of Clarence. On his arrival at Paris, the same white symbol of ancient
servitude and modern rebellion was substituted for the tricolor cockade,
long endeared to the French army by the sacred rights of which it was an
emblem and by the recollection of numberless victories in which it had
been worn. In the same spirit, the restored Prince assumed the title of
Louis the _Eighteenth_, thereby proclaiming himself heir to the rights
which the nation had neglected or denied, and not merely of those they
had instituted and acknowledged. He contrived to evade, or to alter even,
the conditions of his recall. The Emperor of Russia himself affected to
lament the adherence of the restored dynasty to ancient and exploded
notions, and a remark of Prince Talleyrand’s on the Royalists was much
repeated, namely, that they had _forgotten_ nothing and _learnt_ nothing
during their emigration.[192]
Peace was signed at Paris on May 30, 1814. The Confederates, with a view
of reconciling the French to the counter-revolution, either generously or
foolishly abstained from imposing such conditions on the House of Bourbon
as the respective situation of their forces would have enabled and
entitled them to exact from France. Lord Castlereagh neglected to insist
on the general, immediate, and final abolition of the Slave Trade.[193]
The Saints,[194] and indeed the public in England, were deeply
disappointed at this omission, which, whether oversight or design,
betrayed indifference in the cause. It was, at least, no matter of
surprise to those who reflected that the English Ministry was exclusively
composed of men who, during the long controversy on that subject, had
uniformly signalised themselves as the enemies of the abolition, and
represented the zeal in its favour as the enthusiasm of visionaries or
the pretences of designing hypocrites.
Lord Wellington had the bad taste to accept of the Embassy to Paris—a
station which he filled with less credit to himself than any to which his
fortune had called him.
The Emperor of Russia and the King of Prussia visited England early in
June. The Emperor of Austria had been expected, but pleaded business or
health as an excuse. If his object was to ingratiate himself with the
Prince Regent, he did not act injudiciously in absenting himself. The
King of Prussia attracted little notice, either in society or among the
populace. He appeared what he was—a plain soldier and mere corporal, and
he was overshadowed by his own dragoon, General Blucher, whose coarse and
jovial manners, the result of vulgar ignorance and military good-humour,
together with his veteran appearance, rendered him a prodigious favourite
with the multitude. Alexander very reasonably excited more curiosity
and interest. His extensive empire, his inordinate and uncontrolled
power, his age, and even his personal qualities, which, though not
extraordinary, were far superior to those of his brother Sovereigns, his
recent popularity at Paris, and a thousand other circumstances, made him
an object of attention to all who affected or felt any concern in the
events of the political world. Moreover, he lay out for popularity; he
acted his part decently in society and very well in public. A monarch
younger than himself, thus caressing and caressed by an English crowd,
afforded no gratification to the Prince Regent; and he could not but
be nettled at a foreign Prince, manifestly observant of such matters,
becoming a witness to his personal unpopularity in the streets and to the
liberties taken both with his Administration and his family in Parliament.
From contrivance or from accident a conversation arose in the Commons
on subjects connected with the Princess of Wales on the very day the
Sovereigns visited that House.[195] It was as notorious as it was strange
that while the cannon were actually announcing the signature of peace by
victorious generals in the capital of the enemy, the Prince Regent was
pursued in his passage from Carlton to Buckingham House by the hisses
and execrations of the people! These were not agreeable scenes to be
exhibited to such foreign spectators.
It is true that when the Sovereigns accompanied His Royal Highness into
the city no such marks of displeasure escaped from the throngs who
pressed upon them, but even then the populace were at some pains to
make it manifest that affection for their own Prince had no share in
reconciling them to the cavalcade or assemblage of Monarchs, which they
applauded. It was obvious that Alexander remarked these appearances: it
was, moreover, whispered at Court that he and his sister, the Duchess
of Oldenburg, had been busy in estranging the mind of the Princess
Charlotte from a marriage with Henry, the Prince of Orange,[196] then
in contemplation. It is certain that a matrimonial alliance took place
soon afterwards between that Prince and an Arch-duchess of Russia. The
apprehension of having been outwitted in a political intrigue by the
two Russian visitors exasperated the Prince Regent not a little, and
all these considerations produced in his mind a strong personal dislike
to the Emperor Alexander. It was shrewdly suspected that the scheme of
marriage, thus frustrated by the Russians, had been entertained by the
Court of Carlton House, with the double view of removing from the eyes of
the public the object of their growing idolatry and from the Princess of
Wales the only person in whose society she could find any resource and
from whose affections she could derive any support. On the other hand,
it is just to add that the advisers of the Prince Regent have maintained
that his principal motive in pressing an immediate marriage, and possibly
in preferring one which would lead to occasional absences from England,
was a knowledge and dread of the singular impropriety, both of conduct
and conversation, of her mother, and a well-grounded suspicion of a
systematic design in that quarter of involving Princess Charlotte in
imprudent, if not criminal, intercourse with young officers and men of
gallantry and adventure.
Stories of that sort, well or ill authenticated, certainly formed an
original part of the green bag of 1820;[197] and the readiness with which
the Prince Regent and the old Queen acquiesced in, and even promoted,
the subsequent marriage with Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, though not
suggested by either of them,[198] is some presumptive proof that an
early marriage, and not absence, was the object they had chiefly in
view. The conduct of the young lady, if not indecorous, was at least
intrepid enough. She showed strong dispositions to continue the habit
of the Brunswick family, and, had she lived, a disunion between the
child and the parent would in all probability have been as prominent a
feature in the reign of George IV. as it had been in those of his three
predecessors. She peremptorily declined marriage with the Prince of
Orange, and in her letter to him contrived to assign the two motives most
unpalatable to her father, _viz._, a repugnance to any residence abroad
and a strong affection for her mother. The letter was as follows:
WARWICK HOUSE, _16 June, 1814_.
After reconsidering, according to your wishes, the conversation
that passed between us this morning, I am still of opinion
the duties and affections that naturally bind us to our own
respective countries render our marriage incompatible, not only
from motives of policy, but domestic happiness. From recent
circumstances that have occurred I am fully convinced that
my interest is naturally connected with that of my mother,
and that my residence out of this Kingdom would be equally
prejudicial to her interests and my own; as I can never forget
the maternal claims she has upon my duty and attachment. I am
equally aware of the claims your country has upon you. It was
this consideration, added to the desire I had of complying
with your wishes, which induced me some time ago to agree to
accompany you to Holland, if I obtained satisfactory security
of having it in my power to return. Since that time the many
unforeseen events that have occurred, particularly those
regarding the Princess,[199] make me feel it impossible to quit
England at present, or to enter into any engagement leading to
it at a future time.
After what has passed this morning between us (which was much
too conclusive to require explanation), I must consider our
engagement from this moment to be _totally and for ever at an
end_. I leave the explanation of this affair to be made by you
to the Prince in whatever manner is most agreeable to you,
trusting it entirely to your honour (of which for a moment
I never doubted). I cannot conclude without expressing the
sincere concern I feel in being the cause of giving you pain;
which feeling, however, is lessened in a degree by the hope I
stand acquitted in your eyes of having acted dishonourably by
you in the course of this business, or of having ever raised
false hopes in your mind with respect to my consenting to a
residence abroad. You must recollect that in a letter from me
to yours of May 3, that I told you that it was impossible for
me to give any promise on that subject, as it must totally
depend on circumstances.
It only now remains for me to entreat you to accept my
sincerest and best wishes for your happiness, and to express
the friendship and interest I shall always feel towards you.
(Signed) CHARLOTTE.[200]
[Illustration: _Princess Charlotte_
_Sir T. Lawrence, P.R.A. Pinx._
_Emery Walker Ph. Sc._]
The selection of topics in the above letter was unquestionably as
offensive as it could be to the Prince Regent. The unforeseen events
regarding the Princess of Wales were: her late exclusion from Court,
her husband’s declaration that he would never meet her, her appeal to
Parliament in a letter to the Speaker, and the discussions that arose
thereupon.[201] The Prince was exceedingly irritated, and, after various
altercations with his daughter, in which according to her account many
menaces were resorted to, exasperated or alarmed her so much that she
suddenly eloped on July 12, and conveyed herself in a hackney coach to
her mother’s house in Connaught Place. She did so _certainly_ without
legal advice, and I have been always assured without any concert with
the Princess of Wales, who, after consulting Mr. Brougham and the Duke
of Sussex, persuaded her to return.[202] The only use that Princess
Charlotte made of her strange and indecorous _escapade_, was to record a
solemn declaration _while she was at liberty_, that she had herself, of
her own free will, broken off the match with the Prince of Orange, and
that it should never take place.
Soon after these transactions, or rather while they were passing, I left
England, and spent the remainder of the year 1814 abroad. I consequently
know little or nothing that occurred in this country from that time
till the renewal of war in 1815 that is not to be found in newspapers,
Parliamentary reports, and _Annual Registers_.
INTRODUCTION TO BOOK THE FOURTH
The Treaty of Paris in 1814 had materially assisted to restore Europe to
its condition of a quarter of a century before; but the new spirit of
republicanism, inspired by the doctrines of the French Revolution, had in
most cases forced upon the restored Sovereigns a growing regard for the
comfort and welfare of their subjects.
Spain was an unfortunate exception of this happy state of affairs.
Ferdinand, at best little more than a buffoon, celebrated his return to
power by renouncing the Constitution of 1812 and persecuting its chief
supporters. The Spaniards, blind to everything but their veneration
of the name of Monarchy, gave him their entire confidence. This
unfortunately was completely misplaced; the state of the people became as
it was in the worst period of Charles IV.’s reign, and the country again
became a prey to the rapacity of favourites and the extortions of an
unscrupulous clergy.
The re-establishment of the Bourbons in France commenced more peacefully,
but rumours of serious disaffection were soon rife in Paris. Louis
XVIII. had granted a charter on his return, framed on very liberal and
enlightened lines, but his weakness in pandering to the emigrants and
the clergy created much disaffection, especially in the army.
The Congress held at Vienna had many difficulties with which to contend;
and the meetings barely escaped an abrupt termination. A secret
combination of England, France, and Austria was formed to resist the
designs of Russia and Prussia on Poland and Saxony; but fortunately
matters were successfully arranged, and before the chance for further
dissension could arise, complete unanimity was restored by the news
of the escape of Napoleon from Elba. The deposed Emperor, who had
received information of the fact that the people of France were not
satisfied with their present rulers, landed near Cannes on February
26, and advanced north. The country rallied to him as one man, and
within a month he entered Paris. Any hopes, however, that he may have
had of a peaceful retention of France were soon dispelled. The Allied
Sovereigns at once renewed their pledges of combined action; Napoleon was
proclaimed an outlaw, and steps were concerted to cope with the common
danger. Murat took up arms in Italy to assist his former master, but was
easily overthrown by the Austrians, and his forces dispersed. Napoleon,
preferring to fight outside the borders of France, advanced into Belgium
at the head of 129,000 men. The campaign, which lasted less than a week,
terminated at Waterloo. Napoleon fled first to Paris, and afterwards to
Rochefort, whence he hoped to escape to the United States accompanied
by a few faithful adherents. He was, however, unable to carry out his
design, and in despair went on board an English man-of-war, throwing
himself on the mercy of the Prince Regent. The British Government,
determined on this occasion to choose some spot whence there could be no
possibility of return, fixed on St. Helena, and Napoleon ended his days
there in 1821.
Louis XVIII. was restored to the throne on the re-occupation of Paris by
the Allies. The second Treaty of Paris was signed in November, after much
discussion as to the terms to be imposed. By the most important clauses,
France was to pay indemnities amounting to about £40,000,000, and to
defray the cost of an occupation of the northern provinces by an Allied
force of 150,000 men for five years. In the meanwhile, the members of
the Congress of Vienna had continued and terminated their endeavours to
effect a lasting settlement of Europe. The kingdom of Poland was included
in the dominions of the Czar; half Saxony and the Duchy of Warsaw were
joined to Prussia; the smaller German states were federated; and other
international questions, such as the Abolition of the Slave Trade,
received serious attention.
The restoration of the Bourbons was the signal for a political reaction
throughout France, which in parts of the country developed tendencies
reminiscent of the Revolution. Royalist outbreaks took place in the
south on the receipt of the news of Napoleon’s overthrow, and continued
with violence until forcibly repressed with the assistance of the army
of occupation. The election of the Chamber, which took place in August,
1815, resulted in a complete victory for the Ultra-Royalists, to the
almost entire exclusion of the Liberal and Republican parties. Fouché and
Talleyrand were dismissed, and a new Ministry was formed under the Duc
de Richelieu, which at once took in hand the prosecution of those men
excepted by name from the Acts of Amnesty. Most of them had been sensible
enough to leave the country, but some had remained, and of these Ney and
Labedoyère paid the penalty for their temerity. The policy of the new
Ministry, whose hands were forced by the violence of their supporters,
became more and more advanced, and within two years the _rôles_ of the
two parties seemed reversed, the _Ultras_ attempting to weaken the Royal
power, and the Liberals to support the monarchy. The allied forces, under
the supreme command of Wellington, continued their occupation of the
French territories until 1818, when they were withdrawn.
The final termination of a war which had increased the English National
Debt by over £550,000,000, raised hopes in the breasts of the people of
England, which unfortunately proved to be fallacious. The nation expected
that an alleviation of the grievous burden of taxation from which it
had been suffering would be accompanied by a revival of trade. The year
1815 certainly seemed to foretell happier times, but the following year
witnessed a reaction which plunged the poorer portion of the population
in the direst distress. The propertied and influential classes, terrified
at the excesses of the French Revolution, strained every nerve to
discount all popular movements. A Corn Law, passed in 1815, forbidding
the importation of corn until the price reached 80_s._ a quarter, as
well as the repeal of the Property Tax, increased the destitution of
the agricultural labourers and dwellers in the manufacturing towns.
The discontent and agitation were encouraged by William Cobbett’s
paper, _The Weekly Register_, which advocated universal suffrage and
annual parliaments. The Regent, on his return from the House of Lords
in 1816, was assailed by stones, while riots and seditious meetings
were common throughout the country. Lord Sidmouth, the Home Secretary,
covering the weakness of Government with a specious appearance of power,
carried the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and originated other
arbitrary forms of repression. These, however, were insufficient to
quell the disturbances. Meetings were held in all parts of England, and
the celebrated riot near Manchester in 1819, known as the “Massacre of
Peterloo,” raised a storm of protests against the stringent enactments
carried by Lord Liverpool’s Administration. The laws, however, in
restraint of sedition, termed “The Six Acts,” which were passed during
the same year, had their effect; and a revival of trade in 1820 caused a
momentary lull in the radical campaign for reform.
Many deaths occurred in the Royal Family during 1817 and the three
succeeding years. In 1817 Princess Charlotte, the Prince Regent’s only
child, who had married Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg during the preceding
year, died in childbirth; and a year later occurred the death of Queen
Charlotte. Early in January, 1820, the Duke of Kent died, leaving an only
daughter, destined to succeed to the throne as Queen Victoria; and before
the end of the month George III. terminated his miserable and sorely
afflicted existence.
The accession of the Prince Regent again brought into public notice
the unhappy dissensions between him and his wife. He entirely refused
to allow her name to be inserted in the Prayer Book; and on her return
to England to assert her rights as Queen Consort, he compelled the
Government to bring the matter forward in Parliament. Lord Liverpool,
realising that the measure would increase George IV.’s unpopularity with
his subjects, implored him to be content with moderate counsels; but the
King, firm in his resolve, refused to be satisfied with anything less
than a divorce. Queen Caroline’s arrival in London was little less than
a triumphal procession, and demonstrated clearly the sympathy of the
country with her cause. After a secret Committee had reported on the
case, a bill was brought forward against her in the House of Lords, in
the summer of 1820, but was dropped for good and all in October, when the
Government majority, on the third reading, dwindled to nine. The unhappy
lady did not long survive, for she died of internal inflammation early in
August, 1821, after a fruitless attempt, not three weeks before, to take
her place at her husband’s Coronation.
The five years which succeeded the termination of the war on the
Continent passed without any striking incident; but in 1820 movements
were set on foot in several of the Mediterranean States, notably Spain,
Italy, and Greece, to obtain more liberal forms of government. In Spain
the restoration of the Constitution of 1812, withdrawn by the arbitrary
decree of Ferdinand VII. in 1814, was successfully demanded, and the
movement spread with like results to Portugal.
The insurgents at Naples were not equally fortunate in their attempts
to diminish the tyrannical powers of their King, Ferdinand IV. The
question was discussed by a Congress of European Sovereigns at Laybach,
who decided that Ferdinand should be allowed to retain his arbitrary
powers uncurtailed, and that an Austrian army should be sent to enforce
their resolution. Great Britain took no part in this despotic action of
the Powers; and the exemption of Spain from external interference was
chiefly due to a protest from the English Government against the right of
the Allied Powers to intervene in the internal affairs and government of
other States.
BOOK THE FOURTH
1815-1821
N.B.—This book contains notes for Memoirs from the summer of 1815 [to the
autumn of 1821].
It was not begun till 1830, and _many_ of the facts are from memory,
unassisted by notes taken at the time, though refreshed generally by
reference to some correspondence or document.—V.H.
When I transcribed my notes for Memoirs in 1825, I meant that they should
end at the close of the year 1814. I proposed to confine all my future
labours of the kind to the completion of two supplementary chapters
already begun, one of which related to foreign characters and events,
and is now brought down to the year 1815,[203] and the other,[204] still
in hand, relates to such as having fallen within my observation either
in England or elsewhere before 1815, seem to me, albeit unconnected with
politics, not destitute of interest.
It is not necessary to account, much less to apologise, for having at
one time abandoned a task which I had voluntarily imposed upon myself.
It may with more reason be expected that I should explain my motives in
resuming it now. The truth is, that the third expulsion of the Bourbons
from France in July, 1830, has in some little degree revived in my breast
the spirits and hopes which animated me at an earlier period of life:
Agnosco veteris vestigia flammæ.
Moreover, the accession of King William, to whom my son[205] is attached
both by connection and gratitude, makes it possible that I may be privy
to the secret causes of public and party transactions, although neither
my age, position, nor inclinations render it likely that I either can or
shall take a more active part in them than I have done for fifteen years
past.[206] Of the events of these fifteen years my report must be rapid
and imperfect. I have taken little share in party councils during that
period, and have preserved few memorials of the events, especially of the
first five.
I returned to England in the summer of 1815—the day, I believe, that the
Emperor Napoleon was brought to our shores in a British man-of-war, and
after the second restoration of the Bourbons had been virtually effected.
To both those restorations it is strange but true that the personal
character and predilections of George IV. had mainly contributed. On
the first occasion, without the knowledge of Lord Castlereagh and the
Ministers, he connived at, if he did not contrive, the arrival of the
Bourbon Princes at Bordeaux and other places in France, and during the
negotiations at Chatillon he resorted to many underhand manœuvres to
prevent any termination of them which did not include the restoration of
the pretended legitimate dynasty.