THE REIGN OF VICTORIA (_continued_).
More Coercion for Ireland--The Scottish Reform Bill--Government
Defeats--The Church Rates Bill--Mr. Disraeli succeeds Lord
Derby--Reunion of the Liberals--The Irish Reform Bill--Mr.
Gladstone's Irish Church Resolutions--His Victory--Disraeli's
Strategy--Neither Dissolution nor Resignation--Maynooth Grant
and the _Regium Donum_--The Suspensory Bill--Remainder of the
Session--Lord Stanley's Foreign Policy--General Election--Mr.
Disraeli resigns--Mr. Gladstone's Ministry--Attempt on the Life
of the Duke of Edinburgh--Trial of O'Farrel--Murphy Riots--Martin
_v._ Mackonochie--Obituary of the Year--Lord Brougham, Archbishop
Longley, and Others--The Abyssinian War--Christianity in
Abyssinia--The Crescent and the Gallas--European Intercourse--Mr.
Plowden--Rise of Theodore--His enlightened Views--Deaths of
his best Friends--Arrival of Consul Cameron--The unanswered
Letter--Theodore's Retaliation--Provincial Rebellions--Mr.
Rassam's Mission--His Interview with Theodore--The King's Charges
against Cameron--His Humour changes--Dr. Beke's Letter--Theodore
becomes obdurate--Rassam's Arrest--Mr. Flad's Journey--The
Captives' Treatment--Merewether's Advice--Lord Stanley's
Ultimatum--Constitution of Sir R. Napier's Expedition--Annesley
Bay--Difficulties of Transport--Arrival of Napier--Friendliness
of the Natives--Attitude of the Chiefs--Two Plans--An unopposed
March--Proceedings of Theodore--Massacre of Prisoners--Advance
on Magdala--Destruction of Theodore's Army--Negotiations with
Theodore--Release of the Prisoners--A Present of Cows--Bombardment
of Magdala--Suicide of Theodore--The Return March--The "Mountains of
Rasselas"--Sketch of Continental Affairs.
On the 7th of December Parliament was adjourned till the 13th of February,
1868. When it recommenced its sittings on that date the political
situation was, of course, unchanged; the Tory Government was in a minority
of from sixty to seventy voices in the House of Commons; yet, through
the amazing suppleness, versatility, and adroitness of its leader in
the Commons, ably seconded by the heavier metal of Lord Cairns, it made
headway for a time against all its opponents with surprising courage and
success. One of the first measures proposed by Government was to renew
the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland for a twelvemonth.
Already had the Habeas Corpus Act been suspended for two years in the
sister island; yet, although Fenianism was less menacing than it had been,
it still appeared to the Irish Government unsafe to dispense with the
extraordinary powers for the repression of disorder that had been first
granted in 1866. In asking leave to bring in a Bill for the continuance
of the suspension, Lord Mayo, Chief Secretary for Ireland, stated that
though the Fenian leaders had recently transferred the scene of their
active operations to England, there were still events occurring in Ireland
that made it necessary that the Government should have this power. That
the enlarged powers of repression conferred by the law on the executive
had not been ineffectual, he proved by reading an extract from an American
paper, which showed that out of forty-three military leaders sent from
America to aid and direct the Fenian movement, the three principals had
never reached Ireland, and the others had either been brought to justice
or were exiles. The Bill passed through all its stages in both Houses
with very little opposition.
[Illustration: LORD CAIRNS. (_From a Photograph by Russell and Sons._)]
Time had failed in the Session of 1867 to carry through Parliament
measures for the enlargement of the constituencies in Scotland and Ireland
similar to Mr. Disraeli's Reform Bill for England. The matter was now
taken up by Government, and Bills were introduced, and eventually passed,
for reforming the representation of the people both in Scotland and
Ireland. The circumstances attending the progress of these Bills were in
some respects unprecedented, and such as involved no slight humiliation
to the Government, which, in spite of all Mr. Disraeli's adroitness,
was compelled either to allow the details of the measures to be settled
pretty nearly as the opposing majority might think fit, or to resist at
the imminent peril of defeat and expulsion from office. The measure for
Scotland was introduced by the Lord Advocate, Mr. Paton, on the 17th of
February. It proposed that the franchise should be settled on nearly the
same basis as in England, both for counties and boroughs; so that in the
former there would be an ownership franchise of £5 clear annual value, and
an occupation franchise of £12; while in boroughs every householder rated
and paying rates would have a vote. It further gave seven additional seats
to Scotland, without disfranchising any boroughs in England or Ireland;
so that, if the Bill had passed in this form, there would have been a
permanent increase in the numbers of the House of Commons. No sooner was
the draft Bill in the possession of the House, than Scottish members, as
if by one consent, set to work to tear it to pieces. It is unnecessary
to repeat all the objections that were raised, and the more so because
all parties ultimately agreed to pass the second reading, affirming the
principle of the Bill; each trusting to obtain the modifications desired
in committee. So far all had gone well for Government; but when the House
went into committee, their practical powerlessness was apparent to all
the world, and must have been painfully mortifying to themselves. Mr.
Baxter moved, "That it be an instruction to the committee that, instead
of adding to the numbers of the House, they have power to disfranchise
boroughs in England having by the Census returns of 1861 less than 5,000
inhabitants." He pointed out that there were ten such small boroughs in
England; these he proposed to disfranchise, and to add the ten seats thus
obtained to the representation of Scotland. Sir Rainald Knightley proposed
that, instead of disfranchising any boroughs, the committee should take
one member from each of those boroughs in England returning two members to
Parliament which in 1861 had less than 12,000 inhabitants. Mr. Disraeli,
on the part of the Government, accepted Sir Rainald Knightley's proposal.
But Mr. Gladstone seconded the motion of Mr. Baxter, and it was carried on
a division by a majority of 217 to 196. Government was fain to acquiesce;
and the only modification that Mr. Disraeli could obtain consisted in
reducing the number of the boroughs marked out for immolation from ten to
seven. Another and still more damaging alteration in the Government Bill
was carried by Mr. Bouverie, who proposed to get rid of the ratepaying
qualification in Scotland altogether, by omitting the words making the
payment of rates (as in the English Bill) a necessary condition of
the franchise. We have seen, in the course of the Reform debates, how
devotedly, one might almost say sentimentally, attached was Mr. Disraeli
to the principle of the rating franchise. Yet, when defeated on Mr.
Bouverie's motion, he resigned himself with a sigh to the excision of
his darling principle, not only with reference to boroughs, but also to
counties. The occupation franchise for counties was fixed at £14, the
reference to rateable value being omitted. Thus amended, the Bill passed
through committee, and, meeting with hardly any opposition in the House of
Lords, became law.
The author of "Church and State" succeeded in carrying through Parliament
this year a Bill for the abolition of church rates. In the debate on the
second reading Lord Cranborne said, "What shall we gain if we adhere to
the principle of 'No surrender'? That is a question which must be answered
by the circumstances of the time. We must look not only to the disposition
of the nation out of doors, but to the course of events in this House--the
principles upon which parties guide their movements--the laws by which
public men regulate their conduct. Looking to these matters, and taking
the most impartial view in my power, I am bound to say that I do not
think any gain to the Church will arise from prolonging the resistance."
After speaking of the deep reluctance he felt to give up anything that
the Church possessed, he concluded with the words, "I think it wiser to
accept the terms that are now offered to us, because I am distinctly
of opinion that we may go farther and fare worse." The passing of this
measure, though it could not be said to have reconciled the main body of
the Dissenters in any appreciable degree to the existence of the Church as
an establishment, at least closed a long and wearisome chapter of local
bickerings, distinguished by cheap martyrdom on one side and indiscreet
coercion on the other.
Age and the undermining effects of his hereditary malady, the gout, had
told heavily this winter on the vigorous constitution of Lord Derby, and
he felt no longer equal to the cares and toils of office. His retirement
from the Ministry was announced by his son, Lord Stanley, in the House
of Commons on the 25th of February, and drew forth expressions of warm
and respectful sympathy from both sides of the House. The way was thus
naturally opened for the gratification of the great and worthy ambition
of a lifetime. Mr. Disraeli was sent for by the Queen, and requested to
take the post of Premier and reconstruct the Government. On the 27th
Mr. Disraeli had an audience of her Majesty, and kissed hands upon his
appointment as First Lord of the Treasury. To pass over two or three
minor changes, the new Premier declined to include the Chancellor, Lord
Chelmsford (Sir Frederic Thesiger), in the re-constructed Ministry; and
that high functionary, despite an appeal to Lord Derby, was therefore
compelled to resign the seals, which were given to Lord Cairns. The great
ability, industry, and readiness in debate of the new Chancellor were
much needed to strengthen the Ministerial side in the House of Lords. On
the 5th of March Mr. Disraeli addressed a meeting of his Parliamentary
supporters, and encouraged them to look hopefully forward to the future,
and to remember through what storms and sunken rocks they had been safely
steered.
He admitted the difficulties that lay in their path as a minority having
to deal with the great question now pressing on their attention. But
the past two years had given them great triumphs, and he had every
confidence that with a firm front they might add to them fresh triumphs
in 1868. But there were others who felt confident, and with better
reason--unfortunately for him--than Mr. Disraeli. That condition of the
Liberal party described in the caustic observation of Mr. Bouverie,
when it had "leaders that wouldn't lead, and followers that wouldn't
follow," was now at an end. Mr. Gladstone, who assiduously felt the
pulse of his party, soon discovered that those who had played truant
were willing to submit to discipline once more, and his exultation was
extreme. "Having put our hand to the plough," he said, at a dinner given
to Mr. Brand, the Liberal whip, at the end of March, "we shall not look
back. I have entertained from the first a confident hope and belief that
a long and arduous struggle would be accompanied by complete success."
The battle-ground which the Liberal leader had chosen was well adapted
to bring together all the scattered sections of the party; it was the
proposal to disestablish the Irish Protestant Church. The perturbed and
discontented state of Ireland was a continual source of anxiety. The
proposal to abolish the State Church was satisfactory to the Liberals who
were only politicians, because it involved what they deemed a useful and
tranquillising concession to the feelings of the Roman Catholic majority
of the Irish people. It was also satisfactory to that large and important
class of Liberals who had Dissenting sympathies, because it aimed at doing
away with an Established Church, and reducing its ministers to find their
subsistence through reliance on the principle of Voluntaryism.
Although we shall be departing from the strict order of time, we prefer
to describe the more important measures that the Government succeeded
in carrying through Parliament this Session, before entering upon the
narrative of the party contest which resulted in their defeat and paved
the way for their resignation. These measures were three in number. Of
one, the Scottish Reform Bill, we have already given the history; the
two others were the Irish Reform Bill, and the Bill for defining the
boundaries of boroughs in England and Wales. The Irish Reform Bill was
brought in by Lord Mayo on the 19th of March. It was in appearance a
much simpler affair than the corresponding Bill for Scotland; it gave to
Ireland no new members, and made no change in the county franchise, which
had been fixed at a £12 rental for Ireland some years before. In the
boroughs the Bill enacted that the rates of all houses valued at less than
£4 a year should be paid by the landlord, and fixed the franchise at £4
a year rental. Practically, therefore, it was a ratepaying franchise as
in England. It also contained a redistribution scheme, which proposed to
disfranchise six small boroughs, and allot one of the seats thus obtained
to Dublin, and the other five to different counties that were inadequately
represented. The Bill was read a second time on the 7th of May, and then
the real battle began. The redistribution scheme appeared to please no
one, and Government withdrew it. The Irish Liberal members complained that
the Bill, which only added about nine thousand new names to the register
of voters, was absurdly insufficient; they alleged that the qualification
for the county franchise was far too high, and that the retention of the
freeman franchise was an error. Sir Colman O'Loghlen moved an amendment
which, if carried, would have swept away the freeman franchise of Dublin
and other cities; and Colonel French endeavoured to reduce the county
qualification from £12 to £8. Other amendments also were moved; but from
some cause or other Government were always victorious when it came to
a division; and the Bill passed through committee substantially as its
authors had framed it, minus the redistribution clause. The Irish members
complained bitterly of this result, declaring that but for the apathy of
English and Scottish Liberals, who had neglected to come to the House to
support them, they would have carried the amendments above described, and
greatly improved the Bill. As for the county qualification, Sir John Gray
declared that though nominally the same as in England, a rental of £12 a
year in Ireland was really equivalent to one of £30 a year in England.
The Bill for regulating the boundaries of boroughs in England and Wales
was founded on the report of a Royal Commission that had minutely
investigated the subject. When introduced into the House there appeared to
be an indisposition to accept it as it stood, because the municipalities
of a number of boroughs whose boundaries had been extended by the
commissioners remonstrated against such extension and petitioned the House
that the ancient boundaries might be preserved. A motion was accordingly
made and accepted by Government, that the Bill should be referred to a
Select Committee. The recommendations of the Select Committee went to
undermine many of the conclusions of the Commission, and independent
members moved amendments that were derogatory to the recommendations of
the committee. Great wrangling and confusion ensued, but in the end the
Bill was carried as altered by the Select Committee; and fifteen important
boroughs--among which Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool, and Manchester were
included--were permitted to retain their ancient boundaries, contrary to
the recommendations of the Commission. The Bill was not passed by the
House of Lords till near the end of the Session.
At a much earlier period Mr. Gladstone sprang his first mine against
the Government position with destructive effect. Three years before,
when Mr. Dillwyn had brought up the question of the anomalous spectacle
presented to Europe by the Irish Church, Mr. Gladstone had both spoken and
written to the effect that, while admitting the scandal and the danger
of the existing state of things, he did not believe the question to be
within the range of present politics, and considered that a long period
must elapse before it would be ripe for settlement. Now, however, he had
convinced himself that "the hour was come, and the man." On the 23rd of
March he laid three resolutions before the Commons, of which the first
declared that, "in the opinion of this House, it is necessary that the
Established Church of Ireland should cease to exist as an establishment,
due regard being had to all personal interests, and to all individual
rights of property." The object of the second and third resolutions was
to prevent the creation of any more vested interests for the future.
Vacancies occurring in the higher ecclesiastical appointments were not, if
in public patronage, to be filled up pending the decision of Parliament;
and the Queen was to be humbly solicited by the House to place at the
disposal of Parliament with a view to the aforesaid purposes, her interest
in the archbishoprics, bishoprics, and other ecclesiastical dignities
and benefices of Ireland. Mr. Disraeli, had all his Cabinet been of one
mind, would probably have met the resolutions by a direct negative. But
his Secretary for Foreign Affairs--Lord Stanley--the high descent and
great wealth of whose family, coupled with his own unquestioned ability,
enforced consideration for his opinions--was by no means disposed to
maintain a war _à outrance_ in defence of the Church of Ireland. It
was accordingly agreed that Mr. Gladstone's resolutions should be met
at the first stage by an amendment, to be moved by Lord Stanley: "That
this House, while admitting that considerable modifications in the
temporalities of the united Church in Ireland may, after pending inquiry,
appear to be expedient, is of opinion that any proposition tending to the
disestablishment or disendowment of the Church ought to be reserved for
the decision of the new Parliament." The amendment was ingeniously framed,
because it contained an implied menace that the Government, if defeated
on the resolutions, would dissolve Parliament sooner than allow the Irish
Church Question to be dealt with by the "unreformed" constituencies;
thus sending back members to their constituents to face all the trouble
and expense of an election many months before the time that they had
calculated upon. This disagreeable prospect might again, it was hoped,
cause a split in the Liberal party. But the manœuvre did not succeed this
time. The debate on the resolutions commenced on the 30th of March, and
was continued over four nights; the question being, whether the Speaker
should leave the chair so that the House might go into committee on the
resolutions, or whether Lord Stanley's amendment should be affirmed.
In the course of the debate, Mr. Lowe, the great deserter, who had now
returned to his colours, made a vehement and powerful attack on Government
for their attempt to link the fortunes of the Church of England with those
of the sister Establishment in Ireland. This, he said, was a Mezentian
union--an attempt to link the living with the dead.
The division resulted in the rejection of Lord Stanley's amendment by a
majority of 61; the numbers being 270 for, and 331 against it. No further
progress was made for the moment, as the defeat of Government occurred
on the eve of the Easter recess. During the short interval the sense of
the country was variously expressed by two great meetings held in St.
James's Hall--one for, the other against, Disestablishment. At the first,
presided over by Lord Russell, the Chairman professed himself ready to
sacrifice what was, in his own opinion, the best course--the plan of
concurrent endowment by paying the priests. Great unanimity prevailed. At
the Conservative meeting, the only argument put forward that was of much
weight was this--that the ill-feeling which prevailed in Ireland towards
England was more deep-seated than most Englishmen supposed; and that the
disestablishment of the Irish Church, which was far from being a generally
unpopular institution, would do nothing to remove this feeling in the
minds of the majority, while it would tend to diminish the attachment of
the Protestant minority to Great Britain. Parliament resumed its sittings
on the 20th of April, and the 27th was fixed for the debate in committee
on Mr. Gladstone's first resolution. Three more nights were consumed in
the discussion of the question in all its bearings; on the 30th of April
the division took place, and resulted in the affirmation of the first
resolution, by a majority against Government of sixty-five.
Upon the numbers being announced, Mr. Disraeli rose and said that the
vote at which the committee had arrived had altered the relations between
Government and the House; he therefore moved that the House should
adjourn to Monday, the 4th of May, to enable Government to consider
their position. Few imagined that after defeats so decisive Government
would be able to follow aught but one of two courses--either immediate
resignation or immediate dissolution. Many, indeed, of the Liberal leaders
maintained that the only constitutional course open to the Ministry was
resignation. But his opponents did not know all that the accomplished and
versatile Premier was capable of. Mr. Disraeli was not yet at the end of
his resources. He contrived to extract out of defeat a secure tenure of
office for seven months longer, and all the rage and vituperation of the
baffled victors could avail nothing against his imperturbable front. On
the 4th of May he rose in his place, and stated that, having waited on
her Majesty, he told her that "the advice which her Ministers would, in
the full spirit of the Constitution, offer her, would be that her Majesty
should dissolve this Parliament, and take the opinion of the country upon
the conduct of her Ministers, and on the question at issue; but, at the
same time, with the full concurrence of my colleagues, I represented to
her Majesty that there were important occasions on which it was wise
that the Sovereign should not be embarrassed by personal claims, however
constitutional, valid, or meritorious; and that if her Majesty was of
opinion that the question at issue could be more satisfactorily settled,
or that the interests of the country would be promoted by the immediate
retirement of the present Government from office, we were prepared to
quit her Majesty's service immediately, with no other feeling but that
which every Minister who has served the Queen must entertain, viz. a
feeling of gratitude to her Majesty for the warm constitutional support
which she always gives to her Ministers, and I may add--for it is a truth
that cannot be concealed--for the aid and assistance which any Minister
must experience from a Sovereign who has such a vast acquaintance with
public affairs. Sir, I, in fact, tendered my resignation to the Queen. Her
Majesty commanded me to attend her in audience on the next day, when her
Majesty was pleased to express her pleasure not to accept the resignation
of her Ministers, and her readiness to dissolve Parliament so soon as
the state of public business would permit. Under these circumstances, I
advised her Majesty that, although the present constituency was no doubt
admirably competent to decide upon the question of the disestablishment of
the Church, still it was the opinion of her Majesty's Ministers that every
effort should be made that the appeal should, if possible, be directed to
the new constituencies which the wisdom of Parliament provided last year;
and I expressed to her Majesty that, if we had the cordial co-operation
of Parliament, I was advised by those who are experienced and skilful in
these matters that it would be possible to make arrangements by which that
dissolution could take place in the autumn of this year."
[Illustration: SCENE IN THE BIRMINGHAM "NO POPERY" RIOTS. (_See p_. 475.)]
This speech, so charmingly blended and tempered as it was, concealed under
a cloud of plausible words the exact point which every one wanted to
know--how far the Ministerial plan was due to the Queen's own initiative,
and how much was suggested to her by the Premier. The only point about
which there could be no mistake was that the Ministers meant to stay in
till the autumn. The Liberals were greatly incensed; and although many of
them must have keenly relished the joke, and internally done homage to the
genius of this master of political legerdemain, the leaders of the party
felt it as a very serious matter to be kept so long out of the fruits
of a triumph which they had deemed secure. Mr. Disraeli was questioned
and cross-questioned as to the exact nature of the communications that
had taken place between the Queen and himself, and as to an apparent
discrepancy between his own explanation of the circumstances, and that
given by the Duke of Richmond in the other House. Nothing could be more
ingenuous and candid than Mr. Disraeli's replies; nevertheless, the
transaction continued to be wrapped in some degree of mystery and Mr.
Gladstone, Mr. Lowe, and others protested against the course taken by
the Ministry as unconstitutional and unprecedented. According to Lord
Malmesbury, Mr. Gladstone wished to stop supplies, but could not obtain
the support of his party. Mr. Bright, however, severely chastised Mr.
Disraeli for his use of the Queen's name, and the Prime Minister winced
under the castigation. To the statement of Mr. Lowe, that in not resigning
the Ministry was treating the House with disrespect, since the large
majorities by which Government had been defeated on the Irish Church
Question amounted virtually to a vote of want of confidence, Mr. Disraeli
replied that many of those who sided with the majority on these occasions
had assured him that they did not so understand the votes they gave; and
he challenged Mr. Lowe and those who agreed with him to propose a direct
vote of want of confidence, which could be argued and decided on that
plain issue. The challenge was not taken up, and the excitement on this
particular matter gradually subsided.
To the three original resolutions of Mr. Gladstone a fourth was added
in the course of the discussion, relating to the Maynooth Grant and the
_Regium Donum_. The former, which was originally fixed at £8,000 a year,
was raised by Sir Robert Peel, in 1845, to £30,000 a year, and charged
upon the Consolidated Fund. It was devoted to the sustentation of the
great Roman Catholic seminary for the training of priests at Maynooth,
and was administered by the Irish bishops, subject to the control of
the Executive. Before Maynooth was established, the Irish priests were
generally educated in France, whence they brought back, as it was
supposed, feelings of alienation and hostility towards England; it was
therefore considered to be an act of wise statesmanship to subsidise a
seminary in Ireland itself, so that the priests might be educated at
home. The _Regium Donum_ was an annual grant of about £38,000, first
instituted by Charles II., in favour of the Irish Presbyterian Church, and
distributed among the ministers in stipends of £75 each. Evidently the
grounds of justice and conciliation upon which Mr. Gladstone relied in
moving for the disendowment of the Irish Church were inapplicable in the
case of the Maynooth Grant and the _Regium Donum_, both of which were of
very modest amount relatively to the size of the religious communities to
which they were allotted, and the payment of which involved no injustice
nor inequality. But it was necessary for Mr. Gladstone to include these
also in his scheme of disendowment, as, otherwise, he would have forfeited
the support of the English Dissenters and the Scottish Radicals. With
these the disendowment of the Irish Church was popular, not so much as an
abatement of an injustice, as because it committed the State _pro tanto_
to the principle of Voluntaryism. "Levelling down" was the only kind of
equalisation which they approved of; they desired that all religious
organisations should be denuded of State aid equally with themselves,
whether that aid were much or little. This applies more particularly to
the Dissenters; with the Scottish members the detestation of everything
Roman Catholic was the chief motive for their claiming that the Maynooth
Grant should be included in the work of demolition. Mr. Gladstone, in
order to preserve the unity of his party, which he had just patched
together again with such infinite trouble, was obliged to consent to
this enlargement of his scheme; and the fourth resolution accordingly
ran thus: "That when legislative effect shall have been given to the
first resolution of this committee, respecting the Established Church of
Ireland, it is right and necessary that the grant to Maynooth and the
_Regium Donum_ be discontinued, due regard being had to all personal
interests."
The resolutions having been carried, in their final shape (May 8th), the
Address to her Majesty respecting the temporalities of the Irish Church
was duly presented. Some inconsiderate persons supposed that either Mr.
Disraeli would advise the Queen, or that the Queen herself, under the
influence of an imagined scruple as to the bearing of the Coronation
Oath, would refuse, to surrender to Parliament her interest in the Irish
temporalities in the manner requested. But both Mr. Disraeli and the Queen
knew better the path prescribed to each by constitutional duty. The answer
of her Majesty to the Commons' Address, received at the House on the 12th
of May, stated that, relying on the wisdom of her Parliament, the Queen
desired that her interest in the temporalities of the Irish Church should
not stand in the way of the discussion of any measure that Parliament
might deem necessary for the welfare of Ireland. To advise her Majesty to
any other course would have been the less excusable, because it was quite
unnecessary; Mr. Disraeli being serenely confident that the Tory majority
in the House of Lords would allow no measure touching the temporalities to
pass into law--at any rate that year. This was soon made evident, when, as
soon as possible after the receipt of the Queen's consent to legislative
action, Mr. Gladstone brought in a Suspensory Bill, the object of which
was to stop the creation of new vested interests, by preventing for a
limited time any new appointments in the Irish Church, and to restrain
for the same period in certain respects the proceedings of the Irish
Ecclesiastical Commissioners. The Suspensory Bill passed easily through
the House of Commons; but when it came to the Lords it was criticised
with great severity, and the second reading was refused by a majority of
ninety-five.
The rest of the Session passed away with little that was eventful to mark
its course. Government brought in an Education Bill, which contained
one noteworthy and excellent feature--the provision of a real Minister
of Education, in the shape of a new Secretary of State for that special
department. But the general scheme proposed in the Bill was slight and
not deeply considered; it therefore failed to stand its ground against
the numerous objections raised against it, and was before long withdrawn
by its promoters. The financial statement of Mr. Ward Hunt, the new
Chancellor of the Exchequer, showed that the revenue continued to exhibit
that character of elasticity which it had maintained for several years.
The plan for the public endowment of the Irish Catholic University fell
to the ground at an early period of the Session. The Irish prelates
(Archbishop Leahy and Bishop Derry) who had been appointed to conduct
the negotiation on the part of the University authorities with the Chief
Secretary, Lord Mayo, demanded powers so extensive, not only as to the
appointment and dismissal of professors and other officers, but also as
to the use and prohibition of books, that Government abruptly closed
the correspondence. It afterwards appeared that the prelates had not put
forward these demands as an ultimatum, and might have abated their terms
upon good cause being shown. But it is probable that Mr. Disraeli, knowing
how extremely averse was popular feeling from any concession to Romanism,
felt little regret that the large demands of the prelates had furnished
him with a decent excuse for abandoning the project.
Several measures introduced by Government in the course of the Session
met with a similar fate to that which befell the Education Bill. One
really useful Act was passed--that for enabling the State to treat with
the various electric telegraph companies for the purchase of their lines,
in order that the whole telegraphic communication of the country might be
placed under the control of the Postmaster-General. The adjustment of the
various interests involved was a work of great labour and patience; it
was, however, accomplished, and the telegraph companies agreed to accept
twenty years' purchase of the net profits of their undertakings. It was
calculated that Government would require about £6,000,000 in order to
carry the scheme into full effect, the greater part of which sum would
be borrowed from the Savings Banks Fund; but the financial part of the
arrangement was reserved for the next Parliament. Mr. Scudamore, the
originator of the scheme, calculated that the Post Office would derive a
net profit of £200,000 a year from taking the telegraph lines into its own
hands; but the purchase gave rise, then and afterwards, to much hostile
criticism.
The home policy of the Tory Government, checked and foiled as it was
at every turn, by the fact of its supporters being a minority in the
House of Commons, cannot be deemed, however brilliant it may have been
in inception, to have been more than moderately successful in what it
achieved. With foreign affairs it was otherwise. Lord Stanley presided
over the Foreign Office, and controlled the relations of the country
with Foreign Powers with a firmness and dignity that recalled English
statesmen of the old school. Of his conduct in the Luxemburg business we
have already spoken; of his management of the _Alabama_ question we shall
have to speak hereafter. Making a reasonable deduction for partisanship,
we may admit that there was much truth in the lofty language used by the
Prime Minister with regard to the foreign policy of his Government, in a
speech delivered at a banquet in Merchant Taylors' Hall, on the 17th of
June. "When we acceded to office," he said, "the name of England was a
name of suspicion and distrust in every foreign Court and Cabinet. There
was no possibility of that cordial action with any of the Great Powers
which is the only security for peace; and, in consequence of that want
of cordiality, wars were frequently occurring. But since we entered upon
office, and public affairs were administered by my noble friend, who is
deprived by a special diplomatic duty of the gratification of being here
this evening, I say that all this has changed; that there never existed
between England and Foreign Powers a feeling of greater cordiality and
confidence than now prevails; that while we have shrunk from bustling and
arrogant intermeddling, we have never taken refuge in selfish isolation;
and the result has been that there never was a Government in the country
which has been more frequently appealed to for its friendly offices than
the one which now exists."
A short Act--the Registration of Voters Act--was passed before Parliament
separated, in order to facilitate early elections under the Reform Bill
of 1867; and the Session came to a close on the 31st of July. After
the prorogation of Parliament the Ministry lost no time in making the
necessary preparations for a dissolution and general election. The
registers of the enlarged constituencies were actively proceeded with
and so far completed that it was found possible to dissolve Parliament
on the 11th of November, and to summon a new one, to be elected under
the Reform Act of 1867, for the 10th of December. The great public
question at issue was the existence of the Irish Establishment; and, on
a general view, the verdict of the constituencies was given in favour of
Mr. Gladstone's proposals, and disappointed the sanguine anticipations
of Mr. Disraeli. There was a gain to the Liberal party, as the net
result of the elections, of fifteen seats, equal to thirty votes on a
division. But their triumph was chequered by several minor reverses,
among which the rejection of Mr. Gladstone for South Lancashire was
the most remarkable. Every resource that unflagging industry, careful
organisation, and incessant oratory could put in requisition was resorted
to in order to secure the return of the Liberal leader, but all efforts
were in vain; the Conservative candidates--Messrs. Cross and Turner--were
returned at the head of the poll, Mr. Gladstone having two hundred and
sixty fewer votes than Mr. Turner, who was about fifty below Mr. Cross.
There were two principal causes accounting for this result; one the
extreme unpopularity of the Irish in South Lancashire, owing to the
increased turbulence, drunkenness, and pauperism which their presence in
large numbers occasioned, and also to the fact that their competition
beat down wages; the other, the influence of the house of Stanley and
other great Conservative families in that part of the country. Mr.
Gladstone had to console himself with the suffrages of Greenwich, which
had generously elected him while the issue in South Lancashire was still
undecided. In other parts of Lancashire the same feeling of soreness
against the proposal to disestablish the Irish Church, because it seemed
to involve a triumph for the locally unpopular Irish Catholics, produced
a similar result. This great and representative county, taking boroughs
and shire-divisions together, returned twenty-one Conservatives against
eleven Liberals. On the other hand, the Scottish electors accepted Mr.
Gladstone's proposal with extraordinary favour. Not only did the Scottish
boroughs return Liberals without exception, but many counties which had
returned Conservative members for years were on this occasion carried
for Liberals. Of the whole number of members who came up from Scotland,
only seven were Conservatives. In Ireland also there was a Liberal gain,
though one of less magnitude. At the election for Westminster--to the deep
regret of all who could appreciate the profound political insight and
philosophical treatment of great questions which were thus lost to the
House of Commons--Mr. John Stuart Mill was defeated by the Conservative
candidate, Mr. William Henry Smith.
[Illustration: CORONATION OF THE EMPEROR OF AUSTRIA AS KING OF HUNGARY.
(_See p._ 468.)]
By the beginning of December it was abundantly evident that Mr. Gladstone
would be supported in the new House of Commons by a considerably larger
following than before. Mr. Disraeli thereupon took a bold and judicious
resolution. He would not go through the forms of meeting Parliament as
if he were the master of the situation--of advising a Royal Speech that
must either omit all mention of the Irish Church, or mention it in a tone
at variance with the sentiments of the great majority of the House,--of
renewing or seeing renewed a debate that he knew could only end one way.
He resolved, therefore, to resign office before Parliament met, and this
resolution he communicated to his friends and supporters by a circular
dated the 2nd of December. Mr. Disraeli and his colleagues accordingly
resigned, and the Queen, of course, sent for Mr. Gladstone, as the
recognised leader of the party, and the ablest exponent of the policy
of which the majority of the constituencies had just recorded their
emphatic approval. The outgoing Premier declined a peerage for himself,
but accepted one for his wife, who became Viscountess Beaconsfield. Mr.
Gladstone became First Lord of the Treasury, and the principal offices
were thus filled up:--Lord Chancellor, Lord Hatherley (late Sir W. Page
Wood); President of the Council, Lord de Grey and Ripon; Chancellor of
the Exchequer, Mr. Lowe; Home Secretary, Mr. Bruce; Foreign Secretary,
Earl of Clarendon; Colonial Secretary, Earl Granville; Secretary for War,
Mr. Cardwell; Secretary for Ireland, Mr. Chichester Fortescue; Secretary
for India, Duke of Argyll; First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr. Childers;
President of the Board of Trade, Mr. Bright; Chairman of the Poor Law
Board, Mr. Goschen; Vice-President of the Council, Mr. W. E. Forster. The
new Ministers, having necessarily vacated their seats on taking office,
were not present at the meeting of Parliament on the 10th of December,
and the only proceedings then taken were of a formal character, including
the re-election of Mr. Evelyn Denison as Speaker, and the swearing-in of
the new members who were more than 200 in number. Parliament was then
adjourned to the 29th of December, at which date, the re-election of the
new Ministers having been in no instance opposed, the House reassembled,
with Ministers all in their places, but only to be again immediately
adjourned to the 16th of February, 1869.
Some events, non-political in their character, which belonged to the
year 1868, may here be brought together. In the course of the spring the
intelligence of an attempt to assassinate the Duke of Edinburgh while in
Australia created much excitement in London. Prince Alfred, the second son
of the Queen, having taken to a naval life, rose rapidly in the service,
and at the time of the attempt was in command of the _Galatea_, a frigate
attached to the Australian station. In the course of a long visit to
the colony of New South Wales the Prince had consented to be present at
a large picnic at Clontarf (a place on Middle Harbour, Port Jackson),
organised partly to do honour to his Royal Highness, partly to benefit the
funds of a Sailors' Home. Here, under the bright Australian sky, while all
was mirth and enjoyment around, the Prince being engaged in conversation
with Sir William Manning, the Attorney-General, while the Governor (Lord
Belmore) and the Lord Chief Justice were at a short distance, a person was
observed to take deliberate aim at the Prince with a revolver and fire.
The Duke fell forward on his hands and knees, exclaiming, "Good God! my
back is broken." Sir William Manning rushed at the fellow to seize him,
but, seeing him on the point of firing another shot, stooped to evade the
bullet, and in the act of stooping lost his balance and fell. But there
were so many persons on the ground that the criminal had little or no
chance of escape. A stalwart coachbuilder of the name of Vial ran up and
seized him from behind, pinioning his arms to his side. The man struggled
hard, attempting to liberate his right arm sufficiently to discharge the
pistol at Vial over his shoulder; but, finding this impossible, he fired
in the direction of the spot where the Duke was lying, with the supposed
intention of wounding him again. The bullet, which had struck the back and
traversed the ribs, was extracted without difficulty, and the progress
of his Royal Highness to recovery was rapid and without check. While the
Duke was being borne away, a painful scene occurred. Before the police
could take him in charge, the misguided wretch was surrounded by a mob of
infuriated loyalists, incapable of restraining either their feelings or
their fists. By these the criminal was so mauled, so brutally beaten and
bruised, that, when the police at last arrived, he was covered with blood
from head to foot and scarcely retained the semblance of humanity. "Lynch
him!" "Hang him!" "String him up!"--such were the cries that issued from
a hundred throats. When he was brought down to the man-of-war from which
he was to be removed to gaol, the sailors were about to hang him at the
yard-arm incontinently; but Lord Newry interposed and saved him. After
much preliminary investigation, in order to ascertain whether or not the
man had accomplices, he was put on his trial on the 26th of March. He
gave his name as Henry James O'Farrel, admitted that he had intended to
kill the Prince, as a prominent representative of English tyranny over
his native land, and at first used language which pointed, like that of
Mucius Scævola on a similar occasion, to a secret conspiracy in which he
was but one of the adepts and accomplices. When, however, he was condemned
to death, he wrote and signed on the day before his execution (April 21st)
a full and clear statement, declaring that he had had no accomplices,
and that the design of assassinating the Duke had been conceived in his
own brain, and communicated to no other person. He admitted that he was
a Fenian, but denied that he was connected with, or even cognisant of
the existence of, any Fenian organisation in New South Wales. Before he
suffered, he was brought to a becoming sense of the guilt of the criminal
act he had so nearly consummated. The Duke of Edinburgh, after his
recovery, interceded with the Colonial Government, but without effect, for
the pardon of the culprit.
The scandalous scenes caused in 1867 by the discourses of the "No Popery"
lecturer Murphy were renewed in the May of 1868 with yet more calamitous
results. A traveller, passing through the streets of Birmingham, on the
night of June 19th, 1867, saw Park Street in ruins; the traffic stopped in
the great thoroughfare of High Street and Bull Street; Carr's Lane, Moor
Street, etc., strongly occupied by soldiers, and Irishwomen weeping over
the destruction of their little property and their wrecked homes. On the
9th of May, 1868, the furious spirit of bigotry which Murphy's lectures
had awakened in the breasts of his English auditors, at Dukinfield,
Stalybridge, and Ashton-under-Lyne, important manufacturing towns in
South Lancashire, found vent in a combined movement against the quarter
inhabited by the Catholic Irish in the last-named town. Much fighting
ensued, but the party of the assailants was in superior force, and, after
having done considerable damage to a small chapel with its school in the
Irish quarter, they attacked the principal chapel (St. Mary's). The chapel
bell was rung, and the Irish flocked to the aid of their priest; but they
were overpowered by numbers, and the fittings and window-frames of the
chapel were destroyed. Shots were fired, but no lives were lost. On the
11th there was a renewal of rioting; the English attacked Reyner's Row,
the inhabitants of which were mostly Irish, and commenced systematically
to sack and gut the houses, and destroy the furniture. Troops were at last
sent for by the Mayor; the rioters cheered the soldiers, and adjourned to
another street merely to renew the work of devastation. It was the riots
of 1780 repeated on a smaller scale. In one of the rushes made by the
mob a respectable woman was knocked down and trampled to death. A number
of special constables were sworn in; the most mischievous of the rioters
were arrested or disarmed, and the disturbance was gradually got under.
An attempt was made to renew the same outrages at Stalybridge; but here
the authorities were well prepared, and the mob was at once charged and
dispersed by a combined force of constables and specials.
In December, a decision, which had been awaited with deep interest by
both the great parties in the Church, was delivered by Lord Cairns in the
name of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The judgment was
in the case of Martin _v._ Mackonochie. The latter, one of the leading
Ritualist clergy in London, and the incumbent of St. Alban's, Holborn,
was charged with lighting candles on the communion-table at the time of
the celebration of the communion, and with superstitiously prostrating
himself before the elements after pronouncing the prayer of consecration.
On both charges submitted the judgment was against Mr. Mackonochie.
Lighted candles, according to the Judicial Committee, were not "ornaments"
within the meaning of the Rubric; and with regard to the prostrations, it
was evident that they introduced and implied an adoration to a supposed
Divine presence, objectively understood, which the Reformers had carefully
eliminated from the worship of the Anglican Church. Mr. Mackonochie was
condemned in the costs of the appeal, as well as in the costs of the
hearing in the court below.
There died in this year (May 7), at an extreme old age, one whose name
recalled the Liberal reaction that set in in Great Britain at the
beginning of the century, who had worked with Mackintosh and Charles James
Fox, and stood up to defend the unhappy Queen of George IV. This was Lord
Brougham, whose splendid talents were neutralised by a restless ambition,
which had condemned him, since his ostracism by Lord Melbourne, to a long
career of political sterility. Longley, once head-master of Harrow, who
since the death of Sumner had been Archbishop of Canterbury, died this
year (October 27), and was succeeded by Dr. Tait, the Bishop of London. A
life brilliantly commenced, but clouded latterly by many disappointments,
was also closed this year (June 11)--that of Sir James Brooke, the
Rajah of Sarawak. The adventurous story of his early life--how, finding
himself possessed of wealth, and with no special work to do, he fitted
out a yacht, and sailed to the Eastern Archipelago; how he settled down
at Sarawak in Borneo, and, as a beneficent friend and lawgiver, taught
the Dyaks the benefits of law, and the arts and enjoyments of a higher
life; how he warred upon the pirates of the coast and the freebooters
of the interior--all this is told, simply and well, in Captain Keppel's
"Voyage of the _Dido_." Milman, the historian of the Jews and of Latin
Christianity, also passed away; and Bishop Hampden, whose name was
associated with university controversies, and Bishop Jeune, whose name
recalls university reform.
The sequence of events in Abyssinia that terminated in the death of the
Emperor Theodore and the storming of the rock fortress of Magdala,
commenced with the conclusion of a treaty of amity and commerce, in 1848,
between Queen Victoria and Ras Ali, the ruler of central Abyssinia. This
treaty was the work of Lord Palmerston; and to understand his motives,
it is necessary that the reader should have some general knowledge of
the previous history of Abyssinia. The natives of this portion of the
ancient Ethiopia--which, though within the tropics, enjoys a healthy and
delightful climate, on account of its great elevation above the sea--were
converted to Christianity by St. Frumentius, sent from Alexandria by the
great Athanasius in the fourth century of our era. They never for any long
time together broke their connection with Egypt; for centuries the Abuna,
or patriarch, of the Abyssinian Church, had been appointed, whenever the
dignity fell vacant, by the Coptic Patriarch in Egypt, and submissively
accepted by the Abyssinian Christians. Unfortunately, the Copts in Egypt
having ages ago adopted the heresy of the Monophysites, the connection
between the two countries propagated the same heresy in Abyssinia, and
thereby raised in some degree a barrier between the Abyssinians and the
rest of Christendom. But the motive that originally induced the Neguses,
or Emperors, of Abyssinia to seek the head of their Church from Egypt
was wise and laudable; they saw Mohammedanism spreading all around them,
cutting them off from all other Christian countries; and they hoped by
this ecclesiastical arrangement to guard themselves in some measure
against the fatal effects of that isolation.
Ages rolled by and the troubles of Abyssinia continually thickened. Once,
before Mohammed arose, she had had the command of the Red Sea and had
subdued the southern portion of Arabia, where her dominion for a time
promised to be permanent. Gibbon speculates on the strangely different
course which human affairs might have taken if the Christian rulers of
Abyssinia had been able to subjugate the whole of Arabia and stifle Islam
in its cradle. But the Crescent rose higher and higher in the heavens;
the Turkish power gradually extended itself along the shores of the Red
Sea, and about 1570 succeeded in permanently occupying Massowah and other
points on the west coast, thus cutting off Abyssinia from the sea. A still
worse infliction came on the unfortunate country about the same time, in
the invasion of tribes of savage and heathen Gallas from the south. They
came again and again; though often defeated and driven out, they still
returned in greater numbers and with greater ferocity than before. These
intruding Gallas had become Mussulman, while the Galla tribes to the south
remained heathen.
The Portuguese, soon after they had discovered the passage round the
Cape of Good Hope, conceived a high idea of the importance of Abyssinia
as the key of North-Eastern Africa, and opened diplomatic and commercial
intercourse with its rulers. For about a century and a half this heroic
little nation, partly by its soldiers, partly by its Jesuit missionaries,
maintained a close and constant communication with Abyssinia. About the
year 1640 the Portuguese power, succumbing to some mysterious law of
national decay, began everywhere to decline. Thenceforward, till official
relations were opened between Britain and Abyssinia, near the beginning
of the century, it does not appear that any European nation had any
intercourse with the country except through the visits of individual
travellers or adventurers. The ancient royal family, which bore the
sovereign title of Negus (properly "Nagash"), was deposed about 1770,
shortly before the visit of James Bruce, the celebrated traveller; and
Abyssinia was split up into three or more independent States, the chief
of which were Tigré, Amhara, and Shoa. Official communication was first
opened between Britain and Abyssinia in 1810, when Mr. Salt, the British
Envoy, paid a formal visit to Ras Walda Selassyé, the Prince of Tigré,
at Antalo, and presented him with two three-pounder field guns and other
presents. But Mr. Salt's visit was an isolated act, and led to nothing.
Nor was the visit of Major Harris to the King of Shoa, in 1841, undertaken
by orders of the Bombay Government to arrange a treaty of commerce with
that potentate, productive of more lasting consequences; although it
furnished the materials for one of the most popular and interesting
books of travel that the last generation produced. The visit of Walter
Plowden, a private Englishman, who first found his way to Abyssinia in
1843, led eventually to more important consequences than either of the
official visits just mentioned. After a residence of nearly four years
in the country, he returned to England, bearing some presents from Ras
Ali, then chief of central Abyssinia, to the Queen. While in London he
submitted several memoranda on Abyssinian affairs to Lord Palmerston.
The intelligent clearness with which these were written, and the
prospect which they held out of extending British trade and influence in
those parts of Africa, appear to have made a strong impression on Lord
Palmerston, and he appointed Mr. Plowden British Consul at Massowah, for
the protection of British trade in Abyssinia. He also entrusted him (Jan.,
1848) with presents for Ras Ali, and instructed him to conclude with that
ruler a treaty of amity and commerce. Plowden was soon back in Abyssinia
and zealously fulfilled his instructions. Ras Ali, an indolent man, had
no objection to sign the treaty, but he said he did not expect that it
would bring any British traders to Abyssinia. In truth, while the Turks
(or rather the Egyptians, for Turkey ceded her possessions on this shore
in 1866 to the Pasha of Egypt) were allowed to cut off Abyssinia from the
sea, no European trade with the country could flourish.
[Illustration: KING THEODORE'S HOUSE, MAGDALA.]
Consul Plowden had been residing six years at Massowah when he heard that
the Prince to whom he had been accredited, Ras Ali, had been defeated
and dethroned by an adventurer, whose name, a few years before, had been
unknown outside the boundaries of his native province. This was Lij
Kâsa, better known by his adopted name of Theodore. He was born of an
old family, in the mountainous region of Kwara, where the land begins
to slope downwards towards the Blue Nile, and educated in a convent,
where he learned to read, and acquired a considerable knowledge of the
Scriptures. Kâsa's convent life was suddenly put an end to when one of
the marauding Galla bands attacked and plundered the monastery. From
that time he himself took to the life of a freebooter and, through his
superior intelligence and undaunted courage, soon attained the reputation
of being successful in all his enterprises. Adventurers flocked to his
standard; his power continually increased; and in 1854 he defeated Ras
Ali in a pitched battle, and made himself master of central Abyssinia.
His ambition widened in proportion to its gratification; he now sent to
Oobye, the ruler of Tigré, requiring that he should pay him tribute, and
insisted that the Abuna, then resident at the Court of Oobye, should be
sent to Gondar, which, since the fall of Ras Ali, had been Kâsa's capital.
His demands were scornfully rejected, and the Abuna excommunicated him.
But Kâsa was equal to the occasion. Monseigneur de Jacobis, a Roman
Catholic missionary of great ability and saintly life, was at that time
in Abyssinia, with the authority of Vicar-Apostolic; him Kâsa threatened
to recognise as bishop unless the Abuna came to Gondar. The Abuna then
yielded, revoked the excommunication, and came to live at Gondar, thus
giving a kind of religious sanction to the adventurer's power. Fortune
still attended the arms of Kâsa. In 1855 he defeated Oobye at a place
called Derezgye, in the province of Semyen, and all Tigré submitted to
the conqueror. He now resolved to assume a title commensurate with the
wide extent of his dominion. In the church of Derezgye he had himself
crowned by the Abuna as King of the Kings of Ethiopia, taking the name of
Theodore, because an ancient tradition declared that a great monarch so
called would one day arise in Abyssinia. Courtly genealogists were not
wanting who deduced his pedigree from the line of the ancient kings.
These startling events reached the ears of Mr. Plowden at Massowah and
he resolved to visit the new monarch. He arrived at the camp of Theodore
in March or April, 1855, and found that a former fellow-traveller, an
Englishman named Bell, who had married an Abyssinian lady, was already in
Theodore's service, with the title and functions of Grand Chamberlain.
At this time Theodore's character and aims were such as to command the
admiration and respect of Plowden and Bell, both of whom were able and
excellent men. "Plowden said of him that he was generous to excess, and
free from all cupidity, merciful to his vanquished enemies, and strictly
continent; but subject to violent bursts of anger and possessed of
unyielding pride and fanatical religious zeal." His views of government
were far more enlightened than those of the majority of his countrymen.
He abolished the slave trade, put an end to many vexatious imposts on
commerce, and aimed at curtailing or suppressing the feudal privileges
of a number of petty chiefs, who were the tyrants of the districts over
which they ruled. Consul Plowden thus concluded his report on Theodore's
character and policy:--"Some of his ideas may be imperfect, others
impracticable; but a man who, rising from the clouds of Abyssinian
ignorance and childishness, without assistance and without advice, has
done so much, and contemplates such large designs, cannot be regarded as
of an ordinary stamp."