The opposition, however, was powerful. When Mr. Goulburn brought

forward his resolution by which sugar certified to be the growth

of China, Manila, Java, or other countries where no slave labour

was employed, should be admitted at a duty of 34s., the colonial

duty being 24s., the danger of the position of the Ministers was

soon perceived. Lord John Russell proposed an amendment in favour

of admitting all foreign sugars at 34s., a proposal which, though

calculated to maintain the price of sugar at a higher point than the

Government proposition, was less distasteful to the Free Traders, as

abolishing the differential principle. This amendment was rejected by

a majority of only 69. On the 14th of June the Government Bill came

on for a third reading, and the contest then began in earnest. Mr.

Miles, the representative of the West India party, moved an amendment

proposing a reduction of the duty on colonial sugar to 20s., instead

of 24s., and the raising of the duties on foreign to 30s. and 34s. The

Free Trade party were not entrapped by this offer of a reduction of

4s. on colonial sugar. They saw that Mr. Miles's amendment would only

establish a differential duty of 14s. instead of 10s., the difference

going to the West India planters. They now, moreover, at least hoped

more from Sir Robert Peel than from any Minister likely to succeed him.

Mr. Cobden and the League party therefore supported the Government; but

so powerful was the combination against them that the division, which

took place on the 14th of June, left Ministers in a minority of 20.

[Illustration: FREE TRADE HALL, MANCHESTER. (_From a Photograph by

Frith and Co., Reigate._)]

The events that followed form part of the general history of that time.

The Government well knew that they were more popular in the country

than their opponents. In the few days that succeeded, during which men

were doubtful if they would resign, the Minister had had time to feel

the power of that popularity, and the value of the support of the Free

Trade party. To satisfy the selfish expectations of the more bigoted

of his own supporters must have seemed to him more and more helpless.

To break with them, and to look elsewhere for the support which their

vindictiveness would inevitably render necessary--to become less a

leader of a class, and more a statesman seeking the true foundations

of power in a steady regard to the welfare of the great bulk of the

community--were ideas naturally present to the Minister's mind. When he

met Parliament again to announce the determination of the Government

to ask the House to reconsider its decision, his tone was observed to

be more bitter than before. His allusions to the defections of his

own followers were significant; but they plainly indicated that his

course was taken. "We cannot conceal from ourselves," he said, "that in

respect to some of the measures we have proposed, and which have been

supported, they have not met with that cordial assent and agreement

from those for whose character and opinions we entertain the highest

and sincerest respect. But I am bound to say, speaking here of them

with perfect respect, that we cannot invite their co-operation and

support upon the present occasion by holding out expectations that we

shall take a middle or other course with regard to those measures which

we believe to be best for the interests of the country, and consistent

with justice." This modest but firm defiance of the ultra-Protectionist

party was not lost upon the Free Traders in the House; neither were the

Minister's further remarks--"We have thought it desirable to relax the

system of Protection, and admit into competition with articles of the

domestic produce of this country articles from foreign lands. We have

attempted to counsel the enforcement of principles which we believe to

be founded in truth, and with every regard for existing institutions,

and with every precaution to prevent embarrassment and undue alarm."

It was on this occasion that Mr. Disraeli, rising from the benches

filled with the ordinary supporters of the Government, delivered one

of those bitter and sarcastic diatribes which thenceforward proved so

effective in arousing the revengeful feelings of those of the party

who believed their interests to have been betrayed in deference to the

League. "I remember," he said, "in 1841 the right hon. baronet used

these words: he said, 'I have never joined in the anti-slavery cry, and

now I will not join in the cry of cheap sugar.' Two years have elapsed,

and the right hon. gentleman _has_ joined in the anti-slavery cry, and

_has_ adopted the cry of cheap sugar. But," he continued, appealing

to the rebellious supporters of the Government, whom the Minister had

just defied, "it seems that the right hon. baronet's horror of slavery

extends to every place except the benches behind him. There the gang is

still assembled, and there the thong of the whip still resounds. The

right hon. gentleman," he added, "came into power upon the strength of

our votes, but he would rely for the permanence of his Ministry upon

his political opponents. He may be right--he may even be to a certain

degree successful in pursuing the line of conduct which he has adopted,

menacing his friends, and cringing to his opponents; but I, for one,

am disposed to look upon it as a success neither tending to the honour

of the House nor to his own credit. I therefore must be excused if I

declare my determination to give my vote upon this occasion as I did

in the former instance; and as I do not follow the example of the hon.

and gallant member near me (Sir H. Douglas), it will not subject me to

the imputation of having voted on the former occasion without thought

or purpose." The appeal of the Ministers, however, was, fortunately for

the Free Trade movement, for a time successful. The Government were

reinstated by a vote of 255 to 233, in a House in which both parties

had evidently done their utmost.

The party which, under the guidance of Mr. Disraeli, Lord Stanley,

and Lord George Bentinck, was destined to present so formidable an

opposition to the Minister's policy, and to render his labours in the

interests of the people so full of pain and anxiety, as yet only marked

its existence by murmurs along the Conservative benches. As usual,

the somewhat revived prosperity of the country was the chief pretext

for resisting change. People with this view did not see the danger of

opposing reforms until a sudden storm compelled the Legislature to

face them with mischievous haste. It had again and again been shown

that the evils of the old system of restrictions lay chiefly in the

fact that they led to violent fluctuations in the circumstances of

the people. Nothing, therefore, could be more certain than that, even

had the prosperity been tenfold greater, one of those alternations of

depression which brought so much misery to the people would not be

long in making its appearance. The monopolist party, however, seldom

looked beyond the day or the hour. There had been rick-burning in the

country, and an agricultural labourer, named Joseph Lankester, had

declared that his object in committing this crime was to raise the

price of wheat, and so bring about those high wages which the political

farmers and landlords were always saying came from good prices in the

corn market. The Protectionist lords declared, nevertheless, that the

Anti-Corn-Law League, with their mischievous agitation, their models of

the big and the little loaf, their lectures and meetings, their music

and banners, their poisonous tracts and pamphlets, were at the bottom

of these disturbances. In the towns, however, political agitation

was comparatively silent. To some agriculturists it appeared a fair

compromise to maintain the protective laws in consideration of their

being content to put up with the low prices of the day. Any way, the

dreaded League seemed to them to be checked.

The landowners, headed by the Duke of Richmond, had established an

Anti-League League, for counteracting the Manchester men with their own

weapons--an association which the satirists of the day represented by

a slightly modified picture from the fable of the frog and the bull.

To those, however, who read only the tracts of the Anti-League League,

it doubtless appeared that the torrent was to some degree arrested.

It began to be asserted that the League was extinct, that the country

was sick of its incessant agitation, and that Mr. Cobden and Mr.

Bright were about to "back out." These, however, were not the views

of the League men. The lists of voters, the freehold land scheme, and

the gathering in of that £100,000 fund which was now fast approaching

completion, furnished them with abundant employment, and their campaign

was carried on with a success which gave sure promise of the final

capture of the stronghold of the enemy.

The Parliamentary Session for 1845 was opened by the Queen in person on

the 4th of February. At a meeting a few days earlier, Mr. Cobden had

warned his hearers that no change in the Corn Laws could be expected

from Sir Robert Peel so long as the Ministry could avail themselves of

the old excuse, the revived prosperity of manufactures and commerce.

"Ours," he had said, "is a very simple proposition. We say to the

right honourable baronet, 'Abolish the monopolies which go to enrich

that majority which placed you in power and keeps you there.' We know

he will not attempt it; but we are quite certain he will make great

professions of being a Free Trader, notwithstanding."

The Budget was brought forward on the 13th of February. It proposed

to continue the income tax, which experience had shown to afford a

means of supplying the place of taxes repealed, until such time as

the revenue should recover itself. The Minister then unfolded his

scheme, which formed no unworthy complement to his great Budget of

1842. It proposed a reduction in the sugar duties, which could not

be calculated at less than £1,300,000, and was expected to lower the

price to the consumer by about 1-1/4d. a pound. The Minister then

proceeded to refer to a list of articles, 430 in number, which yielded

but trifling amounts of revenue, and many of which were raw materials

used in the various manufactures of the country, including silk, hemp,

flax, and yarn or thread (except worsted yarn), all woods used in

cabinet-making, animal and vegetable oils, iron and zinc in the first

stages, ores and minerals (except copper ore, to which the last Act was

still to apply), dye stuffs of all kinds, and all drugs, with very few

exceptions; on the whole of these articles he proposed to repeal the

duties altogether, not even leaving a nominal rate for registration,

but retaining the power of examination. The timber duties generally he

proposed to continue as they were, with the one exception of staves,

which, as the raw material of the extensive manufacture of casks, he

proposed to include with the 430 articles, and to take off the duty

altogether. On these articles the loss amounted to £320,000. The next

and most important relief in the whole proposition was the article

of cotton wool, on which the Minister proposed also to reduce the

duty altogether, and on which he estimated the loss at £680,000; and

these constituted the whole of the proposed reductions of the import

duties--that is, sugar, cotton wool, and the numerous small articles in

the tariff. The next items of reduction proposed were the few remaining

duties on our exports, such as china-stone, and other trifling things,

but including the most important article of coals, on which the duty

had been placed by the Government, and at the result of which Sir

Robert Peel candidly avowed his disappointment. The duties he estimated

at £118,000. He then passed on to the excise duties, among which he had

selected two items of great importance for entire repeal--the auction

duty and the glass duties. By a repeal of the auction duty he estimated

a loss of £300,000; but as he proposed, at the same time, to increase

the auctioneer's licence uniformly from £5 to £15 (making one licence

answer for all purposes, whereas, at that time, several licences were

often necessary to the same party) he expected from 4,000 auctioneers

an increased income, so as to reduce this loss to £250,000. On the

important article of glass he gave up £642,000. These constituted the

whole of his proposals; and the surplus of £2,409,000 was thus proposed

to be disposed of:--Estimated loss on sugar, £1,300,000; duty on cotton

repealed, £680,000; ditto on 430 articles in tariff, £320,000; export

duty on coal, £118,000; auction duty, £250,000; glass, £642,000. Total,

£3,310,000.

The Budget excited extraordinary interest throughout the country;

but the proposed sugar duties were, in the eyes of the Free Traders,

objectionable, as maintaining the differential rates in favour of

the West Indian landlords. Though well received on the whole, it was

impossible not to see in the Budget traces of the anomalous position

of the Minister. One newspaper described his measures as combining

the most glaring inconsistencies that ever disfigured the policy of

any Minister, and arranged in parallel columns illustrations of its

assertion. Sir Robert Peel was charged with proposing at the same

time a tariff whose express object was declared to be to cheapen the

necessaries of life and corn, and provision laws whose sole object

was to make the chief necessaries of life dear; with professing great

concern to relieve trade and commerce, for the sake of which a property

tax was proposed, combined with a still greater concern to uphold the

rent of land, for the sake of which trade and commerce were loaded

with a bread tax; with devising taxes for the mere purpose of revenue;

with levying taxes for the mere purpose of protection; with repealing

the duty on slave-grown cotton, while imposing prohibitory duties

on slave-grown sugar; with encouraging Brazilian coffee and cotton,

while refusing Brazilian sugar; and with admitting cheap slave-grown

sugar to be refined in Britain, and sold to Continental nations, while

forbidding the selfsame cheap sugar to our own working people. Still,

there was progress. The Corn Law was untouched, but statesmen of all

parties had spoken despairingly of its continuance.

The gulf between the Minister and the landowners was widening. The

debates on the Budget, and on Mr. Cobden's motion for inquiry into

the alleged agricultural distress, had drawn out more bitter speeches

from Mr. Disraeli, and served still further to mark the distinction

between the Minister and a large section of his old followers. But one

of the most significant signs of the time was the increasing tendency

to recognise the talents and singleness of purpose of the Anti-Corn-Law

Leaguers. It became almost fashionable to compliment the ability

of Mr. Cobden. It was almost forgotten that the Minister had once

carried with him the whole House in making an excited charge against

that gentleman of marking him out for assassination. The bitterness

of the ultra-Protectionists was certainly unabated; but neither the

_Quarterly_ nor any other review now classed the Manchester men with

rick-burners and assassins, or called upon the Government to indict

them for sedition.

The debate on Mr. Villiers's annual motion, on June 10, produced

still further evidences of the decline of Protectionist principles.

On that occasion Sir James Graham, who was currently believed to

be better acquainted with the feelings of the Premier than any

other of the Ministers, said, "He would not deny that it was his

opinion, that by a gradual and cautious policy it was expedient to

bring our system of Corn Laws into a nearer approximation to those

wholesome principles which governed legislation with respect to other

industrial departments. But it was his conviction that suddenly and

at once to throw open the trade in corn would be inconsistent with

the well-being of the community, and would give such a shock to the

agricultural interest as would throw many other interests into a state

of convulsion. The object of every Government, without distinction of

party, for the last twenty years, had been to substitute protecting

duties for prohibitory duties, and to reduce gradually protecting

duties, where it had them to deal with. He approved of this as a

safe principle, and showed that it was the keystone of the policy

of Sir Robert Peel.... If they could show him that Free Trade with

open ports would produce a more abundant supply to the labourer, they

would make him [Sir James] a convert to the doctrine of Free Trade in

corn. He confessed that he placed no value on the fixed duty of four

shillings lately proposed; it would be of no avail as a protection,

whilst it would be liable to all the obloquy of a protecting duty;

and he therefore thought that if they got rid of the present Corn

Law, they had better assent to a total repeal." Sir Robert Peel spoke

more cautiously; but he began by striking away a favourite maxim of

his party, in observing that experience proved that the high price of

corn was not accompanied by a high rate of wages, and that wages did

not vary with the price of corn. He said that he "must proceed, in

pursuance of his own policy, to reconcile the gradual approach of our

legislation to sound principle on this subject, with the interests

which had grown up under a different state of things;" but he admitted

that it would be "impossible to maintain any law on the ground that it

was intended to keep up rents."

Such was the position of affairs when Parliament was prorogued on the

9th of August. The Peel Ministry appeared to be as firmly seated as any

combination then possible was likely to be, and the agriculturists'

monopoly seemed safe at least for another year; but the Government had

already received warnings of a coming storm. The weather had been for

some time wet and cold, but as yet a general failure of the wheat crop

was not anticipated. The trouble approached from a quarter in which no

one had looked for it. Early in the month of August Sir Robert Peel had

received an account of an extraordinary appearance in the potato crop

in the Isle of Wight. On the 11th of August Sir James Graham received

a letter from a great potato salesman, indicating that the same

mysterious signs were observable throughout the south-eastern counties,

and he hastened to communicate the facts to his colleague. These

isolated observations soon became confirmed from numerous quarters,

and the account was everywhere the same. First a brown spot was

observable on the skin of the potato; then the spot became black, the

leaves and flowers of whole fields grew shrivelled, black, and putrid;

and the crops, wherever the plague appeared, were almost entirely

destroyed. From Ireland the most alarming accounts were received, and

the newspapers were quickly filled with details of the progress of the

"potato disease." It began to be asked what would be done with the

unemployed multitudes in that country, whose stock of provisions for

the next ten months was gone?

[Illustration: CHARLES PELHAM VILLIERS.]

The Government at once sent Dr. Lindley and Dr. Playfair, two men of

science, to Ireland, in the hope that they might be able to suggest

remedies for staying the progress of the disease, or preserve that

portion of the crop which was still untainted; and the consular

agents in different parts of Europe and of America were directed to

make inquiries and endeavour to obtain a supply of sound potatoes for

seed; indeed, the seed question was even more important than that more

immediately pressing one, of how the people were to be fed. In addition

to this, early in October, they secretly gave orders for the purchase

abroad of £100,000 worth of Indian corn, to be conveyed to Irish ports

for distribution among the people. These measures, however, proved of

little avail, and meanwhile it grew evident that in a great portion

of the United Kingdom a famine was inevitable, which could not fail

to influence the price of provisions of all kinds elsewhere. During

this time it became known that the harvest, about which opinions had

fluctuated so much, would be everywhere deficient. The friends of Sir

Robert Peel in the Cabinet who shared his Free Trade tendencies knew

then how impossible it was that the already tottering system of the

Corn Laws could be any longer maintained. The Ministers had scarcely

reached the country seats in which they looked for repose after the

labours of the Session, ere the cry of "Open the ports!" was raised

throughout the kingdom; but except three, none of them took his view of

the gravity of the crisis. All knew that the ports once open, public

opinion would probably for ever prevent the reimposition of the duties,

and the majority of the Cabinet for a time still adhered to their

Protectionist principles.

The magnitude of the interests at stake, the difficulty of estimating

the real character and extent of the threatened evil, and the alarming

consequences that must ensue if the worst fears should be realised,

rendered immediate action necessary. A Cabinet Council was held on the

31st of October. From what passed on that occasion, says Sir Robert

Peel, in the account which he has left of these events, "it was easy

to foresee that there was little prospect of a common accord as to

the measures to be adopted." On the 5th of November he apprised her

Majesty of the probability of serious differences of opinion. At the

adjourned meeting of the Cabinet, on the 6th of November, he submitted

certain proposals for the consideration of his colleagues, which he has

recorded in the following outline of these events:--

CABINET MEMORANDUM, NOVEMBER 6.

"To issue forthwith an Order in Council remitting the duty on grain in

bond to one shilling, and opening the ports for the admission of all

species of grain at a smaller rate of duty until a day named in the

order.

"To call Parliament together on the 27th instant, to ask for indemnity

and a sanction of the order by law.

"To propose to Parliament no other measure than that during the sitting

before Christmas. To declare an intention of submitting to Parliament

immediately after the recess a modification of the existing law, but

to decline entering into any details in Parliament with regard to such

modification.

"Such modification to include the admission, at a nominal duty, of

Indian corn and of British colonial corn."

The Cabinet, by a very considerable majority, declined giving its

assent to the proposals which the Minister thus made to them. They

were supported by only three members of the Cabinet--the Earl of

Aberdeen, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Sidney Herbert. The other members

of the Cabinet, some on the ground of objection to the principle of the

measures recommended, others upon the ground that there was not yet

sufficient evidence of the necessity for them, withheld their sanction.

"On account of the gravity of the question," says Sir Robert Peel,

"and the smallness of the minority assenting to my views, I might

perhaps have been justified in at once relinquishing office; but after

mature reflection, considering that the rejection of my proposals was

not a peremptory one by all of those who for the present declined to

adopt them, that additional information might materially abate the

objections of many, and that the dissolution of a Government on account

of differences on such a matter as that under consideration must cause

great excitement in the public mind, I determined to retain office

until there should be the opportunity of reconsideration of the whole

subject. That opportunity would necessarily recur at the latter end

of this current month (November), when it was agreed that the Cabinet

should again assemble. In determining to retain office for the present,

I determined also not to recede from the position which I had taken,

and ultimately to resign office if I should find on the reassembling

of the Cabinet that the opinions I had expressed did not meet with

general concurrence. I determined also, in order to guard against the

mischievous consequences of failure in such an undertaking, not to

attempt the adjustment of the question at issue unless there should be

a moral assurance of ultimate success. It was most painful to me to

differ from colleagues with whom I had hitherto acted in uninterrupted

harmony, for whom I had sincere personal regard, and cordial esteem and

respect founded on an intimate knowledge of their motives and conduct

in the discharge of their respective duties."

On the 2nd of November the following letter was addressed to the

Minister by Lord Stanley, containing an exposition of the grounds on

which he dissented from the proposals submitted to the Cabinet:--

[_Secret._] "Colonial Office, November 2, 1845.

"MY DEAR PEEL,--I find it difficult to express to you the regret

with which I see how widely I differ in opinion with Graham and

yourself as to the necessity for proposing to Parliament a repeal

of the Corn Laws. Since the Cabinet on Saturday I have reflected

much and anxiously upon it; but I cannot bring my mind to any

other conclusion than that at which I had then arrived. I have

thought it best to put down in writing the view of the case which

presents itself to me; and when you have read it, I will thank

you to send it on to Graham, with whom I have had no conversation

upon it. I foresee that this question, if you persevere in your

present opinion, must break up the Government one way or the other;

but I shall greatly regret indeed if it should be broken up, not

in consequence of our feeling that we had proposed measures which

it properly belonged to others to carry, but in consequence of

differences of opinion among ourselves."

The purport of these Cabinet Councils was generally understood by

the country; but as yet only the most sanguine anticipated the

proposal of Sir Robert Peel, when the _Times_ newspaper on the 4th

of December announced, apparently from secret information, that it

was the intention of the Government to repeal the Corn Laws, and to

call Parliament together in January for that purpose. The assertion

was received with incredulity, not only by the Opposition, but by the

Ministerial journals. One organ of the Tory party placarded its office

with a bill, headed "Atrocious fabrication of the _Times_!" But the

latter journal, on the following day, declared that it "adhered to

its original announcement." Day by day the controversy raged in the

newspapers; but the news was too probable not to gain credence. The

result was a conviction throughout the country that the _Times_ had

really obtained information of the Government's intentions; but as a

matter of fact its information was incorrect, as the Cabinet, far from

intending to repeal the Corn Laws, had made up its mind to retire.

Meanwhile Lord Ashley, a staunch upholder of the Corn Laws, in a

letter to his constituents of Dorsetshire declared his opinion "that

the destiny of the Corn Laws was fixed," and that it would be wise

to consider "how best to break the force of an inevitable blow." Mr.

Bickham and Captain Estcott, also strong defenders of the landlords'

monopoly, published their conviction that the Corn Laws were no longer

tenable; and on the 22nd of November Lord John Russell, who was at

Edinburgh, addressed a letter to the electors of the City of London,

which was duly circulated throughout the kingdom, and which contained

the following remarkable passages:--

"I confess that, on the general subject, my views have, in the course

of twenty years, undergone a great alteration. I used to be of opinion

that corn was an exception to the general rules of political economy;

but observation and experience have convinced me that we ought to

abstain from all interference with the supply of food. Neither a

Government nor a Legislature can ever regulate the corn markets with

the beneficial effects which the entire freedom of sale and purchase

are sure of themselves to produce.

"I have for several years endeavoured to obtain a compromise on this

subject. The result of resistance to qualified concession must be

the same in the present instance as in those I have mentioned. It is

no longer worth while to contend for a fixed duty. In 1841 the Free

Trade party would have agreed to a duty of 8s. a quarter on wheat,

and after a lapse of years this duty might have been further reduced,

and ultimately abolished. But the imposition of any duty, at present,

without a provision for its extinction within a short period, would

but prolong a contest already sufficiently fruitful of animosity and

discontent. The struggle to make bread scarce and dear, when it is

clear that part, at least, of the additional price goes to increase

rent, is a struggle deeply injurious to an aristocracy which (this

quarrel once removed) is strong in property, strong in the construction

of our Legislature, strong in opinion, strong in ancient associations

and the memory of immortal services."

The Cabinet met again on the 25th, when Sir Robert Peel informed his

colleagues that, in the position of affairs, he could not abstain

from advising the immediate suspension, by Order in Council, of the

restrictive law of importation, or the early assembling of Parliament

for the purpose of proposing a permanent change. Lord Aberdeen, Mr.

Sidney Herbert, and Sir James Graham supported him. The Duke of

Wellington gave a reluctant adhesion. It then became known that Lord

Stanley had withdrawn from the Ministry, and it was believed that the

Duke of Buccleuch intended to follow his example. The majority of the

Cabinet had decided in favour of a permanent reduction in the sliding

scale; but the position of the Minister was now too uncertain for him

to attempt to carry through his measures. A resignation was the only

step which could show the true strength of parties, and determine who

would and who would not follow the Minister in that course which, if he

was to return to power, he had finally resolved to take. On the 5th of

December he announced his determination to her Majesty, and the public

learned that the Peel Administration was at an end.

Lord John Russell was immediately summoned from Scotland, and on the

11th arrived at Osborne, where he received her Majesty's commands to

form a Government. On the ground that his party were in a minority in

the House of Commons, Lord John Russell at first declined the honour

presented to him; but on a paper being placed in his hands by the

Queen, in which Sir Robert Peel promised, in his private capacity,

to aid and give every support to the new Ministry in settling the

question of the Corn Laws, he undertook the task. There was no amicable

feeling between the new and the retiring Minister. Lord John Russell's

letter, published a few days before, had excited as much attention

for its bitter sarcasm against Sir Robert Peel as for the important

change in the Whig policy which it announced. Lord John Russell held

communication with the late Government, but through Sir James Graham.

It was of importance to him to know more clearly the nature of that

support which Sir Robert Peel's memorandum seemed to promise; and

he was, therefore, anxious to know what the latter would consider a

satisfactory settlement. This proposal, however, to the late Minister

to become responsible for the measures of his successors was declined.

Sir James Graham communicated to Lord John Russell the information as

to the state of the country on which they acted; but Sir Robert Peel,

through his colleague, declined to state the details of the measures

which had lately been contemplated. Lord John Russell then gave,

in writing, an outline of the measures which the new Cabinet would

propose, and invited the opinion of the late Minister. Sir Robert Peel,

however, still declined to take part in the plans of his opponents;

and in a letter to the Queen, on the 17th of December, he stated the

constitutional grounds on which he considered it improper that any one,

not an adviser of the Crown, should take a part in the preparation

of Ministerial measures. Lord John Russell thereupon immediately

proceeded with his negotiations with his own party. It soon, however,

appeared that the task he had proposed to himself was beyond his power.

Earl Grey, who had agreed to take the Secretaryship of the Colonies

in the new Ministry, suddenly declared that he would not join any

Administration in which Lord Palmerston should hold the office of

Secretary for Foreign Affairs. This unexpected accident was regarded by

Lord John Russell as decisive. On the 20th of December he communicated

the facts to the Queen, and begged to be relieved from the task he had

undertaken.

On the day before her Majesty had desired to see Sir Robert Peel,

to bid him farewell; but before he had set out for Windsor he had

learnt the circumstances of the failure of the Whig leader to form

a Cabinet; and as the result of his interview with the Queen he

returned to London to resume the reins of Government. His position

was greatly strengthened. Of his late Cabinet, Lord Stanley alone

insisted on retiring, his place at the Board of Trade being filled by

Mr. Gladstone. The baffled Whigs and the discontented monopolist party

threatened a formidable combination; but, as regarded the Ministry

itself, the change of policy was effected with far less sacrifice than

might have been expected, considering all the circumstances of the case.

Parliament reassembled, according to the Minister's plan, at the

unusually early date of the 22nd of January, 1846. The Queen's Speech,

read by her Majesty in person, thus alluded to the topic most prominent

in the public mind:--

"I have to lament that, in consequence of the failure of the potato

crop in several parts of the United Kingdom, there will be a deficient

supply of an article of food which forms the chief subsistence of great

numbers of my people.

"The disease by which the plant has been affected has prevailed to the

greatest extent in Ireland.

"I have adopted all such precautions as it was in my power to adopt

for the purpose of alleviating the sufferings which may be caused by

this calamity; and I shall confidently rely on your co-operation in

devising such other means for effecting the same benevolent purpose as

may require the sanction of the Legislature."

On the subject of the Free Trade measures generally, the Speech

continued:--

"I have had great satisfaction in giving my assent to the measures

which you have presented to me from time to time, calculated to extend

commerce, and to stimulate domestic skill and industry, by the repeal

of prohibitory and the relaxation of protective duties.

"The prosperous state of the revenue, the increased demand for labour,

and the general improvement which has taken place in the internal

condition of the country are strong testimonies in favour of the course

you have pursued.

"I recommend you to take into your early consideration whether the

principles on which you have acted may not with advantage be yet more

extensively applied; and whether it may not be in your power, after a

careful review of the existing duties upon many articles, the produce

or manufacture of other countries, to make such further reductions and

remissions as may tend to ensure the continuance of the great benefits

to which I have adverted, and, by enlarging our commercial intercourse,

to strengthen the bonds of amity with foreign Powers."

[Illustration: MAYNOOTH COLLEGE. (_From a Photograph by Lawrence,

Dublin._)]

In the House of Lords the comments on the Ministerial measures were

characterised by much bitterness, both against the Government and the

League; and the Duke of Richmond asked why Mr. Cobden was not created

a peer, and placed on the Treasury Bench in the House of Lords? In

the Commons the excitement among the Protectionist party was no less

manifest; but the crowded House waited impatiently for the Minister's

explanations. Lord Francis Egerton moved the Address, giving the

key-note of the Ministerial plans by declaring that his own opinions on

the Corn Laws had undergone a complete alteration, and imploring the

House to come to "a full, satisfactory, and final settlement of the

question." Mr. Beckett Denison, who seconded the motion, declared that

experience had "driven" him to the same conclusion.

Sir Robert Peel then rose. He said that the immediate cause which had

led to the dissolution of the Government was "that great and mysterious

calamity which caused a lamentable failure in an article of food on

which great numbers of the people in this part of the United Kingdom

and still larger numbers in the sister kingdom depended mainly for

their subsistence." But he added, "I will not assign to that cause

too much weight. I will not withhold the homage which is due to the

progress of reason, and to truth, by denying that my opinions on the

subject of Protection have undergone a change." This announcement was

received in profound silence from the Ministerial benches, but with

triumphant cheering from the Opposition. Protection, he said, was not

a labourer's question. High prices did not produce high wages, nor

_vice versâ_. In the last three years, with low prices and abundance

of food, wages were comparatively high, and labour was in demand. In

the three years preceding, with high prices and scarcity, wages were

low and employment was scarce. Experience thus proved that wages were

ruled by abundance of capital and demand for labour, and did not vary

with the price of provisions. Again, increased freedom of trade was

favourable to the prosperity of our commerce. In three scarce and dear

years, namely, from 1839 to 1841, our foreign exports fell off from

£53,000,000 in value to £47,000,000. But in three years of reduction

of duties and low prices, namely, from 1842 to 1844, the value of our

exports rose from £47,000,000 to £58,000,000. Even deducting the amount

of the China trade, a similar result was shown. Nor was the reduction

in the customs duties unfavourable to the revenue. In 1842 there was

an estimated loss of £1,500,000; in 1843 a smaller one of £273,000;

but in 1845 there was a reduction at an estimated loss to the revenue

of no less than £2,500,000. The total amount of the various reductions

effected in three years exceeded £4,000,000; and many of the duties

were totally abolished; the loss, therefore, not being compensated by

any increased consumption. Had £4,000,000 been lost to the revenue? He

believed that on the 5th of April next the revenue would be found to

be more buoyant than ever. Sir Robert Peel referred to other proofs

of prosperity resulting from reduced import duties, and then adverted

to his own position, and declared that "he would not hold office on a

servile tenure."

The evening of the 27th of January was fixed for the Minister's general

statement upon the commercial policy of the Government. Sir Robert

proposed the reduction of the duty on Russian tallow from 3s. 2d. to

1s. 6d.; the abolition of duty on the coarser fabrics of linen, cotton,

and woollen, and the reduction on the finer from 20 to 10 per cent.;

on French brandy and Geneva, a reduction from 22s. 10d. to 15s.; on

foreign free-grown Muscovada sugar, a reduction from 9s. 4d. to 5s.

10d.; and on clayed 11s. 10d. to 8s.; the admission of Indian corn

and buckwheat duty free; on butter, the duty to be reduced from 20s.

to 10s.; and on cheese, from 10s. to 5s.; the duty on live animals,

and fresh and salted meats, pork, and vegetables to be abolished. As

to corn, in lieu of the then sliding scale, he proposed that when the

average price of wheat was 48s., the duty should fall by 1s. with every

1s. of rise in price, till on reaching 53s. the duty should be a fixed

one of 4s.; that this mitigated scale should last for three years,

and, by a positive enactment, then disappear on the 1st of February,

1849, leaving for the future only a nominal rate of duty; and that

all British colonial wheat and flour should be forthwith admitted at a

nominal rate.

The debate was fixed for the 9th of February, on which day it was

moved that the House should resolve itself into a committee on the

propositions of the Government. Mr. P. Miles moved, as an amendment,

that the House should go into committee on that day twelvemonth. The

debate occupied twelve nights, in the course of which every species

of vituperation was hurled at the Minister by the monopolist party.

Mr. Beresford Hope denounced him as an apostate. Major Fitzmaurice

thought the farmers might as well die by the manly system of Mr.

Cobden as by the mincemeal interference of the right hon. baronet.

Another member compared the Minister to a counsel who, after taking a

fee for advocating one side, took the other when the case came into

court. Mr. Disraeli attacked with great vehemence and bitterness the

Ministerial proposals, and pointed to the "sad spectacle" of the

Minister surrounded by a majority who, while they gave him their votes,

protested in their speeches against his policy. Lord George Bentinck,

who, in the many years he had hitherto been in Parliament, had never

before taken part in any debate of importance, surprised the House on

the last night of the debate by delivering a long and elaborate speech

against the measure, in which he charged the Minister with "swindling"

and deception--a speech which at once marked him out for one of the

leaders of the new Opposition.

On the fifth night of the debate Sir Robert Peel rose to speak in

defence of his policy against these attacks of his enemies. It was

already ten o'clock, and the House listened to him for three hours. He

spoke with remarkable warmth and energy, and overpowered his opponents

with the unanswerable truths of political economy, and with humorous

demonstrations of the fallacies in which the Protectionist speakers

had indulged. In concluding he said, "This night is to decide between

the policy of continued relaxation of restriction, or the return to

restraint and prohibition. This night you will select the motto which

is to indicate the commercial policy of England. Shall it be 'Advance!'

or 'Recede'?" The division took place on the 27th (or rather on the

28th) of February, at twenty minutes to three in the morning, when the

numbers for the motion were--337; against it, 240; leaving a majority

for going into committee of 97.

This great debate was interrupted by a motion brought on by Mr.

O'Connell, on the impending famine in Ireland, which is chiefly

memorable for a speech of Mr. Bright, in which, alluding to Sir Robert

Peel's last address to the House, he said, "I watched the right

honourable baronet go home last night, and I confess I envied him the

ennobling feelings which must have filled his breast after delivering

that speech--a speech, I venture to say, more powerful and more to be

admired than any speech ever heard in this House within the memory of

any man in it." A further eloquent allusion to the Minister's newly

acquired freedom from the enthralment of the bigoted among his party

had a powerful effect upon the House, and it was observed by those who

sat near Sir Robert Peel that the tears started to his eyes at this

unexpected generosity from his old opponent.

On the 1st of March Mr. Villiers, adhering to his principle, brought

forward the last of those annual motions for immediate repeal which

had contributed so powerfully to undermine the Corn Laws. After a

spirited debate of two evenings, in the course of which Mr. Cobden

warned the monopolist party that a protracted resistance would compel

the Anti-Corn-Law League to maintain its agitation and concentrate its

energies, the House rejected the motion by a majority of 267 to 78.

On the 27th of March, after a powerful address from Sir Robert Peel,

the Corn Importation Bill was read a second time--the House, on

division, showing a majority for the second reading of 302 to 214.

Three nights' debate took place on the third reading, in the course of

which the Protectionists contended with undiminished obstinacy for the

maintenance of the landlords' monopoly. The third reading was finally

carried at four o'clock in the morning of Saturday, May 16th, the

numbers being 327 for the Bill; against it, 229; leaving a majority for

the Government of 98.

In the House of Lords the second reading was carried on the 28th of

May by a majority of 47, and the Bill was finally passed on the 25th

of June. The attitude of the House was due entirely to the Duke of

Wellington, and his conduct constitutes his best claim to the title

of statesman. But the downfall of the Peel Ministry was inevitable.

In a letter to the Duke, of the 18th of February, Lord Stanley had

said that, whatever might be the result of the Corn Bill, the days of

the existing Government were numbered, and that the confidence of his

party in Sir Robert Peel had been so shaken, "that, in spite of his

pre-eminent abilities and great services, he could never reunite it

under his guidance." The Protectionist party found its opportunity in

the Irish Coercion Bill, which, introduced by Earl St. Germans into

the House of Lords, had slowly passed through its various stages, and

appeared in the Commons in March. At first the Bill was obstructed

in order to delay the Corn Bill, but when that measure became law,

Whigs and Protectionists--who had voted for the second reading of the

Protection of Life Bill--resolved to use it as an instrument for the

overthrow of Peel. They combined, therefore, with the Radicals and

Irish members, and, on the very night on which Free Trade was passed by

the Lords, the Minister was finally defeated in the Commons. He might

have dissolved, but his preference was for retirement. The concluding

words of his speech will long be remembered. He said: "With reference

to honourable gentlemen opposite, I must say, as I say with reference

to ourselves, neither of us is the party which is justly entitled to

the credit of those measures. There has been a combination of parties,

and that combination, and the influence of Government, have led to

their ultimate success; but the name which ought to be, and will be,

associated with the success of those measures, is the name of the man

who, acting, I believe, from pure and disinterested motives, has,

with untiring energy, by appeals to reason, enforced their necessity

with an eloquence the more to be admired because it was unaffected

and unadorned--the name which ought to be associated with the success

of those measures is the name of Richard Cobden. Sir, I now close

the address which it has been my duty to make to the House, thanking

them sincerely for the favour with which they have listened to me in

performing the last act of my official career. Within a few hours,

probably, that favour which I have held for the period of five years

will be surrendered into the hands of another--without repining--I

can say without complaint--with a more lively recollection of the

support and confidence I have received than of the opposition which,

during a recent period, I have met with. I shall leave office with a

name severely censured, I fear, by many who, on public grounds, deeply

regret the severance of party ties--deeply regret that severance,

not from interest or personal motives, but from the firm conviction

that fidelity to party engagements--the existence and maintenance of

a great party--constitutes a powerful instrument of government. I

shall surrender power severely censured also by others who, from no

interested motives, adhere to the principle of Protection, considering

the maintenance of it to be essential to the welfare and interests

of the country. I shall leave a name execrated by every monopolist

who, from less honourable motives, clamours for Protection because it

conduces to his own individual benefit; but it may be that I shall

leave a name sometimes remembered with expressions of good-will in

the abodes of those whose lot it is to labour, and to earn their

daily bread by the sweat of their brow, when they shall recruit their

exhausted strength with abundant and untaxed food, the sweeter because

it is no longer leavened by the sense of injustice."

Before passing to the momentous history of the Irish famine we must

notice some isolated facts connected with the Peel Administration,

which our connected view of the triumph of Free Trade has prevented our

mentioning under their proper dates. Among the many measures of the

time which were fiercely discussed, the most complicated were the Bank

Charter Act of 1844, and the Act dealing with the Irish and Scottish

Banks of 1845, whereby the Premier placed the whole banking system of

the kingdom upon an entirely new basis, in particular by the separation

of the issue and banking business of the Bank of England, and by the

determination of the issues by the amount of bullion in reserve. Under

the Act the Bank was at liberty to issue £14,000,000 of notes on the

security of Exchequer Bills and the debt due to it from the Government,

but all issues above this amount were to be based on bullion. Still

hotter were the passions roused by the Maynooth Bill, by which £30,000

were devoted to the improvement of the college founded at Maynooth for

the education of Roman Catholic priests. The language used during the

debates by the Protestant party has few parallels in the history of the

British Parliament, and Sir Robert Peel's difficulties were increased

by the resignation of Mr. Gladstone, who found his present support of

the Bill incompatible with the opinions expressed in his famous essay

on Church and State. Lord Aberdeen's foreign policy was completely the

reverse of the bold, if hazardous, line adopted by Lord Palmerston. We

have seen how the Ashburton mission composed the critical questions at

issue with the United States, and in similar fashion a dispute about

the Oregon boundary, which had been pending for thirty years, was

terminated on sound principles of give-and-take by fixing the line at

the 49th parallel, while Vancouver Island was reserved for Britain, and

the commerce of the Columbia was made free. With France our relations

were of the most pacific character; so close, indeed, was the _entente

cordiale_ that it was a commonplace of Tory oratory that M. Guizot was

Foreign Minister of England. This was certainly not the case; on the

contrary, when the Society Islands, over which Pomare was queen, were

forcibly annexed by a roving French admiral, Lord Aberdeen behaved

with very proper spirit, and obtained an indemnity for the missionary

Pritchard, who had been forcibly placed under arrest. In other respects

the friendship of Great Britain with France continued unimpaired, and

there was an interchange of visits between the Queen and King Louis

Philippe. It was a sign of a harmony of views between the two nations.

Unfortunately, owing to a variety of causes, it was not to be of long

continuance.

[Illustration: RECEPTION OF LOUIS PHILIPPE AT WINDSOR CASTLE, OCT. 8th,

1844.

FROM THE PAINTING BY F. X. WINTERHALTER, IN THE ROYAL COLLECTION.]

[Illustration: THE GREAT SEAL OF VICTORIA.]

CHAPTER XVII.

THE REIGN OF VICTORIA (_continued_).

The Repeal Agitation--Debate in the Dublin Corporation--The

Monster Meetings--O'Connell's Speech at Tara--The Arms

Bill--Dismissal of the Repeal Magistrates--Speeches of the Duke

of Wellington--The Arms Bill becomes Law--Proclamation of the

Clontarf Meeting--O'Connell's Counter-Proclamation--Arrest and

Trial of O'Connell--The Sentence--It is reversed by the House

of Lords--Rejoicings on O'Connell's Liberation--The Excitement

at Cork--Decline of O'Connell--His Breach with the Young

Ireland Party--Irish Debates in Parliament--Approach of the

Irish Famine--The Devon Commission--Its Report--Arrival of the

Potato Disease--The Famine--The Relief Committee of the Society

of Friends--The Famine in Ulster--A Description of Cork and

Skibbereen--Demoralisation of the Population--Policy of the Whig

Cabinet--Lord George Bentinck's Railway Plan--Failure of the new

Poor Law and of the Public Works--The Temporary Relief Act--Father

Mathew--Private Benevolence--Munificence of the United States.

The Repeal Agitation in Ireland, which had been thoroughly organised

in 1842 by "Repeal Missionaries" who had visited every parish in the

country, reached its culminating point in 1843. Early in February

that year Mr. O'Connell, who had filled the civic chair the previous

year, and was then an alderman of the Dublin Corporation, gave notice

that, on the 21st of that month, he would move a resolution, affirming

the right of Ireland to a resident Parliament, and the necessity of

repealing the Union. Alderman Butt expressed his determination of

opposing the motion. Mr. Butt was one of the ablest members of the

Irish bar, and a leader of the Conservative party. The debate was

therefore anticipated with the greatest interest, as it promised to be

a very exciting political duel. The old Assembly House, since abandoned

for the more commodious City Hall, was densely crowded by the principal

citizens, while the street was thronged by the populace during the

debate. Mr. O'Connell marshalled his arguments under many heads:

Ireland's capacity for independence--her right to have a Parliament

of her own--the establishment of that right in 1782--the prosperity

that followed--the incompetence of the Irish Parliament to destroy the

Constitution--the corrupt means by which the Union was carried--its

disastrous results, and the national benefits that would follow its

repeal. The speech, which lasted four hours, was mainly argumentative

and statistical. It was accepted by his followers as an elaborate and

masterly statement of the case. Mr. Butt replied with equal ability and

more fervid eloquence. The debate was adjourned. Next day other members

took part in it. It was again adjourned, and as the contest proceeded

the public excitement rose to fever heat. At two o'clock on the third

day Mr. O'Connell rose to reply. "No report," says Mr. O'Neil Daunt,

"could possibly do justice to that magnificent reply. The consciousness

of a great moral triumph seemed to animate his voice, his glance, and

his gestures. Never had I heard him so eloquent, never had I witnessed

so noble a display of his transcendent powers." The division showed

that 41 were in favour of a domestic legislature and 15 were opposed to

it.

It has been remarked that the "monster meetings" could never have been

conducted in the orderly manner for which they were distinguished, but

for the Temperance reform which had been effected by Father Mathew, a

benevolent, tolerant, and single-minded friar from Cork, who was known

as the Apostle of Temperance, and who had induced vast numbers from all

parts of the country to take the pledge, which the majority religiously

kept for some years. The monster meetings, of which forty-five were

held during the year, were vast assemblages whose numbers it was

difficult to calculate, but they varied from 20,000 to 100,000 each.

The people, generally well-dressed, came crowding to the appointed

place from every direction, some on horseback, some on jaunting

cars and carts, generally preceded by bands with immense banners,

and sometimes marching in military order. O'Connell, the "uncrowned

monarch," as his followers called him, arrived from Dublin, sitting

on the dickey of a coach, usually drawn by four horses. He was always

accompanied by his devoted friend, Tom Steel, the "head pacificator,"

one of the most ardent of hero-worshippers, who looked up to his chief

as a sort of demi-god. The first of the monster meetings was held at

Trim, in the county Meath, on the 19th of March, and was said to have

been attended by about 30,000 persons. A dinner took place in the

evening, at which Mr. O'Connell delivered an exciting speech. Referring

to the bright eyes and hardy look of the multitudes that surrounded

him that day, he asked, would they be everlasting slaves? They would

answer "No," and he would join in the response, and say, "I shall be

either in my grave or be a free man. Idle sentiments will not do. It

will not do to say you like to be free. The man who thinks and does not

act upon his thoughts is a scoundrel who does not deserve to be free."

The monster meeting held at Mullingar on the 14th of May (Sunday) was

attended by Dr. Cantwell and Dr. Higgins, two Roman Catholic bishops,

and a great number of priests. This was one of the largest of the

meetings, and was remarkable for the declaration made by Dr. Higgins,

to the effect that "every Roman Catholic bishop in Ireland, without

exception, was a Repealer. He defied all the Ministers of England to

put down the agitation. If they prevented them from assembling in the

open fields, they would retire to their chapels, and suspend all other

instruction, in order to devote all their time to teaching the people

to be Repealers. They were even ready to go to the scaffold for the

cause of their country, and bequeath its wrongs to their successors."

This outburst excited tumultuous applause, the whole assembly rising

and cheering for a considerable time.

During the summer, meetings of a similar character were held at Cork,

Longford, Drogheda, Kilkenny, Mallow, Dundalk, Baltinglass, Tara, and

other places. At Tara, in the county Meath, on the 15th of August, an

immense multitude was assembled--250,000, at the lowest estimate, but

represented by the Repeal journals as four times that number. The place

was selected because of its association with the old nationality of the

country, where its ancient kings were elected and crowned. O'Connell's

speech on this occasion was defiant in tone, and in the highest degree

inflammatory. Referring to a speech of the Duke of Wellington, he

said, "The Duke of Wellington is now talking of attacking us, and I

am glad of it. The Queen's army is the bravest army in the world, but

I feel it to be a fact that Ireland, roused as she is at the present

moment, would, if they made war upon us, furnish women enough to beat

the whole of the Queen's forces." The Lord Chancellor Sugden having

recently deprived of the commission of the peace all magistrates who

were members of the Repeal Association, Mr. O'Connell announced that

the dismissed magistrates would be appointed by the Repeal Association

as arbitrators to settle all disputes among the people, who were not

again to go to the petty sessions. He pronounced the Union to be null,

to be obeyed as an injustice supported by law, until they had the royal

authority to set the matter right and substitute their own Parliament.

In his speech after dinner to a more select audience, he said that the

statesman was a driveller who did not recollect the might that slumbers

in a peasant's arm, and who expected that 700,000 such men would endure

oppression for ever. An outbreak would surely come, though not in his

time, and then the Government and gentry would weep, in tears of blood,

their want of consideration and kindness to the country whose people

could reward them amply by the devotion of their hearts and the vigour

of their arms. What were the gentry afraid of? It could not be of the

people, for they were under the strictest discipline. No army was ever

more submissive to its general than the people of Ireland were to the

wishes of a single individual.

While the agitation was going forward in this manner in Ireland, the

state of that country was the subject of repeated and animated debates

in Parliament. One of the remedies proposed by the Government was an

Arms Bill, which was opposed with great vehemence by the Irish Liberal

members. Mr. Shaw, the Recorder of Dublin, in his speech on the second

reading, described the condition of Ireland from the Conservative point

of view; he considered that the country was in an alarming state, the

lower classes extensively agitated, and the higher unusually dejected

and depressed. Even the great benefit of the temperance movement

had brought with it the evil of an organisation now turned to the

most dangerous purposes. The real object of the Repeal agitation

was to array the people and the priesthood against the property of

the country. There was no class more alarmed at the progress of the

movement than the respectable portion of the Roman Catholics, who

dreaded lest they should be swept away by the tide. If the law did not

put down the agitation, the agitation would put down the Constitution.

Mr. C. Buller's remedy was "to _Canadianise_" Ireland, which meant to

make Mr. O'Connell Attorney-General, and substitute the titulars for

the clergy of the Establishment. Mr. Roebuck thought "there was no

great difference between the late and the present Government. Neither

of them had put down the giant evil of Ireland, her rampant Church. He

would take away her revenue, and give it, if to any Church at all, to

the Church of the Roman Catholics. The grand evil and sore of Ireland

was the domination of the Church of the minority."

In the House of Lords several discussions took place on the

dismissal of the Repeal magistrates. Lord Clanricarde, on the 14th

of July, moved resolutions declaring that act of the Lord Chancellor

"unconstitutional, unjust, and inexpedient." The Duke of Wellington

met the motion by a direct negative. "These meetings," he said,

"consisting of 10,000, 20,000, or 100,000 men--no matter the number

of thousands--having been continued, I wish to know with what object

they were continued? With a view to address Parliament to repeal

the Union? No, my lords; they were continued in order to obtain the

desired repeal of the Union by the terror of the people, and, if not by

terror, by force and violence; and the persons calling these meetings

were magistrates, the very men who must have been employed by the

Government to resist such terror and violence, and to arrest those

who were guilty of such breaches of the peace. That is the ground on

which the Lord Chancellor of Ireland said to the magistrates, 'You must

be dismissed if you attend, or invite attendance at such meetings.'"

The Duke "regretted to learn there was poverty in Ireland; but," he

asked, "was that poverty relieved by a march of twenty-five and thirty

miles a day in spring and summer to hear seditious speeches? Was

poverty relieved by subscribing to the Repeal rent?" The resolutions

were negatived by a majority of 91 to 29. In a subsequent debate,

arising out of a petition presented by Lord Roden from 5,000 Ulster

Protestants, complaining that they had been prevented from celebrating

the Orange anniversary, while the most flagrant breaches of the law

were passed over in the case of those who wanted to overthrow the

Constitution, which the Orangemen were sworn to defend, the Duke of

Wellington, on that occasion, said that "nothing had been neglected

by the Government that was necessary to preserve the peace of the

country, and to meet all misfortunes and consequences which might

result from the violence of the passions of those men who unfortunately

guided the multitude in Ireland. He did not dispute the extent of

the conspiracy or the dangers resulting from it; he did not deny the

assistance received from foreigners of nearly all nations--disturbed

and disturbing spirits, who were anxious to have an opportunity of

injuring and deteriorating the great prosperity of this country--but he

felt confident that the measures adopted by the Government would enable

it to resist all, and preserve the peace."

[Illustration: O'CONNELL AT THE MEETING AT TRIM. (_See p._ 526.)]

Mr. Smith O'Brien, early in July, gave occasion for another great

debate on the state of Ireland, by moving that the House resolve itself

into a committee for the purpose of taking into consideration the

causes of the discontent prevailing there, with a view to the redress

of grievances, and the establishment of a system of just and impartial

government in that part of the United Kingdom. The honourable gentleman

reviewed the history of the country since the Union, discussed the

questions of the National Debt and taxation, the Church Establishment,

the position of the Roman Catholic hierarchy, Government appointments,

Coercive Acts, and land tenure. Lord Eliot, then Chief Secretary of

Ireland, answered his arguments at length. A great number of speakers

followed, continuing the debate for five nights. At length the House

divided, when the numbers were--against the motion for a committee,

243; for it, 164. The whole of these vexed questions again came up on

the 9th of August, when the Irish Arms Bill was set down for the third

reading. On this occasion Sir Robert Peel made some remarks, expressing

the feeling of his Government with regard to Ireland, declaring that

he viewed the state of things there with deep anxiety and pain. He had

hoped that there was a gradual abatement of animosity on account of

religious differences; that he saw the gradual influence of those laws

which removed the political disabilities of Catholics and established

civil equality. He thought he saw, in some respects, a great moral and

social improvement; that there was a hope of increasing tranquillity,

which would cause the redundant and superfluous capital of England,

then seeking vent in foreign and precarious speculations, to flow into

Ireland. But the agitation had, in his opinion, blasted all those hopes.

[Illustration: SIR JAMES GRAHAM.]

The third reading of the Arms Bill passed by a majority of 66, and

soon received the Royal Assent. In the Queen's Speech at the close

of the Session there was a very pointed reference made to the state

of Ireland. Her Majesty said that she had observed with the deepest

concern the persevering efforts made to stir up discontent and

disaffection among her subjects in Ireland, and to excite them to

demand the repeal of the Union; and from her deep conviction that the

Union was not less essential to the attainment of good government in

Ireland than to the strength and stability of the empire, it was her

firm determination, with the support of Parliament, and under the

blessing of Divine Providence, to maintain inviolate that great bond

of connection between the two countries. She thus concluded, "I feel

assured that those of my faithful subjects who have influence and

authority in Ireland will discourage to the utmost of their power a

system of pernicious agitation which disturbs the industry and retards

the improvement of that country, and excites feelings of mutual

distrust and animosity between different classes of my people."

This royal denunciation of the Repeal movement greatly exasperated

O'Connell. He had recently submitted a plan to the Repeal Association,

recommended by a committee of which he was chairman, for the

restoration of the Irish Parliament. In the document containing this

plan it was declared that the people of Ireland finally insisted

upon the restoration of the Irish House of Commons, consisting of

300 representatives, and claimed, in "the presence of the Creator,"

the right of the Irish people to such restoration, stating that they

submitted to the Union as being binding in law, but solemnly denied

that it was founded on right, or on constitutional principle, or that

it was obligatory on conscience. The franchise was to be household

suffrage, and the voting by ballot. It was also provided that the

monarch or regent _de jure_ in England should be the monarch or regent

_de facto_ in Ireland. This revolutionary scheme was to be carried

into effect, "according to recognised law and strict constitutional

principle." The arbitration courts which O'Connell had threatened to

set up, in consequence of the superseding of magistrates connected with

the Repeal Association, had actually been established; and the Roman

Catholic peasantry, forsaking the regular tribunals, had recourse to

them for the settlement of their disputes.

The Repeal organisation had therefore become exceedingly formidable,

and had been rendered still more so by what O'Connell called "the

mighty moral miracle of 5,000,000 men pledged against intoxicating

liquors." If he had to go to battle, he said, he should have the strong

and steady teetotallers with him. The teetotal bands "would play before

them, and animate them in the time of peril; their wives and daughters,

thanking God for their sobriety, would be praying for their safety; and

he told them there was not an army in the world he could not beat with

his teetotallers. Yes, teetotalism was the first sure ground on which

rested their hope of sweeping away Saxon domination and giving Ireland

to the Irish." O'Connell had been in the habit of wearing a crown-like

cap, richly ornamented, which had been presented to him at the monster

meeting at the Rath of Mullaghmast, in the county Kildare. This symbol

of sovereignty had its effect upon the masses, who began to cherish the

idea that they might have ere long a king of their own. It was probably

with a view to encourage this idea, and to raise their enthusiasm to

the highest pitch, that he resolved to hold the last of the series

of monster meetings at Clontarf, near Dublin, the scene of King

Brian Boru's victory over the Danes. This meeting was to be held on

Sunday, the 8th of October, and was to be the most imposing of all the

demonstrations. But the Government was at last roused to action, and

on the previous day a proclamation was issued by the Lord-Lieutenant

in Council, prohibiting the assembly. The proclamation declared that

whereas advertisements and placards had been printed and extensively

circulated, calling on those who proposed to attend the meeting to come

on horseback, to meet and form in procession, and to march in military

order and array; and whereas the object of the meeting was to excite

discontent and disaffection, hatred and contempt of the Government of

the country, and to accomplish alterations in the laws and Constitution

of the realm, by intimidation and the demonstration of physical force,

tending also to serve the ends of factious and seditious persons, and

violate the peace, the meeting was strictly prohibited. It was stated

that those attending it should be prosecuted, and that effectual

measures should be taken for its dispersion.

This was no idle threat; the guards at Dublin castle and at the

several barracks were doubled; Alborough House, commanding the road

to Clontarf, was garrisoned; the streets on the north side of the

city were patrolled by parties of soldiers during the night. Three

war steamers were placed in the Liffey, with their guns run out,

commanding the ground where the meeting was to be held; while the guns

at the Pigeon House fort at the mouth of the river, right opposite

Clontarf, were so placed as to sweep the road to it. The village

was occupied by the 5th Dragoon Guards, the 60th Rifles, the 11th

Hussars, the 54th Regiment of Infantry, and a brigade of Royal Horse

Artillery; the infantry being commanded by Colonel Fane, the cavalry

by Lord Cardigan, and the artillery by Colonel Higgins. The men and

horses were provisioned for twenty-four hours, and each soldier was

furnished with sixty rounds of ball cartridge. A crisis had now come;

a collision between the troops and O'Connell's army of teetotallers

was imminent, and even he could have no doubt of the issue. He seemed

to stand appalled on the edge of the precipice to which he had brought

his deluded followers, and shrinking from the consequences, he made

all possible haste to save them. As soon as the proclamation was

issued, he called a special meeting of the Repeal Association, and

announced that in consequence of the measures taken by the Government,

which he denounced as "the most base and imbecile step ever taken,"

there would be no meeting at Clontarf the next day. He submitted a

counter-proclamation, which was adopted and posted up that evening

throughout the city beside the Government proclamation. It was also

sent by special messengers to the neighbouring towns and villages. The

preventive measures taken on both sides were completely successful. No

mounted Repealers came in from the country, and though vast multitudes

went out from Dublin to view the military demonstrations, their meeting

with the Queen's forces was quite amicable. They were allowed to see

the spectacle, but they were compelled to move on along the high road,

which they did very good-humouredly.

The Government now resolved to follow up the vigorous step they had

so tardily taken, by the prosecution of O'Connell and several leading

members of the Association. They were arrested in Dublin on the 14th of

October, charged with conspiracy, sedition, and unlawful assembly. The

other gentlemen included in the prosecution were Mr. John O'Connell,

Mr. Thomas Steele, Mr. Ray, Secretary to the Repeal Association, Dr.

Gray, proprietor of the _Freeman's Journal_, Mr. Charles Gavan Duffy,

editor of the _Nation_, Mr. Barrett, of the _Pilot_, and the Rev.

Messrs. Tyrrell and Tierney, Roman Catholic priests. Mr. O'Connell,

with his two sons and several friends, immediately on his arrest, went

to the house of Mr. Justice Burton, and entered into recognisances,

himself in £1,000, with two sureties of £500 each. The tone of

Mr. O'Connell was now suddenly changed. From being inflammatory,

warlike, and defiant, it became intensely pacific, and he used his

utmost efforts to calm the minds of the people, to lay the storm he

had raised, and to soothe the feelings he had irritated by angry

denunciations of the "Saxon." That obnoxious word was now laid aside,

being, at his request, struck out of the Repeal vocabulary, because it

gave offence. Real conciliation was now the order of the day.

The State prosecutions commenced in January, 1844, in the Court

of Queen's Bench, before the Lord Chief Justice Penefather, and

Justices Burton, Crampton, and Perrin. Besides the Attorney and

Solicitor-General, there were ten counsel employed for the Crown, and

there was an equal number on the side of the traversers, including Mr.

Sheil, Mr. Hatchel, Mr. Moore, Mr. Whiteside, Mr. Monaghan, afterwards

Chief Justice, Mr. O'Hagan, and Mr. Macdonogh. This monster trial

was remarkable in many respects. It excited great public interest,

which pervaded all classes, from the highest to the lowest. It lasted

from the 16th of January to the 12th of February; the speech of the

Attorney-General occupied two days; the jury list was found to be

defective, a number of names having been secretly abstracted; newspaper

articles were admitted as evidence against men who never saw them;

the Lord Chief Justice betrayed his partiality in charging the jury,

by speaking of the traversers as "the other side." The principal

witnesses were shorthand writers from London, avowedly employed by

the Government to report the proceedings of the monster meetings. Mr.

Jackson, reporter for the _Morning Herald_, also placed his notes at

the service of the Government. Mr. O'Connell defended himself in a

long argument for Repeal, and an attack on the Government. The most

brilliant orations delivered on the occasion were those of Sheil and

Whiteside. Mr. Fitzgibbon, one of the counsel for the traversers, made

a remark offensive to the Attorney-General, Mr. T. C. B. Smith, who

immediately handed him a challenge, in the presence of his wife, while

the judges had retired for refreshment. The matter was brought before

the court, and, after mutual explanations, was allowed to drop.

All the traversers were found guilty. The Attorney-General did not

press for judgment against the Rev. Matthew Tierney. Upon the rest

Mr. Justice Burton, who was deeply affected, pronounced judgment

on the 30th of May, in the following terms:--"With respect to the

principal traverser, the Court is of opinion that he must be sentenced

to be imprisoned for the space of twelve calendar months; and that

he is further to be fined in the sum of £2,000, and bound in his own

recognisances in the sum of £5,000, and two sureties in £2,500, to

keep the peace for seven years. With respect to the other traversers,

we have come to the conclusion that to each shall be allotted similar

sentences, namely, that they be imprisoned for the space of nine

calendar months, each of them to pay £50 fine, and to enter into their

own recognisances of £1,000 each, and two sureties of £500, to keep the

peace for seven years."

The prisoners were at once sent to Richmond Bridewell, on the South

Circular Road, where the Governor did all in his power to make them

comfortable. Good apartments were assigned to them. They dined together

every day, and they were permitted to receive, without restriction,

the visits of their friends and admirers. The Government was the less

disposed to interfere with these indulgences, as their object was

not so much punishment as prevention, and besides, the traversers

had appealed against the sentence. A majority of the twelve English

judges affirmed the judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench, while

condemning the counts on which the Irish court relied. An appeal was

then made to the House of Lords. The decision was left to the five

law lords--Lyndhurst, Brougham, Cottenham, Denman, and Campbell. The

first two were for a confirmation of the judgment, the last three for

reversal. Lord Denman, in pronouncing judgment, said, referring to

the tampering with the panel, "If such practices as had taken place

in the present instance in Ireland should continue, the trial by jury

would become a mockery, a delusion, and a snare," a sentence which was

hackneyed by repetition for years afterwards. The news of the reversal

reached Dublin on the afternoon of the 5th of September. Great crowds

had assembled on the pier at Kingstown, and tremendous cheers broke

forth from the multitude when the Holyhead packet approached, and they

saw held up a white flag, with the inscription, "Judgment reversed

by the House of Lords. O'Connell is free!" The news was everywhere

received by the Roman Catholics with wild excitement.

Orders soon came from the Government for the liberation of the

prisoners. After some consultation with their friends, it was resolved

that there should be a public procession from the prison in the

morning. Mr. O'Connell, however, left that evening, and proceeded on

foot to his house in Merrion Square. Before he had reached the square,

the tidings spread abroad that he was out, and crowds rapidly assembled

from all directions. The people leaped and danced about him, while

their acclamations rent the air. When he placed his foot upon the step

to ascend to his own door, the exulting shouts of some 10,000 or 15,000

people were almost deafening. Appearing on the balcony of his house,

where he had often stood before, to address his followers, they could

scarcely be got to keep silence while he spoke. The procession next day

was, in point of magnitude, quite in keeping with the other "monster"

proceedings. Twelve o'clock was the time appointed to start from the

prison, and at that hour the first part of the procession arrived. Its

length may be inferred from the fact that it was not until two o'clock

that the triumphal car reached the prison gate. During those two hours

thousands upon thousands defiled before it in one unbroken line of

men, perfect order being kept, without the aid of a single policeman,

and the marching mass being broken into sections only by the bands of

music, preceding the flags or carriages of the different trades, which

numbered about thirty. The bands were all dressed in fancy uniforms,

bearing bright colours--blue, pink, and green--with banners of the

most gorgeous description. There was such a demand for carriages

and vehicles of all sorts, that Dublin alone could not meet it, and

carriages were obtained from Bray, and various other places around the

metropolis. The procession was composed of Repeal wardens, members of

the Repeal Association, the Lord Mayor, aldermen, and town council,

personal friends and political admirers of O'Connell.

The news of his liberation was carried that night by the mail coaches

over all parts of the country, and produced extraordinary excitement

throughout the south and west, particularly in Cork, which Mr.

O'Connell then represented. There the whole population seems to have

turned out, some of the streets being so packed that it was impossible

to get along. Processions were soon formed, with bands of music, and

green boughs. Even the little children were furnished with the emblems

of victory. Along the country roads, too, as well as in the towns

and villages, every little cabin had its green boughs stuck up, and

its group of inhabitants shouting for "the Liberator." At night, in

the towns, every house was illuminated, while bonfires blazed on the

mountains, and the horizon seemed on fire in every direction. On the

following Sunday the liberation of the prisoners was celebrated in the

Metropolitan Church, Dublin. Archbishop Murray sat with his mitre on,

and in his grandest robes, on an elevated throne, with crimson canopy.

On the opposite side, beneath the pulpit, were chairs of state, on

which sat O'Connell and the rest of the "Repeal martyrs." A _Te Deum_

was sung for the deliverance of the liberator of his country; a sermon

was preached by O'Connell's devoted friend and chaplain, the Rev. Dr.

Miley, who ascribed the liberation, not to the law lords, but to the

Virgin Mary.

[Illustration: O'CONNELL RETURNING HOME FROM PRISON. (_See p._ 532.)]

Notwithstanding these rejoicings, however, there is no doubt that the

imprisonment completely broke the spirit of O'Connell. During 1843 he

had been urged forward by the impetuosity and warlike spirit of the

Young Ireland party, and the excitement of the monster meetings seems

to have filled his mind with the notion that he could really wield the

physical power of the country in an actual contest with the Queen's

forces. His prison reflections dissipated all such illusions. The

enforced inactivity, at his time of life, of one accustomed to so much

labour and to such constant speaking, no doubt affected his health.

Probably the softening of the brain, of which he died, commenced

about this time. At all events he was thenceforward an altered man,

excessively cautious and timid, with a morbid horror of war and

blood, and a rooted dislike of the Young Ireland leaders, which the

Old Ireland party did all they could to strengthen. Mr. Smith O'Brien

had been the Conservative member for the county of Limerick, and had

been opposed to the Repeal agitation; but the moment O'Connell was

arrested, he joined the Association, taking the vacant position of

leader, and adopting the policy of the Young Ireland party, which

avowedly tended to war and revolution. Boasting of a lineal descent

from the conqueror of the Danes at Clontarf, and hailed by some of his

admirers as one who had a right to wear his crown, the new convert

to Repeal seemed determined to go all lengths for the liberation of

his country from the Saxon yoke. O'Connell at first seemed to rejoice

in the accession of strength to the cause, but signs of jealousy and

dislike were soon manifested. In private there was a marked coolness

between the two leaders, and when, at the meetings of the Association,

any of the Young Ireland orators gave utterance to martial sentiments,

they were promptly called to order by O'Connell; but they revenged

themselves by frequently outvoting him in committee, which was a

grievous mortification to one so long accustomed to almost absolute

rule among his followers. He attended Parliament during the Session of

1845-46, diligently performing his duties as a representative, sitting

in committees, and taking part in the debates of the House. During

his absence the Young Ireland party gained a complete ascendency in

the Repeal Association. Mr. Smith O'Brien, who refused to sit on any

committee in the House of Commons not connected with Irish business,

and was imprisoned in the cellar for his contumacy, made himself an

idol with the revolutionary party at home by his refractory spirit and

the perversity of his conduct. The other leaders of that party who

exerted the greatest influence were Thomas Davis, Charles Gavan Duffy,

D'Arcy M'Gee, and Thomas Meagher--all men of superior ability, whose

organ, the _Nation_, exerted great influence throughout the country.

Ultimately, a series of "peace resolutions," which were proposed in

the Repeal Association, pledging its members to abjure the sword as an

instrument for redressing the grievances of Ireland, caused an open

rupture between the two parties. The Young Irelanders seceded in a

body from Conciliation Hall, and established an organisation of their

own--"The Irish Confederation." From this time the Repeal rent rapidly

fell off, and when O'Connell again returned to Dublin he found that the

spell of his enchantment, once so potent, was broken; and the famine

came soon after, to consummate his affliction and break his heart.

Before the sad close of his public career had arrived, and pending the

issue of the State trial, O'Connell had a proof of the magnanimity

of the English people, of those Saxons whose national character he

had so often assailed and maligned. When he appeared at one of the

Anti-Corn-Law meetings in Covent Garden Theatre, his reception by

the assembled multitude is described as one of the most magnificent

displays of popular enthusiasm ever witnessed. They remembered only

that his jury was packed, that his judges were prejudiced, and that

he had been for thirty years the able and consistent opponent of the

Corn Laws. He declared himself that he was not prepared for such a

demonstration, even by the experience of the monster meetings. This

great triumph on English ground seemed to infuse new life into the

veteran agitator, for his speech on that occasion was one of the finest

and most effective he ever delivered.

In the meantime the Irish State trial, and the affairs of Ireland

generally, were the subject of frequent discussions in both Houses of

Parliament. On the 13th of February the Marquis of Normanby moved a

resolution condemnatory of the policy of the Government, contrasting it

with his own Administration, with the treatment of Canada, and with the

liberal policy by which, he said, Austria had conquered disaffection

in Lombardy. He was answered by Lord Roden and others, and on a

division his motion was rejected by a majority of 175 to 78. On the

same day the state of Ireland was introduced by Lord John Russell, in

a speech which occupied three hours. The debate that followed lasted

for nine days. The principal speakers who took part in it were Mr.

Wyse, Sir James Graham, Mr. Young, Sir George Grey, Lord Eliot, Mr.

Shaw, the Recorder of Dublin, Lord Howick, Lord Stanley, Mr. Macaulay,

Sir William Follett, Sir Thomas Wilde, Sir F. Pollock, the English

Attorney-General, Mr. Roebuck, Mr. O'Connell, Mr. Sheil, and Sir Robert

Peel. The discussion turned mainly upon the question whether or not

O'Connell had had a fair trial, and upon this the lawyers and the House

pronounced opinions in harmony with the interests of their respective

parties. But nearly every topic that could be mentioned was brought

up in the course of the monster debate. Sir Robert Peel concluded a

long and able speech in defence of his Government with the following

beautiful peroration:--"I have a firm conviction that if there were

calm and tranquillity in Ireland, there is no part of the British

empire that would make such rapid progress in improvement. There are

facilities for improvement and opportunities for it which will make the

advance of Ireland more rapid than the advance of any other country.

I will conclude, then, by expressing my sincere and earnest hope that

this agitation, and all the evil consequences of it, may be permitted

to subside; and hereafter, in whatever capacity I may be, I should

consider that the happiest day of my life when I could see the beloved

Sovereign of these realms fulfilling the fondest wishes of her heart,

possessing a feeling of affection towards all her people, but mingling

that affection with sympathy and tenderness towards Ireland. I should

hail the dawning of that auspicious day, when she could alight like

some benignant spirit on the shores of Ireland, and lay the foundations

of a temple of peace; when she could, in accents which proceeded from

the heart--spoken to the heart rather than to the ear--call upon her

Irish subjects of all classes and of all denominations, Protestants

and Roman Catholics, Saxon and Celt, to forget the difference of creed

and of race, and to hallow that temple of peace which she should then

found, with sacrifices still holier than those by which the temples

of old were hallowed--by the sacrifice of those evil passions that

dishonour our common faith, and prevent the union of heart and hand in

defence of our common country."

We now arrive at the "Irish Crisis," the famine of 1846 and 1847--one

of the greatest calamities that ever afflicted the human race. In order

to understand fully the events connected with this visitation, it is

necessary to notice the social condition of the country which rendered

its effects so destructive. Ireland had long been in a chronic state

of misery, which has been ascribed by the most competent judges to

the peculiar state of the land tenure in that country. It had often

been predicted by writers on the state of Ireland, that, owing to this

rottenness at the foundation of the social fabric, it would come down

with a crash some day. The facts reported by the Census Commissioners

of 1841 showed that this consummation could not be far off. Out of a

population of 8,000,000, there were 3,700,000 above the age of five

years who could neither read nor write; while nearly three millions

and a half lived in mud cabins, badly thatched with straw, having

each but one room, and often without either a window or a chimney.

These figures indicate a mass of ignorance and poverty which could

not be contemplated without alarm, and the subject was, therefore,

constantly pressed upon the attention of Parliament. As usual in cases

of difficulty, the Government, feeling that something should be done,

and not knowing what to do, appointed, in 1845, a commission to inquire

into the relations between landlord and tenant, and the condition of

the working classes. At the head of this commission was the Earl of

Devon, a benevolent nobleman, whose sympathies were on the side of the

people. Captain Kennedy, the secretary to the Commissioners, published

a digest of the report of the evidence, which presented the facts

in a readable form, and was the means of diffusing a large amount

of authentic information on the state of Ireland. The Commissioners

travelled through the country, held courts of inquiry, and examined

witnesses of all classes. As the result of their extensive intercourse

with the farming classes and their own observations, they were enabled

to state that in almost every part of Ireland unequivocal symptoms

of improvement, in spite of many embarrassing and counteracting

circumstances, continually presented themselves to the view, and that

there existed a very general and increasing spirit and desire for

the promotion of such improvement, from which the most beneficial

results might fairly be expected. Indeed, speaking of the country

generally, they add: "With some exceptions, which are unfortunately

too notorious, we believe that at no former period did so active a

spirit of improvement prevail; nor could well-directed measures for the

attainment of that object have been proposed with a better prospect of

success than at the present moment."

But this improvement produced no sensible effect upon the mass of

labouring people. However brightly the sun of prosperity might gild

the eminences of society, the darkness of misery and despair settled

upon the masses below. The Commissioners proceed:--"A reference to

the evidence of most of the witnesses will show that the agricultural

labourer of Ireland continues to suffer the greatest privations and

hardships; that he continues to depend upon casual and precarious

employment for subsistence; that he is still badly housed, badly fed,

badly clothed, and badly paid for his labour. Our personal experience

and observation during our inquiry have afforded us a melancholy

confirmation of these statements; and we cannot forbear expressing our

strong sense of the patient endurance which the labouring classes have

generally exhibited under sufferings greater, we believe, than the

people of any other country in Europe have to sustain."

It was found that the potato was almost the only food of the Irish

millions, and that it formed their chief means of obtaining the

other necessaries of life. A large portion of this crop was grown

under the conacre system, to which the poorest of the peasantry were

obliged to have recourse, notwithstanding the minute subdivision of

land. In 1841 there were 691,000 farms in Ireland exceeding one acre

in extent. Nearly one-half of these were under five acres each. The

number of proprietors in fee was estimated at 8,000--a smaller number

in proportion to the extent of territory than in any other country of

Western Europe except Spain. In Connaught, several proprietors had

100,000 acres each, the proportion of small farms being greater there

than in the rest of Ireland. The total number of farms in the province

was 155,842, and of these 100,254 consisted of from one to five acres.

If all the proprietors had resided among their tenantry, and been in

a position to encourage their industry and care for their welfare,

matters would not have been so bad; but most of the large landowners

were absentees. It frequently happened that the large estates were held

in strict limitation, and they were nearly all heavily encumbered. The

owners preferred living in England or on the Continent, having let

their lands on long leases or in perpetuity to "middlemen," who sublet

them for as high rents as they could get. Their tenants again sublet,

so that it frequently happened that two, three, or four landlords

intervened between the proprietors and the occupying tenant, each

deriving an interest from the land. The head landlord therefore, though

ever so well-disposed, had no power whatever to help the occupying

tenants generally, and of those who had the power, very few felt

disposed. There were extensive districts without a single resident

proprietor, and when the absentees were appealed to by the local relief

committees during the famine to assist the perishing people, they

seldom took the trouble of answering the application.

The minute subdivision of land which placed the population in a state

of such complete dependence upon the potato was first encouraged by

the landlords, in order to multiply the number of voters, and increase

their Parliamentary interest; but subsequently, as the population

increased, it became in a great measure the work of the people

themselves. The possession of land afforded the only certain means of

subsistence, and a farm was therefore divided among the sons of the

family, each one, as he was married--which happened early--receiving

some share, and each daughter also often getting a slice as her

marriage-portion. In vain were clauses against subletting inserted in

leases; in vain was the erection of new houses prohibited; in vain

did the landlord threaten the tenant. The latter relied upon the

sympathy of his class to prevent ejectment, and on his own ingenuity

to defeat the other impediments to his favourite mode of providing

for his family. This process was at length carried to an extreme that

became perfectly ludicrous. Instead of each sub-tenant or assignee

of a portion of the farm receiving his holding in one compact lot,

he obtained a part of each particular quality of land, so that his

tenement consisted of a number of scattered patches, each too small

to be separately fenced, and exposed to the constant depredations of

his neighbours' cattle, thus affording a fruitful source of quarrels,

and utterly preventing the possibility of any improved system of

husbandry. These small patches, however, were not numerous enough to

afford "potato gardens" for the still increasing population, and hence

arose the conacre system, by which those who occupied no land were

enabled to grow potatoes for themselves. Tempted by the high rent,

which varied from £8 to £14 an acre without manure, the farmers gave

to the cottiers in their neighbourhood the use of their land merely

for the potato crop, generally a quarter of an Irish acre to each. On

this the cottier put all the manure he could make by his pig, or the

children could scrape off the road during the year, and "planted" his

crop of potatoes, which he relied upon as almost the sole support of

his family. On it he also fed the pig, which paid the rent, or procured

clothes and other necessaries if he had been permitted to pay the rent

with his own labour. The labourer thus became a commercial speculator

in potatoes. He mortgaged his labour for part of the ensuing year

for the rent of his field. If his speculation proved successful, he

was able to replace his capital, to fatten his pig, and to support

himself and his family, while he cleared off his debt to the farmer.

If it failed, his former savings were gone, his heap of manure had

been expended to no purpose, and he had lost the means of rendering

his pig fit for the market. But his debt to the farmer still remained,

and the scanty wages which he could earn at some periods of the year

were reduced, not only by the increased number of persons looking for

work, but also by the diminished ability of the farmers to employ them.

Speculation in potatoes, whether on a large or small scale, had always

been hazardous in the southern and westerly portions of Ireland. There

had been famines from the failure of that crop at various times, and

a remarkably severe one in 1822, when Parliament voted £300,000 for

public works and other relief purposes, and subscriptions were raised

to the amount of £310,000, of which £44,000 was collected in Ireland.

In 1831 violent storms and continual rain brought on another failure of

the potato crop in the west of Ireland, particularly along the coast of

Galway, Mayo, and Donegal. On this occasion the English public, with

ready sympathy, again came forward, and subscriptions were raised,

amounting to about £75,000. On several other occasions subsequently,

the Government found it necessary to advance money for the relief of

Irish misery, invariably occasioned by the failure of the potatoes, and

followed by distress and disease. The public and the Legislature had

therefore repeated warnings of the danger of having millions of people

dependent for existence upon so precarious a crop.

[Illustration: FATHER MATHEW AND THE FAMINE-STRICKEN POOR. (_See p._

537.)]

In the year 1845 marked symptoms appeared of the approaching total

failure of the national food. The early crop had been saved, but

throughout the whole country the late crop was lost. As, however, the

grain crop was abundant, the loss was not so severely felt. But the

Government were so alarmed that they appointed a commission, consisting

of Professors Kane, Lindley, and Playfair, eminent chemists, to inquire

into the cause of the failure; but all their skill was unavailing to

discover the nature of the mysterious agency by which the destruction

was effected. The farmers and peasantry were not deterred from putting

in an abundant crop of potatoes next year. In the beginning of the

season the crops seemed in excellent condition, and there was every

prospect of a plentiful harvest; but suddenly the blight came, as if

the crop had been everywhere smitten with lightning, or a withering

blast had swept over the whole country. "On the 27th of July," said

Father Mathew, "I passed from Cork to Dublin, and this doomed plant

bloomed in all the luxuriance of an abundant harvest. Returning on

the 3rd of August, I beheld one wide waste of putrefying vegetation.

In many places the wretched people were seated on the fences of their

decaying gardens, wringing their hands and bewailing bitterly the

destruction that had left them foodless." First a brown spot appeared

on the leaf; the spots gradually increased in number and size until the

foliage withered, the stem became brittle, and snapped off immediately

when touched. In less than a week the whole process of destruction was

accomplished. The fields assumed a blackened appearance; the roots were

like pigeons' eggs, which gradually rotted away, and were wholly unfit

for food. In one week the chief support of the masses was utterly lost.

For a few weeks the cottiers and small farmers managed to eke out a

subsistence by the sale of their pigs, and any little effects they

had. But pigs, fowls, furniture, and clothing soon went, one after

another, to satisfy the cravings of hunger. The better class of farmers

lived upon their corn and cattle; but they were obliged to dismiss

their servants, and this numerous class became the first victims of

starvation; for when they were turned off, they were refused admission

by their relations, who had not the means of feeding them. Tailors,

shoemakers, and other artisans who worked for the lower classes,

lost their employment and became destitute also. While the means of

support failed upon every side, and food rose to such enormous prices

that everything that could possibly be eaten was economised, so that

the starving dogs were drowned from compassion, the famine steadily

advanced from the west and south to the east and north, till it

involved the whole population in its crushing grasp. It was painfully

interesting to mark the progress of the visitation, even in those parts

of the country where its ravages were least felt. The small farmer had

only his corn, designed for rent and seed. He was obliged to take it

to the mill, to ward off starvation. The children of the poor, placed

on short allowance, were suffering fearfully from hunger. Mothers,

heart-broken and worn down to skeletons, were seen on certain days

proceeding in groups to some distant depôt, where Indian meal was to be

had at reduced prices, but still double that of the ordinary market. As

they returned to their children with their little bags on their heads,

a faint joy lit up their famine-stricken features. Those children, who

had lived for two days and two nights on a dole of raw turnips, would

now be relieved by a morsel of nourishing food. The fathers, who had

absented themselves from home in order to avoid the agony of listening

to their heart-piercing cries, might now sit down and look their little

ones in the face. But, if the mother failed to obtain the relief for

which she had travelled so far, what then? Yesterday no breakfast, no

dinner, no supper; the same to-day; no prospect of better to-morrow.

The destitute rushed to the workhouses, which soon became crowded to

excess by those who had been able-bodied men and women, while the

aged, the sickly, and the children were left to starve. Overpowered by

hunger, they lay down helpless, the ready victims of the pestilence

that walked close upon the footsteps of famine, and died in thousands.

Let us consider the state of a population such as has been described.

Scattered over remote districts, with no gentry resident within many

miles, none to whom a complaint could be made but the clergyman, whose

energies were overtaxed, how utterly helpless must have been the

condition of those doomed people!

A few sketches of the state of the population given by the agents

of the Relief Committee of the Society of Friends, who exerted

themselves nobly in relieving the distress, may help to give us a

more vivid impression of the horrors of the famine. At Boyle they

found numbers that had eaten nothing but cabbages or turnips for

weeks. The children were in a condition of starvation, ravenous with

hunger. At Carrick-on-Shannon a most painful and heartrending scene

presented itself: poor wretches in the last stage of famine, imploring

to be received into the house; women that had six or seven children

begging that even two or three of them might be taken in, as their

husbands were earning but eightpence a day. Famine was written in their

faces. On bread being given to some of these poor creatures, many of

them devoured it with ravenous voracity. But the mothers restrained

themselves, and carried home portions to their children. The famine

produced a peculiar effect on the appearance of the young. Their

faces looked wan and haggard, seeming like old men and women, with an

extraordinary sharpness of expression; they had lost all their natural

sprightliness, making no attempt to play. In the crowded workhouses

their bedding consisted of dirty straw, in which they were laid in

rows on the floor, even as many as six persons being crowded under one

rug--the living and the dying stretched side by side beneath the same

miserable covering. The town of Westport was in itself a strange and

fearful sight, like what we read of in beleaguered cities; its streets

crowded with gaunt wanderers, sauntering to and fro with hopeless air

and hunger-struck appearance; a mob of starved, almost naked women

around the poor-house, clamouring for soup-tickets.

When the visitors entered a village, their first question was, "How

many deaths?" "_The hunger is upon us_," was everywhere the cry; and

involuntarily they found themselves regarding this hunger as they would

an epidemic, looking upon starvation as a disease. In fact, as they

passed along, their wonder was, not that the people died, but that they

lived; and Mr. W. E. Forster, in his report, said, "I have no doubt

whatever that in any other country the mortality would have been far

greater; and that many lives have been prolonged, perhaps saved, by

the long apprenticeship to want in which the Irish peasant has been

trained, and by that lovely, touching charity which prompts him to

share his scanty meal with his starving neighbour. But the springs of

this charity must be rapidly dried up. Like a scourge of locusts, _the

hunger_ daily sweeps over fresh districts, eating up all before it. One

class after another is falling into the same abyss of ruin."

One of the most appalling of the narratives sent to the Central

Committee of the Society of Friends was Mr. William Bennet's account

of his journey in Ireland. He left Dublin on the 12th of January,

and proceeded by coach to Longford, and thence to Ballina, from

which he penetrated into remote districts of the county Mayo. In the

neighbourhood of Belmullet he and his companion visited a district

which may serve as a representation of the condition of the labouring

class generally in the mountainous and boggy districts, where they

burrowed and multiplied, more like a race of inferior animals than

human beings. "Many of the cabins," wrote Mr. Bennet, "were holes in

the bog, covered with a layer of turf, and not distinguishable as

human habitations from the surrounding moors, until close down upon

them. The bare sod was about the best material of which any of them

were constructed. Doorways, not doors, were provided at both sides of

the latter, mostly back and front, to take advantage of the way of

the wind. Windows and chimneys, I think, had no existence. A second

apartment or partition of any kind was exceedingly rare. Furniture

properly so called, I believe, may be stated at nil. I cannot speak

with certainty, and wish not to speak with exaggeration, we were too

much overcome to note specifically; but as far as memory serves, we saw

neither bed, chair, nor table at all. A chest, a few iron or earthen

vessels, a stool or two, the dirty rags and night coverings, formed

about the sum total of the best-furnished. Outside many were all but

unapproachable from the mud and filth surrounding them; the scene

inside is worse, if possible, from the added closeness, darkness, and

smoke.... And now language utterly fails me in attempting to depict

the state of the wretched inmates.... We entered a cabin. Stretched

in one dark corner, scarcely visible from the smoke and rags that

covered them, were three children huddled together, lying there because

they were too weak to rise, pale and ghastly; their little limbs, on

removing a portion of the covering, perfectly emaciated; eyes sunk,

voice gone, and evidently in the last stage of actual starvation.

Crouched over the turf embers was another form, wild and all but naked,

scarcely human in appearance. It stirred not nor noticed us. On some

straw, soddened upon the ground, moaning piteously, was a shrivelled

old woman, imploring us to give her something, baring her limbs

partly to show how the skin hung loose from her bones, as soon as she

attracted our attention. Above her, on something like a ledge, was a

young woman with sunken cheeks, a mother, I have no doubt, who scarcely

raised her eyes in answer to our inquiries; but pressed her hand upon

her forehead, with a look of unutterable anguish and despair.... Every

infantile expression had entirely departed; and, in some, reason and

intelligence had evidently flown. Many were remnants of families,

crowded together in one cabin; orphaned little relatives taken in by

the equally destitute, and even strangers--for these poor people are

kind to each other, even to the end. In one cabin was a sister, just

dying, lying beside her little brother, just dead. I have worse than

this to relate; but it is useless to multiply details, and they are, in

fact, unfit."

It was not only in the wild and dreary west, always the most neglected

part of Ireland, without resident gentry, without a middle class,

without manufacturers, and almost without towns, that the desolating

effects of the famine were felt. In Ulster, even in the best counties

and most thriving manufacturing districts, where the people were

intensely industrious, orderly, and thrifty, some of its worst horrors

were endured. In the county of Armagh, where the very small farmers

kept themselves in comfort by weaving linen in their own houses, they

were obliged to work their looms by night as well as by day in order

to keep hunger from their homes. They worked till, by exhaustion and

want of sleep, they were compelled to lie down. Many of them were

obliged to sell or pawn all their clothes. In many cases, and as a last

resource, those stout-hearted Presbyterians had to sell their Bibles

in order to purchase a meal of food for their children. A clergyman

of the Church of England in that county wrote to the Committee of the

Society of Friends that he had seen the living lying on straw by the

side of the unburied dead, who had died three days before. Not only

the aged and infirm, not only women and children, but strong men, he

had known to pine away till they died of actual starvation. Strong,

healthy girls became so emaciated that they could not stand or move

a limb. He visited houses, once comfortable homes, in which not an

article of furniture remained. The poor-house of Lurgan was shut.

Seventy-five persons died there in one day. In Armagh poor-house

forty-five died weekly. The poor-houses became pest-houses, which

sent forth the miasma of death into every parish, already full of

dysentery and fever. The congregations in the various churches were

reduced to almost nothing. Deaths occurred so rapidly that the Roman

Catholic priest ceased to attend funerals in his graveyard. The most

deplorable accounts came from Cork, and especially from Skibbereen, a

remote district of that county. In December, 1846, Father Mathew wrote

to Mr. Trevelyan, then Secretary of the Treasury, that men, women, and

children were gradually wasting away. They filled their stomachs with

cabbage-leaves, turnip-tops, etc., to appease the cravings of hunger.

There were then more than 5,000 half-starved wretches from the country

begging in the streets of Cork. When utterly exhausted they crawled to

the workhouse to die. The average of deaths in that union were then

over 100 a week. At Crookhaven the daily average of deaths was from ten

to twelve; and as early as the first Sunday in September a collection

was made to purchase a public bier, on which to take the coffinless

dead to the grave, the means to procure coffins being utterly exhausted

in that locality. Earlier still in Skibbereen numerous cases had

occurred of the dead being kept for several days above ground for want

of coffins. In some cases they were buried in the rags in which they

died. Throughout the entire west of the county of Cork it was a common

occurrence to see from ten to a dozen funerals in the course of the day

during the close of 1846.

[Illustration: FATHER MATHEW.]

Mr. J. F. Maguire, who writes as an eye-witness of the scenes he

describes, referring to the spring of 1847, says:--"The famine now

raged in every part of the afflicted country, and starving multitudes

crowded the thoroughfares of the cities and large towns. Death was

everywhere--in the cabin, on the highway, in the garret, in the

cellar, and even on the flags or side-paths of the most public streets

of the city. In the workhouses, to which the pressure of absolute

starvation alone drove the destitute, the carnage was frightful. It was

now increasing at prodigious pace. The number of deaths at the Cork

workhouse in the last week of January, 1847, was 104. It increased to

128 in the first week in February, and in the second week of that month

it reached 164; 396 in three weeks. During the month of April as many

as thirty-six bodies were interred in one day in that portion of Father

Mathew's cemetery reserved for the free burial of the poor; and this

mortality was entirely independent of the mortality in the workhouse.

During the same month there were 300 coffins sold in a single street

in the course of a fortnight, and these were chiefly required for the

supply of a single parish. From the 27th of December, in 1846, to the

middle of April, in 1847, the number of human beings that died in

the Cork workhouse was 2,130! And in the third week of the following

month the free interments in the Mathew cemetery had risen to 277--as

many as sixty-seven having been buried in one day. The destruction of

human life in other workhouses of Ireland kept pace with the appalling

mortality in the Cork workhouse. According to official returns, it had

reached in April the weekly average of twenty-five per 1,000 inmates;

the actual number of deaths being 2,706 for the week ending the 3rd of

April, and 2,613 in the following week. Yet the number of inmates in

the Irish workhouses was but 104,455 on the 10th of April, the entire

of the houses not having then been completed.

[Illustration: ON BOARD AN EMIGRANT SHIP AT THE TIME OF THE IRISH

FAMINE. (_See p._ 542.)]

"More than 100 workhouse officers fell victims to the famine fever

during this fatal year, which also decimated the ranks of the Catholic

clergy of the country. Mr. Trevelyan gives names of thirty English

and Scottish priests who sacrificed their lives to their zealous

attendance on the immigrant Irish, who carried the pestilence with them

in their flight to other portions of the United Kingdom. Pestilence

likewise slew its victims in the fetid hold of the emigrant ship,

and, following them across the ocean, immolated them in thousands in

the lazar houses that fringed the shores of Canada and the United

States. The principal business of the time was in meal, and coffins,

and passenger ships. A fact may be mentioned which renders further

description of the state of the country needless. The Cork Patent Saw

Mills had been at full work from December, 1846, to May, 1847, with

twenty pairs of saws, constantly going from morning till night, cutting

planks for coffins, and planks and scantlings for fever sheds, and for

the framework of berths for emigrant ships."

At the Church of St. Anne, Shandon, under a kind of shed attached to

a guard-house, lay huddled up in their filthy fetid rags about forty

human creatures--men, women, children, and infants of the tenderest

age--starving and fever-stricken, most of them in a dying state, some

dead, and all gaunt, yellow, hideous from the combined effects of

famine and disease. Under this open shed they had remained during the

night, and until that hour--about ten in the morning--when the funeral

procession was passing by, and their indescribable misery was beheld

by the leading citizens of Cork, including the mayor, and several

members of the board of guardians. The odour which proceeded from that

huddled-up heap of human beings was of itself enough to generate a

plague.

Skibbereen was described as "one mass of famine, disease, and death;

the poor rapidly sinking under fever, dysentery, and starvation."

There, as early as the first week in February, 1847, there was constant

use for a coffin with movable sides, in which the dead were borne to

the grave, and there dropped into their last resting-place. On the

whole, the resignation of this stricken people was something wonderful.

Outrage was rare, and the violations of the rights of property were not

at all so numerous as might have been expected from persons rendered

desperate by hunger; and where such things occurred, the depredators

were not those who suffered the severest distress. But as the famine

proceeded in its desolating course, and people became familiar with

its horrors, the demoralising effects of which we have read in such

visitations were exhibited in Ireland also. Next to the French, the

Irish have been remarkable for their attention to the dead, as well as

for the strength of their domestic affections. They had a decent pride

in having a respectable "wake" and funeral when they lost any member

of the family; and however great their privations were, they made an

effort to spare something for the last sad tokens of respect for those

they loved. But now there was no mourning for the dead, and but little

attention paid to the dying. The ancient and deep-rooted custom with

regard to funerals was "swept away like chaff before the wind." The

funerals were rarely attended by more than three or four relatives or

friends. Sometimes the work of burial was left entirely to persons

hired to do it, and in many cases it was not done at all for five or

six days after death, and then it was only by threats and rewards that

any persons could be got to perform the dangerous duty.

The demoralisation appeared further in the abuses connected with the

distribution of relief. The reports of the Commissioners have stated

that, in those districts where the relief committees worked together

with zeal and in good faith, the administration was excellent, checking

fraud and imposture, while it relieved the really distressed. But in

some districts this was unhappily not the case. Abuses existed, varying

from apathy and neglect to connivance at frauds and misappropriation

of the funds. Gross impositions were daily practised by the poor. The

dead or absent were personated; children were lent for a few days in

order to give the appearance of large families, and thus entitle the

borrowers to a greater number of rations. Almost the whole population,

in many cases, alleged poverty and looked for relief; and then,

conceiving the receipt of cooked food a degradation, they endeavoured

to compel the issue of raw meal. One universal spirit of mendicancy

pervaded the people, to which in several places the committees offered

no opposition. Yielding to intimidation, or seeking for popularity,

they were willing to place the whole population indiscriminately on the

lists to be supported by public charity.

The Marquis of Lansdowne, the President of the Council in the Whig

Ministry which had replaced that of Sir Robert Peel, in a speech

delivered in the House of Lords on the 25th of January, 1847, gave an

estimate, as accurate as the best calculation could make it, of the

loss in money value that had been occasioned by the failure of the

crops in Ireland. "Taking a valuation of £10 per acre for potatoes, and

£3 10s. for oats, the deficiency on the potato crop alone amounted to

£11,350,000, while on the crop of oats it amounted to £4,660,000, or

to a total value of £16,010,000 for the whole of a country which, if

it could not be said to be the poorest, was certainty not one of the

richest in the world. In weight the loss was 9,000,000 or 10,000,000

tons of potatoes. The whole loss had been equivalent to the absolute

destruction of 1,500,000 arable acres." On the same day, Lord John

Russell, who had succeeded Peel as Prime Minister, gave a statement of

what the Government had done during the recess for the relief of the

Irish population, in pursuance of Acts passed in the previous Session.

He stated that an immense staff of servants had been employed by the

Board of Public Works--upwards of 11,000 persons--giving employment

to half a million of labourers, representing 2,000,000 of souls; the

expense for the month of January being estimated at from £700,000 to

£800,000.