In 1820 our imports of foreign and colonial merchandise were valued

at £32,000,000; our exports of foreign and colonial merchandise

at £10,000,000; and our exports of British and Irish produce and

manufactures at £38,000,000. In 1840 these sums had respectively

increased to £67,000,000, £13,000,000, and £102,000,000, setting aside

odd numbers. From 1831 to 1840 the average annual export of British

produce and manufactures was £45,000,000, while in the nine subsequent

years it was nearly £56,000,000. From 1830 onwards the value of our

exports to France increased sixfold, notwithstanding the jealous

system of protection that prevails in that country. The sphere of our

commercial operations was being continually enlarged from year to year,

and the enterprise of our merchants was continually opening up fresh

markets in distant parts of the world. The value of the exports of

British and Irish produce in 1820 was as follows:--To Northern Europe,

£11,000,000; to Southern Europe, £7,000,000; to Africa, £393,000;

to Asia, nearly £4,000,000; to the United States of America, nearly

£4,000,000; to the British North American Colonies and the West

Indies, £5,750,000; to Central and South America, including Brazil,

£3,000,000. The total value of our exports to foreign countries, and

to our colonies in that year, was £36,000,000. In 1840 we exported

the following quantities, which, it will be seen, show a large

increase:--To Northern Europe, about £12,000,000; to Southern Europe,

£9,000,000; to Africa, £1,500,000; to Asia, £9,000,000; to the United

States, £5,250,000; to the British North American Colonies, £6,500,000;

to the foreign West Indies, £1,000,000; to Central and Southern

America, including Brazil, £6,000,000; total, £51,000,000: showing an

increase of £15,000,000 in the annual value of our exports to foreign

countries during twenty years.

In 1821, 7,250,000 lbs. of coffee were consumed by fourteen millions

of people in Great Britain. In 1824 the consumption of coffee in the

United Kingdom was 8,250,000 lbs., and the duties were--on foreign

coffee, 2s. 6d. per lb.; East India, 1s. 6d.; British West India, 1s.

per lb. In the same year the consumption was--of foreign coffee, 1,540

lbs.; East India, 313,000 lbs.; West India, about 800,000 lbs. In

the following year Mr. Huskisson reduced the duties on these several

kinds to 1s. 3d., 9d., and 6d., respectively, which caused a rapid

increase in the consumption. In 1840 the consumption was--of East

and West India, 14,500,000 lbs.; and of foreign, 14,000,000 lbs. In

1841, 27,250,000 lbs. were consumed by eighteen and a half millions of

people. The tea trade with China was used by the East India Company for

the purpose of enriching itself by an enormous tax upon the British

consumer. During one hundred years it ranged from 2s. to 4s. in the

pound excise duty, with a customs duty of 14 per cent., down to a total

minimum duty of 12½ per cent. The former duty was estimated at 200

per cent. on the value of the common teas. The effect, as might be

expected, was an enormous amount of smuggling. The monopoly of the

Company was abolished; it was made lawful for any person to import

tea by the Act 4 William IV., c. 85; and the trade was opened on the

22nd of April, 1834. The _ad valorem_ duties were abolished, and all

the Bohea tea imported for home consumption was charged with a customs

duty of 1s. 6d. per lb.; Congou and other teas of superior quality were

charged 2s. 2d. per lb., and some 3s. per lb. In 1836 these various

duties gave place to a uniform one of 2s. 1d. per lb., which, with the

addition of 5 per cent., imposed in 1840, continued till 1851, when the

penny was removed. During the last year of restricted trade (1833) our

aggregate importations amounted to 32,000,000 lbs.; during the first

year of Free Trade, they bounded up to 44,000,000 lbs.; and in 1856

they had attained to 86,000,000 lbs. The average price of tea per lb.,

including duty, in 1834, was 4s. 4d. In 1821 the total quantity of tea

imported into Great Britain was upwards of 31,000,000 lbs., and its

value £1,873,886; in 1834 the quantity was about 35,000,000 lbs., and

the value about £2,000,000. In 1837 the quantity was about 40,000,000

lbs.

In 1820 the amount of revenue paid into the exchequer as the produce

of taxation was £54,000,000. The interest upon the National Debt was

£31,000,000, and the sums applied to the redemption of public debt

were about £2,000,000. At the same time the current annual expenditure

was £21,000,000. The revenue increased to £59,000,000 in 1824, after

which it declined to £50,000,000 in 1830, when the annual expenditure

was reduced to £18,000,000. In 1840 the revenue was £47,000,000, and

the interest on the public debt £29,000,000; the total amount paid and

expended being £49,000,000.

Great Britain bears a heavy burden of taxation, yet she does not seem

to feel it. Many years ago Mr. Disraeli, in the House of Commons,

called the National Debt a "flea-bite." It is not quite so light a

matter as that; still, it does not seem to render her step less firm,

nor retard her progress, nor give her much trouble. It is a matter of

wonder to foreigners how the British people manage to have so much

money after paying so smartly in the shape of taxes, and spending so

much on food, clothing, and household accommodation. The secret lies

in the wonderful industry and thrift in the masses of the people.

They work hard, live well, and waste little. The number of people who

live in Great Britain without labouring in any way for their support

with head or hand is very small. Of 5,812,000 males twenty years of

age and upwards, in 1831, no less than 5,466,000 were engaged in some

calling or profession. The progressive well-being of the middle classes

of England has been indicated very satisfactorily by the improved

character of their dwellings. If the country is more healthful than

the city, one cause may be found in the less crowded state of the

habitations. In the country the proportion was about five and a half

persons on an average in each house; in London about a third more.

In Scotland the proportion was six to ten in 1831, and in Ireland it

was six to twelve, taking the capital in each case as representing

the urban population. The number of inhabited houses which England

contained in 1821 was 1,952,000; in Ireland the number was 1,142,602;

in Scotland it was 341,474. In 1841 the numbers were--England,

2,753,295; Ireland, 1,328,839; Scotland, 503,357. The large increase

in Scotland is accounted for by the fact that in the returns of 1841

"flats" were set down as houses, which was not the case in the first

return. The tax on inhabited houses rated in three classes from £10

to £20, from £20 to £40, and from £40 and upwards. From 1821 to 1833

the houses rated at £40 and upwards increased in England from 69,000

to 84,000. The other two classes of houses increased in about the same

proportion. The house duty was repealed in 1834. There was a duty on

bricks till 1850, by which means the quantity consumed was ascertained,

and the increase between 1821 and 1847 was 130 per cent. Between the

years 1821 and 1841 the use of carriages with four wheels increased 60

per cent.--double the ratio of the increase of the population. In the

meantime hired carriages had increased from 20,000 to 33,000. Colonel

Sykes, at a meeting of the Statistical Society, counted the cost of

keeping a four-wheeled private carriage, including servants, at £250

a year. This may be too high an estimate; but taking four-wheeled and

two-wheeled carriages together, Mr. Porter thought the average expense

was not less than £100 a year for each, which would give more than

£5,000,000 for this luxury in 1821, more than £9,000,000 for 1831,

and more than £10,000,000 for 1841--a proof of wealth which no other

country in Europe could show.

The proofs of this prosperity have been exhibited in various other

ways. In 1815 the yearly value of dwelling-houses in England and

Wales was £14,000,000 for nearly 10,000,000 of people; in 1841 the

yearly rental was £23,000,000 for Under 16,000,000 of people; which,

reckoning the rental at twenty years' purchase, shows an investment

in houses of capital amounting to £180,000,000 in twenty-six years.

Counting since the Peace in 1815, it was estimated that the real

property of England and Wales in the form of additional dwellings

must have absorbed £240,000,000 of capital. Sir Robert Peel, in

bringing forward his proposal for an income tax in 1842, assumed the

value of real property in Great Britain to be as follows:--Rent of

land, £39,400,000; rent of houses, £25,000,000; tithes, mines, etc.,

£8,400,000: total, £72,800,000, which, at twenty-five years' purchase,

would be equal to a capital of £1,820,000,000. The annual value of

real property actually assessed to the property and income tax in 1843

turned out to be much more than Sir Robert Peel estimated, amounting to

more than £95,000,000 a year.

Savings-banks afford a very good index to the improved condition of the

working classes. In 1830 the total number of depositors in the United

Kingdom was 412,000; and the amount deposited, £13,500,000. In 1840 the

number of depositors had increased to nearly 800,000, and the amount

to £23,500,000. The total number of depositors in 1845 was 1,000,000,

and the amount of investments nearly £33,000,000. Of this sum, domestic

servants, nearly all females, deposited £80,000.

[Illustration: THE OVERLAND ROUTE: SCENE AT BOULAK.]

The earliest statistics by which the progress of popular education may

be measured are contained in the Parliamentary returns of 1813, when

there were in England and Wales nearly 20,000 day schools, with about

675,000 scholars, giving the proportion of 1 in 17 of the population.

There were also 5,463 Sunday schools, with 477,000 scholars, or 1 in 24

of the population. Lord Kerry's Parliamentary returns for 1833 showed

the number of day schools and scholars to be nearly doubled, and the

proportion to be 1 in 11 of the population. The Sunday schools, during

the same period, were trebled in number, and also in the aggregate of

children attending; while their proportion to the population was 1 in

9--the population having in the interval increased 24 per cent., the

day scholars 89 per cent., and the Sunday scholars 225 per cent. Up

to this time (1833) the work of education was conducted by private

liberality, incited mainly by religious zeal, and acting through the

agencies of the two great societies, the British and the National.

In that year Government came to their aid, and a meagre grant of

£20,000 a year continued to be made till 1839, when it was increased

to £30,000. This was shared between the two societies, representing

two educational parties. The principle of the British and Foreign

School Society, chiefly supported by Dissenters, was, that the Bible

should be read without note or comment in the schools, and that there

should be no catechism admitted, or special religious instruction of

any kind. The schools of the National Society, on the other hand, were

strictly Church schools, in which the Church Catechism must be taught.

The total number of schools in 1841 was 46,000, of which 30,000 were

private. These statistics indicate an immense amount of private energy

and enterprise, the more gratifying from the fact that the greater

portion of the progress was due to the working classes themselves.

Great improvements had been effected in the art of teaching. Both the

British and the National Societies from the beginning devoted much

attention to the training of efficient teachers. In 1828 the former

sent out 87 trained teachers; in 1838 as many as 183. The National

Society commenced a training institution in 1811, and after forty

years' progress it had five training colleges, sending out 270 teachers

every year.

The feeling of humanity that gained ground among the masses powerfully

affected the middle classes. The consequence was that the state of

public feeling produced by the practical inculcation of Christianity

and the diffusion of knowledge compelled our legislature to change

its system, despite the obstinate resistance of Lords Eldon and

Ellenborough, hardened by a long official familiarity with the

destructive operation of legal cruelty. How fearful the amount of that

destruction was we may infer from the calculation of Mr. Redgrave,

of the Home Office, who stated that had the offences tried in 1841

been tried under the laws of 1831, the eighty capital sentences

would have been increased to 2,172. Mr. Redgrave gave the following

succinct history of the mitigation of the criminal code during the

reigns of George IV. and William IV., in a series of enactments which

were extorted from a reluctant Legislature by society, humanised

through the education of the masses:--In 1826, 1827, and 1828 Sir

Robert Peel carried several very important Bills for the consolidation

and amendment of the criminal laws, but these Bills did not abolish

capital punishments. That statesman, indeed, made it a matter of

boast that he did not constitute any new capital felonies, and

pointed out an instance in which he had abated the capital punishment

by increasing from 40s. to £5, the sum of which the theft in a

dwelling-house constituted a capital offence, and by widening the

technical description of a dwelling. In 1830 Sir Robert Peel brought

in his Forgery Bill, and petitions were poured into the House from

all quarters against the re-enactment of the severe penalties for

this offence. Sir James Mackintosh again took up the subject, and

moved that the capital punishment be struck out from the Bill. He was

unsuccessful; but in the last stage of the measure Mr. Spring-Rice was

enabled to defeat the Ministry by a majority of 151 to 138, and to

remove the sentence of death from the Bill. It was, however, restored

by the Lords, and the Bill, as altered, was suffered to pass the House

of Commons at the end of the Session. In 1832 two most important Bills

for abolishing capital punishments were passed. Mr. Ewart, assisted by

the Government, was able to carry a Bill abolishing the punishment of

death in cases of horse, sheep, and cattle stealing, and larceny in a

dwelling-house. He was opposed by Sir Robert Peel, and an amendment

was made in the Lords, subjecting these offences to the fixed penalty

of transportation for life. At the same time, Ministers brought in a

Bill for abolishing capital punishment in cases of forgery. The Bill

was introduced into the Commons by the Attorney-General, and into the

House of Lords by the Lord Chancellor. It passed into law, but an

amendment was made in the House of Lords, under protest of the Lord

Chancellor, exempting the forgery of wills and powers of attorney to

transfer stock, which offences were left capital. In 1833 Mr. Leonard

carried his Bill for abolishing capital punishment for housebreaking,

executions for which offence were continued down to 1830. In 1834 Mr.

Ewart carried a Bill for abolishing capital punishment for returning

from transportation, and in the following year for sacrilege and

letter-stealing. This was the state of the criminal law when Lord John

Russell brought in Bills for its mitigation, founded on the report

of a committee which Government had appointed. The little progress

which Sir S. Romilly and Sir J. Mackintosh had made in opposition to

the Governments of their day will be seen by the foregoing sketch, as

well as the extensive and salutary changes which followed. Lord John

Russell's Bills effected an extensive abolition of the sentence of

death, and a mitigation of the secondary punishments. He was enabled

to abolish capital punishments in all cases but murder and attempts

to murder where dangerous bodily injuries were effected; burglary and

robbery when attended with violence or wounds; arson of dwelling-houses

where life was endangered; and six other offences of very rare

occurrence. The number of capital convictions in 1829 was 1,385; and in

1834, three years after the extensive abolition of capital punishments,

the number was reduced to 480.

By means of the classification of offences, which took place for

the first time in 1834, it was possible to ascertain the effects of

education upon crime; and the result was most satisfactory, falsifying

the evil prognostications of the enemies of popular instruction, and

proving that, instead of stimulating the faculties merely to give

greater development to criminal propensities, and greater ingenuity to

offenders, it really operated as an effective restraint; insomuch that

crime was confined almost entirely to the uneducated. In 1835 returns

were first obtained of the degree of instruction that had been imparted

to persons committed for trial--distinguishing, 1st, Persons who can

neither read nor write; 2ndly, Persons who can read only, or read and

write imperfectly; 3rdly, Persons who can read and write well; and,

4thly, Persons who have received instruction beyond the elementary

branches of reading and writing. The result of a comparison upon this

point, during thirteen years from that date, was all that the most

sanguine friends of popular education could desire, and more than they

could have anticipated. Out of 335,429 persons committed, and whose

degrees of instruction were ascertained, the uninstructed criminals

were more than 90 out of every 100; while only about 1,300 offenders

had enjoyed the advantages of instruction beyond the elementary degree,

and not 30,000 had advanced beyond the mere art of reading and writing.

Then, with regard to females, among the 30,000 that could read and

write there were only about 3,000, or 10 per cent. of the female sex;

and among those who had received superior instruction there were only

53 females accused of crimes, throughout England and Wales, in thirteen

years--that is, at the rate of four persons for each year. In the year

1841 not one educated female was committed for trial out of nearly

8,000,000 of the sex then living in this part of the United Kingdom.

In the disturbances which took place in Cheshire, Lancashire, and

Staffordshire, as appeared by the trials that were held in 1842, out of

567 persons tried, there were only 73 who could read and write well,

and only one person who had received a superior education--a fact full

of instruction as to the duty of the State in respect to the education

of the people.

In 1831 the number of churches and chapels of the Church of England

amounted to 11,825; the number in 1851, as returned to the census

officer, was 13,854, exclusive of 223 described as being "not separate

buildings," or as "used also for secular purposes," thus showing an

increase in the course of twenty years, of more than 2,000 churches.

Probably the increase was, in reality, still larger, as it can hardly

be expected that the returns were altogether perfect. The greater

portion of this increase is attributable to the self-extending power

of the Church--the State not having in the twenty years contributed,

in aid of private benefactions, more than £511,385 towards the

erection of 386 churches. If we assume the average cost of each new

edifice to be about £3,000, the total sum expended in this interval

(exclusive of considerable sums devoted to the restoration of old

churches) will be £6,087,000. The chief addition occurred, as was

to be expected and desired, in thickly peopled districts, where the

rapid increase of inhabitants rendered such additional accommodation

most essential. In the ten years between 1821 and 1831 there was an

addition of 276 churches; from 1831 to 1841, 667 were added. Taking the

Nonconformist communities, we find the statistics of the progress of

the Independents, or Congregationalists, to be scarcely less remarkable

than those of the Established Church. The earliest account of the

number of Independent congregations refers to 1812. Before that period

Independent and Presbyterian congregations were returned together. At

that time the number of Independent churches in England and Wales was

a little over 1,000. In 1838 the churches had increased to 1,840, and

the census of 1851 made the number 3,244, of which 640 were in Wales.

These places of worship furnished sittings for 1,063,000 persons.

The Wesleyan Methodists were next in number to the members of the

Established Church. The progress of this society was very rapid after

1820. In that year the number of its ministers was 718, and of its

members or communicants in Great Britain, 191,000. In 1830 the numbers

were respectively 824 and 248,000; and so largely did they increase

in the next ten years, that in 1840 the ministers were 1,167, and the

members 323,000. The 1851 census returns showed 6,579 chapels belonging

to this connexion in England and Wales, containing accommodation for

1,447,580 persons. The Society of Friends, on the other hand, was

declining. The Roman Catholics made considerable progress in England

during the last two reigns. In 1829 they had 394 chapels, which in

1840 had increased to 463, and in 1852 they reached 600. They had at

the same time 11 colleges, 88 religious houses, and 875 priests. Their

chapels at the time of the census furnished accommodation for 186,000,

and the number of attendants on the morning of census Sunday of 1851

was 252,983.

The Catholic and Apostolic Church, founded by the Rev. Edward Irving,

had at the time of the census of 1851 about 30 congregations,

comprising nearly 6,000 communicants, and the number was said to be

gradually increasing. Mr. Irving (who in 1819 assisted Dr. Chalmers

at Glasgow) was the minister of the Scottish Church, Regent Square,

London, very eloquent, and very eccentric; and towards the close of

1829 it was asserted that several miraculous gifts of healing and

prophecy, and of speaking with strange tongues, were displayed in his

congregation. Having been excluded from the Scottish Church, a chapel

was erected for him, in 1832, in Newman Street. In the course of a few

years other churches were erected in different places. The Apostolic

Church was established on the model of the Jewish Tabernacle, with

twelve apostles, a new order of prophets, etc. In 1836 they delivered

their testimony to the Archbishop of Canterbury, to most of the

bishops, and to many ministers in different denominations. They also

resolved to deliver their testimony to the king in person, and "to as

many Privy Councillors as could be found, or would receive it." In 1837

a "Catholic testimony" was addressed to the patriarchs, bishops, and

sovereigns of Christendom, and was subsequently delivered to Cardinal

Acton for the Pope, to Prince Metternich for the Emperor of Austria,

and to other bishops and kings throughout Europe.

On the whole, there was a fair amount of religious activity throughout

the British islands, and as a consequence drunkenness and vulgar

amusements were on the decline. Of the lights of the Establishment,

Archbishop Manners Sutton was Primate until his death in 1828, when he

was succeeded by the amiable Dr. Howley. Bishop Phillpotts of Exeter

was undoubtedly the hardest hitter on the Episcopal bench, and zeal for

the welfare of the Church was admirably represented by Bishop Blomfield

of London. He was one of the most staunch supporters of King's College,

and an earnest advocate of Church extension. It is hardly necessary

to mention the name of the witty Canon of St. Paul's, Sydney Smith.

During the earlier years of this period the tone of the Church was

distinctly evangelical, but a reaction which had its origin in Oxford

University had already begun, whose supporters were known as the

"Tractarian party," from a series of publications, called "Tracts for

the Times," written by Oxford divines, advocating patristic theology,

contending for apostolic succession as necessary to the validity of

the sacraments, for baptismal regeneration, and the real presence

in the eucharist, condemning the Reformation as a great evil, and

claiming for the Anglican Church the right to be regarded as the only

true orthodox church in England. The growing strength of the party had

manifested itself on the occasion of the appointment of Dr. Hampden to

the Regius Professorship of Divinity at Oxford in 1836. Dr. Pusey and

Dr. Newman were among the most vigorous of the protesters against that

unfortunate divine, against whom the charge was made that his Bampton

Lectures contained doctrines which savoured of Socinianism. The outcry

was great, and the Hampden controversy threatened to break up the

Establishment. Lord Melbourne, however, who had recommended Dr. Hampden

on the advice of Archbishop Whately and Bishop Coplestone, declined

to cancel the appointment, and the excitement died away for the time,

though it was renewed in a milder form when in 1847 Dr. Hampden was

created Bishop of Hereford.

[Illustration: THE FIRST GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE FREE CHURCH OF

SCOTLAND.

Signing the Act of Separation and Deed of Demission at Tanfield,

Edinburgh, May 23rd, 1843.

FROM THE PAINTING BY D. O. HILL, R.S.A.]

[Illustration: DR. CHALMERS. (_After the Portrait by John Faed,

R.S.A._)]

In Ireland Roman Catholicism was represented by Archbishop Murray

and Dr. Doyle, the eloquent Bishop of Kildare. The majority of the

Irish Churchmen were Evangelical, and hence came often into collision

with Archbishop Whately, who was a powerful supporter of the system

of mixed education. The Scottish Churches at that time possessed

a number of ministers of great power and eminence, each exerting

in his own denomination extensive influence. Dr. Andrew Thomson, a

mighty spirit, had reached the meridian of his great popularity.

Dr. Chalmers was rising fast to the commanding position he so long

occupied. Among the Baptists the most important names were those of

two laymen, James and Robert Haldane, who not only preached throughout

Scotland, but organised a vast missionary scheme for India. In the

United Presbyterian Church the ablest man was Dr. John Brown, of

Edinburgh, wielding great influence as a theological professor, and

as the pastor of a large congregation in that city. In Glasgow the

Rev. Greville Ewing had founded the Independent Church, then new to

Scotland. Associated with him was a man not less gentle in spirit, but

with intellectual power much more commanding, and of the highest

cultivation as a theologian--Dr. Wardlaw, who during his life continued

the foremost man among the Scottish Congregationalists. Dr. Russell,

of Dundee, possessing an intellect of great force, with an energetic

temperament, contributed his share to the great controversy which

continued for a number of years to agitate the whole Scottish nation,

till it issued in the disruption, and in the establishment of the Free

Church. That movement had already begun, and the decision of the House

of Lords in the Auchterarder case had made the schism inevitable. Among

English Nonconformists the greatest names of the Independents were

those of Dr. Fletcher, of Finsbury Chapel, John Burnet, of Camberwell,

John Angell James, of Birmingham, and William Jay, of Bath. John

Williams was preaching the Gospel to the Melanesians, and Dr. Moffat in

South Africa. The Baptists could boast Robert Hall, and the essayist

John Foster; their greatest missionary was perhaps Dr. Carey. Of the

leading Wesleyans we may notice the names of Dr. Bunting and Dr. Adam

Clarke. The two chief events which affected that body during the

period were--the secession in 1834, when Dr Warren and his followers,

called "Warrenites," separated from the Conference, and the last

secession, when 100,000 broke off, forming a new community. All the

seceding bodies--the Kilhamites, or New Connexion Methodists; the Bible

Christians, or Bryanites; the Wesleyan Methodist Association, formed

in 1835; and last, the Wesleyan Methodist Reformers--separated on the

alleged ground of the tyrannical powers exercised by the Conference,

and the exclusion of the laity from their due share in the management

of the body.

Until the beginning of the nineteenth century the state of mathematical

science was very low in England. The commencement of a better era

originated with Woodhouse at Cambridge and Playfair in Edinburgh, by

both of whom the Continental methods were introduced into the studies

of their respective Universities. About 1820 the translation of La

Croix's "Differential Calculus," superintended by Sir John Herschel

and Dean Peacock, came into use as a text-book. Soon afterwards

the writings of Laplace and Poisson were generally read in the

Universities; and a few men of active and daring minds, chiefly of the

Cambridge school, such as Professor Airy and Sir John Lubbock, grappled

with the outstanding difficulties of physical astronomy; whilst a

larger number applied themselves to the most difficult parts of pure

analysis, and acquired great dexterity in its use, in the solution of

geometrical and mechanical problems.

Sir John F. W. Herschel, son of Sir William Herschel, conversant with

almost every branch of science, also devoted himself with remarkable

success to the cultivation of sidereal astronomy. He evinced very

early a taste for mathematics, but did not devote himself to astronomy

until after his father's death in 1822. He then gave himself up to

it without reserve. At that period the Southern Hemisphere was to

astronomers little more than an unknown region. For the purpose of

exploring it, he visited the Cape of Good Hope in 1834, where, making

use of his father's method, he continued his observations for more than

four years, examining with great care, among other things, the nebulæ

and double stars. On his return to Europe, he gave the results of his

labours to the world in a work of deep interest, and of the highest

importance; and the value of the services he had rendered to science

was recognised, not only by the scientific world, but by his Sovereign

also, who created him a baronet. After he was appointed Master of

the Mint, in 1850, he took no further part in practical astronomy,

but he published many excellent works, not only on that subject,

but on science generally; and he displayed a thorough acquaintance

with natural history, the _belles-lettres_, and the fine arts, and

translated a portion of the "Iliad." This great astronomer and

mathematician died in May, 1871. Lord Rosse's labours to improve the

telescope commenced about 1828, and continued unremittingly until 1844.

His masterpiece was of six feet aperture and 54 feet in focal length.

Amongst the foremost of the promoters of science, and the most eloquent

of its expounders, was Sir David Brewster, who died full of years

and of honours in 1868. Arrived at manhood at the opening of the

present century, having been born in 1781, he continued his brilliant

course during fifty years, pursuing his investigations into the laws

of polarisation by crystals, and by the reflection, refraction, and

absorption of light, in which he made important discoveries. The

attention of the British public was forcibly arrested by an able

treatise on "Light," contributed by Sir John Herschel, in 1827, to

the "Encyclopædia Metropolitana." Its excellent method and lucid

explanations attracted to the theory of Young and Fresnel men of

science who had been deterred by the fragmentary and abstruse style

of the former. This was followed four years later by a most able and

precise mathematical exposition of the theory, and its application to

optical problems, by Professor Airy, who became Astronomer-Royal in

1835.

While an impulse was thus given to the mathematical theory of

light in the University of Cambridge, similar progress was being

made in the sister University of Dublin, where three of her most

eminent professors--Sir William Rowan Hamilton, Dr. Lloyd, and Mr.

M'Cullagh--devoted themselves energetically to its improvement and

verification. Sir William Hamilton, a geometer of the first order,

having undertaken a more complete discussion of the wave surface

of Fresnel, to the equation of which he gave a more elegant form,

ascertained the exact nature of that surface, and consequently the

exact direction of refracted rays in the neighbourhood of the optic

axes. The beautiful and unexpected results he obtained were verified

by his friend Dr. Lloyd. The names of Sir William R. Hamilton and

Dr. Lloyd will be handed down to posterity in connection with this

discovery. "But," says Professor Forbes, "they have other claims to

our respect. The former has generalised the most complicated cases of

common geometrical optics, by a peculiar analysis developed in his

essays on 'Systems of Rays.' To Dr. Lloyd we are indebted for several

interesting experimental papers on optics, for an impartial review of

the progress of the science, and for an excellent elementary treatise

on the wave theory."

In the galaxy of illustrious names that shed light upon this age,

not the least conspicuous is that of Mary Somerville, who is known

in British science not only as the able commentator of Laplace's

"Mécanique Céleste," but as the author of some ingenious experiments

on the magnetising power of the violet ray, and on the permeability

of different bodies to the chemical rays, similar to those of Melloni

on the heating rays; and she found great and seemingly capricious

variations in this respect. The beautiful invention of the stereoscope,

one of the most interesting contributions made to the theory of vision,

was the work of Mr. Wheatstone, who published an account of it in the

"Philosophical Transactions" of 1838. In connection with experiments

of this class should be mentioned the invention of the daguerreotype,

or the production of permanent pictures on plated copper, in 1825,

which was brought to perfection in 1839 by Daguerre, whose name it

bears. About the same time Henry Fox Talbot applied himself to similar

experiments, and invented the calotype, or the production of permanent

pictures on paper; and by a subsequent invention he obtained what he

justly called "an instantaneous process." The science of photography

was, however, in its infancy.

But far more important are the wondrous powers evolved from the study

of heat. The pioneer in this branch of work was the Hon. H. Cavendish,

who was born in 1731, and devoted his life, until his death in 1810, to

the pursuits of science. He was followed by Dalton, who made several

important discoveries in chemistry, particularly with reference to

the gases, and in the doctrine of heat. With the greatest modesty

and simplicity of character, he remained in the obscurity of the

country, neither asking for approbation nor offering himself as an

object of applause. In 1833, at the age of sixty-seven, he received a

pension from Government, which he enjoyed till 1844, when he died. His

discoveries may be said to have terminated at the age of forty, though

he laboured for thirty years after. His first sketch of the atomic

theory was propounded as early as 1807.

Sir Mark Isambard Brunel, a hero of mechanical science, made a great

step in advance by the invention of self-acting machinery to supersede

the work of artisans, by which a new epoch was created in art. The

greatest effort of Brunel was the Thames Tunnel, a structure of perfect

firmness and solidity laid on a quicksand, and forced through a quaking

mass of mud, which will endure like the _cloacæ_ of regal Rome, when

the palace and the cathedral have crumbled to dust. He was enabled to

accomplish this prodigious work by means of "the shield"--a movable

vertical frame of cast iron, provided with thirty-six cells, in each

of which a man was placed with a pick to excavate the area, this frame

or shield being moved bodily forward by powerful screws, while the

bricklayers brought up the arched masonry behind, which was then beyond

the power of injury. The works, however, were several times "drowned"

during their progress by the irruptions of the Thames, but every fresh

difficulty was met successfully by the heroic engineer. The tunnel was

commenced on the 2nd of March, 1825, and finished on the 25th of March,

1843. Brunel survived the completion of this, his greatest work, above

six years, dying on the 12th of December, 1849.

Mention must be made of the extraordinary calculating machines of

Charles Babbage. A few years after leaving college he originated the

plan of a machine for calculating tables, by means of successive orders

of differences, and having received for it, in 1822 and the following

year, the support of the Astronomical and Royal Societies, and a grant

of money from Government, he proceeded to its execution. He also in

1834 contrived a machine called the "analytical engine," extending

the plan so as to develop algebraic quantities, and to tabulate the

numerical value of complicated functions, when one or more of the

variables which they contain are made to alter their values; but the

difficulties of carrying out this plan became insurmountable. In 1839

Babbage resigned the professorship of mathematics in the University of

Cambridge. He died at the end of 1871, having devoted his life to the

study and advancement of science.

Joseph Mallord William Turner (born in 1775) has been pronounced as

"essentially the great founder of English landscape painting, the

greatest poet-artist our nation has yet produced. He excelled in

everything--from the mere diagram and topographic map to the most

consummate truth and the most refined idealism. In every touch of

his there was profound thought and meaning." He was unrivalled in

storms; as Napoleon said of Kleber, "He wakes on the day of battle."

The remark of Admiral Bowles, when looking at Turner's "Wreck of the

_Minotaur_," conveyed the highest compliment to his art--"No ship could

live in such a sea." His "Man Overboard" is a still higher effort

of genius, in conveying an expression of horror and utter despair.

He was the best illustrator of our national poets. He made known to

Englishmen the beauties of their native land, and made them acquainted

with the picturesque on the Continent. He gave our young artists love

for colour, and made us the Venetians of the modern school. From

"The fighting _Temeraire_ tugged to her last Moorings," to "Wilkie's

Burial," and the "Burning of the Houses of Parliament," he let no event

of his age pass without record or comment. He died in 1851.

[Illustration: JOSEPH MALLORD WILLIAM TURNER. (_After the Portrait by

C. Turner._)]

The fame of Sir Thomas Lawrence (_b._ 1769) had attained to its

meridian in this period. In portrait painting he was one of the most

distinguished artists of the day, and he attained proficiency in

it without having gone to Italy or studied the old masters. It has

been said of him, as well as of Sir Joshua Reynolds, that he painted

three generations of beauties. He went to Aix-la-Chapelle in 1818, by

invitation, to take the likenesses of the most distinguished statesmen

who were there assembled for diplomatic purposes. During his residence

on the Continent he was received by the Sovereigns of the different

countries he visited, and entertained with marked distinction; and

the propriety and elegance of his deportment, we are told, made an

impression highly favourable to his character. On his return he found

that he had been unanimously elected to succeed West as the President

of the Royal Academy, and this office he continued to hold till his

death, which took place on the 7th of January, 1830.

Sir David Wilkie (_b._ 1785), one of the greatest of Scottish painters,

claims a few words here, especially regarding the latter part of his

brilliant career. In 1820-1 he accomplished his masterpiece, "The

Chelsea Pensioners listening to the News of Waterloo," for which he

received 1,200 guineas from the Duke of Wellington. His later works did

not increase his reputation, chiefly because he abandoned the style

in which he excelled and adopted the pseudo-Spanish. In 1830 he was

made painter in ordinary to his Majesty on the death of Lawrence, and

became a candidate for the Presidentship of the Royal Academy, but had

only one vote recorded in his favour. Between 1830 and 1840 he painted

a considerable number of works, among which were "John Knox preaching

before Mary," and "The Discovery of the Body of Tippoo Sahib," painted

for the widow of Sir David Baird, for £1,500. In 1836 he was knighted,

and in 1840 he set out on a tour to the East, and went as far as

Jerusalem, which he viewed with rapture. At Constantinople he had the

honour of painting the Sultan for the Queen. He returned by Egypt, but

never saw his native land again. He died off Gibraltar, and, the burial

service having been read by torchlight, his body was committed to the

deep, on the 1st of June, 1841.

[Illustration: ABBOTSFORD AND THE EILDON HILLS. (_From a Photograph by

Valentine & Sons, Dundee._)]

In the lives of English painters the story of Benjamin Robert Haydon

is perhaps the saddest. In youth he devoted himself with such zeal to

the study of art that people wondered how he ever found time to eat.

He was one of those men of genius who may be called "unlucky." He was

always in pecuniary difficulties, though his father allowed him £200

per annum in the earlier part of his career. He applied for admission

into the Academy, but did not obtain a single vote; and he got involved

in controversies, which continued to embitter his life. He succeeded

at last, however, by his energy, in commanding public attention and

winning fame. For the "Judgment of Solomon" he received £700, with

£100 voted to him by the directors of the British Institution, and the

freedom of Plymouth. His pictures were, however, very unequal; here and

there was a powerful piece of work, but the whole was generally rough

and unfinished. He committed suicide in 1846. Sculpture, which was then

at its lowest ebb, was relieved alone from vacuity by the works of

Chantrey, Flaxman, and Gibson.

In architecture the first place is due to the patriarch of the science,

Sir John Soane, who was employed in erecting or improving numerous

public edifices in the metropolis and elsewhere. The atrocious

law-courts, which he added to Westminster Hall, were happily removed

in 1883. In 1826 he built the Freemasons' Hall, in Great Queen Street,

having been chosen grand superintendent of works to the fraternity of

Freemasons some years before. In 1833 he completed the State Paper

Office in St. James's Park. He was now in his eightieth year, and he

retired from the active labours of the profession in which he had been

engaged for sixty years, during forty-five of which he had been in the

service of the Bank of England. At his death, which occurred on January

20th, 1837, his house and museum in Lincoln's Inn Fields became the

property of the public.

Sir Charles Barry was the architect of numerous buildings, but his

greatest work was the New Palace of Westminster. When the old Houses

of Parliament were burned down in 1834, amongst the numerous designs

sent in Mr. Barry's was selected, and he had the honour of constructing

the magnificent temple of legislation in which the most powerful body

in the world debates and deliberates, upon the old, classic site,

rendered sacred by so many events in our history. It has been disputed

whether the style of the building is altogether worthy of the locality

and the object, and whether grander and more appropriate effects might

not have been produced by the vast sums expended. But it has been

remarked in defence of the artist, that the design was made almost at

the commencement of the revival of our national architecture, and that,

this fact being considered, the impression will be one of admiration

for the genius of the architect that conceived such a work; and the

conviction will remain that by it Sir Charles Barry did real service to

the progress of English art.

The two Pugins, father and son, had much to do with the revival of

Gothic architecture among us. The father, Augustus, born in France

in 1769, came over to London to practise his profession. In 1821-3

he published "Specimens of Gothic Architecture," selected from

various ancient edifices in England; and in 1825-28 "Specimens of the

Architectural Antiquities of Normandy." The year before his death,

in 1832, he assisted his son in producing a work entitled "Gothic

Ornaments," selected from various buildings in England and France.

Augustus Welby Pugin, who was born in 1811, very soon eclipsed his

father's fame. Having resolved to devote his time to the archæological

study of style and symbolism in architectural ornaments, he settled

down at Ramsgate in 1833, and carried his resolution into effect both

with pen and pencil. In 1835 he published designs for furniture, in

the style of the fifteenth century; and designs for iron and brass

work, in the style of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The

year following appeared his "Designs for Gold and Silver Ornaments,

and Ancient Timber Houses." His exclusive and ardent devotion to

these studies, aided, no doubt, by his habits of seclusion, began to

produce a morbid effect upon his intellect, which was shown in the

overweening arrogance of a tract entitled "Contrasts; or, a Parallel

between Ancient and Modern Architecture." This morbid tendency probably

was increased by his becoming a member of the Roman Catholic Church,

in which a great field was opened for the display of his peculiar

tastes by the construction of buildings which he expected would shame

the degenerate taste of the age, but which, too often, were found to

be gloomy and inconvenient. His principal works were the Cathedral

of St. George, Southwark, the Church of St. Barnabas, at Nottingham,

the Cistercian Abbey of St. Bernard, in Leicestershire, the cathedral

churches of Killarney and Enniscorthy, Alton Castle, and the model

structure which he erected at his own place near Ramsgate. The Mediæval

Court in the Exhibition of 1851 was associated in all minds with the

name of Pugin. In his case genius was too nearly allied to madness.

The awful boundary was passed towards the close of his life, when his

friends were obliged to confine him in a lunatic asylum, from which he

returned only to die in 1852.

Among the historians of the time there are three or four names that

deserve to be specially mentioned. The first is that of Sir James

Mackintosh, who, notwithstanding the pressure of Parliamentary

duties and the attractions of London society, so far conquered his

constitutional indolence, increased by his residence in India, as to

produce some literary works so valuable that it has been a source of

regret that he could not find time to give to the world something

more than fragments. His dissertation on "The Progress of Ethical

Philosophy" shows what he could have accomplished in that field; while

his three volumes of "The History of England" caused a general feeling

of disappointment that he was not spared to complete the work. He was

engaged on a history of the Revolution of 1688 when he died, rather

suddenly, in May, 1832.

The English Roman Catholics produced an historian--Dr. Lingard--who,

for the correctness and strength of his diction, as well as the extent

of his learning, ranks among the first names in this department of

literature. He was a man of great force of mind, remarkable acuteness

in testing historical evidence, and considerable powers of description.

Being a priest, it was not to be expected that he would be impartial

in his treatment of the events and characters of the Reformation, and

the subsequent conflicts between the Churches of England and Rome. Of

his own Church he was a zealous defender and a skilful apologist; but

where that bias did not interfere, his judgments were generally sound.

He died in 1851.

Henry Hallam, who died in 1859, occupies a higher ground than Lingard,

having no party interests to serve, and having a mind singularly

free from prejudice, as well as a conscientious regard for truth in

his records and judgments; while his clear, impressive, and graceful

style invests dry details with interest. His "View of the State of

Europe during the Middle Ages," a work of great learning and value,

was followed, in 1827, by his "Constitutional History of England;" and

ten years later he published, in four volumes, an "Introduction to

the Literature of Europe in the Fourteenth, Fifteenth, and Sixteenth

Centuries." This is his greatest work, and in point of learning and

utility and purity of style it may be regarded as one of the greatest

in the English language. These works placed Mr. Hallam, by general

consent, at the head of contemporary historians.

The history of the Peninsular War was written very ably and faithfully

by a soldier who bore a distinguished part in it--General Sir W. F. P.

Napier, one of three brothers, all eminently distinguished for their

talents and achievements. About the time when this work was concluded

appeared further illustrations of the war, in the "Despatches of

Field-Marshal the Duke of Wellington," which were edited by Colonel

Gurwood, and which are very valuable. Of these despatches it was justly

remarked in the _Edinburgh Review_ that no man ever before had the

gratification of himself witnessing the formation of such a monument to

his glory.

Thomas Moore, the poet, in the latter period of his life, published

several biographical works--namely, a "Life of Richard Brinsley

Sheridan," in 1825; "Notices of the Life of Lord Byron," in 1830;

and "Memoirs of Lord Edward Fitzgerald," in 1831. Byron had written

memoirs of his own life, which he presented to Moore, and by the

publication of which a very large sum of money could have been made;

but Moore generously placed the MS. at the disposal of Mrs. Leigh,

the poet's sister and executrix; and from a regard to his memory,

they were consigned to the flames. It is supposed, however, that all

that was valuable in them was found in the noble lord's journals and

memorandum-books. Among literary biographies--a class of publications

highly interesting to cultivated minds--the first place is due to

Lockhart's "Life of Sir Walter Scott," a work that ranks next to

Boswell's "Life of Johnson."

The number of distinguished authors on miscellaneous subjects was very

great at this time. In jurisprudence and political economy there were

Jeremy Bentham, whose life ended in 1832; his eminent disciples, John

Stuart Mill, Dr. Bowring, and Dr. Hill Burton; Archbishop Whately,

Mr. M'Culloch, Mr. Sadler, and Mr. N. W. Senior. De Quincey began his

brilliant career as an author in 1822, by the publication of "The

Confessions of an English Opium-Eater."

In 1827 began the plan of publishing monthly volumes of valuable

scientific works, previously so expensive as to be beyond the reach

of the multitude. To Mr. Constable, of Edinburgh, belongs the credit

of this plan; but he failed before it could be carried out. His

name, however, was given to the series, and "Constable's Miscellany"

was started in 1827. The works were issued in monthly numbers, at a

shilling each, and in volumes at 3s. 6d. each. Mr. Murray, the eminent

London publisher, took up the idea, and published monthly volumes of

"The Family Library," at five shillings each. A series of "Sacred

Classics" was also published. The "Edinburgh Cabinet Library" commenced

in 1830, and contained the works of some of the first writers of

the day. There was also a series called a "Library of Entertaining

Knowledge," in four-shilling volumes, started by the Society for the

Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, which was established in 1825. The first

of its sixpenny treatises on science was issued in 1827. It was "A

Discourse on the Objects, Advantages, and Pleasures of Science," by

Henry Brougham. The society thus began to work upon a vast field, a

mere skirt of which it was able to cultivate.

[Illustration: ST. GEORGE'S CATHEDRAL, SOUTHWARK.]

Sir Walter Scott has, perhaps, left the most permanent traces

behind him. We have on many occasions mentioned this illustrious

writer; perhaps this is a fitting time to speak more in detail of

his career. He was born, in 1771, of a very respectable family, at

Edinburgh. He began his career as an author while very young; his

earlier publications, though not successful in a pecuniary way, were

greatly admired by good judges; and his undoubted talents, as well

as his family connections, introduced him to men high in rank, whose

influence became valuable to him, and also to the most distinguished

literary characters of the time. His appointment as sheriff-depute of

Selkirkshire, by securing him a competent income, while its duties

demanded but little of his time, enabled him to devote himself to

his favourite pursuits; and his resources were further augmented by

a small patrimony which he obtained at the death of his father, and

by property he received with the lady whom he married. At this period

he produced several poems, some of which were of considerable length,

and he acquired a large amount of celebrity. "Marmion" appeared in

1808, and "The Lady of the Lake" in 1810. His income from various

sources became, after some time, very considerable; and happy would it

have been for him had he been content with it. But ambition, of which

he had long shown symptoms, became a master passion, and he yielded

fatally to its influence. To hasten the acquisition of wealth, as

a means of adding to the consequence and importance of his family,

which was the dream of his life, he became a partner in a large

publishing firm, which afterwards involved him in its ruin, and whose

liabilities swallowed up the profits of a most successful career. The

demands which it continually made on his resources compelled him to

undertake literary drudgery, in addition to his ordinary labours; and

the magnitude of the enterprises filled him with continual anxiety.

His time was unremittingly occupied: from 1815 to 1825 he vanished,

indeed, from public view; yet he was never more thoroughly employed.

"Waverley" made its appearance in 1814; but the name of the writer

was, for some time, involved in impenetrable mystery. Its success was

unexampled, and it was followed by many similar productions. When the

hour of Sir Walter Scott's seemingly greatest prosperity had arrived,

and his most sanguine expectations appeared to be nearly realised,

the crash came. The firm of which he had so long been a secret partner

stopped payment; this event, besides entailing upon him immense

pecuniary loss, inflicted a deep wound on his feelings by proclaiming

to the world his connection with mercantile speculations. His conduct

upon this trying occasion was, however, in accordance with his whole

life; he refused to avail himself of any legal technicalities for the

purpose of diminishing his responsibilities; and he not only gave up

to the creditors of the concern with which he was so unfortunately

connected all he then possessed, but devoted the energies of the

remainder of his life to make up the large deficit that still remained.

He afterwards realised the enormous sum of £40,000 by his writings, and

shortly after his death his debts were paid in full by his executors.

But his exertions had been too much for him; he became ultimately a

wreck both in body and mind; every effort to recover health was in

vain; the last few months of his life passed with very rare intervals

of consciousness; and he expired, it may be said, prematurely, in the

sixty-first year of his age. He ranks high as a poet, but far higher as

the discoverer of a new world of fiction; in describing which, however

numerous those who attempt to follow the course which he pursued, he is

little likely ever to have a successful rival. He died in 1832, and so

belongs more properly to the reign of George III.

[Illustration: THOMAS MOORE.]

The age was remarkably prolific in female poets and novelists, some

of whom have taken as high a rank in literature as their sex have

done in any age. Lady Blessington and Lady Morgan were not young at

the death of George III., but many of their most celebrated works

were published during the two subsequent reigns. The former, soon

after the death of Lord Blessington in 1829, fixed her residence in

London at Gore House, which became the centre of attraction for men of

talent and distinction in every department. Even great statesmen and

Ministers of the Crown sometimes spent their evenings in her circle,

which was then unrivalled in London for the combined charms of beauty,

wit, and brilliant conversation; and besides, all the celebrities and

lions of London were sure to be met there. The ambiguous attachment

that so long subsisted between her and Count D'Orsay, one of the most

accomplished men of the age, however, excluded Lady Blessington from

the best society. The heavy expenses of her establishment compelled her

to work hard with her pen, and she produced a number of works, which

were in great demand in the circulating libraries of the day. They

are no longer read. Debt at length broke up the establishment at Gore

House, and all its precious collections passed under the hammer of the

auctioneer, to satisfy inexorable creditors. Lady Blessington removed

to Paris, where she lived in retirement for some years, and died in

1849. Lady Morgan (Sydney Owenson) was before the country as an author

for nearly half a century. She was born in Dublin, in 1783, and died

in 1859. Before she was sixteen years of age she was the author of two

novels. Her third work, "The Wild Irish Girl," brought to her the fame

for which she longed, and made her a celebrity. In 1811 she married Sir

Charles Morgan, a Dublin physician. Her principal works as a novelist

were "Patriotic Sketches," "O'Donnell," "Florence M'Carthy," and "The

O'Briens and O'Flahertys," which was published in 1827.

One of the most charming poets of the time was Mrs. Hemans, whose

maiden name was Felicia Dorothea Browne, daughter of a Liverpool

merchant, and sister of Colonel Browne, a distinguished officer, who

was for many years one of the Commissioners of the Metropolitan Police

in Dublin. In 1819 she obtained a prize of £50 for the best poem on the

subject of Sir William Wallace; and in 1821 that awarded by the Royal

Society of Literature for the best poem on the subject of Dartmoor.

Her next production was a tragedy, "The Vespers of Palermo," which was

unsuccessful on the stage. "The Forest Sanctuary" appeared in 1826, and

in 1828 "Records of Woman." In 1830 appeared "Songs of the Affections,"

and four years later, "National Lyrics," "Hymns for Childhood," and

"Scenes and Hymns of Life." There was a collective edition of her

works published, with a memoir by her sister, in 1839, and several

other editions subsequently, not only in Great Britain, but in America,

where her poems were exceedingly popular. She died in 1835.

Letitia Elizabeth Landon, known as one of the most eminent female

poets of her time, by the signature "L. E. L." which she appended to

her numerous contributions in the magazines, was born at Hans Place,

Chelsea, in 1802. Her "Poetical Sketches" were published first in the

_Literary Gazette_. In 1824 appeared her "Improvisatrice." She was the

author of two other volumes of poetry, and of a successful novel. A

spirit of melancholy pervades her writings; but it is stated by Mr. L.

Blanchard, in the "Life and Literary Remains," which he published, that

she was remarkable for the vivacity and playfulness of her disposition.

Her poetry ranked very high in public estimation for its lyric beauty

and touching pathos; but the circumstances of her early death, which

was the subject of much controversy, invested her name with a tragic

and romantic interest. In 1838 she was married to Mr. George Maclean,

Governor of Cape Coast Castle, but the marriage was unhappy, and she

died, shortly afterwards, from an overdose of laudanum.

Robert Pollok was a young Scottish minister, who rose suddenly to

popularity by the publication of a poem in blank verse, entitled "The

Course of Time." It was long and discursive, extending to ten books.

The style was very unequal, sometimes rising to a high level, and often

sinking to tame prose. The author had a wonderful command of words for

one so young, and time would, no doubt, have mellowed what was crude

and refined what was coarse, if he had not been prematurely cut off,

just when his genius and his goodness had gathered round him a host of

warm friends. He died of consumption, on the 15th of September, 1827.

His early death contributed to the popularity of the poem, which ran

through many editions.

John Wilson, though born so far back as 1785, was one of the writers of

this period distinguished for originality, freshness, power, and rich

fancy, combined with learning and eloquence. As "Christopher North"

he was long the delight of the readers of _Blackwood's Magazine_. His

criticisms on poetry were distinguished by a profusion of thought and

imagery, which flowed forth so rapidly, and sometimes so little under

the control of judgment, that there seemed no reason why the stream

of illustration should not flow on for ever. He was a poet as well as

a critic; but it is a singular fact that his imagination, like that

of Milton, was more active in prose than in verse. In the latter,

his genius was like a spirited horse in harness; in the former, like

the same horse unbridled, and bounding wildly over the prairies. His

principal poetical work was "The Isle of Palms," published in 1812,

which was followed by one more elaborate, "The City of the Plague."

Among the most popular of his prose fictions are, "The Lights and

Shadows of Scottish Life," "The Trials of Margaret Lyndsay," and "The

Foresters." But it was in periodical literature that he shone most

brightly. Soon after the establishment of _Blackwood's Magazine_, in

1817, he became its chief editor, and thenceforward he poured forth

through this organ all the treasures of his intellect. In 1820 he

succeeded Dr. Thomas Brown as Professor of Moral Philosophy in the

University of Edinburgh, which he held till 1851, when he resigned, in

consequence of ill-health, receiving about the same time a pension of

£300 a year from the Crown. As a professor he was greatly beloved by

his students, on account of his genial nature and the warm interest

he took in their welfare; and he was always surrounded by troops of

friends, who respected his character almost as much as they admired his

genius. He died in 1854.

The most distinguished dramatic writers of the time were Sheridan

Knowles, Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton, Mr. Justice Talfourd, and Miss

Mitford. Mr. Knowles's first drama, _Caius Gracchus_, appeared in 1815,

and was followed by more successful efforts, namely, _The Wife_, _a

Tale of Mantua_, _The Hunchback_, _Virginius_, _The Blind Beggar of

Bethnal Green_, _William Tell_, _The Love Chase_, _Old Maids_, and _The

Daughter_. Ultimately, however, he became disgusted with the stage

from religious scruples, and taking a fancy to polemics, he published

two attacks upon Romanism, entitled, "The Rock of Rome" and "The Idol

demolished by its own Priest." He ended his career as a preacher in

connection with the Baptist denomination, and died in 1862, having

enjoyed a literary pension of £200 a year since 1849.

Sir E. Bulwer Lytton (afterwards Lord Lytton) is chiefly known as a

most successful novelist, but he won fame also as a dramatic author,

his chief productions in this line being _The Lady of Lyons_ and

_Richelieu_. He was born in 1805, and was the youngest son of General

Bulwer, of Haydon Hall. He commenced the career of authorship

very early, having written "Weeds and Wild Flowers," "O'Neil, the

Rebel," and "Falkland," before the appearance of "Pelham" in 1828.

Then in rapid succession appeared "The Disowned," "Devereux," "Paul

Clifford," "Eugene Aram," "The Last Days of Pompeii," "Rienzi," "Ernest

Maltravers," "Alice, or the Mysteries," "The Last of the Barons,"

"Harold, or the Last of the Saxon Kings," and several others. In 1831

he entered the House of Commons, and represented Lincoln till 1841. His

political career, however, belongs to the reign of Queen Victoria.

The success of the Waverley Novels turned the main force of the genius

and literary resources of the country into the ever widening channel of

prose fiction. Many names of note appeared before the public as novel

writers about that time. In Scotland, under the immediate shadow of the

author of "Waverley," came John Galt, Mrs. Johnstone, Miss Ferrier,

the Ettrick Shepherd, Allan Cunningham, Gibson Lockhart, Picken, Moir.

In Ireland, and of Irish birth, there were Colley, Grattan, Crofton

Croker, Banim, Gerald Griffin, Samuel Lover, and last, though not

least, William Carleton. In England, and chiefly of English birth, were

Mrs. Shelley, Peacock, Thomas Hope, Theodore and James Hook, Morier,

Lister, Ward, Gleig, Horace Smith, Miss Mitford, Mrs. Gore, Mrs.

Trollope, Captain Marryat, and Mr. James.

The changes in the manners and morals of the age since the reign

of George III. have been sufficiently indicated in the preceding

pages. Corresponding changes were gradually introduced in the world

of fashion, though the conservative instinct of the aristocracy and

the spirit of exclusiveness resisted innovation as long as possible.

What was called "good society" was wonderfully select. The temple of

fashion at the beginning of the reign of George IV. was Almack's;

and the divinities that under the name of lady patronesses presided

there were the Ladies Castlereagh, Jersey, Cowper, and Sefton, the

Princess Esterhazy and the Countess Lieven. These and their associates

gave the tone to the _beau monde_. We can scarcely now conceive

the importance that was then attached to the privilege of getting

admission to Almack's. Of the 300 officers of the Foot Guards, not more

than half a dozen were honoured with vouchers. The most popular and

influential amongst the _grandes dames_ was Lady Cowper, afterwards

Lady Palmerston. Lady Jersey was not popular, being inconceivably

rude and insolent in her manner. Many diplomatic arts, much finesse,

and a host of intrigues were set in motion to get an invitation to

Almack's. Very often persons whose rank and fortune entitled them

to the entrée anywhere were excluded by the cliquism of the lady

patronesses. Trousers had come into general use. They had been first

worn by children, then adopted in the army, and from the army they

came into fashion with civilians. But they were rigidly excluded from

Almack's, as well as the black tie, which also came into use about

this time. The female oligarchy who ruled the world of fashion, or

tried to do so, issued a solemn proclamation that no gentleman should

appear at the assemblies without being dressed in knee-breeches, white

cravat, and chapeau bras. On one occasion, we are told, the Duke of

Wellington was about to ascend the staircase of the ball-room, dressed

in black trousers, when the vigilant Mr. Willis, the guardian of

the establishment, stepped forward, and said, "Your Grace cannot be

admitted in trousers." Whereupon the great captain quietly retreated,

without daring to storm the citadel of fashion. The principal dances at

Almack's had been Scottish reels, and the old English country dance. In

1815 Lady Jersey introduced from Paris the quadrille which has so long

remained popular. The mazy waltz was also imported about the same time.

Among the first who ventured to whirl round the _salons_ of Almack's

was Lord Palmerston, his favourite partner being Madame Lieven. This

new dance was so diligently cultivated in the houses of the nobility

and gentry that the upper classes were affected with a waltzing mania.

[Illustration: THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON AT ALMACK'S. (_See p._ 440.)]

The coarse manners of the gentlemen were gradually yielding to refining

influences, but the society of ladies amongst the upper classes was

generally neglected. Husbands spent their days in hunting or other

masculine occupations, and their evenings in dining and drinking; the

dinner party, which commenced at seven, not breaking up before one in

the morning. Four- or five-, or even six-bottle men were not uncommon

among the nobility. Lord Eldon and his brother Lord Stowell used to

say that they had drunk more bad port than any two men in England.

The Italian Opera was then the greatest attraction. It became less

exclusive in its arrangements when the Opera House was under the

management of Mr. Waters; but the strictest etiquette was still kept

up with regard to the dress of gentlemen, who were only admitted with

knee-buckles, ruffles, and _chapeaux bras._ If there happened to be a

Drawing Room, the ladies as well as the gentlemen would come to the

opera in their Court dresses.

[Illustration:

_Reproduced by André & Sleigh, Ld., Bushey, Herts._

THE "FIGHTING TÉMÉRAIRE" TUGGED TO HER LAST BERTH TO BE BROKEN UP, 1838.

FROM THE PAINTING BY J. M. W. TURNER, R.A., IN THE NATIONAL GALLERY.]

[Illustration: ROTTEN ROW IN 1830. (_See p._ 442.)]

English cookery, even in the greatest houses, had not yet been much

affected by French art. The dinners were remarkably solid, hot, and

stimulating. Mulligatawny and turtle soups came first, then at one end

of the table was uncovered the familiar salmon, and at the other the

turbot surrounded by smelts. Next came a saddle of mutton, or a joint

of roast beef, and for the fourth course came fowls, tongue, and ham.

French dishes were placed on the sideboard, but for a long time such

weak culinary preparations were treated with contemptuous neglect. The

boiled potato was then very popular, and vegetables generally were

unaccompanied with sauce. The dessert, which was ordered from the

confectioner's, was often very costly. The wines used at dinner were

chiefly port, sherry, and hock. "A perpetual thirst seemed to come over

people, both men and women," says Captain Gronow, "as soon as they had

tasted their soup, as from that moment everybody was taking wine with

everybody else till the close of the dinner, and such wine as produced

that class of cordiality which frequently wanders into stupefaction.

How this sort of eating and drinking ended was obvious from the

prevalence of gout; and the necessity of every one making the pill-box

a constant bedroom companion."

There was a sort of understanding in those times that Hyde Park was

the peculiar preserve of the aristocracy. Women of notoriously bad

reputation would not then have dared to show themselves in Rotten Row,

and the middle and lower classes of London did not think of intruding

themselves as equestrians upon the pleasure-ground of the nobility.

At that time it was every way more retired; the walks were fewer, and

cows and deer were seen quietly grazing under clumps of trees. The

frequenters of the park, who then congregated daily about five o'clock,

were chiefly composed of dandies and ladies in the best society; the

former, well-mounted and dressed in a blue coat, with brass buttons,

leather breeches and top-boots, with a tremendously deep, stiff, white

cravat, and high shirt-collar, which rendered stooping impossible.

Many of the ladies used to drive round the park in a carriage, called

a _vis-à-vis_, which held only two persons, having a hammer-cloth rich

in heraldic designs, powdered footmen in smart liveries, and a coachman

who assumed all the airs and importance of a wigged archbishop.

The growing importance of the middle classes, the rapid multiplication

of men of wealth and high social position in the mercantile community;

the marriage of their daughters into noble families rendered insolvent

by extravagance, and the diffusion of knowledge among all classes

of the community, gradually levelled or lowered the barriers of

exclusiveness, increased the facilities of social intercourse, and

rendered the fashions in the clothing of both sexes more accordant with

good taste, more convenient, and more conducive to health. With the

use of the trousers, and Hessian or Wellington boots, came the loose

and easy surtout, and frock-coat; and instead of the deep stiff white

cravat, black stocks or black ties were worn except in full dress at

evening parties. The clergy, however, retained the white neckcloth,

and, strange to say, it also became the necessary distinction of

footmen, butlers, hotel-waiters, and shop-assistants. The old Court

dress coat, with its bag-like skirt, was abandoned by gentlemen who

attended dinner parties and balls, for the "swallow-tailed" dress coat.

The style of ladies' dresses in the days of George IV. forms a striking

contrast to the fashions of the present day. The ordinary walking

dresses were made loosely and simply--not high to the throat, as they

were afterwards, nor yet low; the waist, with utter disregard to its

natural length, was portioned off by a belt coming almost immediately

under the arms, from which descended a long, straight, ungraceful

skirt, without any undulation or fulness whatever, reaching to the

feet, but short enough to leave them visible. The sleeves were plain

and close to the arms, and fastened at the wrist with a frill. The same

scantiness of material was observed in the evening dresses; they wore

low bodices and short sleeves, with long gloves reaching to the elbow.

The trimmings varied according to the taste of the wearer, as in our

own day. Small flowers at the bottom of the skirt seem to have been the

prevailing style. The hair was generally arranged in short curls round

the face; but this was also subject to variations, of course, and some

wore it plaited. The head-dress was composed of a bouquet of flowers

placed on the top of the head. But the ugliest and the most uncouth

part of the dress and the most irreconcilable with modern ideas of

taste was the bonnet. The crown was in itself large enough for a hat

of reasonable proportions; and from it, the leaf grew out, expanding

round the face, in shape somewhat like a coal-scuttle, and trimmed

elaborately with feathers and flowers.

Towards the end of William IV.'s reign the style of ladies' dress

suddenly changed. The unshapely short-waisted robe was succeeded by

one of ampler dimensions, longer and fuller, with a moderate amount

of crinoline--enough to give dignity and grace to the figure, but not

expanding to the same absurd extent as afterwards--and long pointed

stomachers. The bonnets were considerably reduced in size. The ball

dresses at the beginning of the Victorian reign became more like

those of a later day, except that they were then made of heavy, rich

materials--silk, satin, brocade, etc. The style of the sleeve varied,

but one of the fashions at this time was a puffing at the shoulder, and

sloping gradually down, commonly called the "leg-of-mutton sleeve." The

cloaks were large and full, enveloping the whole figure, and reaching

almost to the ground.

FOOTNOTE:

[Footnote 2: In this chapter we have not confined ourselves strictly to

the period under review, as it is too short to give the reader a good

idea of the progress achieved, and statistics are frequently wanting

for the exact seventeen years.]

CHAPTER XIII.

THE REIGN OF VICTORIA.

The Queen's Accession--Separation of Hanover from England--The

Civil List--The General Election--Rebellion in Lower Canada--Its

prompt Suppression--Sir Francis Head in Upper Canada--The Affair

of the _Caroline_--Lord Durham's Mission--His Ordinance--It is

disallowed--Lord Durham resigns--Renewal and Suppression of the

Rebellion--Union of the Canadas--The Irish Poor Law Bill--Work of

the Commissioners--Attack on Lord Glenelg--Compromise on Irish

Questions--Acland's Resolution--The Tithe Bill becomes Law--The

Municipal Bill abandoned--The Coronation--Scene in the Abbey--The

Fair in Hyde Park--Rejoicings in the Provinces--Dissolution of

the Spanish Legion--Debate on the Intervention in Spain--Lord

Ashley's Factory Bills--Prorogation of Parliament--The Glasgow

Strike--Reference to Combinations in the Queen's Speech--Remarks

of Sir Robert Peel--Rise of Chartism--The Six Points--Mr.

Attwood's Petition--Lord John Russell's Proclamation--The

Birmingham Riots--Dissolution of the National Convention--The

Newport Riots--Murder of Lord Norbury--Meeting of the

Magistrates--The Precursor Association--Debates in Parliament--Lord

Normanby's Defence of his Administration--The Lords censure

the Government--The Vote reversed in the Commons--The Jamaica

Bill--Virtual Defeat of the Ministry--They resign.

A combination of circumstances invested the accession on the 20th

of June, of the Princess Victoria, with peculiar interest. She was

the third female Sovereign called to occupy the throne since the

Reformation; and like those of Elizabeth and Anne, her reign has served

to mark an era in British history. The novelty of a female Sovereign,

especially one so young, had a charm for all classes in society. The

superior gifts and the amiable disposition of the Princess, the care

with which she had been educated by her mother, and all that had been

known of her private life and her favourite pursuits, prepared the

nation to hail her accession with sincere acclamations. There was

something which could not fail to excite the imagination and touch

the heart, in seeing one who in a private station would be regarded

as a mere girl, just old enough to come out into society, called upon

to assume the sceptre of the greatest empire in the world, and to

sit upon one of the oldest thrones, receiving the willing homage of

statesmen and warriors who had been historic characters for half a

century. We are not surprised, therefore, to read that the mingled

majesty and grace with which she assumed her high functions excited

universal admiration, and "drew tears from many eyes which had not been

wet for half a lifetime;" and that warriors trembled with emotion, who

had never known fear in the presence of the enemy. When the ceremony

of taking the oath of allegiance had been gone through, her Majesty

addressed the Privy Council:--"The severe and afflicting loss which the

nation has sustained by the death of his Majesty, my beloved uncle,

has devolved upon me the duty of administering the government of this

empire. This awful responsibility is imposed upon me so suddenly, and

at so early a period of my life, that I should feel myself utterly

oppressed by the burden, were I not sustained by the hope that Divine

Providence, which has called me to this work, will give me strength

for the performance of it; and that I shall find in the purity of my

intentions, and in my zeal for the public welfare, that support and

those resources which usually belong to a more mature age and to long

experience. I place my firm reliance upon the wisdom of Parliament, and

upon the loyalty and affection of my people."

The young Queen enjoyed, in the new King of Hanover, the advantage of a

foil which, with all the force of contrast, placed her character as a

constitutional Sovereign in the best possible light. At her accession,

the Crown of Hanover, which could not be inherited by a female, was

separated from the Crown of England, with which it had been united

since the accession of George I. in 1714, and had descended to the

Duke of Cumberland, the next surviving male heir of George III. This

severance, instead of being regarded as a loss, was really felt as

a great relief by the British nation, not only as terminating its

connection with German politics, from which nothing but annoyance and

expense could result, but, what was regarded as much more important,

freeing the country from the presence of the Duke of Cumberland, who

was detested for his arbitrary temper. On the 24th of June, Ernest

Augustus, King of Hanover, left London, apparently in a very churlish

spirit, and breathing hostility to constitutional freedom in the

country which was to be cursed by his rule. So strong were his feelings

against constitutional government that he had not the grace to receive

a deputation of the Chambers, who came to offer him their homage and

their congratulations; and on the 5th of July he hastened to issue a

proclamation, announcing his intention to abolish the Constitution. He

not only did this, but he ejected from their offices, and banished from

their country, some of the most eminent professors in the University of

Göttingen. It was thus he inaugurated a rule of iron despotism worse

than that of the native princes, who had not the advantage of being

brought up in a free country.

The Queen did not disturb the Administration which she found in office.

The Premier, Lord Melbourne, who was now fifty-eight years old, had

had much experience of public life. He had been Chief Secretary for

Ireland, Home Secretary, and Prime Minister, to which position he had

been called the second time, after the failure of Sir Robert Peel's

Administration in the spring of 1835. The young Queen seems to have

looked to his counsel with a sort of filial deference; and from the

time of her accession to the close of his career he devoted himself to

the important task of instructing and guiding his royal mistress in the

discharge of her various official duties--a task of great delicacy,

which he performed with so much ability and success as not only to win

her gratitude, but to secure also the approbation of the country, and

to disarm the hostility of political opponents. No royal pupil, it

may be safely said, ever did more credit to a mentor than did Queen

Victoria. For the time being, Lord Melbourne took up his residence at

Windsor, and acted as the Queen's Secretary.

Prior to the Revolution the sums voted for the Civil List were granted

without any specification as to whether they should be applied to

the maintenance of the army, the navy, the civil government, or the

household. The king got a lump sum for carrying on the government,

defending the country, and supporting the royal dignity; and was

allowed to apportion it according to his own discretion--the plan most

agreeable to an arbitrary monarch. After the Revolution the expenses

of the army and navy were separately voted, and the charges for civil

government have been gradually removed from the Civil List. At the

accession of William IV. these charges were reduced to the amount

required for the expenses of the Royal Household, by the removal of

the salaries of the judges, the ambassadors, and the Lord-Lieutenant

of Ireland, together with a number of Civil List pensions. This fact

should be borne in mind in connection with the sums on the Civil List

of former Sovereigns. For example: William III., Anne, and George I.

had £700,000 a year; George II. and George III., £800,000; George IV.,

£850,000; William IV., £500,000; Queen Victoria received £385,000. The

application was thus limited: Privy Purse, £60,000; household salaries

and retired allowances, £131,260; household expenses, £172,500; royal

bounty, alms, and special services, £13,200; leaving an unappropriated

balance of upwards of £8,000 to be employed in supplementing any of the

other charges, or in any way her Majesty thought proper. The Pension

List was limited to £1,200 per annum, and the incomes from the Duchies

of Lancaster and Cornwall, estimated at £50,000 a year, were secured to

the Crown. Economists grumbled about the magnitude of these allowances,

and Lord Melbourne was accused of being over-indulgent to the youthful

Sovereign; but her immense popularity silenced all murmurers, and the

nation felt happy to give her any amount of money she required.

On the 17th of July--a week after the burial of the King--the Queen

went in state to meet Parliament. She was received along the line of

procession with extraordinary enthusiasm; and never on the accession

of a Sovereign was the House of Peers so thronged by ladies of rank.

A tone of kindness, mercy, and conciliation, befitting her youth and

sex, marked her first Speech from the Throne. She stated that she

regarded with peculiar interest the measures that had been brought to

maturity for the mitigation of the criminal code, and the reduction of

the number of capital punishments; promised that it should be her care

to strengthen our institutions, civil and ecclesiastical, by discreet

improvement, wherever improvement was required, and to do all in her

power to compose and allay animosity and discord. Immediately on the

delivery of the Royal Speech Parliament was prorogued in order to its

dissolution. The general elections speedily followed, and were all over

early in August. The Ministerial candidates were accused of making

an unconstitutional use of the Queen's name in their addresses, and

availing themselves of her popularity to strengthen the position of

the Government, and the Conservatives asserted that the Queen had no

partiality for her present advisers, whom she found in office, and bore

with only till Sir Robert Peel and his colleagues should feel strong

enough to take their places. The elections did not materially alter the

balance of parties, the Whigs still commanding a small majority.

[Illustration: THE QUEEN'S FIRST COUNCIL.

AFTER THE PAINTING BY SIR DAVID WILKIE, R. A., IN THE ROYAL COLLECTION.]

[Illustration: NIAGARA FALLS.]

Parliament met on the 15th of November, when Mr. Abercromby was

unanimously re-elected Speaker. On the 20th the Queen opened the new

Parliament in person. In the Royal Speech the serious attention of the

Legislature was requested to the consideration of the state of the

province of Lower Canada, which had now become a question that could

not be any longer deferred. The demands of the inhabitants of that

province were so extravagant that they were regarded by Sir Robert

Peel as revolutionary. They demanded, not only that the Executive

Council should be responsible to the House of Representatives, but

also that the Senate, or Upper House, then nominated by the Crown,

should be elected by the people. The Home Government, sustained by an

overwhelming majority of the House of Commons, rejected the demand; and

when the news reached Canada, the Lower Province was quickly in a flame

of rebellion. Violent harangues were delivered to excited assemblies of

armed men, who were called upon to imitate the glorious example of the

United States, and break the yoke of British oppression. Fortunately,

disaffection in the Upper Provinces was confined to a minority.

The Loyalists held counter-demonstrations at Montreal; regiments

of volunteers to support the Government and maintain the British

connection were rapidly formed, and filled up by brave men determined

to lay down their lives for the fair young Queen who now demanded their

allegiance. Sir Francis Head had so much confidence in the inhabitants

of the Upper Provinces that he sent all the regular troops into Lower

Canada for the purpose of suppressing the insurrection. A small force,

under the command of Colonel Gore, encountered 1,500 of the rebels so

strongly posted in stone houses in the villages of St. Denis and St.

Charles that they were obliged to retreat before the well directed fire

from the windows, with the loss of six killed and ten wounded, leaving

their only field-piece behind. Among the wounded was Lieutenant Weir,

who was barbarously murdered by the insurgents. At St. Charles, Colonel

Wetherall, at the head of another detachment, stormed the stronghold of

the rebels, and completely routed them, after an obstinate resistance,

with a loss of only three killed and eighteen wounded. The strength

of the insurgents, however, lay in the country of the Two Mountains,

where they were pursued by Sir John Colborne in person, with a force

of 13,000 men, including volunteers. Many of them took to flight at

his approach, including their commander Girod, who, on being pursued

and captured, shot himself. But 400 rebels, commanded by Dr. Chenier,

took up a position in a church and some other buildings, around which

they erected barricades, and there made a desperate resistance for two

hours. Next day the British troops proceeded to another stronghold

of the rebels, St. Benoit, which they found abandoned, and to which

the exasperated loyalists set fire. Papineau, the leader of the

insurrection, had escaped to New York.

Sir Francis Head had made a somewhat dangerous experiment in denuding

Upper Canada of troops, conceiving it to be his duty to lay before the

American people the incontrovertible fact that, by the removal of her

Majesty's forces and by the surrender of 600 stand of arms to the civil

authorities, the people of Upper Canada had virtually been granted an

opportunity of revolting; consequently, as the British Constitution had

been protected solely by the sovereign will of the people, it became,

even by the greatest of all republican maxims, the only law of the

land. This was not done, however, without an attempt at revolt, made

chiefly by Irish Roman Catholics. The leader of this movement was W.

L. Mackenzie, the editor of a newspaper. On the night of the 3rd of

December, 1837, this leader marched at the head of 500 rebels, from

Montgomery's Tavern, his headquarters, upon Toronto, having initiated

the war by the murder of Colonel Moodie. They were, however, driven

away. Mackenzie fled in disguise to Buffalo, in New York; a large

number of the rebels were taken prisoners, but almost immediately

released, and sent to their homes.

It was on this occasion that the loyalty of the British settlers in

Upper Canada shone forth with the most chivalrous devotion to the

throne of the Queen. The moment the news arrived of Mackenzie's attack

upon Toronto, the militia everywhere seized their arms, mustered in

companies, and from Niagara, Gore, Lake Shireve, and many other places,

set out on their march in the heavy snow in the depth of winter. So

great was the excitement, so enthusiastic the loyalty, that in three

days 10,000 armed volunteers had assembled at Toronto. There was,

however, no further occasion for their services in that place, and

even the scattered remnants of the insurrection would have been

extinguished but for the interference of filibustering citizens of

the United States, who were then called "sympathisers," and who had

assembled in considerable numbers along the Niagara River. They had

established their headquarters on Navy Island in the Niagara River,

about two miles above the Falls, having taken possession of it on the

13th of December, and made it their chief depôt of arms and provisions,

the latter of which they brought from the American shore by means

of a small steamer called the _Caroline_. Colonel M'Nab resolved to

destroy the _Caroline_, and to root out the nest of pirates by whom

she was employed. On the 28th of December a party of militia found her

moored opposite Fort Schlosser, on the American side, strongly guarded

by bodies of armed men, both on board and on shore. Lieutenant Drew

commanded the British party, and after a fierce conflict the vessel

was boarded and captured, a number of those who manned her being taken

prisoners. These being removed, the British set the vessel on fire,

and the flaming mass was swept down the rapids, and precipitated into

the unfathomable abyss below. According to the American version of

this affair, the British had made an unprovoked and most wanton attack

upon an unarmed vessel belonging to a neighbouring State, on American

territory, at a time of profound peace. The truth came out by degrees,

and the American President, Van Buren, issued a proclamation on the

5th of January, 1838, warning all citizens of the United States that

if they interfered in any unlawful manner with the affairs of the

neighbouring British provinces, they would render themselves liable to

arrest and punishment.

Such was the state of things in Canada which the Imperial Parliament

was called upon to consider in the spring of 1838. The first feeling

which the news of the insurrection produced in Britain was one of

alarm; the next was that all the forces that could be spared should

be immediately dispatched for the purpose of crushing the revolt;

and a ship of the line was employed for the first time in carrying a

battalion of 800 Guards across the Atlantic. The Duke of Wellington

censured the Government for not having had a sufficient military force

to preserve the peace in Canada, and used the oft-repeated expression

that was stultified on several occasions during the latter portion of

Victoria's reign, that a great nation cannot make a little war. On

the 22nd of January Lord John Russell moved for leave to bring in

a Bill suspending the Constitution in Lower Canada for three years,

and providing for the future government of that province, with a

view to effecting a satisfactory settlement of the affairs of the

colony. He stated that her Majesty's Government had resolved to send

out an experienced statesman, of high character and position, and of

well-known popular sympathies, with ample powers, and that Lord Durham

had consented to go. The Government measure was carried in the House of

Commons by a majority of 262 to 16, and unanimously in the Lords.

The Lord High Commissioner immediately proceeded on his great mission,

and after a tedious voyage landed at Quebec on the 29th of May. He

took with him, as his private secretary, Mr. Charles Buller, a man of

singular ability, an ardent friend of free institutions, gifted with a

large mind and generous sympathies, and a spirit that rose superior to

all party considerations. A more suitable man could scarcely have been

found for such a work. But he also took out with him Mr. Turton and Mr.

Gibbon Wakefield, men of ability but hopelessly damaged in character.

He promptly proceeded to dismiss his Council and to select another of

five who had no acquaintance with Canadian politics. He found on his

arrival 116 state prisoners, whose trial had been postponed, awaiting

his instructions. On the 28th of June the Lord High Commissioner

published an ordinance, in which it was stated that Wolfred Nelson,

and seven other persons therein named, had acknowledged their guilt,

and submitted themselves to her Majesty's pleasure; that Papineau,

with fifteen others, had absconded. The former were sentenced to be

transported to Bermuda during pleasure, there to be submitted to

such restraints as might be thought fit; the latter, if they should

return to Canada, were to be put to death without further trial. In

each of these cases an unfortunate error was committed. The Lord High

Commissioner had no legal authority out of Canada, and could not

order the detention of any one at Bermuda; and to doom men to be put

to death without further trial, was denounced in Parliament, by Lord

Brougham and others, as unconstitutional. Lord Brougham described it

as "an appalling fact." Such a proceeding, he said, was "contrary to

every principle of justice, and was opposed to the genius and spirit

of English law, which humanely supposed every accused party to be

innocent until he was proved to be guilty." His reasons for the course

he had adopted were given by Lord Durham, in a despatch to the Home

Secretary, dated June 29th. The British party, he said, did not require

sanguinary punishment; but they desired security for the future, and

the certainty that the returning tranquillity of the province would not

be arrested by the machinations of the ringleaders of rebellion, either

there or in the United States. He said: "I did not think it right to

transport these persons to a convict colony, for two reasons; first,

because it was affixing a character of moral infamy on their acts,

which public opinion did not sanction; and, secondly, because I hold

it to be impolitic to force on the colony itself persons who would be

looked on in the light of political martyrs, and thus acquire perhaps a

degree of influence which might be applied to evil uses in a community

composed of such dangerous elements."

The ordinance was disallowed at home. Lord Brougham, who had never

forgiven his former colleagues the constitution of the Cabinet without

his forming a part of it, signalised himself by the extreme bitterness

with which he headed the onslaught. The result was that, after

protracted debates in both Houses of Parliament, which occupied the

whole of the summer, and fill up nearly 500 pages of the Parliamentary

Proceedings, the ordinance was annulled by Act of Parliament; but an

Act was passed indemnifying Lord Durham and the Canadian authorities.

The majority in the Commons was so large that the Opposition did not

venture on a division; and in the Lords the disallowance was carried

by a majority of 54 to 36. This result occurred on the 10th of August,

and Lord Durham saw the news first in the American newspapers. Lords

Melbourne and Glenelg softened the matter to him as well as they could;

the former communicated the intelligence with the greatest regret and

the deepest apprehension as to its consequences. Lord Durham betrayed

his mortification unwisely in a proclamation which he immediately

issued. As the banishment was an exception to the general amnesty he

had published, he informed the prisoners at Bermuda that her Majesty

being advised to refuse her assent to the exceptions, the amnesty

existed without qualification, and added--"No impediment, therefore,

exists to the return of the persons who have made the most distinctive

admission of guilt, or have been excluded by me from the province on

account of the danger to which it would be exposed by their presence."

Lord Durham at once resigned, and was succeeded by Mr. Poulett Thomson,

afterwards Lord Sydenham, who fully adopted his policy, which was

ably expounded in an important report from the pen of Mr. Charles

Buller, with additions by Gibbon Wakefield. It was characterised by

profound statesmanship, and was the basis of the sound policy which

has made united Canada a great and flourishing State. Meanwhile, the

returned prisoners from Bermuda showed their sense of the leniency

with which they had been treated by immediately reorganising the

rebellion. Sir John Colborne, the commander-in-chief, who had, on

Lord Durham's departure, assumed provisionally the government of

the colonies, thereupon proclaimed martial law, and stamped out the

insurrection. Only twelve of the principal offenders were ultimately

brought to trial, of whom ten were sentenced to death, but only four

were executed. The persons convicted of treason, or political felony,

in Upper Canada, from the 1st of October, 1837, to the 1st of November,

1838, were disposed of as follows:--pardoned on giving security, 140;

sentenced to confinement in penitentiary, 14; sentenced to banishment,

18; transported to Van Diemen's Land, 27; escaped from Fort Henry,

12. The American prisoners had been sent to Kingston, and tried by

court-martial on the 24th of November. Four of them were sentenced

to death, and executed, complaining of the deception that had been

practised on them with regard to the strength of the anti-British

party, and the prospects of the enterprise. Five others were afterwards

found guilty and executed. The American Government, though deprecating

those executions on grounds of humanity, disclaimed all sanction or

encouragement of such piratical invasions, and denied any desire on its

part for the annexation of Canada.

Out of these troubles arose a new state of things, a new era of peace

and prosperity. Lord Durham saw that disaffection and disturbance

had arisen from the animosity of race and religion, exasperated by

favouritism in the Government, and the dispensation of patronage

through "a family compact." He recommended a liberal, comprehensive,

impartial, and unsectarian policy, with the union of the two provinces

under one legislature, and this, after several failures, became law

in 1840. It was a revolution quite unexpected by both parties. The

disaffected French Catholics feared, as the consequence of their

defeat, a rule of military repression; the British Protestants

hoped for the firm establishment of their ascendency. Both were

disappointed--the latter very painfully, when, notwithstanding

their efforts and sacrifices for the maintenance of British power,

they saw Papineau, the arch-traitor, whom they would have hanged,

Attorney-General in the new Government. However, the wise government

of Lord Sydenham soon reconciled them to the altered state of affairs.

The new Constitution was proclaimed in Canada on the 10th of February,

1841; and the admirable manner in which it worked proved that Lord

Durham, its author, was one of the greatest benefactors of the colony,

though his want of tact had made his mission a failure.

[Illustration: QUEEN VICTORIA IN THE CORONATION ROBES, 1838.

FROM THE PICTURE BY C. R. LESLIE, R.A., IN THE POSSESSION OF THE

VICTORIA AND ALBERT MUSEUM, SOUTH KENSINGTON.]

On the 1st of December, 1837, shortly after the opening of Parliament,

Lord John Russell introduced a question of great urgency--the relief

of the Irish poor. After going through, and commenting on, the several

recommendations of the Inquiry Commissioners, and noticing the

objections to which they were all more or less open, he explained, by

way of contrast, the principles on which the present Bill was founded,

much in the same manner that he had done on the first introduction

of the measure. The statement was generally well received, although

there were some marked exceptions in this respect; and the Bill was

read a first time without a division. It was, in like manner, read a

second time on the 5th of February, 1838; but, on the motion for going

into committee, on the 9th, Mr. O'Connell strongly opposed it, and

moved that it be committed that day six months. The amendment was,

however, negatived by 277 to 25, a majority which made the passing

of the measure in some form pretty certain. On the 23rd of February

the question of settlement was again very fully discussed, and its

introduction opposed by 103 to 31, the latter number comprising all

that could be brought to vote for a settlement law of any kind. The

vagrancy clauses were for the present withdrawn from the Bill, on the

understanding that there would hereafter be a separate measure for

the suppression of mendicancy. The Bill continued to be considered in

successive committees until the 23rd of March, when, all the clauses

having been gone through and settled, it was ordered to be reported,

which was done on the 9th of April. On the 30th of April the Bill was

read a third time and passed by the Commons, and on the day following

was introduced and read a first time in the Lords. Many of the peers,

whose estates were heavily encumbered, were alarmed at the threatened

imposition of a poor-rate, which might swallow up a large portion

of their incomes. Those who were opposed to a poor law on economic

principles, appealed to their lordships' fears, and excited a

determined opposition against the measure. On the 21st of May there

was a stormy debate of nine hours' duration. Lord Melbourne moved the

second reading in a judicious speech, in which he skilfully employed

the best arguments in favour of a legal provision for the poor, stating

that this measure was, in fact, but the extension to Ireland of the

English Act of 1834, with such alterations as were adapted to the

peculiar circumstances of that country. It would suppress mendicancy,

and would abate agrarian violence, while relieving the destitute in a

way that would not paralyse the feeling of energy and self-reliance.

Among the most violent opponents of the measure was Lord Lyndhurst, who

declared that it would lead to a dissolution of the Union. The Duke of

Wellington, on the contrary, contended that the Bill, if amended in

committee, would improve the social relations of the people of Ireland,

and would induce the gentry to pay some attention to their properties,

and to the occupiers and labourers on their estates. He objected,

however, to a law of settlement as leading to unbounded litigation and

expense. Owing chiefly to the support of the Duke, the second reading

was carried by a majority of 149 to 20. On the motion that the Bill

be committed, on the 28th of May, a scene of confusion and violence

was presented, surpassing anything that could have been expected in

such a dignified assembly. The Irish peers especially were in a state

of extreme excitement. The discussion was adjourned to the 31st, and,

after a debate of eight hours, the clause embodying the principle

of the Bill was adopted by a majority of 107 to 41. The Bill was

considered in committee on the 7th, 21st, 22nd, and 26th of June, and

was read a third time on the 6th of July. It had now passed the Lords,

altered, and in some respects improved; although, in the opinion of its

author, the charge upon electoral divisions approximated too nearly to

settlement to be quite satisfactory. The Royal Assent was given to the

measure on the 31st of July, and thus a law was at length established

making provision for the systematic and efficient relief of destitution

in Ireland.

[Illustration: THE CAPTURE OF THE "CAROLINE." (_See p._ 446.)]

Armed with their Act of Parliament, the Poor Law Commissioners who

had been appointed to carry it out hastened to Ireland for the

purpose of forming unions, providing workhouses, and making all the

necessary arrangements. Mr. Nicholls was accompanied by four Assistant

Commissioners, Mr. Gulson, Mr. Earle, Mr. Hawley, and Mr. Voules. They

assembled in Dublin on the 9th of October, where they were joined

by four Irish Commissioners, namely, Mr. Clements, Mr. Hancock, Mr.

O'Donoghue, and Dr. Phelan. The erection of workhouses was proceeded

with without loss of time. Reports of the progress made were annually

published, and in May, 1842, the whole of Ireland had been formed into

130 unions; all the workhouses were either built or in progress of

building, and eighty-one had been declared fit for the reception of

the destitute poor. Mr. Nicholls left Ireland in 1842, his functions

being delegated to a board consisting of Mr. Gulson and Mr. Power. It

was indeed a most providential circumstance that the system had been

brought into working order before the potato failure of 1846, as it

contributed materially to mitigate the nameless horrors of the awful

famine.

On the 6th of March, Sir William Molesworth, with a view to bringing

the whole colonial administration of the empire before the House of

Commons, moved that an Address be presented to her Majesty, expressing

the opinion of the House that in the present critical state of many of

her foreign possessions "the Colonial Minister should be a person in

whose diligence, activity, and firmness the House and the public may

be able to place reliance;" and declaring that "her Majesty's present

Secretary of State for the Colonies does not enjoy the confidence of

the House or the country." The honourable baronet made a speech of

two hours' duration, which was a dissertation on colonial policy,

containing a survey of the whole of her Majesty's dominions in both

hemispheres. He disclaimed all party considerations in bringing

forward his motion, or any intention to make an invidious attack on

Lord Glenelg. But as the colonies were so numerous, so diversified in

races, religions, languages, institutions, interests, and as they were

unrepresented in the Imperial Parliament, it was absolutely necessary

that the colonial administration should be vigilant, prompt, sagacious,

energetic, and firm. Lord Glenelg was wanting in these qualities,

and the colonies were all suffering more or less from the errors and

deficiencies of this ill-fated Minister, "who had, in the words of

Lord Aberdeen, reduced doing nothing to a system." Lord Glenelg was

defended by Lord Palmerston, who regarded the attack upon him as an

assault upon the Cabinet, which would not allow one of its members to

be made a scapegoat. The House divided, when the numbers were--ayes,

287; noes, 316; majority for Ministers, 29. Nevertheless the Ministry

were greatly damaged by the debate, which emphasised the growing

Radical revolt. In the following year Lord Glenelg, having declined to

exchange his office for the Auditorship of the Exchequer, resigned.

At the close of the Session of 1837 an earnest desire was expressed by

the leaders of both parties in the House for an amicable adjustment

of two great Irish questions which had been pending for a long time,

and had excited considerable ill-feeling, and wasted much of the

time of the Legislature--namely, the Irish Church question, and the

question of Corporate Reform. The Conservatives were disposed to

compromise the matter, and to get the Municipal Reform Bill passed

through the Lords, provided the Ministry abandoned the celebrated

Appropriation Clause, which would devote any surplus revenue of the

Church Establishment, not required for the spiritual care of its

members, to the moral and religious education of all classes of the

people, without distinction of religious persuasion; providing for the

resumption of such surplus, or any part of it, as might be required, by

an increase in the numbers of the members of the Established Church.

The result of this understanding was the passing of the Tithe Bill.

But there were some little incidents of party warfare connected with

these matters, which may be noticed here as illustrative of the temper

of the times. On the 14th of May Sir Thomas Acland brought forward a

resolution for rescinding the Appropriation Clause. This Lord John

Russell regarded as a breach of faith. He said that the present motion

was not in accordance with the Duke of Wellington's declared desire

to see the Irish questions brought to a final settlement. Sir Robert

Peel, however, made a statement to show that the complaint of Lord John

Russell about being overreached, was without a shadow of foundation.

The noble lord's conduct he declared to be without precedent. He

called upon Parliament to come to the discussion of a great question,

upon a motion which he intended should be the foundation of the final

settlement of that question; and yet, so ambiguous was his language,

that it was impossible to say what was or was not the purport of his

scheme. Sir Thomas Acland's motion for rescinding the Appropriation

resolution was rejected by a majority of 19, the numbers being 317

and 298. On the following day Lord John Russell gave Sir Robert

Peel distinctly to understand that the Tithe measure would consist

solely of a proposition that the composition then existing should be

converted into a rent charge. On the 29th of the same month, Lord

John Russell having moved that the House should go into committee on

the Irish Municipal Bill, Sir Robert Peel gave his views at length

on the Irish questions, which were now taken up in earnest, with a

view to their final settlement. The House of Commons having disposed

of the Corporation Bill, proceeded on the 2nd of July to consider

Lord John Russell's resolutions on the Church question. But Mr. Ward,

who was strong on that question, attacked the Government for their

abandonment of the Appropriation Clause. He concluded by moving a

series of resolutions reaffirming the appropriation principle. His

motion was rejected by a majority of 270 to 46. The House then went

into committee, and in due course the Irish Tithe Bill passed into law,

and the vexed Church question was settled for a quarter of a century.

The Municipal Bill, however, was once more mutilated by Lord Lyndhurst,

who substituted a £10 for a £5 valuation. The amendment was rejected

by the Commons, but the Lords stood firmly by their decision, and a

conference between the two Houses having failed to settle the question,

the measure was abandoned. In these events the Ministry had incurred

much disrepute.

The approaching coronation of the Queen became, as the season advanced,

the prevailing topic of conversation in all circles. The feeling

excited by it was so strong, so deep, and so widespread, that a Radical

journal pronounced the people to be "coronation mad." The enthusiasm

was not confined to the United Kingdom. The contagion was carried to

the Continent, and foreigners of various ranks, from all nations,

flocked into the metropolis to behold the inauguration of the maiden

monarch of the British Empire. There were, however, some dissentients,

whose objections disturbed the current of public feeling. As soon as

it was understood that, on the score of economy, the time-honoured

custom of having the coronation banquet in Westminster Hall would not

be observed, the Marquis of Londonderry and others zealously exerted

themselves to avert the innovation, but their efforts were fruitless.

The coronation took place on the 28th of June. The only novel feature

of importance consisted in the substitution of a procession through

the streets for a banquet in Westminster Hall. It was certainly an

improvement, for it afforded the people an opportunity of enjoying

the ceremony. Persons of all ages, ranks, and conditions, embodied

visibly in one animated and exalted whole, exultant and joyful, came

forth to greet the youthful Sovereign. All the houses in the line

of march poured forth their occupants to the windows and balconies.

The behaviour of the enormous multitude which lined the streets, and

afterwards spread over the metropolis, was admirable. The utmost

eagerness was shown to furnish all the accommodation for spectators

that the space would allow, and there was scarcely a house or a vacant

spot along the whole line, from Hyde Park Corner to the Abbey, that was

not occupied with galleries or scaffolding. At dawn the population were

astir, roused by a salvo of artillery from the Tower, and towards six

o'clock chains of vehicles, of all sorts and sizes, stretched along the

leading thoroughfares; while streams of pedestrians, in holiday attire,

poured in continuously, so that the suburbs seemed to empty themselves

of all their inhabitants at once. At ten o'clock the head of the

procession moved from the palace. When the Queen stepped into the State

coach a salute was fired from the guns ranged in the enclosure, the

bands struck up the National Anthem, a new royal standard was hoisted

on the Marble Arch, and the multitude broke forth in loud and hearty

cheers. The foreign ambassadors extraordinary looked superb in their

new carriages and splendid uniforms. Among them shone conspicuous the

state coach of Marshal Soult, and the old hero was received with vast

enthusiasm by the populace.

The Queen reached the western entrance of Westminster Abbey at

half-past eleven o'clock, and was there met by the great officers of

State, the noblemen bearing the regalia, and the bishops carrying the

paten, the chalice, and the Bible. The arrangements in the interior

of the Abbey were nearly the same as at the previous coronation, but

the decorations were in better taste. Galleries had been erected for

the accommodation of spectators, to which about 1,000 persons were

admitted. There was also a gallery for the members of the House of

Commons, and another for foreign ambassadors. Soon after twelve o'clock

the grand procession began to enter the choir, in the order observed

on former occasions. The Queen was received with the most hearty

plaudits from all parts of the building, and when she was proclaimed

in the formula--"Sirs, I here present unto you Queen Victoria--the

undoubted Queen of this realm. Wherefore, all you who are come this day

to do your homage, are you willing to do the same?"--there was a loud

and universal burst of cheering, with cries of "God save the Queen."

When the crown was placed on her Majesty's head there was again an

enthusiastic cry of "God save the Queen," accompanied by the waving of

hats and handkerchiefs. At this moment the peers and peeresses put on

their coronets, the bishops their caps, and the kings-of-arms their

crowns, the trumpets sounding, the drums beating, the Tower and park

guns firing by signal. The Dukes of Cambridge and Sussex removing their

coronets, did homage in these words:--"I do become your liege man of

life and limb, and of earthly worship and faith and truth I will bear

unto you to live and die against all manner of folk, so help me God."

They touched the crown on the Queen's head, kissed her left cheek, and

then retired. It was observed that her Majesty's bearing towards her

uncles was very affectionate. The dukes and other peers then performed

their homage, the senior of each rank pronouncing the words. As they

retired, each peer kissed her Majesty's hand. The Duke of Wellington,

Earl Grey, and Lord Melbourne were loudly cheered as they ascended the

steps to the throne. Lord Rolle, who was upwards of eighty, stumbled

and fell on the steps. The Queen immediately stepped forward, and

held out her hand to assist the aged peer. This touching incident

called forth the loudly expressed admiration of the entire assembly.

While the ceremony of doing homage was being performed, the Earl of

Surrey, Treasurer of the Household, was scattering silver medals of

the coronation about the choir and the lower galleries, which were

scrambled for with great eagerness. The ceremonials did not conclude

till past four o'clock.

The procession, on its return, presented a still more striking

appearance than before, from the circumstance that the Queen wore her

crown, and the royal and noble personages their coronets. The mass of

brilliants, relieved here and there by a large coloured stone, and the

purple velvet cap, became her Majesty extremely well, and had a superb

effect. The sight of the streets "paved with heads," and the houses

alive with spectators, was most impressive. The Queen entertained a

party of one hundred at dinner, and in the evening witnessed, from

the roof of her palace, the fireworks in the Green Park. The Duke

of Wellington gave a grand banquet at Apsley House, and several

Cabinet Ministers gave official State dinners next day. The people

were gratified, at the solicitation of Mr. Hawes, M.P. for Lambeth,

with permission to hold a fair in Hyde Park, which continued for

four days, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Monday. The area allotted

comprised nearly one-third of the park, extending from near the

margin of the Serpentine river to a line within a short distance of

Grosvenor Gate. To the interior there were eight entrances, the main

one fifty feet wide, and the others thirty feet each. The enclosed

area was occupied by theatres, taverns, and an endless variety of

exhibitions, the centre being appropriated to lines of stalls for the

sale of fancy goods, sweetmeats, and toys. The Queen condescended

to visit the fair on Friday. The illuminations on the night of the

coronation were on a larger and more magnificent scale than had been

before seen in the metropolis, and the fireworks were also extremely

grand. All the theatres in the metropolis, and nearly all the other

places of amusement, were opened gratuitously that evening by her

Majesty's command, and though all were crowded, the arrangements were

so excellent that no accident occurred. In the provinces, rejoicing

was universal. Public dinners, feasts to the poor, processions, and

illuminations were the order of the day. At Liverpool was laid the

first stone of St. George's Hall, in presence of a great multitude.

At Cambridge 13,000 persons were feasted on one spot, in the open

field, called Parker's Piece, in the centre of which was raised an

orchestra for 100 musicians, surrounded by a gallery for 1,600 persons.

Encircling this centre were three rows of tables for the school

children, and from them radiated, like the spokes of a wheel, the main

body of the tables, 60 in number, and 25 feet in length. Beyond their

outer extremity were added 28 other tables, in a circle; and outside

the whole a promenade was roped in for spectators, who were more

numerous than those who dined. The circumference of the whole was more

than one-third of a mile. Other great towns similarly distinguished

themselves.

[Illustration: THE CORONATION OF QUEEN VICTORIA. (_After the Picture by

Sir George Hayter._)]

In this year the Spanish Legion, which had been sent to help the

Constitutionalists in Spain was dissolved, after an inglorious career.

It had been constantly attacked by the Conservatives in Parliament.

Thus, in the Session of 1837, Lord Mahon, who had been Under-Secretary

for Foreign Affairs in Sir Robert Peel's Government, reviewed the line

of policy pursued by Lord Palmerston. He complained that the public

had been kept in a state of ignorance whether they were at peace or

at war, and in his opinion it was a peace without tranquillity and a

war without honour. The object of the Quadruple Alliance had been to

appease the civil dissensions in Portugal, and not to sanction the

intervention of France and Britain in Spain. He lamented the policy

that led to the additional articles signed in 1834, which stipulated

for a certain degree of interference. But Lord Palmerston had thought

proper to proceed still further, in suspending the Foreign Enlistment

Act, and allowing 12,000 Englishmen to enlist under the banners of the

Queen of Spain. More than £540,000 had been already expended in the

war; and in Lord Mahon's opinion the influence of Great Britain in

Spain had not been augmented by these measures, in proof of which he

alleged that British merchants got less fair play there than French

merchants. Lord Palmerston defended his policy against the attacks of

Lord Mahon and other speakers. The Quadruple Treaty, he contended,

contemplated assistance to the Constitutional party in Spain as well

as in Portugal. It was concluded because there was a civil war in

Portugal; and when the civil war was transferred to Spain, the same

parties who took part with Portugal by treaty were bound at an early

period to extend its provisions to Spain, its object being expressly

"the pacification of the Peninsula by the expulsion of the two Infants

from it." He differed widely from Lord Mahon in thinking the suspension

of the Foreign Enlistment Act was disgraceful to the Government.

Examples of the same kind were to be found in the most brilliant

periods of the history of England.

General Evans had taken the command of the Spanish Legion, which

throughout the whole of the campaign was encompassed with difficulties

and pursued by disasters, without any military success sufficiently

brilliant to gild the clouds with glory. Within a fortnight after the

debate on Lord Mahon's motion came the news of its utter defeat before

Hernani. This defeat encouraged the opponents of Lord Palmerston's

policy to renew their attacks. Accordingly, immediately after the

recess, Sir Henry Hardinge brought forward a motion on the subject. He

complained that no adequate provision was made for the support of those

who were in the Legion. At Vittoria they were placed for four months in

uninhabited convents, without bedding, fuel, or supplies of any kind.

Not less than 40 officers and 700 men fell victims to their privations.

The worst consequence was, however, the total demoralisation of the

troops. Theirs was not honourable war, it was butchery. They were

massacring a fine and independent people, who had committed no offence

against Britain. Ill treatment, want of food and of clothing, habits of

insubordination and mutiny, and want of confidence in their officers,

had produced their natural effects. Let them palliate the disaster

as they would, there was no doubt, he said, of the fact that a large

body of Britons had suffered a defeat such as he believed no British

soldiers had undergone in the course of the last five or six hundred

years. The motion was defeated by 70 votes to 62, but as the Legion was

dissolved in the following year, 1838, the object of the Opposition was

gained.