illuminated. An immense and thoroughly
good-humoured crowd filled all the streets, and admired the coloured
transparencies, the Prince of Wales's feathers, the true love-knots,
the A A's, and fifty other devices, which the inventive affection of the
people had rapidly improvised. At Birmingham the outline and the chief
structural lines of the tower and cupola of St. Philip's Church stood out
in flame against a dark and starless sky. The city of Edinburgh, whose
situation lends itself to effective displays of this sort, was strikingly
illuminated. The noble castle was lined with small paraffin lamps, which
clearly defined its contour, and fireworks blazed till a late hour from
the Salisbury Craigs and Arthur's Seat. In London the illuminations were
characterised by the utmost splendour, but untoward events cast a shadow
over the popular rejoicing. Though nothing could be more orderly and
well-disposed than the behaviour of the crowd, yet the pressure of the
enormous multitudes that filled the City thoroughfares up to a late hour
of the night was fatal to six women, crushed or trodden to death between
the Mansion House and the foot of Ludgate Hill, and was the cause of more
or less severe injuries to not less than a hundred persons. The Prince
of Wales addressed a feeling letter to the Lord Mayor on the subject
of these sad accidents, expressing his deep regret that what was meant
for rejoicing should have become an occasion of mourning. The House of
Commons, on the motion of Lord Palmerston, cheerfully granted to the
Prince and Princess of Wales, in addition to and augmentation of, the
revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall, amounting to about £60,000 per annum,
a revenue of £50,000 a year from the Consolidated Fund, of which sum
£10,000 was separately settled on the Princess. It was further proposed
by the Premier, and assented to, that a jointure of £30,000 a year should
be secured to the Princess in the event of her surviving her husband.
Among the subsequent ceremonies at which the Royal pair assisted was the
inauguration of the Albert Memorial at South Kensington.
[Illustration: THE MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCE OF WALES (1863).
FROM THE PAINTING BY G. H. THOMAS IN THE ROYAL COLLECTION]
The financial statement of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Gladstone,
was made on the 16th of April, and was universally considered to be a
masterly and very satisfactory _exposé_ of the monetary and commercial
condition of the country. The estimates of revenue and expenditure for the
coming financial year showed a large probable surplus; and this surplus
Mr. Gladstone applied to the reduction of the tea duty and of the income
tax. Certain minor features of the financial programme were not allowed to
pass unchallenged. One such consisted in levying a licence duty on clubs,
on the ground that, as wine and spirituous liquors were sold in them
to the members, they ought not to be exempted from the burden which every
hotel-keeper and licensed victualler was liable to. But as there were not
wanting many to point out the obvious and essential differences between
a club and a public-house, this portion of the financial scheme was
abandoned. The other feature referred to was Mr. Gladstone's proposal for
the taxation of charities. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had conceived
the notion that the exemption from income tax enjoyed by charitable
institutions was equivalent to a burden of corresponding amount imposed
on the general body of taxpayers. The sum lost to the revenue through
the exemption from income tax of the property of charities was estimated
by Mr. Gladstone to amount to at least £250,000. The great charitable
institutions of the metropolis and elsewhere at once took the alarm, and
a deputation, formidable in numbers, rank, and respectability, was soon
organised to wait on the adventurous financier. In the end it became so
evident to Government that the feeling of the House was opposed to the
taxation of charities that the measure was withdrawn.
Towards the end of February there was great agitation among the
well-wishers and ill-wishers of the Church of England, on account of a
suit brought in the Chancellor's Court at Oxford by the Rev. Dr. Pusey
against Professor Jowett, charging him with having maintained heresy in
certain of his published writings, particularly in the publication so well
known as "Essays and Reviews." The Assessor, Mr. Montague Bernard, after
hearing the case fully argued, gave judgment. He first of all overruled
the exception which the defendant had made to the jurisdiction of the
Court; and then, after examining the statute under which he thought
himself empowered to try the case, he decided that it was so vague in its
terms as to leave him, in his opinion, a discretionary power whether to
proceed to judgment or not; in the exercise of which power he declined to
let the case go forward. Notice was given of appeal against this judgment,
but the intention was afterwards abandoned.
Seldom has a year witnessed the disappearance from the scenes which their
genius, valour, or virtue had adorned, of a greater number of illustrious
men than the year 1863. Two of the heroes of the Indian Mutiny, Sir James
Outram and Lord Clyde; four distinguished statesmen, Lord Lyndhurst,
Lord Lansdowne, Lord Elgin, and Sir George Cornewall Lewis; the veteran
politician, Mr. Ellice, often called the Nestor of the Whig party; and
two great authors, Archbishop Whately and Thackeray, were among those who
within the twelvemonth paid the debt of nature.
The desperate effort made this year by the gallant and unfortunate Poles
to shake off the despotic yoke of Russia, riveted the gaze and engaged the
sympathy of nearly every nation in Europe. We say nearly, for Prussia, as
represented by its Government, assisted, on grounds at the time little
understood, the Muscovite gaoler to remanacle his victim. In January
the Russian Government revived by an ukase the system of conscription.
Lord Napier, the British ambassador at St. Petersburg, described it as
"a design to make a clean sweep of the revolutionary youth of Poland; to
shut up the most energetic and dangerous spirits in the restraints of the
Russian army: it was simply a plan to kidnap the opposition, and carry it
off to Siberia or the Caucasus." At midnight on the 14th of January police
agents and soldiers commenced the work in Warsaw and the revolution began.
The misfortunes of Poland led to one of those diplomatic and didactic
interventions of which Britain about this time was so liberal and of which
the issue was so invariably and so notoriously unfortunate. Earl Russell
wrote (March 2nd, 1863) in a somewhat curt style of remonstrance to Lord
Napier at St. Petersburg, setting forth the view of the British Government
concerning the rights of the Poles under the Treaty of Vienna, maintaining
the right of Great Britain, as a party to that treaty, to interfere,
with a view to the sincere execution and fulfilment of its stipulations,
declaring that since the time of the Emperor Alexander I. Russia had
broken faith with Poland in withholding the free institutions which had
been promised, and concluding with the demand that a general amnesty
should be proclaimed, and the just political reforms required by the Poles
conceded. Prince Gortschakoff, "acting in a spirit of conciliation,"
declined to send a written reply to Earl Russell's despatch, but expressed
to Lord Napier, in conversation, his adverse views upon its principal
clauses. Nevertheless an amnesty was granted, but rejected by the
insurgents.
Earl Russell had by this time formulated, in concert with Austria and
with the knowledge of France, the plan for the regeneration of Poland
which he had been long meditating, and was now prepared to propose for
the acceptance of the Russian Government. The plan, as unfolded in his
despatch of the 17th of June, comprised the following six points or
articles:--
1. A complete and general amnesty.
2. National representation in a form resembling that which had been
granted by Alexander I.
3. A distinct national administration carried on by Poles and
possessing the confidence of the country.
4. Full and entire liberty of conscience, involving the repeal of
the restrictions imposed on Catholic worship.
5. The Polish language to be recognised in the kingdom as the
official language and used as such in the courts of law and in the
schools.
6. The establishment of a regular and legal system of recruiting.
All these reforms were just and desirable _per se;_ but to propose them
was tantamount to an interference in the internal politics of a foreign
State. "The Principal Secretary of State of her Britannic Majesty," said
Prince Gortschakoff, writing in July, "will dispense us from giving an
answer to the proposed arrangement for a suspension of hostilities.
It would not resist a serious examination of the conditions necessary
for carrying it into effect." Turning the tables on the remonstrating
Powers, he said that the speedy re-establishment of order depended
largely "upon the resolution of the Great Powers not to lend themselves
to calculations on which the instigators of the Polish insurrection found
their expectation of an active intervention in favour of their exaggerated
aspirations." The end of the diplomatic comedy was not far off. The
Emperor Napoleon, observing that the views of the three Powers--Britain,
France, and Austria--as expressed in their communications to their
representatives at St. Petersburg, were not precisely in accord, proposed
to the other two Courts to take, in the form of a convention or protocol,
an engagement to pursue in concert a regulation of Polish affairs, by
diplomatic methods, or otherwise if necessary. The meaning of these words
plainly was, that if diplomatic methods failed, the three Powers would
not shrink from the arbitrament of war, in order to compel Russia to do
justice to Poland. "Our proposition," the statement quoted from drily
continues, "was not accepted." The Russian Government consequently assumed
a defiant tone, and Prussia came to her assistance by drawing a military
cordon against the fugitives round the frontier. The propositions of
the three Powers were quietly ignored; Russia proceeded in her task of
restoring order by the methods familiar to despotic Governments and the
fate of Poland was sealed.
Pacific modes of obtaining redress were not invariably preferred by
Earl Russell. When an act of vigour could be performed that did not
risk involving the country in war, he was ready to perform it. Thus he
justified the conduct of the British Envoy at Rio Janeiro, Mr. Christie,
who had instructed (January 2, 1863) the British naval commander on the
station to seize several Brazilian merchant vessels in reprisal for
the pillage of the _Prince of Wales_, an English merchant ship. Much
angry correspondence ensued; the Brazilian Government dismissed two of
its officials for want of promptitude in the matter and prosecuted to
conviction eleven other offenders; but the British Government still
considered that more vigorous measures should have been taken, in order
to prevent such outrages for the future, not less than to punish the
actual offenders. A claim for compensation on account of the pillage of
the cargo was advanced by the British Government; this claim seems to have
been regarded in Brazil as excessive. Mr. Christie was then instructed to
propose arbitration, but accompanied with conditions which the Brazilian
Government thought it inconsistent with their honour to accept. Reprisals
were then authorised to be made and were carried out as above mentioned.
The Brazilian Government then paid the sum demanded under protest and a
rupture of diplomatic relations between the two countries ensued. Another
matter that had caused ill feeling--the unwarrantable arrest of three
officers belonging to a British frigate, the _Forte_, by a guard of
Brazilian police--had been referred to the arbitration of the King of the
Belgians, who pronounced his opinion (June 18, 1863), that in the mode in
which the laws of Brazil had been applied towards the English officers,
there was neither premeditation of offence nor offence given to the
British navy.
The British squadron in Japan, under Admiral Kuper, was under the
necessity, this year, of resorting to measures of coercion against one of
the Daimios, or half independent princes, of Japan, which involved the
loss of many lives. The Prince of Satsuma was the ruler of a large and
fertile territory in Kiusiu, the southernmost of the islands of Japan,
and it was at a place within his jurisdiction that an Englishman, Mr
Richardson, was murdered, and a murderous assault committed on an English
lady and two gentlemen who were riding with him, in September, 1862. The
British Government, when the news of this outrage was received, directed
Colonel Neale, the British chargé d'affaires in Japan, to demand ample
compensation for the murder, from the Tycoon, the temporal sovereign of
Japan, and from the Prince of Satsuma. The former was required to pay
£100,000 as an indemnity, the latter £25,000. After much parleying, the
Tycoon agreed to pay the sum demanded, which was accordingly brought
to Yokohama, in June, 1863, and counted out in the presence of Colonel
Neale. But the Prince of Satsuma could in no way be brought to reason, for
which contumacy his ships were taken, his town was burnt, and his palace
destroyed by the British squadron from Yokohama. The Prince had certainly
suffered reprisals to an extent exceeding many times the amount of the
indemnity demanded. Yet these very injuries--so strange is the working of
the Asiatic mind--appear to have induced him to make overtures for peace.
These were signs of overwhelming power, and power is almost the only thing
that the Asiatic truly reverences. As a matter of fact, before the close
of the year the Prince offered to pay, and actually paid, to the British
chargé d'affaires at Yokohama, the £25,000 which had been originally
demanded from him as compensation money for the murder of Mr. Richardson!
The civil war continued, meanwhile, to rage in America, where at the
beginning of the year General Lee found himself confronted by Hooker
at the head of a powerful force. The latter's attempt to force the
position of Fredericksburg was a complete failure, though the victory of
Chancellorsville was dearly purchased by the death of "Stonewall" Jackson,
most daring of the Confederate soldiers. Lee thereupon advanced upon
Gettysburg, where a series of battles resulted in his decisive defeat and
he was again forced to retire into Virginia. Elsewhere the cause of the
Confederates was gravely affected by the constant successes of General
Grant in Mississippi. They were forced to retire from Jackson and on the
3rd of July the important fortress of Vicksburg surrendered. Bragg held
his own in Tennessee until Grant, fresh from his victories, was sent
to supersede Rosecrans. Ably seconded by Hooker, he forced Bragg into
Georgia; and the fortunes of the Federals were obviously in the ascendant,
when Meade followed Lee into Virginia and harassed him during another
campaign. Upon the coast-line the naval superiority of the Northerners
caused itself to be powerfully felt; and after a preliminary attempt on
Fort Wagner had failed, the siege of Charleston began on August the 21st
and continued until the end of the year. Fort Wagner was abandoned by the
Southerners on the 7th of September, but then the operations declined into
a languid bombardment. Nevertheless the inevitable end of the struggle
could now be foreseen.
While the United States were thus distracted by civil war, and not in
a position to assert, much less to enforce, what is called the Monroe
doctrine, that is, the claim of the United States to prevent European
States from intervening in the internal affairs of American States, the
French Emperor was playing a singular game in Mexico. The enterprise had
sprung out of the unpretending joint expedition agreed to by Britain,
France, and Spain at the close of 1861. Mexico had so vexatiously and
so long evaded its pecuniary obligations to its British and Spanish
creditors, and had left so many outrages on individual Britons and
Spaniards unredressed, that the Governments of the two countries were at
last compelled to resort to coercive measures. France also desired to be
a party to the convention, nor was it at first understood that the aims
of the French Emperor differed materially from those of his confederates.
The expedition sailed in December, 1861, having on board 6,000 Spanish
soldiers; the British military contingent was only a force of 700 marines;
the French contingent was at first weaker than that of Spain, but it
was soon increased. A landing was effected, without resistance, at Vera
Cruz. On the 10th of January, 1862, the allied Commissioners published a
manifesto, addressed to the Mexican people, couched in somewhat ambiguous
language, yet declaring that neither conquest nor political dictation was
the object of the allied Powers, which had long beheld with grief a noble
people "wasting their forces and extinguishing their vitality through the
violent power of civil war and perpetual convulsions," and had now landed
on their shores to give them an opportunity of constituting themselves in
a permanent and stable manner. Yet all this time the views of the French
Emperor were extended to ulterior aims of which his allies never dreamed.
A pamphlet, well known to be "inspired," from the facile pen of M. de la
Guerronière, appeared in Paris, clearly pointing to the regeneration of
Mexico by Cæsarism--to an Emperor and a plebiscite.
When, then, after the issuing of the manifesto, the commissioners of the
allied Powers began to exchange ideas, the divergence of view between
the French and the other two commissioners soon became apparent. The
object of Britain and Spain was simply, by occupying a portion of the
Mexican seaboard, to obtain a material guarantee for the redress of the
wrongs of which their subjects had to complain. Whether this was done
by the Government of Juarez (who was then President) or by any other
Government, was a matter of perfect indifference to Britain and Spain. But
the French Commissioner--with an eye to the eventual introduction of an
imperial régime--refused, on the plea of perverseness, renewed outrages,
and general impracticability, to hold any communication with the Juarez
Government. However, the British and Spanish Commissioners, Sir Charles
Wyke and General Prim, opened negotiations with the Government of Juarez.
But there was a certain General Almonte in the French camp, who was well
known as a promoter of the scheme for substituting imperial for republican
institutions. The Mexican Government required that Almonte should be sent
away; but to this the French Commissioner refused to consent. A conference
between the commissioners of the allied Powers and others to be deputed
by the Mexican Government, to meet at Orizaba, in April, 1862, was agreed
to by Prim and Sir Charles Wyke, but rejected by the French Commissioner,
who insisted that, instead of negotiating with Juarez, the proper course
for the Allies was to march at once upon Mexico. Hereupon Prim and Sir
Charles Wyke, finding that their views and those of their colleague were
irreconcilable, withdrew on the part of their respective Governments from
the expedition. Nevertheless the French forces, increased by 2,500 troops
under the command of General Forey, appeared entirely successful. Puebla
was captured in May, 1862; Mexico, the capital, occupied in June, and
Juarez, though breathing defiance, was forced to retire into the interior.
An assembly of notables resolved that Mexico should adopt monarchical
institutions and the Crown was offered in 1863 to the Archduke Maximilian
of Austria.
From the mysterious central lands of Africa information of the most
interesting character came this year to England, being communicated by
the enterprising travellers Captain Speke and Captain Grant, who landed
at Southampton on the 17th of June, and five days afterwards received a
public welcome at a special meeting of the Royal Geographical Society.
Starting from Zanzibar, and penetrating the country in a north-westerly
direction, Captain Speke had, though with incredible difficulty, and
through the exertion of wonderful patience and adroitness in bribing,
coaxing, mystifying, or browbeating the native rulers whose kingdoms he
traversed, reached the shores of a vast lake, to which he gave the name
of Victoria Nyanza, and seen the White Nile flowing out, at its northern
end, in the direction of Gondokoro. Captain Speke too hastily assumed that
he had found the true source of the Nile in the Victoria Nyanza, just
as, nearly a hundred years earlier, Bruce was convinced that he stood at
the fountain head of the great river when he had merely traced up the
lesser current of the Blue Nile. The brave explorer's career came to a
premature and tragic end. A day had been fixed, in the autumn of 1864,
for a discussion between him and Captain Burton on the question of the
Nile sources, before a meeting of the British Association at Bath, when
a sudden and lamentable accident put a period to Speke's life. He was
shooting in Neston Park, in Wiltshire; and from the posture in which the
body was found, he appeared to have been getting over a low stone wall,
when by some mischance his gun exploded while the muzzle was pointed at
his breast. Death ensued in a few minutes.