to have those representatives whom it should elect thus closely bound to
pursue the line of conduct it dictated, much increased the dread with
which it was regarded. Symptoms were already visible of the influence it
might exert; only ten days after the establishment of the pledges (Aug.
2), Mr. Dawson, Peel's brother-in-law, and himself in the
Administration, after a lively picture of the enormous power of the
Association, concluded with the unexpected assertion, that as this power
could not be crushed it ought to be conciliated. Coming from such a
source the assertion was received as a certain proof that the cause of
the Catholics was winning its way. Consequently the efforts of the
Association were pressed forward with redoubled zeal. Parochial clubs
were established, and great aggregate meetings held in various parts of
Ireland. Mr. Shiel, one of its most ardent supporters, thus describes
the condition of Ireland under its influence:--"Does not a tremendous
organization extend over the whole island? Have not all the natural
bonds by which men are tied together been broken and burst asunder? Are
not all the relations of society which exist elsewhere gone? Has not
property lost its influence? Has not rank been stripped of the respect
which should belong to it? Has not an internal government grown up,
which, gradually superseding the legitimate authorities, has armed
itself with a complete domination? Is it nothing that the whole body of
the clergy are alienated from the State, and that the Catholic gentry
and peasantry and priesthood are all combined in one vast confederacy?"
His description was true; the Association was omnipotent, and in nothing
did it show its power so much as in the complete restraint it held over
the excitable people. Faction and faction fights disappeared; crime of a
graver sort almost vanished; and though the people were drilled and
brought into something resembling military organization, although they
were eager to know against whom they were to fight, the influence of the
Association restrained them from all demonstrations likely to provoke
hostilities, and on one occasion a few words from O'Connell at once
broke up and dispersed a body of 50,000 men. This was the more admirable
as the temper of the Protestants had naturally been roused, and
Brunswick clubs had sprung up, to take the place of the Orange
organization, which do not seem to have been as self-restrained as the
Catholics. During the whole of this time the Duke was painfully making
up his mind to his retreat. The peculiarity of his action was that he
became absolutely silent; so complete was his silence, that Mr. Shiel
thus describes the situation:--"The minister folds his arms as if he
were a mere indifferent observer, and the terrific contest between
Protestant and Catholic only afforded him a spectacle for the amusement
of his official leisure; he sits as if two gladiators were crossing
their swords for his gratification: the Cabinet seems to be little
better than a box in a theatre from which his Majesty's ministers may
survey the business of blood." Indeed, so strangely reticent was the
Duke, that he ceased to correspond at all with his Lord Lieutenant, the
Marquis of Anglesey. Uninstructed from home, Lord Anglesey, who was a
Liberal, and inclined to the emancipation, naturally followed the
dictates of his own opinions, and rendered the conduct of the Government
almost treacherous from the indirect support he gave to the Liberals,
while his chief in London was supporting the opposite party. The
inevitable consequence was that he shortly committed an indiscretion
which necessitated his recall. His place was taken by the Duke of
Northumberland, a strong Tory.
[Sidenote: Peel and Wellington see the urgency of the Catholic
question.]
Peel, the most influential member of the ministry next to the Premier,
had already, since the Clare election, arrived at the conclusion that
the solution of the question could no longer be postponed, and that only
one form of solution was possible. The election of Catholics, while
still unable to sit in Parliament, would deprive Ireland of its
representation. So important an event as O'Connell's election could not
possibly pass unnoticed and the question be left unmoved. With the
present House a high-handed repression of the Association was
impossible; were it attempted by a new House a civil war was inevitable:
there remained but a third course--to give way. Early in August 1828,
Peel had stated this opinion forcibly to the Duke, and told him that he
considered that an attempt to settle the Catholic question was a lesser
evil than to continue to leave it open; at the same time he wished
himself to resign, and to leave the bringing in of the measure to other
hands. Although aware of the penalty he should be called upon to pay for
this change of opinion, the attacks to which he should be subject, and
the loss of friends, he was at length persuaded by Wellington, who felt
it impossible to carry on the Government without him, to retain his
place. Peel's representations had had their effect upon the Duke's mind,
and he was by degrees becoming convinced that further obstruction was
impossible. During the autumn he learned to see that his choice lay
between the reconquest of Ireland, the repeal of the Union, or the
emancipation of the Catholics. He could not hesitate which of the three
to choose. But though his own mind and that of his colleague were made
up, great difficulties lay in the way of the execution of their plans,
the chief of which was the temper of the King, who had now begun to
declare that he, like his father, was troubled with conscientious
scruples. At length, in January, the King consented that the question
should be brought before the Cabinet. The two ministers found little or
no opposition, and it was determined to take in hand the final
settlement of the question. Accordingly, in the royal speech at the
opening of Parliament (Feb. 5), it was stated that measures must first
of all be taken to establish authority by the destruction of the
Association, and that then the whole condition of Ireland should be
taken into consideration, with a view to altering the laws so as to
remove civil disabilities from his Majesty's Catholic subjects. The
speech came as an unexpected blow to the high Tories, but immediate
discussion was postponed at the request of the ministry till the actual
Bill could be introduced in its completed form. Meanwhile the
preliminary measure for the destruction of the Association was brought
in. Its necessity was however forestalled by the clever tactics of the
Irish, who dissolved their Association before the Bill obtained the
force of law. Having declared his change of opinion, Peel, who
throughout acted as honourably as circumstances would allow, thought it
incumbent on him to resign his seat for Oxford, which he no doubt owed
chiefly to his supposed anti-Catholic views. The events of the election
proved that he was right, the seat was contested by Sir Robert Inglis,
who was elected by a considerable majority. Peel found a seat at
Westbury.
[Sidenote: Opposition of the King.]
[Sidenote: Introduction of the Bill. March 5, 1829.]
[Sidenote: The Bill passed. April 1829.]
The coast seemed now clear for the great measure, but the King made a
final stand. The very day before the Bill was to be introduced (March
4), he sent unexpectedly for Wellington, Lyndhurst, and Peel, declared
he had been misunderstood, withdrew his sanction, and asked what they
now intended to do about Ireland. In fact he had been incessantly worked
on by the Tory Lords who had access to him; and, weak and miserable,
apparently thought that the fear of offending him might even yet
postpone the measure. Peel at once declared that nothing remained for
him but to resign. The Duke and the Chancellor expressed the same
intention, and they left the presence of the King, who bade them a most
friendly farewell, in the belief that the ministry was at an end. Late
at night Wellington received a letter, in which the King said that he
was convinced of the impossibility of forming another ministry, and
begged them to remain. Knowing his weak character, it was only on
receiving express leave to declare that the measure was brought in with
his consent that they agreed to remain, and it was with the assertion
that he was acting in full accordance with the King's wishes that Peel
began his speech. The proposed Bill was of a sweeping but simple
character. It substituted a new form of oath for the old oaths of
supremacy, allegiance, and abjuration; thus, if a Catholic bound himself
to support the State and not injure the Church, he could sit in either
House of Parliament, had a perfect equality with his Protestant
neighbours, and was eligible for all offices, civil, military, or
municipal, with the exception of the office of Regent, of Lord
Chancellor, of Viceroy of Ireland, or royal commissioner of the General
Assembly of Scotland. From offices connected with the Church, or
participation in Church patronage, he was naturally excluded. The second
point of the Bill was the position to be occupied by the Roman Church.
It was to be left as a dissenting community, unendowed and unrestricted,
but the use of episcopal titles, the increase of monks, and the
introduction of more Jesuits, were forbidden. This Bill for the
remission of all restrictions was to be coupled with another for the
establishment of certain securities, the chief of which consisted in the
raising of the franchise to £10. In a long and careful speech Peel
explained his views, and vindicated his change of policy. The same
course was pursued by Wellington in the Upper House, where he alleged
that the chief grounds for his present conduct was his horror of civil
war, which he regarded as inevitable. "I am one of those who have
probably passed a longer period of my life engaged in war than most men,
and principally, I may say, in civil war, and I must say this, that if I
could avoid by any sacrifice whatever even one month of civil war in the
country to which I am attached, I would sacrifice my life in order to do
it. There is nothing which disturbs property and wellbeing so much,
which so deteriorates character as civil war, and that, my Lords, would
have been the event to which we must have looked, that the means to
which we must have had recourse." As was natural, there was a strong
opposition, but in both Houses Canningites, Whigs, and Ministerialists
combined to swell the majority; on the first reading it numbered 188, on
the second 180. Not one amendment was carried in Committee, and the Bill
finally passed by a majority of 178 in a House of 452. In the House of
Lords it was as favourably received, and on the 10th of April it was
passed on the third reading by 213 to 209. There was yet one more
struggle, in which the King played a pitiful part. Lord Eldon relates
two interviews he had with him, in which George seemed inclined to deny
that he had ever authorized his ministers to bring in the Bill, and to
represent himself as forced to consent by repeated threats of
resignation. Lord Eldon was honest enough to say, after he had seen
written evidence of the fact, that the King's consent had been given,
and that it could not now be withdrawn, and the interview closed in the
midst of petulant and childish exclamations of anger on the part of the
King. Lord Eldon probably hoped that in spite of what he had said there
might be still some delay, but the royal assent was at once given, and
the Bill became law on the 14th of April.
[Sidenote: O'Connell agitates for the repeal of the Union.]
The Bill for the disfranchisement of the forty shilling freeholders
passed at the same time as the Catholic Emancipation Bill, and received
the royal assent with it. The conduct of O'Connell, who quietly allowed
the passing of this Bill, caused much surprise. "The forties" had been
his best supporters, he had pledged himself in the strongest language to
support their claims, but he quietly allowed them to be disfranchised.
It was strange how little commotion so sweeping a measure produced. A
few of the more advanced reformers of England regarded it as an enormous
price paid for a still greater advantage. But in fact the quarrel had
been rapidly assuming the form of a division of races, and the English
Catholics, without whom the measure could not have been carried, were
far more anxious for the equality of their Church than for the
enlargement of Irish liberty. To O'Connell the question assumed a
different shape. Although he repeatedly declared that the passing of the
Bill would quiet Ireland, he by no means intended that such should be
the case. With him the question was far more Irish than Catholic, as was
soon made evident by his conduct. He presented himself to take his seat
in Parliament (May 15), and offered to take the new oath, but as he had
been elected while the old law was in force, it was held that he was
still under its requirements. With excellent temper and ability he
argued his case, which was however given against him, and a new writ for
Clare was issued. His return was unopposed (July 30), yet he allowed
himself the utmost freedom of language, abused with all the powers of
his invective the English Government, and gave it clearly to be
understood that he meant to continue the struggle till it should end in
the repeal of the Union. These preliminary operations took so much time
that it was not till the next session that he could take his seat. From
this time onwards it is impossible to regard him as the champion of a
good cause; he sank into the position of a demagogue, exciting the
people for an impracticable object, which he must have known no English
statesman or English Parliament could possibly grant.
[Sidenote: Wellington's foreign policy.]
The interest of this Catholic Bill had been so absorbing that little
else had been thought of, but when that obstacle was once cleared away,
there was room to consider what was equally important, the foreign
policy of the Government, in which there was much to excite the anger of
the Liberal party, and to raise a belief that where Wellington could act
without pressure his sympathies were in accordance with the system of
Castlereagh rather than with that of Canning. While holding strictly to
the principle of non-intervention, he appeared to use it so as to throw
its advantages almost entirely upon the side of arbitrary power. It was
the affairs of Portugal, of Greece, and of France which chiefly required
his attention.
[Sidenote: Affairs of Portugal.]
[Sidenote: Miguel usurps the throne. May 1828.]
[Sidenote: Queen Maria acknowledged in England. Sept. 1828.]
John VI. had at length come back from South America to attempt to
establish his power in Portugal in 1821. During his absence Brazil
declared itself independent, and put Don Pedro, John's son, upon the
throne with the title of Emperor. On the death of John in 1826, Don
Pedro was called to the throne of Portugal also. He had to choose
between his South American and his European dominions. He preferred to
remain in Brazil. He therefore gave a constitution to his Portuguese
subjects, and then abdicated in favour of his young daughter Maria. For
a while his sister acted as Regent, but in February 1828 Don Pedro
thought it better to quiet his ambitious brother Miguel by appointing
him Regent, and guardian of his niece, to whom he was to be ultimately
married. Miguel always declared his intention, as was of course his
duty, to uphold the constitution, which had been supported by English
troops sent, it will be remembered, by orders of Canning, but had been
opposed by a strong party of absolutists, and had not produced any
marked improvement in the condition of the country. The priests, the
nobility, and the soldiery were deeply infected with dislike to the
constitution. In January 1828, just after Wellington had assumed the
reins of power, Miguel had visited England for the purpose, it was
understood, of studying the working of the constitution, and had
voluntarily declared that if he violated the constitution in his own
country he should be a perjured usurper. After some delay he accepted
the constitutional oath, but with circumstances which made it doubtful
even then whether he intended to keep it. So obvious were the signs of
his intention to usurp the throne, that when Wellington determined to
recall the English troops as though their duty was now completed, the
English ambassador on his own authority retained them. Their retention
was but temporary. On the 2nd of April they were recalled, although the
Chamber of Deputies had been suddenly dissolved in the middle of March;
for Wellington, clinging to the narrowest interpretation of the
principle of non-intervention, held that the troops were sent to guard
Portugal against foreign invasion, and not to be used in party quarrels.
Their departure was almost immediately followed by open riots in favour
of the absolutists. Restrained for a short time by the threat that all
the ambassadors would leave his Court, on the 3rd of May Miguel began to
throw away disguise. He summoned the three ancient estates of the realm
instead of the new constitutional Parliament, and signed the decree as
King Miguel I. This act of usurpation was followed by the withdrawal of
all the ministers except those of Spain and Rome. A violent reaction set
in, the uneducated masses, the aristocracy, and the clergy had it all
their own way, and raised a general cry against the Freemasons, as they
were pleased to call the Liberal party. While Miguel was planning his
usurpation of the throne the act of abdication on the part of Don Pedro
was finally completed, and the young Queen set sail for Europe. She was
at first intended to visit her uncle the Emperor of Austria; but the
news of what had happened in Portugal induced her guardians to bring her
to England, where she was received with all the honour due to a queen
both by the ministers Wellington and Aberdeen, and by King George
himself. Meanwhile the government of the reactionists in Portugal had
been marked by much violence and contempt of law. In the beginning of
October, in the prisons of Lisbon alone, there were 2400 prisoners, of
whom 1600 were confined for political crimes. The total number of
prisoners throughout the kingdom amounted to upwards of 15,000, among
whom were forty-two members of the Chamber of Peers and seven members of
the Chamber of Deputies; and so unrestrained was the wickedness of
Miguel that he even attempted the life of his sister, the late Regent,
because she refused to give up to him some of her jewels.
[Sidenote: Wellington's adherence to the principle of neutrality.]
The withdrawal of the troops from Lisbon on the one hand, and the recall
of the English minister and the acknowledgment of the young Queen on the
other, appeared to be in accordance with the strictest rules of
neutrality. At the same time it was obvious that that neutrality as yet
had been entirely in favour of Don Miguel. The principle had yet to be
put to harder trials; a number of Portuguese refugees of the
constitutional party were assembled in England, headed by the Marquis
Palmella, the Portuguese ambassador, and General Saldanha, late
constitutional War Minister. Besides their continental dominions, the
Portuguese possessed the islands of the Azores; and although the islands
had declared for Donna Maria, and therefore might be supposed to be
under the protection of the English, Miguel had been allowed to capture
Madeira, and had attempted, though unsuccessfully, a similar attack upon
Terceira. In expectation of a repetition of this effort, application was
made to the Portuguese in England for assistance. A body of between 3000
and 4000 men, the relics of an insurgent army which had attempted in
vain to prevent Miguel's usurpation, had been kept together at Plymouth,
but the representations of the usurper had been listened to, and the
Duke had ordered that they should be distributed throughout England.
Rather than submit to this, Palmella proposed to send them to Brazil;
but Wellington, mistrusting their intentions when once they had left
England, declared his intention of placing them under the escort of the
English fleet. On receiving the application from Terceira, Palmella,
seeing an opportunity for employing his countrymen usefully, determined
to send them thither, but unarmed, to avoid any breach of the neutrality
of England; and, in spite of the avowed intention of Wellington to
prevent this step by force, in the beginning of January 1829 the
expedition actually sailed under Saldanha. Some English frigates were
sent to prevent a landing, and fired upon the leading vessel. Saldanha
then retired to Brest. Thus in the eyes of the Liberals not only had the
Duke been impartial, but he had fired upon an expedition fitted out in
favour of a sovereign acknowledged by and at peace with England, and who
intended to make good her possession of an island of which she was at
the moment actually Queen. Such an interpretation of the duties of
neutrality, especially considering the bitter tyranny under which
Portugal was groaning, afforded good grounds for the anger of the
English Liberal party.
[Sidenote: Non-intervention in the affairs of Greece.]
In the affairs of Greece the same determination under no circumstances
to draw the sword was obvious. While the French sent an army to the
Morea and rescued the peninsula from the Turks, and while Russia pursued
her victorious course towards Constantinople, the English clung
tenaciously to the peaceful side of the Treaty of London. Their
negotiations were so far successful that Russia consented not to act as
a belligerent in the Mediterranean, but the power of Turkey was none
the less annihilated from the north. Meanwhile Wellington seemed chiefly
bent in restraining the French from advancing beyond the Morea, and in
curtailing as far as possible the limits which the powers intended
ultimately to fix for the new kingdom of Greece.
[Sidenote: The Revolution in France.]
[Sidenote: Supposed influence of Wellington in Polignac's appointment.]
In respect to France the effect of the sympathies of the English
Government were perhaps rather fancied than real. The reactionary
tendencies of Charles X.'s minister, M. de Villèle, and the contest in
which he had engaged with the press had excited so much discontent, that
the ministry had been compelled to resign in January 1827. There were in
France three parties, the moderate royalists, of which Villèle was
nominally representative, the ultra-royalists, and the liberals. On
Villèle's retirement a colourless and inefficient ministry was called to
office, and found itself opposed by a coalition between the liberals and
the ultras. At the beginning of 1829 the most important and able of the
ministers, De Peyronnet, retired. It was supposed that his resignation
would break up the ministry, unless it was much strengthened by the
admission of some new element; the arrival from London of Prince
Polignac, a friend of Wellington and a strong royalist, was thought to
mean that the English minister was using his influence to insist that
the required strength should be derived from the introduction of a
strong royalist element, and that an attempt should be made to rule
France upon more strictly monarchical principles. The ministry however
for the moment continued unchanged, but found itself in a complete
minority in the Chamber of Deputies, and was defeated in an attempt to
reform the departmental and municipal governments. Its plan ostensibly
aimed at reducing the power of the prefects, who were government
nominees, by the establishment of municipal councils, but in fact it
secured the ascendancy of the more aristocratic part of the nation in
the local government by rendering a high qualification necessary for the
electors to these councils. So obviously inefficient had the ministry
proved itself to carry on the business of the state, that immediately on
the close of the session it was dismissed. But the King had no idea of
replacing it by a more liberal Cabinet; his thoughts turned rather
towards repression, and he summoned the ultra-royalists to his ministry.
While the new appointments were received with absolute distrust and
dislike in France, they met with nothing but praise from the London
journals; so clear did the connection between the Cabinets of the two
countries appear, that the nickname of the Wellington Ministry was
given to Polignac's administration.
[Sidenote: Increasing opposition to the French ministry.]