, 4^4 WNVWWW 4 4*44X4' % * <
kW 4W\ 4 44\ 4 4 4 4 4 < 4 4 4 < '.•* »
presented to the
LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA • SAN DIKGO
by
FRIENDS OF THE LIIJRARY
MR. & MRS. RICHARD KORNHAUSER
■i ■■«■
."^->-';
I
\ \
Digitized by tlie Internet Arcliive
in 2007 witli funding from
IVIicrosoft Corporation
li ftp ://www.arcli ive.org/details/coristitutional02maytiala
THE
CONSTITUTIONAL
HISTORY OF ENGLAND.
VOLUME n.
\ \
COJSrSTITUTIONAL
HISTORY OF ENGLAND
SINCE THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE THE THIRD
1760-1860
BY
8IK THOMAS ERSKINE MAY, KC.a
WITH A NEW SVPPLEMENTABY CHAPTER
1861-1871
IN TWO VOLUMES
VOLUME XL
NEW YORK
A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON
714 Broadway
1889
K
University Press:
John Wilson & Son, Cambridge.
CONTENTS
THE SECOND VOLUME.
CHAPTER Vm.
Inflaence of party on Parliamentary goTemment ... .17
The principles represented by English parties 18
Origin of parties ib.
The Puritans 19
Parties under the Stuarts ib.
Whigs and Tories 20
Parties after the Revolution .21
Classes from which parties were mainly drawn 22
l{evival of the Tory party on the accession of George III. . . 24
The king's efforts to break up parties 26
Alliance of the king's friends with the Tories 27
The Whigs in opposition ib.
Resistance to change, a principle adopted by the Tories ... 28
Party principles tested by the American war 29
Secession of the Whigs from Parliament, 1776 30
The Wliigs and the American war 31
Rise of the democratic party 32
The Whigs in power, 1782 83
Party crisis on the death of Lord Rockingham ib.
The Coalition, 1788 34
Its overthrow 36
Principles of coalition considered 38
The Tory party under Mr. Pitt ib. •
Character of Lord Thurlow 40
The Whigs and the Prince of Wales t6.
Influence of the French Revolution upon parties 42
Disruption of the Whigs 48
▼i CONTENTS OF
PAsa
Many leading Whigs coalesce with Mr. Pitt 46
The consolidation of liis party 47
Ostracism of liberal opinions 49
The Tory party in Scotland ib.
Secession of the Whigs from Parliament, 1798 51
Disunion of the Tories, 1801 ib.
The Whigs in office, 1806 6:^
The Tories reinstated, 1807 55
The Wliig party revived 56
The Tories imder Lord Liverpool 68
Democratic sentiments provoked by distress, 1817-1820 . . . 6C
The Whigs associated with the people 61
Increasing power of public opinion ib.
Disunion of the Tories on the death of Lord Liverpool ... 63
Mr. Canning supported by the Whigs 64
The Duke of Wellington's administration 65
Effect of Catholic emancipation upon parties 66
The Whigs in power, 1830 : their union witli tiie people ... 68
Parties after the Reform Act 70
The Radicals 71
The L-ish Party 73
The Tory pjirty assume the name of Conservatives .... 75
Sir Robert Peel's short ministry, 1834-35 76
Parties under Lord Melbourne ib.
Conservative reaction 78
Sir Robert Peel's second ministry . ' 79
His free-trade policy 80
His relations with his party 82
Obligations of a party leader considered 83
Conservatives after Sir Robert Peel's fall 84
The Whigs in office, 1846-1852 ib.
fjord Derby's ministry, 1852 85
Union of Whigs and Peelites under Lord Aberdeen, 1853 ... 8ft
Lord Palmerston as premier, 1855 87
Combination of parties against him ib.
His popularity and sudden fall 8S
Lord Derby's second ministry, 1858 8!t
Ivord Palmerston's second ministry, 1869 W
Fusion of parties ib.
Essential difference between Conservatives and Liberals . . . ib.
Ciianges in the character of parties 92
Politics formerly a profession 93
TIIE SECOND VOLUME. va
Effect of reform upon parties . . 96
Conservatism of age . . . . . . 97
Statesmen under the old and new systems A.
Patronage as an instrument of party 98
Effect of competition upon patronage 100
Review of tlie evils and merits of party ib.
CHAPTER IX.
THE PRESS, AND LIBBKTT OF OPINIOK.
Freedom of opinion the greatest of liberties 102
The last to be recognized t&.
Censorship of the press 108
The first newspapers 104
The press under the Stuarts and the Commonwealth .... ib.
After the Restoration 105
Expiration of the Licensing Act 106
The press in the reign of Anne ib.
In the reigns of George I. and II 106
The press on the accession of George III 109
Wilkes and the " North Briton " 110
Ex-officio informations 112
Junius's letters and the law of libel 113
Juries denied the right to judge of the oflence of libel .... 114
Case of the Dean of St. Asaph ^ 118
Stockdale's trial 119
Mr. Fox's Act to amend the law of libel 122
I'rogress of free discussion in the press 123
Public meetings and associations 124
Tlie silk-weavers' riots, 1765 125
Meetings and associations, 1768-70 126
Public meetings, 1779-80 ib.
Political associations considered 129
Protestant associations, their bigotry and violence 12fl
Lord CJeorge Gordon's riots, 1780 ib.
Military action in absence of a magistrate 132
The Slave Trade Association, 1787 : its means of agitation, and
causes of success 1-33
Progress of public opinion, 1760-92 134
Democratic publications, 1792 . . i/».
Democratic associations 186
riii CONTENTS OF
Exaggerated alarm of democracy 188
Repressive policy, 1792 139
Proclamation against seditious writings 141
Prosecutions for sedition 142
Societies for suppressing sedition 143
Democracy in Scotland ' 144
Trials of Muir, Palmer, and others 145
These trials noticed in Parliament 150
Trials for sedition in England, 1794 151
Keports of secret committees 152
State trials, 1794, of Watt and Downie 154
And of Hardy, Home Tooke, and others 156
Attack upon the king, 1795 163
The treasonable practices bill 164
The seditious meetings bill 166
Public opposition to these bills 169
Mr. Reeves's pamphlet 170
Regulation of newspapers, 1789-98 172
Bill to suppress corresponding societies, 1799 173
Repressive measures completed : their effects 174
Trials of Mr. Wakefield and the " Courier," 1799 176
Trial of Jean Peltier, 1803 177
Trials of Cobbett and the Messrs. Hunt, 1804-11 178
Progress of free disciusiou reviewed 180
CHAPTER X.
THB PRESS, AND LIBERTY OF OPINION, CONTINCED,
Repressive policy of the regency 182
Disturbed state of the country, 1815-16 183
Outrage on the prince regent, 1817 . .^ i6.
Repressive measures 184
Trials of Watson and others, 1817 186
Lord Sidmouth's circular to the magistrates ib.
Powers exercised against the press 188
Trials of Hone, 1817 189
Agitation in the manufacturing districts, 1819 191
The Manchester meeting 193
The Six Acts, 1819 196
The Cato Street Conspiracy, 1820 200
Trials of Hunt and Sir C. Wolseley ib.
The contest between authority and liberty of opinion reviewed St
THE SECOND VOLUME. IX
FAOi
Final domination of public opinion over authority . . . 201
The Constitutional Society and tiie press, 1821 203
The Catliolic Association 204
Suppressed by Parliament, 1825 . 206
But continued in auutlicr form 207
Final suppression of tlie association, 1839 209
Progress of public opinion in the reign of George IV 210
Later prosecutions of the press, 1830 211
Complete freedom of the press established 213
Fiscal laws affecting tlie press ib.
Repeal of " Taxes on knowledge " 214
General freedom of opinion 216
Agitation for Parliamentary Reform, 1830-32 216
Political unions and excited meetings 218
Riots on rejection of the second reform bill 219
Dangerous excitement during tlie reform crisis 222
Causes of the popular triumph 223
Agitation for repeal of the Union : causes of its failure ... ib.
Mr. O'Connell submits to the law, 1831 224
His trial, 18U 227
The Orange lodges suppressed 230
The Anti-Slavery Association 232
Trades' unions and Dorchester laborers ib.
The Chartists, 1837-48 : inevitable feilure of their agitation . 234
Chartist meeting, April 10th, 1848 237
The Anti-corn Law League : its organization, and causes of
success 239
Political agitation reviewed 242
Altered relations of government to the people 243
CHAJPTER XI.
LIBERTT OF THE SUBJECT.
Liberty of the subject the earliest of political rights .... 245
General warrants, 1763 ib.
Arrest of Wilkes and the printers 247
Actions brought by them ib.
Search warrant for papers : case of Entinck v. Carrington . . 249
General warrants condemned by the courts, and in Parliament . 251
Early cases of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act . . 253
Habeas Corpus Act suspended, 1794 ib.
Act of indemnity, 1801 266
% CONTENTS OF
PIOI
Habeas Corpus Act suspended, 1817 257
Bill of Indemnity ib.
Suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland 259
Impressment for tlie army 260
Impressment for the navy 261
Revenue laws 263
Imprisonment of Crown debtors 2G4
Imprisonment for contempt of court 265
Arrest on mesne process 267
Imprisonment for debt 268
Kelief to insolvent debtors 270
Slavery in England : the Negro case, 1771 272
Negroes in Scotland 273
Slavery of colliers and salters in Scotland 274
Abolition of colonial slavery 275
Employment of spies and informers 276
Relations of the executive with informers 277
Opening letters at the Post-office 279
Petition of Mazzini and others, 1844 280
Protection of foreigners in England 283
Alien Acts 284
The Naturalization Act, 1844 286
Right of asylum never impaired tV).
Napoleon's demands refused, 1802 287
Principles on which aliens are protected 288
The Orsini conspiracy, 1858 289
The conspiracy to murder bill ib.
Extradition treaties 290
CHAPTER XII.
THE CHURCH AND RELIGIOtIS LIBERTT.
Relations of the Cimrch to political history 291
The Keformation 292
Toleration formerly unknown 293
(^ivil disabilities imposed by Elizabeth ib.
Doctrinal moderation of the Reformation 294
Rigorous enforcement of conformity 295
Close relations of the reformed Church with the State .... 297
The Reformation in Scotland 2j3
The Reformation in Ireland • . 299
Tlie Church policy of James 1 800
THE SECOND VOLUME. Xl
piea
The Church and religion iinder Cliarles I. and the Common-
wealth 301
Persecution of Nonconformists under Charles II 302
The Catholics also repressed 304
The Toleration Act of William III 805
Catholics under William III 30o
The Church policy of Anne and George I. and II 307
State of the Church and religion on the accession of George III. 308
Influence of Wesley and Whitefield 310
lielaxation of the penal code commenced 313
General character of the penal code 314
Subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles 316
Relief granted to dissenting ministers and Bchoolmasters, 1779 . 317
Prevalent opinions concerning Catholics • 818
The Catholic Relief Act of 1778 819
The Protestant riots 320
Motions for the repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, 1787-
1790 322
Relief to protesting Catholic dissenters, 1791 327
Effect of the Test Act in Scotland 828
Restraints on Scotch Episcopalians repealed 329
Mr. Fox's bill for repeal of laws affecting Unitarians, 1792 . . ib.
Relief granted to the Irisli Catholics, 1792-93 330
And to the Scotch Catliolics 831
Claims of relief to Quakers . //).
Union with Ireland in connection with Catholic disabilities . . 333
Concessions forbidden by George III 336
The Catholic question in abeyance 337
Motions on the Catholic claims in 1805 338
The Whig ministry of 1806 and the Catholic question . . . 841
The army and navy service bill 342
Anti-Catholic sentiments of the Portland ministry 844
Catholic agitation, 1808-11 345
CHAPTER XIII.
THE CHCRCH AXD RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, CONTINUED.
The regency in connection with religious liberty 348
Freedom of worship to Catholic soldiers 849
Dissenters relieved from oaths imposed by the Toleration Act . 850
The Catholic question in 1812 tb.
And in 1813 854
Xii CONTENTS OF
Relief to Catliolic officers in army and navy, 1813 and 1817 . . 866
Catholic claims, 1815-22 i6.
Roman Catholic Peers' bill, 1822 359
Position of the Catholic question in 1823 3(5i
Bills for amendment of the marriage laws affecting Roman
Catholics and dissenters 862
Agitation in Ireland, 1823-25 365
The Irish franchise, 1825 ib.
The Wellington ministry 366
Repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts, 1828 867
The Catholic claims in 1828 870
The Clare election 371
Necessity of Catholic relief acknowledged by the ministry . . 373
The king consents to the measure 874
Mr. Peel loses his seat at Oxford 875
The Catholic Relief Act, 1829 876
Elective franchise in Ireland 379
Mr. O'Connell and the Clare election 380
Catholic emancipation too long deferred 381
Quakers and others admitted to the Commons on affirmation . 382
Jewish disabilities 383
Mr. Grant's motions for relief to the Jews i7).
Jews admitted to corporations 386
Baron L, N. de Rothschild returned for London 887
Claims to be sworn ib.
Case of Mr. Alderman Salomons 888
Attempt to admit Jews by a declaration, 1857 889
The Jewish Relief Act, 1858 890
CHAPTER XIV.
THE CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, CONTINUBD.
Marriage laws affocting Roman Catholics and dissenters . . . 802
Dissenters' marriage bills, 1834-35 893
Register of births, marriages, and deaths 895
Dissenters' Marriage Act, 1836 . ^ ih.
Dissenters' burials 396
Admission of dissenters to universities 897
Dissenters' Chapels Act 400
final repeal of penalties on religious worship 402
The law of church-rates jVi.
Earlier schemes for settling the church-rate question .... 40i
THE SECOND VOLUME. ziii
rA«
Tlie first Braintree case 405
The second Braintree case 406
Bills for the abolition of church-rates, and present position of
the question 407
State of the Church of England towards the latter part of the
last century 409
Effect of sudden increase to population 410
Causes, adverse to the clergy in presence of dissent .... ib.
The regeneration of the Church 412
Church building and extension 413
Ecclesiastical revenues 414
Tithe commutation in England 416
Progress of dissent 418
Statistics of places of worship 420
Relations of the Church to dissent ib.
And to Parliament 421
The Papal aggression, 1850 422
The Ecclesiastical Titles bill, 1851 426
Schisms in the Church of Scotland 429
The patronage question 430
The Veto Act, 1834 433
The Auchterarder and Strathbogie cases 434
The General Assembly address the queen 439
And petition Parliament 440
The secession 441
Tlie Free Church of Scotland 442
The Patronage Act, 1843 443
lieligious disunion in Scotland 444
Tlie Church in Ireland ib.
Ixesistance to paj^ment of tithes 445
The Church temporalities (Ireland) Act, 1833 448
The appropriation question ib.
The Irish Church coran\ission 450
Sir Robert Peel's ministry overthrown on the appropriation
question, 1835 453
Revenues and statistics of the Irish Church 454
Abandonment of the appropriation question ib.
Commutation of tithes in Ireland 455
National education in Ireland ib.
Maynooth College 466
The Queen's Colleges . . 458
WV CONTENTS OF
CHAPTER XV.
LOCAL QOVKRNMENT.
Local government the basis of constitutional freedom .... 460
The parish and the vestry 461
History of English corporations 462
Loss of popular rights 463
Abuses of close eorjjorations 464
Monopoly of electoral rights 46(i
The Municipal Corporations Act, 1835 »7>.
Corporation of the city of London 4G8
Reform of corporate abuses, in Scotland 470
Corporations in Ireland 472
Their abuses; total exclusion of Catholics ih.
Tlie corporations (Ireland) bills, 1835-39 473
The Irish Corporations Act, 1840 476
Local Improvement and Police Acts ib.
Courts of Quarter Sessions 477
Distinctive character of counties and towns 478
CHAPTER X^VL
IRELAND BEFOSB THB nNIOK.
Progress of liberty in Ireland 479
The Irish Parliament before the Union ib.
The executive government 481
Protesttmt ascendency ib.
Subordination of the Irish Parliament to the government and
Parliament of England 482
Commercial restrictions 484
New era opened under George III , , ib.
The Irish Parliament asserts its independence 485
Condition of the people . . . 487
Partial removal of commercial restrictions, 1778-79 .... 488
Tiie rise of tlie volunteers 489
They demand legislative independence, 1780 490
The convention of Dungannon 491
Ixfgislative and jiidicialindependence granted, 1782 .... 493
Difficulties of Irish independence ib.
Agitation for Parliamentary Heform 495
Mr Pitt's commercial measures, 1785 496
Liberal measures of 1792-93 497
THE SECOND VOLUME. XV
The United Irishmen, 1791 498
Feuils between Protestants and Catholics 499
The rebellion of 1798 500
The Union concerted 502
Means by which it was accomplished 503
Result of the Union 606
And of the CathoUc Relief Act and Parliamentary Reform . . 608
Freedom and equality of Ireland ib
CHAPTER XVII.
BRITISH COLONIES AND DEPENDENCIES.
The rights and liberties of English colonists ....... 510
Ordinary form of colonial constitutions 611
Supremacy of England over the colonies 512
Commercial restrictions imposed by England 613
Arguments on taxation of colonies for. imperial purposes . . . 614
The American Stamp Act, 1765 617
Mr. 'i'ownshend's colonial taxes, 1767 619
Repealed, except the tea duties 620
Tlie attack on the tea-ships at Boston 621
Boston Port Act, 1774 622
Constitution of Massachusetts suspended f7).
Revolt of the American colonies . 623
Crown colonies 624
Canada and other North American colonies 625
Australian colonies 626
Transportation • . . 627
Colonial administration after the American war ib.
Colonial patronage 528
Effects of free trade upon the political relations of England and
her colonies 530
Contumacy of Jamaica repressed, 1838 531
Insurrection in Canada : union of the two provinces .... ib.
Responsible government introduced into Canada and other
colonies 532
Conflicting interests of England and the colonies 634
Colonial democracy 635
Military defence of the colonies 639
Administration of dependencies, unfitted for self-government . 640
India under the East India Company ib.
Mr. Fox's India bill, 1783 642
xvi CONTENTS OF THE SECOND VOLUME.
PAOI
Mr. Pitt's [ndia bill, 1784 ^4
Later measures ib.
India transferred to the Crown, 1858 645
Subsequent Indian administration ib.
Freedom and good government of the British empire .... 646
CHAPTER XVIIL
PHOOKESS OF GENERAL LEOISLATIOH.
Improved spirit of modern legislation 547
Revision of official emoluments 548
Defects and abuses in the law ib.
Law reforms already effected . 560
The spirit and temper of the judges 552
Merciless character of the criminal code 553
Its revision 556
Other amendments of the criminal law 558
Improvement of prisons and prison discipline 659
Reformatories 661
Establishment of police in England 562
The old and the new poor laws in England 663
In Scotland and Ireland 665
Care and protection of lunatics ' 666
Protection to women and children in factories and mines . . 567
Measures for the improvement of the working classes .... 668
Popular education ib.
Former commercial policy . ^ 671
Free trade 672
Modern financial policy ; its value to the community .... 573
Increase of national expenditure since 1850 574
"Democracy discouraged and content promoted by good govern-
ment 576
Pressure of legislation since the Reform Act ib.
Foreign relations of England affected by her freedom . . 677
Conclusion 578
SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTER.
1861-1871 679
Index 607
THE
CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY
OF
ENGLAND
SLNCE
THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE THE THIRD
CHAPTER VIII.
Influence of Party on Parliamentary Government : — Principles and Origic
of English Parties: — Whigs and Tories: — Sketch of Parties from the
Accession of George III. until the Close of the American War: — The
Coalition: — Tory Party under Jlr. Pitt: — Effect of French Revolu-
tion upon Parties: — State of Parties from 1801 to 1830; and thence to
1860 : — Changes in the Character and Organization of Parties.
We have surveyed the great political institutions by which
the state is governed ; and examined the influence influence of
which each has exercised, and their combined aamentaiy"^
operation. That a form of government so com- government.
posite, and combining so many conflicting forces, has gen-
erally been maintained in harmonious action, is mainly due
to the organization of parties, — an agency hardly recog-
nized by the Constitution, yet inseparable from Parlia-
mentary government, and exercising the greatest influence,
for good or evil, upon the political destinies of the country.
Party has guided and controlled, and often dominated over
the more ostensible authorities of the state : it has sup-
ported the Crown and aristocracy against the people : it has
trampled upon public liberty ; it has dethroned and coerced
kings, overthrown ministers and Parliaments, humbled the
nobles, and established popular rights. But it has protected
VOL. II. 8
18 PARTY.
Ihe fabric of the government from shocks which threatened
its very foundations. Parties have risen and fallen : but
institutions have remained unshaken. The annals of party
embrace a large portion of the history of England : ^ but
passing lightly over its meaner incidents, — the ambition,
intrigues, and jealousies of statesmen, the greed of place-
hunters, and the sinister aims of faction, — we will endeavor
to trace its influence in advancing or retarding the progress
of constitutional liberty and enlightened legislation.
The parties in which Englishmen have associated, have
Principles represented cardinal principles of government,'^ —
byEneUs^ authority on the one side, popular rights and priv-
parties. ilegcs on the other. The former principle, pressed
to extremes, would tend to absolutism, — the latter, to a
republic: but, controlled within proper limits, they are both
necessary for the safe working of a balanced constitution.
When parties have lost sight of these principles, in pursuit
of objects less worthy, they have degenerated into factions.'
The divisions, conspiracies, and civil wars, by which Eng-
Ori^nof par- ^^^^ was convulsed until late in the sixteenth cen-
****• tury, must not be confounded with the development
of parties. Rarely founded on distinctive principles, their
ends were sought by arms, or deeds of violence and treason.
Neither can we trace the origin of parties in those earlier
contentions, sometimes of nobles, sometimes of Commons,
with the Crown, to which we owe many of our most valued
1 Mr. Wingrove Cooke, in his spirited " History of Party," to which I
desire to acknowledge many obligations, relates the most instructive inci-
dents of general history.
3 " Party is a body of men united, for promoting by their joint endeav-
ors the national interest, upon some particular principle in which they are
all agreed." — Burke's Present Discontents, Works, ii. 335.
* '' National interests " . . " would be sometimes sacrificed, and always
made subordinate to, personal interests; and that, I think, is the true char-
acteristic of faction." — Bolingbroke' s Dissert, upon Parties, Works, iii. 15.
" Of such a nature are connections in politics; essentially necessary to
the full performance of 'our public duty: accidentally liable to degenerat*
Into faction." — lUd., Works, ii. 332.
ORIGIN OF ENGLISH PARTIES. 19
liberties. They marked, indeed, the spirit of freedom which
animated our forefathers ; but they subsided with the occa-
sions which had incited them. Classes asserted their rights ;
but parliamentary parties, habitually maintaining opposite
principles, were unknown.
The germs of party, in the councils and Parliament of
England, — generated by the Reformation, — were ^he Pnn-
first discernible in the reign of Elizabeth. The *^^'
bold spirit of the Puritans then spoke out in the House of
Commons, in support of the rights of Parliament, and
against her prerogatives, in matters of Church and State.^
In their efforts to obtain toleration for their brethren and
modifications of the new ritual, they were countenanced by
Cecil and Walsingham and other eminent councillors of the
queen. In matters of state, they could expect no sympathy
from the court ; but perceiving their power as an organized
party, they spared no eflPorts to gain admission into the House
of Commons, until, joined by other opponents of prerogative,
they at length acquired a majority.
In 1601, they showed their strength by a successful re-
sistance to the queen's prerogative of granting
... , , , ^^ Conflict of
monopolies in trade by royal patent. Under her parties under
1 T T -ii • J J ^' /. the Stuarts.
weak successor, James J., lU-judged assertions or
prerogative were met with bolder remonstrances. His doc-
trine of the divine right of kings, and the excesses of the
High-Church party, widened the breach between the Crown
and the great body of the Puritans,* and strengthened the
popular party. Foremost among them were Sandys, Coke,
Selden, and Pym, who may be regarded as the first leaders
of a regular parliamentary opposition.
1 Hume's Hist., iii. 497, 511. This author goes too far, when he asserts,
" It was to this sect, whose principles appear so frivolous, and habits so ri-
diculous, that the English owe the whole freedom of their constitution." —
Ibid., 520. D'Ewes' Journ. 156-175.
2 " The principles by which King James and King Charles I. governed,
and the excesses of hierarchical and monarchical power, exercised in conse-
quence of them, gave great advantage to the oppo.site opinions, and entirely
occasioned the miseries which followed." — Bolitiijbroke, Works, iii. 50-
20 PARTY.
The arbitrary measures of Charles I., the bold schemes
of Straffor^, arid the intolerant bigotry of Laud, precipitated
a collision between the opposite principles of government,
and divided the whole country into Cavaliers and Round-
heads. On one side, the king's prerogative had been pushed
to extremes ; on the dther, the defence of popular rights waa
inflamed by ambition and fanaticism into a fierce republican
sentiment. The principles and the parties then arrayed
against one another long retained their vitality, under other
names and different circumstances.
Charles II., profiting little by the experience of the last
reign, — nay, rather encouraged by the excesses of the com-
monw/ealth to cherish kingly power,* — pursued the reckless
course of the Stuarts ; his measures being supported by the
Court party, and opposed by the Country party.
Tiie contest of these parties upon the Exclusion Bill, in
VTbigsand 1^)80, at length gave rise to the well-known names
Toriaj. jjf "VViiig and Tory. Originally intended as terms
of reproach and ridicule, they afterwards became the dis-
tinctive titles of two great parties, representing principles
essential to the freedom and safety of the State.^ The
Whigs espoused the principles of liberty, the independent
rights of Parliament and the people, and the lawfulness of
resistance to a king who violated the laws. The Tories
maintained the divine and indefeasible right of the king, the
supremacy of prerogative, and the duty of passive obedience
1 Bolingbroke's Dissertation on Parties, Works, iii. 52.
■■' Nothing can be more silly or pointless than these names. The sup-
porters of the Duke of York, as Catholics, were assumed to be Irishmen,
and were called by the Country party " Tories," — a term hitherto applied
to a si-t of lawless bog-trotters, resembling the modern " Whiteboys."'
The Countiy party were called Whigs, according to some, " a vernacular,
in Scotland, for corrupt and sour whey;" and, according to others, from
the Scottish Covenanters of the south-western counties of Scotland, who
had received the appellation of Wliigamores, or Whigs, when they made
an inroad upon Edinburgh in 1648, under the Marquess of Argyll. Roger
Nprlh's Kxamea., 320-324; Burnet's Own Time, i. 78; Cooke's Hiat. of
Fai ty, i. 137.
WHIGS AND TORIES. 21
on the part of the subject.* Both parties ahke upheld the
monarchy : but the Whigs contended for the limitation of i(s
authority within the bounds of law ; the principles of the
Tories favored absolutism in Church and State.''
The infatuated assaults of James II. upon the religion
and liberties of the people united, for a time, the
Whigs and Tories in a common cause ; and the the revoiu-
latter, in opposition to their own principles, con-
curred in the necessity of expelling a dangerous tyrant from
his throne.® The Revolution was the triumph and conclu-
sive recognition of Whig principles, as the foundation of a
limited monarchy. Yet the principles of the two parties,
modified by the conditions of this constitutional settlement,
were still distinct and antagonistic. The Whigs continued
to promote every necessary limitation of the royal author-
ity, and to favor religious toleration ; * the Tories generally
leaned to prerogative, to High-Church doctrines, and hostil-
ity to Dissenters ; while the extreme members of that party
betrayed their original principles, as Non-jurors and Jacobites.
The two parties contended and intrigued, with varying suc-
cess, during the reigns of William and of Anne ; when the
final victory of the Whigs secured constitutional government.
But the stubborn principles, disappointed ambition, and fac-
tious violence of Tories disturbed the reigns of the two first
kings of the House of Hanover with disaffection, treason,
and civil wars.* The final overthrow of the Pretender, in
1 Bolingbroke's Dissertation on Parties, Works, iii. 39; Roger North's
Examen., 325-342.
2 Brady's Hist, of the Crown, 1684, Tracts, 339; Preface to Hist, of Eng-
land, &c. ; and Declaration of University of Oxford, July 21st, 1683. —
Cooke's Hist, of Party, i. 346; Macaulay's Hist. i. 270. Filmer says: "A
man is bound to obey the king's command against law; nay, in some cases,
against divine laws." — Patriarchia, 100.
3 Bolingbroke's Works, iii. 124, 126.
■* Lord Bolingbroke asserts, that the Whigs, after the revolution, insisted
" on nothing further, in favor of the Dissenters, than that indulgence which
the church was most willing to grant." — Works, iii. 132.
6 Pari. Hist. xiii. 568; Coxe's Life of Walpole, i. 66, 199, &c.
22 PARTY.
1745, being fatal to the Jacobite cause, the Tories became
a national party; and, still preserving their principles, at
length transferred their hearty loyalty to the reigning king.
Meanwhile the principles of botli parties had naturally been
modified by the political circumstances of the times. The
Whigs, installed as rulers, had been engaged for more than
forty years after the death of Anne, in consolidating the
power and influence of the Crown in connection with Par-
liamentary government. The Tories, in opposition, had
been constrained to renounce the untenable doctrines of
their party, and to recognize the lawful rights of Parlia-
ment and the people.^ Nay, at times they had adroitly
paraded the popular principles of the Whig school against
ministers, who, in the practical administration of the gov-
ernment and in furtherance of the interests of their party,
had been too prone to forget them. Bolingbroke, Wyndham,
and Shippen had maintained the constitutional virtues of
short parliaments, and denounced the dangers of parliamen-
tary corruption, the undue influence of the Crown, and a
standing army.^
Through all vicissitudes of time and circumstance, how-
ciassesfrom ever, the distinctive principles of the two great
ui^nV""** parties were generally maintained ; * and the so-
drawn, (.jai classes from which they derived their strength
i " Toryism," says Mr. Wingrove Cooke, " was formed for government;
it is only a creed for rulers." — Jlist. of Party, ii. 49.
2 Bolingbroke's Dissertation on Parties, Works, iii. 133; The Craftsman,
No. 40, &c.; Pari. Hist., vii. 311; Jb., ix. 426, ei seq.; lb., x. 375, 479;
Coxe's Life of Walpole, ii. 62; Tindal's Hist., iii. 722, iv. 423; "Your
right Jacobite," said Sir R. Walpole, in 1738, "disguises his true senti-
ments: he roars for revolution principles; he pretends to be a great friend
lo liberty, and a great admirer of our ancient constitution." — Pari. Hist.,
.\. 401.
8 Mr. Wingrove Cooke says, that after Bolingbroke renounced the Jac-
obite cause on the accession of Geo. II., "henceforward we never find the
Tory party struggling to extend the prerogative of the Crown." " The
principle of that party has been rather aristocratical than monarchical," —
a remark which is, probably, as applicable to one party as to the other. —
HitL of Party u. 105.
WHIGS AND TORIES. 23
were equally defined. The loyal adherents of Charles I.
were drawn from the territorial nobles, the country gentle-
men, the higher yeomanry, the Church, and the universities:
the Parliament was mainly supported by the smaller free-
holders, the inhabitants of towns, and Protestant Noncon-
formists. Seventy years afterwards, on the accession of
George L, the same classes were distinguished by similar
principles. The feudal relations of the proprietors of the
soil to their tenantry and the rural population, their close
connection with the Church, and their traditional loyalty,
assured their adherence to the politics of their forefathers.
The rustics, who looked to the squire for bounty, and to the
rector for the consolations of religion and charity, were not
a class to inspire sentiments favorable to the sovereignty of
the people. Poor, ignorant, dependent, and submissive, they
seemed born to be ruled as children, rather than share in the
government of their country.
On the other hand, the commercial and manufacturing
towns, — the scenes of active enterprise and skilled handi-
craft, — comprised classes who naturally leaned to self-gov-
ernment, and embraced Whig principles. Merchants and
manufacturers, themselves springing from the people, had
no feelings or interests in common witli the county-families,
from whose society they were repelled with haughty exclu-
siveness ; they were familiarized, by municipal administra-
tion, with the practice of self-government ; their pursuits
were congenial to political activity and progress. Even
their traditions were associated with the cause of the Parlia-
ment and the people against the Crown. The stout burghers
among whom they dwelt were spirited and intelligent. Con-
gregated within the narrow bounds of a city, they canvassed,
and argued, and formed a public opinion concerning affairs
of state, naturally inclining to popular rights. The stern
nonconformist spirit, as yet scarcely known in country vil-
lages, animated large bodies of townsmen with an hereditary
distrust of authority in church and state.
24 PARTY.
Il was to such communities as these that the Wliig
ministers of the House of Hanover, and the great territorial
families of that party, looked for popular support. As
land-owners, they commanded the representation of several
counties and nomination boroughs. But the greater num-
ber of the smaller boroughs being under the influence of
Tory squires, the Whigs would have been unequal to their
opponents in parliamentary following, had not new allies
been found in the moneyed classes who were rapidly in-
creasing in numbers and importance. The superior wealth
and influence of these men enabled them to wrest borough af-
ter borough from the local squires, until they secured a parlia-
mentary majority for the Whigs. It was a natural and ap-
propriate circumstance, that the preservation and growth of
English liberties should have been associated with the pro-
gress of the country in commercial wealth and greatness.
The social improvement of the people won for them privi-
leges which it fitted them to enjoy.
Meanwhile, long-continued possession of power by the
Whigs, and the growing discredit of the Jacobite
Tories prior party, attracted to the side of the srovernment
to the acces- \,, „ , ^,
Bion of George many lory patrons of boroughs. These causes,
aided by the corrupt parliamentary organization
of that period,^ maintained the ascendency of the Whig
party until the full of Sir Robert Walpole ; and of the
same party, with other alliances, until the death of George
11.^ Their rule, if signalized by a few measures which
serve as landmarks in the history of our liberties, was yet
distinguished by its moderation, and by respect for the the-
ory of constitutional government, which was fairly worked
)ut, as far as it was compatible with the political abuses and
corruptions of their times. The Tories were a dispirited
and helpless minority ; and in 1751 their hopes of better
times were extinguished by the death of the Prince of
1 Siipra, Vol. I. 300.
' Dodington's Diary, 386 ; Cuxe's Pelham Administration, ii. 166.
SKETCH OF PARTIES. 25
Wales and Bolingbroke.* Some were gained over by the
government ; and others cherished, in sullen silence, the
principles and sympathies of their ruined party. But the
new reign rapidly revived their hopes. The Their renvai
young king, brought up at Leicester House, had reiga.
acquired, by instruction and early association, the principles
in favor at that little court.^ His political faith, his ambi-
tion, his domestic affections, and his fiiendships alike at-
tracted him towards the Tories ; and his friends were, ac-
cordingly, transferred from Leicester House to St. James's,
He at once became the regenerator and leader of the Tory
party. If their cause had suffered discouragement and dis-
grace in the two last reigns, all the circumstances of this
period were favorable to the revival of their principles and
tlie triumph of their traditional policy. To rally round the
throne had ever been their watchword ; respect for preroga-
tive and loyal devotion to the person of the sovereign had
been their characteristic pretensions. That the source of
all power was from above, was their distinctive creed. And
now a young king had arisen among them, who claimed for
himself their faith and loyalty. The royal authority was
once more to be supreme in the government of the state :
the statesmen and parties who withstood it were to be cast
down and trampled upon. Who so fit as men of Tory princi-
ples and traditions to aid him in the recovery of regal power ?
The party which had clung with most fidelity to the Stuarts,
and had defended government by prerogative, were the nat-
ural instruments for increasing — under another dynasty and
lifferent political conditions — the influence of the Crown.
We have seen how early in his reign the king began to
put aside his Whig councillors ; and with what ^.j^^ Ki„gta
precipitation he installed his Tory favorite, Lord ^^^^^l ^
^ ^ •' ' OTerthrow
Bute, as first minister.' With singular steadiness <*« Whigs.
1 Coxe's Life of Walpole, 379.
2 Supi-a, Vol. I. 22; Lord Waldegrave's Mem., 63; Lord Hervey'« Ahm
ii. 443, &c.; Coxe's Life of Walpole. 703-707.
8 Supra. Vol. L 30. 31.
26 PARTY.
of purpose, address, and artful management, he seized upon
every occasion for disuniting and weakening the Whigs, and
extending the influence of the Tories. It was his policy
to bring men of every political connection into his service ;
but he specially favored Tories, and Whigs alienated from
their own party. All the early administrations of his reign
were coalitions. The Whigs could not be suddenly sup-
planted; but they were gradually displaced by men more
willing to do the bidding of the court. Restored for a short
time to power, under Lord Rockingham, they were easily
overthrown, and replaced by the strangely composite minis-
try of the Duke of Grafton, consisting, according to Burke,
"of patriots and courtiers, king's friends and Republicans,
Whigs and Tories, treacherous friends and open enemies." *
On the retirement of Lord Chatham, the Tories acquired a
preponderance in the cabinet ; and when Lord Camden
withdrew, it became wholly Tory. The king could now
dispense with the services of Whig statesmen ; and accord-
ingly Lord North was placed at the head of the first minis-
try of this reign, which was originally composed of Tories.
But he seized the first opportunity of strengthening it, by a
coalition with the Grenvilles and Bedfords.**
Meanwhile, it was the fashion of the court to decry all
u Men, not P^rtj Connections as factions. Personal capacity
ineasuiea." ^^g }jg|^ „p ^ jj^g g^jg qualification for the ser-
vice of the Crown. This doctrine was well calculated to in-
crease the king's own power, and to disarm parliamentary
opposition. It served also to justify the gradual exclusion
of the Whigs from the highest offices, and the substitution
of Toi'ies. When the Whigs had been entirely supplant-
ed, and the Tories safely established in their place, the
doctrine was heard of no more, except to discredit an oppo-
sition.
The rapid reconstruction of the Tory party was facilitated
1 Speech on American Taxation, Works, ii, 420.
' Lord Mahoii's Hist, v. 442.
WHIGS IX OPPOSITION. 27
by the organization of the king's friends.* Most of these
men originally belonged to that party ; and none
could be enrolled amongst them, without speedily friends aiued
becoming converts to its principles.* Country gen-
tlemen who had been out of favor neariy fifty years, found
themselves courted and caressed ; and, faithful to their prin-
ciples, could now renew their activity in public life, encour-
aged by the smiles of their sovereign. This party was also
recruited from another class of auxiliaries. Hitherto the
new men, unconnected with county families, had generally
enrolled themselves on the opposite side. Even where their
preference to Whig principles was not decided, they had
been led to that connection by jealousy of the land-own-
ers, by the attractions of a winning cause, and government
favors ; but now they were won over, by similar allurements,
to the court. And henceforth, much of the electoral corrup-
tion which had once contributed to the parliamentary ma-
jority of the Whigs, was turned against them by their Tory
rivals and the king's friends.
Meanwhile, the Whigs, gradually excluded from power,
were driven back upon those popular principles Q^g^^ry j^^
which had been too long in abeyance. They opposi'io"*-
were still, indeed, an aristocratic body ; but no longer able
to rely upon family connections, they offered themselves as
leaders of the people. At the same time, the revival and
activity of Tory principles in the government of the state
reanimated the spirit of freedom represented by their party.
They resisted the dangerous influence of the Crown, and the
scarcely less dangerous extension of the privileges of Parlia-
ment : they opposed the taxation of America : they favored
the publication of debates, and the liberty of the press : they
exposed and denounced parliamentary corruption. Their
strength and character, as a party, were impaired by the jeal-
ousies and dissensions of rival families. Pelhams, Rocking-
hams, Bedfords, Grenvilles, and the followers of Mr. Pitt too
1 Bvpra, Vol. I. 2-t, 41. 2 Walp. Mem., i. 15; Butler's Kem. i. 74, &e
28 PARTY.
often lost sight of the popular cause in their contentions for
mastery. But, in the main, the least favorable critic of the
Whigs will scarcely venture to deny their services in the cause
of liberty, from the commencement of this reign until the
death of Lord Rockingham. Such was the vigor of their op-
posiiion, and such the genius and eloquence of their leaders, —
Lord Chatham, Mr. Fox, Lord Camden, Mr. Burke, and Mr.
Sheridan, — that they exercised a strong influence upon pub-
lic opinion, and checked and moderated the arbitrary spirit of
the court party. The haughty pretensions to irresponsibili-
ty, which marked the first ministers of this reign, became
much lowered in the latter years of Lord North's adminis-
tration. Free discussion prevailed over doctrines opposed to
liberty. Nor was the publication of debates already without
its good results upon the conduct of both parties.
But while the Tories were renouncing doctrines repug-
nant to public liberty, they were initiating a new
Tories op- ... !•! 1 • • r 1 •
posed to pnnciple not hitherto characteristic or their party.
^' Respect for authority, nay, even absolute power, is
compatible with enlightened progress in legislation. Great
emperors, from Justinian to Napoleon, have gloried in the
fame of lawgivers. But the Tory party were learning to view
the amendment of our laws with distrust and aversion. In
iheir eyes change was a political evil. Many causes concurred
to favor a doctrine wholly unworthy of any school of states-
men. Tory sympatliies were with the past. Men, who in
the last generation would have restored the Stuarts and an-
nulled the Revolution, had little in their creed congenial to
enlightened progress. The power which they had recovered
was associated with the influence of the crown and the ex-
isting polity of the state. Changes in the laws urged by
opponents, and designed to restrain their own authority,
were naturally resisted. Nor must the character of the
men who constituted this party be forgotten. Foremost
among them was the king himself, — a man of narrow intel-
lect and intractable prejudices, without philosophy or states-
PRINCIPLES OF THE TWO PARTIES. 29
manship, and whose science of government was ever to carry
out, by force or management, his own strong will. The
main body of the party whom he had raised to power and
taken into his confidence, consisted of country gentlemen, —
types of immobility, — of the clergy, trained by their trust
and calling to reverence the past ; and of lawyers, guided by
prescription and precedent, venerating laws which they had
studied and expounded, but not aspiring to the higher phi-
losophy of legislation. Such men, contented " stare super
antiquas vias" dreaded every change as an innovation. In
this spirit the king warned the people, in 1780, against "the
hazard of iiniovation." * In the same spirit the king's
friend, Mr. Rigby, in opposing Mr. Pitt's first motion for
reform, " treated all innovations as dangerous theoretical
experiments." "^ This doctrine was first preached during the
ministry of Lord North. It was never accepted by Mr. Pitt
and his more enlightened disciples, but it became an article
of faith with the majority of the Tory party.
The American War involved principles which rallied the
two parties, and displayed their natural antago- priDcipiea
nism. It w^as the duty of the government to the*Americai, i
repress revolt, and to maintain the national ^"•
honor. Had the Whigs been in power, they would have
acknowledged this obligation. But the Tories — led by the
king himself — were animated by a spirit of resentment,
against the colonists, which max'ked the characteristic prin-|
ciples of that party. In their eyes resistance was a crime "i
no violation of rights could justify or palliate rebellion.!
Tories of all classes were united in a cause so congenial to
their common sentiments. The court, the landed gentry,
and the clergy insisted, with one voice, that rebellion must
be crushed, at whatever (ost of blood and treasure. They
wers supported by a great majority of the House of Com-
mons, and by the most influential classes in the country.
The Whig;!, on the other hand, asserted the first principles \
1 Svjpra, Vol. I 314 a Wraxall's Hist Mem., iii. 85.
80 PARTY.
of Iheir party in maintaining tlie riglits of all British subjects
to tax themselves by their representatives, and to resist op-
pression and injustice. But in their vain efforts to effect a
reconciliation with America, they had a slender following in
Parliament; and in the country had little support but that
of the working classes, — then wholly without influence, —
and of the traders, who generally supported that party, and
whose interests were naturally concerned in the restoration
of peace.*
Such were the sentiments and such the temper of the
ruling party, that the leading Whigs were not without ap-
prehension, that if America should be subdued, English
liberty would be endangered.^
Having vainly opposed and protested against the measures
^ , . of the government, in November, 1776, they se-
Secession of ° . ' .
the Whigs in ceded from Parliament on American questions —
desiring to leave the entire responsibility of co-
ercion with ministers and their majority. It can scarcely
be denied that their secession — like earlier examples of the
same policy' — was a political error, if not a dereliction of
duty. It is true that an important minority, constantly over-
borne by power and numbers, may encourage and fortify,
instead of restraining, their victorious opponents. Their
continued resistance may be denounced as factious, and the
1 Lord Camden, writing to Lord Chatham, February, 1775, said : " I am
grieved to observe that the landed interest is almost altogether anti-Ameri-
ean, though the common people hold the war in abhorrence, and the mer-
ehants and tradesmen," for obvious reasons, are altogether against it." —
Chatham Corr., iv. 401. — "Parties were divided nearly as they had been
at the end of the reign of Queen Anne: the Court and the landed gentry
with a majority in the House of Commons, were with the Tories: the trad
ing interest and popular feeling, with the Whigs." — Lord J. Russell's Life
of Fox, i. 83.
2 Debates on Amendments to Address, 31st Oct. 1776, &c. ; Fox Mem., i.
143 ; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 136 ; Lord Itotkingham Cprr., ii. 270 ;
Walpole's Mem., iv. 125; Grenville Papers, iv. 573; Burke's Works, ii. 399.
* The Tory opposition had seceded in 1722, and again iu 1738 ; Pari.
Hist., X. 1323; Tindal's Hist, iv. 668; Smollett's Hist., ii. 219, 364; Coxe'a
Walpole, ill. 519 : Marchmont Papers, ii. 190.
SECESSION OF THE WmCS. 31
flmallness of their numbers pointed at as evidence of the
weakness of their cause. But secession is flight. The ene-
my is left in possession of the field. The minority confess
themselves vanquished. They even abandon the hope of
retrieving their fallen cause by rallying the people to their
side. Nor do they escape imputations more injurious than
any which persistence, under every discouragement, could
bring upon them. They may be accused of sullen ill-tem-
per, of bearing defeat with a bad grace, and of the sacrifice
of public duty to private pique.
The latter charge, indeed, they could proudly disregard,
if convinced that a course, conscientiously adopted, was
favorable to their principles. Yet it is difficult to justify
the renunciation of a public duty in times of peril, and the
absolute surrender of a cause believed to be just. The
Whigs escaped none of these charges ; and even the dignity
of a proud retirement before irresistible force was sacrificed
by want of concert and united action. Mr. Fox and others
returned after Christmas to oppose the suspension of the
Habeas Corpus Act,^ while many of bis friends continued
their secession. Hence his small party was further weak-
ened and divided,^ and the sole object of secession lost.'
The fortunes of the Whig party were now at their lowest
point ; and, for the present, the Tories were com- ^he Whigs
pletely in the ascendant.* But the disastrous in- ^"i^erican
cidents of the American War, followed by hostil- ^^*'-
1 This Act applied to persons suspected of high treason in America, or on
he high seas.
2 He mustered no more than forty-three followers on the second reading,
nd thirty-three on the third reading.
3 The Duke of Richmond, writing to Lord Rockingham, said : — " The
worst, I see, has happened, — that is, the plan that was adopted has not
been steadily pursued." — RocHnijhain Corr., ii. 308; Pari. Hist., xvi. 1229.
* Burke, >vriting to Fox, 8th Oct. 1777, says : — " The Tories universally
think their power and consequence involved in the success of this American
business. The clergy are astonishingly warm in it, and what the Tories
are when embodied and united with their natural head the Crown, and ani-
mated by the clergy, no man knows better than yourself. A8 to the
32 PARTY.
ities with France, could not fail to increase the influence of
one party, while it discredited and humbled the other. The
government was shaken to its centre ; and in the summer
of 1778, overtures were made to the Whigs, which would
have given them the majority in a new cabinet under Lord
Weymouth, on the basis of a withdrawal of the troops from
America, and a vigorous prosecution of the war with France.
Contrary to the advice of Mr. Fox, these overtures were
rejected ; and the Whigs continued their opposition to the
fruitless contest with our revolted colonists.^ A war at once
so costly and so dishonorable to our arms disgusted its for-
mer supporters ; and the Whigs pressed Lord North with
extraordinary energy and resolution, until they finally drove
him from power. Their position throughout this contest —
the generous principles which they maintained, and the
eloquence and courage with which they resisted the united
force of the king, the ministers, and a large majority of both
Houses of Parliament — went far to restore their strength
and character as a party. But, on the other hand, they too
often laid themselves open to the charge 'of upholding rebels,
and encouraging the foreign enemies of their country, — a
charge not soon forgotten, and successfully used to their
prejudice.^
In watching the struggles of the two great parties, an-
Thedemo- Other incident must not be overlooked. The
cratic party. American contest fanned the latent embers of
democracy throughout Europe ; and in England a demo-
Whigs, I think them far from extinct. They are, what they always were
(except by the able use of opportunities), by far the weakest party in this
country. They have not yet learned the application of their principles to
the present state of things ; and as to the Dissenters, the main effective part
of the Whig strength, they are, to use a favorite expression of our American
campaign style, ' not all in force.' "— Burke's fVorks, ix. 148.
1 Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 193.
5 They imprudently adopted the colors of the American army — "blue
and buff" — as the insignia of their party. These well-knowTi colors were
afterwards assumed by the Fox Club and the Edinburgh Review. — Bock-
ingkam Corr., ii. 276.
DEATH OF LORD ROCKINGHAM. 33
cratic party was founded,* which, a few years later, ex-
ercised an important inHuence upon the relations of Whigs
and Tories.
The Whig>, restored to power under their firm and
honest leader, Lord Rockingham, appeared, once ^jj^ ^ggt^^.
more, in the ascendant. Tiie king, however, had *^y^\ °[^^
taken care that their power should be illusory, power,
and their position insecure. Lord Rockingham was placed
at the head of another coalition ministry, of which one part
consisted of Whigs, and the other of the Court party, —
Lord Shelburne, Lord Thurlow, Lord Ashburton, and the
Duke of Grafton. In such a cabinet, divisions and distrust
were unavoidable. The Whig policy, however, prevailed,
and does honor to the memory of that short-lived administra-
tion.^
The death of Lord Rockingham asKiin overthrew his
party. The king selected Lord Shelburne to peath of Lord
succeed him ; and Mr. Fox, objecting to that j°[y j^f^™'
minister as the head of the rival party in the ^''^'^•
Coalition, in whom he had no confidence, and whose good
faith towards himself he had strong rea-ons to doubt, refused
to serve under him, and retired with most of his friends.'
This was a crisis in the history of parties, whose future
destinies were deeply affected by two eminent men.
' "^ •' Crisis in the
Had Mr. Fox arranged his differences with Lord history of
Shelburne, his commanding talents might soon
have won for himself and his party a dominant influence
in the councils of the state. His retirement left Lord Shel-
burne master of the situation, and again disunited his own
inconsiderable party. Mr. William Pitt, on his entrance
into Parliament, had joined the Whigs in their opposition
to Lord North.'* He was of Whig connections and prin«
1 Stephens' Life of Home Tooke; Cooke's Hist of Party, iii. 188.
2 Supra, Vol. L 61.
8 Fox's Mem., i. 304-430; Lord J. RusseU's Life of Fox, i. 321-336.
* Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 50, 52.
VOL. II. 3
34 PARTY.
ciples, and concurred with that party in all liberal measures
His extraordinary talents at once marked hira, in his early
youih, as a leader of men. His sympathies were all with
Lord Rockingham: he supported his government:^ and
/ there cjin be little doubt that he might have been won as
\v u member of his party. But he was passed over when the
\ Rockingham ministry was formed ; ^ and was now secured
' by Lord Shelburne, as his Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Henceforth the young statesman, instead of cooperating with
Fox, became his successful rival ; and as his fortunes were
identified with the king's friends and the Tories, he was per-
manently alienated from the Whig connection. Who can
tell what two such men, acting in concert, might have ac-
complished for the good of their country and the popular
cause ! * Their altered relations proved a severe discom-
fiture to the Whigs, and a source of hope and strength to
the Tories.
There were now three parties, — Lord Shelburne and the
The Coau- Court, — Lord North and his Tory adherents, —
tion. g^J^^ -^j.^ Y'ox and his Whig followers. It was
plain that the first could not stand alone ; and overtures
were, therefore, separately made to Lord North and to Mr.
Fox to strengthen the administration. The former wsrs still
to be excluded himself, but his friends were to be admit-
ted, — a proposal not very conciliatory to the leader of a
1 Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 72.
2 In an article in the I^w Magazine, Feb. 1861, attrfbuted to Lord Brough-
am,— on the Auckland Correspondence, — it is said, "What mischief
might have been spared, both to the party and the country, had not this
error been committed! "
* Wraxall's Mem., iii. 152, 158, 176. — " I am indeed persuaded, that if
Fox had been once confirmed in oflice, and acce|>table to the soverei>^n, he
would have steadily ropre.«sed all democratic innovations; as, on the other
hand, had I'itt passed his whole life on the opposition bench, poor, and ex-
cluded from power, I believe he would have endeavored to throw his
weight into the scale of the popular representation It appeared to
me, that I'itt had received from nature a greater mixture of republican
spirit than animated his rival; but royal favor aud cniployment softened
its asperity." — Wraxall's Mem., iii. 98.
THE COALITION. 35
party. The latter declined to join the ministry, unless Lord
Shelburne resigned in favor of the Duke of Portland,^ — a
suggestion not likely to be agreeable to the premier. These
overtures, consequently, failed : but Lord North, fearing a
junction between Mr. Fox and Mr. Pitt, and the destruction
of his own party, was inclined to listen favorably to sug-
gestions for uniting with Mr. Fox, and overpowering the
party of Lord Shelburne, to whom both were opposed.
The singular coalition of these two statesmen, so long
opposed in principles, in connections, and in party strife,
was brought about by the arts of Lord Loughborough,
Mr. Eden, Mr. Adam, Colonel Fitzpatrick, and Mr. George
North.2
The immediate occasion of their alliance was a coincidence
of opinion, adverse to the preliminaries of peace. Feb. I7th,
Tiie concessions made by Lord Shelburne to the^""'^'^*
enemy were such as fairly to provoke objections ; and a cas
ual agreement between parties otherwise opposed, was natural
and legitimate. To restrain the influence of the crown was
another object which Mr. Fox had much at heart ; and in
this also he found his facile and compliant ally not indisposed
to cooperate. The main cause of their previous differences,
the American war, was at an end ; and both were of too
generous a temper to cherish personal animosities with sullen
tenacity. What Mr. Fox said finely of himself, could be
affirmed with equal truth of his former rival, " Amicitice
sempitemcB, immiciticB placahiles." But the principles of the
two parties were irreconcilable ; and their sudden union
could not be effected without imputations injurious to the
credit of both. Nor could it be disguised that personal am-
bition dictated this bold stroke for power, in which principles
were made to yield to interest. It was the alliance of fac-
1 Wraxall's Mem., Hi. 252; Fox's Mem., ii. 12; Lord J. Russell's Life of
Fox, i. 346.
2 Wraxall's Mem., iii. 261; Lord Auckland's Corr , chap, i., ii.; I'ox'a
Mem., ii. 15 ; Lord J. Russell's Lil'e of Fox, i. 345 ; Loi d Stanhope's Life of
Pitt, i. 94, &c.
S6 PARTY.
tions, rather than of parties ; and on either side it was a
grave political error. Viewed with disfavor by the most
earnest of both parties, it alienated from the two leaders
many of their best followers. Either party could have
united with Lord Shelbunie more properly than with one
another. The Whigs forfeited the popularity which they
had acquired in opposition. Even Wilkes and the demo-
cratic party denounced them. Courtiers and mob orators
vied with one another in execrating the " infamous coalition.''
So long as coalitions had served to repress the Whigs, ad-
vance the Tories, and increase the personal authority of the
king, they had been favored at court : but the first coalition
M'hich threatened the influence of the crown was discovered
to be unprincipled and corrupt, and condemned as a polit-
ical crime.*
How the coalition, having triumphed for a time, was tram
pled under foot by the king and Mr. Pitt, has
Opinions con- iot/>i'i
earning tiie been already told.'^ It fell amidst groans and
coalition. , . i i • t i • i "
hisses; and has since been scourged, with un-
sparing severity, by writers of all parties. Its failure left
it few friends: Lord North's followers were soon lost in the
general body of Tories who supported Mr. Pitt ; and Mr.
Fox's party was again reduced to a powerless minority.
But the errors and ruin of its leaders have brought down
upon them too harsh a judgment. The confusion and inter-
mixture of parties, which the king himself had favored,
must not be forgotten. Every administration of his reign,
but that of Lord North, had been a coalition ; and the prin-
ciples and connections of statesmen had been strangely shift-
ing and changing. Mr. Fox, having commenced his career
as a Tory, was now leader of the Wliigs : Mr. Pitt, having
entered Parliament as a Whig, had become leader of the
Tories. The Grenvilles had coalesced with Lord Rocking-
1 Wraxall gives an entertaining narrative of all the proceedings connected
with tlie coalition. — Mem., iii. 254-277.
a Vol. 1. 03-80.
THE COALITION. 37
ham. Lord Temple had, at one time, consorted with Wilkes,
and braved the king ; at another, he was a stout champion
of his Majesty's prerogative. Lord Shelburne and Mr.
Dunning, liaving combined with Lord Rockingham to re-
strain the influence of the crown, had been converted to the
policy of the court. Lord Thurlow was the inevitable chan-
cellor of Whigs and Tories alike. Wilkes was tamed, and
denied that he had ever been a Wilkite. Such being the
unsettled condition of principles and parties, why was tlie
virtuous indignation of the country reserved for Mr. Fox
and Lord North alone ? Courtiers w^re indignant because
the influence of the crown was threatened: the people, scan-
dalized by the suspicious union of two men whose invectives
were still resounding in their ears, followed too readily the
cry of the court. The king and his advisers gained their
end ; and the overthrow of the coalition insured its general
condemnation. The consequent ruin of the Whigs secured
the undisputed domination of the crown for the next fifty
years.*
That the prejudices raised against coalitions were a pre-
tence, was shown by the composition of Mr. Pitt's , <
own ministry, which was scarcely less a coalition ministry a \
111 1 1 coalition. I
than that which he had overthrown and covered I
with opprobrium for their supposed sacrifice of principle and
consistency. He had himself contended against Lord North,
yet his government was composed of friends and associates
of that minister, and of Whigs who had recently agreed
with himself and Mr. Fox. And when it became donbtful
whether he could hold his ground against his opponents,
negotiations were entered into, by the king's authority, for
1 Mr. Fox, writing in 1804, said : " I know this coalition is always quoted
against us, because we were ultimately unsuccessful ; but after all that can
be said, it will be difHcult to show when the power of the Whigs ever made
so strong a struggle against the Crown, the Crown being thorouglily in
earnest and exerting all its resources." — Fox's Mem., iv. 40 Again, in
1805, he ■wrote: — "Without coalitions nothing can be done against tJie
Crown ; with them, God knows how little." — IbicL, 102.
38 PARTY.
the reconstruction of the government on the basis of a new
coalition.* Yet Mr. Pitt escaped the censure of those
iMncipies of who were loudest in condemning the h\te coali-
eoaiition. jj^^^ Both, however, were tlie natural conse-
quence of the condition of parties at that period. No ore
party being able to rule singly, a fusion of parties wjis inev-
itable. Lord Shclburne, unable to stand alone, had sought
the alliance of each of the other parties. They had rejected
his offers and united against him ; and Mr. Pitt, in his weak-
ness, was driven to the same expedient, to secure a majority.
A strong party may despise coalitions ; but parties divided
and broken up are naturally impelled to unite ; and to repro-
bate such unions is to condemn the principles upon which
the organization of parties is founded. Members of tlie
same party cannot agree upon all points: but their concur
rence in great leading principles, and general sympathy,
induce them to compromise extreme opinions, and disregard
minor differences. A coalition of parties is founded n|)0M
the same basis. Men who have been opposed at another
time, and upon different questions of policy, discover an
agreement upon some important measures, and a common
object in resisting a third party. Hence they forget former
differences, and unite for the purpose of carrying out the
particular policy in which they agree.
Mr. Pitt's popularity and success, at the elections of 1784,
widened the basis of the Tory party. He was sup-
baf=wof the ported by squires and traders, churchmen and dis-
under Mr. sentcrs. He had gained over the natural allies of
Pitt.
the Whigs ; and governed with the united power of
the Crown, the aristocracy, and the people.'^ He had no nat-
ural connection with the party which he led, except as the
1 Nicholls' Recoil., ii. 113; Adolphus' Hist, iv. 85; Tomline's Life of Pitt,
i. 204; Ann. Reg., 1784, ch. vi. ; Pari. Hist., xxiv. 472; Lord Stanhope's
Life of Pitt, i. 184; supra, Vol. L 74.
2 Adolphus' Hist., iv., 115; Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 468; Lord Stanhope's
Life of Pitt, i. 211, &c.; Lord Macaulay's Biography of Pitt; Lord J. Kua-
»eU's Life of Fox, ii. 92.
TORIES UNDEK MR. PITT. 39
kind's minister. He had been born and educated a Whifj. He
Iwid striven to confine the influence of the crown, and enlarge
the liberties of the people. But before his principles had
time to ripen, he found hiin.-elf the first minister of a Tory
king, and the leader of the triumphant Tory party. The
doctrines of that party he never accepted or avowed. If he
carried tliem into effect, it was on the ground of expediency
rather than of principle.^ In advocating the rights of Par-
liament in regard to the Regency and the abatement of ira
peachraents, he spoke the sentiments and language of the
Whig school. In favoring freedom of commerce and restor-
ing the finances, he stands out in favorable contrast with his
great "Whig rival, ]\Ir. Fox, who slighted political economy
and the fruitful philosophy of Adam Smith.^ But called, at
twenty-four years of age, to the practical administration of
the government, — possessing unbounded power, — of a
haughty and imperious temper, — and surrounded by influ-
ences congenial to authority, — who can wonder that he be-
came alienated from popular principles? Even the growth
and expansion of his powerful intellect were affected by too
early an absorption in the cares of office and the practical
details of business. A few more years of opposition and
study, — even the training of a less eminent office in the
government, — would luive matured his powers, and enlarged
his philosophy. Yet, notwithstanding these early trammels,
he surpassed every statesman of his party in enlightenment
and liberality.
1 " His education and original connections mnst have given him some
piedilection for popular notions; and although he too often promoted meas-
ures of an opposite tendency, he was at great pains to do so, on tlie ground
of immediate expediency rather than of principle." — Lord Holland's Mem.,
ii. 35.
2 Butler's Reminiscences, i. 176; Massey's Hist., iii. 281; Lord Stanhope's
Life of l^itt, i. 263-273; Debates on Commercial Intercourse with Ireland
in 1785; Pari. Hist.,xxv., 311, 575; Pitt's Budget Speech, 1792, Pari. Hist.,
xxix. S16; Debates on Commercial Treaty with France, 1787, Pari. Hist.,
xxvi. 342, &c.; Tomline's Life of Pitt, ii. 227; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt,
1. 315, 317, 323, ii. 141; Fox's Mem., ii. 27G.
40 PARTY.
Widely different was the character of Lord Thurlow.
Long in tlie king's most secret counsels, — his Chancellor
liordThnr- '" every administration, except the coalition, from
•*»*• Lord North's to Mr. Pitt's, — he had directed
the movements of the king's friends, encouraged his Majes-
ty's love of power, and supported those principles of govern-
ment which found most favor in tiie royal mind. He was in
theory, in sympathy, and in temper, the very impersonation
of a Tory of that peiiod. For some years he exercised a
sway, — less potential, indeed, than that of Mr. Pitt, in the
general policy of the state, — but scarcely inferior to that of
the minister in influence with the king, in patronage, in court
favors, and party allegiance. If Mr. Pitt was absolute mas-
ter of the House of Commons, the House of Lords was the
plaything of Lord Thurlow. It was not until Mr. Pitt re-
solved to endure no longer the intrigues, treachery, and inso-
lent opposition of his Chancellor, that he freely enjoyed all
the powers of a responsible minister.^
The Whigs, proscribed at court, and despairing of royal
The Whigs favor, cultivated the friendship of the Prince of
Prince*of Wales, who, in his first youth, warmly encouraged
Wales. their personal intimacy, and espoused their cause.
The social charms of such men as Fox, Sheridan, and
Erskine, made their society most attractive to a young prince
of ability and many accomplishments ; and his early estrange-
ment from the king and his ministers naturally threw him
into the arms of the opposition. Even his vices received
little reproof or discouragement from some of the gay mem-
bers of the Whig party, who shared in the fashionable indul-
gences of that periwl. Young men of fashion drank deeply •,
and many wasted their health and fortunes at the gaming
table. Some of his Whig associates — Fox and Slieridan
among the number — did not affect to be the most moi"al
or prudent men of their age ; and their association with the
1 Moore's Life of Sheridan, i. 406 ; Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors,
T. 532, 555, 002, &c. ; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 148.
THE WIIIPS AXD THE PRIXCE OF WALES. 41
prince n^rgravated the king's repugnance to their party •
How could he forgive the men whom he believed to be per-
verting the politico, alienating the affections, and corrupting
the morals of the heir to his throne ?
It was no new political phenomenon to see the court of the
h<-ir-apparent the nucleus of the opposition. It had been the
unhappy lot of the Hanoverian family that every Prince of
Wales had been alienated from the reigning sovereign.
George I. hated his son with unnatural malignity ; and the
Prince, repelled from coui't, became the hope of the oppo-
sition.* Again, in the next reign, Frederick Prince of
Wales, estranged from his father in domestic life, espoused
the opinions and cultivated the friendship of Bolingbroke,
Chesterfield, Wyndham, Cartaret, Pulteney, and other
statesmen most vehemently opposed to the king's govern-
ment.^
The Whigs being in office throughout both these reigns,
the court of the heir-apparent fell naturally under the influ-
ence of the Tories. And now the first-born son of George
III. was in open opposition to his father and bis father's
chosen ministers ; and the Tories being in the ascendant at
court, the Whigs took possession of Carlton House. The
Prince wore the buff and blue uniform, and everywhere
paraded his adherence to the Whig party. In 1784, after
the Westminster election, he joined Mr. Fox's procession,
gave fetes at Carlton House in celebration of his victory,
attended public dinners, and shared in other social gatherings
of the party.*
Their alliance was still more ostensible durinsr the kind's
1 Coxe's Walpole, i. 78, 93.
2 Walpole's Mem. of Geo. II., i. 47; Lord Hervey's 5Iem., i. 235, 230, 27L
277. Hearing of their meeting at Kew, in September, 1737, the king said
" They will all soon be tired of the puppy, for besides his being a scoundrel,
he is such a fool, that he will talk more fiddle-faddle to them in a day than
any old woman talks in a ^s-eek." — JbuL, 442.
« Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 337, &c.
42 PARTY.
illness in 1788. They openly espoused the caiife of the
prince, and boasted of their approaching restoration to
power ;* while the prince was actively canvassing for votes
to support them in Parliament. To the Eai-1 of Lonsdale he
wrote to solicit liis support as a personal favor ; and all his
nominees in the House of Commons, though ordinarily stanch
supporters of Mr. Pitt, were found voting with Mr. Fox and
the opposition.^
The Whigs were still a considerable party. However
Effects of the inferior, in numbers, to the ministerial phalanx,
Uition'^upon"' ^'^^7 Were led by men of commanding talents,
parUes. jjjgi, rank, and social influence ; their principles
were popular, and they were generally united in senti-
ment and policy. But events were impending, which
were destined to subvert the relations of parties. The
momentous incidents of the French Revolution, — new and
unexampled in the history of the world, — could not fail to
affect deeply the minds of every class of politicians. In
their early development, the democrats hailed them with en-
thusiasm ; the "Whigs with hopeful sympathy ; the king and
the Tories with indignation and alarm.' Mr. Fox foresaw
the spread of liberty throughout Europe.* Mr. Pitt, sympa-
thizing with freedom more than any of his party, watched the
progress of events with friendly interest.^ Mi'. Burke was
the first statesman who was overcome with terror. Fore-
seeing nothing but evil and dangers, he bi'ought the whole
force of his genius, with characteristic earnestness, to the
denunciation of the French Revolution, its principles, its
actors, and its consequences.® In his excitement against de-
1 Supra, Vol. 1. 149, et seq.
2 Court and Cabinets of George III., ii. 64.
8 Tomline's Life of Pitt, iii. 104: Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. App. x\ni.
* Mem. of Fox, ii. 301.
6 Tomline's Life of Pitt, iii. 118 ; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 48, 49.
8 Prior's Life of Burke, ii. 42 ; MacKnight's Life of Burke, iii. 274, el scj. ;
Burke's Correspondence, iii. 102, 183, 2G7, 286. — " He loved to exaggerate
everptliing: when exasperated by the slightest opposition, even on accidcn-
DIYISIONS AMONG THE WHIGS. 43
mocracy, he publicly renounced the generous and manly
friendship of Mr. Fox, and repudiated the old associations
of his party .^
Society was becoming separated into two opposite parties,
— the friends and the foes of democracy. For a
'' Divifioiis
time, the Whi<;s were able to stand between Ihera, among th»
. . ,., . , . , . Whigs.
— maintaining liberty, without either encouraging
or fearing demociacy. But their position was not long ten-
able. Democrats espoused parliamentary reform : their op-
ponents confounded it with revolution. Never had there been
a time so inopportune for the discussion of that question,
when the Society of the Friends of the People was founded.
Mr. Fox, foi'eseeing the misconstructions to which it would
be exposed, prudently withheld his support ; but it was
joined by Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Erskine, Mr. Grey, Mr. Tier-
ney, and other leading Whigs, who, for the sake of the cause
they had espoused, were willing to cooperate with men of
democratic opinions, and even with members of the Corre-
sponding Society, who had enrolled themselves among the
Friends of the People.^ When Mr. Grey gave April 30th,
notice of his motion for reform, the tone of the de- ' '
bate disclosed the revulsion of feeling that was arising against
popular questions, and the widening scliism of the Wliig
party. While some of its members were not diverted from
their purpose by the contact of democracy, others jiaj 2lat
were repelled by it even from their traditional love ^'^"
of liberty. A further breach in the ranks of the opposition
tal topics of conversation, he always pushed his principles, his opinions
and even his impressions of the moment, to tlie extreme." — Lord HoUand't
Mem., i. 7.
1 Pari. Hist., Feb. 9, 1790, xxviii. 363, xxix. 249 ; Fox's Speeches, iv.
51-200; Burke's Appeal from the new to the old Whigs, Works, vi. 110;
Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 241-2.52, 273, 283, 318; Annual Register,
1791, p. 114; Lord Holland's Mem., i. 10; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii.
91, et seq.; Moore's Life of Sheridan, ii. 125; MacKnight's Life of Burke, iii.
383-411.
2 Lord Holland's Mem., i. 13; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 281 ; life
and Opinions of Earl Grey, 9-13.
I
44 PARTY.
wa.^ soon afterwards caused by the proclamation against
seditious writing-. Mr. Fox, ]SIr. Whitbread, and Mr.
Grey condemned the proclamation, as designed to dis-
credit the Friends of the People and to disunite the opposi-
tion.* On the otiier hand. Lord North, Lord Tichfield, Mr.
Wyndham, and Mr. Powys, thought the proclamation neces-
sary, and supported the government. Whether Mr. Pitt de-
signed it or not, no measure could have been more effectual
for dividing the Whig party.
An attempt was now made, through Mr. Dundas, Lord
Loughborough, Lord Malmesbury, and the Duke of Port-
land, to arrange a coalition between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox.
Both were, at this time, agreed in viewing the revolutionary
excesses of France with disgust ; and both were alike anx-
ious for neutrality and peace: but the difficulties of satisfy-
ing the claims of the different parties, the violent opposition
of Mr. Burke, the disunion of the Whigs, and little earnest-
ness on either side, insured the failure of these overtures.'
Their miscarriage had a serious influence upon the future
policy of the state. The union of two such men as Mr. Pitt
and Mr. Fox would have insured temperate and enlightened
counsels at the most critical period in the history of Europe.
But Mr. Fox, in opposition, was encouraged to coquet with
democracy, and proclaim, out of season, the sovereignty of
the people ; while the alarmist section of the Whigs were
naturally drawn closer to Mr. Pitt.
1 Lord Holland's Mem., i. 15; Pari. Hist., xxix. 1476, 1514. Before the
proclamation was issued, " Mr. Pitt sent copies of it to several members of
the opposition in both Houses, requesting their advice." — Lord Mntmes-
bui-y's Dim-y, June 13, 1792; Tomline's Life of Pitt, iii. 347; Lord Stan-
hope's Life of I'itt, ii. 156.
'^ Lord Malmesburj's Corr., ii. 425-440. Lord Colchester's Diary and
Corr., i. 13. " It was the object of Mr. Pitt to separate Mr. Fox from some
of his friends, and particularly from Sheridan. He wished to make him a
party to a coalition between the mini.^try and the aristocratical branches of
the Whigs. Mr. Fox, with iiis usual generosity, declined the offer." — Lord
Holland's Mem., ii. 40. Lord Campl)ell'3 Life of Lord Loughborough —
Lives of Chancellors, vi. 221, tt $eq.
COALITIOX OF WHIGS WITH MR. PITT. -^
The advancing events of the French Revolution, — the de- 1
cree of fraternity issued by the French Conven- coaution of
tion, — the execution of tiie king, — the breakinj? ie;wUng ^V'higa 1
' °' ° witU Mr. '
out of the revolutionary war, — and the extrava- ?'"•
gjince of the English democrats, completed the ruin jan. 2Stii,
of the Whig party. In January, 1793, Lord ^^^^•
Loughborough passed from the opposition benches to the
woolsack. He was afterwards followed, in the House of
Lords, by the Duke of Portland, — the acknowledged leader
of the Whigs, — Lord Spencer, Lord Fitzwilliam, and Lord
Carlisle ; and in the Commons, by Mr. Windham, Mr. Thomas
Grenville, Sir Gilbert Elliot, many of the old Whigs, and
all the .adherents of Lord North, who were henceforth the
colleagues or firm supporters of Mr. Pitt.* Even Mr.
Grattan and the Irish patriots sided with the government.'
The small party which still clung to Mr. Fox numbered
scarcely sixty members ; and rarely mustered more than
forty in a division.' In the Lords, Lord Derby, Lord Laiis-
downe. Lord Stanhope, and Lord Lauderdale, constituted
nearly the entire opposition.* Mr. Burke, having com-
menced the ruin of his party, retired from Parliament when
it was consummated, — to close his days in sorrow and de-
jection.*
The great Whig party was indeed reduced in numbers
1 Lord Malmesbury's Corr., ii. 452; Mem. of Fox, iii. 24; Lord Holland's
Mem. of the Whig Party, i. 5, 22-25; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii.
242; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 309.
- Lord Holland's Mem., i. 73-77.
8 Feb. 18, 1792 ; 44 to 270; 4-3 to 284 on Pari. Reform; 40, on the breaki)ig
out of the war. — Lord HoUniul's .)fem., i. 30; Pari. HLst., xxx. 59, 453, 925.
They mustered 53 against tiic tliird reading of the Seditious As?3mbly Bill,
Dec. 3, 1795; and 50 in support of Mr. Grey's motion in favo of treatiui^
for peace, Feb. 15, 1796. — Lord Colchester's Diary, i 12, 33: 42, on Mr.
Fox's motion ou tlie state of the nation with regard to the war, May 10,
1796. — Ibuf., 57.
* Lord Holland's Mem., i. 32. — They were soon joined by the Duke of
Bedford.— /6k/., 78.
i Prior's Life of Burke, 489; MacKnight's Life of Burke, iii. 582, G04,
Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 243, 320, &c.; Burke's Corr., iv. 4.10.
46 PARTY.
and influence ; but all tlieir ablest men, except Mr. Burke
and Mr. Windliam, were still true to their prin-
Tho remains . , ii- t-i i i -ar oi • i
oftheopposi- ciple?. Mr. Jbox was supported by Mr. biierida",
*'°°- Mr. Erskine, Mr. Grey, Mr. Wliitbread, Mr. Coke
of Norfolk, Mr. Lambton, Lord Jolin, and Lord William
Russell ;^ and soon received a valuable auxiliary in the per-
son of Mr. Tierney.^ Tiiey were powerless against minis-
ters in divisions ; but in debates their eloquence, their manly
defence of constitutional liberty, and their courageous resist-
ance to the arbitrary measures of the government, kept alive
a spirit of freedom which the disastrous events of the time
had nearly extinguished. And the desertion of lukewarm
and timid supporters of their cause left them without re-
straint in expressing their liberal sentiments.' They re-
ceived little support from the people. Standing between
democracy on the one side, and the classes whom democ-
racy had scared, and patriotism or interest attracted to the
government, on the other, they had nothing to lean upon but
the great principles and faith of their party.* Even the
Prince of Wales abandoned them. His sympathies were
naturally with kings and rulers, and against revolution ; and
renouncing his friends, he became a fickle and capricious
supporter of the minister.' The great body of the people,
1 Lord Holland's Mem., 30; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 324, &c.
2 Mr. Tiemey entered Parliament in 1796.
* Lord Holland's Mem., i. 25.
» Fox's Mem., iii. 35; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 253-324; Cooke o
Hist, of Party, iii. 366-452; Life and Opinions of Earl Grey, 22.
5 " In 1795 the Prince was offended by Mr. Pitt's arrangement for
the payment of his debts out of his increased income, upon his marriage,
and his support of the government was weakened." — Lord Holland's Mem.,
i. 81.
I^Iarch 28, 1797. " The Prince of Wales sat under the gallery during 111
whole debate (on the Bank Committee), and his fi'iends voted in the opp:;:-
tion." — Loi-d Colchester's Dinri/, i. 83.
April 3, 1797. The Prince of Wales, not being permitted to undertake a
mission to Ireland, which he had proposed, " wrote to Lord Fitzwilliam, and
also to Mr. Fox, offering to put himself at the head of their party at home,
tnd to oppose ooenly all measures of the present administration. Thuv ai'
MR. PITT'S SUPPORTERS. 47
whom the democrats failed to gain over, recoiled from the
bloodthirsty Jacobin?, and took part with the government in
the repression of democracy.
If such was the prostration of the Whigs, what was the
towerinw streniTth of Mr. Pitt ? Never had any
mmister been so absolute, smce Ji,ngiand had been of sir. Pitt's
a constitutional state, governed by the instrumen- ^" ^"
tality of parties. Never had a minister united among his
upporters so many different classes and parties of men.
Democracy abroad had threatened religion ; and the clergy
— almost to a man — were with the defender of "Church
and King." The laws and institutions of the realm were
believed to be in danger ; and the lawyers pressed forward
to support the firm champion of order. Property and public
credit were menaced ; and proprietors of the soil, capitalists,
fund-holders, confided in the strong-handed minister. The
patriotism of the nation was aroused in support of a states-
man, who was wielding all the resources of the state in a
deadly war.
Such were the political causes which attracted men of all
parties to the side of the minister, whose policy was accepted
as national. Motives less pati-iotic, but equally natural, con-
tributed to the consolidation of his power.
Many of the largest proprietors of boroughs were now de-
tached from the Whig party, and carried over their parlia-
mentary interest to the other side. Their defection was not
met by the minister with ingratitude. They shared his in-
fluence, and were overloaded with honors, which he himself
despised. Boroughs in the market also rapidly fell into the
hands of the dominant party. To supporters of the goveru-
mentthe purchase of a borough was a promising investment:
to opponents it offered nothing but disappointment. The
close corporations were filled with Tories, who secured the
dissuaded him from that line of conduct: but on Saturday, 25th March, Mr.
Fox, Erskine, the Duke of Norfolk, &c., dined at Carlton House." — Ibid.,
i. 94.
48 PARTY.
representation of their cities for their own party. None but
zealous adherents of the government could hope for the least
share of the patronage of the crown. The piety of a church-
man brouglit him no preft-nnent, unless his political ortlio-
doxy was well attested. All who aspired to be prebendaries,
deans, and bisliops, sought Tory jiatrons, and professed th«i
Tory creed. At the bar, an advocate might be learned and
eloquent beyond all rivalry, eagerly sought out by clients,
persuasive witii juries, and overmastering judges by his in-
tellect and erudition, — but all the prizes of his noble pro-
fession were beyond his reach, unless he enrolled himself a
member of the dominant party. An ambitious man was
offered the choice of the fashionable opinions of the majority,
I with a career of honor and distinction, — or the proscribed
' sentiments of a routed party, with discouragement, failure,
! and obscurity. Who can wonder that the bar soon made
i their choice, and followed the minister ?
1 The country gentlemen formed the natural strength of the
Tory party. They joined it heartily, without any induce-
ment save their own strong convictions; but their fidelity
was rewarded by a generous monarch and a grateful minis-
ter. If a man's ambition was not entirely satisfied by the
paternal acres, — let him display zeal at the elections. If he
would not see his rivals outstrip him in the race of life, —
let him beware of lukewarmness in the Tory cause. A Whig
country gentleman could rarely aspire even to the commis-
sion of the peace : a dissenter could not hope for such a tru.-t.
Ambition quickened the enthusiasm of Tories, and converted
many an undecided and hesitating Whig. The monejed
I classes, as we have already seen, had been gradually d"'-
tached from the Whig interest, and brought over to iln; king
atid the Tories ; and now they were, heart and soul, with Mr.
Pitt. If the people were impoverished by his loans and war
taxes, they, at least, prospered and grew rich. Stic-h a min-
ister was I'ar too "good for trade" not to command their will-
ing allegiance. A vast expenditure bound ihem to him j and
THE TORIES IN SCOTLAND. 49
posterity is still paying, and will long continue to pay, the
price of their support.
Another cause contributed to the depression of the Whigs.
Tliere was a social ostracism of liberal opinions,
Ostracism of
which continued Air into the present century. It liberal
, , , "' , opinioDB.
was not enough that every man who ventured to
profess them, should be debarred from ambition in public and
professional life. He was also frowned upon and shunned
in the social circle.. It was whispered that he was, not only
a malecontent in politics, but a freethinker or infidel in re-
ligion. Loud talkers at dinner-tables, emboldened by the
zeal of the company, decried his opinions, his party, and his
friends. If he kept his temper, he was supposed to be over-
come in argument : if he lost it, his warmtli was taken as evi-
dence of the violence of his political sentiments.*
In Scotland, the organization of the Tory party was
stronger, and its principles more arbitrary and ^ory party ia
violent, than in England. All men of rank, Scotland,
wealth, and power, and three fourths of the people, were
united in a compact body, under Mr. Dundiis, the dictator of
that kingdom. Power, thus concentrated, was unchecked by
any popular institutions. In a country without freedom of
election,^ without independent municipalities, witliout a free
press, without public meetings, — an intolerant majority pro-
scribed the opposite party, in a spirit of savage persecution.
All Whigs were denounced as Jacobins, shunned in society,
intimidated at the bar, and ruthlessly punished for every in-
discretion as public speakers, or writers in the press.' Their
leaders were found at the bar, where several eminent men,
at great sacrifice and risk, still ventured to avow their opin-
ions, and rally the failing hopes of their partj'. Of these,
the most remarkable in wit, in eloquence, and political cour-
1 Sydney Smith's Mem., i. 65, &c.
2 Supra, Vol. I. 283.
8 Lord Cockbuni's Memorials of his Time, p. 80, 147, et teq.; Lord Kol«
land's Mem., i. 210.
TOL. II. 4
50 PARTY.
age, was the renowned advocate, Henry Erskine.* Let all
honor be paid to the memory of men \vho,"by^ their talents
and personal character, were able to keep alive the spirit
and sentiment of liberty, in the midst of a reign of terror.
Lord Cockburn thus sums up a spirited account of the
state of parties under the administration of Mr. Dundas : —
" With the people put down and the Whigs powerless, gov-
ernment was the master of nearly every individual in Scot-
land, but especially in Edinburgh, which 'was the chief seat
of its influence. The infidelity of the French gave it al-
most all the pious ; their atrocities, all the timid ; rapidly
increasing taxation and establishments, all the venal ; the
higher and middle ranks were at its command, and the
people at its feet. The pulpit, the bench, the bar, the col-
leges, the pai'liamentary electors, the press, the magistracies,,
the local institutions, were so completely at the service of the
party in power, that tlie idea of independence, besides being
monstrous and absurd, was suppressed by a feeling of con-
scious ingratitude." *
It is one of the first uses of party to divide the govem-
Mr. Pitt's- ^"S classes, and leave one section to support the
Kcrou3^*o°Iib- '^"t'lo^ty of the State, and the other to protect
erty. the rights of the people. But Mr. Pitt united
all these classes in one irresistible phalanx of power. Loy-
alty and patriotism, fears and interests, welded together such
a party as had never yet been created ; and which, for the
eake of public liberty, it is to be hoped will never again be
known.
Under these discouragements, lh§ remnant of the Whig
The Whigs in P^rty resisted the repressive measures of Mr.
opposition, pjjf 8 an<j strove earnestly to promote the resto-
ration of peace. But it was vain to contend against the
1 He was removed from the office of Dean of the Faculty of Advocates
12th January, 1790, for presiding at a public meeting, to petition against
the war with France.
2 Memorials of his Time, 86. « See infra, p. 167.
DISUNION OF THE TORIES, 1801. 51
government. Arguments and remonstrance were unavail-
ing: divisions merely exposed the numerical weakness of
the minority; and at length, in 1798, Mr. Fox Their seces-
and many of his friends resolved to protest """^ '" ' *
against the minister, and absolve themselves from the re-
eponsibility of his measures, by withdrawing from the de-
bates, and seceding from Parliament. The tactics of 1776
were renewed, and with the same results. The opposition
was weakened and divided ; and, in the absenfte of its chiefs,
was less formidable to ministers, and less capable of appeal-
ing with effect to public opinion. Mr. Tierney was the only
man who profited by the secession. Coming to the front, he
assumed the position of leader ; and with great readiness
and vigor, and unceasing activity, assailed every measure
of the government The secession was continued during
three sessions. As a protest against the minister, it availed
nothing. He was more absolute, and his opponents more
insignificant, than ever.^
Mr. Pitt needed no further accession of strength ; but the
union with Ireland recruited his majority with an Disunion of
overwhelming force of Tories from the sister ty^jJi^i^"
country. Yet, at the moment of his highest '^*^ effects,
prosperity, this very union cast down the minister, and
shook his party to its centre. It was far too powerful
to be overthrown by the loss of such a leader ; but it
1 Lord Holland's Mem., i. 84, 101; Lord Sidmouth's Life, i. 203; Memo-
fills of Fox, iii. 136, 137, 249. "During the whole of this Session (1799)
the powerful leaders of Opposition continued to secede. Mr. Fox did not
come once. Grey came and spoke once against the Union, and Sheridan
opposed it in several stages. Tierney never acted with them, but main-
tained his own line of opposition, especially on questions of finance." — Lord
Colchester^ s Diary, i. 192.
" 1800. In February, Fox came upon the question of treating for peace
with Bonaparte, and upon no other occasion during the session. Grey
::ame upon the union only. Tierney attended throughout, and moved his
annual finance propositions. Upon the opening of the session in November,
all the Opposition came and attended regularly, except Fox." — Ibid., i.
216; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iii. 41, 76, 77; Life and Opinions of Earl
Gicy, 49.
52 PARTY.
was divided by conflicting counsels and personal rival*
ries ; and its relations to other parlies were materially
clianjj;ed. Mr. Pitt's liberal views upon the Catholic ques-
tion and tlie government of Ireland were shared by liis ablest
colleagues and by nearly all the Whigs ; while the majority
of his party, siding with the king, condemned them as dan-
gerous to church and state. This schism was never wholly
cured, and was destined, in another generation, to cause the
disruption of fhe party. The personal differences conse-
quent upon Mr. Pitt's retirement introduced disunion and
estrangement among several of the leading men, and weak-
ened the ties which had hitherto held the party together in
a compact confederacy. Mr. Canning — brilliant, ambitious,
and intriguing — despised the decorous mediocrity of Mr.
Addington, derided " the Doctor " with merciless wit, ridi-
culed his speeches, decried his measures, and disparaged his
friends.* With restless activity he fomented jealousies
and misunderstandings between Mr. Pitt and his successor,
which other circumstances concurred to aggravate, — until
Mr. Pitt and his adherents were found making common
cause with the Whigs against the Tory minister.'* The
Tory party was thus seriously disunited, while friendly
relations were encouraged between the friends of Mr. Pitt
and the Whig members of the opposition. Lord Grenville
and his party now separated from Mr. Pitt, and associated
themselves with the Whigs ; and this accession of strength
1 Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iii. 297, 306, 320, 363, 405, 428. — Ih't<1.,
iv. 58. Lord Malraesbury's Corr., iv. 375; Lord Sidinouth's Life, ii. 145,
&c., 298; Stapleton's Canning and his Times, 66, tt seq.; Rose's Mem., ii.
466, &c. " Old Lord Liverpool justly observed that Mr. Addington was
laughed out of power and place in 1803 by the beau momle, or, as tJmt grave
old politician pronounced it, the biu motide." — Lord IlnUand's ^fem., ii. 211.
'•« Lord Sidmouth'8 Life, ii. 254, et seq., 298, 301. Sir William Scott,
speaking of the state of parties in 1803, said: " There could be no adjust-
ment between the parties, frcm the numbers of their respective adlierents;
there was not pasture enough for all." Lord Malmesbury's Corr., iv. 77,
101, &c.; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iv. 21, 88, 116, 117, 139; Lord Col-
cheater s Dlaiy, ii. 403.
THE TTHIGS IN OFFICE, 1806. 53
promised a revival of the influence of their part)'. When
Mr. Pitt was recalled to power in 1804, being estranged
from the king's friends and the followers of Mr. Addington,
he naturally sought an alliance with Lord Grenville and the
Whig leaders, whose parliamentary talents were far more
important than the number of their adherents. Such an
alliance was favored by the position of Lord Grenville, who,
having been Mr. Pitt's Foreign Secretary, might fitly be-
come tiie mediator between two parties, which, after a pro-
tracted contest, had at length found points of agreement and
pvmpathy. The king's personal repugnance to Mr. Fox
frustrated an arrangement which, by uniting the more liberal
section of the Tories with the Whigs, would have constituted
an enlightened party, progressive in its policy, and directed
by the ablest statesmen of the age.* Lord Grenville, loyal
to his new friends, dissevered his connection with the Tories,
and associated himself with the Whigs.^ Mr. Pitt, thus
weakened, was soon obliged to make peace with Mr. Adding-
ton,' and to combine, once more, the scattered forces of his
party. The reunion was of brief duration ; and so wide
was the second breach, that on the death of Mr. Pitt the
Addington party were prepared to coalesce with the Whigs.*
This disruption of the Tory party restored the Whigs to
office, for a short time, not indeed as an indepen- TheWiiigs
dent party, — for which they were far too weak, — ^^"^^ '°
but united with the Grenvilles, Lord Sidraouth, i*^-
and the king's friends. A coalition with the liberal followers
of Mr. Pitt would have been the more natural and congenial
1 Supra, Vol. I. 90; Lord Malmesbury's Corr., iv. 309; Rose's Corr., ii.
100; Life and Opinions of Earl Grey, 91-97, 107; Lord Holland's Mem., i.
191 ; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, 177, et seq. ; Lord Sidmouth's Lite, ii.
370, &c.
2 Lord Malmesbury, speaking of this secession, says: "The French
proverb is here verified. ' Un bon ami vaut mieux que trois niauvais
parents.' " — Co?t., iv. 309.
8 He was created VLscount Sidmouth in January, 1805.
* Lord Holland's Mem., i. 203; Lord Sidmouth's Life, ii. 371; Rose's
Corr., ii. 308.
54 PARTY.
arrangement ; * but the peculiar relations of Lord Sidmouth
to the late administration, the number of his friends, his
supposed anxiety for peace, and his personal influence with
-the king, suggested the necessity of sucli an alliance. No
single party could stand alone. A coalition was inevitable ;
and Lord Sidmouth, being estranged personally from Mr.
Pitt's followers, was naturally led to associate himself with
Lord Grenville asd Mr. Fox ; while the latter, being dis-
tasteful to the king, was glad to cooperate with the leader
of the king's friends.^ It was a coalition between men as
widely opposed in political sentiments and connections as
Mr. Fox and Lord North had been three-and-twenty years
before ; but it escaped the reproaches to which that more
celebrated coalition had fallen a victim.
The signal failures of Mr. Pitt's war administration, and
the weariness of the nation under constantly increasing tax-
ation, afforded to the "Whigs — who had consistently urged
a more pacific policy — an opportunity of recovering some
portion of their former influence and popularity. Their
brief reign was signalized by the abolition of the slave-
trade, and other wise and useful measures. But they
had not the confidence of the king ; ' they failed even to
conciliate the Prince of Wales ; * they mismanaged the
1 Lord Holland says: " The disunited rump of Mr. Pitt's ministry were
no party, whereas Lord Sidinouth's friends, though few, formed a compact
body ; and if the leaders were inferior in talents to those of other political
parties, their subalterns were more respectable than the clerks and secre-
taries of Mr. Pitt's and Lord Melville's school." — Mem. of Whig Party, i.
209.
2 Life of Lord Sidmouth, ii. 423.
8 " The king and his household were, from the beginning and throughout,
hcEtile to the ministrj'." — Lord Hullaruts Mem., ii. 68.
* The prince, in a letter to Lord Moira, March 30th, 1807, said : — " From
the hour of Tox's death, — that friend, towards whom and in whom my
attachment was unbounded, — it is known tliat my earnest wish was to re-
lire from further concern and interference in public affairs." At the same
time he complained of neglect on the part of the Grenville ministry, — *• hav-
ing been neither consulted nor considered in any one important uistance; "
and on the fall of that ministry, whom he had generally desired to support
THE TORIES IX 1807. 55
elections ; * they were weakened by the death of Mr. Fox ; '
they were unsuccessful in their negotiations for peace ; " and
fell easily before the king's displeasure and the intrigues of
their opponents.*
It was now evident that the party which Mr. Pitt had
raised to such erreatness was not to be cast down ^ „ .
" _ The Tones ra-
by his death, li had been disorganized by the loss instated,
of its eminent leader, and by the estrangement of
his immediate followers from Lord Sidraouth and the king's
friends. It possessed no statesmen of commanding talents
to inspire its disheartened members with confidence ; and
there were jealousies and rivalries among its ablest states-
men. But the king was its active and vigilant patron, and
aided it with all the influence of the crown ; while the war-
cries of " The Church in danger," and " No popery," were
sufficient to rally all the forces of the party. Even those
ministers who favored the Catholic claims were content to
profit by the appeals of Mr. Perceval and his friends to the
fanaticism of the people. Such appeals had, on other occa-
he " determined to resume his original purpose, sincerely prepared, in his
own mind, on the death of poor Fox, to cease to be a party man." This
resolution he communicated to the king. — Lord Colchester's Diary, ii. 115;
Lord Holland's Mem., ii. 68-72, 244. — "In his letters to Earl Grey, im-
mediate!}' after the death of Mr. Fox, there is no trace of such feelings." —
Life and Opinions of Earl Grey, 116.
1 Lord Holland's Mem., ii. 93. — "The king who throughout hb reigu
had furnished everj' treasurj' with 12,000/. to defray election expenses on a
dissolution, withheld that unconstitutional assistance from the administra-
tion of 1806."— /6irf., 94.
2 Lord Holland says: "Had Lord Grenville in the new arrangements
(after Mr. Foxs death) sought for strength in the opposite party, had he
consulted the wishes of the Court, rather than his o^nti princijiles and con-
sistency, he would have conciliated the king, lixed himself permanently
in office, and divested everj- party in the state of the means of annrying him
in Parliament." — Mem. of Whig Party, ii. 50.
3 Ann. Reg., 1806, ch. ix., stated by Lord Holland to have been WTitten
by Mr. Allen: Pari. Papers relating to the negotiation with France, 1806;
Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., viii. 305, Jan. 5, 1807, &c. ; Life and Opinions of EarJ
Grey, 126-138.
* Supra, Vol. I. 94, et seg.
56 PARTY.
sions, been a favorite device of the Tories. They had even
assumed the church to be in danger on the accession of
George I., as a pretence for inviting a popish pretender to
the throne.^ Mr. Pitt had fallen before the same prejudice
in 1801 ; and in 1807, the Duke of Portland and Mr. Per-
ceval proved its efficacy in restoring strength and union to
their party.
Even the Dissenters, swayed by their intolerant sentiments
against the Catholics, often preferred the Court and High
Church candidates to the friends of religious liberty. Nor
did the Whigs generally gain popular support. The crown
and the great Tory nobles prevailed against them in the
counties ; and more democratic candidates found favor in
the populous towns.*
The Whigs were again routed ; but they had gained
strength, as an opposition, by their brief restoration
The Whigs in ° '» i i 1
opposition, to power. 1 hey were no longer a proscribed
party, without hope of royal favor and public
confidence. If not yet formidable in divisions against the
government, their opinions were received with tolerance ;
and much popular support, hitherto latent, was gradually
disclosed. This was especially apparent in Scotland. The
impeachment of Lord Melville, the idol of the Scottish To-
ries, had been a severe blow to that party ; and the unwonted
spectacle of their opponents actually wielding, once more
the power and patronage of the state, " convinced them," —
to use the words of Lord Cockburn, — " that they were nol
absolutely immortal." * Their political power, indeed, waa
not materially diminished ; but their spirit was tempered,
and they learned to respect, with decent moderation, the
rights of the minority. Lord Melville was replaced in the
administration of the affairs of Scotland by his son, Mr.
Robert Dundas, who, with less talents than his father,
» King's Speech, 1715; Pari. Hist, vii. 222. Romilly's Life, ii. 1!)2.
9 Lord Holland's Mem., ii. 227-230.
« Lord Cockbum's Mem., 215, 229.
THE WHIG OPPOSITION, 1807. 57
brought to the office of leader of a dominant party much
good sense and moderation.^
Younger men of the Wliig party were now rising into
notice, in literature and at the Scottish bar. Brougham,
Francis Hoi'ner, Jeffrey, Sydney Smith, Cockburn and Mur-
ray, were destined to play a conspicuous part in the politics
and literature of their age ; and were already beginning to
exercise an important influence upon the hopes and interests
of their party. Among their most signal services was the
establishment of tlie Edinburgh Review,^ — a journal distin-
guished for the combination of the highest literary merit with
enlarged views of political philosophy far in advance of its
age, and an earnest, but temperate zeal for public liberty,
which had been nearly trodden out of the literature of the
country.'
The Whigs had become, once more, a great and powerful
party. Abandoned a few years before by many men of the
highest rank and influence, they had gradually recovered the
principal Whig families. They were represented by several
statesmen of commanding talents ; and their numbers had
been largely recruited since 1793. But they were not well
led or organized ; and were without concert and discipline.
When Lord Howick was removed to the House of Lords
by the death of his father, the rival claims of Mr. Whitbread
and Lord Henry Petty brought forward Mr. Ponsonby, an
Irishman, as leader of a party with whom he had little ac-
quaintance or connection.* In 1809, they were further di-
vided, by the embarras-ing inquiry into the conduct of tlie
Duke of York.® And for several years, there was little
1 Lord Cockburn's Mem., 223, 230.
2 The first number of tliis journal was published in October, 1802.
8 Cockburn's ilem. of Jeffrey, i. 286; Lady Holland's Life of Sydney
Smiih, i. 59, et seq. ; Cockburn's ^lem. ICG.
* Lord Holland's .Mem., 236-242. Lord H. says: "Mr. Windham, Mr.
iSheridan, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. T. Grenville, were from ver}- different but
obvious causey disqualified" for the lead. — Jbid., 237. — Life and Opinions
jfEarl Grey, 174-189.
6 /i/^., 223-227, 239.
58 PAETY.
agreement between the aristocratic Whigs who followed Earl
Grey, and members who acted with Mr. Whitbread or Sir
Francis Burdett.*
The administrations of the Duke of Portland and Mr.
Perceval were formed upon the narrowest Tory
Tory admin- . . , „
utrations, principles. They were the governments of the
1807-1812
king and his friends. Concessions to Catholics
were resisted as dangerous to the church.*^ Repression and
coercion were their specifics for insuring the safety of the
state : the coiTection of abuses and the amendment of the
laws were resisted as innovations.®
On the death of Mr. Perceval, the last hopes of the "Whigs,
liord Liver- founded upon the favor of the Prince Regent, were
fst^iuon'^""''' extinguished ; * and the Tory rule was continued
1812. gg securely as ever, under Lord Liverpool ; but
the basis of this administration was wider and more liberah
The removal of Catholic disabilities was henceforth to be
an open question. Every member of the government wa.<i
free to speak and vote independently upon this important
mcASure ; * and the divisions to which such a constitution
of the cabinet gave rise, eventually led to the dissolution
of the Tory party. The domestic policy of this administra-
tion was hard and repressive.' It carried out, as far as was
1 Jhid., 3.3G-338; Court and Cabinets of Geo. IV., i. 131.
2 Mr. Perceval said : " I could not conceive a time or any change of cir-
cumstances which could render further concession to tlie Catholics consist-
ent with the safety of the State."— Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxi. G63.
« e. g. Mr. Bankes' Offices in Reversion bills, 1809 and 1810; Sir S
Romilly's Criminal Law bills, 1810, 1811; Earl Grey's Life and Opinions
202-206.
* Supra, Vol. I. 109.
s It was announced by Lord Castlereagh " that the present government
would not, as a government, resist discussion or concession "... " and that
every member of the government would be free to act upon his own indi-
vidual sentiments." — Lord Cvkhtsttr's Dinry, 10th June, 1812, ii. 387.
" Lord Sidmouth, Lord Liverpool, and Lord Kldon, would resist inquiry,
meaning to resist concession; but Lord Harrowby, Lord Melville, Lord
Bathurst, and Lord Mulgrave, would concede all. Vansittart would go
pedtlenlinC — /bid., 403.
s See Chap. X.
THE TORIES UNDER LORD LIVERPOOL. 59
practicable in a free state, the doctrines of absolutism. But
victories and glory crowned their efforts, and increased their
strength ; while the Whigs, by condemning their foi*eign
and military policy, exposed themselves to the reproach
of unpatriotic sentiments, which went far to impair their
popularity.
But notwithstanding the power of ministers, the great
force of the Tory party was being gradually Growing
undermined. The king, indeed, was on their ^^g*^^^^*"^
side: the House of Lords was theirs, by connec- ty : its causes.
tion and creations : the House of Commons was theirs, by
nomination and influence : the church was wholly theirs, by
sentiment, interest, and gratitude. But the fidelity of their
followers could not always be relied on ; ^ and great changes
of sentiment and social conditions were being developed in
the country. The old squires were, perhaps, as faithful as
ever ; but their estates were being rapidly bought by wealthy
capitalists, whom the war, commerce, manufactures, and the
stock exchange had enriched.'^ The rising generation of
country gentlemen were, at the same time, more open to
the convictions and sympathies of an age which was grad-
ually emancipating itself from the narrow political creed of
their fathers.
Meanwhile commercial and manufacturing industry was
rapidly accumulating large populations, drawn from the
agricultural counties. Towns were continually encroaching
upon the country ; and everywhere the same uniform law
prevailed, which associates activity and enterprise with a
spirit of politicjil progress, and social inertness with senti-
1 See Letter of Duke of Wellington to the Duke of Buckingham, March
6tli, 1S22.— Court and Cabinets of Geo. IV., i., 292.
2 Lord Redesdale, writii^ to Lord Sidmouth, Dec. 11th, 1816, said:
" Many of the old country gentlemen's families are gone, and I have no
doubt that the destruction of their hereditary influence has greatly con-
tributed to the present insubordination. . . . We are rapidlj' becoming
— if we are not already — a nation of shopkeepers." — Loi-d Sidmouth't
Life, iii. 162.
60 PARTY.
merits opposed to political change. The great industrial
communities were forcing the latent seeds of democracy : the
counties were still the congenial soil of Toryism. But the
former were ever growing and multiplying : the latter were
stationary or retrograde. Hence liberal opinions were con-
stantly gaining ground among the people.^
A Tory government was slow to understand the spirit of
Democratic the times, and to adapt its policy to the temper
provokrf'by ^"^ condition of the people. The heavy bur
distress. (jpjjs of the war, and the sudden cessation of the
war expenditure, caused serious distress and discontent, re-
1817-1820. suiting in clamors against the government, and
the revival of a democratic spirit among the people. These
symptoms were harshly checked by severe repressive meas-
ures, which still further alienated the people from the gov-
ernment ; while the Whigs, by opposing the coercive policy
of ministers, associated themselves with the popular cause.^
There had generally been distrust and alienation between
the democrats, or Radicals,' and the aristocratic Whigs.
Tiie latter had steadily maintained the principles of consti-
tutional liberty : but had shown no favor to demagogues and
visionaries.* But the events of 1817 and 1819 served to
unite the Whigs with the democratic party, — if not in
general sympathy, yet in a common cause ; and they
gained in weight and influence by the accession of a more
popular following. Cobbett, Hunt, and other demagogues
denounced them for their moderation, and scoffed at them
1 " Depnis que les travaux de rintelligence furent devenus des sources
de force et de richesses, on dut consid^rer chaque d^veloppenient de la
science, chaque connaisance nouvelle, chaque idde neuve, conime un
germe de puissance, mis a la port^e du peuple." — De Tocqueville, Dera-
ocratie en .\mer., i. 4.
2 See infrn, p. 195.
8 In 1819, Hunt and his followers, for the fi'st time, assumed the name
of Kadieal Reformers. — Lwd Sidmoulh's Life, iii. 2-17; Cooke's Uisl. of
I'nrhj, iii. 511.
* £arl Grey's Life and Opinions, 242-254.
THE WHIGS DURING THE REGENCY. Gl
as aristocratic place-hunters : * mobs scouted their preten-
sions to hberality ; * but the middle classes, and large num-
bers of reflecting people, not led by mob-orators or demo-
cratic newspapers, perceived that the position of the Wiiigs
was favorable to the advancement of constitutional liberty,
and supported them. In leaning to the popular
cause, however, they were again separated from the Oren- •
Lord Grenville and his friends, who renewed tue whigs,
1S17
their ancient connection with the Tories.^ Mean-
while, on the death of Mr. Ponsonby, the leadership of the
opposition had at length fallen upon Mr. Tierney.*
The popular sentiments which were aroused~1)y the pro
ceedings against Queen Caroline again brought the
„r T. The Whigs
Whigs into united action with the Radicals and and Queen
the great body of the people. The leading Whigs
espoused her cause ; and their parliamentary eminence and
conspicuous talents placed them in the front of the popuUu
movement.
While the Whigs were thus becoming more closely asso-
ciated with popular sentiments, a permanent change increasing
in the condition of the people was gradually in- ^Mft^ofThe
creasing their influence in public affairs. Edu- p«°p'«-
cation was being rapidly extended, and all classes were
growing more enlightened. The severities of successive
governments had wholly failed in repressing the activity of
1 See Cobbett's Register, 1818, 1819, 1820, pamm; Edinburgh Review,
June 1818, p. 198. Mr. Tierney said, Nov. 23d, 1819 :'" It was impossible
to conceive any set of men under less obligations to the Radicals than the
Whigs were. True it was that ministers came in for a share of abuse and
disapprobation: but it was mild and merciful compared with the eastiga-
tion w^hich their opponents received." — Bans. Deb., Ist Ser., xli. 74;
Remains of Mrs. Trench, 44.
2 See Canning's Speech on the State of the Nation. — Hans. Deb., 1st
Ser., xxxvi. 1423.
8 Court and Cabinets of the Regency, ii. 347-366; Lord Sidmouth'a
Life, iii., 297; Life and Opinions of Earl Grey, 125, 351-384; Lord Col-
shester's Diary, iii. 94, 99, &c.
* Lord Colchester's Diary, iii. 69, &c
62 PARTI,
the press : the fear of democracy had died out : the opposi-
tion speakers and writers had widely disseminated liberal
principles ; and public opinion was again beginning to assert
its right to be heard in the councils of the state. The Tory
party could not fail to respond, in some measure, to this
spirit ; and the last few years of Lord Liverpool's adminis-
tration were signalized by many wise and liberal measures,
which marked the commencement of a new era in the an-
nals of legislation.^ In domestic policy, Mr. Peel and Mr
Huskisson were far in advance of their party : in foreiga
policy, Mr. Canning burst the strait bands of an effete di-
plomacy, and recognized the just claims of nations, as well
as the rights of sovereigns. But the political creed of the
dominant party was daily becoming less in harmony with the
sentiments of an enlightened people, whom the Constitution
was supposed to invest with the privileges of self-govern-
ment. Men like Lord Eldon were out of date ; but they
still ruled the country. Sentiments which, in the time of
Mr. Perceval, had been accepted as wise and statesmanlike,
were beginning to be ridiculed by younger men, as the
drivellings of dotards ; but they prevailed over the argu-
ments of the ablest debaters and public writers of the day.
And looking beyond the immediate causes which contrib-
Gensrai utcd to the growth of democratic sentiment in
dmocraUc England, we must embrace in our more distant
sentiments, yjg^y ([^q general upheaving of society through-
out Europe and. America, during the last fifty years. The
people of the United States had established a great republic.
The revolutionary spirit of France — itself, sigain, the result
of deeper causes — had spread with epidemic subtlety over
the civilized world. Ancient monarchies had been over-
thrown, and kings discrowned, as in a drama. The tradi-
tional reverence of the people for authority had been shaken :
their idols had been cast down. Men were now taught to
respect their rulers less, and themselves more : to assert their
1 See Chap. XVIII.
DISUNION OF THE TOKli!,». 63
own rights and to feel their own power. In every country,
— whatever its form of government, — democracy was gain-
ing strength in society, in the press, and in the sentiments of
the people. Wise governments responded to its expansive
spirit : blind and bigoted rulers endeavored to repress it as
sedition. Sometimes trampled down by despotism, it lay
smouldering in dangerous discontent : sometimes confronted
with fear and hesitation, it burst forth in revolution. But in
England, harmonizing with free institutions, it merely gave
strength to the popular cause, and ultimately secured the
triumph of constitutional liberty. Society was at the same
time acquiring a degree of freedom hitherto unknown in
England. Every class had felt the weight of authority
Parents had exercised a severe discipline over their chil-
dren : masters a hard rule over their workpeople : every one
armed with power, from the magistrate to the beadle, had
wielded it sternly. But society was gradually asserting its
claims to gentler usage and higher consideration. And this
social change gave a further impulse to the political senti-
ments of the people.
While these changes were silently at work, the illness and
death of Lord Liverpool suddenly dissolved the _. .
' •' Disnmon of
union of the great Tory party. He had repre- the Tories on
1 . 1. -1 1.. 1 /. 1 1 the death of
sented the policy and political system or the late Lord Liver-
king and of a past generation ; and his adherents ^*^'
in the cabinet outnumbered the advocates of more advanced
principles. Mr. Canning, the member of the cabinet most
eminent for his talents, and long the foremost champion oi
the Catholics, was now called to the head of affairs. The
king did not intrust him with the power of carrying the
Catholic question ; ^ but his promotion was the signal for
the immediate retirement of the Duke of Wellington, Lord
Eldon, Mr. Peel, Lord Bathurst, Lord Melville,^ and their
1 Stapleton's Canning and his Times, 582.
2 Lord Melville concurred with Mr. Canning upon the Catholic question
Lord Bexley also resigned, but withdrew his resiirnation.
64 PARTY.
liigh Tory followers. Lord Palraerston, Mr. Haskisson, and
Mr. Wynn remained faithful to Mr. Canning ; and the ac-
complished Master of the Rolls, Sir John Copley, succeeded
Lord Eldon, who, at length, had ceased to be one of the per-
manent institutions of the country. Differences of opinion
upon tlie Catholic question were the avowed ground of this
schism in the Tory party ; and whatever personal considera-
tions of ambition or jealousy may have contributed to tliis
result, there can be no doubt that the open Catholic ques-
tion, which had been the principle of Lord Liverpool's min-
istry, contained the seeds of disunion, rivalry, and conflict.
Mr. Canning and his friends had contended in debates and
divisions against their own colleagues, and had obtained the
warmest support from the opposition. And now the person-
al pretensions and the cause of the first minister, alike re-
pelled that section of his colleagues, who had adopted a
narrower policy than his own.'-
The same causes naturally attracted to Mr. Canning the
Mr. Canning friendly support of the Whigs. They differed
bv^'the'*'* with him upon the subject of parliamentary re-
^Vhigs. form, and the repeal of the Test Act ; but had
long fought by his side on behalf of the Catholics : they ap-
proved his liberal foreign policy, and hailed his separation
from the high Tory connection, as a happy augury of good
government, upon enlarged and generous principles. An
immediate coalition was not desirable, and was discounte-
nanced by Earl Grey and other Whig leaders ; but the cabi-
net was soon joined by Lord Lansdowne, Lord Carlisle, and
Mr. Tierney ; while the Whigs, as a body, waited to defend
him against the acrimonious attacks of the Tory seceders.^
Such was the commencement of that union between the
1 Stapleton's Political Life of Canning, iii. 324; George Canning and
his Times, 590; Twiss's Life of Lord Kidon, ii. 5S6; Hans. Deb., May 2d,
1827, 2d Ser., xvii. 448-498; Lord Colchester's Diary, iii. 484, 493, &c.
Plumer Ward's Mem., ii. 167.
8 Stapleton's Political Life of Canning, iii. 337-345, 348, et seq., 338,
etieq.
DUKE OF WELLINGTON PREMIER. 65
liberal Tories and the Whigs, which was destined to lead to
the most important political consequences.
In a few months, Mr. Canning was snatched from the
scene of his glory and his trials.^ His old friends Divisions of
and associates had become his bitterest foes : his Mr.^can-^*'
new allies, however sincere, were estranged from *"°s » death,
him by their connections, by a life-long parliamentary op-
position, and by fundamental differences of opinion. His
brpken health succumbed to the harassing difficulties of his
position. Had he lived, he might have surmounted them.
Mutual concessions might have consolidated a powerful and
enlightened party, under his guidance. But what his com-
manding talents might possibly have accomplished, was be-
yond the reach of his successor, Lord Goderich. That
nobleman, — after a provisional rule of five months, — una-
ble to reconcile the claims and pretensions of the two parties,
resigned his hopeless office.^ The complete union of the
Whigs with the friends of Mr. Canning was soon to be ac-
complished : but was reserved for a more auspicious period.
The resignation of Lord Goderich was followed by the
immediate revival of the old Torv party, under
„ " Dube of Wel-
the Duke of Wellington. The formation of such Ungton Pre-
. . ,. . , ... mier.
a ministry was a startling retrogression. A mili-
tary premier, surrounded by his companions in arms and by
the narrowest school of Tory politicians, could not fail to dis-
appoint those who had seen with hope the dawn of better
days, under Mr. Canning.^ At first, indeed, the Duke had
the aid of Lord Palmerston, Mr. Huskisson, and other friends
1 August 8th, 1827
2 Lord Colchester's Diary, iii. 527.
8 Sir. T. Grenville, writing to the Duke of Buckingham, Sept. 9, 1828,
says: " My original objections to the formation of a govemment concocted
out of the Army List and the Ultra-Tories, are quite insuperable on consti-
tutional principles alone: neither is there any instance since the Revolu-
tion of any government so adverse, iu its fonnation, to all the free princi-
ples and practice of our Constitution." — Court and Cabinets of Geo. 1 V.. ii
880.
VOL. II. 5
66 PART\ .
of Mr. Canning ; ^ but the general character of the ministry
was ultra-Tory ; and within a few months, sill the Liberal
members seceded.* It was loo late, however, for an effete
school to prevail over principles of liberty and justice ; and
its temporary revival served to precipitate its final overthrow.
The first assault upon the stronghold of the Tory party
was led by Lord John Russell, who carried aaainst
Repeal of "^ • o ii-n ^i i
Corporation the government his motion for a Bill to repeal the
Arts. F^b. Corporation and Test Acts. The Duke, once fair.
. 1828. ly overcome, retreated from his position, and suf-
fered the Bill to pass through both Houses, amid the exe-
crations of Lord Eldon, Lord Winchelsea, and the ultra-
Tories.^
Ireland was the Duke's next difficulty. Affairs in that
country had, at length, reached a crisis which de-
emancipation manded present concessions or a resort to the
viewed iu , * mi !•/«•• 13
reference to sword.* Ihe narrow pohcy of muiisters could
^^ ^' not longer be maintained; and they preferred
their duty to the state to the obligations of party. To the
consternation of the Tories, the leaders whom they trust-
ed suddenly resolved upon the immediate removal of the
civil disabilities of the Catholics. The Duke and Mr. Peel
were, doubtless, induced to renounce the faith which had
gained them the confidence of their party, by a patriotic de-
sire to avert civil war ; but how could they hope to be judged
by their followers, their opponents, and the people ? Tories
who conscientiously believed that the church, and the Prot-
estant Constitution of their ancestors were about to be sac-
rificed to political expediency, loudly complained that they
had been betrayed, and their citadel treacherously surren-
dered to the enemy. Never had party-spirit been inflamed
1 As first constituted, the administration comprised a majority favorable
to the Catholic claims, viz, seven for and six against them. — Lord Coir
Chester's Diary, iii. 535.
■■* Sec supra, Vol. I. 329.
8 See in/ra, p. 367.
* Sec infra, p. 371.
THE TORIES AND CATHOLIC CLAIMS. 67
to a higher pitch of bitterness and exasperation. The great
body of tlie Torie?, — sullen, indignant, and revengeful, —
were wholly alienated from their leaders. Men who had no
sympathy with that party, could not deny that their com-
plaints were well founded. According to all the ethics of
party, they had been wronged, and were absolved from fur-
ther allegiance.^
Ministers were charged with sinning against political
morality, in another form. The Whigs and followers of Mr.
Canning, allowing their tardy resolution to be wise and
statesmanlike, asked if they were the men to carry it into
execution ? If they were convinced that the position they
had held so stubbornly could no longer be defended, should
they not have capitulated, and surrendered the fortress to
the besieging force ? If a just and conciliatory policy was,
at length, to be adopted, the principles of the opposition had
prevailed-; and to that party should be confided the honora-
ble privilege of consummating the labors of a political life.
Men who had maintained power for thirty years, by defer-
ring to the prejudices of their party, were not entitled to its
continuance, when they had accepted the policy of the op-
position. If the Catholics were to be emancipated, they
should owe their privileges to their own steady friends, and
not to their oppressors.^ Nor was this opinion confined to
the opposition. The Tories themselves, — fiercely as they
condemned the convereion of their leaders, — condemned no
less fiercely their retention of office.* Had ministers re-
1 Hans. Deb., Sess. 1829, passim; Ann. Reg., 1829, ch. i.-iv.; Letter of
Duke of Wellington to Duke of Buckingham, AprU 21st, 1829; Court and
Cabinets of Geo. IV., ii. 397.
2 Mr. Peel ft-eely acknowledged that the measure was due to the efforts
of the opposition. He said: " The credit belongs to others, and not to me:
it belongs to Mr. Fox, to Mr. Grattan, to Mr. Plunket, — to the gentle-
men opposite, and to an illustrious and right hon. friend of mine, who is .
now no more. By their efforts, in spite of every opposition, it has proved
victorious." — Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xx. 1289; Guizot's Life of Peel, 39.
« Hans. Dfeb., 2d Ser., xx. 1119, 1163, 1263; Twiss's Life of Lord Eldon,
ill. 73.
68 PARTY.
signed, the united body of Tories might have shown a formi-
dable front against a Whig government, though aided by tho
Tory supporters of the Catholic cause ; but they were power-
less against tiieir own leaders, who retained the entire influ-
ence of the government, and could further rely upon the
support of the opposition.
The friends of Mr. Canning observed that two years ago,
the Duke of Wellington and Mr. Peel had refused to serve
with that eminent man, lest they should give countenance to
the Catholic claims, and had pursued him with relentless
hostility. And now these very men were engaged in carry-
ing a measure which Mr. Canning himself would have been
restrained, by the conditions under which he took oifice, from
promoting.^
Men of all parties looked with astonishment at the sudden
abandonment, by ministers, of the distinctive principles of
their party. Some doubted the honesty of their former pro-
fessions : others deplored an inconsistency which had shaken
the confidence of the people in the character and statesman-
ship of public men. All saw plainly that the Tory party
could not long survive the shock. The question which had
first broken the consolidated strength of that party in 1801,
and had continued to divide and weaken it, throughout the
regency and the reign of George IV., had at length shattered
it to pieces. The Catholic Relief Bill was passed ; but time
did not abate the resentment of the Tories. Henceforth the
government were kept in power by the friendly support of
the opposition, who, at the same time, prepared the way for
their own eventual accession, by the advocacy of economic
and parliamentary reform, the exposure of abuses, and the
assertion of popular principles.
In 1830, the ministers^ thus weakened and discredited, were
The Whigs forced, by the dct-ath of George IV., to appeal to
powerin 1880. the people; — when their own unpopularity, the
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xxi. 221 ; Stapleton's Political Life of Canninft
lii. 460 ; Quarterly Review, vol. xliv. 286.
THE PEOPLE WITH THE WHIGS. 69
resentment or coolness of their friends, the increased activity
and spirit of the Whigs and Radical Reformers, popuhir dis-
contents at iiorae, and revolutions abroad, combined further to
disturb the ministerial majority at the elections.^ The Duke
of Wellington's imprudent handling of the question of parlia-
mentary reform speedily completed his ruin.^ He fell ; and
at length the W^higs were restored to power, at a time most
favorable to the triumph of their principles, and the consol
idation of their strength. The ministry of -Earl Grey com-
prised the mo>t eminent Whigs, together with the adherents
of Mr. Canning, who had separated from the Duke of Wel-
lington, and were now united with the reformers. This
union was natural ; and it was permanent. Its seeds had
been sown in 1801, when ditferences first arose amongst
the Tories: it had grown throughout the administration of
Lord Liverpool : it had ripened under Mr. Canning ; and
had been forced into maturity by the new impulse of re-
form.
The time was also propitious for enlisting on the side of the
Whigs the general support of the people. Hither-
1 1 1 /• 11 • • . Union of the
to they had fallen, as an aristocratic party, be- Whigs with
tween the dominant Tories on one side, and the
clamorous Radicals on the othei'. Notwithstanding the pop-
ularity of their principles, they had derived little support
from democracy. On the contrary, democracy had too often
weakened their natural influence, and discredited their ef-
forts in the cause of liberty. But now the popular voice
demanded a measure of parliamentary reform ; and the re-
form ministry became at once the leaders of the people
Even democracy, — hitherto the terror of every government,
— was now the turbulent and dangerous, but irresistible ally
of the king's ministers. Such was the popular ferment, that
it was even able to overcome the close electoral system of
1 Svpra, Vol. I. 331, Edinb. Rev vol. li. 574; Court3 and Cabinets of
Will. IV. and Queen Victoria, i. 45, 47, 77, 85, 143.
a St^ra, Vol. I. 331.
70 PARTY.
the unreformcd Parliament. The Tories, indeed, forgetting
their recent differences, were suddenly reunited by the sense
of a common danger. The utter annihilation of their power
was threatened; and they boldly strove to maintain their
ground. But they were routed and overthrown. The as-
cendency of landlords in counties, the local influence of
[tatrons in boroughs, were overborne by the determined cry
for reform ; and the dissolution of 1831, when none of the
old electoral abuses had yet been corrected, secured a large
majority for ministers in the House of Commons. The dis-
solution of 1832, under the new franchises of the Reform
Acts, completed their triumph. Sad was the present down-
fall of the Tories. In the first reformed Parliament they
numbered less than one hundred and fifty.* The condition
of the Whigs in 1793 had scarcely been more hopeless.
Their majority in the House of Lords was, indeed, un-
shaken ; but it served merely to harass and hold in check
their opponents. To conquer with such a force alone, was
out of the question.
The two first years after the Reform Act formed the
Ascendency "^o*^ glorious period in the annals of the Whig
aftertheKf' p3'''y* Their principles had prevailed : they were
fonu Act. once more paramount in the councils of the state ;
and they used their newly acquired power in forwarding the
noblest legislative measures which have ever done honor to
the British Parliament, Slavery was abolished : the com-
merce of the East thrown open : the church in Ireland re-
formed: the social peril of the poor-laws averted.
But already, in the midst of their successes, their influ-
„, ^ , ence and popularity were subsiding ; and new
State of par- f f J o '
ties after the embarrassments were arising out of the altered
Refurm Act. , . „ . .._- . , .,, „ ,
relations or parties. While they were still fight-
ing the battle of reform, all sections of reformers united
1 In 1834, Sir R. Peel said one hundred and thirty only. — ITins. Deb.,
3d Scr., xxvi. 293. It appears from statistics of the old and new Parlia-
ments, in Courts and Cabinets of Will. IV. and Queen Victoria, that there
were 149 Conservatives against 509 Reformers of all descriptions, ii. 2C.
PARTIES AFJER THE REFORM ACT. 71
to support them. Their differences were sunk in that great
contest. But when the first enthusiasm of victory was over,
they displayed themselves in stronger relief than ever.
The alliance of the Whigs with democracy could not be per-
manent ; and, for the first time, democracy was now repre-
sented in Parliament. The radical reformers, or Radicals,
long known as an active party in the country, had at length
gained a footing in the House of Commons, where they had
about fifty representatives.* Without organization or unity
of purpose, and with little confidence in one another, they
were often found in combination against the government.
And in addition to this body, the great towns recently en-
franchised, and places suddenly released from the thraldom
of patrons and close corporations, had returned a new class
of reformers, having little sympathy with the old Whigs.
These men had sprung from a different source : they had no
connection with the aristocracy, and no respect for the tradi-
tions of the constitutional Whig party. Their political views
were founded upon principles more democratic ; and expe-
rience of-the diflSculties, restraints, and compromises of public
affairs had not yet taught them moderation. They expected
to gather, at once, all the fruits of an improved representa-
tion ; and were intolerant of delay. Tliey ignored the ob-
stacles to practical legislation. The non-conformist element
was strong amongst them ; and they were eager for the im-
mediate redress of every grievance which Dissenters had
suffered from the polity of a dominant church. On the other
hand. Earl Grey and his older aristocratic associates recoiled
I'rom any contact with democracy. The great object of their
lives had been accomplished. They had perfected the Con-
stitution, according to their own conceptions ; they looked
back with trembling upon the perils through which it had
recently passed ; and dreaded the rough spirit of their rest-
less allies, who — without veneration for the past, or mis-
1 Ediiib. Rev., July, 1837, p. 270; Bulwer's England and the English
H. 261; Guizot's Life of Peel, 67.
72 PARTY. .
giviugs as to the future — were already clamoring for fur*
ther changes in church and state. His younger and more
hopeful colleagues had faith in the vital energies of the Con-
stitution, and in its power of self-adaptation to every political
and social change. They were prepared to take tlie lead, as
statesmen, in furthering a comprehensive policy, in harmony
with tlie spirit of the times ; but they desired to consummate
it on safe principle.*, with a prudent regard to public opinion,
the means at their disposal, and the opposition to be over-
come.^ Such has ever been the policy of wise statesmen, in
our balanced Constitution. None but despots or democrats
expect instant submission to their will. Liberty not only
tolerates, but respects the independent judgment of all free
citizens.
The social pretensions of these two sections of the Liberal
party were not less distinct than their political sentiments.
The Whigs formed an aristocracy of great families, exclu-
sive in their habits and associations, and representing the
tastes of the old regime. The new men, speaking the dia-
lect of Lancashire and the West Riding, — with the rough
manners of the mill and the counting-house, and wearing the
unfashionable garb of the provinces, — were no congenial
associates for the high-bred politicians, who sought their
votes, but not their company. These men, and their families,
— even less presentable than themselves, — found no welcome
to the gay saloons of the courtly Whigs : but were severed,
1 The policy of the Whigs, as distinguished from the impatient tactics
of the R-idicals, was well expressed by Lord Durhiim, an advanced mem-
ber of their party, in a letter to fhe electors of North Durham, in 1837.
lie announced his determination never to force his measures" peremptorily
and dogmatically on the consideration of the government or the Parlia-
ment. If they are (as in my conscience I believe them to be) useful and
salutarj' mea-ures, — for they are based on the most implicit confidence in
the loyalty and gi>od 'eeling of the people, — the course of events and the
experieifce of every day will remove the objections and prejudices which
may now exist, and insure their adoption whenever they arc recommi.'nded
by the deliberate and determined voice of the people." — Edhib. Rev. July
1837, p. 282.
PARTIES AFTER THE REFORM ACT. 73
by ail impassable gulf, from the real rulers of the people;
wliose ambition they promoted, but could not hope to share.
The Whigs held all the olfices, and engrossed every distinc-
tion which public service and aristocratic connections confer.
The Radicals, while supporting the government against the
Tories, were in no better position than that of a despised
opposition. A hearty union between men with sentiments,
habits, and fortunes so diverse, wa# not to be expected ,
and jealousies and distrust were soon apparent in every de-
bate, and disagreement in every division.*
A further element of discord among the ministerial ranks
was found in the Irish party, under the leader- ^^ j^j^
ship of Mr. O'Connell. They were reformers, in- p^yty.
deed, and opposed to the pei-sons and policy of the Tories ;
but no sooner did the government adopt coercive measures
for the maintenance of peace in Ireland, than Mr. O'Connell
denounced them as " bloody and brutal ; " and scourged the
"Whigs more fiercely than he had assailed the opponents of
Catholic emancipation.*
After the Union, the members representing Ireland had
generally ranged themselves on either side, according to their
several political divisions. Some were returned by the in-
fluence of great Whig land-owners ; but the large majority
belonged to the Protestant and Orange connection, and sup-
ported successive Tory administrations. The priests and
the Catholic Association wrested, for a time, from the Prot-
estant landlords their accustomed domination, in some of the
counties; but the disfranchisement of the 40s. freeholders in
1829 restored it. Soon, however, the Catholic Relief Act,
followed by an enlarged representation, overthrew the Tory
party in Ireland, and secured a majority for the Whigs and
reformers.
But these men represented another country, and distinct
1 Ann. Reg., 1833, pp. 32, 70. Ill; Roehiick's Hist, of the W.hig Minis-
tiy, ii. 407-409; Courts and Cabinets of Will. IV. and Vict., ii. 45-47.
3 Debate on the Address, Feb. 5th, J833; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser xv. 148.
74 PARTY.
interests, sympathies, and passions. Tliey could not be
reckoned upon, as members of the Liberal party. Upon sev-
eral measures affecting Ireland, they were hotly opposed to
government ; on other questions they were in close alliance
with the Radicals. In the struggles of the English parties,
they sometimes voted with the reformers ; were often absent
from divisions, or forthcoming only in answer to pressing
solicitations: on some« occasions, they even voted with the
Tories. The attitude and tactics of this party were fraught
with embarrassment to Lord Grey and succeeding ministera ;
and when parties became more evenly balanced, were a
serious obstacle to parliamentary government. When they
opposed ministers, their hostility was often dangerous ; when
they were appeased and satisfied, ministers were accused of
truckling to Mr. O'Connell.
While the Liberal party were thus divided, their oppo-
KeTivaiofthe Hcnts Were United and full of hope. A few old
Tory party, jorics Still distrusted their leaders ; but the prom-
ise of future triumphs to their party, hatred of the Whigs,
and fear of the Radicals, went far to efface the memory
of their wrongs. However small the numbers of the Tory
party in the House of Commons, they were rapidly I'ecover-
ing their local influence, which the refoi*m crisis had over-
come. Their nomination boroughs, indeed, were lost ; the
close and corrupt organization by which they had formerly
maintained their supremacy was broken up ; but the great
confederation of rank, property, influence, and numbers was
in full vigor. The land, the church, the law, were still the
strongholds of the party ; but having lost the means of con-
trolling the representation, they were forced to appeal to tlie
people for support. They readily responded to the spirit of
the times. It was now too late to rely upon the distinctive
principles of their party, which had been renounced by them-
selves or repudiated by the peojile. It was a ])eriod of in-
telligence and progress ; and they were prepared to contend
with their rivals in the race of improvement.
I'ARTIES AFTER THE REFORM ACT. 75
But to secure popular support, it was necessary to divest
themselves of the discredited name of Tories. It
was a name of" reproach, as it had been 150 years conserya-
bet'ore ; and ihey renounced it. Henceforth they
uilroitly adopted the title of *' Conservatives ; " and pro-
claimed their mission, to be the maintenance of the Constitu-
tion against the inroads of democracy. Accepting recent
changes, as the irrevocable will of Parliament and the coun-
try, they were prepared to rule in the spirit of a more popu-
lar Constitution. They were ready to improve institutions,
but not to destroy or reconstruct them.*
The position which they now assumed was well suited to
the temper of the times. Assured of the support of the old
Tory party, they gained new recruits through a dread of
democracy, which the activity of the Radicals encouraged.
At the same time, by yielding to the impulses of a progres-
sive age, they conciliated earnest and ardent minds, which
would have recoiled from the narrow principles of the old
Tory school.
Meanwhile the difficulties of the Whigs were increasing.
In May, 1834, the cabinet was nearly broken up Breaking up
by the retirement of Mr. Stanley, Sir J. Graham, Grey^minis-
the Duke of Richmond, and the Earl of Ripon, *^^-
on the question of dealing with the revenues of the Church
in Ireland. The causes of this disunion favored the approach
of the seceding members of the cabinet to the Conservative
party. They immediately crossed over to the opposition
benches; and though accompanied by a very small body
of adherents, their eminent talents and character promised
much future advantage to the Conservative party. In July,
the government was dissolved by the resignation of Earl
Grey ; ^nd the Reform ministry was no more.
1 In his Address to the Electors of Tamworth, Sir Robert Peel stated
that he " considered the Reform Bill a final and irrevocable settlement of a
great constitutional question, — a settlement which no friend to the peace
and welfare of this countrj' would attempt to disturb, either by direct or
by insidious means." — Ann. Reg., 183-1, p. 3-11; Guizot's Life of Peel,
60-66.
76 PARTY.
Lord Melbourne's ministry, still further estranged from
Sir Robert the Radicals, were losing ground and public cori-
m^iystry""^* fidencc, when they were suddenly dismissed by
1834-35. William IW This precipitate and ill-advised
measure reunited the various sections of the liberal par:y
into an overwhelming opposition. Sir Robert Peel vainly
endeavored to disarm them, and to propitiate the good will
of the people, by promising ample measures of reform.^ He
went so far in this direction, that the old scliool of Tories
began to foresee alarming consequences in his policy ; ' but
his opponents recognized the old Tory party in disguise, — ■
the same persons, the same instincts, and the same traditions.
They would not suffer the fruits of tlieir recent victory to be
wrested from them by the king, and by the men who had
resisted, to the utmost, the extension of parliamentary repre-
sentation. His ministry was even distrusted by Lord Stan-
ley ■* and Sir James Graham, who, though separated from the
reformers, were not yet prepared to unite their fortunes with
the untried Conservatives.
Sir Robert Peel strengthened his minority by a dissolu-
stateofpar- tion ; ® but was speedily crushed by the united
LordTiei- forces of the opposition ; and Lord Melbourne was
bourne. restored to power. His second administration
1 Supra, Vol. I. 125.
2 In his Address to the Electors of Tamworth, he said that he was pre-
pared to adopt the spirit of the Reform Act by a " careful review of insti-
tutions, civil and ecclesiastical, undertaken in a friendly temper, combining
with the firm maintenance of established rights the correction of proved
abuses and the redress of real grievances." He also promised a fair
consideration to municipal reform, the question of church rates, and oth-
er measures affecting the Church and Dissenters. — Ann. Rty., 1334, p.
839.
8 Lord Eldou wrote, in March, 1835, the new ministers, " if they do not
at present go to the full length to which the others were goinj:, will at
least make so many important changes in Churcn and State that nobody
cm <;Uess how far the precedents they establish may lead to changes of a
very formidable kind hereafter." — Twiss's Life of Lord KUton, iii. 244.
* liy the death of his grandfather ui Oct. 1834, be had become Lord
Stanley.
' Before the dissolation, his followers in the House of Commons num-
PARTIES UNDER LORD MELBOLTtNE. 77
was again exclusively Whig, with the single exception or
Mr. Poulett Thomson, who, holding opinions somewhat more
advanced, was supposed to represent the Radical party in
the cabinet. The Whigs and Radicals were as far asundei
as ever ; but their differences were veiled under the compre-
hensive title of the " Liberal party," which served at once
to contrast them with the Conservatives, and to unite under
one standard the forces of Lord I^Ielbourne, the English
Radicals, and the Irish followers of Mr. O'Connell.
During the next six years, the two latter sections of the
party continued to urge organic changes, which were resisted
alike by Whigs and Conservatives. Meanwhile, Chartism
in England, and the repeal agitation in Ireland, increased
that instinctive dread of democracy which, for the last fifty
years, had strengthened the hands of the Tory party. Min-
isters labored earnestly to reform political and social abuses.
They strengthened the Church, both in England and Ire-
land, by the commutation of tithes : they conciliated the Dis-
senters by a liberal settlement of their claims to rehgious
liberty : they established municipal self-government through-
out the United Kingdom. But, placed between the Radicals
on one side and the Conservatives on the other, their posi-
tion was one of continual embarrassment.* When they in-
clined towards the Radicals, they were accused of favonng
democracy : when they resisted assaults upon the House of
Lords, the Bishops, the Church, and the Constitution, they
bered less than 150 ; in the Xew Parliament, they exceeded 250 ; and the
support he received from others, who desired to give him a fair trial,
E-R-elled tliis minority to very formidable dimensions. On the election of
Speaker, he was beaten by ten votes only ; on the Address, by seven ; and
on the decisive division, upon the appropriation of the surplus revenues of
the Irish Church, by thirtj'-three. — Hans. Deb., 3d. Ser. xxvi. 224, 425,
&c.; Jhid., xxvii. 770; Courts and Cab. of Will. IV. and Vict., ii. 161;
Guizot's Life of Peel, 72.
1 The relative numbers of the different parties, in 1837, have been thus
computed : — Whigs, 152 ; Liberals, 100 ; Radicals, 80 = 332. Tories, 139 ;
Ultra-Tories, 100; Conservatives, 80 = 319. — CWrte and CabineU of WilL
IV. and Vict.^ ii. 253.
73 PARTY.
were denounced by their own extreme follower's, as Tories.
Nay, so much was'their resistance to further constitutional
changes resented, that sometimes Radicals were found join-
ing the opposition forces in a division ; ^ and Conservative
candidates were preferred to Whigs, by Radical and Chartist
electors. The liberal measures of the government were ac-
cepted without grace, or fair acknowledgment; and when
they fell short of the extreme Radical standard, were reviled
as worthless.'^ It was their useful but thankless office to act
as mediators between extreme opinions and parties, whict
would otherwise have been brought into perilous conflict.'
But however important to the interests of the state, it sacri-
ficed the popularity and influence of the party.
Meanwhile the Conservatives, throughout the country,
ConservatiTe wers busy in reconstructing their party. Their
reaction. organization was excellent : their agents were
zealous and active ; and the registration courts attested their
growing numbers and confidence.*
There were diversities of opinion among different sections
of this party, — scarcely less marked than those which char-
acterized the ministerial ranks, — but they were lost sight of,
for a time, in the activity of a combined opposition lo the
government. There were ultra-Tories, ultra-Protestants, and
Orangemen, who had not forgiven the leaders by whom
they had been betrayed in 1829. There were unyielding
politicians who remembered, with distrust, the liberal policy
of Sir Robert Peel in 1835, and disapproved the tolerant
spirit in which he had since met the Whig measures afFect-
1 Edinb. Rev., April, 1840, 283.
2 Ibid., p. 284.
8 Bulwer saj's: "They clumsily attempted what Machiavel has termed
the finest masterpiece in political science, — 'to content the people and to
manage the nobles.'" — Enyland and the English, ii. 271. But, in truth,
their principles and their position alike dictated a middle course.
4 Sir R. Peel, at a dinner in Merchant Taylor's Hall, in May, 1838, raised
the not very exalted, but extremely practical cry of " register, register,
register," which was responded to by election«erijig agents with the utmost
alacrity.
THE CONSERVATIVES. , 79
mg the Established Churcli and Dissenters.* The leaders
were appealing to the judgment and sentiments of the people,
while many of their adherents were still true to the ancient
traditions of their party.
But the^se diversities, so far from weakening the Conserva-
tives while in opposition, served to increase their strength,
by favoring the interests, prejudices, and hopes of various
classes. Men who would have repealed the Catholic Relief
4.ct, and withheld the grant for Maynooth ; who deemed the
Church in danger from the aggressions of Dissenters j who
regarded protection to native industry as the cardinal maxim
of political economy ; who saw in progress nothing but de-
mocracy, — were united with men who believed that the safety
of the Church was compatible with the widest toleration of
Catholics and Dissenters, that liberty would ward off democ-
racy, and that native industry would flourish under free
trade. All these men, having a common enemy, were, as
yet, united ; but their divergences of opinion were soon to
be made manifest.^
Before the dissolution of 1841, they had become more
than a match for the ministry ; and having gained sir Robert
a considerable majority at the elections, they were muJift^"*
again restored to power, under the masterly lead- ^^*^-
ership of Sir Robert Peel. Such were the disrepute and
unpopularity into which the Whigs had fallen, that Sir
Robert Peel commenced his labors with prospects more
hopeful than those of any minister since Mr, Pitt. He was
now joined by Lord Stanley, Sir James Graham, and the
Earl of Ripon, — seceders from the reform ministry of Earl
Grey. He combined in his cabinet men who retained the
confidence of the old Tory school, and men who gave prom-
ise of a policy as liberal and progressive as the Whigs had
1 Edinb. Rev., April, 1840, p. 288; Ann. Reg., 1840, pp. 64, 71.
2 A reviewer treating in April, 1840, of Sir Robert Peel and his party
said: " His ostracism may be distant, but to us it appears to be certain." —
E&nh. Rev., April, 1840, p. 313.
80 , PARTY.
ever professed. He was himself prepared for measures of
wisdom, and the highest statesmanship ; but such was the
constitution of his party, and such the state of the country,
that his policy was soon destined to destroy his own power,
and annihihite his party.
During the late elections, a fixed duty on corn had been
His free-trade advocated by the Whigs, and free trade, on a more
policy. extended scale, by the Corn-law League and
many liberal supporters of Lord Melbourne's govern-
ment. The Conservatives, as a body, had denounced
the impolicy of these measures, and claimed protection for
native industry.^ Their main strength was derived from
the agricultural classes, wTio regarded any relaxation of the
protective system as fatal to their interests. The Conserva-
tives had taken issue with the Liberal party, on the policy
of protection, and had triumphed. But the necessities of
the country, and more advanced political science, were de-
manding increased supplies of food, and an enlarged tield for
commerce and the employment of labor. These were wants
which no class or party, however powerful, could long with-
stand ; and Sir Robert Peel, with the foresight of a states-
man, perceived that by gradually adopting the principles of
commercial freedom, he could retrieve the finances, and de-
velop the wealth and industry of his country. Such a
policy being repugnant to the feelings and supposed interests
of his party, and not yet fully accepted by public opinion, —
he was obliged to initiate it with caution. The dangers of
his path were shown by the resignation of the Duke of Buck-
ingham, — the representative of the agricultural interest, —
before the new policy had been announced. In 1842, the
1 " Sir Robert Peel solicited and obtained the confidence of the countn- in
the general election of 1841, as against the whole free-trade policy embodied
in the Whig budget of that year." .... " This budget, so scorned, so vilified,
that it became the death-warrant of its authors, was destined, as it turned
out, to be not tlie trophy, but the equipment of its conquerors, — as the
Indian, after a victory, dresses himself in the bloody scalp of his adver-
•ary."— Quarterly Rev., Sept., 1846, p. 564.
SIR ROBERT PEEL AND HIS PARTY. 81
mlmster maintained the sliding scale of duties upon corn
but relaxed its prohibitory operation. His bold revision of
the customs' tariff in the same year, and the passing of the
Canada Corn Bill in 1843, showed how little his views were,
in harmony with the sentiments of his party. They already
distrusted his fidelity to protectionist principles ; while they
viewed with alarm the rapid progress of the Corn-law
League, and the successful agitation for the repeal of the
corn laws, to which he offered a dubious resistance.^ la
1845, the policy of free trade was again advanced by a fur-
ther revision of the tariff. The suspicions of the protection-
ists were then expressed more loudly. Mr. Disraeli declared
protection to be in " the same condition that Protestantism
was in 1828 ; " and expressed his belief " that a Conservative
government was an organized hypocrisy."^
The bad harvest of this year, and the failure of the po-
tato crop, precipitated a crisis which the Corn- j^^ j ^^j. ^^^
law League and public opinion must erelong have ^"""^ ^'"•
brought about ; and, in December, Sir Robert Peel proposed
to his colleagues the immediate repeal of the corn laws.
It was not to be expected that a ministry, representing
the landed interest, should at once adopt a policy repugnant
to their pledges and party faith. They dissented from the
advice of their leader, and he resigned.^ Lord John Russell,
who had recently declared himself a convert to the repeal
of the corn laws,* was commissioned by Her Majesty to form
a govenunent; but failed in the attempt ; when Sir Robert
Peel, supported by all his colleagues except Lord Stanley,*
1 Lord Palmerston's speech, Aug. 10th, 1842 ; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixv.
1230; Lord Stanhope; Jbid., Ixx. 578; Guizot's Life of Peel, 107, 125, 22G.
2 Hans. Deb., 3d Sor., bcxviii. 1028; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 7;
Guizofs Life of Peel, 235-240.
8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., l.xxxiii. 39; Peel's Mem., ii. 182-226; Disraeli's
Lord G. Bentinck, 21-31.
* Letter to the Electors of London, Nov. 22d, 1845; Peel's Mem., ii. 175.
6 Peel's Mem, ii. 220-251; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 30. Lord
Wharnclirte died tlie day before Sir R. Peel's return to office. Ann. Reg.,
1845, Chron. 320.
vol.. n. 6
82 PARTY.
resumed office ; and ventured, in the face of a prolec-
tionist Parliament, wholly to abandon the policy of protec-
tion.*
As a statesman. Sir Robert Peel was entitled to the grat-
Sir Robert itude of his country. No other man could then
tioris*wUh his '"^^'*^ passed this vital measure, for which he sacri-
party. fj^gj ^l^e confidence of followers and the attach-
ment of friends. But, as the leader of a party, he was
unfaithful and disloyal. The events of 1829 were repeated
in 1846. The parallel between " Protestantism " and " pro-
tection " was complete. A second time lie yielded to political
necessity, and a sense of paramount duty to the state ; and
found himself committed to a measure, which he had gained
the confidence of his party by opposing. Again was he
constrained to rely upon political opponents to support him
against his own friends.' He passed this last measure of
his political life, amid the reproaches and execrations of his
party. He had assigned the credit of the Catholic Relief
Act to ]Mr. Canning, whom he had constantly opposed ; and
he acknowledged that the credit of this measure was due to
" the unadorned eloquence of Richard Cobden," — the apos-
tle of free trade, — whom he had hitherto resisted.* As he
had braved the hostility of his friends for the public good,
the people applauded his courage and self-sacrifice, — felC
for him as he writhed under the scourging of his merciless
foes, — and pitied him when he fell, buried under the ruins
of the great political fabric which his own genius had recon-
structed, and his own hands had twice destroyed.* But every
one was sensible that, so long as party ties and obligations
hould continue to form an essential part of parliainentiiry
1 Peel's Mem., ii. 259; Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 49-57; 108, 204-207.
2 See his own memorandum on the position of ministers, June 21st, 1846 ;
Mem., ii. 288; Disraeli's Lord U. Bentinck, 110, &c.
3 Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, Ixxxvii. 1054: Disraeli's Lord G. Bentinck, 307-
310.
* Guizot's Life of Peel, 270, 289-298, 368; Disraeli's Lord G. Beutuick
259, 262, 288.
SIR ROBERT PEEL AND HIS PARTY. 83
government, the tir.~t statesman of his age had foifeited all
future claim to govern.*
The fallen minister, accompanied by a few faithful friends,
— the first and foremost men of his party, — were separated
forever from the main boily of the Conservatives.
" Tliev stood aloof, the scars remaining,
Like cliffs which had been rent asunder ;
A drean' sea now flows between ; —
But neither heat, nor frost, nor thunder,
Shall wholly do away, I ween.
The marks of that which once hath been."
Men of all parties, whether approving or condemning the
measures of 1829 and 1846, agreed that Sir Rob-
. , Obligations of
ert Peel's conduct could not be justified upon any » party
of the conventional principles of party ethics.
The i-elations between a leader and his followers are those ot
mutual confidence. His talents give them union and force :
their numbers invest him with political power. They tender,
and he accepts, the trust, because he shares and i-epresents
their sentiments. Viewing affairs frpm higher ground, he
may persuade them to modify or renounce their opinions, in
the interests of the state : but, without their concurrence, he
has no right to use for one purpose that power which they
have intrusted to him for another. He has received a limited
authority, which he may not exceed without further instruc-
tions. If, contrary to the judgment of his party, he believes
•• On quitting office he said, " In relinquishing power I shall leave a
Dame severely censured, I fear, by many who, on public grounds, deeply re-
gret tlie severance of party ties, — deeply regret that severance, not from
intere>ted or personal motives, but from the firm conviction that fidelity to
party engagements, the existence and maintenance of a great party, consti-
tutes a powerful instrument of government." — Uatts. Dtb., .3d Ser., lx.x:svii.
1054.
So complete was the alienation of the Tory party from Sir R. Peel that
even the Duke of Wellington, who cooperated with him in the repeal ot
the corn laws, concurred with Lord Derby in opinion, that it was impossi-
ble that he should ever place himself at the head of his party again, with
any prosjiect of success. — Speech of Lard Derby at Lictrpocl, Oct. 29tli,
I85rt
84 PARTY.
the public welfare to demand an entire change of policy, it
is not for him to carry it out. He cannot, indeed, be called
upon to conceal or disavow his own o[)inions ; but he is no
longer entitled to lead the forces intrusted to his command,
— still less to seek the aid of the enemy. Elected chief of
a free republic, — not its dictator, — it becomes his duty,
honorably and in good faith, to retire from his position, with
as little injury as may be to the cause he abandons, and to
leave to others a task which his own party allegiance forbids
him to attempt.*
This disruption of the Conservative party exercised an
The conserv- important influence upon the political history of.
the&u^'sir ^'^® succeeding period. The Whigs were restored
B. Peel. tQ power under Lord John Russell, — not by
reason of any increase of their own strength, but by the
disunion of their opponents. The Conservatives, sudden-
ly deprived of their leaders, and committed to the hope-
less cause of protection, were, for the present, powerless.
They were now led by Lord Stanley, one of the greatest
orators of his time, who had been the first to separate from
Earl Grey, and the first to renounce Sir Robert Peel. In
the Commons, their cause was maintained by the chivalrous
devotion of Lord George Bentinck, and the powerful, ver-
satile, and caustic eloquence of Mr. Disraeli, — the two fore-
most opponents of the late minister. But they were, as yet,
without spirit or organization, — disturbed in their faith, and
repining over the past rather than hopeful of the future.'*
Meanwliile the Whigs, under Lord John Russell, were ill
mu «ru! ! at ease with their more advanced supporters, as
The Whiffs in i i '
office under tiiev had been under Lord Melbourne. They had
Mij, 1846- nearly worked out the political reforms comprised
in the scheme of an aristocratic party; and Sir
Robert. Peel had left them small scope for further experi-
1 See his own justification, Mem., IL 163, 229, 311-325; Disraeli's Lcrd
G'jorge IJenliiick, 31-33, 390, &c.
2 Disrauli's Lurd G. Bentlack, 79, 173, &c.
THE CONSERVATIVES. 85
ments in fiscal legislation. They resisted, for a time, all proj-
ects of change in the representation ; but were at length
driven, by the necessities of their position, to promise a fur
ther extension of the franchise.^ With parties so disunited,
a strong government was impossible ; but Lord J. Russell's
administration, living upon the distractions of the Conserva
lives, lasted for six years. In 1852, it fell at the first touch
of Lord Palraerston, who bad been recently separated from
bis colleagues.^
Power was again within the reach of the Conservatives?,
and they grasped it. The Earl of Derby ' was a
, , , . ■ . , . , \. Lord Derby's
leader worthy to mspire them with conhdence ; miDistry,
but he had the aid of few experienced statesmen.
Free trade was flourishing ; and the revival of a protective
policy utterly out of the question. Yet protection was still
the distinctive principle of the great body of his party. He
could not abandon it, without unfaithfulness to his friends :
he could not maintain it, without the certain destruction of
his government. A party cannot live upon memories of the
past : it needs a present policy and purpose ; it must adapt
itself to the existing views and needs of society. But the
Conservatives clung to the theories of a past generation,
which experience had already overthrown ; and had adopted
no new principles to satisfy the sentiment of their own time.
In the interests of his party, Lord Derby would have done
well to decline the hopeless enterprise which had fallen to
his lot. The time was not yet ripe for the Conservatives.
Divided, disorganized, and unprepared, — without a popular
cry, and without a policy, — their failure was inevitable. In
vain did they advocate protection in counties, and free trade
in towns. In vain did many " Liberal Conservatives " out-
bid their Whig opponents in popular professions : in vain did
others avoid perilous pledges, by declaring themselves fol«
1 Supra, Vol. I. 357.
2 Supi-a, Vol. I. 136.
* Lord Stanley had succeeded his Either in the earldom in 1851.
86 PARTY.
lowers of Lord Derby, wliorever he might lead them. They
were defeated at the elections : they were constrained to re-
nounce the policy of protection : ^ they could do little to gratify
their own friends ; and they had again united .ill sections of
their opponents.
And now the results of the schism of 1846 were apparent.
The disciples of Sir Robert Peel's school had hith-
Junctton of , i ^ /. it • ft • i
Whip and erto kept aloor irora both parties. Having lost
derLord " their eminent leader, they were free to form new
Aberdeen. connections. Distinguished for their talents and
political experience, their influence was considerable, not-
withstanding the smallness of their following. Their ambi-
tion had been checked and unsatisfied. Their isolation had
continued for six years : an impassable gulf separated them
from the Conservatives ; and their past career and present
sympathies naturally attracted them towards the Liberal
party. Accordingly, a coalition ministry was formed, under
Lord Aberdeen, comprising the Peelites, — as they were
now called, — the Whigs, and Sir William Molesworth, a
representative of the piiilosophical school of Radicals. It
united men who had labored with Mr. Canning, Sir Robert
Peel, Earl Grey, and Mr. Hume. The Liberal party had
gained over nearly all the statesmanship of the Conservative
ranks, witiiout losing any of its own. Five-and-twenty years
before, the foremost men among the Tories had joined Earl
Grey ; and now again, the first minds of another generation
were won over, from the same party, to the popular side. A
fijsion of parties had become the law of our political system.
The great principles of legislation, which had divided par-
ties, had now been settled. Public opinion had accepted and
ratified them ; and the disruption of party ties which their
adoption had occasioned, brought into close connection the
persons as well as principles of various schools of poli-
ticians.
1 Ilans. Deb., 3d Ser.,cxxii. 637, 693; czxiii. 54, 40«.
COMBIXATIOX OF PARTIES, 1857. HT
No administration, in modern times, had been stronger in
talent, in statesmanship, and in parliamentary sup- „.
' I :» 1 J I Disunion and
port, than that of Lord Aberdeen. But the union f«ii of this
, . ministry.
of pariies, which gave the cjibinet outward force,
was not calculated to secure harmony and mutual confidence
amongst its members. The Peelites engrossed a preponder-
ance, in the number and weight of their offices, out of pro-
portion to their following, which was not borne without jeal-
ousy by the Whigs. Unity of sentiment and purpose wa3
wanting to the material strength of the coalition ; and in lit-
tle more than two years, discord, and the disastrous incidents
of the Crimean war, dissolved it.
Lord Aberdeen, the Duke of Newcastle, and Lord J. Rus-
sell retired ; and Lord Palmerston was intrusted separation of
with the reconstruction of the ministry. It was ^Jj^p^JmS.
scarcely formed, when Sir James Graham, Mr. ^ton.
Gladstone, and Mr. Sidney Herbert, followed their Peel-
ite colleagues into retirement. The union of these states-
men with the Liberal party, — so recently effected, — was
thus completely dissolved. The government was again re-
duced to the narrower basis of the Whig connection. Lord
John Russell, who had rejoined it on the retirement of Mr.
Gladstone from the Colonial Office, resigned after the confer-
ences at Vienna, and assumed an attitude of opposition.*
The Radicjils, — and especially the peace party, — pursued
the ministry with determined hostility and resentment. The
Peelites were estranged, critical, and unfriendly.
The ministerial party were again separated into their dis-
cordant elements, while the opposition were watch- combination
ing for an occasion to make common cause with ^ust'the
any section of the Liberals against the govern- ^°'*'«'"-
ment. But a- successful military administration, and the
conclusion of a peace with Russia, rendered Lord Palmers-
ton's position too strong to be easily assailed. For two
1 Ann. Reg., 1855, p. 152, et seq.
88 PARTY.
years he maintained his ground, from whatever quarter it
was threatened. Pearly in 1857, however, on the breaking
out of hostilities in China, he was defeated by a combinalion
of parties.^ He was opposed by Mr. Cobden and his friends,
by Lord John Russell, by all the Peelites who had lately
been his colleagues, and by the whole force of the Conserva-
tives.' Coalition had recently formed a strong government ;
and combination now brought suddenly together a powerful
opposition. It was not to be expected that Lord Palmerston
would submit to a confederation of parties so casual and in
congruous. He boldly appealed to the confidence of the
country, and routed his opponents of every political sec-
tion.'
In the new Parliament, Lord Palmerston was the minister
Lord Palmer- ^^ ^ national party. The people had given him
ilrityand"" t^^*-'i*' Confidence; and men, differing widely from
sudden fau. q^q another, concurred in trusting to his wisdom
and moderation. He was the people's minister, as the first
William Pitt had been a hundred years before. But the
parties whom he had discomfited at the elections, — smart-
ing under defeat, and jealous of his ascendency, — were
ready to thrust at any weak place in his armor. In 1858,
our relations with France, after the Orsini conspiracy, — in-
felicitously involved with a measure of municipal legislation,
— suddenly placed him at a disadvantage ; when all the par-
ties who had combined against him in the last Parliament,
again united their forces and overpowered him.*
1 Previous concert between the difTerent parties was denied; and combi-
nation is, therefore, to be understood as a concurrence of opinion and of
votes. Earl of Derby and Lord J. Russell; Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, cxliv.
1910, 2322.
2 The majority against government wjis 16 ; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser. ; cxliv.
1846. Ann. Reg., 1857, ch. iii.
3 iMr. Cobden, Mr. IJright, Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr. Layard, and Mr. Fox,
among his Liberal supporters, and Mr. Cardwell and Mr. Rouudell-Palmer
among the Peelites, lost their seats. — Ann. Bef/., 1857, 84.
* The majority against him was 19 — Ayes, 215 ; Noes, 234 — Ann. Reg.,
1858, ch. ii. ; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxlviii. 1844
RECONCILIATION OF THE LIBERAL PARTY. 89
These parties had agreed in a single vote against the min"
ister ; but their union in the government of the
, rtM /^ • 1'OrCl Derhv'B
country was inconceivable. Ihe Conservatives, f!econ<i minis-
tlierefore, as the strongest party, were restored to '^'
power, under the Earl of Derby. The events of the last
few years had exemplified the fusion of parties in the gov-
ernment, and their combination, on particular occasions, in
opposition. The relations of all parties were disturbed
and unsettled. It was now to be seen that their principles
were no less undetermined. The broad distinctions between
them had been almost effaced ; and all alike deferred to pub-
lic opinion, rather than to any distinctive policy of their own.
The Conservatives were in a minority of not less than one
hundred, as compared with all sections of the Liberal party;*
and their only hopes were in the divided councils of the op-
position, and in a policy which should satisfy public expecta-
tions. Accordingly, though it had hitherto been their char- ,
acteristic principle to resist constitutional changes, they ac-
cepted Parliamentary Reform as a political necessity ; and
otherwise endeavored to conform to public opinion. For
the first session, they were maintained solely by the disunion
of their opponents. Their India Bill threatened them with
ruin ; but they were rescued by a dexterous raanceuvre of
Lord John Russell.* Their despatch disapproving Lord
Canning's Oude proclamation imperilled their position ; but
they were saved by the resignation of Lord Ellenborough,
and by a powerful diversion in their favor, concerted by
Mr. Bright, Sir James Graham, and other members of the
opposition.' It was clear that, however great their intrinsic
weakness, they were safe until their opponents had composed
their differences. Early in the following session, this recon-
ciliation was accomplished ; and all sections of the Liberal
1 Quarterly Rev., civ. 517.
' Ann. Reg., 18-58, ch. iii. ; Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, cxlix. 858.
» Ann. Reg. 1858, ch. iv. ; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cl. 944, 985.
90 PARTY.
party concurred in a resolution fatal to fl.e Ministerial Re-
form Bill.i
Ministers appt^aled in vain to the country. Their own
liord Palmer- distinctive pHnciplcs were so far lost, that they
nai'uistry'""'' "^re uHuble to rely upon reactionary sentiments
1859. against constitutional change ; and having commit-
ted themselves to popular measures, they were yet outbidden
by their opponents. They fell ; * and Lord Palmcrston was
restored to power, with a cabinet representing, once more,
every section of the Liberal party.
The fusion of parties, and concurrence or compromise of
Fusion of principles, was continued. In 1859, the Con-
P"*»*** servatives gave in their adherence to the cause of
parliamentary reform ; and in 1860, the Liberal administra-
tion which succeeded them, were constrained to abandon it.
Thirty years of change in legislation, and in social progress,
had bi'ought the sentiments of all parties into closer approxi-
mation. Fundamental principles had been settled : grave
defects in the laws and Constitution had been corrected. The
great battle-fields of party were now peaceful domains, held
by all parties in common. To accommodate themselves to
public opinion, Conser%'atives had become liberal : not to out-
strip public opinion, ultra-Liberals were forced to maintain
silence or profess moderation.
Among the leaders of the Conservatives, and the leaders
of tiie ministerial Liberals, there was little differ-
difference encc of policy and professions. But between their
between Con- • n i -n • i i-
servativesand respective adliercuts, there were still essential di-
** ■ versities of political sentiment. Tiie greater num-
ber of Conservatives had viewed the progress of legislation
— which they could not resist — as a hard necessity : they
1 Supra, "Vol. 1., 360. It was moved by Lord J. Russell, and supported
by I..ord Pa'merston, Mr. Bright, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Milner Gibson, Mr. Sid-
ney Herbert, Sir James Graham, and Mr. Cardwell. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser^
cliii. 405.
« Hans. Deb , 3d Scr., cllv. 418.
VARIOUS SECTIONS OF EACH PARTY. 91
had accepted it grudgingly, and in an unfriendly spirit, — as
defendants submitting to the adverse judgment of a court,
whence there is no appeal. It had been repugnant to the
princi[)les and traditions of their party ; and they had yielded
to it without conviction. " He that consents against his will,
is of the same opinion Still ; " and the true Conservative,
silenced but not convinced by the arguments of his opponents
and the assent of his leaders, still believed that the world was
going very wrong, and regretted the good old times, when it
was less headstrong and perverse.
On the other hand, the Liberal party, which had espoused
the cause of liberty and progress from the beginning, still
maintained it with pride and satisfaction, — approving the
past, and hopeful of the future, — leading public opinion,
rather than following it, and representing the spirit and senti-
ment of the age. The sympathies of one party were still
with power and immutable prescription : the sympathies of
the other were associated with popular self-government and
a progressive policy. The Conservatives were foi'ced to con-
cede as much liberty as would secure obedience and content-
ment : the Liberals, confiding in the people, favored every
liberty that was consistent with security and order.
At the same time, each party comprised within itself di-
versities of opinion, not less marked than those
,.,,.. • , T • n 1 1 rwM , 1 Various sec-
which distmguisaed it irom the other, ihe old tions of each
constitutional Whig was more nearly akin to the
Liberal Conservative, than to many of his democratic allies
Enlightened statesmen of the Conservative connection had
more principles in common with the bold disciples of Sir
Robert Peel, than with the halting rear-rank of their own
Tory followers.
Such diversities of opinion among men of the same par-
ties, and such an approach to agreement between men of op-
posite parties, led attentive observers to speculate upon fur-
ther combination and fusion hereafter. A free representa-
tion had broucrht tosrether a Parliament reflecting the varied
92 PARTY.
interests and sentiments of all classes of the people ; and the
ablest statesmen, who were prepared to give effect to the
national will, would be accepted as members of tiie national
party, by whom tlie people desired to be governed. Loving
freedom and enlightened progress, but averse to democracy,
the great body of the people had learned to regard the strug-
gles of parties with comparative indifference. Tiiey desired
to be well and worthily governed by statesmen fit to accept
their honorable service, rather than to assist at the triurapl
of one party over another.
Having traced the history of parties, the principles by
which they were distinguished, their successes and
Changes in •' , ° '
the character defeats, their coalitions and separations, — we must
tion of " not overlook some material changes in their char-
^^ ***■ acter and organization. Of these the most im-
portant have arisen from an improved representative system,
and the correction of the abuses of patronage.
When parliamentary majorities were secured by combina-
tions of great families, acting in concert with the
Formicas- ° . . ' ° .
Bocutionsof Crown and agreeing in the constitution of thegov-
great tamilies. . . ^ .
ernment, the organization ot j)arties was due rather
to negotiations between high contracting powers, for the dis-
tribution of offices, honors, and pensions, than to considera-
tions of policy, statesmanship, and popularity.* The Crown
and aristocracy governed the country; andjlieir connections
1 A spirited, but highly colored, sketch of this condition of parties, ap
peared in Blackwood's Magazine, No. 350, p. 754. " Xo game of whist L'
one of the lordly clubs of St. James's Square was more exclusively played.
It was simply a question whether his grace of Bedford would be content
with a quarter or a half of the cabinet; or whether the Marquess of Rocking-
ham would be satisiied with two fifths; or whether the Earl of Shelburne
would have all, or share his power with the Duke of Portland. In those
barterings and borrowings we never hear the name of the nation: no
wbisper announces that there is such a thing as the people; nor is there
any allusion, in its embroidered conclave, to its interests, feelings, and
necessities. All was done as in an assemblage of a higher race of beings,
calmly carving out the world for themse'v<>s, a tribe of epicurean deities,
with the cabinet for their Olympus."
CHANGES IN THE CHARACTER Of PARTIES. 93
and nominees in (he House of Commons wex'e held to iheir
party allegiance by a profuse dispensation of patronage.
Men independent of constituents naturally looked up to the
Crown and the great nobles, — the source of all lionor and
profit. Long before the rei)resentation was reformed, the
most flagrant abuses of parliamentary patronage had been
corrected. Offices and pensions had been reduced, the ex-
penditure of the civil list controlled, and political corruption
in many forms abated.* But while a close representative /
system continued, parties were still compacted by family I
connections and interests, rather than by common principles [
and convictions. The Reform Acts modified, but did net
subvert, this organization. The influence of great families,
though less absolute, was still predominant. The Constitu-
tion had been invigorated by more popular elements ; but
society had not been shaken. Rank and ancestral property
continued to hold at least their fair proportion of power, in a
mixed government. But they were forced to wield that
power upon popular principles, and in the interests of the
public. They served the people in high places, instead of
ruling them as in-esponsible masters.
A reformed representation and more limited patronage
have had an influence, not less marked, upon the pouacs then
organization of parties, in another form. When * profession,
great men ruled, in virtue of their parliamentary interest
they needed able men to labor for them in the field of
politics. There were Parliaments to lead, rival statesmei
to combat, foreign ministers to outwit, finances to economize
fleets and armies to equip, and the judgment of a free peo
pie to satisfy. But they who had the power and patron
age of the Crown in their hands, were often impotent ii
debate, drivellers in council, dunces in writing minutes and
despatches. The country was too great and free to be gov-
erned wholly by such men ; and some of their patronage wai
therefore spared from their own families and dependents, U
1 See supra, Vol. I., 233-312; also, ch. iv-
94 PARTY.
encourage eloquence and statesmanship in others. They
could bestow seats in Parliament without the costs of an
election : they could endow their able but needy clients with
otfices, sinecures, and peni^ions ; and could use their talents
and ambition in all the arduous affairs of slate. Politics be-
ciime a dazzling profession, a straight road to fame and for-
tune. It was the day-dream of tiie first scholars of Oxford
and Cambridge, Eton, Harrow, and Westminster. Men of
genius and eloquence aspired to the most eminent positions
in the government : men of admini.-trative capacity, and use-
ful talents for business, were gratified with lucrative but less
conspicuous places in the various public departments. Such
men were trained, from their youth upwards, to parliamen-
tary and official aptitude ; and were powerful agents in the
consolidation of parties. Free from the intrusion of constit-
uents, and the distractions and perils of contested elections,
they devoted all their talents and energies to the service of
their country, and the interests of their [)arty. Lord Chat-
ham, the brilliant " cornet of hor.<e," owed the beginning of
his great career to the mythical borough of Old Sarum.
Mr. Burke was indebted to Lord Rockingham for a field
worthy of his genius. William Pitt entered Parliament as
the client of Sir James Lowther, and member for the insig-
nificant borough of Appleby. His rival, Mr. Fox, found a
path for his ambition, when little more than nineteen years
of age,^ through the facile suffrages of Midhurst. Mr. Can-
ning owed his introduction to public life to Mr. Pitt and the
oelect constituency of Newport. These and other examples
were adduced, again and again, — not only before but even
smce the Reform Act, — in illustration of the virtues of rot-
ten boroughs. Few men would now be found to contend that
6uch boroughs ought to have been spared ; but it must be
admitted that the attraction of so much talent to the public
service went far to redeem the vices of the old system of
1 He was nineteen years and four months old, and spoke before he was
of age. — L<»xl J. HusscU't Mem. of Fox, i. 51.
CHANGES IN THE CHARACTER OF PARTIES. 95
parliamentary government. Genius asserted its mastery ;
and the oligaichy of great families was constrained to share
its power with the distinguished men whom its patronage had
first brought forward. An aristocratic rule was graced and
popularized by the talents of statesmen sprung from the peo-
ple. Nay, such men were gencTully permitted to take the
foremost places. The territorial nobles rarely aspired to the
chief direction of affairs. The Mai-quess of Rockingham
was by his character and principles, as well as by his emi-
nent position, the acknowledged leader of the Whig party,*
and twice accepted the office of premier ; but the Dukes of
Grafton and Portland, who filled the same office, were mere-
ly nominal ministers. The Earl of Shelburne was another
head of a great house, who became first minister. With
these exceptions, no chief of a great territoi'ial family pre-
sided over the councils of the state, from the fall of the Duke
of Newcastle in 1762, till the ministry of the Earl of Derby
in 1852.^ Even in their own privileged chamber, eminent
lawyers and other new men generally took the lead in
debate, and constituted the intellectual strength of their
order.
How different would have been the greatness and glory of
En";lish history, if the nobles had failed to asso-
° "" . . Howfer
ciate with themselves these brilliant auxiliaries ! fiiTorabie to
,p, . . . , ^ r freedom.
I heir union was a conspicuous homage to free-
dom. The public liberties were also advanced by the con-
flicts of great minds and the liberal sympathies of genius.*
1 Rockingham Mem., ii. 245 ; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 319.
■^ Earl Grey was the acknowledged leader of the \\higs, irrespectively
uf his ranlv.
3 On the 29th March, 1859, Mr. Gladstone, in an eloquent speech upon
Lord Derby's Reform Bill, asked, " Is it not, under Providence, to be at-
trihuted to a succession of distinguished statesmen, introduced at an early
age into this Uouse, and, once made known in tliis House, securing to
themselves the general favor of their countrj'men, that we enjo)' our pres-
ent extension of popular liberty, and, above all, the durable form which
that liberty has assumed? " — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cliii. 1059.
An able reviewer has lately said that " historians will recognize th«
96 PARTY.
But it must not be forgotten that the system which they em-
belHshed was itself opposed to freedom ; and that the fore-
most men of the dominant party, during the reigns of the
two last Georges, exercised all their talents in maintaining
principles, which have since been condemned as incompatible
with the riglits and liberties of the people. Nor can it be
doubted that without their aid, the effete aristocracy, whose
cause they espoused and whose i-anks they recruited, would
have been unable to hold out so long against the expanding
intelligence and advancing spirit of the times.
The prizes of public life were gradually diminished : pen-
„_ . , sions and sinecures were abolished : offices reduced
EfiSects of sup-
prfcA«ion of \n number and emolument ; and at length, the
rotten bor- . . " '
oughs upon greater part of the nommation boroughs were
swept away. These privileged portals of the
House of Commons were now closed against the younger
son, the aspiring scholar, and the ambitious leader of a
university debating club. These candidates Mere now sup-
planted by men of riper age, by men versed in other busi-
ness and disinclined to learn a new vocation, by men who
had already acquired fame or fortune elsewhere, by men to
whom Parliament was neither a school nor a profession, but
a public trust.^ Such men looked to their constituents and
to public opinion, rather than to the leaders of parties, of
whose favors they were generally independent. In parties
composed of such materials as these, the same di-cipline and
share which a privileged and endowed profession of politics had in the
growth of English fi-eedom and greatness, between the accession of the
Hanoverian dynasty and the Reform Bill." — Ediiib. Jicv., April 13U1, ]>.
368.
1 It isbj' no means true that the general standard of instruction and ac-
complishment was superior under the system of nomination. Wra.xall
says, " Mr. I'itt, who well knew liow large a part of his audience, cs|iecial-
ly among the countrj- gentlemen, were little conversant in tlie writings of
the AugusUm age, or familiar with Horace, always displayed great caution
in borrowing from those classic sources.". ..." Barre usually coixlesccnded.
whenever he quoted Latin, to translate for the benefit of the county mem
bers."— ///j(/. Mtin., iii. 318.
CHANGES IN THE CHARACTER OF PARTIES. 97
unity of purpose could not be maintained. Leaders sought
to secure the adherence of their followers, by a policy which
they and their constituents alike approved. They no longer
led regular armies ; but commanded bodies of volunteers.
This change was felt less by the Conservatives than by the
Liberal party. Tlieir followers sat for few of the large
towns. They mainly represented counties and boroughs con-
nected with the landed interest : they were homogeneous in
character, and comprised less diversities of social position
and pretensions. Their confederation, in short, resembled
that of the old regime. These circumstances greatly aided
their cause. They gained strength by repose and inaction :
while their opponents were forced to bid high for the support
of their disunited bands, by constant activity, and by fre-
quent concessions to the demands of the extreme members
of their party.
A moral cause has further favored the interests of the Con-
servatives. Conservatism is the normal state of conserra-
raost minds after fifty years of age, — resulting not 'i^mofage.
so much from experience and philosophy, as from the natural
temperament of age. The results of a life have then been
attained. The rich and prosperous man thinks it a very good
world that we live in, and fears lest any change, should spoil
it. The man who has struggled on with less success, begins
to weary of further efforts. Having done his best to very
little purpose, he calmly leaves the world to take care of
itself. And to oien of this conservative age belongs the great
bulk of the property of the country.
Whatever the difficulties of directing parties so constituted,
the new political conditions have, at least, con- statesmen
tributed to improved government, and to a more "nd newsj^**
vigilant regard to the public interests. It hsvs been '^™^-
observed, however, that the leading statesmen who have ad-
ministered affiiirs since the Reform Act, had been trained
under the old organization ; and that as yet the representa
tives of the new system have not given tokens of future emi
VOL. II. 7
98 PARTY.
nence.^ Yet there has been no lack of young men in the
Hou?e of Commons. The Reform Act left abundant oppor-
tunities to the territorial interest for promoting rising talent ;
and if they have not been turned to good account, the men,
and not the Constitution, have been at fault. Who is to
blame, if young men have shown less of ambition and ear-
nest purpose, tiian the youth of another generation : if those
qualified by position and talents for public life, prefer ease
and enjoyment to the labors and sacrifices which a career of
usefulness exacts ? Let us hope that the resources of an
enlightened society will yet call forth the dormant energies
of rising orators and statesmen. Never has there been a
fairer field for genius, ambition, and patriotism. Nor is Par-
liament the only school for statesmanship. Formerly, it re-
claimed young men from the race-course, the prize-ring, and
the cockpit. Beyond its walls there was little political knowl-
edge and capacity. But a more general intellectual cultiva-
tion, greater freedom and amplitude of discuesion, the ex-
pansion of society, and the wider organization of a great
community, have since trained thousands of minds in political
knowledge and administrative ability ; and already men,
whose talents have been cultivated and accomplishments ac-
quired in other schools, have sprung at once to eminence in
debate and administration. But should the public service be
found to suffer from the want of ministers already trained in
political life, leadere of parties and independent constituen-
cies will learn to bring forward competent men to serve their
country. Nor are such men wanting among classes inde-
pendent in fortune, and needing neither the patronage of the
great, nor any prize but that of a noble ambition.
It has been noticed elsewhere,* that while the number of
places held by members of Parliament was being
Patronage an ' _ •' ^
instrument of continually reduced, the general patronage of the
government had been extended by augmented es«
1 Sir John Walsh's Pamphlet on the Reform Bill, 1860.
a Vol. I., 138, 295-298.
CHANGES IN THE CHARACTER OF PARTIES. 99
tablishments and expenditure. But throughout these changes
patronage lias been the mainspring of the organization of
parties. It has ever been used to promote the interests and
consolidate the strength of that party in which its distribu-
tion happened to be vested. The higher appointments offer-
ed attractions and rewards to the upper classes for their
political support. The lower appointments were not less in-
fluential with constituencies. Tiie offer of places, as a cor-
rupt inducement to vote at elections, has long been recognized
by the legislature as an insidious form of bribery.^ But
without committing any offence against the law, patronage
has been systematically used as the means of rewarding past
political service, and insuring future support. The greater
part of all local patronage has been dispensed through the
bands of members of Parliament, supporting the ministers
of the day. They have claimed and received it as their
right ; and have distributed it, avowedly, to strengthen their
political connection. Constituents have learned too well to
estimate the privileges of ministerial candidates, and the
barren honors of the opposition ; and the longer a party has
enjoyed power, the more extended has become its influence
with electors.
The same cause has served to perpetuate party distinctions
among constituent bodies, apart from varieties of interests
and principles. The ministerial party are bound together by
favors received and expected : the party in opposition —
smarting under neglect and hope deferred — combine against
their envied rivals, and follow, with all the ardor of self-
interest, the parliamentary leaders, who are denied at once
the objects of their own ambition, and the power of befriend-
ing their clients. Hence, when the principles of contending
parties have seemed to be approaching agreement, their in-
terests have kept them nearly as far asunder as ever.
The principle of competition, lately applied to the distri*
1 2 Geo. II. c. 24; 49 Geo. III. c. 118, &c.; Rogers on Elections, 316
U7
\
100 PARTY.
bution of offices, has threatened to subvert the established
Effect of influence of patronage. With open competition,
uTCiTpa?.°° candidates owe nothing to ministers. In this way,
ronage. the civil and medical services of India, the scien-
tific corps of the army, and some civil departments of the
state, have already been lost to ministers of the crown. This
loss, however, has been compensated by the limited competi-
tion introduced into other departments. There, for every
vacancy, a minister nominates three or more candidates.
The best is chosen ; and, with the same number of offices,
the patronage of the minister is multiplied. Two of his
nominees are disappointed ; but the patron is not the less en-
titled to their gratitude. He laments their failure, but could
not avert it. Their lack of proficiency is no fault of his.
In the history of parties, there is much to deplore and
Review of the Condemn : but more to approve and to commend,
nlerite'of ^^® obscrvc the evil passions of our nature arous-
v^y- ed, — "envy, hatred, malice, and all uncharita-
bleness." We see the foremost of our fellow-countrymen
contending with the bitterness of foreign enemies, reviling
each other with cruel words, misjudging the conduct of emi-
nent statesmen and pursuing them with vindictive animosity.
We see the whole nation stirred with sentiments of anger
and hostility. We find factious violence overcoming patriot-
ism ; and ambition and self-interest prevailing over the high-
est obUgations to the state. We reflect that party rule ex-
cludes one half of our statesmen from the service of their
country, and condemns them — however wise and capable
— to comparative obscurity and neglect. We grieve that
the first minds of every age should have been occupied in
collision and angry conflict, instead of laboring together for
the common weaL
But, on the other side, we find that government without
party is absolutism, — that rulers, witiiout oppo.<ition, may
be despots. We acknowledge, with gratitude, that we owe
to party most of our rights and liberties. We recognize
THE EVILS AND MERITS OF PARTY. 101
in the fierce contentions of our ancestors, tlie conflict of
great principles, and the final triumph of freedom. We
glory in the eloquence and noble sentiments which the rivalry
of contending statesmen has inspired. We admire the cour-
age with which power has been resisted ; and the manly res-
olution and persistence by which popular rights have been
established. We observe that, while the undue influence of
the crown has been restrained, democracy has been also held
in check. We exult in the final success of men who have
suffered in a good cause. We admire the generous friend
ships, fidelity, and self-sacrifice, — akin to loyalty and pa-
triotism, — which the honorable sentiments of party have
called forth,^ We perceive that an opposition may often
serve the country far better than a ministry ; and that where
its principles are right, they will prevail. By argument and
discussion truth is discovered, public opinion is expressed,
and a free people are trained to self-government. We feel
that party is essential to representative institutions. Every
interest, principle, opinion, theory, and sentiment, finds ex-
pression. The majority governs ; but the minority is never
without sympathy, representation, and hope. Such being
the two opposite aspects of party, wlio can doubt that good
predominates over evil ? Who can fail to recognize in party
the very hfe-blood of freedom ?
1 " The best patriots in the greatest commonwealths have always com-
mended and promoted such connections. Idem sentire de republicd was
with them a principal ground of friendship and attachment : nor do I know
any other capable of forming firmer, dearer, more pleasing, more honor-
able, and more virtuous habitudes." — Burke,'! Preterit. Discontents, Workt^
ii 332.
102 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
CHAPTER IX.
Freedom of Opinion the greatest of Liberties, and last acquired : — Fh*
Press under the Censorship, and afterwards: — Its Contests with Govern-
ment early in the Reign of George III.: — Wilkes and Junius: — Rights
of Juries: — Mr. Fox's Libel Act: — Public Meetings, Associations, and
Political Agitation: — Progress of Free Discussion, 1760-1792: — Re-
action caused by French Revolution and English Democracy: —
Repressive Policy, 1792-1799: — The Press until the Regency.
We now approach the greatest of all our liberties, —
Freedom of liberty of opinion. We have to investigate the
greatest'of * development of political discussion, to follow its
uberUes. contests with poAver, to observe it repressed and
discouraged, but gradually prevailing over laws and rulers,
until the enlightened judgment of a free people has become
the law by which the state is governed.
Freedom in the governed to complain of wrongs, and
Free discus- readiness in rulers to redress thera, constitute
ubTrtv to^ the ideal of a free state. Philosophers and states-
recognized, men of all ages have asserted the claims of lib-
erty of opinion.^ But the very causes which have filled
1 " OvTE iK Tov Kocjfjov Tdv ^hov, ovTE iK T^f TToideiac (ipreov ttjv traji-
Arjaiav." — Socrates, Stobaei F^lorilegium. Ed. Gaisford, i. 328. Translated
thus by Gilbert W&kefield: — "The sun might as easily be spared from
the universe, as free speech from the liberal institutions of society."
'• Ovdlv uv e'lTj Tolg k7.Ev9Epoii full^ov uri'xvf^o. tov aTEftecrdai r^f wa/V
(njaiac." — Dtnuislhenet. Ibid., 323; translated by the same eminent
scholar: — "No greater calamity could come upon a people than the
privation of free speech."
" TovT^depov S' iKclvo el tic ^^i^M mXei
Xpv^'i'ov n (ioi?£Vfi' eif fiiaov <pepeiv, Ixi-iv''
This is true liberty, when free-bom men.
Having to advise the public, may speak frie.
Euriptdet.
THE PRESS UNDER THE CENSORSHIP. 103
enlightened thinkers with admiration for this liberty, have
provoked the intolerance of rulers. It was nobly said by
Erskine, that " other liberties are held under governments,
but the liberty of opinion keeps governments themselves in
due subjection to their duties. This has produced the mar-
tyrdom of truth in every age ; and the world has been only
purged from ignorance with the innocent blood of those who
have enlightened it." ^ The church has persecuted freedom
of thought in religion : the state has repressed it in politics.
Everywhere authority has resented discussion, as hostile
to its own sovereign rights. Hence, in states otherwise free,
liberty of opinion has been the last political privilege which
the people have acquired.
When the art of printing had developed thought, and multi-
plied the means of discussion, the press was sub- censorship of
jected, throughout Europe, to a vigorous censorship. '•'^P''^*^-
First, the church attempted to prescribe the bounds of
human thought and knowledge ; and next, the state assumed
the same presumptuous office. No writings were suffered to
be published without the imprimatur of the licenser ; and
the printing of unlicensed works was visited with the severest
"punishments.
After the reformation in England, the crown assumed the
right which the church had previously exercised, of prohib-
iting the printing of all works " but such as should be first
seen and allowed." The censorship of the press became
part of the prerogative ; and printing was further restrained
by patents and monopolies. Queen Elizabeth interdicted
printing save in London, Oxford, and Cambridge. ^
" For this is not the liberty which we can hope, that no grievance ever
should arise in the commonwealth, — that let no man in the worid expect:
but when complaints are freely heard, deeply considered, and speedily
reformed, then is the utmost bound of civil liberty attained that wise men
look for." — 21 Hum's Areopageiicu, Works, iv. 39Q; Ed. 1851.
" Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue, freely according to
conscience, above all liberties." — Jbid., 442.
1 Erskine's speech for Paine.
2 State Tr., i. 1263.
104 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
But the minds of men had been too deeply stirred to
submit to ignorance and lethargy. They thirsted
Trsete, fljiDg ,. , , , , . . T i i i .
Bhe«t8, and alter knowledge; and it reactjed them through the
newspapers, gyj^jj^ agency of the press. The theological con-
troversies of the sixteenth century, and the political conflicts
of the seventeenth, gave birth to new forms of literature.
The heavy folio, written for the learned, was succeeded by
the tract and flying sheet, — to be read by the multitude.
At length, the printed sheet, continued periodically, assumed
the shape of a news-letter or newspaper.
The first example of a newspaper is to be found late in the
The press I'^^'gi^ ot' James I.,^ — a period most inauspicious for
under the the press. Political discussion was silenced by the
Stuarts. . ^ •'
licenser, the Star Chamber, the dungeon, the pil-
lory, mutilation, and branding. Nothing marked more deeply
the tyrannical spirit of the two first Stuarts than their bar-
barous persecutions of authors, printei*s, and the importers
of prohibited books: nothing illustrated more signally the
love of freedom, than the heroic courage and constancy
with which those persecutions were borne.
The fall of the Star Chamber^ augured well for the liberty
The common- o^ ^^^ press; and the great struggle which en*
wealth. sued, let loose the fervid thoughts and passions of
society in political discussion. Tracts and newspapers en-
tered hotly into the contest between the Court and Parlia-
ment.' The Parliament, however, while it used the press
1 The Weekly Newes, May 23d, 1622, printed for Nicholas Bourne and
Thomas Archer. The English Mercurie, 1588, in the British Museum,
once believed to be the first English newspaper, has since been proved a
fabrication. — Letter to Mr. Panizzi by T. Watts, of the British Museum,
1839 ; Disraeli's Curiosities of Literature, 14th Ed., i. 173 ; Hunt's Fourth
Estate, i. 33.
2 February 1641.
' Upwards of 30,000 political pamphlets and newspapers were issued from
the press between 1640 and the restoration. They were collected by Mr.
Thomasson. and are now in the British Museum, bound up in 2000 vd-
nmes. — Kniyht's Old Printer and Modem Press, 199; DifraeU's Cur. ij
Literature i. 175-
THE PIJESS UNDER THE CEXSOESHIP. 105
as an instrument of party, did not affect a spirit of toler-
ation. It passed severe orders and ordinances in restraint
of printing ; ^ and would have silenced all royalist and
prelatical writers. In war none of the enemy's weapons
were likely to be respected ; yet John Milton, looking be-
yond the narrow bounds of party to the great interests
of truth, ventured to brand its suppression by the licenser,
as the slaying of " an immortality rather than a life." *
The restoration brought renewed trials upon the press.
The Licensing Act placed the entire control of
... 7 « T , The press
prmting in the government. In the narrow after the
^ -,,,.,,. . ,.1 T restoration.
spirit ot Jiilizabeth, printing was connned to Lon-
don, York, and the Universities, and the number of master-
printers limited to twenty. The severe provisions of this act
were used with terrible vindictiveness. Authors and printers
of obnoxious works were hung, quartered and mutilated,
exposed in the pillory and flogged, or fined and imprisoned,
according to the temper of their judges : * their productions
were burned by the common hangman. Freedom of opin-
ion was under interdict : even news could not be pub-
lished without license. Jsay, when the Licensing Act had
been suffered to expire for a while, the twelve judges,
ander Chief Justice Scroggs, declared it to be criminal,
at common law, to publish any public news, whether true
or false, without the king's license.* Nor was this mon-
strous opinion judicially condemned, until the better times
1 Orders June 1-tth, 1G42: Aug. 26th, 1642 ; Husband's Ord., 591; Or-
Unance, June, 164-3; Pari. Hist., iii. 131; Ordinance, Sept. 30th, 1647;
arl. Hist., iii. 780; Kushworth, ii. 957, &c. ; Further Ordinances, 1649
and 1652; Scobell, i. 44, 134; ii. 88, 230.
2 Areopagetica; a Speech for Liberty of Unlicensed Printing, Works
iv. 400; Ed. 1851.
8 13 & 14 Chas. H. c. 33.
< St. Tr., vi. 514. The sentence upon John Twj-n, a poor printer, wa»
one of revolting brutality; St. Tr., vi. 659; Reach's case, pillory, Ih., 710
Cases of Harris, Smith, Curtis, Carr, and Cellier, lb., vii. 926 - 1043, 1111,
1183.
8 Carr'8 Case, 1680; State Trials, vii. 929.
106 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
of that constitutional judge, Lord Camden.^ A monopoly
in news being created, the public were left to seek intelli-
gence in the official summary of the " London Gazette."
The press, debased and enslaved, took refuge in the licen-
tious ribaldry of that age.^ James II. and his infamous
judges carried the Licensing Act into effect, with barbarous
severity. But the revolution brought indulgence even to
the Jacobite press ; and when the Commons, a few years
„ . ,, . later, refused to renew the Licensiniir Act," a
Expiration of ' , o '
licensing ccnsorship of the press was forever renounced by
the law of England.
Henceforth the freedom of the press was theoretically es-
tablished. Every writing could be freely published ;
Theory of jo j i ^
freeprew but at the peril of a rigorous execution of the libel
***^°^ ' laws. The administration of justice was indeed im-
proved. Scroggs and Jeffreys were no more ; but the law
of libel was undefined, and the traditions of the Star Cham-
ber had been accepted as the rule of Westminster Hall.
To speak ill of the government was a crime. Censure of
ministers was a reflection upon the king himself.* Hence
the first aim and use of free discussion was prohibited by
law. But no sooner had the press escaped from the grasp
of the licenser, than it began to give promise of its future
energies. Newspapers were multiplied : news and gossip
freely circulated among the people.'
With the reign of Anne opened a new era in the history
of the press. Newspapers then assumed tlieir
the reign of present form, combining intelligence with political
discussion ; ' and began to be published daily.' This
1 Entinck v. Carrington, St. Tr., xix. 1071.
3 See Macaalay's Hist., i. 365, for a good account of the newspapers o.
this period.
' See Macaulay's Hist, iii. 656; iv. 540.
* See the law as laid down by Ch. J. Holt, St. Tr., xir. 1103.
6 Macaulay's Hist., iv. 604.
• Uallam's Const. Hist., ii. 331, 460.
' Disraeli's Cur. of Literature, i. 178; Nichols' Lit. Anecd., iv. 8f. The
Daily Courant was the first daily paper, in 1709. — HunCs Fourth Estate,
I i-'s.
THE PRESS IX ANNE'S REIGN. 107
reign was also marked by the higher intellectual character of
its periodical literature, which engaged the first talents of
that Augustan age, — Addison and Steele, Swift and Boling-
broke. The popular taste for news and political argu-
ment was becoming universal : all men were politicians, and
every party had its chosen writers. The influence of the
press was widely extended ; but in becoming an instrument
of party, it compromised its character, and long retarded the
recognition of its freedom. Party rancor too often
° , . . •' The press an
betrayed itself in outrageous license and calumny, inftrmnent
And the war which rulers had hitherto waged
against the press was now taken up by parties. Writers
in the service of rival factions had to brave the vengeance
of their political foes, whom they stung with sarcasm and
lampoon. They could expect no mercy from the courts, or
fiom Parliament. Every one was a libeller who outraged
the sentiments of the dominant party. The Commons, far
from vindicating public liberty, rivalled the Star Chamber in
their zeal against libels. Now they had " a sermon to con-
demn and a parson to roast : " ^ now a member to expel : '
now a journalist to punish, or a pamphlet to burn.' Society
•was no less intolerant. In the late reign. Dyer, having been
reprimanded by the speaker, was cudgelled by Lord Mohun
in a coffee-house ; * and in this reign, Tutchin, who had
braved the Commons and the attorney-general, was waylaid
in the streets, and actually beaten to death.® So strong was
the feeling against the press, that proposals were even made
for reviving the Licensing Act. It was too late to resort to
1 Dr. SacheveTell, 1709 ; Bolingbroke, "Works, iii. 9 ; Preface to Bishop
of St. Asaph's Four Sermons, burned 1712; Pari. Hist,, vi. 1151.
2 Steele, in 1713. See Sir R. Walpole's admirable speech ; Pari. Hist.,
vi. 1268; Coxe's Walpole, i. 72.
3 Dr. Drake and others, 1702; Pari. Hist., vi. 19; Dr. Coward, 1704,
/frirf., 331; David Edwards, 1706; IbuL, 512; Swift's Public Speech of Un
Whigs, 1713 (Lords); Pari. Hist., vi. 1261.
* 1694; Kennet's Hist, iii. 666; Hunt's Fourth Estate, i. 164.
» 1704; /Wrf.,i. 173.
108 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
6uch a policy ; but a new restraint was devised in the form of
a stamp duty on newspapers and advertisements,* — avowedly
First stamp ^or the pur{X)se of repressing libels. This policy,
luty, 1,12. being found effectual in liuuting the circulation of
;heap papers,'^ was improved upon in the two following
-eigns,' and continued in high esteem until our own time.*
The press of the two first Georges made no marked ad-
fhe press in vanccs in influence or character. An age adorned
«i.'ir^°' by Pope, John.^on, and Goldsmith, by Hume and
»nd u. Kobertson, by Sterne, Gray, Fielding, and Smol-
lett, claims no mean place in the history of letters. But its
political literature had no such pretension-?. Falling far be-
low the intellectual standard of the previous reign, it continued
to express the passions and malignity of parties. Writers
were hired by statesmen to decry the measures and blacken
the characters of their rivals; and, instead of seeking to in-
struct tlie people, devoted their talents to the personal service
of their employers, and the narrowest interests of faction.
Exercising unworthily a mean craft, they brought literature
itself into disrepute.''
1 10 Anne, c. 19, § 101, 118; Resns. June 2d, 1712; Pari. Hist, vi.
1141; Queen's Speech, April 1713; Jb., 1173.
2 " Do you know that Gruh Street is dead and buried during the last
week." — Sunfl'a Joum. to Stella, Aug. 7th, 1712.
" His works were hawked in every street,
But seldom rose above a sheet:
Of late, indeed, the paper stamp
Did very much his genius cramp;
And since he could not spend his fire
He now intended to retire."
Swiffs Poems, iii. 44, Pickering's Edition.
« 11 G. I.e. 8; 30 G. II. c. 19.
* See in/ra, p. 213.
* Speaking in 1740, Mr. Pulteney termed the ministerial writers " a herd
of wretches, whom neither information can enlighten, nor affluence elevate."
" If their patrons would read their writings, their salaries would quickly be
withdrawn: for a few pages would convince them that they can neither
attack nor defend, neither raise any man's reputation bj' their panegjTic,
nor destroy it by their defamation." — Pari. IJist., xi. 882. — See also soma
excellent passages in Forster's Life of Goldsmith, 71; Ed. 1848.
THE PRESS PRIOR TO 1760. 109
The press, being ever the tool of party, continued to be .
exposed to its vengeance ; * but, except when Jacobite papers,
more than usually disloyal, openly prayed for the restoration
of the Stuarts,^ the press generally enjoyed a fairer tolera-
tion. Sir Robert Walpole, good-humored, insensitive, lib-
eral, — and no great reader, — was indifferent to the attacks of
the press, and avowed his contempt for political writers of all
parties.' And other ministers, more easily provoked, found
a readier vengeance in the gall of their own bitter scribes,
than in the tedious processes of the law.
Such was the condition of the press on the accession of
George III. However debased by the servile
^ . . . Press on
uses of party, and the low esteem of its writers,* accession of
1- • 1 • ,1 II 1 , Geo. III.
its pohtical miiuence was not the less acknowl-
edged. With an increasing body of readers, interested in
public affairs, and swayed by party feelings and popular im-
pulses, it could not fail to become a powerful friend or for-
midable foe to ministers. *' A late nobleman, who had been
a member of several administrations," said Smollett, "ob-
served to me, that one good writer was of more importance
to the government, than twenty placemen in the House of
Commons."^ Its influence, as an auxiliary in party warfare,
had been proved. It was now to rise above party, and to
become a great popular power, — the representative of pub-
lic opinion. The new reign suddenly developed a freedom
of discussion hitherto unknown ; and within a few years, the
1 Pari. Hist, viii. 1166; ix. 867.
2 Mist's Journ., May 27th, 1721; Pari. Hist., vii. 804; Trial of Mathews,
1719; St. Tr., XV. 1.323.
8 On the 2(1 Dec, 1740, he said: — "Xor do I often read the papers oi
either party, except when I am informed by some who have more inclina-
tion to such studies than myself, that they have risen by some accident
above their common level." Again: "I have never discovered any
reason to exalt the authors who write against the administration, to a
higher degree of reputation than their opponents." — Pari, llisi., xi. 882.
■* Walpole's Mem., iii. 115, 164; Forster's Life of Goldsmith, 387.
6 Forster's Life of Goldsmith. 605. In 17.38, Danvers said: " The senti-
ments of one of these scribblers have more weight with the multitude than
the opinion of the best politician in the kingdom." — Pari. Hist., x. 448.
110 LIBERTY OF OPINIOIf.
people learned to exercise a powerful control over their
rulers, by an active and undaunted piess, by public meet-
ings, and, lastly, by political concert and association.
The government was soon at issue with the press. Lord
Bute was the first to ilhistrate its power. Over-
n likes and '
the "North whelmed bv a storm of obloquy and ridicule, he
Briton." , , , , /. . , /, / tt t,
bowed down before it, and fled, lie did not at-
tempt to stem it by the terrors of the law. Vainly did his
own hired writei"s endeavor to shelter him : ^ vainly did th.
king uphold his favorite. The unpopular minister was swep
away ; but the storm continued. Foremost among his assail-
ants had been the " North Briton," conducted by Wilkes, who
was not disposed to spare the new minister, Mr. Grenville, or
the court. It had hitherto been tlie custom for journalists to
cast a thin veil over sarcasms and abuse directed against pub-
lic men ;^ but the " North Briton " assailed them openly and
by name.' The affected concealment of names, indeed, was
compatible neither with the freedom nor the fairness of the
press. In shrinking from the penalties of the law, a writer
also evaded the responsibilities of truth. Truth is ever asso-
ciated with openness. The free use of names was therefore
essential to the development of a sound political literature.
But as yet the old vices of journalism prevailed; and to
coarse invective and slander was added the unaccustomed in-
eult of a name openly branded by the libeller.
On the 23d of April, 1763, appeared the memorable num-
"North ber 45 of the "North Briton," commentinsr iii)on
Briton," , , . , , , . , ,
Na. 46. the kings speech at the prorogation, and upon the
1 Dodington's Diary, 245, 419, &c. ; History of a Late Minority, 77.
* Even the Annual Register, during the first few years of this reign, in
narrating domestic events, generally avoided the use of names, or gave
merely the initials of ministers and others; e. g. " Mr. P.," " D. of N.,"
"E. of B.," 1762, p. 46; " Mr. F.," "Mr. Gr.," p. 62; "Lord H." and
"Lord E— r— t," 1763, p. 40; " M. of R.," 1765, p. 44; "Marquis of
R ," and "Mr. G ," 1769, p. 50; " The K ," 1770, p. 58, ice. &c
* " The highest names, whether of statesmen or magistrates, were
printed at length, and the insinuations went still higher." — WalpoleUMem^
L 179.
THE "NORTH BRITOX." Ill
unpopular peace recently concluded.* It was at once stig-
matized by the court as an audacious libel, and a studied in-
sult to the king himself; and it has since been represented
in the same liglit, by historians not heated by the controver*
sies of that time.^ But however bitter and offensive, it un-
questionably assailed the minister rather than the king.
Recognizing, again and again, the constitutional maxim of
ministerial responsibility, it treated the royal speech as the
composition of the ministei*.'
The court were in no mood to brook the license of the
press. Why had {jreat lords been humbled, par-
, ^ Proceedings
ties broken up, and the Commons managed by the against
paymaster, if the king was to be defied by a libel-
ler?* It was resolved that he should be punished, — not, like
common libellers, by the attorney-general, — but by all the
powers of the state. Prerogative was strained by the issue
of a general warrant for the discovery of the authors and
printers ; ^ privilege was perverted for the sake of vengeance
and persecution ; ® and an information for libel was filed
against Wilkes in the Court of King's Bench. Had the
Court contented themselves with the last proceeding, they
would have had the libeller at their feet. A verdict was ob-
tained against Wilkes for printing and publishing a seditious
and scandalous libel. At the same time the jury found his
" Essay on Woman " to be " an obscene and impious libel."'
But the other measures taken to crush Wilkes were so re-
pugnant to justice and decency, that these verdicts were re-
sented by the people as part of his persecutions. The Court
of King's Bench shared the odium attached to the govern-
ment, which Wilkes spared no pains to aggravate. He com
1 Pari. Hist, xv. 1331, n.
2 Adolphus' Hist., i. 116; Hughes' Hist, i. 312.
' Lord Mahon's Hist., v. 45; Massey's Hist., i. 157.
• Dodington's Diary. 245, 419, &c.; Hist, of a Late ilinority, 77.
• Infra, p. 245.
• See supra, Vol. L 365, et seq.
1 Burrow's Reports, iv. 2527 ,- St. Tr., xix. 1075.
il2 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
plained that Lord Mansfield had permitted the informations
against him to be irregularly amended on the eve of his trial ;
he inveighed against the means by which a copy of his
*' Essay on Woman " had been obtained by the bribery of
his servant; and by questions arising out of his outlawry, he
contrived to harases the court, and keep his case before the
public for the next six years.* The people were taught to
be suspicious of the administration of justice in cases of libel.'
And assuredly the j-.roceedings of tlie government and the
doctrines of the courts aliiie justified their suspicions.
The printers of the " Noi*th Briton " suffered as well aa
Printers of *'^<^ author ; and the government, having secured
Briton^"'''* these convictions, proceeded with unrelenting rigor
1764. against other printers.^ No grand jury stood be-
tween the attorney-general and the defendants ; and the
courts, in the administration of the law, were ready instru-
ments of the government. Whether this severity tended to
check the publication of libels or not, it aroused the sym-
pathies of the people on the side of the sufferers. Williams,
who had reprinted the " North Briton," being sentenced to
the pillory, drove there in a coach marked " 45." Near the
pillory the mob erected a gallows, on which they. hung the
obnoxious symbols of a boot and a Scotch bonnet ; and a
collection was made for the culprit, which amounted to 200/.*
Meanwhile ex-officio informations had become so numer-
Ex-officio in- oi's ^^ to attract observation in Parliament ; where
Mrc^°ert'8 ^''' Nicholson Calvert moved for a bill to discon-
M**"°h 4th tinue them. He referred the origin of the prac-
1766. tice to the Star Ciiamber, complained of persons
1 State Tr., xix. 1136.
2 Horace Walpole affirms that 200 infomrations were filed, a larger num
ber than had been prosecuted in the whole thirty-three years of the last
re"gn. — Walp. Mem., ii. 15, 67. But many of these must have been
abandoned, for in 1791 the attorney-general stated that in the last thirty-
one j'ears there had been seventy prosecutions for libel, and about fifty
convictions: twelve had received severe sentences; and in five cases the
pillory had formed part of tlie punishment. — Pari. Hist., xxix. 551.
8 Walp. Mem., ii. 80; Walp. Letters, iv. 49.
JUNIUS. 113
being put upon their (rial without the previous finding of
a grand jurj, and argued that the practice was opposed to
the entire policy of our laws. His motion, however, was
brought forward in opjiosition to the advice of his friends,^
and being coldly seconded by Mr. Serjeant Hewitt, was lost
on a division, by a large majority.^
The excitement whii:h Wilkes and his injudicious oppres-
sors had aroused had not yet subsided, when a Junius,
more powerful writer arrested public attention.' Junius was
by far the most remarkable public writer of his time.* He
was clear, terse, and logical in statement, learned, character of
ingenious, and subtle in disputation, eloquent in Junius,
appeals to popular passion, polished, and trenchant as steel
in sarcasm, terrible in invective. Ever striving to wound
the feelings and sully the reputation of others, he was even
more conspicuous for rancor and envenomed bitterness than
for wit. With the malignant spirit of a libeller, without
scruple or regard for truth, he assailed the private character,
no less than the actions of public men. In the " Morning
Advertiser " of the 19th of December, 1769, appeared Ju-
nius's celebrated letter to the kinjr.* Inflamma- , . ,
° Jumus's
tory and seditious, it could not be overlooked ; and letter to the
as the author was unknown, informations were im-
mediately filed against the printers and publishers of the let-
ter. But before they were brought to trial, Almon, the
bookseller, was tried for selling the *' London Museum," in
which the libel was reprinted.* His connection with the
publication proved to be so slight that he escaped with a
1 Walp. Mem., ii. 84.
2 Ayes, 20-t; Noes, 78; Pari. Hist., xvi. 40.'
8 Walp. Mem., iii. 164; Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 425, et seq.
•* Burke, speaking of his letter to the king, said: — " It was the rancour
and venom with which I was struck. In these respects the North Briton
is as much inferior to him, as in strength, wit, and judgment." — Pari.
Uift., xvi. 1154.
5 Letter, No. xxxv. ; Woodfall's Ed., ii. 62.
c Walp. Mem., iv. 160; Notes to the St. Tr., xx. 821; Pari. Hist, xvi
115-3, 1156.
vol,. H. 8
114 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
nominal punishment. Two doctrines, however, were main-
tained in this case, which excepted libels from the general
principles of the criminal law. By the first, a publisher was
held criminally answerable for the acts of his servants, un-
less proved to be neither privy nor assentinj; to
Publisher '■ /. o
criminally the publication of a libel. So long as exculpatory
liable for acta ., , • i i. i . -, ,-
of his evidence was admitted, this doctrine was deien-
"^ ° sible ; but judges afterwards refused to admit such
evidence, holding that the publication of a libel by a pub-
lisher's servant was proof of his criminality. And this mons-
trous rule of law prevailed until 1843, when it was con-
demned by Lord Campbell's Libel Act.*
The second doctrine was wholly subversive of the rights
Rightof Jury of juries in cases of libel. Already, on the trial
Ibi ortfuclof of t'le printers of the « North Briton," Lord Mans-
ubei, dcDicd. flgij i,,j(j ].ji(j ;j. down, that it was the province oi
the court alone to judge of the criminality of a libel. This
doctrine, however questionable, was not without authority ; ^
and was now enforced with startling clearness by his lord-
ship. The only material issue for the jury to try, was
whether the paper was libellous or not ; and this was em-
phatically declared to be entirely beyond their jurisdic-
tion.* Trial by jury was the sole security for the freedom
of the press ; and it was found to have no place in the law
of England.
Again, on the trial of "Woodfall, his lordship told the jury
that, " as for the intention, the malice, the sedition,
WoodfaU'8 ^ , , , , , . . . , , .
trial, jnn« Or any other harder words which might be given
' ' * in informations for libels, public or private, they
were merely formal woi'ds. mere words of course, mere in-
ferences of law, — with which the jury were not to con-
<-em themselves." The jury, however, learning that the
1 6 & 7 Vict., c. 96, § 7 ; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ivi. 305, &c.
* Lord Raymond in Franklin's Case, 1731; Ch. Justice Lee in Owen'*
case, 1752. — St. Tr., xvii. 1-243; xviii. 1203; ParL Hist., xvi. 1275.
» Burr., 2G86; Stole Tr., xx. 803.
RIGHTS OF JURIES. 115
offence which they were trying was to be withdrawn from
their cognizance, adroitly hit the palpable blot of such a doc-
trine, by finding Woodfall " guilty of printing and publishing
only." In vain was it contended, on the part of the crown^
that this verdict should be amended, and entered y.^^ joth
as a general verdict of guilty. The court held the i^^^-
verdict to be uncertain, and that there must be a new trial.*
Miller, the printer and publisher of the " P^vening
Post," was next tried, at Guildhall. To avert juiy l8th, '
such a verdict as that in Woodfall's case, Lord " *
Mansfield, in language still stronger and more distinct, laid it
down, that the jury must not concern themselves with the
character of the paper charged as criminal, but merely with
the fact of its publication, and the meaning of some few
words not in the least doubtful. In other words, the pris-
oner was tried for his offence by the judge and not by the
jury. In this case, however, the jury boldly took the mat-
ter into their own hands, and returned a verdict of not
guihy.^
Other printers were also tried for the publication of this
same letter of Junius, aqd acquitted. Lord Mans- Disapproval
fiel3 had, in fact, overshot the mark ; and his dan- fieid^Ja^!"^
gerous doctrines recoiled upon himself.* Such trines.
startling restrictions upon the natural rights of a jury ex-
cited general alarm and disapprobation.* They were im-
pugned in several able letters and pamphlets ; and above
all,- in the terrible letter of Junius to Lord Mansfield him-
self.' It was clear that they were fatal to the liberty of the
press. Writers, prosecuted by an officer of the crown, with-
out the investigation of a grand jury, and denied even a trial
by their peers, were placed beyond the pale of the law.
These trials also became the subject of animadversion
1 State Tr., xx. 895.
a State Tr., xx. 870.
8 Walp. :Mem., iv. 160, 168.
* See Lord Chatham's Corr., iv. 50.
« Nov. Uth, 1770; Letter No. 41, Woodfall's Ed., ii. 159,
116 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
in Parliament. On a motion of Captain Constantine Phipps,
D.>bate.<i in fof a bill to restrain ex-officio informations, grave
p'pj^°'*°*" opinions were expressed upon the invasion of the
motFonNoT eights of juries, and the crin)inal responsibility
27th, 1770. of a publisher for the acts of his servants.
Lord Mansfield's doctrines were questioned by Mr. Cornwall,
Mr. Serjeant Glynn, Mr. Burke, Mr. Dunning, and Sir
W. Meredith ; ^ and defended by Mr. Attorney-General
De Grey, and Mr. Solicitor-General Thurlow.*
Lord Chatham, in the House of Lords, assailed Lord
. ^ /«. » Mansfield, for his directions to iuries in the recent
Lord Chat- ' •*
ham. Dec. libel cases. Lord Mansfield justified them, and
6th, 1770. •'
Lord Camden desired that they should be fully
stated, in order that the House might judge of their le-
gality.'
This debate was followed, in the Commons, by a motion of
Mr. Seijeant Mr. Serjeant Glynn for a committee, to inquire
tion^DecT" '"^^ *'^^ administration of criminal justice, par
Ctb, inO. ticularly in cases relating to the liberty of the
press, and the constitutional power and duty of juries. The
same controverted questions were again discussed ; and such
was the feeling of the House, that the motion was lo?t by
a majority of eight only.* In this debate, Mr. Cliarles Fox
gave little promise of his future exertions to improve the
law of libel. He asked, where was the proof, " that juries
are deprived of their constitutional rights ? " " The abettors
of the motion," he said, " refer us to their own libellous re-
monstrances, and to those infamous lampoons and satires
which they have taken care to write and circulate."
The day after this debate. Lord Mansfield desired that the
lioni Mans- Lords might be summoned on the 10th of De-
fleW produces
the judgment ccriiber, as he had a communication to make to
case. their Lordships. On that day, however, instead
1 Mr. Wedderburn also spoke against tx-officio informations.
3 Pari. Hist, xvi. 1127, 1175 (two reports).
8 Pari. Hist., xvi. 1302.
* Ayes. 176; Noes, 184; Pari. Hist., xvi. 1211; Cavendish Deb., ii. 89:
Walp. Mem., iv. 211.
RIGHTS OF JURIES. 117
of submitting a motion, or making a statement to the
House, he merely informed their Lordships that he had
left with the clerk of the House a copy of the judgment of
the Court of King's Bench in Woodtall's case, which their
Lordships might read, and take copies of, if they pleased.
This, however, was enough to invite discussion ; and on the
following day, Lord Camden accepted this paper as a chal-
lenge directed personally to himself. " He has thrown down
the glove," he said, " and I take it up. Jn direct contradic-
tion to him, I maintain that his doctrine is not the law of
England." He then proposed six questions to Lord Mans-
field upon the subject. His Lordship, in great distress and
confusion, said, " he would not answer interrogatories," but
that the matter should be discussed.* No time, however,
was fixed for this discussion ; and notwithstanding the warmth
of the combatants, it was not resumed.
So grave a constitutional wrong, however, could not be suf-
fered witliout further remonstrances. Mr. Dowdes- Mr. Dowdes-
well moved for a bill to settle doubts concerning M?i^h'7th,°°'
the rigiits of jurors in prosecutions for libels, which ^'^^•
formed the basis of that brought in, twenty years later, by
Mr. Fox.^ Tiie motion was seconded by Sir G. Savile, and
supported by Mr. Burke, in a masterly speech, in which he
showed, that if the criminality of a libel were properly ex-
cluded from the cognizance of a jury, — then should the~
malice in charges of murder, and the felonious intent in
charges of stealing, be equally removed from their juris-
diction, and confided to the judge. If such a doctrine were
permitted to encroach upon our laws, juries would "become
a dead letter in our constitution." The motion was defeated
on a question of adjournment.^ All the Whig leaders were
sensible of the danger of leaving public writers at the mercy
1 Pari. Hist , xvi. 1-321; Preface to Woodfall's Junius, L 49; Letter No.
82, Junius; Woodfulfs Ed., iii. 295; Walpole's Mem., iv. 220; Lord
Campbeil's Lives of the Chancellors, v. 295.
2 Rockingham Mem., ii. 198.
8 218 to 72; Pari. Hist., xvii. 43; Burke's Works, x. 109; Ed. 1812.
118 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
of the courts ; and Lord Rockingham, writing to Mr. Dowdes-
vfell, said, '* he who would really assist in reestablishing and
confirming the right in juries to judge of both law and fact,
would be the best friend to posterity." * Tiiis work, however,
was not yet to be accomplislied for many years ; and the law
of libel continued to be administered by tiie courts, accord-
ing to the doctrine which Parliament had hitherto shrunk
from condemning.
But the rights of juries continued to be inflexibly main-
tained in the courts, by the eloquence and noble
Mr. Erskine - , '. i m
supports the counige of Mr. Erskine.'^ The exertions of that
Juries. consummate advocate in defence of the Dean of
Ca»eof Dean St. Asaph, are memorable in forensic history. At
of St. Asaph. . p , ..... ,
various stages ot the proceedmgs m this case, lie
vindicated the right of the jury to judge of the criminality
Not. 15th, of the libel ; and in arguing for a new trial, deliv-
" ■ ered a speech, whicii Mr. Fox repeatedly de-
clared to be " the finest argument in the English language."*
He maintained " that the defendant had had, in fact, no trial ;
having been found guilty without any investigation of his
guilt, and without any power left to the jury to take cogni-
zance of his innocence." And by the most closely con-
nected chain of reasoning, by authorities, and by cases, he
proved that the anomalous doctrine against which he was
contending was at variance with tlie laws of England. The
new trial was refused ; and so little did Lord Mansfield an-
ticipate the approacliing condemnation of his doctrine, that
he sneered at the " jealousy of leaving the law to the court,"
as " puerile rant and declamation." Such, however, was not
the opinion of the first statesmen of his own time, nor of
posterity.
Mr. Erskine then moved in arrest of judgment. He had
1 Rockinj^hain Mem., ii. 200.
* In 1778. He had only been called to the bar on the last daj' of tli*
preceding term. — St. Tr., xxi. 1; Erskiue's Speeches, i. 4; Edinburgb
Review, Vol. xvl. 103.
« Note to St. Tr., xxi. »71.
RIGHTS OF JURIES. 119
known throughout that no part of the publication, as charged
in the indictment, was criminal; but had insisted upon
maintaining the great public rights which he had so glori-
ously defended. He now pointed out the innocence of the
publication in point of law : the court were unanimously
of opinion that the indictment was defective ; and the dean
was at length discharged from his prosecution.^
The trial of Stockdale, in 1789, afforded Mr. Erskine
another opportunity of asserting the liberty of gtockdaie's
the press, in the most eloquent speech ever de- *"*'' ^'^'
livered in a British Court of Justice. Stockdale was pros-
ecuted by the attorney-general, at the instance of the House
of Commons,'-^ for publishing a defence of Warren Hast-
ings, written by the Rev. ]\lr. Logan. This pamphlet was
charged in the information as a scandalous and seditious
libel, intending to vilify the House of Commons as corrupt
and unjust in its impeachment of Warren Hastings. After
urging special grounds of defence, Mr. Erskine contended,
with consummate skill and force of argument, that the de
fendant was not to be judged by isolated passages, selected
and put together in the information, but by the entire con-
text of the publication, and its general character and ob«
jects. If these were fair and proper, the defendant must be
acquitted. That question he put to thejuryasone which
" cannot, in common sense, be anything resembling a ques-
tion of law, but is a pure question of fact." Lord Kenyon,
who tried the cause, did not controvert this doctrine, and the
iury fairly comparing the whole pamphlet with the informa-
tion, returned a verdict of not guilty.* Thus Mr. Erskine
succeeded in establishing the important doctrine that full
and free discussion was lawful, — that a man was not to be
punished for a few unguarded expressions, but was entitled
1 St. Tr., xxi. 847-1046; Erskine's Speeclies, i. 386; Lord Campbell's
Chiel' Justices, ii. 540.
2 Pari. Hist.,xxvii. 1, 7.
• St. Tr., xxii. 2-37; Erskine's Speeches, 11. 205.
120 LIBERTY OF OPINION
to a fair construction of his general purpose and animus
in writing, of which the jury were to judge. This was
the List trijil for libel which occurred before Mr. Fox's libel
bill. Mr. Erskinc had done all that eloquence, courage,
and forensic skill could do for the liberty of the press and
the rights of juries.
It now only remained for the legislature to accomplish
Mr. Fox'a wliat had been too long postponed. In May,
M^'^th' 1791, Mr. Fox made noble amends for his flip-
1791. p{int speech upon the libel laws, twenty years
before. Admitting that his views had then beeh mistaken,
he now exposed the dangerous anomaly of the law, in a
speech of gi'eat argumentative power and learning. Mr.
Erskine's defence of the Dean of 8t. Asaph he pronounced
to be " so eloquent, so luminous, and so convincing, that
it wanted but in opposition to it, not a man, but a giant."
If the doctrine of the courts was right in cases of libel,
it would be right in cases of treason. He might himself
be tried for writing a paper charged to be an overt act
of treason. In the fact of publication the jury would find
a verdict of guilty ; and if no motion were made in arrest
6f judgment, the court would say, " let him be hanged and
quartered." A man would thus lose his life without the
judgment of his peers. He was worthily seconded ^ by Mr.
Erskine, whose name will ever be associated with that im-
portant measure. His arguments need not be recapitulated.
But one statement, illustrative of the law, must not be
omitted. After showing that the judges had usurped the
unquestionable privilege of the jury to decide upon the
guilt or innocence of the accused, he stated, " that if, upon a
motion in arrest of judgment, the innocence of the defend-
ant's intention was argued before the court, the answer
would be and was given uniformly, that the verdict of
guilty had concluded the criminality of the intention, though
1 The motion was one of form, " that the Grand Committee for Courts of
Justice do sit on Tilesday next."
MR. FOX'S LIBEL BILL. 121
the consideration of that question had been, by the judge's"
authority, wholly withdrawn from the jury at the trial."
The opinion of the Commons had now undergone so
complete a change upon this question, that Mr. Fox's views
found scarcely any opponents. The attorney -general sup-
ported him, and suggested that a bill should be at once
brought in for declaring the law, to which Mr. Fox readily
assented. Mr. Pitt thought it necessary " to regulate the
practice of the courts in the trial of libels, and render it
conformable to the spirit of the constitution." The bill was
brought in without a dissentient voice, and passed rapidly
through the House of Commons.^
In the Lords, however, its further progress was opposed
by Lord Thurlow, on account of its importance, and the late
period of the session. Lord Camden supported it, as a
declaration of what he had ever maintained to be the true
principles of the law in England. The bill was put off for
a month, without a division ; but two pi'otests were entered
against its postponement.^
In the following session Mr. Fox's bill was again unani-
mously passed by the Commons. In the Lords it L]*"^! BiU,
met with renewed ooposition from Lord Thurlow, „ "' ..^^
' ^ March aOth,
at whose instance the second reading was post- 1792.
poned, until the opinions of the judges could be obtained
upon certain questions.' Seven questions were Opinion of
submitted to the judges,* and on the 11th of May, Aprii"2^u'
their answers were returned. Had anything been ^^y ^^*■^•
wanting to prove the danger of those principles of law
which it was now sought to condemn, it would have been
supplied from the unanimous answers of the judges. These
principles, it seemed, were not confined to libel : but the
criminality or innocence of any act was '• the result of the
judgment which the law pronounces upon that act, and
must, therefoi'e, be, in all cases and under all circumstances,
1 Pari. Hist., xxix. 551-602. « Ibid., 1036.
3 Jbid., 726-742. * Ibid., 1293.
122 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
matter of law, and not matter of fact." They even main-
tained,— as Mr. Fox had argued, — that the criminality
or innocence of letters or papers set forth as overt acts
of treason was matter of law, and not of tact; yet shrink-
ing from so alarming a conclusion, they added that they had
offered no opinion "which wilt have the effect of taking
matter of law out of the general issue, or out of a general
verdict."* Lord Camden combated the doctrines of the
judges, and repeated his own matured and reiterated opinion
of the law. The bill was now speedily passed ; with a pro-
test, signed by Lord Thurlow and five other lords, predicting
" the confusion and destruction of the law of England." -
And thus, to the immortal honor of Mr. Fox, Mr.
Results of the Erskine, Lord Camden, and the legislature, was
UbeiAct. passed the famous Libel Bill of 1792,^ in op-
position to all the judges and chief legal authorities of the
time. Being in the form of a declaratory law, it was in
effect a reversal of the decisions of the judges by the High
Court of Parliament. Its success was undoubted for all the
purposes for which it was designed. While it maintained
the rights of juries, and secured to the subject a fair trial
by his peers, it introduced no uncertainty in the law, nor
dangerous indulgence to criminals. On the contrary, it was
acknowledged that government was better protected from
unjust attacks, when juries were no longer sensitive to privi-
leges withheld, and jealous of the bench which was usurping
them.*
1 Pari. Hist., xxix. 1361.
2 IMd., 1404, 1534-1538; Ann. Reg., 1792, p. 353; Chron. 69; Lord
Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, v. 346. It was followed by a similar
law passed by the Parliament of Ireland.
8 32 Geo. III. c. 60. Lord Macaulay says: "Fox and Pitt are fairly
entitled to divide the high honor of having added to our statute book the
inestimable law wliich places the liberty of the press mider the protection
of juries." This is cited and accepted by Lord Stanhope in liis Life of
Pitt, ii. 148: but why such prominence to Pitt, and exclusion of Erskine?
* Lord Erskine's Speeches, i. 382, «. ; Lord Campbell's Lives of the
Chancellors, v. 35U.
PROGRESS OF FREE DISCUSSION. 123
Since the beginning of this reign, the press had made
gi'eat advances in freedom, influence, and con- General prog
sideration. The right to criticise pubHc affairs, ^iltfJZin
to question the acts of the goverament, and "^^ y^^-
the pi'oceedings of the legislature, had been established.
Ministers had been taught, by the constant failure of prose-
cutions,* to trust to public opinion for the vindication of their
measures, rather than to the tenors of the law for the
silencing of libellers. Wilkes and Junius had at once stimu-
lated the activity of the press, and the jwpular interest in
public affairs. Reporters and printers having overcome the
resistance of Parliament to the publication of debates,^ the
press was brought into closer relations with the state. Its
functions were elevated, and its responsibilities increased.
Statesmen now had audience of the people. They could jus-
tify their own acts to tlie world. The falsehoods and mis-
representations of tlie press were exposed. Rulers and their
critics were brought face to face, before the tribunal of public
opinion. The sphere of the press was widely extended. Not
writers only, but the first minds of the age, — men ablest in
council and debate, — were daily contributing to the instruc-
tion of their countrymen. Newspapers promptly met the
new requirements of their position. Several were estab-
lished during this period, whose high reputation and influence
have survived to our own time;' and by fulness and rapidity
of intelligence, frequency of publication, and literary ability,
proved themselves worthy of their honorable mission to in-
struct the people.
Nor is it unworthy of remark that art had come to the aid
of letters in political controversy. Since the days Caricatures.
1 On the 27th Nov., 1770, the Attorney-General De Grey " declared sol-
emnly that he had hardlj' been able to bring a single offender to justice."
— Pari. Hist., xvi. 1138.
2 Supra, Vol. I. 390-405.
8 Viz., The Morning Chronicle, 1769 (extinct in 18*32); The Morning
Post, 1772; the Morning Herald, 1780: The Times, founded in 1788. holds
an undisputed position as the first newspaper in the world. — HuaCt
Fourth EstaU, ii. 99-189.
124 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
of Walpole, caricatures had occasionally portrayed ministers
in grotesque forms and with comic incidents; but during
this period, caricaturists had begun to exercise no little
influence upon popular feeling. The broad humor and
bold pencil of Gillray had contributod to foment the excite-
ment aguin>t Mr. Fox and Lord North ; and this skilful
limner elevated caricature to the rank of a new art. The
people were familiarized with the persons and characters of
public men: crowds gathered round the printsellers' win-
dows ; and as they passed on, laughing good-humoredly, felt
little awe or reverence for rulers whom the caricaturist had
made ridiculous. The press had found a powerful ally,
which, first used in the interests of party, became a further
element of popular force.^
Meanwhile, other means had been devised, — more power-
ful than the press, — for directing public opinion
Pnblicmeet- . . . ' ,
ingsandas- and cxerciSHig miluence over the government and
the legislature. Public meetings had been assem-
bled, political associations organized, and "agitation," — as it
has since been termed, — reduced to a system. Jn all ages
and countries, and under every form of government, the
people have been accustomed, in periods of excitement, to
exercise a direct influence over their rulers. Sometimes by
tumults and rebellions, sometimes by clamors and discontent,
they have made known their grievances, and struggled for
redress.^ In England, popular feelings had too often explod-
ed in civil wars and revolutions ; and, in more settled times,
the people had successfully overborne the government and
the legislature. No minister, however powerful, could be
wholly deaf to their clamors. In 1733 Sir Robert Walpole
had been forced to withdraw his excise scheme.' In 1754
1 Wright's Enpland under the House of Hanover, i. 136,403; ii. 74-
83, ike; Twiss's Life of Eldon, i. 102; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 239.
2 " I'oiir hi populace, ce n'est jamais par euvie d'attaquer qu'ello se
Bouleve, niais par impatience de souffrir." — ^fem. de Siillt/, i. 133.
8 Pari. Hist., viii. 1300; Lx. 7; Coxa's Walpole. i. 372; Lord Ilervey'a
llem.< i. 185, el seq.
PUBLIC MEETINGS. 125
Parliament had been compelled to repeal a recent act of just
toleration, in deference to popular prejudices.*
In the beginning of this reign, the populace had combined
with the press in hooting Lord Bute out of the king's service
and for many years afterwards popular excitement was kei t
alive by the ill-advised measures of the Court and Par
liaraent. It was a period of discontent and turbalence.
In 1765, the Spitalfields' silk-weavers, exasperated by the
rejection of a bill for the protection of their trade
by the House of Lords, paraded in front of St. weavers'
■' . riots, 1766.
James' Palace with black flags, surrounded the
Houses of Parliament at Westminster, and questioned the
peers as they came out, concerning their votes. May loth.
They assailed the Duke of Bedford, at whose instance the
bill had been thrown out ; and having been dispersed by cav-
alry in Palace Yard, they proceeded to attack May nth.
Bedford House, whence they were repulsed by the guards.'
It was an irregular- and riotous attempt to overawe the de-
liberations of Parliament. It was tumult of the old type,
opposed alike to law and rational liberty; but it was not the
less successful. Encouraged by the master-manufacturers,
and exerted in a cause then in high favor with statesmen, it
was allowed to prevail. Lord Halifax promised to satisfy
the weavers ; ' and in the next year, to their great joy, a bill
was passed restraining the importation of foreign silks.*
But the general discontents of the time shortly developed
other popular demonstrations far more formidable,
which were destined to form a new era in consti- citementf
tutional government. In 1768, the excitement of '^ '
the populace in the cause of Wilkes led to riots and a conflict
1 Naturalization of Jews, 1754.
2 Ann. Reg., 1765, p. 41; Grem-ille Papers, iii. 168-172; Walp. Mem.,
li. 155, et seq.; Rockingham Mem., i. 200, 207; Adolphus' Hist, i. 177;
Lord Mahon's Hist., v. 152.
3 He wrote to Lord Hillsborough to assure the master-wearers that the
l)ill should pass both Houses. — Rockingham Mem., i. 200-207.
« 6 Geo. IIL c. 28.
126 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
with the military. But the tumultuous violence of mobs was
succeeded by a deeper and more constitutional agitation.
The violation of the rights of the electors of Middlesex by the
Commons,^ united, in support of Wilkes, the first statesmen
of the time, the parliamentary opposition, the wronged elec-
tors, the magistrates and citizens of London, a large body of
the middle'classes, the press, and the populace. Enthusiastic
meetings of freeholders were assembled to support their
Public meet- champion, with whom the freehohlers of other
w^ationst*" counties made common cause. The throne was
l<68-,o. approached by addresses and remonstrances. Ju-
nius thundered forth his fearful invectives. Political agi-
tation was rife in various forms ; but its most memor-
able feature was that of public meetings, which at this
p>eriod began to take their place among the institutions of the
country.* No less than seventeen counties held meetings to
support the electors of Middlesex.* Never had so general a
demonstration of public sentiment been made, in such a form.
It was a new phase in the development of public opinion.
This movement was succeeded by the formation of a " society
for supporting the bill of rights."
Ten years later, public meetings assumed more importance
PubUcmeet- and a wider organization. The freeholders of
ings,i(, 9-80. Yorkshire and twenty-three other counties, and
the inhabitants of many cities, were assembled by their
sheriffs and chief magistrates to discuss economical and
parliamentary reform. These meetings were attended by
the leading men of each neighborhood ; and speeches were
made, and resolutions and petitions agreed to, with a view to
influence Parliament, and attract public support to the cause.
1 Supra, Vol. I. 374-383.
2 Ann. Reg., 1770, p. 58, 60. On the 31st October, 1770, a large meet-
ing of the electors of Westminster was held in^Westminster Ilall, when
Mr. Wilkes counselled them to instruct their members to impeach Lord
North. — Adblphus' Hist., i. 451; Ann. Keg., 1770, p. 159; (Jhron., 206;
Lord Rockingham's Mem., ii. 93; Cooke's Hist, of Party, iii. 187.
« Ann. PiCg., l-'O, p. 58.
POLITICAL ASSOCIATIONS. 1"^
A great meeting was held in Westminster Hall, with Mr.
Fox in the chair, which was attended by tlie Duke of Port-
land, and many of the most eminent members of the Opposi
tion. Nor were these meetings spontaneous in each locality.
They were encouraged by active correspondence, associa-
tion, and concerted movements throughout the country.*
Committees of correspondence and association were political as-
appointed by the several counties, who kept alive ^'>^'^'»°°*-
the agitation ; and delegates were sent to London to give it
concentration. This practice of delegation was severely
criticised in Parliament. Its representative principle was
condemned as a derogation from the rights of the legislature :
no county delegates could be recognized, but knights of the
shire returned by the sheriff. Mainly on this ground, the
Commons refused to consider a petition of thirty-two dele-
gates who signed themselves as freeholders only.^ The future
influence of such an organization over the deliberations of
Parliament was foreseen ; but it could not be prevented.
Delegates were a natural incident to association. Far from
arrogating to themselves the power of the Commons, they
approached that body as humble petitioners for redress.
They represented a cause, — not the people. So long as it
was lawful for men to associate, to meet, to discuss, to corre-
spond, and to act in concert for political objects, they could
select delegates to represent their opinions. If their aims
were lawful and their conduct orderly, no means which they
deemed necessary for giving effect to free discussion were
unconstitutional ; and this system, — subject, however, to cer-
tain restraints,' — has generally found a place in later politi-
cal organizations. Other political societies and clubs were
now established ■* and the principle of association was brought
1 Supra, Vol. L 412; Ann. Reg., 1780, p. 8.5; ParL Hist , xx. 1.378;
W\-vill's Political Papers, i. 1, et seq.; Wraxull's Mem., iii. 292, &c. ;
Rockingham Mem., ii. 391-403; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 222.
a 13th Nov., 1780; 2d April and 8th May, 1781; ParL Hist., xxi. 844j
xxii. 95, 138.
» Infra, pp. 174, 18.5.
* Adolphiis" Hist., :;: 2.1S
128 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
into active operation, with all its a;iencies. At this time
Mr. Pitt, the future enemy of" political combinations, en-
couraged as.-sociations to forward the cause of parliamen-
tary reform, took counsel with their delegates, and enrolled
himself a member of the society for constitutional informa-
tion.*
Here were further agencies for working upon the public
mind, and brinjiinsr the popular will to bear upon
Political M- „ . „ ° f . . r , •• 1
•ociations affairs of State. Association for political purposes,
and large assemblages of men, henceforth became
the most powerful and impressive form of agitation. Marked
by reality and vital power, they were demonstrations at once
of moral conviction and numerical force. They combined
discussion with action. However forcibly the press might
persuade and convince, it moved men singly in their homes
and business ; but here were men assembled to bear witness
to their earnestness: the scattered forces of public opinion
were collected and made known : a cause was popularized by
the sympathies and acclamations of tiie multitude. The
people confronted their rulers bodily, as at the hustings.'
Again, association invested a cause with permanent inter-
est. Political excitement may subside in a day: but a cause
adopted by a body of earnest and active men is not suffered
to languish. It is kept alive by meetings, deputations, cor-
respondence, resolutions, petitions, tracts, advertisements. It
is never suffered to be *brgotten : until it has triumphed, tlie
world has no peace.
Public meetings and associations were now destined to ex-
ercise a momentous influence on the state. Their force was
great and perilous. In a good cause, and directt-d by wise
1 See resolutions aj^ccd to at a meeting of members and delegates at the
Thatched House Tavern, May 18tli, 1782, in Mr. Pitt's own writing.
State Tr., xxii. 492; also Mr. Pitt's evidence on the Trial of Home Tookc.
— Jbi'I., XXV. 381.
^ " L'association possfede plus de puissance que la presse" ..... "Les
moyens d'exi'cution se combineiit, les opinions se df^pioient iivec cetle
force, et cette chaleiir, que ne peut jamais attendre la pensee 6crite." — Be
TocqueviUe, Denwir. tii Amti-ique, i. 277.
PROTESTANT ASSOCIATIONS. 120
and honorable men, they were designed to confer signal ben-
efits upon their country and mankind. In a bad cause, and
under the guidance of rash and mischievous leaders, they
were ready instruments of tumult and sedition. The union
of moral and physical force may convince, but it may also
practise intimidation : arguments may give place to threats,
and fiery words to deeds of lawless violence.* Our history
abounds with examples of the uses and perils of political
agitation.
The dangers of such agitation were exemplified at this
very time, in their worst form, by the Protestant „ , , .
. . _„ . . Protestant
associations. In 1778, the lesrislature having con- associations,
ceded to the Catholics of England a small measure
of indulgence, a body of Protestant zealots in Scotland asso-
ciated to resist its extension to that country. So rapidly had
the principle of association developed itself, that no less than
eighty-five societies, or corresponding committees, were es-
tablished in communication with Edinburgh. The fanaticism
of the people was appealed to by speeches, pamphlets, hand-
bills, and sermons, until the pious fury of the populace ex-
ploded in disgraceful riots. Yet was this wretched agitation
too successful. The Catholics of Scotland waived their just
rights for the sake of peace; and Parliament submitted its
own judgment to the arbitrament of Scottish mobs.^
Tliis agitation next extended to England. A Protestant
association was formed in London, with which , , „
IfOrd Qeorg"
numerous local societies, committees, and clubs in Gordon, prea-
various parts of the kingdom, were affiliated. Of
this extensive confederation, in both countries, Lord George
Gordon was elected president. The Protestants of Scotland
had overawed the legislature : might not the Protestants of
1 "On ne peut se dissirauler que la liberty illimitde d'association, en
matifere politique, ne soil, de toutes les liberies, la dernifere qu'un peuple
puisse supporter. Si elle ne la fait pas tomber dans I'anarchie, elle la lui
lait, pour ainsi dire, toucher a chaque instant" — De TocqueviQe, Dimocr.
i. 231.
2 Infra, p. 323.
VOL.. II. 9
130 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
England advance their cause by intimidation? The experl-
Meetingat nicnt was now to be tried. On the 29th of May,
H^Xf*"' ^^^^' ^"'■'^ George Gordon called a meeting
29th, 1780. of tije Protestant Association, at Coachmakers'
Hall, where a petition to the Commons was agreed to, pray-
ing for the repeal of the late Calholic Relief Act. Loi'd
George, in haranguing this meeting, said that, " if they
meant to spend their time in mock debate and idle opposi-
tion, they might get another leader ; " and declared that he
would not present their petition, unless attended by 20,000
of his fellow-citizens. For that purpose, on the 2d of June,
a large body of petitioners and others, distinguished by blue
Disorders at cockades, assembled in St. George's Fields, whence
w^tmin- jjjgy proceeded by different routes to Westmin-
ad. ster, and took possession of Palace Yard, before
the two Houses had yet met. As the peers drove down to
the meeting of their House, several were assailed and pelted.
Lord Boston was dragged from his coach, and escaped with
difficulty from the mob. At the House of Commons, the
mob forced their way into the lobby and passages, up to the
very door of the House itself. They assaulted and molested
many members, obliged them to wear blue cockades, and
shout " no popery ! "
Though full notice had been given of such an irregular
assemblage, no preparations had been made for
Houses of . . . ' ,r. - . -r. ,.
pariiauieut maintaming the public peace and secunng Parlia-
ment from intimidation. The Lords were in dan-
ger of their lives ; yet six constables only could be found to
protect them. The Commons were invested ; but their door-
keepers alone resisted the intrusion of the mob. While this
tumult was raging. Lord George Gordon proceeded to pre-
sent the Protestant petition, and moved that it should be im-
mediately considered in committee. Such a proposal could
not be submitted to in presence of a hooting mob ; and an
amendment was moved to postpone the consideration of the
petition till another day. A debate ensued, during which
LORD GEORGE GORDON'S RIOTS. 131
disorders ivere continued in the lobby and in Palace Yard.
Sometimes the House was interrupted by violent knocks at
the door, and the rioters seemed on the point of bursting in.
Members were preparing for defence, or to cut their way out
with their swords. Meanwhile, the author of these disorders
went several times into the lobby, and to the top of the gal-
lery stairs, where he harangued the people, telling them that
their petition was likely to meet with small favor, and nam-
ing the members who opposed it. Nor did he desist froia
this outrageous conduct, until Colonel ^Murray, a relative of
his own, threatened him with his sword, on the entrance of
the first rioter. When a division was called, the sergeant re-
ported that he could not clear the lobby ; and the proceedings
of the House were suspended for a considerable time. At
length, a detachment of military having arrived, the mob
dispersed, the division was taken, and the House adjourned.^
The scene at Westminster had been sufficiently disgrace-
ful : but it was merely the prelude to riots and in- juots in
cendiarism, by which London was desolated for a ^"d""*-
week. On the 6th, the Protestant petition was to be con-
sidered. Measures had been taken to protect the legislature
from further outrage : but Lord Stormont's carriage was at-
tacked and broken to pieces ; Mr. Burke was for some time
in the hands of the mob ; and an attempt was made upon
Lord North's official residence in Downing Street, The
Commons agreed to resolutions in vindication of their privi-
leges, and pledging themselves to consider the petition when
the tumults should subside.'
Meanwhile, the outrages of the mob were encouraged by
the supineness and timidity of the government and magis-
tracy, until the whole metropolis was threatened with con-
flagration. The chapels of Catholic ambassadors were
burned, prisons broken open, the houses of magistrates and
1 Ann. Reg., 1780, 190, el seq.; Pari. Hist., xxi. 654-686; State Tr.
xxi. 486.
2 Pari. Hist., xxi. 661.
132 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
statesmen destroyed ; the residence of the venerable Mans-
field, with his books and priceless manuscripts, reduced to
ashes. Even the bank of England was threatened. The
streets swarmed with drunken incendiaries. At length the
devastation was stayed by the bold decision of the kinj.
" Tliere shall, at least, be one magistrate in the kingdom,"*
paid he, " who will do his duty ; " and by his command a proc-
lamation was immediately issued, announcing that the king's
officere were instructed to repx-ess the riot^ ; and the military
received orders to act without waiting for directions from the
civil magistrate. The military were prompt in action ; and
the rioters were dispersed with bloodshed and slaugiiter.*
The legality of military interference, in the absence of a
Military ac- magistrate, became afterwards the subject of dis-
a^nce*ofa cussion. It was laid down by Lord Mansfield,
magistrate. ti,at; the insurgents having been engaged in overt
acts of treason, felony, and riot, it was the duty of every
subject of His Majesty, — and not less of soldiers than of
other citizens, — to resist them. On this ground was
the proclamation justified, and the action of the military
pronounced to be warranted by law. His authority was ac-
cepted as conclusive. It was acknowledged that the execu-
tive, in times of tumult, must be armed with necessary pow-
er: but with how little discretion had it been used? Its
timely exercise might have averted the anarchy and outrages
of many days, — ^perhaps without bloodshed. Its tardy and
riolent action, at the last, had added to the evils of insurrec-
tion a sanguinary conflict with the people.^
Such was the sad issue of a distempered agitation in an
unworthy cause, and conducted with intimidation and vio-
lence. The foolish and guilty leader of the movement
1 Ann. Reg., 1780, 205, et »eq. Nearly three hundred lives were known
to have been lost; and one hundred and seventy-three wounded persons
were received into the hospitals.
' Debates of Lords and Commons, June 19th, 1780; Pari. Hist., xxi
690-701; Debate on Mr. Sheridan's motion (We8tmin«ter Police),
Maich 5th, 1781; Ibid., 1305.
SLAVE TRADE ASSOCUTIOK. 188
escaped a conviction for high treason, to die, some years later,
in Newgate, a victim to the cruel administration of the law
of libel ; * and many of the rioters expiated their crimes on
the scaffold.
A few years later another association was formed, to for-
ward a cause of noble philanthropy, — the aboli- „,
tion of the slave trade. It was almost beyond the AsRociation,
range of politics. It had no constitutional change
to seek : no interest to promote : no prejudice to gratify : not
even the national welfare to advance. Its clients were a
despised race, in a distant clime, — an inferior type of the
human family, — for whom natures of a higher mould felt
repugnance rather than sympathy. Benevolence and Chris-
tian charity were its only incentives. On the other hand,
the slave-trade was supported by some of the most powerful
classes in the country, — merchants, shipowners, planters.
Before it could be proscribed, vested interests must be over-
borne, ignorance enlightened, prejudices and indifference
overcome, public opinion converted. And to this great work
did Granville Sharpe, Wilberforce, Clai"kson, and other noble
spirits devote their lives. Never was cause supported by
greater earnestness and activity. The organization of the
society comprehended all classes and religious denominations.
Evidence was collected from every source, to lay bare the
cruelties and iniquity of the traffic. Illustration and argu-
ment were inexhaustible. Men of feeling and sensibility ap-
pealed, with deep emotion, to the religious feelings and benev
olence of the people. If extravagance and bad taste some-
limes courted ridicule ; the high purpose, just sentiments,
and eloquence of the leaders of this movement won respect
and admiration. Tracts found their way into every house :
pulpits and platforms resounded with the wrongs of the
negro : petitions were multiplied : ministers and Parliament
moved to inquiry and action. Such a mission was not to be
Boon accompUshed. The cause could not be won by sudden
i State Tr., xxii. 175-236; Ann. Beg., 1793, Chron. 3.
134 LIBERTY OF OPINION'.
enthusiasm, — ■ still less by intimidation ; but conviction mu-it
be wrought in the mind and conscience of the nation. And
this was done. Parliament was soon prevailed upon to at-
tempt the mitigation of the worst evils which had been
brought to light ; and in little more than twenty years, the
slave-trade was utterly condemned and prohibited.^ A goH
cause prevailed, — not by violence and passion, not by dem-
onstrations of popular force, but by reason, earnestness
and the best feelings of mankind.
At no former period had liberty of opinion made advance-
Progress of so signal, as during the first thirty years of thL
o^n'ion reign. Never had the voice of the people beer
1760-1792. heard so often, and so loudly, in the inner councils
of the state. Public opinion was beginning to supply th(
defects of a narrow representation. But evil days were now
approaching, when liberties so lately won were about to b«
suspended. Wild and fanatical democracy, on the one hand
transgressing the bounds of rational liberty ; and a too sensi
live apprehension of its dangers, on the other, were introduc
ing a period of reaction, unfavorable to popular rights.
In 1792, the deepening shadows of the French revolution
had inspired the great body of the people with
Democratic . „ .
pabucationa, sentiments 01 grave reprobation ; wlule a small,
but noisy and turbulent, party, in advocating uni-
versal suffrage and annual parliaments, were proclaiming
their admiration of French principles, and sympathy with
the Jacobins of Paris. Currency was given to their opinions
in democratic tracts, handbills, and newspapers, conceived in
the spirit of sedition. Some of these papers were the work
of authors expressing, as at other times, their own individual
sentiments : but many were disseminated, at a low price, by
democratic associations, in correspondence with France.^
1 Clarkson'8 Hist of the Slave Trade, i. 288, &c.; Wilberforce's Life, i.
139-173, &c.
2 Ann. Keg., 1792, p. 365; Hist of the Two Acts, Introd., xxxvU.j
Adolphus' Hist., V. 67; Tomline's Life of Pitt iii- 272.
DEMOCRATIC WRITINGS, 1792. 135
One of the most popular and dangerous of these publications
was Paine's second part of the " Rights of Man."
Instead of singling out any obnoxious work for a separate
prosecution, the government issued, on the 21st of pj^j^^^.
May, 1792, a proclamation warning the people jj°y'2i8t
against wicked and seditious writings, industriously 1792.
dispersed amongst them, — commanding magistrates to dis-
cover tlie authors, printers, and promulgators of such writ-
ings, and sheriffs and others to take care to pi'event tumults
and disorders. This proclamation, having been laid before
Parliament, was strongly denounced by Mr. Grey, Mr. Fox,
and other members of the opposition, who alleged that it was
calculated to excite groundless jealousies and alarms,* — the
government already having sufficient powers, under the law,
to repress license or disaffection.
Both Houses, however, concurred in an address to the
king, approving of the objects of the proclamation, and ex
pressing -indignation at any attempts to weaken the senti-
ments of tlie people in favor of the established form of gov
ernment.^
Thomas Paine was soon afterwards brought to trial. He
was defended by Mr. Erskine, whom neither the xnaiof
displeasure of the king and the Pi-ince of Wales, pain^^Doc
nor the solicitations of his friends, nor public clam- i^"^> 1792.
ors, had deterred from performing his duty as an advocate.'
To vindicate such a book, on its own merits, was not to be
attempted ; but Mr. Ei'skine contended that, according to the
laws of England, a writer is at liberty to address the reason
of the nation upon the constitution and government, and is
criminal only if he seeks to e^^cite them to disobey the law,
or calumniates living magistrates. He maintained " that
opinion is free, and that conduct alone is amenable to the
1 See also siipt-n, p. 44
2 Pari. Hist., xxix. 1476-1534; Tomline's Life of Pitt, iii. 347; Lord
Vlalmesburj-'s Corr., ii. 441. There had been similar proclamations in the
•eigns of Queen Anne and George I.
3 St. Tr., xxvi. 715; Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, vi. 455
13G LIBERTY OF OPINION.
law." He himself condemned Mr. Paiiie's opinions ; but hia
client was not to be punished because the jury disapproved
of them as opinions, unless their character and intention
were criminal. And he sliowed from the writings of Locke,
Milton, Burke, Paley, and other speculative writers, to what
an extent abstract opinions upon our constitution had been
expressed, without being objected to as libellous. Paine was
very properly found guilty : * but the general principles ex-
pounded by his advocate, to which his contemporaries turned
a deaf ear, have long been accepted as the basis on which
liberty of opinion is established.
Meanwhile, the fears of democracy, of the press, and ol
Alum of the Speculative opinions, were further aggravated by
SSd^milKu"* *'^*^ progress of events in France and the extrav-
tracy. agaucc of English democrats.
Several societies, which had been formed for other objects,
Democratic ^ow avowed their sympathy and fellowship with
associations, ^j^^ revolutionary party in France, addressed the
National Convention, corresponded with political clubs and
public men in Paris, and imitated the sentiments, the
language, and the cant then in vogue across the channel.*
Of these the most conspicuous were the " Revolution So-
ciety," the " Society for Constitutional Information," and th(?
TheiUToiu- "London Corresponding Society." The Revolu-
tion Society. {Jqu Society had been formed long since, to com-
memorate the English revolution of 1688, and not that
of France, a century later. It met annually on the 4th
of November, when its principal toasts were the memory
of King William, trial by jury, and the liberty of the
press. On the 4th of Nov., 1788, the centenary of the
revolution had been commemorated throughout the country
by men of all parties ; and the Revolution Society had been
attended by a secretary of state and other distinguished per-
sons.* But the excitement of the times quickened it with 8
1 St. Tr., xxii. 357.
2 Ann. Reg , 1792, part ii. 128-170, 344.
• History of the Two Acta, latrod. xxxv.
DEMOCRATIC SOCIETIES, 1792. 137
new life ; and hi>toru'al sentiment was lost in political agi-
tation. The example of France almost effaced the memory
of William.^ The Society for Constitutional In- society for
formation had been formed in 1780, to instruct tlie ^jonlunfor-
people in their poHtical rights, and to forward the motion.
cause of parliamentary reform. Among its early members
were the Duke of Richmond, Mr. Fox, Mr. Pitt himself,
and Mr. Slieridan. These soon left the society ; but Mr.
Wyvill, Major Cartwright, Mr. Home Tooke, and a few
more zealous politicians, continued to support it, advocating
universal suffrage and distributing obscure tracts. It was
scarcely known to the public : its funds were low ; and it
was only saved from a natural death by the French revolu-
tion.'
The London Corresponding Society, — composed chiefly
of working men, — was founded in the midst of
. , London Cor
tiie excitement caused by events in France. It responding
sought to remedy all die grievances of society, "
real or imaginary, to correct all political abuses, and par-
ticularly to obtain universal suffrage and annual parlia-
ments. These objects were to be secured by the joint action
of affiliated societies throughout the country. The scheme
embraced a wide correspondence, not only with other politi-
cal associations in England, but with the National Conven-
tion of France and the Jacobins of Paris. The leaders
were obscure, and, for the most part, illiterate men ; and
the proceedings of the society were more conspicuous for
extravagance and folly than for violence. Arguments for
miversal suffrage were combined with abstract speculations
1 Abstract of the History and Proceedings of the Revolution Society,
1789; Sermon by Dr. Price, with Appendix, 1789; " The Correspondence
of the Revohition Society in London," &c., 1792; Ann. Reg., 1792, part i.
165, 311, 366; part ii. 135; App. to Chron., 128, etseq.; Adolphus' Hist,
iv. 513, V. 211.
2 Stephen's Life of Home Tooke, i. 435; ii. Ill; Hist, of the Two Acts,
Iiitrod. xxxvli. Adolphus' Hist, v. 212; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii
g5.
138 LIBERTY OF OPINIOX.
Rnd conventional phrases, borrowed from France, — wholl)'
foreign to tlie sentiments of Englishmen and the genius of
English liberty. Their members were " citizens," the king
was " chief magistrate." ^
These societies, animated by a common sentiment, en-
gaged in active correspondence ; and published numerous
resolutions and addresses of a democratic, and sometimes
of a seditious character. Their wild and visionary
schemes, — however captivating to a lower class of poli
ticians, — served only to discredit and endanger liberty.
They were repudiated by the " Society of the Friends of
the People," * and by all the earnest but temperate reformers
of that time : they shocked the sober, alarmed the timid,
and provoked — if they did not justify — the severities of
the government.
In ordinary times, the insignificance of these societies
would have excited contempt rather than alarm ; but as
clubs and demagogues, originally not more formidable, had
obtained a terrible ascendency in France, they aroused
apprehensions out of proportion to their real danger. In
presence of a political earthquake, without a parallel in
the history of the world, every symptom of revolution was
too readily magnified.
There is no longer room for doubt that the alarm of
Exaggerated ^his period was. exaggerated and excessive. Evi-
•**""*■ dence was not forthcoming to prove it just and
well founded. The societies, however mischievous, had a
email following: they were not encouraged by any men of
influence: the middle classes repudiated them: society at
large condemned them. None of the causes which had
precipitated the revolution in France were in existence
here. The evils of an absolute government had long been
1 Ann. Reg., 1792, p. 366; 1793. p. 1C5; App. to Cliron., 75, 1794, p
129; Adolphus' Hist., v. 212; Tomline's Life of Pitt, iii. 272, 821; Lord J
Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 281; Belsham's Hist, viii. 495, 499.
» See supra, Vol. L 319; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 293,
REPRESSIVE POLICY, 1792. 139
corrected. We had no lettres de cachet, nor Bastille : no
privileged aristocracy : no impassable gulf between nobles
and the commonalty : no ostracism of opinion. We had
a free constitutiorf, of which Englishmen were proud ; a
settled society, with just gradations of rank, bound together
by all the ties of a well-ordered commonwealth ; and our
liberties, long since secured, were still growing with the
greatness and enlightenment of the people. In France
there was no bond between the government and its sub-
jects but authority : in England, power rested on the broad
basis of liberty. So stanch was the loyalty of the country,
that where one person was tainted with sedition, thousands
were prepared to defend the law and constitution with their
lives. The people, as zealous in the cause of good order
as th^ir rulers, were proof against the seductions of a few
pitiful democrats. Instead of sympathizing with the French
revolution, they were shocked at its bloody excesses, and
recoiled with horror from its social and religious extrav-
agances. The core of English society was sound. Who
that had lately witnessed the affectionate loyalty of the
whole people, on the recovery of the king from his afflic-
tion, could suspect them of republicanism ?
Yet their very loyalty was now adverse to the public
liberties. It showed itself in dread and hatred RepressiTo
of democracy. Repression and severity were p*'^'=J'» ^'^
popular, and sure of cordial support. The influential
classes, more alarmed than the government, eagerly fomented
the prevailing spirit of reaction. They had long been
jealous of the growing influence of the press and popular
opinion. Their own power had been disturbed by the po-
litical agitation of the last thirty years, and was further
threatened by parliamentary reform. But the time had
now come for recovering their ascendency. The demo-
cratic spirit of the people was betraying itself; and must
be crushed out, in the cause of order. The dangers of
parliamentary reform were illustrated by clamors for uni-
140 LIBERTY OF OPINIOX.
versal suffrage, annual parliaments, and the rights of man ;
and reformers of all degrees were to be scouted as revo
lutionary.
The calm and lofty spirit of Mr. Pitt was little prone
to apprehension. He had discountenanced Mr. Burke's
early reprobation of the French revolution : he had recently
declared his confidence in the peace and prosperity of his
country ; and had been slow to foresee the political dangers
of events in France. But he now yielded to the pressure
of Mr. Burke and an increasing party in Parliament; and
while he quieted their apprehensions, he secured for him-
self a vast addition of moral and material support. En-
larging his own party, and breaking up the opposition, he
at the same time won public confidence.
It was a crisis of unexampled difficulty, — needing the
utmost vigilance and firmness. Ministers, charged with the
maintenance of order, could not neglect any security which
the peril of the time demanded. They were secure of sup-
port in punishing sedition and treason : the guilty few would
meet with no sympathy among a loyal people. But, coun-
selled by their new chancellor and convert, Lord Lough-
borough, and tlie law officers of the crown, the government
gave too ready a credence to the reports of their agents ;
and invested the doings of a small knot of democrats —
chiefly workingmen — with the dignity of a wide-spread
conspiracy to overturn the constitution. Ruling over a free
state, they learned to dread the people, in the spirit of
tyrants. Instead of relying upon the sober judgment of
the country, they appealed to its fears; and in repressing
seditious practices, they were prepared to sacrifice liberty
of opinion. Their policy, dictated by the circumstances of
a time of strange and untried danger, was approved by the
prevailing sentiment of their contemporaries : but has not
been justified, — in an age of greater freedom, — by the
maturer judgment of posterity.
The next step taken by the government was calculated to
REPRESSIVE POLICY, 1792. 141
excite a panic On the 1st of December, 1792, a proclama-
tion was issued, statins; that so danjrerous a spirit
. ^ ° ^ . Proclama-
of tumult and disorder had been excited by evil- tion. Dec.
,. , ^. . ^ •*! • l8t,1792.
disposed persons, actmg in concert with persons in
foreign parts, that it was necessary to call out and embody
the militia. And Parliament, which then stood prorogue'!
until the 3d of January, was directed to meet on the 13th of
December.
The king's speech, on the opening of Parliament, repeate *
the statements of the proclamation ; and adverted
, . . . , . „ . King's
to design.*, in concert with persons in foreign speech. Dec.
countries, to attempt "the destruction of our happy '
constitution, and the subversion of all order and govern
ment." ^ These statements were warmly combated by Mr
Fox, who termed them "an intolerable calumny upon the
people of Great Britain," and argued that the executive gov-
ernment were about to assume control, not only over the acts
of the people, but over their very thoughts. Instead of
silencing discussion, he counselled a forwardness to redress
every grievance. Other speakers also protested against the
exaggerated views of the state of the country which the ad-
ministration had encouraged. They exhorted ministers to
have confidence in the loyalty and sound judgment of the
people ; and, instead of fomenting apprehensions, to set an
example of calmness and sobriety. But in both Houses ad-
dresses were voted,*^ giving the sanction of Parliament to the
sentiments expressed from the throne.' The majority did
not hesitate to permit popular privileges to be sacrificed to
the prevailing panic.
But as yet no evidence of the alleged dangers had been
produced ; and on the 28th of February, Mr. jjr. Sherf-
Sheridan proposed an inquiry, in a committee of y^^'^gsth""^
die whole House. He denied the existence of se- 1^^-
1 Comm. Journ., xlviii. 4; Pari. Hist., xxx. 6; Fox's Speeclna, tv. 44fc
* In the Commons by a majority of 290 to 50.
• Pari. Hist., xxx. 1^0. Ana.Reg., 1793, p. 2U-U9.
142 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
ditious practices ; and imputed to the government a desire to
create a panic, in order to inflame the public mind against
France, with which war was now dechired, and to divert
attention from parliamentary reform. The debate elicited no
further evidence of sedition ; but the motion was negatived
without a division.*
Meanwhile, prosecutions of the press abounded, especially
against publishers of Paine's works.* Seditious speaking
was also vigilantly repressed. A few examples will illusti-ate
the rigorous administration of the laws. John
trobt, March, Fi'ost, a respectable attorney, who had been asso-
' ■ ciated with the Duke of Richmond and Mr. Pitt,
a few years before, in promoting parliamentary reform, was
prosecuted for seditious words spoken in conversation, after
dinner, at a coffee-house. His words, reprehensible in them-
selves, were not aggravated by evidence of malice or seditious
intent They could scarcely be termed advised speaking;
yet was he found guilty, and sentenced to six months' im-
prisonment, to stand in the pillory at Charing Cross, and to
Mr. Winter- be Struck off the roll of attorneys.' Mr. Winter-
botham,i793. Gotham, a Baptist minister, was tried for uttering
seditious words in two sermons. The evidence brought
agiunst him was distinctly contradicted by several witnesses ;
and in the second case, so weak was the evidence for the
crown, and so conclusive his defence, that the judge directed
an acquittal ; yet in both cases the jury returned verdicts of
guilty. The luckless minister was sentenced to four years'
imprisonment, to pay two fines of 100/., and to give security
for his good behavior.* Thomas Briellat wa
Case of . '^
ThcTnas _ tried for the use of seditious words in conversa-
' ' ' tions at a public-house and in a butcher's shop.
1 Pari. Hist., xxx. .523.
'^ E. g., Daniel I.«aac Eaton, Daniel Holt and others; State Tr., xxii.
674-822; Jbtil., xxiii. 214, &c. The Attorney-General stated, on the
i3th December, 1792, that he had on his file 200 informations for seditious
libels. — Adolphus' Hist., v. 524. See also Currie's Life, i. 185; Boscoe'i
Life, i. 124; Uolcroft's Mem., ii. 151.
« St. Tr., xxii. 522.
« Ibid., 823 875.
TRIALS FOR SEDITION, 1793. 143
Here again the evidence for the prosecution was contradicted
by witnesses for the defence ; but no credit being given to
the latter, the jury returned a verdict of guilty ; and Briellat
was sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment, and to pay a
fine of lOO/.i
The trial of Dr. Hudson, for seditious words spoken at the
London Coffee-House, affords another illustration
of the alarmed and watchful spirit of the people. Dec. &th,
1793
Dr. Hudson had addressed toasts and sentiments
to his friend Mr. Pigott, who was dining with him in the
same box. Other guests in the coffee-house overheard them,
and interfered with threats and violence. Both the friends
were given in charge to a constable : but Dr. Hudson was
alone brought to trial.^ He was found guilty, and sentenced
to two years' imprisonment, and to pay a fine of 200^.'
Nor were such prosecutions confined to the higher tribu-
nals. The mamstrates, invited to vigilance by the
° . " •' Trials at
king's proclamation, and fully sharing the general Quarter
Sessions*
alarm, were satisfied with scant evidence of sedi-
tion ; and if they erred in their zeal, were sure of being up-
held by higher authorities.* And thus every incautious dis-
putant was at the mercy of panic-stricken witnesses, officious
constables, and country justices.
Another agency was evoked by the spirit of the times, —
dangerous to the liberty of the press, and to the Toiuntary
security of domestic life. Voluntary societies were ?^'^dng'
established in London and throughout the country, ^'^'""'•
for the jjurpose of aiding the executive government in the
1 St. Tr., xxii. 910.
2 The bill of indictment against Pigott was rejected by the grand jury.
8 St. Tr., xxii. 1019.
* A yeoman in his cups being exhorted by a constable, as drmik as him-
self, to keep the peace in the king's name, muttered, " D — you and the
king too: " for which the loyal quarter sessions of Kent sentenced him to a
year's imprisonment. A complaint being made of this sentence to Lord
Chancellor Loughborough, he said "that to save the country from revolu-
tion, the authority of all tribunals, high and low, must be upheld." — Lcnxl
CnnwbtlCs Lives of the Chancellors, vi. 265.
144 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
discovery and punishment of seditious writings or lan-
guage. Of these the parent was the " Society for the protec-
tion of liberty and property against republicans and levellers."
These societies, supported by large subscriptions, were busy
in collecting evidence of seditious designs, — often consisting
of anonymous letters, often of the reports of informers, lib-
erally rewarded for their activity. Tliey became, as it were,
public prosecutors, supplying the government with proofs of
supposed offences, and quickening its zeal in the prosecution
of offenders. Every unguarded word at the club, the market-
place, or the tavern, was reported to these credulous alarm-
ists, and noted as evidence of disaffection.
Such associations were repugnant to the policy of our laws,
by which the crown is charged with the office of bringing
offenders to justice, while the people, represented by juries,
are to judge, without favor or prejudice, of their guilt or in-
nocence. But here the people were invited to make common
cause with the crown against offenders, to collect the evi-
dence, and prejudge the guilt. How then could members of
these societies assist in the pure administration of justice, as
jurymen and justices of the peace ? In the country especially
was justice liable to be warped. Local cases of sedition were
tried at the Quarter Sessions, by magistrates who were lead-
ers of these societies, and by jurors who, if not also members,
were the tenants or neighbors of the gentlemen on the bench.
Prosecutor, judge, and jury being all leagued against the ac-
cused, in a time of panic, how could any man demand with
confidence to be tried by his peers ? ^
Meanwhile, the authorities in Scotland were more alarmed
Apprehen- by the French revolution than the English govern
democracy in natjut ; and their apprehensions were increased by
Scotland. ^jjg proceedings of several societies for demo-
cratic reform, and by the assembling in Edinburgh of a
"convention of delegates of the associated friends of the
1 Proceedings of the Friends of the Liberty of the Press, Jan. 1793; Ers-
kine'8 Speeches, iv. 411.
TRIAL OF MUIR, 1793. 146
people" from various parts of England and Scotland. The
mission of these delegates was to discuss annual parliaments
and universal suffrage ; but the excitement of the times led
them to an extravagance of language, and proceedings whicU
had characterized other associations.^ The government ri-
solved to confront democracy and overawe sedition ; but i.i
this period of panic, even justice was at fault; and the law
was administered with a severity discreditable to the courts
and to the public sentiments of that country. Some of the
persons implicated in obnoxious publications withdrew from
the jurisdidion of the courts ; ^ while those who remained
found little justice or mercy."
Thomas Muir, a young advocate of high talents and attain-
ments, having exposed himself to suspicion by his
... . , M T - Trial of Muir,
activity m promotmg the proscribed cause ot par- Aug. 30th,
liamentary reform, and as a member of the con-
vention of delegates, was brought to trial before the High
Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh, for sedition. Every inci-
dent of this trial marked the unfairness and cruel spirit of his
judges.
In deciding upon the relevancy of the indictment, they di-
lated upon the enormity of the offences charged, — which, in
their judgment, amounted almost to high treason, — upon the
excnllence of our constitution,* and the terrors of the French
revolution. It was plain that any attempt to amend our in-
stituUons was, in their eyes, a crime. All the jurymen,
S'iHcled by the siieriff and picked by the presiding judge,*
were members of an association at Goldsmith's Hall, who
h:\d erased Muir's name from their books as an enemy to the
1 Ann. Reg., 179-i, p. 129; State Tr., xxiii. 385, et seq., 398.
2 James Tytler, St. Tr., xxiii. 2; John Elder and William Stewart, /6jV/.
25; James Smith and John Mennons, Ibid. 34; James T. Callender, Jbid.
84.
3 See Trial of Walter Berry and James Robertson, State Tr., xxiii. 79.
4 The Lord Justice Clerk (Lord Braxfield) termed it "the happiest, the
best, and the most noble constitution in the world, and I do not believe it
possible to make a better." — St. Tr., xxiii. 132.
5 State Tr., xix. 11, n.; Cockbuni's Mem., 87.
XIII.. II. l)
14G LIBERTY OF OPINION.
constitution. He objected th:it such men had already pre-
judged his cause, but was told he might as well object to his
judges, who had sworn to maintain the constitution ! The
witnesses for the crown failed to prove any seditious speecli-
es, — while they all bore testimony to the earnestness with
which he had counselled order and obedience to the law.
Throughout tlie trial, he was browbeaten and threatened by
the judges. A contemptible witness against him was " caressed
by the prosecutor, and complimented by the court," — while
a witness of his own was hurriedly committed for concealing
the truth, without hearing Muir on his behalf, who was told
that " he had no right or title to interfere in the business,"
In the spirit of a bygone age of judicature, the Lord Advo-
cate denounced Muir as a demon of sedition and mischief.
He even urged it as a proof of guilt that a letter had been
found among his papers, addressed to Mr. Fyshe Palmer,
who was about to be tried for sedition !
Muir defended himself in a speech worthy of the talents
and courage which were to be crushed by this prosecution.
Little did they avail him. He knew that he was addressing
men by whom his cause had been prejudged ; but he ap-
pealed worthily to the public and to posterity ; and affirmed
that he was tried, in truth, for promoting parliamentary re-
form. The Lord Justice Clerk, Braxfield,^ confirmed this
assertion, by charging the jury that to preach the necessity
of reform, at a time of excitement, was seditious. This
learned judge also harangued the jury upon parliamentary
reform. " The landed interest alone had a right. to be repre-
sented," he said ; " as for the rabble, who have nothing but
personal property, what hold has the nation of them ? "
Need it be told that the jury returned a verdict of guilty ?
And now the judges renewed their reflections upon the enor-
1 Robert McQueen of Braxfield — Lord Braxfield, "was the Jeffreys of
Scotland." " Let them briny me more prisoners, and I will find them
-w," was said to have been his language to the government. — Loia
. ^kbwn's Man., 116.
TRIAL OF MUIR, 1793. 147
mity of the prisoner's crimen. Lord Henderland noticed the
applause with which Muir's noble defence had been received
by the audience, — which could not but admire his spirit and
eloquence, — as a proof of the seditious feelings of the people ;
and though his lordship allowed that this incident should not
aggravate Muir's punishment, proceeded to pass a sentence of
transportation for fourteen years. Lord Swinton could
scarcely distinguish Muir's crime from high treason, and said,
with a ferocity unworthy of a Christian judge, "if punishment
adequate to the crime of sedition were to be sought for, it
could not be found in our law, now that torture is happily
abolished." lie concurred in the sentence of tiansporta-
tion, — referring to the Roman law where seditious criminals
^^ aut infurcam tolluntur, aut bestiis objiciuntur, aut in insu-
lam deportantur." " We have chosen the mildest of these
punishments," said his lordship ! Lord Abercromby and the
Lord Justice Clerk, thought the defendant fortunate in hav-
ing escaped with his life, — the penalty of treason ; and the
latter, referring to the applause with which Muir had been
greeted, admitted that tiie circumstance had no little weight
with iiim in considering the punishntent.'^
Wliat was this but an avowal that public opinion was
to be repressed and punished in the person of Muir, who
was now within the grasp of the law ? And thus, without
even the outward show of a fair trial, Muir stood sentenced
to a punishment of unwarrantable, if not illegal, severity.*
1 St. Tr., xxiii. 118-238; Lord Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors,
vi. 261. In reference to this trial, Lord Cockbum says, " if, instead of
being a Supreme Court of Justice, sitting for the trial of guilt or innocence,
It had been an ancient conimis.sion appointed by the crown to procure con-
rictious, little of its judicial manner would have required to be changed."
— Memorials, p. 100.
2 There is little doubt that the law of Scotland did not authorize the sen-
tence of transportation for sedition, but of banishment only. This was
affirmed over and over again. In 1797 Mr. Fox said he was satisfied, " not
merely on the authority of the most learned men of that country, but on
the infonuation he had himself been able to acquire, that uo such law did
exist in Scotland, and that those who acted upon it will one day be
148 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
A few days after this trial, the Rev. T. Fyshe Palmer*
TbeRer. T. ^'^ tried for sedition before the Circuit Court
Palmer Sept. ^^ Justiciary at Perth. He was charged with
l2tb, 1793. circulating an address from "A Society of
the friends of liberty to their fellow-citizens." However
strong the language of this paper,* its sole object was
to secure a reform of the House of Commons, to who?e
corruption and dependence were attributed all the evils
which it denounced. His trial was conducted with les.'i
intemperance than that of Muir, but scarcely with more
fairness. In deciding upon the relevancy of the indictment,
the judges entertained no doubt that the paper was seditious,
which they proved mainly by combating the truth of the
propositions contained in it. The witnesses for the crown,
who gave their evidence with much reluctance, proved that
Palmer was not the author of the address ; but had cor-
rected it, and softened many of its expressions. Tliat he
was concerned in its printing and circulation, was clearly
proved.
The judicial views of sedition may be estimated from
part of Lord Abercromby's summing up. " Gentlemen,''
faid he, '* the right of universal suffrage the subjects of this
country never enjoyed ; and were they to enjoy it, they
would not long enjoy either liberty or a free constitution.
You will, therefore, consider whether telling the people that
they have a just right to what Mould unquestionably be
tantamount to a total subver.sion of this constitution, is such
brought to a severe retribution for their conduct." — Pari. Bist.f xxxiil.
616.
It seems also that the Act 25 Geo. III. c. 46, for removing offenders, in
Scotland, to places of temporary confinement, had expired in 1788; and
that "Muir and Palmer were nevertheless removed from Scotland and
transported to Botany Bay, though there was no statute then in force to
wairant it. — Lord Cokhtisttr's Diary, i. 50.
1 Mr. Palmer had taken orders in the Church of England, but after-
wards became an Unitarian minister.
■■* " that portion of liberty you once enjoyed is fast setting, we fear, in
the darkness of despotism and tyranny," was the strongest sentence.
TRIALS OF SKinVIXG AND OTHERS. 149
a writing as any per?on is entitled to compose, to print, and
to publish." When such opinions were declared from the
bench, who can wonder if complaints were heard that the
law punished as sedition the advocacy of parliamentary re-
form ? Palmer was found guilty and sentenced to seven years'
transportation, — not without intimations from Lord Aber-
cromby and Lord Eskgrove that his crime so nearly amounted
to treason, that he had narrowly escaped its punishment.^
After these trials, the government resolved to put down
the Convention of the friends of the people in ,^^^ ^^
Edinburgh, whose proceedings had become IS^^^*™
marked by crreater extravagance.^ Its leaders Jan. 6th and
° . 7th, 1794.
were arrested, and its papers seized. In Janu-
ary, 1794, William Skirving, the secretary, was tried for
sedition, as being concerned in the publication of the address
to the people, for which Palmer had already been convicted,
and in other proceedings of the convention. He was found
guilty and sentenced to fourteen years' transportation. On
hearing his sentence, Skirving said : — " My Lords, I know
that what has been done these two days will be rejudged ;
that is my comfort, and all my hope." ' That his guilt was
assumed and prejudged, neither prosecutor nor judge at-
tempted to disguise. The solicitor-general, in his opening
speech, said : — " The very name of British Convention
carries sedition along with it." — " And the British Con-
vention associated for what ? For the purpose of obtaining
universal suffrage : in other words, for the purpose of sub-
1 St. Tr., xxiii. 237.
2 It was now called the British Convention of Delegates, &c Its mem-
bers were citizens: its place of meeting was called Liberty Hall: it
appointed secret committees, and spoke mysteriously of a convention ot
emergency.
3 State Trials, xxiii. 391-602. Hume's Criminal Commentaries were
compiled " in a great measure for the purpose of vindicating the proceed-
ings of the Criminal Court in these cases of sedition;" but " there ia
scarcely one of his favorite points that tlie legislature, with the cordial
assent of the public and of lawyers, has not put down. — Lord Cockbum'$
Mem., 161; and see his art. in Edinb. Rev., No. 167, art. 7.
150 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
verting the government of Great Britain." AnJ when
Skirving, like Muir, objected to the jurors, as members
of the Goldsmith's H;ill Association, Lord Eskgrove said,
"by making this objection, the panel is avowing that it wa.-
their purpose to overturn the government."
Maurice Margarot* and Joseph Gerrald,^ who had been
Margnrotand ^^^^ ^^Y ^^^ London Corresponding Society to
an.rMarch*"" ^^^'^ Convention of the friends of the people at
1794. Edinburgh, were tried for seditious speeches and
other proceedings, in connection with that convention ; and
on being found guilty, were sentenced to fourteen years'
transportation.*
The circumstances attending these trials, and the extreme
These trials severity of the sentences, could not fail to rai:?e
PariUmMit animadversions in Parliament. The case of Mr.
Jan. 31st, Muir was brought before the Lords by Earl Stan-
1794. .
Feb.24tb hope;* and that of Mr. Fyshe Palmer before tlie
March 10th. Commons, on a petition from himself, presented
by Mr. Slieridan.*
The cases of Muir and Palmer were afterwards more
fully brought before the House of Commons by Mr. Adam.
He contended, in an able speech, that the offences with
which they had been charged were no more than leasing-
making, according to tlie law of Scotland,® for which no
such punishment as trans|K)rtation could be inflicted. He
also called attention to many of the circumstances connected
with these trials, in order to show their unfairness ; and
1 St. Tr., xxiii. 603.
2 Ilwl., 805.
* Mr. Fox said of Gerrald, in 1797, "his elegant and useful attainment.'*
made liini dear to the circles of literature and taste. Bred to enjoyments,
in wliich his accomplishments fitted him to participate, and endowed with
taieiit.s tliat rendered him valuable to his country, . . . tlie punishment to
Bucii a man was certain death, and accordingly he sank under the sen-
tence, the victim of virtuous, wounded sensibility.*' — ParL Bisl.,xxxii'\. 617.
* Pari. Hist., xxx. 1298.
6 /bUL, xxx. 1449.
* Scots Act of Queen Anne, 1703, c. 4.
OTHER TRIALS FOR SEDITION, 1794. 151
moved for a copy of the record of Muir's trial. The ti-iala
and sentences were defended by the Lord Advocate, Mr.
Windham, and Mr. Pitt; and strongly censured by Mr.
Sheridan, Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Grey, and Mr. Fox. Tht
latter denounced, with eloquent indignation, some of the
extravagant expressions which had proceeded from the
bench, and exclaimed, " God help the people who have such
judges ! " Tiie motion was refused by a large majority.^
These cases were again incidentally brought into dis
cussion, upon a motion of Mr. Adam respecting March 25th.
the criminal law of Scotland.^ They were also discussed
in the House of Loi-ds, upon a motion of Lord April loth.
Lauderdale, but without any results.'
The prisoners were without redress, but their sufierings
excited a strong popular sympathy, especially
in Scotland. " These trials," says Lord Cock burn, for the
,/ 1 1 1-1 I'll prisoners.
''sank deep, not merely mto the popuhir mmd, but
into the minds of all men who thought. It was by these pro-
ceedings, more than by any other wrong, that the spirit of
discontent justified itself throughout the rest of that age." *
This strong sense of injustice rankled in the minds of a
whole generation of Scotchmen, and after fifty years, found
expression in the Martyrs' Memorial on Gallon Hill.^
Meanwhile, some of the cases of sedition tried by the
courts, m England, brought ridictJe upon the other cases
administration of justice. Daniel Isaac Eaton was i*,^ Enl^and.
tried for publishing a contemptible pamphlet inti- ^^^^ p^
tuled " Politics for the people, or Hog's Wash," in 24th, 1794.
which the king was supposed tc be typified under the character
1 A.ves, 32; Noes, 171; Pari. Hist, xxx. 1486.
« Ibid., 54.
8 Ibid., xxxi. 263. For an account of the .<;iiffering8 of Mair and Palmer
on board the hulks, see St. Tr., xxiii. 377, note. Palmer, Gerrald, and
Skirviug died abroad; Muir escaped to Europe, and died in Paris, in 17P9
-Ann. Reg., 1797, Chron., p. 14, and 1799, Chron., p. 9.
* Lord Cockbum's Mem., 102; Belsham's Hist., ix. 77-80.
6 Erected 1844.
152 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
of a game-cock. It was a ridiculous prosecution, character*
istic of the times: the culprit escappd, and the lawyers
were laughed at.*
Another prosecution, of more formidable pretensions, was
broufrht to an issue in April, 1794. Thomas
Thomas ° • '
Walker, of "Walker, an eminent merchant of Manchester, and
Manchester, . i i . ,
and others, SIX Other persons, were charged with a conspiracy
^" ' ' to overthrow the constitution and government,
and to aid the P>ench in the invasion of these shores. This
charge expressed all the fears with which the government
were harassed, and its issue exposed their extravagance.
The entire charge was founded upon the evidence of a dis-
reputable witness, Thomas Dunn, whose falsehoods were so
transparent that a verdict of acquittal was immediately taken,
and the witness Vas committed for his perjury. The arras
that were to have overturned the government and constitution
of the country, proved to be mere children's toys, and some
firearms which Mr. Walker had obtained to defend his own
house against a church and king mob, by whom it had been
assailed.* That such a case could have appeared to the
officers of the crown worthy of a public trial, is evidence of
the heated imagination of the time, which discovered con
spiracles and treason in all the actions of men.
It was not until late in the session of 1794, that the minis-
King-8 ters laid before Parliament any evidence of sedi-
•pSuSg'*' tious practices. But in May, 1794, some of the
pnufticM leading members of the democratic societies having
M^ 12th, been arrested, and their papers seized, a message
May 16th. from the king was delivered to both Houses, stating
hat he had directed the books of certain corresponding socie-
ics to be laid before them.' In the Commons, these papers
were referred to a secret committee, which first reported upon
the proceedings of the Society for Constitutional information,
1 St Tr., xxiii. 1014.
2 Ibul., 1056.
« Pari. Hist., xxxi. 471.
SEDITIOUS PRACTICES, 1794. 153
and the London Corresponding Society ; and pronounced its
opinion that measures were being taken for assembHng a
general convention '' to supersede the House of Commons in
its representative capacity, and to assume to itself all the
functions and powers of a national legislature." * It was also
stated that measures had recently been taken for providing
arms, to be distributed amongst the members of the societies.
No sooner had the report been read, than Mr. Pitt, after
recapitulating the evidence upon which it was founded, moved
for a bill to suspend the habeas corpus act, which was rapidly
passed through both Houses.''
A secret committee of the Lords reported that "a traitor-
ous conspiracy had been formed for the subversion Lord's com
of the established laws and constitution, and the ^th**!^*'
introduction of that system of anarchy and confusion '^^■
which has fatally prevailed in France."' And the committee
of the Commons, in a second report, revealed
r I. • Second Ro
evidence of the secret manufacture of arms, m port of Secret
... . . c 1 1 • Committee
connection with the societies, or other designs {Commons), •
dangerous to the public peace, and of proceedings
ominously formed upon the French model.* A second
report was also issued, on the following day, from the
committee of the Lords.® They were followed by loyal
addresses from both Houses, expressing their indignation at
the.se seditious practices, and their determination to support
the constitution and peace of the country.* The warmest
friends of free discussion had no ."sympathy with sedition, or
the dark plots of political fanatics ; but, relying upon the
oyalty and good conduct of the people, and the soundness of
he constitution, they steadily contended that these dangers
were exaggerated, and might be safely left to the ordinary
administration of tlie law.
Notwithstanding the dangers disclosed in these reports,
1 Pari. Hist., xxxi. 495. * Ibid., 688.
2 See infra, p. 258. 6 /frjf/., 688.
» Pari. Hist., xxxi. 574. • Ibid., 909-931
154 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
prosecutions for seditious libel, both in England and Ire-
land, were sinnrularly infelicitous. The convictions
Triatafor ' ° •'
Kditioiu secured were few compared with the acquittals ; and
Ubels, 1794. . . , r -, /• • ,
the evidence was so often drawn from spies and
informers, that a storm of unpopularity was raised against
the government. Classes, heartily on the side of order,
began to be alarmed for the public liberties. They were
willing that libellers should be punished : but protested
against the privacy of domestic life being invaded by spies,
who trafficked upon the excitement of the times.*
Crimes more serious than seditious writings were now to be
State trials repressed. Traitorous societies, conspiring to sub-
1794. ygj-t the layyg a„(j coustitution, were to be assailed,
and their leaders brought to justice. If they had been guilty
of treason, all good subjects prayed that they might be con-
victed ; but thoughtful men, accustomed to free discussion
and association for political purposes, dreaded lest the rights
and liberties of the people should be sacrificed to the public
apprehensions.
In 1794, Robert Watt and David Downie were tried, in
Scotland, for hi"h treason. They were accused of
Trials of . ' =" „ . . ,
Kobert Watt a conspiracy to call a convention, with a view to
and David ' , . , . , .
Downie for usurp legislative power, to procure arms, and resist
Aug. a'nd**"'' the royal authority. That their designs were dan-
Sept. 1,94. gerous and criminal was sufficiently proved, and
was afterwards confessed by Watt. A general conven-
tion was to be assembled, comprising representatives from
England, Scotland, and Ireland,* and supported by an armed
insurrection. The troops were to be seduced or over-
powered, the public offices and banks secured, and the king
compelled to dismiss his ministers and dissolve Parliament.
These alarming projects were discussed by seven obscure
individuals in Edinburgh, of whom Watt, a spy, was the
leader, and David Downie, a mechanic, the treasurer. Two
of the seven soon withdrew from the conferences of the con-
i Adolphus' Hist, vi. t5, 46.
TBE STATE TRIALS, 1794. 135
spirators ; and four became witnesses for the crown. Forty-
seven pikes had been made, but none had been distributed.
Seditious writing and speaking, and a criminal conspiracy,
were too evidently established ; but it was only by straining
the dangerous doctrines of constructive treason, that the
prisoners could be convicted of that graver crime. They
were tried separately, and both being found guilty, received
sentence of dcatli.^ Watt was executed ; but Downie,
having been recommended to mercy by the jury, received a
pardon.^ It was the first conviction yet obtained for any of
those traitorous design^, for the reality of which Parliament
had been induced to vouch.
While awaiting more serious events, the public were ex-
cited by the discovery of a regicide plot. The
. •' f "^^^ pop-gun
conspirators were members of the much-dreaded plot, Sept.
. . 1794.
Corresponding Society, and had concerted a plan
for assassinating the king. Their murderous instrument wa.s
a tube, or air-gun, through which a poisoned arrow was to be
shot ! No wonder that this foul conspiracy at once received
the name of the " Pop-Gun Plot ! " A sense of the ridicu-
lous prevailed over the fears and loyalty of the people.' But
before the ridicule excited by the discovery of such a plot had
subsided, trials of a far graver character were approaching,
in which not only the lives of the accused, but the credit of
the executive, the wisdom of Parliament, and the liberties of
the people were at sttike.
1 St Tr., xxiii. 1167; Ibid., xxiv. 11. Not long before the commission
of those acts which cost him his life, Watt had been giving information to
Mr. Secretary Dundas of dangerous plots which never existed; and sus-
picions were entertained that if his criminal suggestions had been adopted
by others, and a real plot put in movement, he would have been the first
to expose it and to claim a reward for his disclosures. If such was his
design, the " biter was bit," as he fell a sacrifice to the evidence of his con-
federates.— St. Tr., xxiii. 1325; Belsham's Hist, ix. 227.
2 Speech of Mr. Curwen in defence of Downie, St. Tr., xxiv. 150;
Speech of Mr. Erskine in defence of Hardy, lb., 964, &c.
■8 Crossfield, the chief conspirator, being abroad, the other traitors wera
not brought to trial for nearly two years, when Crossfield and his confed'
eratea were all acquitted. — St. Tr., xxvi '_.
156 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
Parliament had declared in May * " that a trait»)rou3 and
State triau, detestable conspiracy had been formed for subvert-
^^^' ing the existing laws and constitution, and for in-
troducing the system of anarchy and confusion which has so
Oct. 6th, lately prevailed in France." In October, a special
I***- commission was issued for the trial of the leaders
of this conspiracy. The grand jury returned a true bill
against Thomas Hardy, John Home Tooke, John Thelwall,
and nine other prisoners, for high treason. These persons
were members of the London Corresponding Society, and of
the Society for Constitutional information, which had formed
the subject of the reports of secret committees, and had in-
spired the government with so much apprehension. It had
been the avowed object of both these societies to obtain par-
liamentary reform ; but the prisoners were charged with con-
spiring to break the public peace, — to excite rebellion, — to
depose the king and put him to death, and alter the legisla-
ture and government of the country, — to summon a conven-
tion of the people for effecting these traitorous designs, — to
write and issue letters and addresses, in order to assemble
such a convention ; and to provide arms for the purpose of
resisting the king's authority.
Never, since the revolution, had prisoners been placed al
go great a disadvantage, in defending themselves from charges
of treason. They were accused of the very crimes which
Parliament had declared to be rife throughout the country;
and in addressing the grand jury, Chief Justice Eyre had re-
ferred to the recent act, as evidence of a wide-spread con-
spiracy to subvert the government.
The first prisoner brought to trial was a simple mechanic,
Thomas Hardy, — a shoemaker by trade, and
Hani °. Oct. secretary of the London Corresponding Society.
' ' ■ Day afier day, evidence was produced by the
crown, first to establish the existence and character of this
conspiracy ; and secondly to prove that the prisoner was con*
1 Preamble to Habeas Coq)us Suspensioa Act, 34 Geo. III. c. fiii
THE STATE TRIALS, 1794. 157
cerned in it. Tliis evidence having already convinced Par-
liament of a dangerous conspiracy, the jury were naturally
])redisposed to accept it as conclusive ; and a conspiracy being
established, the prisoner, as a member of the societies con-
ceined in it, could scarcely escape from the meshes of tie
general evidence. Instead of being tried for his own acts (T
language only, he was to be held responsible for all the pro-
reedings of these societies. If they had plotted a revolution,
he must be adjudged a traitor ; and if he should be found
guilty, what members of these societies would be safe?
The evidence produced in this trial proved, indeed, that
there had been strong excitement, intemperate language, im-
practicable projects of reform, and extensive correspondence
and popular organization. Many things had been said and
done, by persons connected with these societies, which proba-
bly amounted to sedition ; but nothing approaching either the
dignity or the wickedness of treason. Their chief offence
consisted in their efforts to assemble a general convention of
the people, ostensibly for obtaining parliamentary reform, —
but in reality, it was said, for subverting the government. If
their avowed object was the true one, clearly no offence had
been committed. Such combinations had already been
formed, and were acknowledged to be lawful. Mr. Pitt
himself, the Duke of Richmond, and some of the first men in
the state had been concerned in th6m. If the prisoner had
concealed and unlawful designs, it was for the prosecution to
prove their existence by overt acts of treason. Many of the
crown witnesses, themselves members of the societies, declared
their innocence of all traitorous designs ; while other witnesses
gained little credit when exposed as spies and informers.
It was only by pushing the doctrines of constructive treason
to the most dangerous extremes, that such a crime could even
be inferred. Against these perilous doctrines Mr. Erskine
had already successfully protested in the case of Lord George
Gordon ; and now again he exposed and refuted them, in a
speech which, as Mr. Home Tooke justly said, " will live
158 LIDERTT OF OPIXION.
forever."* The shortcomings of the evidence, and the con
summate skill and eloquence of the counsel for the defence,
f;ecured the acquittal of the prisoner.^
Notwithstanding their di^jcoinfiture, the advisers of the
jj^jif crown re?olved to proceed with the trial of Mr.
Home Took*. John Home Tooke, an accomplished scholar and
wit, and no mean disputant. His defence was easier
than that of Hardy. It had previously been doubtful how
far the fairness and independence of a jury could be re-
lied upon. Why should they be above the influences and
prejudices which seemed to prevail everywhere ? In his
defence of Home Tooke, Mr. Erskine could not resist ad-
verting to his anxieties in the previous trial, when even the
" protecting Commons had been the accusers of his client,
and had acted as a solicitor to prepare the very briefs for the
prosecution." But now that juries could be trusted, as in
ordinai-y times, the case was clear; and Home Tooke was
acquitted.'
The groundless alarm of the government, founded upon
the faithless reports of spies, was well exemplified in the case
of Home Tooke. He had received a letter from Mr. Joyce,
containing the ominous words " Can you be ready by Thurs-
day?" The question was believed to refer to some rising,
or other alarming act of treason ; but it turned out, that it
related only to " a list of the titles, offices, and pensions be-
stowed by Mr. Pitt upon Mr. Pitt, his relations, friends, and
dependents." * And again, Mr. Tooke, seeing Mr. Gay, an
1 The conclusion of his speech was received with acclamations by th
vpectators who thronged the court, and by the multitudes surrounding it
Fearful that their numbers and zeal should have the appearance of over
awing the judges and jurj', and interfering with the administration of jus-
tice, Mr. Erskine went out and addressed the crowd, beseeching them to
disperse. "In a few minutes there was scarcely a persfin to be seen near
the Court." — Note to Ei'skine's Speeches, iii. 502.
* State Tr., xxiv. 19; Erskine's Speeches, iii. 53; Lord Campbell's
Lives of the Chancellors, vi. 471.
« St. Tr., XXV. 745.
* Mr. Erckine's Speech, St. Tr.. xxv. 309.
THE STATE TRIALS, 1794. 15JI
enterprising traveller, present at a meeting of the Constitu-
tional Society, had humorously observed that he " was dis-
posed to go to greater lengths than any of us would choose to
follow him ; " an observation which was faithfully reported by
a spy, as evidence of dangerous designs.*
Messrs. Bonney, Joyce, Kyd, and Holcroft were next
arraigned, but the attorney-general, having twice other pHs
failed in obtaining a conviction upon the evidence cha^wir
It his command, consented to their acquittal and ^^j^^*'^'^-
lischarge.^ But Thelwall, against whom the Theiwaii
prosecution had some additional evidence personal to him-
self, was tried, and acquitted. After this last failure, no
further trials were ventured upon. The other prisoners,
for whose trial the special commission had been issued,
were discharged, as well as several prisoners in the coun-
try, who had been implicated in the proceedings of the ob-
noxious societies.
Most fortunate was the result of these trials. Had the
prisoners been found "fuilty and suffered death, a „
r ^ o J Fortunate
sense of iniustice would have aroused the people result of these
trials.
to dangerous exasjieration. The right of free
discussion and association would have been branded a3
treason : public liberty would have been crushed ; and no
man would have been safe from the vengeance of thft gov-
ernment. But now it was acknowledged, that if the ex-
ecutive had been too easily alarmed, and Parliament too
readily persuaded of the existence of danger, the admin-
istration of justice had not been tampered with ; and that,
even in the midst of panic, an English jury would see right
done between the crown and the meanest of its subjects.*
1 St Tr., XXV. 310.
2 /&/rf., 746.
3 Mr. Speaker Addington, writing after these events, said, " It is of
more consequence to maintain the credit of a mild ana unprejudiced
administration of justice than even to convict a Jacobin." — Loi-d Sid-
mouth's Life, i. 132. See al.so Belsham's Hiat., ix. 244 ; Cartwriglit*!
Life, i. 210; Holcoft's Mem., ii. 180.
160 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
And while the people were made sensible of their freedom,
ministers were checked for a time in their perilous career.
Nor were these trials, however impolitic, without their
uses. On the one hand, the alarmists were less credulous
of dangers to the state : on the other, the folly, tlie rashness,
the ignorance, and criminality of many of the persons con-
nected with political associations were exposed.
On the meeting of Parliament, in December, the failure
of these prosecutions at once became the subject
Debates ia . ._, \ r i -i • <• i
Parliament 01 discussion. hiVcu ou the tormal readmg oi the
Dec. 30tu, ' Clandestine Outlawries Bill, Mr. Sheridan urged
' ■ the immediate repeal of the act for the suspension
of the Habeas Corpus, While he and other members of the
opposition contended that the trials had discredited the
evidence of dangerous plots, ministers declined to accept any
such conclusion. The solicitor-general maintained, that the
*• only effect of the late verdicts was, that the persons
acquitted could not.be again tried for the same offence;"
and added, that if the juries had been as well informed as
himself, they would have arrived at a different conclusion !
These expressions, for which he was rebuked and ridiculed
by Mr. Fox, were soon improved upon by Mr. Windham.
The latter wished the opposition "joy of the innocence of
an acquitted felon," — words which, on being called to order,
he was obliged to explain away.^
A few days afterwards, Mr. Sheridan moved for the repeal
Jan. 5th, 1795. of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, in a speech
abounding in wit, sarcasm, and personalities. The debate
elicited a speech from Mr. Erskine, in which he proved,
in the clearest manner, that the acquittal of the prisoners
had been founded upon the entire disbelief of the jury
in any traitorous conspiracy, — such as had been alleged
to exist. His arguments were combated by Mr. Serjeant
Adair, who, in endeavoring to prove that the House had
been right, and the juries in error, was naturally rewarded
1 Pari. Hist., xxxi. 994-1061.
REPRESSIVE MEASURES CONTINUED. 161
with tlie applause of his audience. His speech culled forth
this happy retort of Mr. Fox. The learned gentleman,
lie said, "appealed from the jury to the House. And here
let me adore the trial by jury. When this speech was made
to another jury, — a speech which has been to-night re-
ceived witli such plaudits that we seemed ready ire pedibus
in sententiam, — it was received with a cold ' not guilty.' "
The minister maintained a haughty silence ; but being ap
pealed to, said that it would probably be necessary to con
tinue the act. Mr. Sheridan's motion was supported by no
more than forty-one votes.*
The debate was soon followed by the introduction of the
Continuance BilU The government, not having
„ . Suspensioa
any further evidence of public danger, relied upon of Habeas
\ r 1 iTi i-T-»i' 1 • t!orpu3 Act
the tacts already disclosed m Jrarliament and m continued,
1795
the courts. Upon these they insisted, with as
much confidence as if there had been no trials ; while, ou
the other side, the late verdicts were taken as a conclusive
refutation of all proofs hitherto offered by the executive.
These arguments were pressed too far, on either side. Proofs
of treason had failed : proofs of seditious activity abounded.
To condemn men to death on such evidence was one thing :
to provide securities for the public peace was another : but
it was clear that the public danger had been magnified, and
its character misapprehended. The bill was speedily passed
by both Houses.^
While many prisoners charged with sedition had been
I'eleased after the state trials, Henry Redhead
Yorke was excepted from this indulgence. He n^nry Red
was just twenty-two years old, — of considerable fo^on-""^^"
talent ; and had entered into politics, when a mere ^^}'?-%i.-^-
boy, with more zeal than discretion. In April,
1794, he had assembled a meeting at Castle Hill, Sheffield,
whom he addressed, in strong and inflammatory language,
1 Ayes, 41; Noes, 185; Pari. Hist., xxxi. 1062.
2 Ibid., 1144-1194; 1280-1293.
VOL. II. 11
162 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
upon the corruptions of the House of Commons, and the
necei?sity of parliamentary reform. The proceedings at
this meeting were subsequently printed and published ; but
it was not proved that Mr. Yorke was concerned in the
j>ublication, nor that it contained an accurate report of
his speech. Not long afterwards, he was arrested on a
charge of high treason. After a long imprisonment,
this charge was abandoned; but in July 1795, he was at
length brought to trial at the York Assizes, on a charge
of conspiracy to defame the House of Commoqs, and ex-
cite a spirit of disaffection and sedition amongst the people.
He spoke ably in his own defence ; and Mr. Justice Rooke,
before whom he was tried, admitted in his charge to the
jury that the language of the prisoner, — presuming it to
be correctly reported, — would have been innocent at anoth-
er time and under other circumstances ; but that addressed
to a large meeting, at a period of excitement, it was danger-
ous to the public peace. The jury being of the same opinion,
found a verdict of guilty ; and the defendant was sentenced
to a fine of 2001., and two years' imprisonment in Dorchester
jail.*
The year 1795 was one of suffering, excitement, uneasi-
Dwtressand ncss, and disturbance: "the time was out of
nou, 1(95. joint." The pressure of the war upon industry,
aggravated by two bad harvests, was already beginning
to be felt Want of employment and scarcity of food, as
usual, provoked political discontent; and the events of the
last three years had made a wide breach between the gov-
ernment and the people.* Until then, the growth of freedom
IiaJ been rapid : many constitutional abuses had already been
corrected ; and the people, trained to free thought and discus-
sion, had been encouraged by the first men of the age, — by
Chatham, Fox, Grey, and the younger Pitt himself, — to
hope for a wider representation as the consummation of their
1 St Tr., XXV. 1003.
* Ann. Rc^., 1796, p. 7; History of the Tvro Acts, Introduction.
DISCONTENTS IN 1795. 163
liberties. But how had the government lately responded to
these popular influences ? By prosecutions of the pre?s, —
by the. punishment of political discussion as a crime, — by
the proscription of parliamentary reformers, as men guilty
of sedition and treason, — and by startling restraints upon
public liberty. Deeply disturbed and discontented was the
public mind. Bread riots, and excited meetings in favor of
parliamentary reform, disclosed the mixed feelings of the
populace. These discontents were inflamed by the mischiev-
ous activity of the London Corresponding Society,* embold-
ened by its triumphs over the government, and by dema-
gogues begotten by the agitation of the times. On the 26th
of October, a vast meeting was assembled by the London
Corresponding Society at Copenhagen House, at which
150,000 persons were said to have been present. An ad-
dress to the nation was agreed to, in which, among other
stirring appeals, it was said, " We have lives, and are ready
to devote them, either separately or collectively, for the sal-
vation of the country." This was followed by a remon-
strance to the king, urging parliamentary reform, the removal
of ministers, and a speedy peace. Several resolutions were
also passed describing the sufferings of the people, the load
of taxation, and the necessity of universal suffrage and an-
nual parliaments. The latter topic had been the constant
theme of all their proceedings ; and however strong their
language, no other object had ever been avowed. The meet-
ing dispersed without the least disorder.*
Popular excitement was at its height, when the king was
about to open Parliament in person. On the 29th Attack
of October, the Park and streets were thronged ^1^° q ®t.
with an excited multitude, through which the royal ^"'' ^^^*
procession was to pass, on its way to Westminster. Instead
1 See their addresses to the nation and the king, June 29th, 1795, in sup-
port of universal suffrage and annual parliaments. — Hist, of Che Two Act*
90-97.
2 Iliat. of the Two Acts, 98-108.
164 LIBERTY OF OPINIOX.
of the cordial acclamations with which tlie king had generally
heen received, he was now assailed with groans and hisses,
and cries of " Give us bread," — " No Pitt," — " No war," —
" No famine." His state carriage was pelted, and one mis-
sile, apparently from an air-gun, passed through the window.
In all his dominions, there was no man of higher courage
than the king himself. He bore these attacks upon his per-
son with unflinching firmness ; and proceeded to deliver his
speech from the throne, without a trace of agitation. On his
return to St. James's, these outrages were renewed, the glass
panels and windows of the carriage were broken to pieces ; *
and after the king had alighted, the carriage itself was nearly
demolished by the mob. The king, in passing from St.
James's to Buckingham House in his private carriage, was
again beset by the tumultuous crowd; and was only rescued
Iroin further molestation by the timely arrival of some horse-
guards, who had just been dismissed from duty.*^
These disgraceful outrages, reprobated by good men of all
classes, were made the occasion of further encroach-
tkm«and ments upon the political privileges of the people,
addresses. 3oth Houses immediately concurred in an address
to his Majesty, expressing their abhorrence of the late events.
Oct. sist, Th\a was succeeded by two proclamations, — one
1796. offering rewards for the apprehension of the au-
thors and abettors of these outrages ; and the other advert-
NoT. 4th. ing to recent meetings near the metropolis, fol-
lowed by the attack upon the king ; and calling upon the
magistrates and all good subjects to aid in preventing such
meetings, and in apprehending persons who should deliver
inflammatory speeches or distribute seditious papers. Both
Trea.«on:ibie these proclamations were laid before Parliament,
Biii'^Nov'.4th. ^^^ Lord Grenville introduced into tlie House of
Not. 6th. Lords a bill founded upon them, for the " preser-
1 "Wlien a stone M'as thrown at one of his glasses in returning home,
the king said, ' Tliat is a stone, — you see the difference from a bullet.' " —
Lord CoUhtsUr''» Diary, i. 3.
« Ann. Reg., 176, p. 9; History of the Two Acta, 1796, 4-21; Lord
Colchester's Diary, i. 2.
TREASONABLE PRACTICES BILL, 1795. 165
vation of his Majesty's person and government against trea-
sonable practices and attempts."
This bill introduced a new law of treason, at variance with
the principles of the existing law, the opemtion of which had
gravely dissatisfied the government in the recent state trials.
The proof of overt acts of treason was now to be dispensed
with; and any person compassing and devising the death,
bodily harm, or restraint of the king, or his deposition, or the
levying of war upon him, in order to compel him to change
his measures or counsels, or who should express such designs
by any printing, writing, preaching, or malicious and advised
Bpeaking, should suffer the penalties of high treason.^ Any
person who by writing, printing, preaching, or speaking
should incite the people to hatred or contempt of his Majesty,
or the established government and constitution of the realm,
would be liable to the penalties of a high misdemeanor ; and
on a second conviction, to banishment or transportation. The
act was to remain in force during the life of the king, and till
the end of the next session after his decease.
It was at once perceived that the measure was an alarm
ing encroaching upon freedom of opinion. Its opponents
saw in it a statutory prohibition to discuss parliamentary re-
form. The most flagrant abuses of the government and con-
stitution were henceforth to be sacred from exposure. To
speak of them at all would excite hatred and contempt ; and
silence was therefore to be imposed by law. Xor were the
arguments by which this measure was supported such as to
qualify its obnoxious provisions. So grave a statesman as
Lord Grenville claimed credit for it as being copied from
acts passed in the reigns of Queen Elizabeth and Charles II.,
— " approved times," as his Lordship ventured to affirm.'
Dr. Horsley, Bishop of Rochester, " did not know what the
mass of the people in any country had to do with the lawS;
1 The provision concerning preaching and advised spealdng was after
wards omitted.
2 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 243 ; Lord Colchester's Diary, i. 5.
166 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
but to obey them." This constitutional maxim he repealed
on another day, and was so impressed with its excellence
that he exclaimed, " My Lords, it is a maxim which I ever
will maintain ; — I will maintain it to the death, I will main-
tain it under the axe of the guillotine." * And notwithstand-
ing the obloquy which this sentiment occasioned, it was, in
truth, the principle and essence of the bill which he was sup-
porting.
Within a week the bill was passed through all its stages,
Not. 13th, there being only seven dissentient Peers ; and sent
^'^- to the House of Commons.''
But before it reached that House, the Commons had been
^ . , occupied by the discussion of another measure
Sedltiovu r j n -kt
Mei-tingsBiu, equally alarminjc. On the 10th r^iovember, the
Not. lOth. ,., ■' , ? -1 1 , nr
kmgs proclamations were considered, when Mr.
Pitt founded upon them a bill to prevent seditious meetings.
Following the same reasoning as these proclamations, he
attributed the outrages upon his Majesty, on the opening of
Parliament, to seditious meetings, by which the disaffection
of the people had been inflamed. He proposed that no
meeting of more than fifty persons (except county and
boiough meetings duly called) should be held, for considering
petitions or addresses for alteration of matters in church or
btate, or for discussing any grievance, without previous notice
to a magistrate, who should attend to prevent any proposition
or discourse tending to bring into hatred or contempt the
sovereign, or the government and constitution. The magis-
trate would be empowered to apprehend any person making
such proposition or discourse. To resist him would be
felony, punishable with death. If he deemed the proceed-
1 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 268. His explanations in no degree modified the
extreme danger of this outrageous doctrine. He admitted tliat where there
were laws bearing upon the particular interests of certain persons or bodies
of men, such persons might meet and discuss them. In no other cases
had the people anything to do with the laws, i. e., they had no right
to an opmion upon any question of public policy ! See mpra, Vol. I. 411.
'■« Ibid., xxxii. 244-272; Lord Colchester's Diary, i. 6, 6.
SEDITIOUS MEETINGS BILL, 1795. 167
Ings tumultuous he might disperse the meeting ; and was
indemnified if any one was killed in its dispersion. To
restrain debating societies and political lectures, he proposed
to introduce provisions for the licensing and supervision of
lecture-rooms by raagistwites.
When this measure had been propounded, Mr. Fox's
indignation burst forth. That the outrage upon the king had
been caused by public meetings, he denounced as a flimsy
pretext ; and denied that there was any ground for such a
measure. " Say at once," he exclaimed, " that a free consti-
tution is no longer suited to us ; say at once, in a manly
manner, that on a review of the state of the world, a free
constitution is not fit for you ; conduct yourselves at once as
the senators of Denmark did, — lay down your freedom, and
acknowledge and accept of despotism. But do not mock the
understandings and the feelings of mankind, by telling the
world that you are free."
He showed that the bill revived the very principles of the
Licensing Acts. They had sought to restrain the printing
of opinions of w'hich the government disapproved : this pro-
posed to check the free utterance of opinions upon public
affairs. Instead of leaving discussion free, and reserving the
powers of the law for the punishment of offences, it was
again proposed, after an interval of a hundred years, to
license the thoughts of men, and to let none go forth without
the official dicatur. With the views of a statesman in
advance of his age, he argued, " We have seen and l>eard of
revolutions in other states. Were they owing to the freedom
of popular opinions ? Were they owing to the facility of
popular meetings ? No, sir, they were owing to the reverse
of these ; and therefore, I say, if we wish to avoid the dan-
ger of such revolutions, we should put ourselves in a state as
different from them as possible." Forty-two members only
could be found to resist the introduction of this bill.*
1 Ayes, 2-44; Noes, 42; Pari Hist., xxxii. 272-300; Lord Colchester'*
Diary, i. 6.
168 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
Each succeeding stage of tlie bill occasioiied renewed discus-
NoT 2"th sions upon its principles.* But when its details
1795. were about to be considered in committee, Mr. Fox,
Mr. Erskine, Mr. Grey, Mr. Lambton, Mr. Whitbread, and
Ihe other opponents of the measure, rose frona their seats
and withdrew from the House.^ Mr. Sheridan alone re-
mained, not, as he said, to propose any amendments to the
bill, — for none but the omission of every clause would make
it acceptable, — but merely to watch its progress through the
Deo. 8d. committee.' The seceders returned on the third
reading, and renewed their opposition to the bill ; but it was
passed by a vast majority.*
Meanwhile, the Treasonable Practices Bill, having been
,^^ brougiit from the Lords, had also encountered a
Prartices Bill resolute Opposition. The irritation of debate pro-
iQ the Com- , J . , , ., 1. •
mons, Nov. voked expressions on both sides tending to increase
the public excitement. Mr. Fox said that it
" ministers were determined, by means of the corrupt influ-
ence they possessed in the two Houses of Parliament, to
pass the bills, in direct opposition to the declared sense of a
great majority of the nation ; and should they be put in
force with all their rigorous provisions, if his opinion were
asked by the people, as to their obedience, he should tell
them that it was no longer a question of moral obligation
and duty, but of prudence. He expressed this strong opinion
advisedly, and repeated and justified it again and again, with
the encouragement of Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Grey, Mr. Whit-
bread, and other earnest opponents of the bills.® On the
ither side, this menace was met by a statement of Mr.
1 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 300-364, 387-422.
2 JbuL, Lord Colcliester's Diary, i. 11.
8 ParL Hist., xxxii. 422.
* A.ves, 266; Noes, 51. Jbi'l, 422-470.
6 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 383, 385, 386, 392, 451-460: Lord Colchester's
Diary, i. 9. Nov. 24th: " Grey to-night explained his position of resist-
ance to be theoretical, wliich in the preceding night he had stated to be
practically applicable to the present occasion." — Ibid., i. 10. And see
Lord Malinesbuiy's Diary, iii. 247.
REPRESSIVE MEASURES OF 1795. IGb
Windham, " that ministers were determined to exert a rigor
beyond the law, as exercised in oi"dinary times and under
ordinary circumstances." *
After repeated discussions in both Houses, the bills were
eventually passed,^ During their progress, how- The wus
ever, large classes of the people, whose liberties ^^ '
were threatened, had loudly remonstrated against out of doors,
them. The higher classes generally supported the govern-
ment, in these and all other repressive measures. In their
terror of democracy, they had unconsciously ceased to respect
the time-honored doctrines of constitutional liberty. They
saw only tiie dangers of popular license ; and scarcely heeded
the privileges which their ancestors had prized. But on the
other side were ranged many eminent men, who still fear-
lessly asserted the rights of the people, and were supported
by numerous popular demonstrations.
On the lOth November, the Whig Club held an extraor-
dinary meeting, which was attended by the first ^he whi"
noblemen and gentlemen of that party. It was there ^''**'*
agreed, that before the right of discussion and meeting had been
abrogated, the utmost exertions should be used to oppose these
dangei-ous measures. Resolutions were accordingly passed,
expressing abhorrence of the attack upon the king, and
deploring that it should have been made the pretext for bills
striking at the liberty of the press, the freedom of public
discussion, and the right to petition Parliament for redress
of grievances ; and advising that meetings should be imme
iiately held and petitions presented against measures which
nfringed the rights of the people.' The London Correspond
.ng Society published an address to the nation, indignantly deny
ing that the excesses of an aggrieved and uninformed populace
could be charged upon them, or the late meeting at Copen
hagen House, — professing the strictest legality in pursuit
of parliamentary reform, and denouncing the minister as
1 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 386. a 36 Geo. III. c. 7, 8.
3 Hist of the Two Acts, 120.
170 LIBERTY OF OriNION.
seeking pretences *' to make fresh invasion upon our liber-
ties, and establish despotism on the ruins of popular associa-
tion." 1
The same society assembled a prodigious meeting at
Meeting at Copenhagen House, which agreed to an address,
Ho^^'^''**™ petition, and remonstrance to tlie king, and petitions
Nov. 13th. ^Q ijoth Houses of Parliament, denouncing these
" tremendous bills, which threatened to overthrow the con-
fititutional throne of the house of Brunswick, and to es-
tablish the despotism of the exiled Stuarts." * A few days
afterwards, a great meeting was held in Palace
in Palace Yard, with Mr. Fox in the cliair, which voted an
address to the king and a petition to the House of
Commons against the bills.* Mr. Fox there denounced the
bills "as a daring attempt upon your liberties, — an attempt
to subvert the constitution of England. The Bill of Riglits
is proposed to be finally repealed, that you shall be deprived
of the right of petitioning." And the people were urged by
the Duke of Bedford to petition while that right remained to
them.
Numerous meetings were also held in London, P^dinburgh,
Other Glasgow, York, and in various parts of the coun-
meetinits. jj.y,^ jq petition against the bills. And other meet-
higs were held at the Crown and Anchor, andelse where, in
support of ministers, which declared their belief that tiie
seditious excesses of the people demanded these stringent
measures, as a protection to society.*
The debates upon the Treason and Sedition Bills had been
Mr. Reeves's enlivened by an episode, in which the oppositioi
pamphlet. found the means of retaliating upon the govern-
ment and its supporters. A pamphlet, of ultra-monarchical
1 Hist, of the Two Acts, .39. 2 jbid., 125-134.
« /6«/., 2-32-236-239; Adolph. Hist, vl. 370; Lord Colchester's Diary
i. 7. This meeting had been convened to assemble in Westminster Hallj
'but as the Courts were .sitting, it adjourned to Palace Yard.
* Hist, of the Two Acts, 135, 1G5, 244, 306-361, 389-392, 466, et seq.
Belsham's Hist x. 10-23.
REPRESSrV'E MEASURES OF 1795. 171
piinciples, was published, entitled " Thoughts on the English
Government." One passage represented the king as the
ancient stock of the constitution, — and the Lords and Com-
mons as merely branches, which might be "lopped off"
without any fatal injury to the constitution itself. It was a
speculative essay which, at any other time, would merely
have excited a smile ; but it was discovered to be the work
of Mr. Reeves, chairman of the " Society for protecting lib-
erty and property from Republicans and Levellers," — better
known as the " Crown and Anchor Association." ^ The work
was published in a cheap form, and extensively circulated
amongst the numerous societies of which Mr. Reeves was the
moving spirit ; and its sentiments were in accordance with
those which had been urged by the more indiscreet support-
ers of repressive measures. Hence the opposition were pro-
voked to take notice of it. Having often condemned the
government for repressing speculative opinions, it would
have been more consistent with their principles to answer
than to punish the pamphleteer ; but the opportunity was too •
tempting to be lost. The author was obnoxious, and had
committed himself: ministers could scarcely venture to de-
fend his doctrines ; and thus a diversion favorable to the
minority was at last feasible. Mr. Sheridan, desirous, he
said, of setting a good example, did not wish the author to be
prosecuted : but proposed that he should be reprimanded at
the bar, and his book burned in New Palace Yard by the
common hangman. Ministers, however, preferred a prose-
cution, to another case of privilege. The attorney-general
vas therefore directed to prosecute Mr. Reeves ; and, on his
rial, the jury, while they condemned his doctrines, acquitted
the author.^
1 Mr. Reeves was the author of the learned " History of the Law of Eng-
land," well known to posterity, by whom his paiuphlet would have been
forgotten but for these proceedings.
2 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 608, 627, 651, 662. In the Lords, notice was also
taken of the pamphlet, but no proceedings taken against it; Ibid., 631
St. Tr., xxvi. 529; Lord Colchester's Diary, i. 8.
172 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
In 1797, Mr. Fox moved lor the repeal of the Treason
Mr Fox's **"'^ Sedition Acts, in a speech abounding in politi-
motion to ^al wisdom. The truth of many of his .-sentiments
> repeal Trea- _ _ •' _
souandSeai- has since received remarkable confirmation. ^' In
tion Acts, . , . 11 1 • 1 1
May uth, proportion as opinions are open, he said, " they
are innocent and harmless. Opinions become dan-
gerous to a state only when persecution makes it necessary
for the people to communicate their ideas under the bond
of secrecy." And, again, with reference to the restraint
imposed Uf^n public meetings : " What a mockery," h
exclaimed, " to tell the people that they shall have a right
to applaud, a right to rejoice, a right to meet when they
are happy ; but not a right to condemn, not a right to de-
plore their misfortunes, not a right to suggest a remedy ! "
And it was finely said by him, " Liberty is order : liberty is
strength," — words which would serve as a motto for the
British constitution. His motion, however, found no more
than fifty-two supporters.^
During this period of excitement, the regulation of news-
, papers often occupied the attention of the legisla
KeRulation of * ' ^ '^ °
newspapers, ture. The Stamp and advertisement duties were
■l-gftl-Qg ^
increased : more stringent provisions made against
unstamped publications ; and securities taken for insuring
the responsibility of printers.^ By all tliese laws it was
sought to restrain the multiplication of cheap political papers
among the poorer classes ; and to subject the press, generally,
to a more effectual control. But more serious matters were
till engaging the attention of government.
The London Corresponding Society and other similai
societies continued their baneful activity. Their
florrespond- .
inz societies, rancor against the government knew no bounds
Mr. Pitt and his colleagues were denounced as
tyrants and enemies of the human race. Hitherto their pro-
1 Pari. Hist., xxxiii. 613.
9 29 Geo. III. c. 50; 34 Geo. III. c. 72; 37 Geo. III. c. 90; 38 Geo. ILL
C. 78; Pari. Hist., xxxiii. 1415, 1482.
CORRESPONDING SOCIETIES BILL, 1799. 173
ceedings had been generally open : they had courted publicity,
paraded their numbers, and prided themselves upon their
appeals to the people. But the acts of 1795 having re-
strained their popular meetings, and put a check upon their
speeches and printed addresses, they resorted to a new or-
ganization, in evasion of the law. Secrecy was no\r the
scheme of their association. Secret societies, committees,
and officers were multiplied throughout the country, by whom
an active correspondence was maintained : the members were
bound together by oaths : inflammatory papers were clan-
destinely printed and circulated : seditious handbills secretly
posted on the walls. Association degenerated into conspiracy.
Their designs were congenial to the darkness in wliich they
were planned. A general convention was projected ; and
societies of United Englisliinen and United Scotsmen es-
tablished an intercourse with the United Irishmen. Corre-
spondence with France continued; but it no longer related to
the rights of men and national fraternity. It was undertaken
in concert with the United Irishmen, who were encouraging
a French invasion.' In this basest of all treasons some of
the English societies were concerned. They were further
compromised by seditious attempts to foment discontents in
the army and navy, and by the recent mutiny in the fleet.'
But whatever their plots or crimes, their secrecy alone made
them dangerous. They were tracked to their hiding-places
by the agents of the government; and in 1799, when the re-
bellion had broken out in Ireland, papers disclosing these
proceedings were laid before the House of Commons. A
secret committee related, in great detail, the history of these
societies ; and Mr. Pitt brought in a bill to repress them.
It was not sought to punish the autiiors of past excesses;
but to prevent future mischiefs. The societies con-espond-
of United Englishmen, Scotsmen, and Irishmen, '^f.^xpHr^
and the London Corresponding Society, were 1^'^> i'^''^-
I Infra, p. 498.
^ An Act had been passed in 1797 to punish this particular crime, 3V
Geo. III. c. 70.
174 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
suppressed by name ; and all other societies irere de-
clared unlawful of which the members were required to
take any oath not required by law, or which had any mem-
bers or committees not known to the society at large, and
not entered in their books, or which were composed of
distinct divisions or branches. The measure did not stop
here. Debating clubs and reading-rooms not licensed were
to be treated as disorderly houses. All printing-presses and
type-founderies were to be registered. Printers were to
print their names on every book or paper, and register the
names of their employers. Restraints were even imposed
upon the lending of books and newspapers for hire. This
rigorous measure encountered little resistance. Repression
had been fully accepted as the policy of tiie state ; and the
Opposition had retired from a hopeless contest with power.
Nor for societies conducted on such principles, and with
such objects, could there be any defence. The provisions
concerning the press introduced new rigors in the execution
of the law, which at another time would have been resisted :
but a portion of the press had, by outrages on decency and
order, disconcerted the stanchest friends of free discussion.*
The series of repressive measures was now complete
RepiessiTe We Cannot review them without sadness. Lib-
compiei^ erty had suffered from the license and excesses of
^^^- one party, and the fears and arbitrary temper of
the other. The government and large classes of the people
had been brought into painful conflict. The severities of
rulers, and the sullen exasperation of the people, had shaken
that nmtual confidence which is the first attribute of a free
state. The popular constitution of England was suspended.
Yet was it a period of trial and transition, in which public
liberty, repressed for a time, suffered no permanent injury.
Subdued in one age, it was to arise with new vigor in
another.
1 Reports of Committees on Sealed Papers, 1799; Pari. Hist, xxxiv
579, 1000; Debates, Ibid., 984. &c.; 39 Geo. UI. c. 79.
LIBEL LAWS, 1799-1811. 175
Political agitation, in its accustomed forms of public meet-
ings and association, was now checked for several Adminbtra-
years,* — and freedom of discussion in the press ^^"1 'il^^
continued to be restrained by merciless persecu- 1^99-1811-
tion. But the activity of the press was not abated. It
was often at issue with the government ; and the records
of our courts present too many examples of the license
of the one, and the rigors of the other. Who can read
rt-ithout pain the trials of Mr. Gilbert Wakefield
. The ReT.
nd his publishers, in 1799 ? On one side we Gilbert '
see an eminent scholar dissuading the people,
in an inflammatory pamphlet, from repelling an invasion
of our shores : on the other, we find publishers held crim-
inally responsible for the publication of a libel, though ig-
norant of its contents ; and the misguided author punished
with two years' imprisonment in Dorchester jail,^ — a pun-
ishment which proved little short of a sentence of death.'
Who can peruse without indignation the tiial of the con-
ductors of the " Courier," in the same year, for a libel upon
tlie Emperor of Russia,* in which the pusillanimous doctrine
was laid down from the Bench, that public writers were to
1 In Scotland, " as a body to be deferred to, no public existed." — Cock-
bum's Mtm., 88. See also Ihid., 282, 302, 376.
2 St. Tr., xxvii. 679; Erskine's Speeches, v. 213; Lord Campbell's
Chancellors, vi. 517.
* .£5000 was subscribed for him, but he died a fortnight after his
release. Mr. Fox, writing March 1st, 1799, to Mr. Gilbert Wakefield,
says: — " The liberty of the press I consider as virtually destroyed by the
proceedings against Johnson and Jordan; and what has happened to yoa
I cannot but lament, therefore, the more, as the sufierings of a man whom
I esteem, in a cause that is no more." — Fox Mem., iv. 337- — And again
ou June 9th: — " Nothin<; could exceed the concern I felt at the extreme
severity (for such it appears to me) of the sentence pronounced against
you." — 76., 339.
* This libel was as follows: — " The Emperor of Russia is rendering him-
self obnoxious to his subjects by various acts of tyranny, and ridiculous in
the eyes of Europe by his inconsistency. He has now passed an edict pro-
hibiting the exportation of timber, deals, &c. In consequence of this ill
timed law, upwards of one hundred sail of vessels are likely to return to
this kingdom without freight."
176 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
be punished, not for their guiU, but from fear of the dis-
pleasure of foreign powers.^
From such a case, it is refresliing to turn to worthier
The First principles of freedom, and independence of foreign
th"EnKHsh dictation. However often liberty may have been
press, 1802. invaded, it has ever formed the basis of our laws.
When the First Consul, during the peace of Amiens, de-
manded that liberty of the press in England should be placed
under restraints not recognized by the constitution, he was
thus answered by the British government : — " His Majesty
neither can nor will, in consequence of any representation
or menace from a foreign power, make any concession which
may be in the smallest degree dangerous to the liberty of
the press, as secured by the constitution of this country.
This liberty is justly dear to every British subject; tlie con-
stitution admits of no previous restraints upon publications
of any description ; but there exist judicatures wholly inde-
pendent of the executive, csjpable of taking cognizance of
such publications as the law deems to be criminal ; and
which are bound to inflict the punishment the delinquents
may deserve. These judicatures may investigate and punish
not only libels against the government and magistracy of
this kingdom, but, as has been repeatedly experienced,
of publications defamatory of those in whose hands the
administration of foreign governments is placed. Our gov-
ernment neither has nor wants any other protection than
what the laws of the country afford ; and though they are
willing and ready to give to every foreign government all
the protection against offences of this nature, which the
principle of their laws and constitution will admit, they
never can consent to new-model their laws, or to change
1 Lord Kenyon said : — " When these papers went to Russia and held
up this great sovereign as being a tyrant and ridiculous over Europe, it
might tend to his calling for satisfaction as for a national afl'ront, if it passed
unreprobated by our government and in our courts of justice." Trial
of Vint, Ross, and Perry: St Tr., xxvii. 627; Starkie's Law of Libel, ii.
217.
LIBELS ON FOKEIGN SOVEREIGNS. 17/
their constitution, to gratify the wishes of any foreign
power." ^
But without any departure from the law of England, the
libeller of a foreign power could be arraigned;^
^ ^ ,. , , o ' Trial of Jean
and this correspondence was followed by the mem- Peltier. Feb.
orable trial of Jean Peltier.' Mr. Mackintosh, in
his eloquent and masterly defence of the defendant,* dreaded
this prosecution " as the first of a long series of conflicts be
tween the greatest power in the world and the only free press
remaining in Europe ; " and maintained by admirable argu-
ments and illustrations, the impolicy of restraining the free
discussion of questions of foreign policy and the character and
conduct of foreign princes, as affecting the interest of this
country. The genius of his advocate did not save Peltier
from a verdict of guilty ; but as hostilities with France were
soon renewed, he was not called up for judgment.® Mean-
■while the First Consul had continued to express his irritation
at the English newspapers, between which and the news-
papers of France a warm controversy was raging-; and find-
ing that they could not be repressed by law, he desired that
the government should at least restrain those newspapers
which were supposed to be under its influence. But here
again he was met by explanations concerning the indepen-
dence of English editors, which he found it difficult to com-
prehend ; ® and no sooner was war declared, than all the
newspapers joined in a chorus of vituperation against
1 Lord Hawkesbury to Mr. Merrv, Aug. 28th, 1802; Pari. Hist., xxxvi.
1273.
2 R. V. D'Eon. 176-t; Starkie's Law of Libel, ii. 216; R. v. Lord George
tiordaii, 1737 ; State Tr., xxii. 175; Vint, Ross, and Perry, 1790, supra,
p. 175.
3 Letter from M. Otto to Lord Hawkesbury, July 25th, 1802; Pari. Hist.,
xxxvi. 1267.
* The Attorney-General (Spencer Perceval) spoke of it as "one of the
most splendid displays of eloquence he ever had occasion to hear;" and
Lord Ellenboroufjh termed it " eloquence almost unparalleled."
6 St. Tr., xxviii. 529.
6 Lord Whitworth to Lonl Hawkesbury, Jan. 27th, and Feb. 21st, 1803.
vol,. 11. 12
178 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
Napoleon Bonaparte, without any fears of the attorney-
general.
In following the history of the press, we now approach
William names familiar in our own time. William Cob-
Cobbetrg i)ett, having outraged the republican feelings of
triala, 1804. ' o o r o
America by his loyalty, now provoked the loyal
sentiments of England by his radicalism. His strong good
sen.se, his vigorous English style, and the bold independence
of his opinions, soon obtained for his " Political Register " a
wide popularity. But the unmeasured terms in which he
assailed the conduct and measures of the government exposed
him to frequent prosecutions. In 1804, he suffered for the
publication of two letters from an Irish judge, ridiculing Lord
Hardwicke, Lord Redesdale, and the Irish executive.^ Rid-
icule being held to be. no less an offence than graver obloquy,
Gibbett was fined ; and Mr. Justice Johnson, the author of
the libels, retired from the bench with a pension.''
In 1809, another libel brought upon Mr. Cobbett a severer
, ... , punishment. Some soldiers in a regiment of mili-
Qis hbcl on \ . »
the German tia having been flos;ged, under a guard of tlie
legion, 1809. _ ° . >^ ,T • , , • r
German legion, Cobbett seized the occasion for
inveighing at once against foreign mercenaries and mili-
tary flogging. He was indicted for a libel upon the
German legion ; and being found guilty, was sentenced
to two years' imprisonment, a fine of 1000/., and to give
security for 3000/. to keep the peace for seven years.
The printer of the Register, and two persons who had sold
it, were also punished for the publication of this libel. The
extreme severity of Cobbett's .sentence excited a general
sympathy in his favor, and indignation at the administration
of the libel laws.'
1 There was far more of ridicule than invective. Lord Hardwicke wa»
termed " a very eminent ssheepfeeder from Cambridgeshire " with " a wood-
en head;" and Lord Kedesdale "a verj' able and strong-built Chancery
pleader from Lincoln's Inn."
2 St. Tr., xxix. 1, 54, 422, 437; Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., v. 119.
» Sydney Smith, in a letter to Lady Holland, Feb. llth, 1810, said: —
THE "STAMFORD NEWS." 179
Another similar case illustrates the grave perjls of the law
of libel. In 1811, Messrs. John and Leigh Hunt ^j^gg^ j^^„
were prosecuted for the republication of a spirited ^u„^'p^
article against military flogging from the " Stam- 24th, 18U.
ford News." They were defended by the vigor and elo-
quence of Mr. Brougham, and were acquitted.^
Yet a few days afterwards, John Drakard, the printer of
the " Stamford News," though defended by the The " stam-
same able advocate, was convicted at Lincoln for Mareli'^iath
the publication of this very article.^ Lord Ellen- ^^^^•
borough had laid it down that "it is competent for all
the subjects of his Majesty, freely but temperately to dis-
cuss, through the medium of the pre^s, every question con-
nected with public policy." But on the trial of Drakard,
Baron Wood expressed opinions fatal to the liberty of the
press. " It is said that we have a right to discuss the acta
of our legislature. This would be a large permission indeed.
Is there, gentlemen, to be a power in the people to counteract
the acts of the Parliament; and is the libeller to come and
make the people dissatisfied with the government under
which he lives ? This is not to be permitted to any man, —
it is unconstitutional and seditious."' Such doctrines were
already repugnant to the law ; but a conviction obtained by
their assertion from the bench, proves by how frail a thread
the liberty of the press was then upheld.
The last three years before the regency were marked by
unusual activity, as well as rigor, in the adminis-
tration of the libel laws. Informations were mul- years b«fore
tiplied ; and the attorney-general was armed with ^'^sencjr.
a new power of holding the accused to bail.*
•' Who would have mutinied for Cobbett's libel? or who would have risen
up ag-ainst the German soldiers? and how easily might he have been an-
swered! He deserved some punishment; but to shut a man up in jail for
two years for such an offence is most atrocious." — Sydney Smilh'i Mem.,
ii. 86.
1 St. Tr., xx.Ki. 367. 2 Ibid., 495. s ibid., 535.
* From 1308 to 1811, forty-two informations were filed, of which twenty-
six were brought to trial. Lords' Deb. on Lord Holland's motion, March
4th, 1811; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xix. 140; Commons' Deb. on Lord Folke-
180 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
It is now time again to review the progress of the press,
Progress of during this long period of trial and repression,
tue press. Every excess and indiscretion had been severely
visited: controversial license had often been confounded with
malignant libel : but tlie severities of the law had not subdued
the influence of the press. Its freedom was often invaded
but its conductors were ever ready to vindicate their righia
with a noble courage and persistence. Its character wa>.
constantly improving. The rapidity with which intelligence
of all the incidents of the war was collected, in anticipation of
official sources, increased the public appetite for news : its
powerful criticisms upon military operations and foreign and
domestic policy, raised its reputation for judgment and
capacity. Higher intellects, attracted to its service, were
able to guide and instruct public opinion. Sunday news-
papers were beginning to occupy a place in the periodical
press, — destined to future eminence, — and attempts to re-
press them, on the grounds of religion and morality, had
failed.^ But in the press, as in society, there were many
grades ; and a considerable class of newspapers were still
wanting in the sobriety and honesty of purpose necessary to
maintain the permanent influence of political literature. They
were intemperate, and too often slanderous.^ A lower class
Btone's motion, March 28th, 1811; Ibid., 548; Ann. Reg., 1811, p. 142;
Romilly's Life, ii. 380; Homer's Life, ii. 139.
1 In 171)9 Lord Belgrave, in concert witli Mr. Wilberforce, brought in a
bill for that purpose, which was lost on the second reading. Its loss was
attributed by its promoters to the fact that three out of tlie four Sunday
newspapers supported the government. Pari. Hist., xxxiv. lOOG ; Life of
Wilberforce, ii. 424.
2 In his defence of John and Leigh Hunt, in 1811, Mr. Brougham gave
a highly-colored sketch of the licentiousness of the press : — " There is not
only no personage so important or exalted, — for of that I do not complain,
— but no person so humble, harmless, and retired, as to escape the defama-
tion which is daily and hourly poured forth by the venal crew, to gratify
the idle curiosity, or still less excusable malignity; to mark out, for the in-
dulgence of that propensity, individuals retiring into the privacy of domes-
tic life; to hunt them down and drag them forth as a laughing-stock to the
vulgar, has become, in our days, with some men, the road even to populari-
ty; but with multitudes the means of earning n base subsistence." —
iit. Tr., xNxi. :m.
THE PRESS BEFORE THE REGENCY. 181
of papers, clandestinely circulated in evasion of the stamp
laws, went far to justify reproaches upon the religion and
decency of the press. The ruling classes had long been at
war with the press ; and its vices kept alive their jealousies
and prejudice. ^They looked upon it as a noxious weed, to
be rooted out, rather than a plant of rare excellence, to be
trained to a higher cultivation. Holding public writers in
low esteem, — as instruments of party rancor, — they failed
to recognize their transcendent services to truth and knowl-
edge.*
But all parties, whether regarding the press with jealousy
or favor, were ready to acknowledge its extraordinary influ-
ence in affairs of state. " Give me," said Mr. Sheridan,
" but the liberty of the press, and I will give the minister a
venal House of Peers, — I will give him a corrupt and servile
House of Commons, — I will give him the full swing of the
patronage of office, — I will give him the whole host of
ministerial influence, — I will give him all the power that place
can confer upon him to purchase submission, and overawe
resistance ; and yet, armed with the liberty of the press, I
will go forth to meet him undismayed : I will attack the
mighty fabric he has reared, with that mightier engine : I
will shake down from its height corruption, and lay it beneath
the ruins of the abuses it was meant to shelter." *
1 In 1808, the benchers of Lincoln's Inn passed a by-law, excluding all
persons who had written for hire, in the daily papers, from being called to
the bar. The other Inns of Court refused to accede to such a proposition.
On the 2-3d March 1809, Mr. Sheridan presented a petition complaining of
this by-law, which was generally condemned in debate, and it was soon
afterwards rescinded by the benchers. — Lard Colchester's Diary, ii. 240.
In 1810, Mr. Windham spoke of the reporters as having amongst them
" bankrupts, lottery-office keepers, footmen, and decaj'^ed tradesmen." And
he understood the conductors of the press to be "a set of men who would
give in to the corrupt misrepresentation of opposite sides." — Hans. Deb.
1st Ser., XV. 330.
a Feb. 6th, 1810. — Ibid., 341.
182 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
CHAPTER X.
Repressive Policy of the Regency: — Measures of 1817: — The llanchestei
Meeting, 1819 : — The Six Acts : — Advancing Power of Public Opinion ;
— The Catholic Association: — Freedom of the Press assured: — Political
Unions, and the Reform Agitation : — Repeal Agitation : — Orange Lodg-
es:— Trades' Unions: — The Chartists: — The Anti-Corn-Law League:
— General Review of Political Agitation.
The regency was a period memorable for the discontents
Lord Sid- ^"^ turbulence of the people, and for the severity
torvo^stue" ^'*''* which they were repressed. The working
1812. classes were suffering from the grievous burdens
of the protracted war, from the high prices of food, from
restraints upon trade, and diminished employment. Want
engendered discontent ; and ignorant and suffering men were
misled into disorder, tumult, and violence. In June 1812,
Lord Sidmouth was appointed secretary of state. Never
was statesman more amiable and humane : but falling upon
evil times, and committed to the policy of his generation, his
Tule was stern and absolute.
The mischievous and criminal outrages of the " Luddites,"
TheLudcUtes ^nd the measures of repression adopted by the
ISll-ioU. government, must be viewed wholly apart from
the history of freedom of opinion. Bands of famished oper
atives in the manufacturing districts, believing their distresse
to be due to the encroachment of machinery upon their
labor, associated for its destruction. Bound together by
secret oaths, their designs were carried out with intimidation,
outrage, incendiarism, and murder.* Life and property were
1 A full account of these lawless excesses will be found in the State
Trials, xxxi. 959 ; Ann. Reg., 1812, 54-66, &c. The Reports of the Secret
RIOTS AND DISTURBANCES. 183
alike insecure ; and it was the plain duty of the government
to protect them, and punish the wrongdoers. Attempts,
indeed, were made to confound the ignorance and turbulence
of a particular class, suffering under a specific grievance,
with a general spirit of sedition. It was not enough that the
frame-breakers were without work, and starving : that they
were blind to the causes of their distress ; and that the
objects of their fury were near at hand ; but they were also
accused of disaffection to the state.* In truth, however, their
combinations were devoid of any political aims ; and the
measures taken to repress them were free from just imputa-
tions of interference with the constitutional rights of the
subject. They were limited to the particular evil, and pro-
vided merely for the discovery of concealed arms in the
disturbed districts, the dispersion of tumultuous assemblies,
and the enlargement of the jurisdiction of magistrates, so as
to prevent the escape of offenders.^
In 1815, the unpopular Coi*n Bill, — expressly designed to
raise the price of food, — was not passed without Riots,
riots in the metropolis.'' In the following year there ^^^^' ^^^^
were bread-riots and tumultuous assemblages of workmen at
Nottingham, Manchester, Birmingham, and Merthyr Tydvil.
London itself was the scene of serious disturbances.* All
these were repressed by the executive government, with
the ordinarj' means placed at its disposal.
But in 1817, the excesses of mischievous and misguided
men led, as on former occasions, to restraints ontrago on
upon the public liberties. On the opening of Jan-ls^,^"*"
Parliament some bullets, stones, or other mis- 1^^^-
siles, struck the state-carriage of the prince regent, on
Committees, 14th Julj-, 1812, are extremely meagre; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser.»
xxiii. 951, 1029.
i 2 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxiii. 962, 999, &c ; Lord Sidmouth's Life, ilL
79-9G.
2 52 Geo. Iir. c. 162.
8 Ann. Keg. 1815, 140; Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 125.
* y6«/., 143-162 ; Bamford's Passages in the Life of a Radical, i. 7, .' • ,
Ann. Keg. 1816, 95.
184 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
his return from the House of Lords.^ This outrage waa
followed by a message from the prince regent, communi-
cating to both Houses papers containing evidence of sedi-
,tious practices. These were referred to secret committees,
which reported that dangerous associations had been formed
in different parts of the country, and other seditious practices
carried on which the existing laws were inadequate to pre-
vent. Attempts had been made to seduce soldiers ; arms and
banners had been provided, secret oaths taken, insurrection
plotted, seditious and blasphemous publications circulated.
The jails were to be broken open, and the prisoners set
free : the Bank of England and the Tower were to bo
stormed : the government subverted : property plundered and
divided. Hampden clubs were plotting revolution : Spenceans
were preparing to hunt down the owners of the soil, and
the " rapacious fundholders." '^
The natural consequence of these alarming disclosures was
a revival of the repressive policy of the lattei-
Repressive p i i
measures years oi the last century, to which this period af-
^^ ' fords a singular parallel. The act of 1795, for the
protection of the king from treasonable attempts, was now
extended to the prince regent ; and another act renewed,
to restrain the seduction of soldiers and sailors from theii
allegiance. To such measures none could object : but there
were others, dictated by the same policy and considerations
as those, which, on former occasions, had imposed restraint?
upon public liberty. Again, the criminal excesses of a smaU
class were accepted as evidence of wide-spread disaffection
In suffering and social discontent were detected the seeds
of revolution ; and to remedies for partial evils were added
jealous restrictions upon popular rights. It was proposed
to extend the acts of 1795 and 1799, against corresponding
1 Evidence of Lord James Murray; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 34; Ana
Reg. 1817, p. 3.
2 Reports of Secret Committees, Lords and Commons ; Hans. Deb., let
Ser., xxxv. 411, 438.
REPRESSIVE MEASURES OF 1817. 185
societies, to other political clubs and associations, wlielher
atHliated or not : to suppress the Spencean clubs, to regulate
meetings of more than fifty persons, to license debating socie-
ties ; and lastly, to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act.^ These
measures, especially the latter, were not passed without remon-
strance and opposition. It was maintained that the dangers
were exaggerated, that the existing laws were sufficient to
repress sedition, and that no encroachment should be suffered
on the general liberties of the people for the sake of reach-
ing a few miscreants whom all good citizens abhorred. AVhile
the inadequacy of the means of the conspirators to carry out
their fearful designs was ridiculed, it was urged that the ex-
ecutive were already able to cope with sedition, to put down
secret and other unlawful societies, and to restrain the circu-
lation of blasphemous and seditious libels. But so great
wns the power of the government, and so general the repug-
nance of society to the mischievous agitation which it was
proposed to repress, that these measures were rapidly
passed through both Houses, without any formidable oppo-
sition.'^
The restraints upon public liberty expired in the follow-
ing year ; but other provisions, designed to insure Pai-liament
against intimidation and insult, were allowed a permanent
place in our constitutional law. Public meetings were pro-
hibited within a mile of Westminster Hall, during the sitting
of Parliament or the courts ; and to arrest the evil of con-
ventions assuming to dictate to the legislature, restraints were
•m posed on the appointment and cooperation of delegates
rom different societies.^
The state prosecutions for treason were as infelicitous an
^ Speeches of Lord Sidmouth in the House of Lords, and Lord Castle-
teagh in the House of Commoas; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 551, 590;
J>ord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 172; Acts 57 Geo. HL c. 3, 6, 7, 19.
■i For the third reading of Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill there were
265 votes against 103 — the minority including nearly all the opposition. —
Bans. Dtb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 8-22 ; Edinburgh Review, Aug. 1817, p. 524-5^13.
« 57 Geo. HL c. 19, §^ 23, 25.
186 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
those of 1794, which had been undertaken under similar cir-
cumstances. James Watson, Arthur Tliistlewood,
Trials of m -n 1
Watson ana Jamcs "Watson tlie younger, Thomas Preston, and
' ' John Hooper, were indicted for high treason, aris-
ing out of a riotous meeting in Spa Fields, which they had
called together, and other riotous and seditious proceedings, for
which none will deny that they deserved condign punishment.
They were entitled to no sympathy as patriots or reformers ; and
the wickedness of their acts was only to be equalled by their
folly. But the government, — not warned by the experience
of 1794, — indicted them, not for sedition and riot, of which
they were unquestionably guilty, but for treason ; and so
allowed them to escape with impunity.^
In the month of June disturbances, approaching the char-
acter of insurrection, broke out in Derbyshire ;
Derbyshire . , i • ^ ■,
insurrection, and the ringleaders were tried and convicted.
Brandreth, commonly known as the Nottingham
Captain, Turner and Ludlam were executed : Weightman and
twenty-one others received His Majesty's pardon, on con-
dition of transportation or imprisonment ; and against
twelve others no evidence was offered by the attorney-
general.'
When the repressive measures of this session had been
Lord Sid- passcd, the government commenced a more rigor-
^"i^r'^M^^ ous execution of the laws against the press. Lord
2Tth, 1817. Sidmouth addressed a circular letter to the lords-
lieutenants of counties,. acquainting them that the law officers
of the crown were of opinion, that a justice of the peace
may issue a warrant to apprehend any person charged on
oath with the publication of a blasphemous or seditious libel,
and compel him to give bail to answer the charge ; and
desiring them to communicate this opinion to the magistrates
at the ensuing quarter sessions, and to recommend them to
1 St. Tr., xxxW. 1,674; Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 158.
« St. Tr.,xxxii. 755-1394; Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 179-183; Eeports
en the state of the country ; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxvii. 568, 679.
LORD SIDMOUTHS CIRCULAR, 1817. 187
Rct upon it. He further informed them that the venders of
pamphlets or tracts should be considered as within the pro-
visions of the Hawkers' and Pedlars' Act, and should be
dealt with accordingly, if selling such wares without a license.
Doubts were immediately raised conceniing the j^^ la^fuinesa
lawfulness and policy of this circular ; and the j|i"*f*^"^*^'
question was brought by Earl Grey before the |?4"'yi',®-
Lords,^ and by Sir Samuel Romilly before the
Commons.^ Their arguments were briefly these. The law
itself, as declared in this circular, was ably contested, by
reference to authorities and principles. It could not be shown
that justices had this power by common law : it had not
been conferred by statute ; nor had it been recognized by
any express decision of the courts. But, at all events, it was
confessedly doubtful, or the opinion of the law officers would
not have been required. In 1808, it had been doubted if
judges of the Court of King's Bench could commit or hold
to bail persons charged with the publication of libels, before
indictment or information ; and this power was then conferred
by statute.' But now the right of magistrates to commit, like
the judges, was determined, neither by Parliament, nor by
any judicial authority, but by the crown, through its own
executive officers. The secretary of state had interfered with
the discretion of justices of the peace. What if he had ven-
tured to deal, in such a manner, with the judges ? The
justices had been instructed, not upon a matter of adminis-
tration or police, but upon their judicial duties. The con-
stitution had maintained a separation of the executive and
judicial authorities ; but here they had been confounded.
The crown, in declaring the law, had usurped the province
of the legislature ; and in instructing the magistrates, had
encroached upon an independent judicature. And, apart
A May 12th, 1817 (Lords); Hans. Deb., Ist Ser.,xxxvi. 445. See also
Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 176-
a Ibid., June 2otIi (Commons), 1158.
« 48 Geo. UI. 0 58
.^ J.
._-- -J^ :
188 LrBERTY OF OPINION.
from these constitutional considerations, it was urged that the
exercise of such powers by justices of the peace was ex-
posed to grave abuses. Men might be accused before a
magistrate, not only of publishing libels, but of uttering sedi*
tious words : they might be accused by spies and informers
of incautious language, spoken in the confidence of private
society ; and yet, upon such testimony, they might be com-
mitted to prison by a single magistrate, — possibly a man of
violent prejudices and strong political prepossessions. Ou
the part of ministers it was replied that magistrates, embar
rassed in the discharge of their duties, having applied to
the secretary of state for information, he had consulted the law
officers, and communicated their opinion. He had no desire
to interfere with their discretion, but had merely promulgated
a law. The law had been correctly expounded, and if dis-
puted, it could be tried before a court of law on a writ of
habeas corpus. But, in the meantime, unless the hawkers of
seditious tracts could be arrested, while engaged in their
pernicious traffic, they were able to set the police at defiance.
Whatever the results of these discussions, they at least
served as a warning to the executive, ever to keep in view
the broad principle of English freedom, which distinguishes
independent magistrates from prefects of police.
Threatening, indeed, were now the terrors of the law.
_ While every iustice of the peace could issue his
The press, •' ** '
1817. warrant against a supposed libeller, and hold him
cUeUugainst to bail ; the secretary of state, armed with the ex-
eprebs. traordinary powers of the Habeas Corpus Suspen-
sion Act, could imprison him upon bare suspicion, and detain
him in safe custody without bringing him to trial. The
attorney-general continued to wield his terrible ex-officio in-
formations,— holding the accused to bail, or keeping them in
prison in default of it, until their trial.* Defendants were
punished, if convicted, with fine and imprisonment, — and,
even if acquitted, with ruinous costs. Nor did the judges
1 48 Geo. III. c. 58.
LIBEL CASES, 1817- 189
ppare any exertion to obtain convictions. Ever jealous and
distrustful of the press, they had left as little discretion to
juries as they were able ; and using freely the power re-
served to them by the Libel Act of 1792, of stating their
own opinion, they were eloquent in summing up the sins of
libellers.*
William Cobbett, who had already suffered from the sever-
ities of the attorney-general, was not disposed to cobbett'g
brave the "secretary of state, but suspended his ^'^''^g^
'• Political Register," and sailed to America. " I ^^<^-
do not retire," said he, " from a combat with the attorney-
general ; but from a combat with a dungeon, deprived of
pen, ink, and paper. A combat with the attorney-general
is quite unequal enough. That, however, I would have en-
countered. I know too well what a trial by special jury is .
yet that, or any sort of trial, I would have stayed to face.
But against the absolute power of imprisonment, without
even a hearing, for time unlimited, in any jail in the king-
dom, without the use of pen, ink, and paper, and without
communication with any soul but the keepers, — against such
a power it would have been worse than madness to attempt
to strive." ^
Ministers had silenced and put to flight their most formi-
dable foe ; but against this success must be set their Trials of
utter discomfiture by an obscure bookseller, who *"'*' '"
would never have been known to fame, had he not been
drawn out from his dingy shop into a court of justice. Wil-
liam Hone had published some political squibs, in the forni
of parodies upon the liturgy of the church ; and for this piti
fill trash was thrice put upon his trial, for blasphemous anij
seditious libels. Too poor to seek professional aid, he dc'
fended himself in person. But he was a man of genius in
his way ; and with singular ingenuity and persistence, and
much quaint learning, he proved himself more than a match
for the attorney-general and the bench.
1 Lord CanipbelTs Lives of the Chancellors, vi. 517.
2 Political Kegister, 28th March, 1817.
190 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
In vain did Lord Ellenboroiigh, uniting the authority of
the judge with the arts of a counsel, strive for a conviction-
Addressing tlie jury, — " under the authority of the Libel
Act, and still more in obedience to his eon>cience and his
God, he pronounced this to be a most impious and profane
libel." But the jury were proof alike again?t his authority
and his persuasion. The humble bookseller fairly overcame
the awful chief justice ; and, after intellectual triumplis which
would have made the reputation of a more eminent man
was thrice acquitted.^
These proceedings savored so strongly of persecution, that
they excited a wide sympathy for Hone, amongst men who
would have turned with disgust from his writings ; and his
trial, in connection with other failures, insured at least a
temporary mitigation of severity in the administration of the
libel laws.*
At this lime some trials in Scotland, if they remind us ot
Triaiiiin 1793; iifford a gratifying contrast to the adminis-
Scotiand. tration of justice at that period. Alexander
Baini, Marcii M'Lareu, a weaver, and Thomas Baird, a grocer,'
' '■ were tried for sedition before the High Court of
Justiciary at Edinburgh. The weaver had made an intem-
perate speech at Kilmarnoch, in favor of parliamentary re-
form, which the grocer had been concerned in printing. It
was shown that petitions had been received by Parlia-
ment, expressed in language at least as strong ; but the
accused, though defended by the admirable arguments and
eloquence of Francis Jeffrey, were found guilty of se
dition.*
1 Mr. Justice Abbott presided at the first trial ; Lord Ellenborougb at the
second ana third. Lord Ellenborougb felt his defeat so sensibly, that on the
following day he sent to Lord Sidinouth the draft of a letter of resignation.
Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 236 ; Hone's Printed Trials; Mr. Charles Knight'B
Narrative in Martineau's Hist., i. 144.
2 Lord Dudley's Letters, 199.
8 So statt'd in evidence, St. Tr., xxxtii. 22, though called in the indict-
ment " a nicrtlmnt."
* St. Tr., xxxiii. 1.
PUBLIC MELTINGS, 1819. 191
Neil Douglas, " Universalist Preacher," had sought to
enliven his prayers and sermons with political jj^j, Dongua,
lucubrations ; and spies, being sent to observe i*^*^-
hira, reported that the fervid preacher, with rapid utterance
and in a strong Highland dialect, had drawn a seditious
parallel between our afflicted king and Nebuchadnezzar,
King of Babylon ; and between the prince regent and King
Belshazzar. Tlie crown witnesses, unused to the eccentrici-
ties of the preacher, had evidently failed to comprehend
him ; while others, more familiar with Neil Douglas, his
dialect, opinions, and preaching, proved him to be as innocent
of sedition, as he probably was of religious edification. He
was ably defended by Mr. Jeffrey, and acquitted by the
jury.*
But the year 1819 was the culminating point of the pro-
tracted contest between the state and liberty of put,iic meet-
opinion. Distress still weighed heavily upon the '"^^ in 1819.
working classes. They assembled at Carlisle, at Leeds, at
Glasgow, at Ashton-under-Line, at Stockport, and in London,
to discuss their wants, and to devise remedies for their
destitution. Demagogues were prompt in giving a political
direction to their deliberations ; and universal suffrage and
annual Parliaments were soon accepted as the sovereign
remedy for the social ills of which they complained. It was
affirmed that ihe constitutional right to return members be-
longed to all communities. Unre|?resenied towns were in-
vited to exercise that right, in anticipation of its more formal
acknowledgment; and accordingly, at a large meeting at
Birmingham, Sir Charles Wolseley was elected *' legislatorial
attorney and representative " of that populous place.^
Other circumstances contributed to invest these large
assemblages with a character of peculiar insecu- state of the
rity. A great social change had been rapidly S^^j^Juu-'*
developed. The extraordinary growth of manu- **°°-
1 St. Tr., xxxiii. 634.
2 Ann. Keg., 1819, p. 104. Sir Charles was afterwards arrested, while at-
tending a meeting at Smitlxticld, for seditious words spoken by him at
Stockport.
192 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
factures had suddenly brought together vast populations,
severed from those ties which usually connect the members
of a healthy society. They were strangers, deprived of the
associations of home and kindred, without affection or tra-
ditional respect for their employers, and baffling, by their
numbers, the ministrations of the church and the softening
influence of charity. Distressed and discontented, they were
readily exposed to the influence of the most mischievous
portion of the press, and to the lowest demagogues ; while so
great were their numbers, and so densely massed together,
ihat their assemblages assumed proportions previously un-
known ; and became alarming to the inhabitants and magis-
tracy, and dangerous to the public peace.
These crowded meetings, though addressed in language of
„ , ,. excitement and extravagance, had hitherto been
Proclamation, _ ° '
juiySOtb, held without disturbance. The government had
watched them, and taken precautions to repress
disorder: but had not attempted any interference with their
proceedings. On the 30th of July, however, a proclamation
was issued against seditious meetings ; and large assemblages
of men were viewed witli increased alarm by the govern-
ment and magistracy.
Following the example of Birmingham,^ the reformers of
... . Manchester appointed a meeting for the 9 th of
Manchester Ausfust, for the election of a " legislatorial attor-
dii'per.sed, o ' , . . ,
Aug leth, ney " : but the magistrates, havmg issued a notice,
declaring an assemblage for such a purpose illegal,
another meeting was advertised for the 16th, to petition for
Parliamentary Reform. Great preparations were made for
this occasion ; and in various parts of Lancashire large bodies
of operatives were drilled, in the night-time, and practised in
military training. It was the avowed object of this drilling
to enable the men to march in an orderly manner to the
1 At the Leeds meeting it had been resolved that a similar election
should take place, when a suitable candidate had been found; but no rep*
rcsentative had been chosen. — Ann. Reg., 1819, p. 105.
THE MANCHESTER MEETING, 1819. 193
meeting : but the magistrates were, not unnaturally, alarmed
at demonstrations so threatening.
On the 16th, St. Peter's Field in Manchester became the
scene of a deplorable catastrophe. Forty thousand men ^
and two clubs of female reformers, marched in to the meet-
ing, bearing flags, on which were inscribed the objects of
their political faith, — "Universal Suffrage," " Equal Repre-
sentation or Death," and " No Corn Laws." However
menax'ing their numbers, their conduct was orderly and
peaceful. Mr. Hunt, having taken the chair, had just
commenced his address, when he was interrupted by the
advance of cavalry upon the people. The Manchester yeo-
manry, having been sent by the magistrates to aid the chief
constable in arresting Mr. Hunt, and other reform leaders, on
the platform, executed their instructions so awkwardly as to
find themselves surrounded and hemmed in by the dense
crowd, and utterly powerless. The loth Hussars, now sum-
moned to their rescue, charged the people sword in hand ;
and in ten minutes the meeting was dispersed, the leaders
were arrested, and the terrified crowd driven like sheep
through the streets. Many were cut down by sabres, or
trampled upon by the horses : but more were crushed and
wounded in their frantic struggles to escape from the military.
Between ^00 and 400 persons were injured: but happily no
more than five or six lives were lost.
This grievous event brought to a sudden crisis the antago-
nism between the government and the popular state of pub-
right of meeting to discuss grievances. The magis- ^"^ feeding-
trates complimented the military upon their forbearance ; and
the government immediately thanked both the magistrates and
the military, for their zeal and discretion in maintaining the
public peace. But it was indignantly asked, — not by dema-
gogues and men ignorant of the law, but by statesmen and
1 It was variously estimated at from 20,000 to 00,000. Lord Liverpool
said 20,000; Lord Castlereagh, 40,000. In the indictment against Ilunt
and others it was laid at 60,000.
VOL. II. 13
194 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
lawyers of eminence, — by whom the public tranquillity had
been disturbed ? Other meetings had been held without mo-
lestation : why ihen was this meeting singled out for the
inopportune vigor of the magistrates ? If it threatened
danger, why was it not prevented by a timely exercise of
authority? If Hunt and his associates had violated the
law, why were they not arrested before or after the meeting?
Or if arrested on the hustings, why not by the civil power?
The people were peaceable and orderly ; they had threat*
ened no one; they had offered no resistance. Then why
had they been charged and routed by the cavalry? It was
even doubted if the Riot Act had been duly read. It had
certainly not been heard ; and the crowd, without notice oi
warning, found themselves under the flashing swords of the
soldiery.*
Throughout the country, " the Manchester Massacre," as
it was termed, aroused feelings of anger and in
MeetiDgsand . ' . ° »
petitions for dignation. Influential meetmgs were held m many
of the chief counties and cities, denouncing the con-
duct of the magistrates and the government, and demanding
inquiry. In tlie manufacturing districts, the working classes
assembled, in large numbers, to express their sympathy with
the sufferers, and their bitter spirit of resentment against the
authorities. Dangerous discontents were inflamed into sedi-
tion. Yet all these excited meetings were held peaceably,
1 The evidence on this point was very confused. Earl Grey, after read-
ing all the document", affirmed that the Riot Act had not been read. Lord
Liverpool said it had been completely read once, and partly read a second
time. Lord Castlereagh said the Kiot Act had been read from the window
of the house in which the magistrates were assembled. This not being
deemed sufficient, another magistrate went out into the crowd to read it,
nd was trampled under foot. Another vainly endeavored to read it at the
costings after tlie arrest of ^Ir Hunt.
Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., xli. 4, 51, &c.; Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 249, ft
teq.; Ann. Reg., 1819, p. 106; Trial of Mr. Hunt and others 1820; Ann.
Beg., 1820; Chron., 41; Barn, and Aid. Rep., iii. 566; I'apcrs laid before
Parliament, Nov. 1819; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xli. 230 (Mr. Hay's state-
ment); Bamford's Passages from the Life of a Radical, i. 176-213; Pren-
tke'a Manchester. 160.
MEETING OF PARLIAMENT, 1819. 195
except one at Paisley, where the magistrates havhig caused
the colors to be seized, riots and outrages ensued.^ But
ministers were hard and defiant. Tiie Common Council of
the city of London addressed ihe prince regent, praying for
an inquiry, and were sternly rebuked in his reply. Earl
Fitzwilliam, a nobleman of the highest character, who had
zealously assisted the government in the repression of disor-
ders in his own county, joined the Duke of Norfolk and sev-
eral other noblemen and gentlemen of the first importance, in
a requisition to the high sheriff of the county of York, to call
a meeting for the same purpose. At this meeting he attend-
ed and spoke ; and was dismissed from his lord-lieutenancy.'
Hitherto the Whigs had discountenanced the radical reform-
ers ; but now the rigors of the government forced them to
make common cause with that party, in opposing the measures
of the executive.'
In the midst of this perilous excitement. Parliament was
assembled, in November ; and the Manchester Meeting of
meeting was naturally the first object of discus- not.'^''*'
sion. Amendments were moved to the Address, ^S^^-
in the Lords by Earl Grey, and in the Commons by Mr.
Tierney, reprobating all dangerous schemes, but urging the
duty of giving just attention to the complaints of the people,
and the propriety of inquiring into the events at Manches-
ter.* It was the object of the Opposition to respond to the
numerous meetings, petitions, and addresses, which had
prayed 'for inquiry; and to evince a spirit of sympathy and
conciliation on the part of Parliament, which had been sig-
1 Ann. Reg., 1819, p. 109.
2 Lord Sidmouths Life, iii. 263-272; Ann. Reg., 1819, p. 113, and Lord
Grey's obsen-ations ; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xli. 11-15. The resolutions of
this meeting, without condemning the magistrates, merely demanded in-
quiry.
3 Lord Liverpool, writing to Lord Sidmouth, Sept 30th, 1819, said: —
•* As far as the Manchester business goes, it will identify even the respect-
able part of the opposition with Hunt and the radical refomers." — LoiM
Sidiipjuth's Life, iii. 270.
4 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser-, xli. 4, 51 ; Lord Sidmc nth'a Life, iii. 297, et teg.
196 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
Dally wanting in the government. P^arl Grey said, '* tUore
was no attempt at conciliation, no concession to the people ;
nothing was attended to but a resort to coercion, as the only
remedy which could be adopted." — "The natural consequen-
ces of such a system, when once begun, was that it could not
be stopped : discontents begot the necessity of force : the
employment of force increased discontents : these v, ould de-
mand the exercise of new powers, till by degrees they would
depart from all the principles of the constitution." It was
urged, in the language of Burke, that " a House of Commons
who, in all disputes between the people and administration,
presume against the people, — who punish their disorders,
but refuse even to inquire into the provocations to them, —
this is an unnatural, a monstrous state of things, in such a
constitution."
But conciliation formed no part of the hard policy of min-
inquiry istcrs. Sedition was to be trampled out The
n^ttsed. executive had endeavored to maintain the peace
of the country ; but its hands must now be strengthened. In
both Houses the amendments were defeated by large majori-
ties;^ and a similar fate awaited distinct motions for inquiry,
proposed, a few days afterwards, by Lord Lansdowne in the
Lords, and Lord Aithorp in the Commons.^
Papers were laid before Parliament containing evidence
The six of the state of the country, which were iraraedi-
^'^' ately followed by the introduction of further meas-
ures of repression, — then designated, and since familiarly
known, as the " Six Acts." The first deprived defendants ir
cases of misdemeanor of the right of traversin";: to which
Lord Holland induced the chancellor to add a clause, obliging
the attorney-general to bring defendants to trial within twelv*
months. By a second it was prcfposed to enable the court
^ In the Lords there were 159 for the Address, and 34 for the amend
ment. In the Commons, 381 for the Address, and 150 for the amendment
— Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, xli., 50, 228.
a Nov. 30th. Contents, 47; Non-contents, 178. Ayes, 150; Noes, 323
— iKd.,418, 517.
THE "SIX ACTS." 197
on the conviction of a publisher of a seditious libel, .o order
the seizure of all copies of the libel in his possession, and to
punish him, on a second conviction, with fine, imprisonment,
banishment, or transportation. By a third, the newspaper
stamp-duty was imposed upon pamphlets and other papers
containing news, or observations on public affairs; and re-
cognizances were required from the publishers of newspapers
and pamphlets for the payment of any penalty. By a fourth,
no meeting of more than fifty persons was permitted to be
held without six days* notice being given by seven house-
holders to a resident justice of the peace ; and all but free-
holders or inhabitants of the county, parish, or township, were
prohibited from attending, under penalty of fine and impris-
onment. The justice could change the proposed time and
place of meeting ; but no meeting was permitted to adjourn
itself. Every meeting tending to incite the people to hatred
and contempt of the king's person, or the government and
constitution of the realm, was declared an unlawful assembly ;
and extraordinary powers were given to justices for the dis-
persion of such meetings, and the capture of persons address-
ing them. If any persons should be killed or injured in the
dispersion of an unlawful meeting, the justice was indemni
fied. Attending a meeting with arms, or with flags, banners,
or other ensigns or emblems, was an oflfence punishable with
two years' imprisonment. Lecture and debating rooms were
to be licensed, and open to inspection. By a fifth, the train-
ing of persons in the use of arms was prohibited ; and by a
sixth, the magistrates, in the disturbed counties, were em-
powered to search for and seize arms.
All these measures, except that for prohibiting military
training, were strenuously opposed in both Houses.
. -/.Ill ThebiUs
riiey were justified by the government on the opposed in
J n , , , • 1 1 1 . Parliament.
ground oi tlie dangers which threatened society.
It was argued by Lord Castlereagh, "that unless we could
reconcile the exercise of our liberties with the preservation
of the public peace, our liberties would inevitably perish.*
198 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
It was said that blasphemous and seditious libels were un«
derniining the very foundations of society, while public meet-
ings, under pretence of di»cussing grievances, were assembled
for purposes of intimidation, and the display of physical force.
Even the example of the French Revolution was not yet con-
sidered out of date, but was still relied on in justification of
these measures.^ On the other side, it was contended that
the libel laws were already sufficiently severe, and always
liable to be administered capriciously. Writings, which at
one time would be adjudged innocent and laudable, at an-
other would be punished as subversive of the laws and con-
stitution. Zealous juries would be too ready to confound
invectives against nainisters with incitements to hatred and
contempt of established institutions. The punishments pro-
posed were excessive. Transportation had hitherto been
confined to felonious offences ; and banishment was unknown
to the laws of England. Such punishments would either de-
ter juries from finding persons guilty of libel: or, if inflicted,
would be out of all proportion to the offence. The extent of
the mischief was also denied. It was an unjust reproach to
the religion of the country to suppose that blasphemy would
be generally tolerated, and to its loyalty, that sedition would
be encouraged.
To the Seditious Meetings Bill it was objected that the
constitutional right of assembling to discuss grievances was
to be limiied to the narrow bounds of a parish, and exer-
cised at the pleasure of a magistrate, — probably a stanch
supporter of ministers, jealous of popular rights, and full of
prejudice against radicals and mob orators.*
These discussions were not without advantage. The
monstrous punishment of transportation was withdrawn
from the Seditious Libels Bill; and modifications were ad-
mitted into the bill for restraining seditious meetings : but
1 See especially Speech of Lord Grenville, Nov. 30th, 1819, oa Lord
Lansdo^nie's motion for inquiry. — Hixns. Deb., 1st Ser., xli. 448.
' Hans. Deb , Ist Sen, xli. 343, 378, 594, &c.
THE "SIX ACTS." 199
these severe measures were eventually passed with httle
change.* •
In presence of a novel development of popular meetings
in crowded districts, ministers sought to prevent Distrust of
the assemblage of vast numbers fi'om different ^^^ P*»P'e-
parts, and to localize political discussion. Nor can it be
denied that the unsettled condition and ignorance of the
manufacturing population justified apprehensions and pre-
caution. The policy, however, which dictated these measures
was not limited to the correction of a special danger ; but
was marked, as before, by settled distrust of the press and pop-
ular privileges. Ten years before it had been finely said by
Mr. Brougham, " Let the public discuss ! So much the bet-
ter. Even uproar is wholesome in England, while a whisper
is fatal in France." * But this truth had not yet been ac-
cepted by the rulers of that period.^ They had not yet
learned to rely upon the loyalty and good sense of the people,
and upon the support of the middle classes, in upholding order
and repressing outrage. On the other hand, we cannot but
recognize in the language of the Opposition leaders a bold
confidence in their countrymen, and a prescient statesmanship,
— destined in a few years to be accepted as the policy of
the state.
Disaffection, however, still prevailed ; and the evil passions
1 60 Geo. III. c. 1; Geo. IV. c. 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9. All these were perma-
nent, except the Seditious Meetings Act, which, introduced as a permanent
measure, was afterwards limited to five years, and the Seizure of Arms
Act, -which expired on the 25th March, 1822.
2 In defence of the Stamford News.
8 Stringent as were the measures of the government, they fell short of
the views of the old Tory party. Mr. Bankes wrote to Lord Colchester,
Dec. 31st, 1819 : — " My only doubt is whether we have gone far enough in
our endeavor to restrain and correct the licentiousness and abuse of the
pre.ss." — Lord Colchester's Diary, iii. 104.
Lord Redesdale, another tj'pe of the same school, wrote : — "I doubt
whether it would not have been fortimate for the country, if half Man-
chester had been burned, and Glasgow had endured a little singing.'' —
To Lord Colchester, Jan. 4th, 1820. — Jbid., iii. 107.
200 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
of this distempered period soon afterwards exploded in the
* atrocious conspiracy of Tliistlewood and his mis-
Cato street rr. , /• t-. i- ,
conspiracy, creant cannf. To the honor of Enn;nshinen, few
Feb., 1820. •,/.,. .-til,.
were guilty of plotting this blooily and insensate
crime, the discovery of which filled all classes of men with
horror and disgust.*
"While the country was still excited by this startling event,
TrUisof Hunt and his associates were convicted, with five
c.'wo^ey'' others, of unlawfully meeting together, with divers
^®*' other persons unknown, for the purpose of creat-
ing discontent and disaffection, and of exciting the king's
subjects to hatred of the government and constitution.
Hunt was sentenced to two years and six months' imprison-
ment, and the others to one year's imprisonment. Sir
Charles Wolseley and Harrison, a. dissenting preacher, were
also tried and sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment
for their participation in the Stockport meeting.^
Let us now examine the general results of the long contest
Review of wliich had been maintained between the ill-reg-
betwMn*** ulated, mischievous, and often criminal struggles
•nd'iiil'rty °^ ^'^® people for freedom, on the one hand, and
ofopiuion. l\^Q harsh policy of repression maintained by the
government, on the other. The last twenty-eight years of
the reign of George IH. formed a period of perilous transi-
tion for liberty of opinion. While the right of free discussion
had been discredited by factious license, by wild and danger-
ous theories, by turbulence and sedition, — the government
and legislature, in guarding against these excesses, had dis-
countenanced and repressed legitimate agitation. The ad-
vocates of parliamentary reform had been confounded with
Jacobins and fomenters of revolution. Men who boldly im-
1 Ann. Reg., 1820, p. 34, and Chron. 29 ; St. Tr., xxxiii. G81 ; Lord Sid-
mouth's Life, iii. 311-325. Lord Sidmouth himself says (p. 320): -"Party
feelings appeared to be absorbed in those of indignation, which the lowei
orders had also evinced very strikingly upon the occasion."
' Ann. Reg., 1820; Chron. 41; Bam. and Aid. Rep, iii. 566; Bamford'i
Life of a Radical, ii. 56-103, 162.
PROGRESS OF FREE DISCUSSION. 201
peached the conduct of their rulers, had been punished for
sedition. Tlie discussion of grievances — the highest privi-
lege of freemen — had been checked and menaced. The as-
sertion of popular rights had been denounced by ministers and
frowned upon by society, until low demagogues were able to
supplant the natural leaders of the people in the confidence of
those classes wlio most needed safe guidance. Authority was
placed in constant antagonism to large masses of people, who
had no voice in tlie government of their country. Mutual
distrust and alienation grew up between them. The people
lost confidence in rulers whom they knew only by oppressive
taxes, and harsh law^s severely administered. The govern-
ment, harassed by suspicions of disaffection, detected con-
spiracy and treason in every murmur of popular discontent.*
Hitherto the government had prevailed over every adverse
influence. It had defied parliamentary opposition Finaidomina
by never-failing majorities: it had trampled upon opi"ionover
the press : it had stifled public discussion. In a"tii"rity.
quelling sedition, it had forgotten to respect liberty. But
henceforward, we shall find its supremacy- gradually de-
clining, and yielding to the advancing power and intelligence
of the people. The working classes were making rapid ad-
vances in numbers, industrial resources, and knowledge.
Commerce and manufactures, bringing them together in large
masses, had given them coherence and force. Education
had been widely extended ; and discontent had quickened
political inquiry. The press had contributed to the enlighten-
ment of the people. Even demagogues who had misled
hem, yet stirred up their minds to covet knowledge and tc
ove freedom. The numbers, wealth, and influence of the
1 On May 12th, 1817, Earl Grey truly said: — " It is no longer the en-
croachments of power, of which we are jealous, but the too great extension
of freedom. Kvery symptom of popular uneasiness, every ill-regulated
effort of that spirit, without which liberty cannot exist, but which, whilst
it exists, will break out into occasional excesses, affords a pretence which
we seem cnuilous to seize, for imposing on it new restraints." — Ham. Deb>
Ist Ser., xxxvi. 446.
202 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
middle classes had been extended, to a degree unknown at
any former period. A new society had sprung up, outnum-
bering the limited class by whom the state was governed, and
rapidly gaining upon them in enlightenment and social influ-
ence. Superior to the arts of demagogues, and with every
incitement to loyalty and patriotism, — their extended inter-
ests and important position led them to watch, with earnest-
ness and sober judgment, the course of public affairs. Their
views were represented by the best public writers of the time,
whose cultivated taste and intellectual resources received en-
couragement from their patronage. Hence was formed a
public opinion of greater moral force and authority. The
middle classes were with ministers in quelling sedition ; but
against them when they menaced freedom. During the war
they had generally sided with the government ; but after the
peace, the unconciliatory policy of ministers, a too rigorous
repression of the press, and restraints upon public liberty,
tended to estrange those who found their own temperate
opinions expressed by the leaders of the Parliamentary Op-
position. Their adhesion to the Whigs was the commence-
ment of a new political era,* fruitful of constitutional growth
and renovation. Confidence was established between consti-
tutional statesmen in Parliament and the most active and in-
quiring minds of the country. Agitation, no longer left to
demagogues and operatives, but uniting the influence of all
classes under eminent leaders, became an instrument for in-
fluencing the deliberations of Parliament, — as legitimate as
it was powerful.
From this time, public opinion became a power which
ministers were unable to subdue, and to which statesmen of
all parties learned, more and more, to defer. In the worst
of times, it had never been without its influence ; but
from the accession of George IV. it gathered strength until
it was able, as we shall see, to dominate over ministers and
parliaments.
1 See tupra, p. 60.
THE CONSTITUTIONAL ASSOCIATION, 1821. 203
Meanwhile, the severities of the law failed to suppress
libels,* or to appease discontents. Complaints of
both evils were as rife as ever. A portion of the purifieu by
rigor.
press still abounded in libels upon public and
private character, which the moral tone of its readers did not
yet discourage. It was not in default of legal repression
that such libels were published ; but because they were
acceptable to the vitiated taste of the lower classes of that
day. If severity could have suppressed them, the untliank-
ful efforts of the attorney-general, the secretary of state,
and the magistrates, would have long since been crowned
with success. But in 1821, the Constitutional
... ' . . . TheCon-
Association officiously tendered its intervention, stuutionai
in the execution of the law. The dangers of such '
a scheme had been exposed nearly thirty yeai's before ; * and
were at once acknowledged in a more enlio;htened and dis-
passionate age. This association even ventured to address a
circular to every justice of the peace, expounding the law of
libel. An irresponsible combination, embracing magistrates
and jurymen throughout the country, and almost exclusively
of one political party, threatened the liberty of the press,
and the impartial administration of justice. The Court of
King's Bench, sensible of these dangers, allowed members
of the association to be challenged as jurors ; and discussions
in Parliament, opportunely raised by Mr. Brougham and
Mr. Whitbread, completed the discomfiture of those zealous
gentlemen, whom the vigilance of Lord Sidraouth, the activ-
ity of the attorney-general, and the zeal of country justices
had failed to satisfy.* Had ministers needed any incitement
1 Mr. FremantlQ, writing to the Marquess of Buckingham, Aug. 30th,
1820, says : — " The press is completely open to treason, sedition, blas-
phemy, and falsehood, with impunity." ..." I don't know whether you
see Cobbeit's Independent Whig, and many other papers now circulating most
extensively, and which are dangerous much beyond anj'thing I can de-
scribe. I have an opportunity of seeing them, and can speak, therefore, from
knowledge." — Court and Cabintts of Geo. IV., i. 68; Cockbum's Mem., 308.
2 See supra, p. 144.
3 Ann. Reg., 1821, p. 203; Edinb. Rev., vol. xxxvii. (1821) 114-131;
Hans. Deb.. 2d Ser., v. 891, 1046, 1487-1491.
204 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
lo vigor, they would have received it from the king himself,
who took the deepest personal interest in prosecutions of the
press ; * and from men of rank and influence, who were over-
Bensitive to every political danger.'
The government had soon to deal with a political organi-
Jathoiic zation more formidable than any which had hitiier-
sociatjon. jq needed its vigilance, — the Catholic Association
m Ireland. The objects, constitution, and proceedings of this
body demand especial notice, as exemplifying the bound
within which political agitation may be lawfully practised
To obtain the repeal of statutes imposing civil disabilities
upon five sixths of the population of Ireland, was a legitimate
object of association. It was no visionary scheme, tending
to the subversion of the state : but a practical measure of
relief, which had been urged upon the legislature by the first
statesmen of the time. To attain this end, it was lawful to
instruct and arouse the people, by speeches and tracts, and
by appeals to their reason and feelings. It was also lawful
to demonstrate to Parliament the unanimity and earnestness
of the people in demanding a redress of grievances ; and to
influence its deliberations by the moral force of a great popu-
lar movement. With these objects, organization, in various
forms, had been at work for many years.' In 1809, a
Catholic Committee had been formed in Dublin, of which
Mr. O'Connell — destined to become a prominent figure in
the history of his country — was a leading member. Active
1 On .Tanuary 9th, 1821, His Majesty wrote to Lord Eldon: — "As the
courts of law will now be open within a few days, I am desirous to know
the decision that has been taken by the attorney-general upon the mode in
which all the vendors of treason, and libellers, such as Henbow, &c., &c.,
are to be prosecuted. This is a measure so vitally indispensable to my
feclinj^s, as well as to the country, that I must insist that no fiirther loss ol
time should be suffered to elapse before proceedings be instituted." — Court
and C'abinels of Geo. I V., i. 107.
2 Jbid., 121, &c. ; Lord Colchester's Mem., iii. 87, &c.
• The first association or committee was formed so far back as 17G0. —
Wyse's Cntli. Asm., i. G9; 0' Conor's Hist, of (he Ji-iih Catholics, i. 262. An-
other committee was arranged in 1773. — ^Vyse, i. 91 ; and a more general
committee or association in 1790. — Jbid., 104.
THE CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. '205
in the preparation of petitions, and holding weekly meetings,
it endeavored, by discussion and association, to arouse the
Catholics to a sense of their wrongs.* In 1811, it endeav-
ored to enlarge its constitution by assembling managers of
petitions from all parts of Ireland ; but this project was
arrested by the government, as a contravention of the Irish
Convention Act, which prohibited the appointment of dele-
gates or representatives.^ The movement now languished
for several years ;' and it was not until 1823 that the Cath-
olic Association was formed on a wider basis.* It embraced
Catholic nobles, gentry, priesthood, peasantry ; ® and though
disclaiming a delegated authority, its constitution and objects
made it, in effect, the representative of the Catholic body.
Exclusively Catholic, its organization embraced the whole of
Ireland. Constantly increasing in numbers and influence, it
at length assumed all the attributes of a national parliament.
It held its "sessions" in Dublin, appointed committees,
received petitions, directed a census of the population of Ire-
land to be taken ; and, above all, levied contributions, in the
form of a Catholic rent, upon every parish in Ireland.' Its
stirring addresses were read from the altars of all Catholic
chapels. Its debates, abounding in appeals to the passions
of the people, were published in every newspaper. The
speeches of such orators as O'Connell and Shiel could not
fail to command attention ; but additional publicity was
secured to all the proceedings of the Association, by contri-
butions from the Catholic rent.
In 1825, its power had become too great to be borne, if
1 Wyse, i. 142-165.
2 33 Geo. HI. c. 29 (Ireland); see Debates, Feb. 22d, March 7th, and
April 4th, 1811. — Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xix. 1-18,269-321,700; Wyse, L
174-178.
8 A Catholic board was formed, but soon dissolved. — Wyse, i. 179.
4 Ibid., 199.
6 Ibid., 205.
« Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, xi. 944 (May 31st, 1824); Ibid., xii. 171, et seq.
(Feb. 10-15); Wyse, i. 208-217. Mr. Wyse assigns a later date to this
oeneus, i. 247; Ibid., ii. App. xxxvii.
206 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
the authority of the state was to be upheld. Either thft
Parliament at Westminster, or its rival in Dublin, must give
way. The one must grant the demands of the Catholics, or
the olher must be silenced. Ministers were not yet prepared
for the former alternative ; and determined to suppress the
Catholic Association. This, however, was a measure of no
oi"dinary difficulty. The association was not unlawful ; and
was engaged in forwarding a legitimate cause. It could not
be directly put down, without a glaring violation of the right
of discussion and association. Agitation was not to be treated
as lawful, so long as it was impotent ; and condemned when
it was beginning to be assured of success. This embarrass-
ment was avoided by embracing in the same measure, Orange
Societies and other similar bodies, by which political and
religious animosities were fomented.
The king, on opening Parliament, adverted to '* associa
Suppressed tions which have adopted proceedings irreconcil-
men^'i'^. ^^^^ with the spirit of the constitution ; " and a
Feb. lotb, hill was immediately brought in to amend the
•'^* laws relating to unlawful societies in Ireland.
This bill prohibited the permanent sittings of societies, —
the appointment of committees beyond a certain time, —
the levying of money for the redress of grievances, — the
affiliation and correspondence of societies, — the exclusion
of persons on the ground of religion, — and the administra-
tion of oaths.* It was strenuously resisted. Ministers were
counselled to stay agitation by redressing grievances, rather
than by vain attempts to prevent their free discussion. But
80 perilous was the state of Ireland, so fierce the hatred
of her parties, and so full of warning her history, — that a
measure, otherwise open to grave constitutional objections,
found justification in the declared necessity of insuring the
public peace.'' Its operation, however, was limited to three
years.
1 5 Geo. rV. c. 4.
2 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser , xii. 2-122, 128-522, &»•
THE CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. 207
The Catholic Association was dissolved in obedience to
this act; but was immediatelj replaced by a new
association, constituted so as to evade the provis- Unued in
ions of the recent law. This society professed to
be established for promoting education and other charita'
ble objects ; and every week, a separate meeting was con-
vened, purporting to be unconnected with the association.
Fourteen days' meetings " and aggregate meetings were
Iso held ; and at all these assemblies the same violent lan-
guage was used, and the same measures adopted, as in the
time of the original society. While thus eluding the recent
statute, this astute body was beyond the reach of the common
law, being associated neither for the purpose of doing any
unlawful act, nor of doing any lawful act in an unlawful man-
ner. It was equally unscathed by the Convention Act of
1793, as not professing a representative character. In other
respects the new association openly defied the law. Perma-
nent committees were appointed, and the Catholic rent was
collected by their own " church-wardens " in every parish.*
The government watched these pix>ceedings with jealousy
and alarm ; but perceived no means of restraining them.
The act was about to expire at the end of the session of 1828 ;
and, after very anxious consideration, ministers determined
not to propose its renewal. It could not have been made
effectual without such restraints upon the liberty of speech
and public meetings, as they could not venture to recom-
mend, and which Parliament would, perhaps, have declined
to sanction.^
No sooner had the act expired, than the old Catholic As-
sociation, with all its organi^.ation and offensive
. . , r\ Cathalic As-
lactics, was revived. At the same time, the Urange Bociatiou
Societies were resuscitated. Protestant associa- "^'^^**'
1 Opinion of Mr Joy, 1828; Sir R. Peel's Mem., i. 45; Wyse i. 222-
246; Ibid, ii. App. xxxix.
2 Memorandum and Correspondence of Mr. Peel, the Marqness of Aiv
j^esey, and Mr. Lamb.— Peefs Mem., i. 22-58, 150.
208 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
tions, called Brunswick Clubs, were established on the model
of (he Catholic Association, and collected a Protectant rent*
Meanwhile, the agitation fomented by the Catholic Asso-
ciation was mo^t threatenino;. Meetinjis were as-
Danfrerous _ ° ~
meetings, sertibled to whicli laroje bodies of Catholics marched
Sept., 1828. .... , • n , . , J
in mihtary array, bearing nags and music, dressed
in uniforms, and disciplined to word of command. Such
assemblages were obviously dangerous to the public peace.
Ministers and the Irish executive watched them with so-
licitude ; and long balanced between the evils ^of permit-
ting such demonstrations on the one side, and precipitat-
ing a bloody collision with excited masses of the people, on
the other. They were further embarrassed by counter-
demonstrations of the Protestants, and by the hot zeal of tlie
Orange Societies, which represented their cautious vigilance
as timidity, and their inaction as an abandonment of the
„ . ,, functions of government. They were advised
Proclamation " •' _ .
against them, that such meetings, having no definite object sanc-
Oct. 1st. 182S. " ° . ,
tioned by law, and being assembled in such num-
bers and with such organization as to strike a well-grounded
fear into peaceable inhabitants, were illegal by the common
law, even when accompanied by no act of violence.** And
at length they determined to prevent such meetings, and to
concert measures for their dispersion by force.* A procla-
mation, being issued for that purpose, met with a ready obe-
dience. It tbrmed no part of the scheme of the Catholic
'eaders to risk a collision with military force, or with their
Protestant rivals ; and the association had already begun to
discourage these dangerous assemblages, in anticipation of
1 Wyse, i. 347-359.
2 Opinion of attorney and solicitor-general of England. — Sir E. Peel's
Mem., i. 225 ; Queen v. Soley, 11 Modem Reports, and King v. Hunt and
others.
s The correspondence of Mr. Peel with Lord Anglesey and the Irish ex-
ecutivs, discloses all the considerations by which the government was in-
fluenced, under circumstances of great embarrassment. — Sir R. Peets
Mem., \. 207-231.
THE CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION. 209
disorders injurious to their cause. The immediate object of
the government was secured : but the association — while it
avoided a contest with autliority — adroitly assumed all the
credit of restoring tranquillity to the country.^
But the proceedings of the association itself became moi
violent and offensive than ever. Its leaders were insolei.t
and defiant to the government, and exercised an absolute
sway over the Catholic population. In vain the governraen
took counsel with its law otficers.^ Neither the Conventior
Act of 1793 nor the common law could be relied on, for re
straining the proceedings of an association which the legisla-
ture itself had interposed, three years before, to condemn.
Peace was maintained, as the Catholics were unwilling to
disturb it: but the country was virtually under the dominion
of the association.
In the following year, however, the suppression of this and
other societies in Ireland formed part of the gen- g^ ^^
eral scheme of Catholic Emancipation.^ The of the associ*-
, . . , 1 tion in 1829.
Catholic Association was, at length, extinguished ;
but not until its objects had been fully accomplished.
It was the first time a measure had been forced upon a
hostile court and reluctant Parliament, a dominant party
and an unwilling people, by the pressure of a political or-
ganization. The abolition of the slave-trade was due to
the conviction which had been wrought by facts, arguments,
and appeals to the moral and religious feelings of the people.
But the Catholic cause owed its triumph to no such moral
(•onversion. The government was overawed by the hostile
demonstrations of a formidable confederacy, supported by the
Irish people and priesthood, and menacing authority witl
their physical force. It was, in truth, a dangerous example
and threatened the future independence of Parliament. But,
however powerful this association, its efforts would have been
1 Ann. Reg., 1828, p. 140-146; Peel's Mem., i. 232.
2 Peefs Mem., i. 243-264.
S Infra, p. 374 ; 10 Geo. IV. c. 1.
VOL. 11. 14
210 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
paralyzed without a good cause, espoused by eminent states-
Agood cause ™6" ^"^ an influential party in Parliament.
°i!^fui'*" The state would have known how to repel ir-
Bgitation. rational demands, however urged ; but was un-
able to resist the combined pressure of parliamentary and
popular force, the sympathies of many liberal Protestants
in Ireland, and the steady convictions of an enlightened
minority in England. In our balanced constitution, political
agitation, to be successful, must be based on a real griev-
ance, adequately represented in Parliament and in the
press, and supported by the rational approval of enliglitened
men. But though the independence of Parliament remained
intact, the triumph of the Catholic Association marked the
increased force of political agitation, as an element in our
constitution. It was becoming superior to authorities and
party combinations, by which the state had hitherto been
governed.
During the short reign of George IV., the influence of
Increased public opinion made steady advances. The press
pub"ic"^°' obtained a wider extension; and the people ad-
opinion in vanced in education, intelligence, and self-reliance.
n-ign of ' o '
George IV. There was also a marked improvement in po-
litical literature, corresponding with the national progess.
And thus the very causes which were increasing the power
iniproTement of the people, wcre qualifying them to use it
ofthepres*. ^^,jg^j^,_
It was not by the severities of the law that the inferior
press was destined to be improved, and its mischievous ten-
dencies corrected. These expedients — after a trial of two
centuries — had failed. But moral causes were in operation
y which the general standard of society was elevated. The
cliurch and other religious bodies had become more zealous
in their sacred mission :* society was awakening to the duty
of educating the people ; and the material progress of the
country wa<5 t^ovf]op'mg a more general and active intelli-
1 S«fl mfra. o. 412
PKOSECUTIONS OF THE PRESS, 1830. 211
gence. The classes most needing elevation had begun to
desire sound and wholesome instruction ; and this inestima-
ble benefit was gradually extended to them. Improved
publications successfully competed for popular favor with
writings of a lower character ; and, in cultivating the public
taste, at the same time raised the general standard of
periodical literature. A large share of the credit of this
important work is due to the Society for the Diffusion of
Useful Knowledge, established in 1826, and to the exertions
of its chief promoters, Lord Brougham and Mr. Charles
Knight.^ The publications of this society were followed by
those of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge,
and by the admirable serials of Messrs. Chambers. By
these and other periodical papers, — as well political as lite-
rary, — an extraordinary impulse was given to general edu-
cation. Public writers promptly responded to the general
spirit of the time ; and the aberrations of the press were in
great measure corrected.
The government, however, — while it viewed with alarm
the growing force of public opinion, which controlled its
own authority, — failed to observe its true spirit and ten-
dency. Still holding to the traditions of a polity, then on
the very point of exhaustion, it was unable to reconcile the
rough energies of popular discussion with respect for the
law and obedience to constituted authority. It regarded
\he press as an obstacle to good government, instead of
".ouciliating its support by a bold confidence in public appro-
station.
This spirit dictated to the Duke of Wellington's adminis-
tration its ill-advised prosecutions of the press in ^ , ,„
' . ^ DukeofWel-
1830. By passing the Roman Catholic Relief Ungton's pro-
Act, ministers had provoked the resentment of the press,
• 1830
the Tory press ; and foremost among their assail-
ants was the " Morning Journal." One article, appearing
to impute personal corruption to Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst,
1 Edinb. Rev., xlvi. 225, &c.
212 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
could not be overlooked ; but the editor having sworn that
his lordship was not the person alluded to, an information
again>:t him was abandoned. The attorne} -general, however,
now filed no less than three ex-ojfficio informations against
the editor and proprietors, for this and two other articles,
as libels upon the king, the ministers, and Parliament. A
fourth prosecution was also instituted, for a separate libel
upon the Duke of Wellington. So soon as the personal
character of a member of the administraiion had been
cleared, ministers might have allowed animadversions upon
their public conduct to pass with impunity. If the right
of free discussion was not respected, the excitement of
the times might have claimed indulgence. Again, the
accumulation of charges against the same persons betrayed
u spirit of persecution. It was not justice that was sought,
but vengeance, and the ruin of an obnoxious journal. So
far as the punishment of their political foes was concerned,
ministers prevailed.* But their success was gained at the
expense of much unpopularity. Tories, sympathizing with
writers of their own party, united with the opposition in
condemning this assault upon the liberty of the press. Nor
was the temper of the people such as to bear, any longer,
with complacency, a harsh execution of the libel laws. The
Failure of unsuccessful prosccution of Cobbett, in the follow-
of^obbett" '"o yt:**'", by a Whig attorney-general, nearly
W31- brought to a close the long series of contests be-
tween the government and the press.'
1 Verdicts were obtained in three out of the four prosecutions. In the
second a partial verdict only was given (guilty of libel on the king, but
not on his ministers), witli a recommendation to n>ercy, — Mr. Alexander,
the editor, being sentenced to a year's imprisonment, a fine of ;£300, and
to give security for good behavior during three years; and the proprietors
to lesser punishments. — Ann. Reg., 1830, p. 3, 119; Hans. Deb., 2d Ser.,
xxii. 1167.
2 He was charged with no libel on ministers, but with inciting laborers
to burn ricks; Ann. Reg., 1831, Chron., p. 95. In the same year Carlile
and Haley were indicted; and in 1833, Reeve, Ager, Grant, Bell, Hether-
ington, Russell, and Stevens. — Hunt's Fourth Est., ii. 07; Roebuck's Hist
of the Whig Miuiiiry, ii. 219, «.
FREEDOM OF THE I'KESS ASSUUED. 213
Since that time, the utmost latitude of criticism and invec-
Jive has been permitted to the press, in discuss- Ofmpiete
ing public men and measures. The law has ^^^g ^^^^
rarely been appealed to, even for the exposure esubu-hed.
of malignity and falsehood. Prosecutions for libel, like the
censorship, have fallen out of our constitutional system.
When the press errs, it is by the press itself, that its errora
are left to be corrected. Repression has ceased to be the
policy of rulers ; and statesmen have at length fully realized
the wise maxim of Lord Bacon, that " the punishing of wits
enhances their authority ; and a forbidden writing is thought
to be a certain spark of truth, that flies up in the faces of
them that seek to tread it out."
Henceforth the freedom of the press was assured; and
nothing was now wanting to its full expansion,
° ° . . Fiscal Uws
but a revision of the fiscal laws, by which its ut- affecting the
most development was restrained. These were
the stamp, advertisement, and paper duties. It was not
until after a struggle of thirty years, that all these duties
were repealed : but in order to complete our survey of
the press, their history may, at once, be briefly told.
The newspaper stamp of Queen Anne had risen, by suc-
cessive additions, to fourpence. Originating in Newspaper
jealousy of the press, its extension was due, partly stamps.
to the same policy, and partly to the exigencies of finance.
So high a tax, while it discouraged cheap newspapers, was
naturally liable to evasion. Tracts, and other unstamped
papers, containing news and comments upon public affairs,
were widely circulated among the poor ; and it was to re-
strain this practice, that the stamp laws had been extended to
that class of papers by one of the Six Acts.^ They were
denounced as seditious and blasphemous, and were to be
extinguished. But the passion for news and political dis-
cussion was not to be repressed ; and unstamped publications
were more rife than ever. Such papers occupied the same
1 60 Geo. III. c. 9; supra, p. 197.
214 LIBERTY OF OriNION.
place in the periodical press, as tracts printed, at a former
period, in evasion of the licenser. All concerned in such
papers were violating the law, and braving its terrors : the
jail was ever before their eyes. This was no honorable call
ing ; and none but the meanest would engage in it. Hence
the poor, who most needed whole-ome instruction, received
the very worst from a contraband press. During the Reform
agitation, a new class of publishers, of higher character and
purpose, set up unstamped newspapers for the working
classes, and defied the government in the spirit of Prynne
and Liburne. Their sentiments, already democratic, were
further embittered by their hard wrestling with the law.
They suffered imprisonment, but their papers continued in
large circulation : they were fined, but their fines were paid
by subscription. Prosecutions against publishers and vend-
ers of sucli papers were now becoming a serious aggravjitioJi
of the criminal law. Prisons were filled with offenders ; '
and the state was again at war with the press in a new form.
If the law could not overcome the unstamped press, it was
Onstamped ^l^^i" that the law itself must give way. Mr.
newspapers. Lytton Bulwer^and Mr. Hume exposed the grow-
ing evils of the newspaper stamp : ministers were too pain-
fully sensible of its embarrassments ; and in 1836 it was
reduced to one penny, and the unstamped press was put
down. At the same time, a portion of the paper duty was
remitted. Already, in 1833, the advertisement duty had
been reduced ; and newspapers now labored under a lighter
weight.
Meanwhile, efforts had been made to provide an antidote
Taxes on ^^^ *''^ poison circulated in the lowest of the un-
knowiedga. stamped papers, by a cheap and popular literature
without news;* but the progress of this beneficent work dis-
1 From 1831 to 1S35 there were no less than 728 prosecutions, and about
600 cases of imprisonment. — Mr. Hume's Return, Sept. 1836, No. 21;
Hunt's Fourth Estate, 69-87.
3 June 14th, 1812; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., ziii. 619.
» Bupra, p. 211.
GENERAL FREEDOM OF OPINION. 215
closed the pressure of the paper duty upon all cheap publica-
tions, the cost of which was to be repaid by extensive circu-
lation. Cheapness and expansion were evidently becoming
the characteristics of the periodical press ; to which every
tax, however light, was an impediment. Hence a new move-
ment for the repeal of all " taxes on knowledge," led by
Mr. Milner Gibson, with admirable ability, address, and per-
sistence. In 1853, the advertisement duty was swept away;
and in 1855, the last penny of the newspaper stamp was re-
linquished. Nothing was now left but the duty on paper;
and this was assailed with no less vigor. Denounced by
penny newspapers, which the repeal of the stamp duty had
called into existence : complained of by publishers of cheap
books ; and deplored by the friends of popular education, it
fell, six years later, after a parliamentary contest memorable
in history.^ And now the press was free alike from legal
oppression and fiscal impediments. It stands responsible to
society for the wise use of its unlimited franchises ; and,
learning from the history of our liberties, that public virtue
owes more to freedom than to jealousy and restraint, may
we not have faith in the moderation of the press and the
temperate judgment of the people ?
The influence of the press has extended with its liberty;
but it has not been suffered to dominate over the
Public
independent opinion of the country. The people jealousies
1 /• 1 11 , 11 T of the press.
love freedom too well to bow the knee to any dic-
tator, whether in the council, the senate, or the press. And
no sooner has the dictation of any journal, conscious of its
power, become too pronounced, than its influence has sensibly
declined. Free itself, the press has been taught to respect,
with decency and moderation, the freedom of others.
Opinion — free in the press, free in every form of public
discussion — has become not less free in society.
It is never coerced into silence or conformity, as freedom of
in America, by the tyrannous force of a ma- '^P'"'*"'-
^ Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxxv. 118; cxxviii. 1128; cxxxvii. 1110, &«
Supia, Vol. I. 447
216 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
jority.* However small a minority : however un[-opular, ir-
rational, eccentric, perverse, or unpatriotic its sentiments:
however despised or pitied ; it may speak out fearlessly, in
full confidence of toleration. The majority, conscious of
right and assured of its proper influence in the state, neither
fears nor resents opposition.*
The freedom of the press was fully assured hefore the
PoUtScai passing of the Reform Act ; and political organi-
onions, 1831. gation — more potent than the press — was now
about to advance suddenly to its extreme development.
The agitation for Parliamentary Reform in 1831-32 ex-
ceeded that of any previous time, in its wide-spread organi-
zation, in the numbers associated, in earnestness, and faith in
the cause. In this agitation there were also notable circum-
stances, wholly unprecedented. The middle and the work-
ing classes were, for the first time, cordially united in a
common cause : they were led by a great constitutional party ;
and, — more remarkable still, — instead of opix)sing the gov-
ernment, they were the ardent supporters of the king's min-
isters. To these circumstances is mainly due the safe pas-
sage of the country through a most perilous crisis. The
violence of the masses was moderated by their more instruct-
ed associates, — who, again, were admitted to the friendly
counsels of many eminent members of the ministerial party.
Popular combination assumed the form of " Political Unions,"
The Bir- which were established in the metropolis and in
pSu& »^1 the large towns throughout the country. Of
Union. j^e provincial unions, that of Birmingham took the
Jead. Founded for another purpose so early as January,
1 "Tant que la majority est douteuse, on parle; mais d^s qu'elle s'est
irr^vocablement prononede, chacun se tait, et amis comme ennemis sem-
blent alors s'attacher de concert a son char." — De Tocgueville, Democr. en
Amer., i. 307.
2 In politics this is true nearly to the extent of Mr. Mill's axiom : " If
all mankind, minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of
the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silcncmg Il)at
one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silerxing
mankind." — On Liberty, 33.
POLITICAL UNIONS, 1831-32. 2'./
1830/ it became the type of most other unions tliroUf^hout
the country. Its original design was " to form a general
political union between the lower and middle classes of the
people;"^ and it "called, with confidence, .upon the ancient
aristocracy of the land to come forward, and take their proper
station at the head of the people, in this great crisis of the
national affairs." ' In this spirit, when the Reform agitation
commenced, the council thought it prudent not to " claim uni-
versal suffrage, vote by ballot, or annual parliaments, because
all the upper classes of the community, and the great majori-
ty of the middle classes, deem them dangerous, and the coun-
cil cannot find that they have the sanction of experience to
prove them safe."* And througliout the resolutions and
speeches of the society, the same desire was shown to pro-
pitiate the aristocracy, and unite the middle and working
classes.*
Before the fate of the first Reform Bill was ascertained,
the political unions confined their exertions to^gtj^typf
debates and resolutions in favor of Reform, and *''® umonB.
the preparation of numerous petitions to Parliament. Al-
ready, indeed, they boasted of their numbers and physical
force. The chairman of the Birmingham Union vaunted
that they could find two armies, — each as numerous and
brave as that which conquered at Waterloo, — if the king
and his ministers required them.' But however strong the
language .-ometimes used, discussion and popular association
were, as yet, the sole objects of these unions. No sooner,
•I Curiously enough, it was founded by Mr. Thomas Attwood, a Tory, to
advance his currency doctrines, nnd to denounce the resumption of cash
payments in 1819. — Report of Proceedings, Jan. 25th, 1830 (Hodgett's
Birmingham).
2 Hequis^ition to High Bailiff of Birmingham, Jan., 1830.
8 Report of Pnx-eedings, Jan. 25th, 1830, p. 12.
* Report of Council, May 17thf 1830.
6 Proceedings of Union, p(tssim. " You have the flower of the nobility
with you; you have the sons of the heroes of Runnymede with you: the
best and the noblest blood of England is on your side." — Birmingham
Journal, Jlay 14th, 1832.
6 Ann. Keg., 1831, p. 80.
218 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
however, was the bill lost, and Parliament dissolved, than
they were aroused to a more formidable activity. Their first
object was to influence the elections, and to secure tlie retuni
of a majority of reformers. Electors and non-electors, co-
operating in these unions, were equally eager in the cause of
reform; but with the restricted franchises of that time, the
former would have been unequal to contend against the great
territorial interests opposed to them. The unions, however,
threw themselves hotly into the contest ; and their demon-
strations, exceeding the license of electioneering, and too often
amounting to intimidation, overpowered the dispirited anti-
reformers. There were election riots at Wigan, at Lanark,
at Ayr, and at Edinburgh.* The interposition of the unions,
and the popular excitement which they encouraged, brought
some discredit upon the cause of Reform ; but contributed to
the ministerial majority in the new Parliament.
As the parliamentary struggle proceeded upon the sec-
Meetings and 0"*^ Reform Bill, the demonstrations of the polit
petiUons. jj.jj| unions became more threatening. Meetings
were held, and petitions presented, wliich, in expressing the
excited feelings of vast bodies of men, were, at the same
time, alarming demonstrations of physical force. When the
Oct. 3d measure was about to be discussed in the House of
1831. Lords, a meeting of 150,000 men, assembled at
Birmingham, declared by acclamation that if all other consti-
tutional means of insuring the success of the Reform Bill
should fail, they would refuse the payment of taxes, as John
Hampden had refused to pay ship-money, except by a levy
upon their goods.''
It was the first time, in our history, that the aristocracy
Conflict had singly confronted the people. Hitherto the
nobles and^ people liad Contended with the crown, — supported
the people. j,y {j,g aristocracy and large classes of the com-
1 Ann. Reg., 1831, p. 152.
2 Ann. Reg., 1831, p. 282. See Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., vii. 1323; Report
of Proceedings of Meeting at Newhall Hill, Oct. 3d, 1831 ; Speech of Mr
Edmonds, &c. ; Roebuck's Hist of the Whig Ministry, ii. 218.
POLITICAL UNIONS, 1831-32. 219
munity : now the aristocracy stood alone, in presence of a
popular force, almost revolutionary. If they continued the
contest too long for the safety of the state, they at least
met its dangers with the high courage which befits a
noble race. Unawed by numbers, clamor, and threats, the
Lords rejected the second Reform Bill. The ex- Rjcts on
citeraent of the time now led to disorders disgrace- ^^ono"^ °^
ful to the popular cause. Mobs paraded the ^f"™ BUi.
streets of London, hooting, pelting and even assaulting
distinguished peers, and breaking their windows.* There
were riots at Derby : when, some rioters being seized,
the mob stormed the jail and set the prisoners free. At
Nottingham, the Castle was burned by the populace, as an
act of vengeance against the Duke of Newcastle. In both
these places, the riots were not repressed without the aid of
a military force.^ For two nights and days, Bris- oct. 29th,
tol was the prey of a tui-bulent and drunken rab- ^^^'
ble. They broke into the prisons, and having let loose the
prisoners, deliberately set on fire the buildings. They rifled
and burned down the Mansion House, the Bishop's Palace,
the Custom House, the Excise Office, and many private
houses. The irresolution and incapacity of magistrates and
military commanders left a populous and wealthy city at the
mercy of thieves and incendiaries : nor was order at length
restored without military force and loss of life, which a
moi'e timely and vigorous interposition might have averted.'
These painful events were deplored by reformers, as a dis-
grace and hindrance to their cayse ; and watched by their
opponents, as probable inducements to reaction.
Hitherto the political unions had been locally organized,
and independent of one another, while forwarding poHtioai
an object common to all. They were daily grow- ^"J^^^^'^qj
ing more dangerous ; and the scheme of an armed delegates.
1 Ann. Reg., 1831, p. 280; Life of Lord Eldon, iii. 153; Courts and Cab-
inets of Will. IV. and Queen Vict, i. 364.
2 Ann. Reg., 1831, p. 280.
< Ann. Keg., 1831, p. 291. Twelve peisbns were killed, and ninety-four
wounded and injured.
220 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
national guard was soon projected. But however threat-
ening their demonstrations, they had been conducted within
the bounds of law. In November, 1831, however, they
assumed a different character. A National Union was
formed in London, to which the several provincial unions
throughout the country were invited to send delegates.
From that time, the limits of lawful agitation were exceeded;
and the entire organization became illegal.^
At the same time, meetings assembled in connection with
the unions were assuming a character more violent
Alarming "
meetings and Unlawful. The Metropolitan Union, — an
association independent of the London Political
Union, and advocating extreme measures of democratic re-
form, — gave notice, in a seditious advertisement, of a meet-
ing for the 7th of November, at White Conduit House. The
magistrates of Hatton Garden issued a notice declaring the
proposed meeting seditious and illegal ; and enjoining loyal
and well-disposed persons not to attend it. Whereupon a
deputation of working men waited upon Lord Melbourne, at
the Home Office, and were convinced by his lordship of tlie
illegality of their proceedings. The meeting was at once
abandoned.' Danger to the public peace was averted by
confidence in the government. Some exception was taken
to an act of official courtesy towards men compromised by
sedition ; but who can doubt the wisdom of preventing,
rather than punishing, a breach of the law.
Lawful agitation could not be stayed ; but when associa-
Prociamation tious. Otherwise dangerous, had begun to trans-
Miiticai gress the law. Ministers were constrained to in-
umona terfere ; and accordingly, on the 22d of Novem-
ber, 1831, a proclamation was issued for the repression
of political unions. It pointed out that such associations,
"composed of separate bodies, with various divisions and
subdivisions, under leaders with a gradation of ranks and
1 39 Geo. III. c. 79; 57 Geo. III. c. 19; supra, pp. 173, 184.
» Ann. Reg., 1831, p. 297.
POLITICAL UNIONS, 1831-^2. 221
authority, and distinguished by certain badges, and subject to
the general control and direction of a superior council," were
♦' unconstitutional and illegal," and comraanded all loyal sub-
jects to refrain from joining them. The " National Political
Union " denied that this proclamation applied to itself, or Ij
the majority of existing unions. But the Birmingham Union
modified an extensive organization of unions, in the Midland
Counties, which had been projected ; and the system of dele-
gation, correspondence and affiliation was generally checked
and discouraged.^
On the meeting of Parliament on the 6th of Decem-
ber, political unions were further discountenanced nijonsdis-
in the speech from the throne, in which His Maj- f° p"*^,^***
esty declared that such combinations were incora- "»«"*•
patible with regular government, and signified his determi-
nation to repress all illegal proceedings.*
But an organization directed to the attainment of Parlia-
mentary Reform could not be discontinued until
•^_ Unions more
that object was accomplished. The unions con- threatening
tinued in full activity ; their numbers were increased
by a more general adhesion of the middle classes ; and if
ostensibly conforming to the law, in their rules and regula-
tions, their proceedings were characterized, more than ever,
by menace and intimidation. When the third Reform Bill
\vas awaiting the Committee in the Lords, immense meetings
were assembled at Birmingham, Manchester, Edinburgh,
Glasgow, and other populous places, which by their numbers,
combination, and resolute purpose, as well as by the speeches
made and petitions agreed to, proclaimed a determination to
overawe the Peers, who were still opposed to the bill. The
withholding of taxes was again threatened, and even the
extinction of the peerage itself, if the bill should be rejected.
On the 7th of May, 1832, all the unions of the counties of
Warwick, Worcester, and Stafford assembled at Newhall
1 Ann. Reg., 1831, p. 297; Twiss' Life of Lord Eldon, iii. 163.
a Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., ix. 5.
222 LIBERTY OF 0P1XI02?.
Hill, Birmingham, to the number of nearly 150,000. A
petition to the Commons was there agreed to, praying them
to withhold the supplies, in order to insure the safety of the
Reform Bill; and declaring that the people would think it
necessary to have arms for their defence. Other petitions
from Manchester and elsewhere, praying that the supplies
might be withheld, were brought to London by excited depu-
tations.*
The adverse vote of the Lords in Committee, and the
Dangerous resignation of the reform ministry, was succeeded
dmin^gThe by demonstrations of Still greater violence. Revo-
Keformcrwui. Jutionary sentiments, and appeals to force and
coercion, succeeded to reasoning and political agitation. Tiie
immediate creation of peers was demanded. " More lords,
or none : " to this had it come, said the clamorous leaders of
the unions. A general refusal of taxes was counselled.
The Commons, having declared themselves not to be repre-
sentatives of the people, had no right to vote taxes. Then
why should the people pay them ? The National Political
Union called upon the Commons to withhold supplies from
the Treasury, and intrust them to commissioners named by
themselves. The metropolis was covered with placards
inviting the people to union, and a general resistance to the
payment of taxes. A run upon the Bank for gold was coun-
selled, " to stop the Duke." The extinction of the privileged
orders, — and even of the monarchy itself, — general confusion
and anarchy, were threatened. Prodigious crowds of peojjle
marched to open-air meetings, with banners and revolutionary
mottoes, to listen to the frantic addresses of demagogues, by
whom these sentiments were delivered.* The refusal to
pay taxes was even encouraged by men of station and influ-
ence,— by Lord Milton, Mr. Buncombe, and Mr. William
1 Ann. Reg., 1332, p. 172; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xii. 876, 1032, 1274,
Roebuck's Hist of the Whig Ministry, ii. 295 ; Prentice's Recollections of
Mnnchester. 408-415.
2 Ann. Keg., 1832, p. 1G9, et seq. ; Roebuck's Hist, of the Whig Miuistiy,
ii. 288-297.
REPEAL AGITATION. 223
Brougham.* The press also, responding to the prevailing
excitement, preached resistance and force.*
The limits of constitutional agitation and pressure had
long been exceeded ; and the country seemed to considera-
be on the very verge of revolution, when the polit- thTpoimUr
ical tempest was calmed by the final surrender of '"umph.
the Lords to the popular will. An imminent danger was
averted ; but the triumph of an agitation conducted with so
much violence, and marked by so many of the characteristics
of revolution, portended serious perils to the even course of
constitutional government. The Lords alone had now been
coerced ; but might not the executive, and the entire legislar
ture, at some future period, be forced to submit to the like
coercion ? Such apprehensions were not without justification
from the immediate aspect of the times ; but further expe-
rience has proved that the success of this popular measure
was due, not only to the dangerous pressure of democracy,
but to other causes not less material to successful agitation,
— the inherent justice of the measure itself, the union of the
middle and working classes under the guidance of their natu-
ral leaders, and the support of a strong parliamentary party,
embracing the majority of one house and a considerable
minority in the other.
At the very time when this popular excitement was raging
in England, an agitation of a different kind, and fol- Agitation for
lowed by results widely dissimilar, had been com- t|Jeu,^n**'
menced in Ireland. Mr. O'Connell, emboldened iS3i>-3i.
by his successful advocacy of the Catholic-claims, resumed the
exciting and profitable arts of the demagogue ; and urged the
repeal of the legislative union of England and Ireland. But
his new cause was one to which no agitation promised success.
Not a statesman could be found to counsel the dismember-
ment of the empire. All politicid parties alike repudiated
1 Roebuck's Hist, of the Whig Ministry, ii. 291, 297; Hans. Deb., 3d
Sen, xiii. 430, June 5th, 1832.
« Courts and Cabinets of Will. IV. and Vict I. 303-331.
224 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
it : the press denounced it : the sense of the nation revolted
against it. Those who most deplored the wrongs i.nd mis-
governraent of Ireland, foresaw nothing but an aggravation
Mr. O'Con- of those evils, in the idle and factious cry for
te)ts*wUb repeal. But Mr. O'Connell hoped, by dt;nionstra-
ix«>uti>e tions of physical force, to advance a cause wiiich
1830-31. jjjg^ yf\t\i none of that moral support which is
essential to success. On the 27th of December, 1830, a pro-
cession of trades' unions through the streets of Dublin was
])revented by a proclamation of the lord-lieutenant, under
the Act for the suppression of dangerous assemblies and
associations in Ireland,^ as dangerous to the public peace.
An association was then formed "for the prevention of un-
lawful meetings;" but again, tlie meeting of this body was
prohibited by proclamation. Mr. Q'GjnneU's subtle and
crafty mind quickly planned fi'esh devices to evade the
Act. First, to escape the meshes of the law against socie-
ties, he constituted himself the " Pacificator of Ireland," and
met his friends once a week at a public breakfast at Home's
Hotel. These meetings were also proclaimed illegal, under
the Act. Next, a number of societies were formed, with
various names, but all having a common object. All these
— whatever their pretext and devices — were prohibited.
Mr. O'Connell now resorted to public meetings, by which the
Mr. o'Con- ^^^^ of the lord-lieutcnant were denounced as tyran-
to'the'b.vr''* ^'^"^^ ^^^ Unlawful : but he was soon to quail before
1831. the law. On the 18th of January, 1831, he was ap-
prehended and held to bail, with some of liis associates, on in-
Ibrmations charging him with having held various meetings, in
• violation of the lord-lieutenant's proclamation. True bills hav
ng been found against him, he pleaded not guilty to the iirsc
fourteen counts and put in demurrers to the others. But not
being prepared to argue the demurrers, he was permitted to
1 10 Geo. IV. c. 1, by which the Catholic Association had been sup-
pressed (supra, p. 209). It was in force for one j'ear from March 6th, 1829,
and until the end of the then next session of Parliament.
KEPEAL AGITATION. 225
withdraw them, and enter a plea of not guilty. This plea, again,
he soon afterwards withdrew, and pleaded guilty to the first four-
teen counts in the indictment ; when the attorney-general en-
tered a nolle prosequi on the remaining counts, which charged
him with a conspiracy. So tame a submission to the law,
after intemperate defiance and denunciations, went far to dis-
credit the character of the great agitator. He was, however,
suflFered to escape without punishment. He was never brought
up for judgment ; and the act of 1829, not having been renewed,
expired at the end of the short session, in April 1831.^ The
repeal agitation was for a time repressed. Had its objects
and means been worthier, it would have met with more sup-
port. But the government, relying upon public opinion, had
not shrunk from a prompt vindication of the law ; and men
of every class and party, except the followers of Mr. O'Con-
nell himself, condemned the vain political delusions, by which
the Irish people had been disturbed.
This baneful agitation, however, was renewed in 1840, and
continued, for some time, in forms more dangerous Renewal of
and mischievous than ever. A Repeal Associa- [So'J^*^***'*'
tion was formed with an extensive organization of i^^-
members, associates, and volunteers, and of officers desig-
nated as inspectors, repeal-wardens, and collectors. By the
agency of these officers, the repeal rent was collected, and
repeal newspapers, tracts, poems, songs, cards, and other de-
vices disseminated among the people. In 1843, many mon-
ster meetings, assembled by Mr. O'Connell, were of the mo?t
threatening character. At Mullingar, upwards of jj^yj^jj^
100,000 people were collected to listen to inflara- i^^-
matory speeches from the liberator.* On the hill of Tara,
where the rebels had been defeated in 1798, j^^„ j-^^
250,000 people were said to have assembled ^ for ^^43.
1 Ann. Reg., 1831, ch. x.; Hans. Deb. (14th and 16th Feb., 1831), 3d
Ser., ii. 490, 609.
2 Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 228, 231.
' Ann. Reg., 184^5, p. 231. Seme said even a million; Speech of Attorney-
Gen .^ral, jA//.. 1844. p. 310.
22G LIBERTY OF OPINION.
the same purpose. These meetings, by their numbers and
organization, and by the order and discipline with which they
were assembled and marshalled, assumed the form of military
demonstrations. Menace and intimidation were plainly their
object, — not political discussion. The language of the lib-
erator and his friends was designed to alienate the minds of
the people from the English government and nation. Eng-
lishmen were designated as " Saxons : " their laws and rulers
were denounced : Irishmen who submitted to tlie yoke, wt-re
slaves and cowards. Justice was to be sought in arbitration
courts, appointed by themselves, and not in the constituted
tribunals. To give battle to the English, was no uncommon
AtiR. 20th theme of repeal oratory. " If he had to go to hat-
1**^ tie," said O'Connell, at Roscommon, "he should
have the strong and steady tee-totallers with him : the tee-
total 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 that he would not
fight, with his tee-totallers. Yes, tee-totalism was the first
sure ground on which rested their hope of sweeping away
Saxon domination, and giving Ireland to the Irish." ^ This
was not constitutional agitation, but disaffection and re%'olt.
Oct. 8th -^^ length, a monster meeting having been an-
1843. nounced to take place at Clontarf, near Dublin,
the government issued a proclamation ^ to prevent it ; and by
necessary military precautions, effectually arrested the dan-
gerous demonstration. The exertions of the government
were seconded by Mr. O'Connell himself, who issued a no-
1 Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 234; Jbid., 1844, p. 335, et seq. Trial of Mr.
O'Connell; summing up of chief justice, &c.
2 The proclamation stated " that the motives and objects of the persons
to be assembled thereat, are not the fair legal exercise of constitutional
rights and privileges, but to bring into hatred and contempt the govern-
ment and constitution of the United Kingdom, as by law established, and
to iiccompli:<li alterutions in tlie lawB and constitution of tlie realm, by in-
timidation, and the demonstration of physiral force."
REPEAL AGITATION. 227
tice abandoning the meeting, and used all his influence to
prevent the assembling of the repealers.
This immediate danger having been averted, the govern-
ment resolved to bring Mr. O'Connell and his Trial of Mr.
confederates to justice, for their defiance of the ana°th<f re-
law ; and on the 14th of October, Mr. O'Connell, pe^'-^*"-
his son, and eight of his friends were arrested and held
to bail on charges of conspiracy, sedition, and the unlaw-
ful assembling of large numbers of persons for the pur-
pose of obtaining a repeal of the Union by intimidation and
the exhibition of physical foroe.i From this moment Mr.
O'Connell moderated his language, abjured the use Nov. 2d
of the irritating term of " Saxon," exliorted his ^^"^^
followers to tranquillity and submission ; and gave tokens of
his readiness even to abandon the cause of repeal itself.*^ At
length the trial was commenced ; but, at the out- xnai com-
set, a painful incident, due to the peculiar condi- ™^n'^i5th
tion of Ireland, deprived it of much of its moral ^^^•
weight, and raised imputations of unfairness. The old feud
between Catholic and Protestant was the foundation of the
repeal movement : it embittered every political struggle ;
and notoriously interfered with the administration of justice.
Neither party expected justice from the other. And in this
trial, eleven Catholics having been challenged by the crown,
the jury was composed exclusively of Protestants. The
leader of the Catholic party, the man who had triumphed
over Protestant ascendency, was to be tried by his foes.*
After a trial of twenty-five days, in which the proceedings of
the agitatoi's were fully disclosed, Mr. O'Connell was found
guilty upon all, or parts of all, the counts of the indictment ;
and the other defendants (except Father Tierney) May30th
on nearly all. Mr. O'Connell was sentenced to a ^^***
year's imprisonment, to pay a fine of 2000/., and to give
1 Ann. Repf., 1843, p. 237.
2 Ibid., p. 238.
« Hans. Deb., .3d Ser., Ixxiii. 4-35; Ixxvi. 1956, &c
228 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
security for good behavior for seven years. The other de-
fendants were sentenced to somewhat lighter punishments
and Mr. Tierney was not called up for judgment
Mr. O'Connell was now old, and in prison. Who can
The writ wonder that he met with compassion and sympa-
of error. thy? His friends complained that he had been
unfairly tried ; and the lawfulness of his conviction was ira
mediately questioned by a writ of error. Many who con
dernned the dangerous excesses of the repeal agitation, re-
membered his former services to his country, his towering
genius, and rare endowments ; and grieved that such a man
should be laid low. After four months' imprisonment, liow-
ever, the judgment of -the court below was reversed by the
House of Lords, on the writ of error, and the repealers were
once more at liberty. The liberator was borne from his
prison, in triumph, through the streets of Dublin. He was
received with tumultuous applause at meetings, where he
still promised a repeal of the Union : his rent continued to
be collected : but the agitation no longer threatened danger
to the state. Even the miscarriage of the prosecution favored
the cause of order. If one who had defied the government
of England could yet rely upon the impartial equity of its
highest court, where was the injustice of the hated Saxon ?
And having escjiped by technical errors in the indictment,
and not by any shortcomings of the law itself, O'Connell was
sensible that he could not again venture to transgress the
bounds of lawful agitation.
Henceforth the cause of repeal gradually languished and
died out. Having no support but factious violence,
Failnre of the to I r
repeal agita- working upon general discontent and many social
maladies, it migiit indeed have led to tumulLs
«f*rep"^°° bloodshed, and civil war, — but never to the co-
li^"""' ercion of the government and legislature of Eng-
Mr Smith 'and. Revived a few years later by Mr. Smith
O'Brien. O'Brien, it again perished in an abortive and ri
diculous insurrection.*
1 Ann. Keg., 1848, p. 95; Chron., p. 95.
ORANGE LODGES. 229
During the repeal agitation in Ireland, other combinations,
in both countries, were not without peril to the orange
peace of society. In Ireland, Catholics and Prot- 'odges.
estants had long been opposed, like two hostile races ; *
and while the former had been struggling to throw off their
civil disabilities, to lessen the burden of tithes, to humble
the Protestant Church, to enlarge their own influence, and
lastly, to secure an absolute domination by casting off the
Protestant legislature of the United Kingdom, — the latter
had combined, with not less earnestness, to maintain that
Protestant ascendency, which was assailed and endangered.
So far back as 1795, Orange societies had been established
in Ireland, and particularly in the north, where the popula-
tion was chiefly Protestant. Early in the present century
they were extended to England, and an active correspondence
was maintained between the societies of the two kingdoms.
As the agitation of the Catholics increased, the confederation
expanded. Checked, for a time, in Ireland, together with
the Catholic Association, by the Act of 1825, it assumed, in
1828, the imposing character of a national institution. The
Duke of Cumberland was inaugurated; in London, as grand
master : commissions and warrants were made out under the
great seal of the order : office-bearers were designated, in
the language of royalty, as " trusty and well-beloved : " large
subscriptions were collected ; and lodges founded in every
part of the empire, whence delegates were sent to the grand
lodge. Peers, members of the House of Commons, country
gentlemen, magistrates, clergy, and officers in the army and
navy, were the patrons and promoters of this organization.
The members were exclusively Protestants : they were ad-
mitted with a religious ceremony, and taught secret signs
and pass-words.^ In the following year, all the hopes of
Orangemen were suddenly dashed, and the objects of the
institution frustrated, by the surrender of the Protestant cita
1 Infra, Chap. XVI. (Ireland).
3 Commons' Report, 1835, p. vi.-x.
230 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
del by the ministers of the crown. Hitherto their loyalty
had scarcely been exceeded by their Protestant zeal ; but
now the violence and^folly of some of their most active, but
least discreet members, brought imputations even upon their
fidelity to the crown. Such men were possessed of the mo.t
extravagant illusions. It was pretended that the Duke of
Wellington was preparing to seize upon the crown, as mili-
tary dictator ; and idle plots were even fomented to set aside
the succession of the Duke of Clarence, as insane, and the
prospective claims of the infant Princess Victoria, as a female
and a minor, in order that the Duke of Cumberland might
reign, as a Protestant monarch, over a Protestant people.*
Treason lurked amid their follies. Meanwhile, the organiza-
tion was extended until it numbered 1500 lodges compris-
ing 220,000 Orangemen in Ireland ; and 381 lodges in Great
Britain, with 140,000 members. There were thirty Orange
lodges in the army at home, and many othei-s in the colonies,''
which had been held without the knowledge of the com-
manding officers of regiments.
Secret as were tiie proceedings of the Grand Orange
Society, the processions of its lodjjes in Ireland,
Parliainen- , •" ■; . . ^ '
tary innui- and its cxtcnsive ramifications elsewhere, could not
' ' fail to arouse suspicion and alarm ; and at length
in 1835, the magnitude and dangerous character of the organi-
zation were fully exposed by a committee of the House of
Commons. It was shown to provoke animosities, to interfere
with the administration of justice, and to endanger the disci-
Orange loages pline of the army.' Mr. Hume urged the neces-
conaemueo' '^'^J ^^ prompt mcasurcs for suppressing Orange
^^^- and other secret associations in the army ; and
so fully was the case established, that the House concurred
in an address to the king, praying him to suppress political
1 Hans. IX^b., xxxi. 797, 807: Ann. Reg., 18-36, p. 11.
2 Commons' Report, 1835, xi.-xv., xxvii. ; Ann. Reg., 1835, chap. xii.
Martineaus History, ii. 206-275.
' Keport p. xvi'i.
ORANGE LODGES. 231
societies in the array/ and calling attention to the conduct
of the Duke of Cumberland. His Majesty promised liia
ready compliance.^ The most indefensible part of the organi-
zation was now condemned. Early in the ensuing j^^^^t-ss
session, the disclosures of the committee beino; ag^i'wt
' _ ° Orange
then complete, another address was unanimously ioag«». tvb.
. . , J. , „•' 23d, 1836.
agreed to, praymg tlie kmg to take measures tor
the effectual discouragement of Orange lodges, and generally of
all political societies, excluding persons of different religions,
and using secret signs and symbols, and acting by means of
associated branches. Again the king assured the House of
his compliance.' His Majesty's answ^er having been commu-
nicated to the Duke of Cumberland by the Home Secretary,
his Royal Highness announced that he had already recom-
mended the dissolution of Orange societies in Ireland, and
would take measures to dissolve them in England.*
Other societies have endeavored to advance their cause
by public discussions, and appeals to their numbers
•' ^ ' ' ^ Peculiarity
and resolution. The Orange Association labored of Orange
secretly to augment its numbers, and stimulate the
ardor of its associates, by private intercourse and correspon
dence. Publicity is the very life of constitutional agitation ;
but secrecy and covert action distinguished this anomalous in-
stitution. Such peculiarities raised suspicions that men who
shrank from appeahng to public opinion, meditated a resort
to force. It was too late to 'repel Catholic aggression and
democracy by argument ; but might they not, even yet, be
resisted by the sword ? ® That such designs were entertained
by the leading Orangemen, few but their most rancorous ene-
mies affected to believe ; but it was plain that a prince of
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxx. 58, 95, 266 ; Ann. Reg., 1835, chap. xii. ;
Comin. Joum., xc. 5-3.3.
-2 Jl/id.,b52.
8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxxi. 779, 870.
4 Ann. Reg., 1836, p. 19.
« See Letters of Col. Fairman, Report of Committee, 1835, Nr. 605, ^
xvi.
232 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
the l>lood and the proudest nobles, — inflamed by political
discontents, and associated with reckless and foolish men, —
might become not less dangerous to the state, than the most
vulgar tribunes of the people.
Such were the failures of two great combinations, respect-
ively representing the Catholics and Protestants of
Anti-Sill- .^
»ery AasocSa- Ireland, and their ancient feuds. While they were in
dangerous conflict, another movement — essentially
differing from these in the sentiments from which it sprang,
and the means by which it was forwarded — was brought to
a successful issue. In 1833, the generous labors of the
Anti-Slavery Association were consummated. The venerable
leaders of the movement which had condemned the slave-
trade,* together with Mr. Fowell Buxton, and other younger
associates, had revived the same agency, for attaining the
abolition of slavery itself. Again were the moral and relig-
ious feelings of the people successfully appealed to : again
did the press, the pulpit, the platform, — petitions, addresses,
and debates, — stimulate and instruct the people. Again
was public opinion persuaded and convinced ; and again
a noble cause was won, without violence, menace, or dic-
tation.*
Let us now turn to other combinations of this period,
Trades' formed by working men alone, with scarcely a
unions, 1834. jgader from another class. In 1834, the trades'
unions which had hitherto restricted their action to matters
affecting the interests of operatives and their employers,
were suddenly impelled to a strong political demonstration.
TheDorches- ^ix laborers had been tried at Dorchester for ad-
ter laborers, ministering unlawful oaths, and were sentenced to
transportation.' The unionists were persuaded that these
1 Supra, p. 13-3.
2 Life of Wilberforce, v. 122-127, 163-171, &c. ; Life of Sir Fowell Btur-
ton, 125, 256, 311, &c.; Ann. Reg., 1833, ch. vii.
8 Courts and Cabinets of Will. IV., &c., ii. 82. The Duke of Bucking-
ham Bays that tAvo out of the six " Dorchester laborers " were dissenting
ministers.
TRADES' UNIONS, 1834. 233
men liad been punished as an example to themselves : they
lia<l administered similar oaths, and were amenable to the
same terrible law. Their leaders, therefore, re- procession
solved to demand the recall of the Dorchester uy^f^'pni
laborers; and to support their representations by ^i*^' ^^*'-
an exhibition of physical force. A petition to the king was
accordingly prepared ; and a meeting of trades' unions was
summoned to assemble at Copenhagen Fields on the 21st of
April, and escort a deputation, by whom it was to be presented*
to the Home Office. About 30,000 men assembled on that
day, marslialled in their several unions, and bearing emblems
of their several trades. After the meeting, they formed a
procession and marched, in orderly array, past Whitehall, to
Kennington Common, while the deputation was left to its
mission, at the Home Office. The leaders hoped to over-
awe the government by their numbers and union ; but were
quickly undeceived. The deputation presented themselves
at the Home Office, and solicited the interview which Lord
Melbourne had appointed : but they were met by Mr. Phil-
lips, the under-secretary, and acquainted that Liord Melbourne
could not receive the petition presented in such a manner,
nor admit them to his presence, attended, as thej^ were, by
30,000 men. They retired, humbled and crestfallen, and
half afraid to announce their discomfiture at Kennington :
they had failed in their mission, by reason of the veiy
demonstration upon which they had rested their hopes of
success.
Meanwhile the procession passed onwards, without dis-
turbance. The people gazed upon them as they passed, with
mingled feelings of interest and pity, but with little appre-
hension. The streets were quiet: there were no signs of
pre|)aration to quell disorder: not a soldier was to be seen:
even the police were in the background. Yet, during the
previous night, the metropolis had been prepared as for a
siege. The streets were commanded by unseen artillery :
the barracks and public offices were filled with soldiers undei
234 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
arms : large numbers of police and special constables were
close at hand. Riot and outrage could have been crushed at
a blow ; but neither sight nor sound was there, to betray
distrust of the people, or provoke them to a collision with
authority. To a government thus prepared, numbers were
no menace : they Avere peaceable, and were unmolested. The
vast assemblage dispersed ; and a few days afterwards, a
deputation, with the petition, was courteously received by
Lord Melbourne.* It was a noble example of moderation
and firmness on the part of the executive, — worthy of imita-
tion in all times.
Soon after these events, a wider combination of working
The Chartists, men was Commenced, — the history of which is
~ pregnant with political instruction. The origin of
Chartism was due to distress and social discontents, rather
than to political causes. Operatives were jealous of their
employers, and discontented with their wages, and the high
price of food ; and between 1835 and 1839, many were work-
ing short time in the factoi'ies, or were wholly out of employ-
ment. The recent introduction of the new poor law was also
represented as an aggravation of their wrongs. Their dis-
contents w^re fomented, but their distresses not alleviated, by
trades' unions.
In 1838 they held vast torch-light meetings throughout
Torch-light Lancashire. They were addressed in language of
meetings. frantic violence : they were known to be collecting
arms: factories were burned : tumults and insurrection were
Not iffid threatened. In November, the government desired
1888. the magistrates to give notice of the illegality of
such meetings, and of their intention to prevent them ; and
in December, a proclamation was issued for that purpose.*
Hitherto the Chartists had been little better than the Lud-
dites of a former period. Whatever their political objects,
I Ann. Reg., 1834, Chron. p. 58; Courts and Cabineta of WiL. IV., ii.
s Ann. Reg., 1839, p. 304; Carljle's Tract on Chartism.
THE CHARTISTS, 1837-4S. 235
they were obscured by turbulence and a wild spirit of discon-
tent,— to which hatred of Cfipitalists seemed to be
„.. _, .„„-,, x^ The National
the chief incitement. But in 1838, the " Peoples Petition,
2839,
Charter " was agreed upon ; and a national petition
read at numerous meetings, in support of it.^ Early in 1839, a
national convention of delegates from the working classes was
established in London, whose views were explained in the mon-
ster national petition, signed by 1,280,000 persons, and pre-
sented to the House of Commons on the 14th of June.^ It
prayed for univei-sal suffrage, vote by ballot, annual parlia-
ments, the payment of members, and the abolition of their
property qualification, — such being the five points of the
people's chai-ter. The members of the convention deprecated
appeals to physical force ; and separated themselves, as far as
possible, from those turbulent Chartists who had preached,
and sometimes even practised, a different doctrine. The
petition was discussed with temper and moderation ; but cer-
tainly with no signs of submission to the numbers and organ-
ization of the petitioners.®
While the political section of Chartists were appealing to
Parliament for democratic reform, their lawless
, » • I Chartist
associates, in the country, were making tlie name riotsand
of Chartists hateful to all classes of society. There
were Chartist riots at Birmingham, at Sheffield, at Newcastle .
contributions were extorted from house to house by threats
and violence : the services of the church were invaded by the
intrusion of large bodies of Chartists. At some of their
meetings, the proceedings bore a remarkable resemblance to
those of 1819. At a great meeting at Kersal Moor, near
Manchester, there were several female associations ; and in
imitation of the election of legislatorial attorneys. Chartists
were desired to attend every election ; when the members
1 Ann. Eeg., 1838, Chron. p. 120.
« Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xlviii. 222; Ann. Reg., 1839, p. 30i.
8 June 14th, July 12th, Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xlviii. 222, xlix. 220. A
motion for referring it to a committee was negatived by a majority of 189
— Ayes, 46; Noes, 235.
236 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
letiirned by show of hands, being the true representatives of
the people, would meet in London at a time to be appointed.
Riot at Thousands of armed men attacked the town of
Newport. Newport ; but were repulsed with loss by the spirit
of Mr. Phillipps, the mayor, and his brother magistrates, and
the well-directed fire of a small file of troops. Three of their
leaders, Frost, Williams, and Jones, were tried and trans-
ported for their share in this • rebellious outrage.^ Such
excesses were clearly due to social disorganization among the
operatives, to be met by commercial and social remedies, —
rather than to political discontents, to be cured by constitu-
tional changes : but being associated with political agitation,
they disgraced a cause which, — even if unstained by crimes
and outrage, — would have been utterly hopeless.
The Chartists occupied the position of the democrats and
Weakness of radical reformers of 1793, 1817, and 1819. Prior
ciaL^siione *<> 1830, reformers among the working classes had
fai agitation, glwajs demanded universal suffrage and annual
parliaments. No scheme less comprehensive embraced
their own claims to a share in the government of the
country. But measures so democratic having been repudi-
ated by the Whig party and the middle classes, the cause of
reform had languished.' In 1830 the working classes, pow-
erless alone, had formed an alliance with the reform party
and the middle classes ; and, waiving their own claims, had
contributed to the passing of a measure which enfranchised
every class but themselves.' Now they were again alone, in
their agitation. Their numbers were greater, their knowl-
edge advanced, and their organization more extended : but
their hopes of forcing democracy upon Parliament were not
less desperate. Their predecessors in the cause had been
met by repression and coercion. Free from such restraints,
the Chartists had to encounter the moral force of public
1 Ann. Reg., 1839, p. 303; Chron. 73, 132-161.
3 Supra, Vol. I. 322; Vol. II. 195.
« Supra, p. 217.
THE lOTH OF APRIL, 1848. 237
opinion, and the strength of a Parliament resting upon a
M'ider basis of rapresentation, and popular confidence.
This agitation, however hopeless, was continued for several
years ; and in 1848, ihe Revolution in France in- chartist
spired the Chartists with new life. Relying upon ^^[1'^^^'
the public excitement and their own numbers, they i^^-
now hoped to extort from the fears of Parliament, what they
had failed to obtain from its sympathies. A meeting was ac-
cordingly summoned to assemble on the 10th of April, at
Kennington Common, and carry a Chartist petition, pretend-
ing to bear the signatures of 5,000,000 persons, to the very
doors of the House of Commons. The Chartist leaders
seemed to have forgotten the discomfiture of the trades' unions
in 1835; but the government, profiting by the experience of
that memorable occasion, prepared to protect Parliament
from intimidation, and the public peace from disturbance.
On the 6th, a notice was issued declaring the proposed
meeting criminal and illegal, as tending to excite „
° . . . . Preparations
terror and alarm; and the intention of repairing to oftuegov-
■r. , . « ... ernment.
Parliament, on pretence or presenting a petition,
with excessive numbers, unlawful, — and calling upon well-
disposed persons not to attend. At the same time, it was an-
nounced that the constitutional right of meeting to petition,
and of presenting the petition, would be respected.'^
On the 10th, the bridges, the Bank, the Tower, and the
neighborhood of Kennington Common, were guard- The special
ed by horse, foot, and artillery. Westminster *^'^**''^«^-
Bridge, and the streets and approaches to the Houses of
Parliament and the public offices, were commanded by un-
seen ordnance. An overpowering military force, — vigilant,
yet out of sight, — was ready for immediate action. The
Houses of Parliament were filled with police ; and the streets
guarded by 170,000 special constables. The assembling of
this latter force was the noblest example of the strength of a
constitutional government, to be found in history. The maia-
1 Ann. Reg., 1848, Chron. p. 61.
238 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
tenance of peace and order was confided to the people them-
selves. All classes of society vied with one another in
loyalty and courage. Nobles and gentlemen of fashion, law-
yers, merchants, scholars, clergymen, tradesmen, and opera-
tives, hastened together to be ssvorn, and claim the privilege
of bearing the constable's staff, on this day of peril. The
Chartists found themselves opposed not to their rulers only,
but to the vast moral and material force of English society.
They might, indeed, be guilty of outrage : but intimidatioi
was beyond their power.
The Chartists, proceeding from various parts of the town,
Faiinreof '^^ length assembled at Kennington Common. A
the meeting, ij^jy ^f 150,000 men had been expected: not
more than 25,000 attended, — to whom may be added about
10,000 spectators, attracted by curiosity. Mr. Feargus O'Con-
nor, their leader, being summoned to confer with Mr. Mayne,
the Police Commissioner, was informed that the meeting
would not be interfered with, if Mr. O'Connor would en-
gage for its peaceable character : but that the procession to
Westminster would be prevented by force. The discon-
certed Chartists found all their proceedings a mockery. The
meeting, having been assembled for the sake of the proces-
sion, was now without an object, and soon broke up in con-
fuaion. To attempt a procession was wholly out of the ques-
tion. The Chartists were on the wrong side of the river,
and completely entrapped. Even the departing crowds were
intercepted and dispersed on their arrival at the bridges, so
as to prevent a dangerous reunion on the other side. Tor-
rents of rain opportunely completed their dispersion ; and
in the afternoon, the streets were deserted. Not a trace was
left of the recent excitement.*
Discomfiture pursued this petition, even into the House of
Commons. It was numerously sijined, beyond all
Signatures , , .. ,.,,, '' . " '' .
to the example ; but Mr. O Connor, m presentmg it,
** ' '**"■ stated that it bore 5,70(5,000 signatures. A few
» Anil. Keg., 1848, Chron. p. DO; Newspapers, 9t!i, lOlh, and 11th April,
184S. I'crsoii:il observalioi
ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE. 239
days afterwards, the real number was ascertained to be
1,900,000, — of which many were in the same handwriting,
and others fictitious, jocose, and impertinent. Tlie vast
numbers who had signed this petition, earnestly and in good
Caith, entitled it to respect ; but the exaggeration, levity, and
carelessness of its promoters brought upon it discredit and
ridicule.^ The failure of the Chartist agitation was another
example of the hopelessness of a cause not supported by a
parliamentary party, by enlightened opinion, and by the co-
operation of several classes of society.
The last political agitation which remains to be described,
was essentially different in its objects, incidents, Aoti-Com-
character, and result. The "Anti-Corn-Law ^'^*sue.
League " affords the most remarkable example in our history,
of a great cause won against powerful interests and preju-
dice, by the overpowering force of reason and public opinion.
When the League was formed in 1838, both Houses of Par-
liament, the first statesmen of all parties, and the landlords
and farmers throughout the country, firmly upheld the protec-
tive duties upon coin ; while merchants, manufacturers, trad-
ers, and the inhabitants of towns, were generally indifferent
to the cause of free trade. The parliamentary advocates of
free trade in corn, led by Mr. Poulett Thomson and Mr.
Charles Villiers, had already exhausted the resources of
political science, in support and illustration of this measure.
Their party was respectable in numbers, in talent, and polit-
ical influence; and was slowly gathering strength. It was
supported, in the country, by many political philosophers, —
by thoughtful writers in the press ; and by a few far-seeing
merchants and manufacturers : but the impulse of a popular
movement, and public conviction, was wanting. This it
became the mission of the Anti-Corn-Law League to create.
This association at once seized upon all the means by
1 The Queen, the Duke of Wellington, Sir R. Peel, and others were
represented as having signed it several times. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser.,
zcviii., 285; Report of Public Petitions Committee.
240 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
which, in a free country, pubhc opinion raay be acted upon.
Its oream- Free-trade newspapers, pamplilets, and tracts were
Mtion. circulated with extraordinary indvistry and perse-
verance. The leaders of the League, and, above all, Mr.
Cobden, addressed meetings, in every part of the country, in
language calculated at once to instruct the public mind in the
true principles of free trade, and to impress upon the people
the vital im[X)rtance of those principles to the interests of the
whole community. Delegates from all parts of England
were assembled at Westminster,* Manchester, and elsewhere,
who conferred with ministers and members of Parliament.'
In 1842 they numbered nearly 1600.* In London, Drury
Lane, and Covent Garden, tiieatres were boirowed from the
drama, and converted into arenas for political discussion,
where crowded audiences listened with earnest, and often pas-
sionate, attention, to the stirring oratory of the corn-law
repealers. In country towns, these intrepid advocates even
undertook to convert farmers to the doctrines of free trade ;
and were ready to break a lance with all comers, in the
town-hall or corn-exchange. The whole country was awak-
ened by the masterly logic and illustration of Mr. Cobden,
aiid the vigorous eloquence of Mr. Bright. Religion was
pressed into the service of this wide-spread agitation. Con-
ferences of ministers were held at Manchester, Carnarvon,
and Edinburgh, where the corn-laws were denounced as sin-
ful restraints upon the bounty of the Almighty ; and the
clergy of all denominations were exhorted to use the persua-
sions of the pulpit, and every influence of tlieir sacred call-
ing, in the cause.* Even the sympathies of the fair sex
were enlisted in the agitation, by the gayeties and excite-
ment of free-trade bazaars.* Large subscriptions were col-
lected, which enabled the League to support a numerous
1 Prentice, i. 101, 107, 125.
a Ibid., 150, 200.
« Ibid., 306.
* Ibid., i. 234, 252, 290.
i Prentice's History of the Ck>m-Law League, i. 296.
AXTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE. 241
staff of agents, who everywhere collected and disseminated
information upon the ofieration of the corn laws, and encour-
aged the preparation of petitions.
By these means public opinion was rapidly instructed, and
won over to the cause of free trade in corn. But Parliament
and the constituencies were still to be overcome. Parlia-
ment was addressed in petitions from nearly every parish ;
and nothing was left undone, that debates and divisions could
accomplish within its walls. The constituencies were appealed
to, at every election, on behalf of free-trade candidates ; the
registration was diligently watched ; and no pains 1844.
was spared to add free-trade voters to the register. Nor did
the League stop here ; but finding that, with all their efforts,
the constituencies wei*e still opposed to them, they resorted
to an extensive creation of votes by means of 40«. freeholds,
purchased by the working classes.*
Never had political organization been so complete. The
circumstances of the time favored its efforts ; and in its success
1846, the protective corn law — with which the most power
ful interests in the state were connected — was uncondition-
ally and forever abandoned. There had been great pressure
from without, but no turbulence. Strong feelings had been
aroused in the exciting struggle : landlords had been de-
nounced : class exasperated against class : Parliament ap-
proached in a spirit of dictation. Impetuous orators, heated
in the cause, had breathed words of fire: promises of cheap
bread to hungry men, and complaints that it was denied them,
were full of peril : but this vast disorganization was never
discredited by acts of violence or lawlessness. The leaders
had triumphed in a great popular cause, without the leas
taint of sedition.
This movement had enjoyed every condition of success. The
csiusc itself appealed alike to the reason and judgment Q^nses of
of thinking men, and to the interests and passions of success.
1 JbiJ.. 2)ass{in, and particularly i. 64, 90, 126, 137, 225, 410; ii. 168, 236
&c.; M. Bastiatf Cobden et la Ligue; Ann. Reg., 1843, 1844.
vol.. II 16
242 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
the multitude : it had the essential basis of parliamentary sup'
port ; and it united, for a common object, the employers of
labor and the working classes. The latter condition mainly
insured its success. Manufacturers foresaw, in free trade, an
indefinite extension of the productive energies of the coun-
try : operatives hoped for cheap bread, higher wages, and
more constant employment. These two classes, while suffer-
ing from the commercial stagnation of past years, had been
estranged and hostile. Trades' unions and Chartism had
widened the breach between them ; but they now worked
heartily together, in advancing a measure which promised
advantage to them all.
The history of the League yet furnishes another lesson.
It was permitted to survive its triumph ; and such
law league is the lovc of freedom which animates English-
after 1846. ,. ^ U J v • • I,
men, that no sooner had its mission been accom-
plished, than men who had labored with it, became jealous of
its power and dreaded its dictation. Its influence rapidly
declined ; and at length it became unpopular, even in its own
strongholds.
In reviewing the history of political agitation, we cannot
be blind to the perils which have sometimes threat-
Review of
political ened the state. We have observed fierce antago-
«g> ion. nism between the people and their rulers, ^ — evil
passions and turbulence, — class divided against class, — asso-
ciations overbearing the councils of Parliament, — and large
bodies of subjects exalting themsejives into the very seat of
government. Such have been the storms of the political at-
mosphere, which, in a free state, alternate with the calms and
light breezes of public opinion ; and statesmen have learned to
calculate their force and direction. There have been fears and
dangers; but popular discontents have been dissipated, wrongs
have been redressed and public liberties established, without
revolution ; while popular violence and intimidation have been
overborne by the combined force of government and society.
And what have been the results of agitation upon the legis-
BEVIEW OF POLITICAL AGITATION. 243
lation of the country ? Not a measure has been forced upon
PaHiament, which the calm judgment of a- later time has
not since approved ; not an agitation has failed, which poster-
ity has not condemned. The abolition of the slave-trade and
slavery, Catholic emancipation, parliamentary reform, and the
repeal of the corn laws, were the fruits of successful agita-
tion ; — the repeal of the Union, and Chartism, conspicuous
examples of failure.
But it may be asked, is agitation to be the normal condi-
tion of the state ? Are the people to be ever combining,
and the government now resisting, and now yielding to, their
pressure ? Is constitutional government to be worked with
this perpetual wear and tear, — this straining and wrenching
of its very framework ? We fervently hope not. The
struggles we have narrated marked the transition from old
to new principles of government, — from exclusion, repres-
sion, and distrust, to comprehension, sympathy, and confi-
dence. Parliament, yielding slowly to the expansive ener-
gies of society, was stirred and shaken by their upheavings.
But with a free and instructed press, a wider representation,
and a Parliament enjoying the general confidence of the
people, — agitation has nearly lost its fulcrum. Should Par-
liament, however, oppose itself to the progressive impulses
of another generation, let it study well the history of the
past; and discern the signs of a pressure from without,
which may not wisely be resisted. Let it reflect upon the
wise maxim of Macaulay : " The true secret of the power of
agitators is the obstinacy of rulers ; and liberal governments
make a moderate people." *
The development of free institutions, and the entire rec-
ognition of liberty of opinion, have wrought an Altered
essential change in the relations of the govern- I^yg^en'
ment and the people. Mutual confidence has *° **»« p«>p1«-
succeeded to mutual distrust. They act in concert, in-
stead of opposition ; and share with one another the cares
1 Sp«ech on Reform Bill, 5th July, 1831; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., iv. 118.
244 LIBERTY OF OPINION.
and re^^ponsibility of state affairs. If the pow»!r and in-
dependence of ministers are sometimes impaired by the ne-
cessity of admitting the whole people to their councils. —
their po.-ition is more often fortified by public approbation.
Free discussion aids them in all their deliberations : the first
intellects of the country counsel them : the good sense of
the people strengthens their convictions. If they judge
rightly, they may rely with confidence on public opinion ;
and even if they err, so prompt is popular criticism, that
they may yet have time to repair their error. The people
having advanced in enlightenment as well as in freedom,
their judgment has become more discriminating, and less
capricious, than in former times. To wise rulers, therefoi'e,
government has become less difficult. It has been their aim
to satisfy the enlightened judgment of the whole community,
freely expressed and readily interpreted. To read it rightly,
— to cherish sentiments in advance of it, rather than to halt
and falter behind it, — has become the first office of a success-
ful statesman.
What theory of a free state can transcend this gradual
, development of freedom, — in which the power of
Concurrent "^ _ '
Increase of the people has increased with their capacity for
power and , <> »• t • i . i . i i • .
Intelligence selt-govemment .»* It is this remarkable condition
peop 8. ^j^^^ j^^^ distinguished English freedom from de-
mocracy. Public opinion is expressed, not by the clamorous
chorus of the multitude, but by the measured voices of
all classes, parties, and interests. It is declared by the press,
the exchange, the market, the club, and society at large. It
is subject to as many checks and balances as the constitution
itself; and represents the national intelligence, rather than
the popular wilL
GENERAL WABRANTS. 245
CHAPTER XI.
Ijberty of the Subject secured before Political Pri\-ileges: — General War-
rants:— Suspension of Habeas Corpus Act: — Impressment: — Revenue
Laws as affecting Civil Liberty; — Commitments for Contempt: — Ar-
rests and Imprisonment for Debt: — Last Relics of Slavery: — Spies and
Informers: — Opening Letters: — Protection of Foreigners: — Extradi-
tion Treaties.
During the last hundred years, every institution has been
popularized, — every public liberty extended. Liberty of
Long before this period, however. Englishmen ^urea^^*
had enjoyed pergonal liberty as their birthright. ^^,'^"31'""'
More prized tlian any other civil right, and more P""iege8.
jealously guarded, — it had been secured earlier than those
political privileges, of which we have been tracing the de-
velopment. The franchises of Magna Charta had been
firmly established, in the seventeenth century. The Star
Chamber had fallen: the power of arbitrary imprisonment
had been wrested from the crown and privy council : liberty
had been guarded by the Habeas Corpus Act: judges re-
deemed from dependence and corruption ; and juries from
intimidation and servile compliance. The landmarks of
civil liberty were fixed : but relics of old abuses were yet
to be swept away, and traditions of times less favorable to
freedom to be forgotten. Much remained to be done for the
consolidation of rights already recognized ; and we may
trace progress, not less remarkable than that which lias char-
acterized the history of our political liberties.
Among the remnants of a jurisprudence which had favored
prerogative at the expense of liberty, was that of General war-
the arrest of persons under general warrants, **"'*' ^"^^
246 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
without previous evidence of their guilt or identifica-
tion of their person.^. This practice survived the Revolu-
tion, and was continued without question, on the ground of
usage, until the reign of George III., when it received its
death-blow from the boldness of Wilkes and the wisdom of
Lord Camden. This question was brought to an issue by No.
45 of the " North Briton," already so often mentioned. There
was the libel, but who was the libeller? Ministers knew not,
nor waited to inquire, after the accustomed forms of law : but
forthwith Lord Halifax, one of the secretaries of state, issued
a warrant, directing four messengei's, taking with them a
constable, to search for the authors, printers, and publishers;"
and to apprehend and seize them, together with their papers,
and bring them in safe custody before him. No one having
been charged or even suspected, — no evidence of crime
having been offered, — no one was named in this dread in-
strument. The offence only was pointed at, — not the of-
' fender. The magistrate, who should have sought proofs of
crime, deputed this office to his messengers. Armed with
their roving commission, they set forth in quest of unknown
offenders ; and unable to take evidence, listened to rumors,
idle tales, and curious guesses. They held in their hands the
liberty of every man whom they were pleased to suspect.
Nor were they triflers in their work. In three days, they
arrested no less than forty-nine persons on suspicion, — many
as innocent as Lord Halifax himself. Among the number
was Dryden Leach, a printer, whom they took from his bed
at night. They seized his papers ; and even apprehended
his journeymen and servants. He had printed one number
of the " North Briton," and was then reprinting some other
numbers ; but as he happened not to have printed No. 45,
he was released, without being brought before Lord Halifax.
They succeeded, however, in arresting Kearsley the pub-
lisher, and Balfe the printer, of the obnoxious number, with
all their workmen. From them it was discovered that
Wilkes was the culprit of whom they were in search : but
GENERAL WARRANTS. 247
the evidence was not on oath ; and the messengers received
verbal directions to apprehend Wilkes, under the general
warrant. Wilkes, far keener than the crown lawyers, not
seeing his own name there, dechired it " a ridiculous warrant
against the whole English nation," and refused to Arrest of
obey it. But after being in custody of the mes-^^'^**-
sengers for some hours, in his own house, he was taken away
in a chair, to appear before the secretaries of state. No
sooner had he been removed, than the messengers, returning
to his house, proceeded to ransack his drawers ; and carried
off all his private papers, including even his will and pocket- ;
book. When brought into the presence of Lord Halifax and
Loi'd Egremont, questions were put to Wilkes, which he re-
fused to answer : whereupon he was committed, ^ ^^ goth
close prisoner, to the Tower, denied the use of pen 1^63.
and paper, and interdicted from receiving the visits of his
friends or even of his professional advisers. From this im-
prisonment, however, he was shortly released on a jj^- 2±
writ of habeas corpus, by reason of his privilege ^'^^•
as a member of the House of Commons.^
Wilkes and the printers, supported by Lord Temple's '^
liberality, soon questioned the legality of the gen- .
eral warrant. First, several journeymen printers against the
II- • , /-v 1 messengers,
brought actions agamst the messengers. On the juiy 6th,
first trial. Lord Chief Justice Pratt, — not allow-
ing bad precedents to set aside the sound principles of Eng-
lish law, — held that the general waiTant was illegal ; that
it was illegally executed ; and that the messengers were not
indemnified by statute. The journeymen recovered 300/.
damages ; and the other plaintiffs also obtained verdicts. In
all these cases, however, bills of exceptions were tendered
and allowed.
Mr. Wilkes himself brought an action against Mr. Wood,
under-secretary of state, who had personally super- wiikes'
intended the execution of the warrant. At this tvood, d^°''
trial it was proved that Mr. Wood and the mes- ^"*i ^'^^*
1 >Almoa's Corr. of Wilkes, i. 96-124; iii. 19G-210, kc.
248 LIBKIMY OF THE SUBJECT.
sengcTS, after Wilkes' removal in custody, Imd taken en
tire possession of his house, refusing admission to his
ft"iends ; had sent for a bhicksmith, who opened the
drawers of liis bureau ; and havinsj taken out the papers,
had carried them away in a sack, without taking any list or
inventory. All his private manuscripts were seized, and his
pocketbook filled up the mouth of the sack.* Lord Halifax
was examined, and admitted that the warrant had been made
out, three days before he had re<;eived evidence that Wilkes
was the author of the " North Briton." Lord Chief Justice
Pratt thus spoke of the warrant : — " The defendant claimed
a right, under precedents, to force persons' houses, break
open escritoires, and seize their papers, upon a general war-
rant, where no inventory is made of the tilings thus taken
away, and where uo offenders' names are specified in the
warrant, and therefore a discretionary power given to mes-
sengers to search wherever their suspicions may chance to
fall. If such a power is truly invested in a secretary of
state, and he can delegate this power, it certainly may af
feet the person and property of every man in this kingdom,
and is totally subversive of the liberty of the subject." Tlie
jury found a verdict for the plaintiff, with 1000/ damages.'
Four days after, Wilkes had obtained his verdict against
Mr. Wood, Dryden Leach, the printer, gained an-
Leach«. 4 . '' , ' ^ ° .
Money. Dec. Other vcrdict, with 400Z. damages, against the
10th,1768. '. ,.„ „ . " , °
messengers. A bill or exceptions, however, was
tendered and received in this, as in other cases, and came on
for hearing before the Court of King's Bench, in 1765.
After much argument, and the citing of precedents showing
the practice of the secretary of state's ofiice ever since the
Bevolution, Lord Mansfield pronounced the warrant illegal,
saying, "It is not fit that the judging of the information
should be left to the diswetion of the officer. The magistrate
should judge and give certain directions to the officer." The
1 So stated by Lord Camden in Entiiick v. Carriiigton.
» Lofft's Reports, St. Tr., xix. 1153.
GENERAL WARRANTS. 2i9
other three judges agreed that the warrant was illegal and
bad, believing that "no degree of antiquity can give sanction
to an usage bad initselt"."* The judgment was therefore
affirmed.
Wilkes had also brought actions for false imprisonment
against both the secretaries of state. Lord Egre- „,.
*= _ ° Wilkes and
moiit's death put an end to the action against him ; i^rd Hau-
and Lord Halitax, by pleading privilege, and in-
terposing other delays unworthy of his position and char-
acter, contrived to put off his appearance until after Wilkes
had been outlawed, — when he appeared and pleaded the
outlawry. But at length, in 1769, no further postponement
could be contrived, — the action was tried, and Wilkes ob-
tained no less than 4000/. damages.^ Not only in this ac-
tion, but throughout the proceedings in which persons ag-
grieved by the general warrant had sought redress, the gov-
ernment offered an obstinate and vexatious resistance. The
defendants were harassed by every obstacle which the law
permitted, and subjected to ruinous costs.* The expenses
which government itself incurred in these various actions
were said to have amounted to lOO.OOOZ.*
The liberty of the subject was further assured, at this
period, by anotlier remarkable judgment of Lord search
Camden. In November, 1762, the p:ail of Hali- ror7a"per3:
fax, as secretary of state, had issued a warrant cai^i°Q^Jj;
directing certain messengers, taking a constable to i'^^-
their assistance, to search for John Entinck, Clerk, the author,
or one concerned in the writing, of several numbers of the
1 Burrow's Rep., iii. 1742; St. Tr., xix. 1001; Sir W. Blackstone's Rep.,
555.
2 Wilson's Rep., ii. 256; Almon's Correspondence of Wilkes, iv. 13;
Adolph. Hist., i 1.36, n. ; St. Tr., xix. 1406.
•^ On a motion for a new trial in one of these numerous cases on the
ground o*^ excessive damages, Ch. Justice Pratt said: — " Tliey heard tho
king's counsel, and saw the solicitor of the treasury endeavoring to sup- .
port and maintain tke legality of the warrant in a tyrannical and seven
manner." — St. Tr., xix. 1405.
* Almon's Corr. of Wilkes
250 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
" Monitor, or British Freeholder," and to seize him, '' together
with his books and papers," and to bring them in safe custody
before the secretary of state. In execution of this warrant,
the messengers apprehended Mr. Entinck in his house, and
seized the books and papers in his bureau, writing-desk, and
drawers. This case differed from that of Wilkes, as the
warrant specified the name of the person against whom it
was directed. In respect of the person, it was not a general
warrant ; but as regards the papers, it was a general search-
warrant, — not specifying any particular papers to be seized,
but giving authority to the messengers to take all his books
and papers, according to their discretion.
Mr. Entinck brought an action of trespass against the mes-
sengers for the seizure of his papers,^ upon which the jury
found a special verdict with 300/. damages. This special
verdict was twice learnedly argued before the Court of Com-
mon Pleas, where at length, in 1765, Lord Camden pro-
nounced an elaborate judgment. He even doubted the right
of the seretary of state to commit persons at all, except for
high treason: but in deference to prior decisions"^ the court
felt bound to acknowledge the right. The main question,
however, was, the legality of a search-warrant for papers.
" If this point should be determined in favor of the jurisdic-
tion," said Lord Camden, " the secret cabinets and bureaus
of every subject in this kingdom will be thrown open to the
search and inspection of a messenger, whenever the secre-
tary of state shall think fit to charge, or even to suspect, a
person to be the author, printer, or publisher of a seditious
libel." " This power, so assumed by the secretary of state,
is an execution upon all the party's papers in the first in-
stance. His house is rifled, his most valuable papers are
taken out of his possession, before the paper, for which he is
charged, is found to be criminal by any competent jurisdic-
tion, and before he is convicted either of writing, publishing,
» Entinck r. Carrington, St. Tr., xix. 1030.
* Queen v. Derl.y, Fort., 140, and R. r. Earbuiy, 2 Barnadist., 293, 346.
GENERAL WARRANTS. 251
or being concerned in the paper." It had been found by the
special verdict that many such warrants had been issued
since the Revolution : but he wholly denied their legality.
He referred the origin of the practice to the Star Cham-
ber, which in pursuit of libels had given search-warrants to
their messenger of the press, — a practice which, after the
abolition of the Star Chamber, had been revived and author-
ized by the Licensing Act of Charles II. in the person of
the secretary of state. And he conjectured that this prac-
tice had been continued after the expiration of that act, —
a conjecture shared by Lord Mansfield and the Court of
King's Bench.^ With the unanimous concurrence of the
other judges of his court, this eminent magistrate now finally /
condemned this dangerous and unconstitutional practice.
Meanwhile, the legality of a general warrant had been
repeatedly discussed in Parliament.^ Several mo- General
tions were offered, in difi'erent forms, for declaring JgcuSed in
it unlawful. While trials were still pending, Parliament,
there were obvious objections to any proceeding by which
the judgment of the courts would be anticipated ; but
in debate, such a warrant found few supporters. Those
who were unwilling to condemn it by a vote of the House,
had little to say in its defence. Even the attorney- and
solicitor-general did not venture to pronounce it legal. But
whatever their opinion, the competency of the House to de-
cide any matter of law was contemptuously denied. Sir
Fletclier Norton, the attorney-general, even went so far as
to declare that " he should regard a resolution of the mem-
bers of the House of Commons no more than the oaths of
so many drunken porters in Covent Garden," — a senti-
ment as unconstitutional as it was insolent. Mr. Pitt affirmed
1 Leach r. Money and others, Burrow's Rep. iii. 1692, 1767; Sir W
Blackstone's Rep., 555. The same view was also adopted by Blackstone,
Ccmim., iv. 336, n. (Kerr's Ed., 1862).
2 Jan. 19th, Feb. 3d, 6th, 13th, 14th, and 17th, 1764; ParL Hist, xv
1393-1418; Jan. 29th, 1765; Ibid., xvi. 6.
252 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
*' that there was not a man to be found of sufficient profligacy
to defend this warrant upon the principle of legality."
In 1766, the Court of King's Bench had condemned the
Resolutions warrant, and the objections to a declaratory reso-
mon'r April ^"''O" ^'^i*® therefore removed; the Court of Com-
22a, 1766-. mon Pleas had pronounced a search-warrant for
papers to be illegal ; and lastly, the more liberal adminis-
tration of the Marquees of Rockingham had succeeded to
that of Mr. Grenville. Accordingly, resolutions were now
agreed to, condemning general warrants, whether for th«
seizure of persons or papers, as illegal ; and declaring
them, if executed against a member, to be a breach of
privilege.^
A bill was introduced to carry into effect these resolutions,
and passed by the House of Commons : but was
bui, April not agreed to by the Lords.'' A declaratory act
' ' ' ■ was, however, no longer necessary. The illegality
of general warrants had been judicially determined, and the
judgment of the courts confirmed by the House of Com-
mons, and approved as well by popular opinion, as by the
first statesmen of the time. The cause of public liberty had
been vindicated, and was henceforth secure.
The writ of Habeas Corpus is unquestionably the first
security of civil liberty. It brings to hght the
Sugpension ^ . . •' ■ , /> ,
ofiiabeas cause of every unprisonment, approves its lawful-
Corpus Act. -., , . _ , T
ness, or liberates the prisoner. Jt exacts obedi-
ence fi'om the highest courts : Parliament itself submits to
its authority.* No right is more justly valued. It protects
the subject from unfounded suspicions, from the aggressions
of power, and from abuses in the administration of justice.*
Yet this protective law, which gives every man security and
confidence in times of tranquillity, has been suspended, again
1 Pari. Hist., xvi. 209.
2 Ihid., 210.
« May's Law and Usage of Parliament, 76.
* Blackstone's Coram. (Kerr), iii. 13S-147, &c.
SUSPENSION OF HABEAS CORPUS ACT. 253
and again, in periods of public danger or appiehension.
Rarely, however, has this been suffered without jealousy
hesitation, and remonstrance ; and whenever the perils of the
state have been held sufficient to warrant this sacrifice of per-
sonal liberty, no minister or magistrate has been suffered to
tamper with the law at his discretion. Parliament alone,
convinced of the exigency of each occasion, has suspended, for
a time, the rights of individuals, in the interests of the state
The first years after the Revolution were full of danger
A dethroned king, aided by foreign enemies and a „
° JO Cases from
powerful body of English adherents, was threaten- the Kevoiu
• I 1 r , . , T tiontolTS*-
ing the new settlement ot the crown with war and
treason. Hence the liberties of Englishmen, so recently
assured, were several times made to yield to the exigencies
of the state. Again, on occasions of no less peril, — the rebel-
lion of 1715, the Jacobite conspiracy of 1722, and the inva-
sion of the realm by the Pretender in 1745, — the Habeas
Corpus Act was suspended.^ Henceforth, for nearly half a
century, the law remained inviolate. During the American
war, indeed, it had been necessary to empower the king to
secure persons suspected of high treason, committed in North
America or on the high seas, or of the crime of piracy ; ^ but
it was not until 1794 that the civil liberties of Englishmen,
at home, were again to be suspended. The dangers and
alarms of that dark period have already been recounted.'
Ministers, believing the state to be threatened by traitorous
conspiracies, once more sought power to countermine treason
by powers beyond the law.
Relying upon the report of a secret committee, Mr. Pit/
moved for a bill to empower His Majesty to secure Habeas
and detain persons suspected of conspiring against suspension
his person and government. He justified this j^^'' jg^i^'
1 Pari. Hist., viii. 27-39 ; xiii. 671. In 1745 it was stated by the solicitor
general that the act had been suspended nine times since the Revolution
and in 1794 Mr. Secretary Dundas made a similar statement. — Pari. Hut.
XXX. 539.
•-' In 1777, act 17 Geo. m. c. 9.
» Supra, f. 152
254 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
measure on the ground, that whatever the temporary danger
of placing such power in the hands of the government, it
was far less than tlie danger with which the constitution and
society were threatened. If ministers abused the power
intrusted to them, they would be responsible for its abuse.
It was vigorously opposed by Mr. Fox, Mr. Grey, Mr. Sher-
idan, and a small body of adherents. They denied the dis-
affection imputed to the people, ridiculed the revelations of
the committee, and declared that no such dangers threatened
the state, as would justify the surrender of the chief safe
guard of personal freedom. This measure would give minis-
ters absolute power over every individual in the kingdom. It
would empower them to arrest, on suspicion, any man whose
opinions were obnoxious to them, — the advocates of reform,
even the members of the parliamentary opposition. Who
would be safej when conspiracies were everywhere suspected,
and constitutional objects and language believed to be the
mere cloak of sedition .'' Let every man charged with trea-
son be brought to justice : in the words of Sheridan, " where
there was guilt, let the broad axe fall ; " but why surrender
the liberties of the innocent ?
Yet thirty-nine members only could be found to oppose the
introduction of the bill.^ Ministers, representing its imme-
diate urgency, endeavored to pass it at once through all its
stages. The opposition, unable to resist its progress by num-
bers, endeavored to arrest its passing for a time, in order to
appeal to the judgment of the country : but all their efforts
were vain. With free institutions, the people were now gov-
erned according to the principles of despotism. The will
of their rulers was supreme, and not to be questioned.
After eleven divisions, the bill was pressed forward as far
as the report, on the same night ; and the galleries being
closed, the arguments urged against it were merely ad-
dressed to a determined and taciturn majority. On the
following day, the bill was read a third time and sent up to
^ Ajes, 201; Noes, 39.
SUSPENSION OF HABEAS CORI'US ACT. 255
the Lords, by whom, after some sharp debates, it was speed-
ily passed.^
The strongest opponents of the measure, while denying its
present necessity', admitted that when danjrer is „
J . . ■' ' . ° Grounds and
immiaent, the liberty of the subject must be sacri- character of
/, 1 , . /. . T-.. the measure.
need to the paramount mterests or the state. Rmg-
leaders must be seized, outrages anticipated, plots discon-
certed, and the dark haunts of conspiracy filled with distrust
and terror. And terrible indeed was the power now intrusted
to the executive. Though termed a suspension of the
Habeas Corpus Act, it was, in truth, a suspension of Magna
Charta,"-^ and of the cardinal principles of the common law.
Every man had hitherto been free from imprisonment until
charged with crime by information upon oath ; and entitled
to a speedy trial, and the judgment of his peers. But any
subject could now be arrested on suspicion of treasonable
practices, without specific charge or proof of guilt : his
accusers were unknown ; and in vain might he demand public
accusation and trial. Spies and treacherous accomplices,
however circumstantial in their narratives to secretaries of
state and law officers, shrank from the witness-box ; and their
victims rotted in jail. Whatever the judgment, temper, and
good faith of the executive, such a power was arbitrary, and
could scarcely fail to be abused.' Whatever the dangers by
which it was justified, — never did the subject so much need
the protection of the laws, as when government and society
were filled with suspicion and alarm.
Notwithstanding the failure of the state prosecutions, and
the discredit cast upon the evidence of a traitor- itscon-
,.,,,, . • , , tinuance;
ous conspiracy, on winch the ouspension Act had I7&i-1800.
1 Pari. Hist., xxxi. 497, 521, 525.
2 " Nullus liber homo capiatur aut imprisonetur, nisi pi;r legale judicium
parium suorum." " Nulli negabaraus, nulli differemus justiciam." •
8 Blackstone says: — "It has happened in England during temporary
suspensions of the statute, that persons apprehended upon suspicion have
Buffered a long imprisonment, merely because they were forgotten." —
Oamm. iii. (Kerr) 146.
25fi LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
been expressly founded, ministers declined to surrender
the invidious power with which they had been intrusted.
Strenuous re^^istance was offered by the opposition to the
continuance of the act ; but it was renewed again and again,
so long as the public apprehensions continued. From 1798
to 1800, the increased malignity and violence of English
democrats, and their complicity with Irish treason, repelled
further objections to this exceptional law.*
At length, at the end of 1801, the act, being no longer
Habeas Cor- defensible on grounds of public danger, was suf-
'*on AcT*" fered to expire, after a continuous operation of
expired 1801. eight years.''' But before its operation had ceased,
a bill was introduced to indemnify all persons who since
Indemnity the Ist of Febi'uary, 1793, bad acted in the afipre-
' ' ■ hension of persons suspected of high treason. A
measui-e designed to protect the ministers and their agents
from responsibility, on account of acts extending over a period
of eight years, was not suffered to pass without strenuous
opposition.* When exti'aordinary powers had first been
sought, it was said that ministers would be responsible for
their proper exercise ; and now every act of authority, every
neglect or abuse, was to be buried in oblivion. It was stated
in debate that some persons had suffered imprisonment for
three years, and one for six, without being brought to trial ;*
and Lord Thurlow could " not resist the impulse to deem
men innocent until tried and convicted." The measure was
defended, however, on the ground that persons accused of
abuses would be unable to defend themselves, without disclos
ing secrets dangerous to the lives of individuals and to the
1 In 1798 there were only seven votes against its renewal. In 1800 it
was opposed by twelve in the Commons, and by three in the Lords. It was
then stated that twenty-nine persons had been imprisoned, some for more
than two years, without being brought to trial. — Pari. IJisl., xxxiv. 1484.
'-* The act 41 Geo. III. c. 26, expired six weeks after the commencement
or the next session, which commenced on the 29th of Oct., in the same
year.
» Pari. Hist., xxxv. 1507-1549.
* Ilnd., xxxv. 1517.
SUSPENSION OF HABEAS CORPUS ACT. 2.37
State. Unless the bill were passed, those channels of informa-
tion would be stopped, on which government relied for guard-
ing the public peace.* When all the accustomed forms of
law had been departed from, the justification of the executive
would indeed have been difficult : but evil times had passed,
and a veil was drawn over them. If dangerous powers had
been misused, they were covered by an amnesty. It were
better to withhold such powers, than to scrutinize their exer-
cise too curiously ; and were any further argument needed
against the suspension of the law, it would be found in the
reasons urged for indemnity.
For several years, the ordinary law of arrest was free from
further invasion. But on the first appearance of g^gp^^io^
popular discontents and combinations, the govern- cor^u^j^t
ment resorted to the same ready expedient for 1817.
strengthening the hands of the executive, at the expense of
public liberty. The suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act
formed part of Lord Sidraouth's repressive measures in 1817,*
when it was far less defensible than in 1794. At the first
period, the French Revolution was still raging : its conse-
quences no man could foresee ; and a deadly war bad broken
out with the revolutionary government of France. Here, at
least, there may have been grounds for extraordinary precau-
tions. But in 1817, France was again settled under the
Bourbons : the revolution had worn itself out : Europe was
again at peace ; and the state was threatened with no danger
but domestic discontent and turbulence.
Again did ministers, having received powers to apprehend
and detain in custody persons suspected of treason- ^.„ ^^
able practices, and, having imprisoned many men ^emnity, 1817.
without bringing them to trial, — seek indemnity for all con-
cerned in the exercise of these powers, and in the suppres-
sion of tumultuous assemblies.' Magistrates had seized papers
1 Pari. Hist., xxxv. 1510. 2 Supra, p. 186.
« Haus. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 491, 551, 643, 708, 795, &c.; 57 Geo. Ill
c. 55 ; repealed by 58 Geo. III. c. 1.
VOL. II. 17
258 LffiERTY OF TUE SUBJECT.
and anas, and interfered with meetings, under circumstances
not warranted even by the exceptional powers intrusted to
them : but having acted in good faith for the repression of
tumults and sedition, they claimed protection. This bill was
not passed without strenuous resistance. The executive had
not been idle in the exercise of its extraordinary powers.
Ninety-six persons had been arrested on suspicion. Of
these, forty-four were taken by warrant of the secretary of
state ; four by warrant of the privy council ; the remainder
on the warrants of magistrates. Not one of those arrested
on the warrant of the secretary of state, had been brought to
trial. The four arrested on the warrant of the privy coun-
cil, were tried and acquitted.* Prisoners had been moved
from prison to prison in chains ; and after a long, painful,
and even solitary imprisonment, discharged on their recog-
nizances, without trial.*
Numerous petitions were presented, complaining of cruel-
ties and hardships ; and though falsehood and ex-
complaining aggcration characterized many of their statements,
the justice of inquiry was insisted on, before a
general indemnity was agreed to. " They were called upon,**
said Mr. Lambton, " to throw an impenetrable veil over all
the acts of tyranny and oppression that had been committed
under the Suspension Act. They were required to stifle ibe
voice of just complaint, — to disregard the numerous petitions
that had been presented, arraigning the conduct of ministers,
detailing acts of cruelty unparalleled in the annals of the
Ba^tile, and demanding full and open investigation." ' But
on behalf of government, it appeared tiiat in no instance
had warrants of detention been issued, except on information
upon oath ; * and the attorney-general declared that none of
1 Lords' Report on the State of the Country. In ten other cases the par-
ties had escaped. Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., xxxvii. 573; Sir M. W. Ridley,
March 9th, 1818; Jbi(l.,901.
2 Petitions of Benbow, Drummond, Bagguley, Leach, Scholes, Ogden,
and others. — Hans. Deb., l.st Ser., xxxvii. 438, 441, 453, 4G1, 519.
« March 9th, 1818; Uans. Deb., Ist Sen, xxxvii. 891.
* Lords' Rep. on State of the Nation, Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxvii. 574.
SUSPENSION OF HABEAS CORPUS ACT. 259
the prisoners had been deprived of liberty for a single hour,
on the evidence of informers alone, which was never acted
on, unless corroborated by other undoubted testimony.^
Indemnity was granted for the past: but the discussions
which it provoked, disclosed, more forcibly than Habeas
ever, the hazard of permitting the even course of gj^^**^ ■*^'''
the law to be interrupted. They were' not with- "^^pe^*®*.
out their warning. Even Lord Sidmouth was afterwards satis-
fied with the rigorous provisions of the Six Acts ; and, while
stifling public discussion, did not venture to propose another
forfeiture of personal hberty. And happily, since his time,
ministers, animated by a higher spirit of statesmanship, have
known how to maintain the authority of the law, in England,
without the aid of abnormal powers.
In Ireland, a less settled state of society, — agrarian out-
rages, — feuds envenomed by many deeds of blood, suspension
— and dangerous conspiracies, have too often called ^^^Act
for sacrifices of liberty. Before the Union, a "* ire^nd.
bloody rebellion demanded this security ; and since that
period, the Habeas Corpus Act has been suspended on
no less than six occasions.^ The last Suspension Act, in
1848, was rendered necessary by an imminent rebellion,
openly organized and threatened : when the people were arm-
ing, and their leaders inciting them to massacre and plunder.'
Other measures in restraint of crime and outrage have also
pressed upon the constitutional liberties of the Irish people.
But let us hope that the rapid advancement of that country
in wealth and industry, in enlightenment and social improve-
ment, may henceforth entitle its spirited and generous people
to the enjoyment of the same confidence as their English
neighbors.
But perhaps the greatest anomaly in our laws, — the most
1 Feb. 17th, 1818, Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxvii. 499, 881, 953, &c.
2 It was suspended in 1800, at the verr time of the Union; from 1802
till 1805; from 1807 till 1810; in 1814; and from 1822 till 1824.
8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., c. 696-755.
260 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
signal exception to personal freedom, — 13 to be found in the
impreas- custom of impressment for the land and sea ser
ment. vice. There is nothing incompatible witli freedom
in a conscription or forced levy of men for the defence of the
country. It may be submitted to, in the freest republic, like
the payment of taxes. The services of every subject may
be required, in such form as the state determines. But im-
pressment is the arbitrary and capricious seizure of individ-
uals from among the general body of citizens. It differs
from conscription, as a particular confiscation differs from a
gener9.1 tax.
The impressment of soldiers for the wars was formerly
exercised as part of the royal prero";ative : but
impress- ^ . , ,
ment for the among the serviccs rendered to liberty by the
Long Parliament, in its earlier councils, this cus-
tom was condemned, " except in case of necessit}' of the sud-
den coming in of strange enemies into the kingdom, or ex-
cept" in the case of persons "otherwise bound by the tenure
of their lands or possessions." ^ The prerogative was dis-
continued : but during the exigencies of war, the temptation
of impressment was too strong to be resisted by Parliament,
The class on whom it fell, however, found little sympathy
from society. They were rogues and vagabonds, who were
held to be better employed in defence of their country, than
in plunder and mendicancy.^ During the American war,
impressment was permitted in the case of all idle and dis-
orderly persons, not following any lawful trade or having
some substance sufficient for their maintenance.' Such men
were seized upon, without compunction, and hurried to the
war. It was a dangerous license, repugnant to the free spirit
of qur laws ; and, in later times, the state has trusted to
bounties and the recruiting sergeant, and not to impressment,
— for strengthening its land forces.
1 16 Charles I, c. 28.
9 Pari. Hist., xv. 547.
8 19 Geo. III. c. 10; Pari. Hiat, xx. 114.
IMPRESSMENT. 261
But lor manning the navy in time of war, the impress-
ment of seamen has been reco";nized by the com- ^
^ •' _ ImpreM-
mon law and by many statutes. The hardships ment for th*
and cruelties of the syslera were notorious.^ No
violation of natural liberty cx)uld be more gross. Free men
were forced into a painful and dangerous service, not only
against their will, but often by fraud and violence. Entrap-
ped in taverns, or torn from their homes by armed press-
gangs, in the dead of night, they were hurried on board
ship, to die of wounds or pestilence. Impressment was re-
stricted by law to seamen, who, being most needed for the
fleet, chiefly suffered from the violence of the press-gangs.
They were taken on the coast, or seized on board merchant-
ships, like criminals : ships at sea were rifled of their crews,
and left without sufficient hands to take them safely into port.
Nay, we even find soldiers employed to assist the press-
gangs : villages invested by a regular force : sentries stand-
ing with fixed bayonets; and churches surrounded, during
divine service, to seize seamen for the fleet.'
The lawless press-gangs were no respecters of persons.
In vain did apprentices and landsmen claim ex- Press-gangs.
emption. They were skulking sailors in disguise, or would
make good seamen at tlie first scent of salt-water ; and
were carried off to the sea ports. Press-gangs were the
terror of citizens and apprentices in London, of laborers in
villages, and of artisans in the remotest inland towns.
Their approach was dreaded like the invasion of a foreign
enemy. To escape their swoop, men forsook their trades
and families and fled, — or armed themselves for resistance.
Their deeds have been recounted in history, in fiction, and
in song. Outrages were of course deplored ; but the navy
was the pride of England, and every one agreed that it must
1 Sir JI. Foster's Rep., 154; Stat. 2 Rich. II. c. 4; 2 & 3 Phil, and Mary
c. 16, &c.; 5 & 6 Will. IV'. c. 24; Barrington on the Statutes, 334; Black-
stone, i. 425 (Kerr); Stephen's Comm., ii. 576; Pari. Hist., vi. 518.
2 Pari. Hist., xv. 544, xix. 81, &c.
» Dec. 2d, 1755, Pari. Hist, xv. 549.
262 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
be recrnited. In vain were other means suggt.'Sted for man-
ning the fleet, — higher wages, limited service, and increased
pensions. Such schemes were doubtful expedients : the navy
could not be hazarded : press-gangs must still go forth and
execute their rough commission, or England would be lost.
And so impressment prospered.*
So constant were the drauglits of seamen for the American
war, that in 1779 the customary exemptions from
tive Act, impressment were withdrawn. Men following
callings under the protection of various statutes
were suddenly kidnapped, by the authority of Parliament,
and sent to the fleet ; and this invasion of their rights was
eflfected in the ruffianly spirit of the press-gang. A bill pro-
posed late at night, in a thin house, and without notice, —
avowedly in order to surprise its victims, — was made retro-
spective in its operation. Even before it was proposed to
Parliament, orders had been given for a vigorous impress-
ment, without any regard to the existing law. Every illegal
act was to be made lawful ; and men who had been seized
in violation of statutes, were deprived of the protection of
Enlistment ^ ^^^ of habeas corpusJ^ Early in the next ex-
Act, 1(96. hausting war, the state, unable to spare its rogues
and vagabonds for the army, allowed them to be impressed,
with smugglers and others of doubtful means and industry,
for the service of the fleet. The select body of electors
were exempt ; but all other men out of work were lawful
prize. Their service was without limit : they might be
slaves for life.'
Throughout the war, these sacrifices of liberty were ex-
1 See debate on Mr. Luttrell's motion, March 11th, 1777; Pari. Hist,
xix. 81. On the 22d Nov., 1770, Lord Chatham said:— "I am myself
clearly convinced, and 1 believe every man who knows anything of tiio
English navy will acknowledge, that, without impressing, it is impossible
to equip a respectable fleet within the time in which such armaments ara
usually wanted." — Pari. UisL, xvi. 1101.
2 June 23d, 1779. Speech of the attorney-general Wedderbnm; Pari.
Hist., XX. 962; 29 Geo. IIL c. 75.
« -ib Geo. IIL c. 34.
REVENUE LAWS. 263
acted for the public safety. But when the land was once
more blessed with peace, it was asked if they
n V J 1 • T^l -1 e ■ Enlistment
would be endured again. Ihe evils or impress- rfnce the
ment were repeatedly discussed in Parliament, and
schemes of voluntary enlistment proposed by Mr. Hume *
and others.^ Ministers and Parliament were no less alive
to the dangerous principles on which recruiting for the navy
had hitherto been conducted ; and devised new expedients
more consistent with the national defences of a free country.
Higher wages, larger bounties, shorter periods of service,
and a reserve volunteer force,* — such have been the means
by which the navy has been at once strengthened and pop-
ularized. During the Russian war great fleets were manned
for the Baltic and the Mediterranean by volunteers. Im-
pressment, — not yet formally renounced by law, — has been
condemned by the general sentiment of the country ; * and
we may hope that modern statesmanship has, at length, pro-
vided for the efficiency of the fleet, by measures consistent
with the liberty of the subject.
The personal liberty of British subjects has further suf-
fered from rigors and abuses of the law. The su- ^^,5^^^
pervision necessary for the collection of taxes, — ^^^•
and especially of the excise, — has been frequently observed
upon, as a restraint upon the natural freedom of the subject.
The visits of revenue officers throughout the processes of
manufacture, the summary procedure by which penalties are
enforced, and the encouragement given to informers, have
1 June 10th, 1824; Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xi. 1171; June 9th, 1825; Jbid^
xiii. 1097.
2 Jlr. Buckingham, Aug. 15th, 1833; March 4th, 1834; Hans. Deb., .3d
Ser, XX. 691; xxi. 1061; Earl of Durham, March 3d, 1834; Ibid., xxi.
9i)2; Capt. Harris, May 23d, 1850; Ibid., cxi. 279.
3 5 & 6 Will. IV. 0.24; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxvi. 1120; xcii. 10, 729;
16 & 17 Vict. c. 69; 17 & 18 Vict. c. 18.
* The able commission on manning the navy, in 1859, reported "th«
evidence of the witnesses, with scarcely an exception, shows that the sys-
tem of naval impressment, as practised in former wars, could not now b*
Bu< cessfully enforced." — p. xi.
264 LIBERTY OF THE SURiRCf
been among tlie most popular arguments against duties of
excise.* The repeal of many of these duties, under an
improved fiscal policy, has contributed as well to the Uberiies
of the people, as to their material welfare.
But restraints and vexations were not the worst incidents of
Crown tl'® revenue laws. An onerous and complicated
debtors. system of taxation involved numerous breaches
of the law. Many were puni>hed with fines, which, if not
paid, were followed by imprisonment. Jt was right that the
law should be vindicated ; but while other offences escaped
with limited terms of imprisonment, the luckless debtors of
the crown, if too poor to pay their fees and costs, might suffer
imprisonment for life.^ Even when the legislature at length
took pity upon other debtors, this class of prisoners were
excepted from its merciful care.' But they have since
shared in the milder policy of our laws ; and have received
ample indulgence from the Treasury and tlie Court of
Exchequer.*
While Parliament continued to wield its power of commit-
VindicHve ^6"^ capriciousIy and vindictively, — not in vindi-
excrciseof cation of its own just authority, but for the punish-
pnTiIeges by *' .
I'ariiatuent, ment of libels, and other offences cognizable by the
croachtnent law, — it was Scarcely less dangerous than those
upon ' y- aj.5itj.jjry acts of prerogative which the law had
already condemned, as repugnant to liberty. Its abuses,
however, survived but for a few years after the accession of
George III.*
1 Adam Smith, speaking of " the frequent visits and odious examination
ofthe tax-gatherers," says: — " Dealers have no respite from the continual
visits and examination of the excise oHicers." — Book V. c. 2. — Black-
tone says: — '' The rigor, and arbitrary proceedings of excise laws, seem
Bardly compatible with the temper of a free nation." — Comm., i. 308
(Kerrs ed.)-
2 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., viii. 808.
8 53 Geo. HI. c. 102, § 51.
* 7 Geo. IV. c. 57, ^ 74; 1 & 2 Vict c 110, §§ 103, 10-t.
6 Supra, Chap. VII.; and see Townsend's Mem. of the House of Ccm*
mons, paiuim.
COMMITMENTS FOR CONTEMPT. 26")
But another power, of like character, continued to impose
— and still occasionally permits — the most cruel
1 I'l 1 I- ' Commit-
restraints upon personal liberty. A court or equity mentsfor
can only enforce obedience to its authority by
imprisonment. If obedience be refused, commitment for
contempt must follow. The authority of the court would
otherwise be defied, and its jurisdiction rendered nugatory.
But out of this necessary judicial process grew up gross
abuses and oppression. Ordinary • offences are purged by
certain terms of imprisonment ; men suffer punishment and
are free again. And, on this principle, persons committed
for disrespect or other contempt to the court itself were
released after a reasonable time, upon their apology axid sub-
mission.* But no sucli mercy was shown to those who failed
to obey the decrees of the court in any suit. Their impris-
onment was indefinite, if not perpetual. Their contempt was
only to be purged by obedience, — perhaps wholly beyond
their power. For such prisoners, there was no relief but
death. Some persisted in their contempt from obstinacy,
sullenness, and litigious hate ; but many suffered for no
offence but ignorance and poverty. Humble suitors, dragged
into court by richer litigants, were sometimes too poor to
obtain professional advice, or even to procure copies of the
bills filed against them. Lord Eldon himself, to his honor
be it said, had charitably assisted such men to put in answers
in his own court.^ Others, again, unable to pay money and
costs decreed against them, suffered imprisonment for life.
This latter class, however, at length became entitled to
relief as insolvent debtors.' But the complaints of other
wretched men, to whom the law brought no relief, were often
heard. In 1817, Mr. Bennet, in presenting a petition from
one of these prisoners, thus stated his own experience :
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., viii. 808.
2 Jbid., xiv. 1178.
8 49 Geo. III. c. 6. 53 Geo. III. c. 102, § 47; Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xiv
il78.
266 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
" Last year," he said, " Thomas Williams had been in con-
finement for thirty-one years by an order of the Court of
Chancery. He had visited him in his wretched house of
bondage, where he had found him sinking under all the
miseries that can afflict humanity, and on the following day
he died. At this time," he added, " there were in the same
prison with the petitioner, a woman who had been in confine-
ment twenty-eight years, and two other persons who hud
been there seventeen years." * In the next year, Mr. Bennet
April 22d presented another petition from prisoners confined
1818. foj. contempt of court, complaining that nothing
had been done to relieve them, though they had followed all
the instructions of their lawyers. Tlie petitioners had wit-
nessed the death of six persons, in the same condition as
themselves, one of whom had been confined four, another
eighteen, and another thirty-four years.^
In 1820, Lord Althorp presented another petition ; and
Aug. 81st, among the petitioners was a woman, eighty-one
1820 years old, who had been imprisoned for thirty-one
years.' In the eight years preceding 1820, twenty prisoners
had died while under confinement for contempt, some of
whom had been in prison for upwards of thirty years.*
Even so late as 1856, Lord St. Leonards presented a peti-
tion, complaining of continued hardships upon prisoners for
contempt ; and a statement of the Lord Chancellor revealed
the difficulty and painfulness of such cases. " A man who
had been confined in the early days of Lord Eldon's Chan-
cellorship for refusing to disclose certain facts, remained in
prison, obstinately declining to make any statement upon the
jjubject, until his death a few months ago." ^
1 6th May, 1817; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxvi. 158. Mr. Bennet had
made a statement on the same subject in 1816; Ibid., xxxiv. 1099.
2 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxviii. 284.
8 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., i. 693.
* Ibid., xiv. 1178; Mr. Hume's Return, Pari. Paper, 1820 (302).
6 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxlii. 1570. In another recent case, a lad was
committed for refu.«iiig to di.scontinue bis addresses to a ward of the court,
and died in prison.
ARREST ON MESJTE PROCESS. 267
Doubtless the peculiar jurisdiction of courts of equity has
caused this extraordinary rigor in the punishment of con-
tempts ; but justice and a respect for personal liberty alike
require that punishment should be raeted out according to
the gravity of the offence. The Court of Queen's Bench
upholds its dignity by commitments for a fixed period ; and
may not the Court of Chancery be content with the like
punishment for disobedience, however gross and culpable ?
Every restraint on public liberty hitherto noticed has
been permitted either to the executive govern- Arrest on
... ^ , ° Mesne Pro-
ment, in the interests or the state, or to courts cess,
of justice, in the exercise of a necessary jurisdiction. In-
dividual rights have been held subordinate to the public
good ; and on that ground, even questionable practices ad-
mitted of justification. But the law further permitted, and
society long tolerated, the most grievous and wanton restraints,
imposed by one subject upon another, for which no such jus-
tification is to be found. The law of debtor and creditor,
until a comparatively recent period, was a scandal to a civil-
ized country. For the smallest claim, any man was liable to
be arrested, on mesne process, before legal proof of the debt.
He might be torn from his family, like a malefactor, — at
any time of day or night, — and detained until bail was
given ; and in default of bail, imprisoned until the debt was
paid. Many of these arrests were wanton and vexatious ;
and writs were issued with a facility and looseness which
placed the liberty of every man — suddenly and without no-
tice — at the mercy of any one who claimed payment of a
debt. A debtor, however honest and solvent, was liable to
arrest. The demand might even be false and fraudulent :
but the pretended creditor, on making oath of the debt, was
armed with this terrible process of the law.^ The wretched
defendant might lie in prison for several months before his
cause was heard ; when, even if the action was discontinued
1 An executor might even obtain an arrest on aweariug to his belief of a
debt. Report, 1792, Com. Joum , xlvii. 640.
268 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
or the debt disproved, he could not obtain his discharge
without further proceedings, often too costly for a poor
debtor, already deprived of his livelihood by imprison-
ment. No longer even a debtor, — he could not shake off
his bonds.
Slowly and with reluctance did Parliament address itself
to the correction of this monstrous abuse. In the reign of
George I. arrests on mesne process, issuing out of the supe-
ior courts, were limited to sums exceeding lOZ. ;^ but it was
not until 1779, that the same limit was imposed on the pro-
cess of inferior jurisdictions.^ This sura was afterwards
raised to 15/., and in 1827 to 20/. In that year, 1100 per-
sons were confined, in the prisons of the metropolis alone, on
mesne process.'
The total abolition of arrests on mesne process was fre-
quently advocated, but it was not until 1838 that it was at
length accomplislied. Provision was made for securing ab-
sconding debtors ; but the old process for the recovery of
debt in ordinary cases, which had wrought so many acts of
oppression, was abolished. While this vindictive remedy
was denied, the debtor's lands were, for the first time, allowed
to be taken in satisfaction of a debt ; * and extended facilities
were afterwards afforded for the recovery of small claims, by
the establishment of county courts.*
The law of arrest was reckless of liberty : the law of exe-
imprison- cutiou for debt was one of savage barbarity. A
ment for debt, creditor is entitled to every protection and remedy,
which the law can reasonably give. All the debtor's prop-
erty should be his ; and frauds by which he has been
wronged should be punished as criminal. But the remedies
of English law against the property of a debtor were
1 12 Geo. I. c. 29.
2 19 Geo. III. c. 70.
' Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xvii. 386. The nomber in Ergland anKmntod to
8G62.
* 1 & 2 Vict c. 110.
« 9 & 10 Vict. c. 95.
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. 269
Strangely inadequate, — its main security being the body of
the debtor. This became the property of the creditor, until
the debt was paid. The ancients allowed a creditor to seize
his debtor and hold him in slaveiy. It was a cruel practice,
condemned by the most enlightened lawgivers;* but it was
more rational and humane than the law of England. By
servitude a man might work out his debt: by imprison-
ment, restitution was made impossible. A man was torn
from his trade and industry, and buried in a dungeon : the
debtor perished, but the creditor was unpaid. The penalty
of an unpaid debt, however small, was imprisonment for life.
A trader within the operation of the bankrupt laws might
obtain his discharge, on giving up all his property ; but for
an insolvent debtor, there was no possibility of relief, but
charity or the rare indulgence of his creditor. His body be-
ing the property of his creditor, the law could not interfere.
He might become insane, or dangerously sick : but the court
was unable to give him liberty. We read with horror of a
woman dying in the Devon County Jail, after an impris-
onment of forty-five years, for a debt of 19/.^
While the law thus trifled with the liberty of debtors, it
took no thought of their wretched fate, after the Debtors'
prison-door had closed upon them. The traditions P"*"""-
of the debtors' prison are but too familiar to us all. The
horrors of the Fleet and Marshalsea were laid bare in 1729.
The poor debtors were found crowded together on the " com-
mon side," — covered with filth and vermin, and suffered to
die, without pity, of hunger and jail-fever. Nor did they
suffer from neglect alone. They had committed no crime :
yet were they at the mercy of brutal jailers, who loaded
them with irons, and racked them with tortures.* No at-
1 Solon renounced it, finding examples amongst the Egyptians. — Plu-
tarch's Life of Sokn; Diod. Sic, lib. i. part 2, ch. 3; Montesquieu, livr.
xii. ch. 21. It was abolished in Rome, A. R. 428, when the true principle
vas thus defined : — " Bona debitoris, non corpus obnoxium asset." — Livg,
lib. 8; Montesquieu, livr. xx. ch. 14.
2 Rep. cf 1792, Com. Journ., xlvii. 647.
8 Com. Journ., xxi. 274, 376, 613
270 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
tempt was made to distinguish the fraudulent from the unfor-
tunate debtor. The rich rogue — able, but unwilling to pay
his debts — might riot in luxury and debauchery, while his
poor, unlucky fellow-prijoner was left to starve and rot on the
" common side." ^
The worst iniquities of prison-life were abated by the
active benevolence of John Howard ; and poor debtors found
some protection, in common with felons, from the brutality
of jailers. But otherwise their sufferings were without
mitigation. The law had made no provision for supplying
indigent prisoners with necessary food, bedclothes, or other
covering;'* and it was proved, in 1792, that many died of
actual want, being without the commonest necessaries of life.'
The first systematic relief was given to insolvent debtors
Th« by the benevolence of the Thatched House So-
hau8e&>" ciety, in 1772. In twenty years this noble body
dety, 1772. released from prison 12,590 honest and unfortunate
debtors ; and so trifling were the debts for which these pris-
oners had suffered confinement, that their freedom was ob-
tained at an expense of forty-five shillings a head. Many
were discharged merely on payment of the jail-fees, for which
alone they were detained in prison : others on payment of
costs, the original debts having long since been discharged.*
The monstrous evils and abuses of imprisonment for debt.
Exposure ^^^ *'^^ Sufferings of prisoners, were fully exposed
of abus^, JQ an able report to the House of Commons, drawn
1792 and '^ '
1815. by Mr. Grey in 1792.® But for several years
1 Rep. 1792, Com. Journ., xlvii. 652; Vicar of Wakefield, ch. xxv.
xxviii.
2 Report, 1792, Com. Journ., xlvii. 641. The only exception was under
the act 32 Geo. II. c. 28, of very partial operation, under which the detain-
ing creditor was forced to allow the debtor id. a day; and such was the
cold cruelty of creditors, that many a debtor confined for sums under 20s.
■was detained at their expense, which soon exceeded the amount ol tho
debt — Jbid., 644, 650. This allowance was raised to 3s. M. a week by 37
Geo. III. c. 85.
8 JbU., 651.
* Report, 1792, Com. Journ., xlviL 648. *
' Com. Journ., xlvii. 640.
IMPRISONMENT FOR DEBT. 271
these evils received little correction. In 1815 the prisons
were still overcrowded, and their wretched inmates left with-
out allowance of food, fuel, bedding, or medical attendance.
Complaints were still heard of their perisliing of cold and
hunger.^
Special acts had been passed, from time to time, since th«*
reign of Anne,^ for the relief of insolvents ; but , ,
° . Insolvent
they were of temporary and partial operation. Debtors'
Overcrowded prisons had been sometimes thinned :
but the rigors and abuses of the laws affecting debtors were
unchanged ; and thousands of insolvents still languished in
prison. In 1700. a remedial measure of more general oper
ation, was passed : but was soon afterwards repealed.® Pro-
vision was also made for the release of poor debtors in certain
cases : * but it was not until 1813 that insolvents were placed
under the jurisdiction of a court, and entitled to seek their
discharge on rendering a true account of all their debts and
property.® A distinction was at length recognized between
poverty and crime. This great remedial law restored Uberty
to crowds of wretched debtors. In the next thirteen years
upwards of 50,000 were set free.* Thirty years ^ ^
I ' •' •' Later meas-
later, its beneficent principles were further ex- "resofreUef
' 1 1 , /. *° debtors.
tended, when debtors were not only released from
confinement, but able to claim protection to their liberty, on
giving up all their goods.'' And at length, in 1861, the law
attained its fullest development : when fraudulent debt was
dealt with as a crime, and imprisonment of common debtors
1 7th March, 1815, Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxx. 39; Commons' Report on
King's Bench, Fleet, and Marshalsea Prisons, 1815. The King's Bench,
calculated to hold 220 prisoners, had 600 ; the Fleet, estimated to hold 200,
had 769.
2 1 Anne, st. i. c. 25.
8 1 Geo. III. c. 17; Adolph. Hist., i. 17, n.
* 32 Geo. II. c. 28. 33 Geo. IK. c. 5.
6 53 Geo. III. c. 102; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxvi. 301, &c
6 Mr. Hume's Return, 1827 (430).
f Protection Acts, 5 & 6 Vict. c. 96; 7 & 8 Vict, c 96.
272 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
was repudiated.* Nor did the enlightened charity of the
legishiture rest here. Debtors already in confinement were
not left to seek their liberation : but were set free by the of-
ficers of the Court of Bankruptcy.^ Some had grown famil-
iar with their prison-walls, and having lost all fellowship
with the outer world, clung to their miserable cells as to a
home.' They were led forth gently, and restored to a life
that had become strange to them ; and their untenanted dun-
geons were condemned to destruction.
The free soil of England has, for ages, been relieved from
The negro ^^e reproach of slavery. The ancient condition of
case, inl. villenage expired about the commencement of the
seventeenth century ; * and no other form of slavery was rec-
ognized by our laws. In the colonics, however, it was
legalized by statute ; * and it was long before the rights of
a colonial slave, in the mother-country, were ascertained.
Lord Holt, indeed, had pronounced an opinion that, " as
soon as a negro comes into England, he becomes free ; " and
Mr. Justice Powell had affirmed that *' the law takes no
notice of a negro." ® But these just opinions were not con-
firmed by express adjudication until the celebrated case
pf James Sommersett in 1771. This negro having been
brought to England by his owner, Mr. Stewart, left that gen-
tleman's service, and refused to return to it. Mr. Stewart
had him seized and placed in irons on board a ship then
lying in the Thames and about to sail for Jamaica, — where
he intended to sell his mutinous slave. But while the negro
was still lying on board, he was brought before the Court of
King's Bench by habeas corpus. The question was now fully
1 Bankruptcy Act, 24 & 25 Vict. c. 134, § 221.
2 Ibid., § 98-'l2.
8 In .Tanuan", 1862, John Miller was removed from the Queen's Bench
Prison, having been there since 1814. — Times, Jan. 23(1, 1862.
* Nov. 27. Hargrave's Argument in Negro Ca.se, St. Tr., xx. 40;
Smith's Commonwealth, book 2, ch. 10; Barringtou on the Statutes, 2d
ed., p. 232.
6 10 Will. II r. c. 26; 5 Geo. II. c. 7; 32 Geo. II. c. 31.
• Smith V. Browuo and Cowper, 2 Salk. 666.
LAST RELICS OF SLAVERV. 273
discussed, more particularly in a most learned and able argu-
ment by Mr. Hargrave; and at length, in June, 1772, Lord
Mansfield pronounced the opinion of the Court, that slavery
in England was illegiil, and that the negro must be sit
free.*
It was a righteous judgment: but scarcely worthy of the
extravagant commendation bestowed upon it at that time
and since. This boasted law, as declared by Lord Mans-
field, was already recognized in France, Holland, and some
other European countries ; and as yet England had shown
no symptoms of compassion for the negro beyond her own
shores.*
In Scotland, negro slaves continued to be sold as chattels,
until late in the last century.* It was not until jjegroes in
1756, that the lawfulness of negro slavery was ^co-Jand.
questioned. In that year, however, a negro who had been
brought to -Scotland, claimed his liberty of his master, Rob-
ert Sheddan, who had put him on board ship to return to
Virginia. But before his claim could be decided, the poor
negro died.* But for this sad incident, a Scotch court would
first have had the credit of setting the negro free on British
soil. Four years after the case of Sommersett, the law of
Scotland was settled. Mr. Wedderburn had brought with
him to Scotland, as his personal servant, a negro named
Knight, who continued several years in his service, and
married in that country. But, at length, he claimed his
freedom. The sheriff, being appealed to, held " that the
state of slavery is not recognized by the laws of this king-
dom." The case being brought before the Court of Session'
it was adjudged that the master had no rigiit to the negro's
1 Case of James Sommersett, St. Tr., xx. 1; LofFt's Rep., 1.
2 Hargrave's Argument, St. Tr., xx. 62.
8 Chambers' Domestic Annals of Scotland, iii. 453. On the 2d May,
1722, an advertisement appeared in the Edinburgh Evening Courant, an-
nouncing that a stolen negro had been found, who would be sold to pajr
expenses, unless claimed within two weeks. — Ibul.
* See Dictionary of Decisions, lit. Slave, iii. 14,545.
vol.. II. 18
274 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
service, nor to send him out of the country without his
consent.*
The negro in Scotland was now assured of freedom : but^
^ startlinof as it may sound, the slavery of native
Colliers and ° •' ' _ •' .
saiurs. in Scotchmen continued to be recomiized, in that
ScoUand. , , ., ° rw,, ,
country, to the very end of last century. Ihe col
Hers and salters were unquestionably slaves. They were
bound to continue their service during their lives, were fixed
to their places of employment, and sold with the works to
which they belonged. So completely did the law of Scot-
land regard them as a distinct class, not entitled to the san)e
liberties as their fellow-subjects, that they were excepted
from the Scotch Habeas Corpus Act of 1701. Nor had
their slavery the excuse of being a remnant of the ancient
feudal state of villenage, which had expired before coal-mines
were yet worked in Scotland. But being paid high wages,
and having peculiar skill, their employers had originally con-
trived to bind them to serve for a term of years, or for life ;
and such service at length became a recognized custom.^ In
1775 their condition attracted the notice of the legislature,
and an act was passed for their relief.' Its preamble stated
that " many colliers and salters are in a state of slavery and
bondage ; " and that their emancipation " would remove the
reproach of allowing such a state of servitude to exist in a
free country." But so deeply rooted was this hateful custom,
that Parliament did not venture to condemn it as illegal. It
was provided that colliers and salters commencing work after
the 1st of July, 1775, should not become slaves; and that
Jhose already in a state of slavery might obtain their free-
. dom in seven years, if under twenty-one years of age ; in
ten years, if under thirty-five. .To avail themselves of this
enfranchisement, however, they were obliged to obtain a
decree of the Sheriff's Court; and these poor ignorant
1 See Dictionan' of Decisions, ttt. Slave, iii. p. 14,549.
- Forb. Inst., part 1, b. 2, t. 3; Macdonal. Inst., i. 63; Cockbnm's Mem.
76.
» 15 Geo. III. c. 28.
SPIES AND INFORMERS. 275
slaves, gi.'nerally in debt to their masters, were rarely in a
condition to press their claims to freedom. Hence the act
was practically inoperative. But at length, in 1799, their
freedom was absolutely established.^ The last vestige of
slavery was now effaci-d from the soil of Britain : but not
until the land had been resounding for years with outcries
against the African slave-trade. Seven years _, ^^
° •' Slave-trade
later that odious traffic was condemned ; and at an<i colonial
length coloniiil slavery itself — so long encouraged
and protected by the legislature — gave way before the en-
lightened philunihropy of another generation.
Next in importance to personal freedom is immunity from
suspicions and jealous observation. Men may be spies and
without restraints upon their liberty : they may '° °""'-""-
pass to and fro at pleasure : but if their steps ai*e tracked
by spies and informers, their words noted down for crimina
tion, their associates watched as conspirators, — who shall
say that they are free ? Nothing is more revolting to Eng-
lishmen than the espionage which forms part of the adminis-
trative system of continental despotisms. It haunts men
like an evil genius, chills their gayety, restrains their wit,
casts a shadow over their friendships, and blights their do-
mestic hearth. The freedom of a country may be measured
by its immunity from this baleful agency.^ Rulers who dis-
trust their own people must govern in a spirit of abso-
lutism ; and suspected subjects will be ever sensible of their
bondage.
Our own countrymen have been comparatively exempt
from this hateful interference with their moral spiesin
freedom. Yet we find many traces of a system ^''*^-
1 39 Geo. III. c. 56.
2 Montesquieu speaks of informers as " un genre d'hommes fiineste." —
Liv. vi. ch. 8. And of spies, he says: — " Faut-il des espions dans la mo-
narchie? ce n'est pas la pratique ordinaire des bons princes." — Liv. xii.
ch. 23. And again: — " L'espionage seroit peut-§tre tolerable s'il pouvait
etre exerc^ par d'honnetes-gens; mais I'infamie necessaire de la personne
peut faire juger de Tinfamie de la chose." — Ibid.
276 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
repugnant to the liberal policy of our laws. In 1764, we
see spies following Wilkes everywhere, dogging his steps
like shadows, and reporting every movement of himself and
his friends to the secretaries of state. Nothing was too in-
significant for the curiosity of these exalted magistrates.
Every visit he paid or received throughout the day was
noted : the persons he chanced to encounter in the streets
were not overlooked : it was known where he dined, or went
lo church, and at what hour he returned home at night.*
In the state trials of 1794, we discover spies and inforrn-
Spies in 1794. ers in the witness-box, who had been active mem-
bers of political societies, sharing their councils, and encour-
aging, if not prompting, their criminal extravagance.'-^ And
throughout that period of dread and suspicion, society was
everywhere infested with espionage.'
Again, in 1817, government spies were deeply compro-
Inl8l7. mised in the turbulence and sedition of that
period. Castle, a spy of infamous character, having
uttered the most seditious language and incited the people
to arm, proved in the witness-box the very crimes he had
himself prompted and encouraged.* Another spy, named
Oliver, proceeded into the disturbed districts, in the charac-
ter of a London delegate, and remained for many weeks
amongst the deluded operatives, everywhere instigating them
to rise and arm. He encouraged them with hopes that, in
the event of a rising, they would be assisted by 150,000 m';n
in the metropolis ; and thrusting himself into their society,
he concealed the craft of tiie spy under the disguise of a
traitorous conspirator.* Before he undertook this shameful
1 Grenville Papers, ii. 155.
2 St. Tr., xxiv. 722, 800, 806.
« Suj>ra, p. 143; Wilberforce's Life, iv. 369; Cartwright's Life, i. 209;
Currie's Life, i. 172; Uolcrofl's Mem., ii. 190; Stephens' Life of Home
Tooke, ii. 118.
* Ibid., xxxii. 214, 284, et seq.\ Earl Grey, June 16th, 1817; Hans.
Deb., Ist Ser. xxxvi. 1002.
6 Rainford's Life of a Radical, i. 77, 158; Mr. Ponsonby's Statement,
June 23d, 1817; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxvi. 1114.
SPIES AND INFOR'MERS. 277
mission, he was in communication with Lord Sidmouth, and
throughout his mischievous progress was corresponding with
the government or its agent?. Lord Sidmouth himself is
above the suspicion of having connived at the use of covert
incitements to treason. The spies whom he employed had
sought him out and offered their services in the detection of
crime ; and, being responsible for the public peace, he had
thought it necessary to secure information of the intended
movements of dangerous bodies of men.^ But Oliver's ac-
tivity was so conspicuous as seriously to compromise the
government Immediately after the outbreak in Derbyshire,
his conduct was indignantly reprobated in both Houses ; '
and after the outrages, in which lie had been an accomplice,
had been judicially investigated, his proceedings received a
still more merciless exposure in Parliament.' There is little
doubt that Oliver did more to disturb the public peace by his
malign influence, than to protect it by timely information to
the government. The agent was mischievous, and his prin-
cipals could not wholly escape the blame of his misdeeds.
Their base instrument, in his coai'se zeal for his employers,
brought discredit upon the means they had taken, in good
faith, for preventing disorders. To the severity of repres-
sive measures, and a rigorous administration of (he law, was
added the reproach of a secret alliance between the execu-
tive and a wretch who had at once tempted and betrayed his
unhappy victims.
The relations between the government and its informers
are of extreme delicacy. Not to profit by timely Relations
information were a crime ; but to retain in govern- u'tive wttS"
nient pay and to reward spies and informers, who infonners.
consort with conspirators as their sworn accomplices and
encourage while they betray them in their crimes, is a
1 Lord Sidmouth'g Life, iii. 185.
2 IGth and 2.3d June, 1817; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxvi. 1016, 1111.
« St. Tr., xxxii. 755, ei seq.; 11th Feb., 1818; Hans. Deb., xxxvii. 338;
Speeches of Lord Milton, Mr. Bennet; Feb. 19th and March 5th (Lords);
Jbid., 522, 802.
278 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
practice for which no plea can be offered. No government^
indeed, can be supposed to have expressly instructed ita
spies to instigate the perpetration of crime; but to be un-
suspected, every spy must be zealous in the cause which h}
pretends to have espoused ; and his zeal in a criminal enter-
prise is a direct encouragement of crime. So odious is the
character of a spy, that his ignominy is shared by his em-
ployers, against whom public feeling has never failed to pro-
nounce itself, in proportion to the infamy of the agent and
the complicity of those whom he served.
Three years later, the conduct of a spy named Edwards,
The spy Ed- *" Connection with the Cato Street Conspiracy,
wards, 1820. attracted unusual obloquy. For months he had
been at once an active conspirator and the paid agent of
the government ; prompting crimes, and betraying his ac-
complices. Thistlewood had long been planning the as-
sassination of the ministers ; and Edwards had urged him
to attempt that monstrous crime, the consummation of whicli
his treachery prevented. He had himself suggested other
crimes, no less atrocious. He had counselled a murderous
ftutrage upon the House of Commons, and had distributed
hand-grenades among his wretched associates, in order to
tempt them to deeds of violence.* The conspirators wero
justly hung : the devilish spy was hidden and rewarded.
Infamy so great and criminal in a spy had never yet been
exposed ; but the frightfulness of the crime which his infor-
mation had prevented, and the desperate character of the men
who had plotted it, stived ministers from much of the odium
that had attached to their connection with Oliver. They
had saved themselves from assassination ; and could they
be blamed for having discovered and prevented the bloody
design ? The crime had been plotted in darkness and secrecy,
and countermined by the cunning and treachery of an accom-
1 Ann. Reg., 1820, p. 30; Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., i. 54, 242; Lord Sid-
mouth's Life, iii. 216; Edinb. Eev., xxxiii. 211; St. Tr., xxxiii. 749, 764,
B87, 1004, 1435.
OPENING LETTERS. 279
plice. That it had not been consummated, was due to the
very agency which hostile critics sought to condemn. But
if ministers escaped censure, — the iniquity of the spy-system
was ilhistrated in its most revolting aspects.
Again, in 1833, complaint was made that the police had
been concerned in equivocal practices, too mucli Detectire
resembling the treachery of spies ; but a parlia- p°"'=«-
mentary inquiry elicited little more than the misconduct of
a single policeman, who was dismissed from the force.*
And the organization of a well-qualified body of detective
police has at once facilitated the prevention and discovery
of crime, and averted the worst evils incident to the employ-
ment of spies.
Akin to the use of spies, to watch and betray the acts of
men, is the intrusion of government into the con- opening
fidence of private letters intrusted to the Post- i*"*"^-
office. The state having assumed a monopoly in the trans
mission of letters on behalf of the people, its agents could
not pry into their secrets without a flagrant breach of trust,
which scarcely any necessity could justify. For the detec-
tion of crimes dangerous to the state or society, a power of
opening letters was, indeed, reserved to the secretary of state.
But for many years, ministers or their subordinate officers
appear to have had no scruples in obtaining information,
through the Post-office, not only of plots and conspiracies, but
of the opinions and projects of their political opponents.
Curiosity more often prompted this vexatious intrusion, than
motives of public policy.
The political correspondence of the reign of George III.
affords conclusive evidence, that the practice of opening the
letters of public men at the Post-office was known to be
general. We find statesmen of all parties alluding to the
practice, without reserve or hesitation, and intrusting their
1 Petition of F. Young and others; Commons' Rep., 1833; Hans. Deh
3d Ser., xviii. 1359; xx. 404, 834
280 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
letters to private bands whenever their communications were
confidential.*
Traces of this discreditable practice, so far as it ministered
to idle or malignant curiosity, have disappeared since the
early part of the present century. From that period, the
general corres|>ondence of the country, through the Post-
oflSce, has been inviolable. But for purposes of police and
diplomacy, — to thwart conspiracies at home, or hostile com-
binations abroad, — the secretary of state has continued,
until our own time, to issue warrants for opening the letters
of persons suspected of crimes, or of designs injurious to the
Petition of State. This power, sanctioned by long usage and
Mazziniand |jy many Statutes, had been continually exercised
others, June J J ^ J ^
14th, 1844. for two centuries. But it had passed without ob-
1 From a great niiinl>er of examples, the following may be selected : —
Lord Hardwicke, vrriting in 1762 to Lord Rockingham of the Duke of
Devonshire's spirited letter to the Duke of Newcastle, said : — " Which his
grace judged very rightly in sending by the common post, and trusting to
their curiosity." — Rvcklnykam Mem., i. 157.
Mr. Hans Stanley, writing to Mr. Grenville, Oct. 14tb, 1765, says: —
" Though this letter contains nothing of consequence, I chuse to send it by
a private hand, obsen-ing that all my correspondence is opened in a very
awkward and bungling manner, which I intimate in case you should chuse
to write anything which you would not have publick." — Grenville Papers,
iii. 99. Again, Mr. Whately, writing to Mr. Grenville, June 4th, 1768,
says: — " I may have some things to say which I would not tell the post-
master, and for that reason have chosen thb manner of conveyance." —
Jbifl., iv. 299.
Lord Temple, writing to Mr. Beresford, Oct. 2.3d, 1783, says: — "The
shameful lil>erties taken with my letters, both sent and received (for even
the speaker's letter to me had been opened), make me cautious on politics."
— Beresfurd Correspondence, i. 24.3.
Mr. I'itt, writing to Lady Chatham, Nov. 11th, 1783, said: — "I am
afraid it will not be easy for me, by the post, to be anything else than a
asbionable correspondent, for I believe the fashion which prevails, of open-
ng almost every letter that is sent, makes it almost impossible to write
anything worth reading." — /,wy/ Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 130.
Lord Melville, writing to Mr. Pitt, April 3d, 1804, said: — " I shall con-
tinue to address you through Alexander Hope's conveyance, as I remember
our friend Bathurst very strongly hinted to me, last jear, to beware of the
Post-office, when you and I had occasion to correspond on critical points, or
in critical times."— Jbid., iv. 145; see also Currie's Life, ii. 160; Stephens'
Mem. of Home Tooke, ii. 118; Court and Cab. of Geo. HL, iii. 265, &c
OPENING LETTERS. 281
sei'vation until 1844, when a petition was presented to the
House of Commons from four persons, — of whom the noto-
rious Joseph Mazzini was one, — complaining that their let-
ters had bten detained at the Post-office, broken open, and
read. Sir James Graham, the secretary of state, denied that
the letters of three of these persons had been opened ; but
avowed that the letters of one of them had been detained and
opened by his warrant, issued under the authority of a statute.*
Never had any avowal from a minister encountered so gen-
eral a tumult of disapprobation. Even Lord Sidmouth's spy-
system had escaped more lightly. The public were ignorant
of the law, tl)ough renewed seven years before,^ — and wholly
unconscious oi the practice which it sanctioned. Having be-
lieved in the security of the Post-office, they now dreaded
the betrayal of all secrecy and confidence. A general sys-
tem of espionage being suspected, was condemned with just
indignation.
Five-and-twenty years earlier, a minister, — secure of a
parliamentary majority, — having haughtily de- p^uamen-
fended his own conduct, would have been content '^'"^'"i'""^'
to refuse further inquiry and brave public opinion. And in
this instance, inquiry was at first successfully resisted ; ^ but a
few days later, Sir James Graham adopted a course, at once
eignificiint of the times, and of his own confidence in the in-
tegrity and good faith with which he had discharged a hate-
ful duty. He proposed the appointment of a secret commit-
tee, to investigate the law in regard to the opening of lettei-s,
and the mode in which it had been exercised.* A similar
committee was also appointed in the House of Lords.® These
committees were constituted of the most eminent and impar-
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxv. 892.
2 Post-office Act, 1837, 1 Vict. c. 33, § 25.
3 June 24th, 1844; Mr. Duncombe's motion for a committee — Ayes,
162 ; Noes, 206. — Hans Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxv. 1264.
* .July 2d, as an amendment to another motion of Mr. Ouncombe;
Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxvi. 212.
6 Ibid., 296.
282 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
tial men to be found in Parliament; and their inquiries,
while eliciting startling revelations as to the practice, entirely
vindicated the pergonal conduct of Sir James Graham. It
appeared that foreign letters had, in early times, been con-
stantly searched to detect correspondence with Rome and
other foreign powers : that by orders of both Houses, dur-
ing the Long Parliament, foreign mails had been searched ;
and that Cromwell's Postage Act expressly authorized the
opening of letters, in order " to discover and prevent danger-
ous and wicked designs against the peace and welfare of
the commonwealth." Charles II. had interdicted, by proc-
lamation, the opening of any letters, except by warrant from
the secretary of state. By an act of the 9th Anne, the
secretary of state first received statutory power to issue war-
rants for the opening of letters ; and this authority had been
continued by several later statutes for the regulation of the
Post-office. In 1783, a similar power had been intrusted to
the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.* In 1722, several letters
of Bishop Atterbury having been opened, copies were pro-
duced in evidence against him, on the bill of pains and
penalties. During the rebellion of 1745, and at other pe-
riods of public danger, letters had been extensively opened.
Nor were warrants restricted to the detection of crimes or
practices dangerous to the state. They had been constantly
issued for the discovery of forgery and other offences, on the
application of the parties concerned in the apprehension of
offenders. Since the commencement of this century, they
had not exceeded an annual average of eight. They had
been issued by successive secretaries of state, of every party,
and except in periods of unusual disturbance, in about the
same annual numbers. The public and private correspond-
ence of the country, both foreign and domestic, practically
enjoyed complete security. A power so rarely exer-
cised could not have materially advanced the ends of justice.
At the same time, if it were wholly withdrawn, the Post*
1 23 & 24 Geo. UI. c. 17.
PROTECTION OF FOREIGNERS. 283
oflRce would become the privileged medium of criminal corre-
spondence. No amendment of the law was recommended ; *
and the secretary of state retains his accustomed authority.
But no one can doubt that, if used at all, it will be reserved
for extreme occasions, when the safety of the state demands
the utmost vigilance of its guardians.
Nothing has served so much to raise, in other states, the
estimation of British liberty, as the protection protection of
w hich our laws afford to foreigners. Our earlier ^"^•k"^"-
history, indeed, discloses many popular jealousies of stranger^
settling in this country. But to foreign merchants, special
consideration was shown by Magna Charta ; and whatever
the policy of the state, or the feelings of the people, at later
periods, aliens have generally enjoyed the same personal lib-
erty as British subjects, and complete protection from the
jealousies and vengeance of foreign powers. It has been a
proud distinction for England to afford an inviolable asylum
to men of every rank and condition, seeking refuge on her
shores, front persecution and danger in their own lands.
England was a sanctuary to the Flemish refugees driven
forth by the cruelties of Alva; to the Protestant refugees
w ho fled from the persecutions of Louis XIV. ; and to the
Catholic nobles and priests who sought refuge from the bloody
guillotine of revolutionary France. All exiles from their
own country, — whether they fled from despotism or de-
mocracy,— whether they were kings discrowned, or humble
citizens in danger, — have looked to England as their, home.
Such refugees were safe from the dangers which they had
escaped. No solicitation or menace from their own govern-
ment could disturb their right of asylum ; and they were
equally free from molestation by the municipal laws of Eng
land. The crown indeed had claimed the right of ordering
aliens to withdraw from the realm ; but this prerogative had
not been exercised since the reign of Elizabeth.^ From
1 Reports of Secret Committees of Lords and Commons.
a Viz., in 1571, 1574, and 1575.
284 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
that period, — through civil wars and revolutions, a disputed
succession, and treasonjiblo plots against the state, — no for-
eigners had been disturbed. If guilty of crimes, they were
punished ; but otherwise enjoyed the full protection of the
law.
It was not until 1793, that a departure from this generous
UienAct, policy was deemed necessary, in the interests of
''^ the state. The revolution in France had driven
\iost3 of political refugees to our shores * They were pitied,
%nd would be welcome. But among the foreigners claiming
our hospitality. Jacobin emissaries were suspected of con-
spiring with democratic associations in England, to overthrow
the government. To guard against the machinations of such
men, ministers sought extraordinary powers for the super-
yision of aliens, and, if necessary, for their removal from the
realm. Whether this latter power might be exercised by
the crown, or had fallen into desuetude, became a subject of
controversy ; but however that might be, the provisions of
the Alien Bill, now proposed," far exceeded the limits of any
ancient prerogative. An account was to be taken of all
foreigners arriving at the several ports, who were to bring no
arms or ammunition : they were not to travel without pass-
ports : the secretary of state might remove any suspected
alien out of the realm ; and all aliens might be directed to
reside in such districts as were deemed necessary for public
security, where they would be registered, and required to
give up their arms. Such restraints upon foreigners were
novel, and wholly inconsistent with the free and liberal spirit
with which they had been hitherto entertained. Marked
with extreme jealousy and rigor, they could only be justified
by the extraordinary exigency of the times. They were,
indeed, equivalent to a suspension of the Habeas Corpus
Act, and demanded proofs of public danger no less conclu-
sive. In opposition to the measure, it was said that there
• In Dec., 1792, it appeared that 8000 had emigrated to England. —
' «r/ nisi., XXX. 147.
PROTECTION OF FOREIGNERS. 285
was no evidence of the presence of dangerous aliens : thai
discretionary power to be intrusted to the executive might
be abused ; and that it formed part of the policy of ministers
to foment the public apprehensions. But the right of the
state, on sufficient grounds, to take such precautions, could
not be disputed.^ The bill was to continue in force for one
year only,^ and was passed without difficulty.
So urgent was deemed the danger of" free intercourse with
the continent at this period, that even British sub- Traitorous
jects were made liable to unprecedented restraints, Bpondeme
by the Traitorous Correspondence Bill.' ^"'' ^"^•
The Alien Bill was renewed from time to time ; and
throughout the war, foreigners continued under ^uen Bill
strict surveillance. When peace was at length re- '^■>^*«^-
stored, government relaxed the more stringent provisions of
the war alien bills ; and proposed measures better suited to a
time of peace. This was done in 1802, and again in 1814.
But, in 1816, when public tranquillity prevailed throughout
Europe, the propriety of continuing such measures, even in
a modified form, was strenuously contested.*
Again, in 1818, opposition no less resolute was offered to
the renewal of the Alien Bill. Ministers were AUenBUi,
urged to revert to the liberal policy of former ^^^^'
times ; and not to insist further upon jealous restrictions and
invidious powers. The hardships which foreigners might
suffer from sudden banishment were especially dwelt upon.
Men who had made England their home, — bound to it by
domestic ties and affections, and carrying on trade under pro-
tection of its laws, — were liable, without proof of crime, on
secret information, and by a clandestine procedure, to one of
the gravest punishments.^ This power, however, was rarely
1 Pari. Hist, X3CX. 155-238.
2 33 Geo. III. c. 4.
» Pari. Hist., XXX. 582, 928.
* Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., xxxiv. 430, 617.
• Ibid., xxxviii. 521, 735, 811, &c.; 58 Geo. III. c. 96.
286 LIBKRTY OF THE SUBJECT.
exercised, and in a few years was surrendered.* During
the political convulsions of the continent in 1848, the execu-
tive again received authority, for a limited time, to remove
any foreigners who might be dangerous to the peace of the
country;* but it was not put in force in a single instance.'
The law has still required tiie registration of aliens ; * but
its execution has fallen more and more into disuse. The
confidence of our policy, and the prodigious intercourse de-
veloped by facilities of communication and the demands of
commerce, have practically restored to foreigners that entire
freedom which they enjoyed before the French Revolution.
The improved feeling of Parliament in regard to foreign-
Naturaiim- ^^'^ ^'^* marked in 1844 by Mr. Plutt's wise
UonAct, 1844. jjpj jjijeral measure for the naturalization of
aliens.* Confidence succeeded to jealousy ; and the legisla-
ture, instead of devising impediments and restraints, offered
welcome and citizenship.
AVhile the law had provided for the removal of aliens, it
Right of ^'^^ ^^^ *'**^ safety of England, — not for the satis-
8»yium faction of other states. The riujht of asylum was
neTer im- o '
paired. as inviolable as ever. It was not for foreign gov-
ernments to dictate to England the conditions on which
aliens under her protection should be treated. Of this prin-
ciple, the events of 1802 offered a remarkable illustration.
During the short peace succeeding the treaty of Amiens,
Napoleon, First Consul of the French Republic,
Napoleon'8 , , , , , ,,
deniands demanded that our jjovernment should " remove
in 1802.
out of the British dominions all the French princes
and their adherents, together with the bishops and other in-
dividuals, whose political principles and conduct must neces-
sarily occasion great jealousy to the French Government." •
1 In 1826: 5 Geo. IV. c. 37; Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, x. 1376.
2 11 & 12 Vict. c. 20.
» Pari. Return, 18.50 (688).
* 7 Geo. IV. c. 54; 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 11.
8 7 & 8 Vict, c 66; 10 & 11 Vict. c. 83.
« .Mr. Mcrrj- to Lord Hawkesburr, .June 4th, 1P02; Pari. Hist., xxx
1263
PEOTECTION OF FOREIGXERS. 287
To this demand Lord Hawkesbury replied, his Majesty
" certainly expects that all foreigners who may reside within
his dominions should not only hold a conduct conformable to
the laws of the country, but should abstain from all acts
which may be hostile to the government of any country, with
which his Majesty may be at peace. As long, however, as
they conduct themselves according to these principles, his
Majesty would feel it inconsistent with his dignity, with his
honor, and with the common laws of hospitality, to deprive
thera of that protection which individuals, resident in his
dominions, can only forfeit by their own misconduct." ^
Still more decidedly were these demands reiterated. It
was demanded, 1st. That more effectual measures should be
adopted for the suppression of seditious publications. 2d.
That certain persons named should be sent out of Jersey.
3d. " That the former bishops of Arras and St. Pol de
Leon, and all those who, like them, under the pretext of
religion, seek to raise disturbances in the interior of France,
shall likewise be sent away." 4th. That Georges and his
adherents shall be transported to Canada. 5th. That the
princes of the House of Bourbon be recommended to repair
lo Warsaw, the residence of the head of their family. 6th.
That French emigrants,, wearing orders and decorations of
the ancient government of France, should be required to
leave England. These demands assumed to be based upon
a construction of the recent treaty of Amiens ; and effect
was expected to be given to them, under the provisions of the
Alien Act.*
These representations were frankly and boldly met. For
he repression of seditious writings, our govern-
ment would entertain no measure but an appeal to thi'EngUsh
the courts of law.« To apply the Alien Act in Q°^«°°"»«»»»-
aid of the law of libel, and to send foreign writers out of
1 Lord Hawkesbury to Mr. Merry, 10th June, 1802.
2 M. Otto to Lord Hawkesbury, Aug. 17th, 1802.
• See supra, p. 177. ,
?88 LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
the country, because they were obnoxiou?, not to our own
government, but to another, was not to be listened to.
Tlie removal of other French emigrants, and especially of
the princes of the House of Bourbon, was refused, and every
argument and precedent adduced in support of the demand
refuted.^ The emigrants in Jersey had already removed of .
their own accord ; and the bishops would be required to leave
England, if it could be proved that they had been distributing
papers on the coast of France, in order to disturb the gov-
ernment ; but sufficient proof of this charge must be given.
As regards M. Georges, who had been concerned in circulat-
ing papers hostile to the government in Finance, his Majesty
agreed to remove him from our European dominions. The
king refused to withdraw the rights of hospitality from the
French princes, unless it could be proved that they were
attempting to disturb the peace between the two countries.
He also declined to adopt the harsh measure which had been
demanded against refugees who continued to wear French
decorations.^
The ground here taken has been since maintained. It is
Principles "ot enougli that the presence or acts of a foreigner
f^*gne™ are ^^7 ^^ displeasing to a foreign power. If that
protected. j.yj^ were accepted, where would be the right of
asylum ? The refugee would be followed by the vengeance
of his own government, and driven forth from the home
he had chosen in a free country. On this point, Eng-
lishmen have been chivalrously sensitive. Having under-
taken to protect the stranger, they have resented any menace
to him, as an insult to themselves. Disaffection to the rulers
of his own country is natural to a refugee: his banishmen
attests it. Poles hated Russia: Hungarians and Italians
were hostile to Austria : French Royalists spurned the re-
public and the first empire : Charles X. and Louis Napoleon
were disaffected to Louis Philippe, King of the French : le-
1 Mr. Merry to Lord Hawkesbury, June 17th, 1802.
3 Lord Hawkesbuiy to Mr. Merry, Aug. a8th, 1809.
PROTECTION OF FOREIGNERS. • 289
gitimists and Orleanists alike abhorred the French republic
of 1848 and the revived empire of 1852. But all were safe
under the broad shield of England. Every political senti-
ment, every discussion short of libel, enjoyed freedom.
Every act' not prohibited by law, — however distasteful to
other states, — was entitled to protection. Nay, more : large
numbers of refugees, obnoxious to their own rulers, were
maintained by the liberality of the English government.
This generosity has sometimes been abused by aliens
who, under cover of our laws, have plotted against
friendly states. There are acts, indeed, which tlie conspiracy,
1QCQ
laws could only have tolerated by an oversight ;
and in this category was that of conspiracy to assassinate
the sovereign of a friendly state. The horrible conspiracy
of Orsini, in 1858, had been plotted in England. Not coun-
termined by espionage, nor checked by jealous restraints on
personal liberty, it had been matured in safety ; and its more
overt acts had afterwards escaped the vigilance of the police
in France. The crime was execrated ; but how could its
secret conception have been prevented ? So far our laws
were blameless. The government of France, however, in
the excitement of recent danger, angrily remonstrated against
the alleged impunity of assassins in this country.^ English-
men repudiated, with just indignation, any tolerance of mur-
der. Yet on one point were our laws at fault. Orsini's des-
perate crime was unexampled : planned in England, it had
been executed beyond the limits of British jurisdiction : it was
doubtful if his confederates could be brought to justice ; and
certain that they would escape without adequate conspiracy
])unishment. Ministers, believing it due, no less biii"*Feb*'
to France than to the vindication of our own laws, 8tii, 1868.
that this anomaly should be corrected, proposed a measure,
with that object, to Parliament. But the .Commons, resent-
ing imputations upon this country, which had not yet been
repelled ; and jealous of the apparent dictation of France,
1 Despatch of Count Walewski, Jan. 20th, 1858.
vol- II. 19
290 . LIBERTY OF THE SUBJECT.
under which Ihey were called upon to legislate, refused to
entertain the bill.^ A powerful ministry was struck down ;
and a rupture hazarded with the Emperor of the French.
Yet to the metisure itself, apart from the circumstances under
which it was offered, no valid objection could be raised ; and
three years later, its provisions were silently admitted to a
place in our revised criminal laws.^
A just protection of political refugees is not incompatible
Extradition with the Surrender of criminals. All nations have
''**"*** a common interest in the punishment of heinous
crimes ; and upon this principle, has England entered into
extradition treaties with France and the United States of
America, for mutually delivering up to justice persons
charged with murder, piracy, arson, or forgery, committed
within the jurisdiction of either of the contracting states."
England offers no asylum to such criminals ; and her own
jurisdiction has been vastly extended over offenders escaping
from justice. It is a wise policy, — conducive to the comity
of civilized nations.
1 Mr. Milner Gibson's amendment on second reading. — Hans. Deb., 3d
Sen, cxlviii. 1742, &c.
2 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, § 4.
8 Treaty with France, 1843, confirmed by 6 & 7 Vict. c. 75; treaty with
United States, 1842, confirmed by 6 & 7 Vict. c. 76. Provisions to the
same effect had been comprised in the treaty of Amiens; and also in a
treaty with the United States in 1794. — PhiUimore, Int. Law, i. 427;
Hans Deb., 3d Sen, Ixx. 1325; Ixxi. 664.
CHURCH BEFORE THE REFORMATION. 291
CHAPTER Xn.
Relations of the Church to Political Histon': — Leading Incidents anu
Consequences of the Reformation in England, Scotland, and Ireland: —
Exaction of Conformity with the State Church : — Sketch of the °ena
Code against Roman Catholics and Nonconformists: — State of the
Church and other Religious Bodies on the Accession of George III. : —
Gradual Relaxation of the Penal Code : — History of Catholic Claims
priDf to the Regency.
In the sixteenth century, the history of the church is the
history of England. In the seventeenth century, Relations of
the relations of the church to the state and society J^^ponSS^
contributed, with political causes, to convulse the J^istory.
kingdom with civil wars and revolutions. And in later and
more settled times, they formed no inconsiderable part of the
political annals of the country. The struggles, the contro-
versies, the polity, and the laws of one age, are the inherit-
ance of another. Henry VIII. and Elizabeth bequeathed
to their successors ecclesiastical sti-ifes which have disturbed
every subsequent reign ; and, after three centuries, the re-
sults of the Reformation have not yet been fully developed.
A brief review of the leading incidents and consequences
of that momentous event will serve to elucidate The church
the later history of the church and other religious Refomadon.
bodies, in their relations to the state.
For centuries, the Catholic church had been at once the
church of the state and the church of the people. All the
subjects of the crown acknowledged her authority, accepted
her doctrines, participated in her oflSces, and worshipped at
her consecrated shrines. In her relations to the state she
approached the ideal of Hooker, wherein the church and the
commonwealth were identified : no one being a member of
292 BELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
the one, who was not also a member of the other.* But un-
der the shadow of this majestic unity grew ignorance, errors,
superstition, imperious authority and pretensions, excessive
weaUh, and scandalous corruption. Freedom of thought was
proscribed. To doubt the infallible judgment of the churcli
was heresy, — a mortal sin, for which the atonement was re-
cantation or death. From the time of Wickliffe to the Ref
ormation, iieresies and schisms were rife:^ the authority of
the church and the influence of her clergy were gradually
impaired ; and at length, she was overpowered by the eccle-
siastical revolution of Henry VIII. With her supremacy,
perished the semblance of religious union in England.
So vast a change as the Reformation, in the religious faith
rheRef- **"^ liabitudcs of a people, could not have been
onnaticn. effected, at any time, without wide and permanent
dissensions. When men were first invited to think, it was
not probable that they should think alike. But the time and
circurastarjces of the Reformation were such as to aggravate
theological schisms, and to embitter the contentions of re-
ligious parties. It was an age in which power was wielded
with a rough hand ; and the reform of the church was ac-
companied with plunder and persecution. The confiscation
of church property envenomed the religious antipathies of
the Catholic clergy : the cruel and capricious rigor with
which every communion was, in turn, oppressed, estranged
and divided the laity. Tlie changes of faith and policy,
— sometimes progressive, sometimes reactionary, — which
marked the long and painful throes of the Reformation, from
its inception under Henry VIII. to its final consummation un-
der Elizabeth, left no party without its wrongs and suffering-.
1 Book yiii., [2] Keble's Ed., iii. 411. Bishop Gardiner had already ex-
pressed the same theory; "the realm and the church consist of the same
persons: and as the kinp is the head of the realm, he must, therefore, be
head of the church." — Gilpin, ii. 29. — See also Gladstone's Stale and Church,
4th Ed., i. 9-31.
2 Warner, i. 527; Rennet's Hist., i. 265; Collier's Eccl. Hist., 1. 579;
Echard's Hist., 159; Burnet's Hist, of the Reformation, i. 27.
THE REFORMATION. 293
Toleration and liberty of conscience were unknown. Cath-
olics and Protestants alike recognized the duty Toleration
of the state to uphold truth and repress error, uni^own-
In this conviction, reforming prelates concurred with popes
and Roman divines. The Reformed church, owing her very
life to the right of private judgment, assumed the same
authority, in matters of doctrine, as the church of Rome,
which pretended to infallibility. Not to accept the doctrines
or ceremonies of the state church, for the time being, was a
crime ; and conformity with the new faith as with the old, was
enforced by the dungeon, the scaffold, the gibbet, and the
torch.^
The Reformed church being at length established under
Elizabeth, the policy of her reign demands espe- poiicy of
cial notice. Finding her fair realm distracted by ^ii^^th.
the religious convulsions of the last three reigns, she insisted
upon absolute unity. She exacted a strait conformity of doo-
ti-ine and observance, denied liberty of conscience gj^j ^jg.
to all her subjects, and attached civil disabilities to a^biiuies.
dissent from the state church. By the first act of her reign,*^ the
oath of supremacy was required to be taken as a qualification
for every ecclesiastical benefice, or civil office under the crown.
The act of uniformity,' enforced, witli severe penalties, conform-
ity with the ritual of the established church, and attendance
upon it« services. A few years later, the oath of supremacy
was, for the first time, required to be taken by every member
of the House of Commons.*
The Catholics were not only hostile to the state church,
but disaffected to the queen herself. They con- The CathoUc
tested her right to the crown ; and despairing of cilted^^h
the restoration of the ancient faith, or even of tol- treasoa.
eration, during her life, they plotted against her throne.
Hence the Catholic religion was associated with treason ;
1 " A prince being God's deputy, ought to punish impieties against Grod,"
said Archbishop Cranmer to Edward VI. — Burnet's Hist., i. 111.
2 1 Eliz. c. 1. 8 2 Eliz. c. 2. 4 5 Eliz. c. 1.
294 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
and the measures adopted for its repression were designed
as well for the safety of the state, as for the discouragement
of an obnoxious faith.^
To punish Popish recusants, penalties for non-attendance
Po ish r upon the services of the church were multiplied,'
cusauts. aQ(j enforced with merciless rigor.' The Catholic
religion was utterly proscribed : its priests were banished, or
hiding as traitors : * its adherents constrained to attend the
services of a church which they spurned as schismatic and
heretical.
While Catholics were thus proscribed, the ritual and
Doctrinal polity of the Reformed church were narrowing
^foT/iter *h6 foundations of the Protestant establishment.
ormaUon. 'phe doctrinal modifications of the Roman creed
were cautious and moderate. The new ritual, founded
on that of the Catholic church,^ was simple, eloquent, and
devotional. The patent errors and superstitions of Rome
were renounced ; but otherwise her doctrines and ceremonies
were respected. The extreme tenets of Rome, on the one
side, and of Geneva on the other, were avoided. The design
of Reformers wjus to restore the primitive church,'' rather
than to settle controversies already arising among Protes-
tants.^ Such moderation, — due rather to the predilections
of Lutheran Reformers, and the leaning of some of them to
the Roman faith, than to a profound policy, — was calculated
to secure a wide conformity. The respect shown to the ritual,
and many of the observances of the Church of Rome, made
1 13 Eliz. c. 2; Burnet's Hist., ii. 354; Short's Hist of the Church, 273
2 23 Eliz. c. 1; 29 KHz. c. 6; 33 Eliz. c 2; 35 Eliz. c. 1; Strype's Lite
f Whitgift, 95; Collier's Eccl. Hist, ii. 637; Warner, ii. 287; Kennel's
Hist., ii. 497.
« Lingard, note u, viii. 356; Dodd's Church Hist, iii. 75; and Butler's
Hist. Mem. of the Catholics, 230.
* 27 Kliz. c. 2.
6 Cardwell's Hist of the Book of Common Prayer.
< Bishop Jewel's Apology, ch. vii., Div. 3, c. x., Div. 1, &c.; Short'a
Uist of the Church, 238; Mant's Notes to Articles.
T Lawrence's Bampton Lectures, 237; Short's Hist, 199.
THE PURITANS. 295
the change of religion less abrupt and violent to the great
body of the people. But extreme parties were not to be
reconciled. The more faithful Catholics refused to renounce
the supremacy of the Pope and other cherished doctrines and
traditions of their church. Neither conciliated by concessions,
nor coerced by intimidation, they remained true to the ancient
faith.
On the other hand, these very concessions to Romanism
repelled the Calvinistic Reformers, who spurned ThePu-
every vestige of the Romish ritual, and repudiated "'*'"•
the form of church government, which, with the exception of
the Papal supremacy, was maintained in its ancient integrity.
They condemned every ceremony of the church of Rome as
idolatrous and superstitious ; ^ they abhorred episcopacy, and
favored the Presbytei'ian form of government in the church.
Toleration might have softened the asperities of theological
tontroversy, until time had reconciled many of the differences
springing from the Reformation, A few enlightened states-
men would gladly have practised it;^ but the im-
,. , a 111- 1 1 Rigorous
perious temper or the queen,' and the bigoted zeal enforcement
of her ruling churchmen, would not suffer the least
liberty of conscience. Not even waiting for outward signs
of departure from the standard of the church, they jealously
enforced subscription to the articles of religion ; and addressed
searching interrogatories to the clergy, in order to extort con-
fessions of doubt or nonconformity.* Even the oath of
supremacy, designed to discover Catholics, was also a stum-
1 In matters of ceremonial they objected to the wearing of the surplice,
tlie sign of the cross, and the office of sponsors in baptism; the use of the
riiig in the marriage ceremony, kneeling at the sacrament, the bowing at
the name of Jesus, and music in the servaces of the church. They also ob-
jected to the ordination of priests without a call by their flocks. — Heylyn's
Hist, of the Presbyterians, 259.
2 Strype's Life of Whitgift, i. 431.
3 Elizabeth's policy may be described in her own words: — " She would
suppress the papistical religion, that it should not grow : but %vould root
out puritanism, and the favorers thereof." — Strype's Eccl. Annals, iv. 242.
4 Strype's Eccl. Annals, iii. 81; Strype's Life of Whitgift, iii. 106; Ful
) ?i's Church Hist., is. 156 ; Sparrow, 123.
296 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
bling-block to manj Puritans. The former denied the queen's
supremacy, because they still owned that of the Pope ; many
of the latter hesitated to acknowledge it, as irreconcilable with
their own church polity. One party were known to be dis-
loyal : the other were faithful subjects of the crown. But
conformity with the reformed ritual, and attendance upon the
services of the church, were enforced against both with indis-
criminating rigor.* In aiming at unity, the church fostered
dissent.
The early Puritans had no desire to separate from the
national church ; but were deprived of their berie-
Orowthof - -1 <. 1 1 .mi .
nonconform- dccs, and cast forth by persecution. They sought
^ further to reform her polity and ceremonies,
upon the Calvinistic model ; and claimed greater latitude
in theii* own conformity. They objected to clerical vest-
ments and other forms, rather than to matters of faith
and doctrine ; and were slow to form a distinct communion
They met secretly for prayer and worship, hoping that
truth and pure religion would ultimately prevail in the
church, according to their cherished principles, as Protes-
tsmtism had prevailed over the errors of Rome. The ideal
of the Presbyterians was . a national church, to which they
clung through all their sufferings : but they were driven out
with stripes, from the church of England. The Indepen
dents, claiming self-government for each congregation, repel!
ing an 'ecclesiastical polity, and renouncing all connection with
the state, naturally favored secession from the establishment.
Separation and isolation were the very foundation of their
creed ; ^ and before the death of Elizabeth they had spread
hemselves widely through the country, being chiefly known
1 Burnet's Hist, of the Reformation, iii. 587; Short's Hist, of the Church,
306; Strype's Eccl. Annals, iv. 93, et seq.; Strj'pe's Parker, 155, 225;
Strype's Grindai, 99.
2 Heylyn's Hist, of the Presbyterians, lib. vi.-x. ; Neal's Hist, of the
Puritans, i. ch. iv., &c.; Bogue and Bennett's Hist, of Dissenters, Intr. 58-
66; i. 109-140; Price's Hist of Nonconformity; Conders View of all Re-
ligions.
CHURCH AND STATE. 2y7
as Brownists.^ Protestant nonconformity had taken root in
the land ; and its growth was momentous to the future des-
tinies of church and state.
While the Reformed church lost from her fold considera-
ble numbers of the people, her connection with „,
' ' Close con-
the state was far more intimate than that of the necUonofth*
church of Rome. There was no longer a divided church with
authority. Tiie crown was supreme in church
and state alike. The Reformed church was the creation
of Parliament: her polity and ritual, and even her doc-
trines, were preticribed by statutes. She could lay no claim
to ecclesiasticai independence. Convocation was restrained
from exercising any of its functions without the king's
license.^ No canons had force without his assent; and even
the subsidies granted •by the clergy, in convocation, were
henceforward confirmed by Parliament. Bishops, dignitaries
and clergy looked up to the crown, as the only source of
power within the realm. Laymen administered justice in
the ecclesia>tical courts ; and expounded the doctrines of the
church. Lay patronage placed the greater part of the bene-
fices at the disposal of the crown, the barons, and the land-
owners. The constitution of the church was identified with
that of the state ; and their union was political as well as re-
ligious. The church leaned to the government, rather than
to the people ; and, on her side, became a powerful auxiliary
in maintaining the ascendency of the crown, and the aris-
tocracy. The union of ecclesiastical supremacy with pre-
rogatives, already excessive, dangerously enlarged the power
of the crown over the civil and religious liberties of the
people. Authority had too strong a fulcrum ; and threatened
the realm with absolute subjection ; but the wrongs of Puri-
tans provoked a spirit of resistance, which eventually won
for Eiiglisiimen a surer freedom.
Meanwhile, the Reformation had taken a different course
1 The act 35 Eliz. c. 1, was passed to suppress them.
3 25 Hen. VHI. c. 19; Froude's Hist, ii. 193-198, 325, iv. 479.
298 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
in Scotland. The Calvinists had triumphed. They had
Reformation Overthrown episcopacy, and established a Pres-
in Scotland, ^jytej-j^ji church upon their own cherished modeh*
Their creed and polity suited the tastes of the people,
and were accepted with enthusiasm. The Catholic faith
was renounced everywhere but in some parts of the
Highlands ; and the Reformed establishment at once assumed
the comprehensive character of a national church. But
while supported by the people, it was in constant antagonism
to the state. Its rulers repudiated the supremacy of the
crown : ' resisted the jurisdiction of the civil courts ; ' and
set up pretensions to spiritual authority and independence,
not unworthy of the church tliey had lately overthrown.*
They would not suffer temporal power to intrude upon the
spiritual church of Christ.^ •
The constitution of the Scottish church was republican ;
The church her powcr at once spiritual and popular. Instead
of Scotland. ^^ being governed by courtly prelates and an im-
potent convocation, she was represented by the general
assembly, — an ecclesiastical parliament of wide jurisdic-
tion, little controlled by the civil power. The leaders of that
1 1560-1592. — The events of this period are amply illustrated in Spot-
tiswood's Hist, of the Church of Scotland; M'Crie's Lives of Knox and
Melville; Knox's Hist, of the Keformation; Robertson's Hist, of Scotland;
Tytler's Hist, of Scotland; Cook's Hist, of the Reformation in Scotland;
Cunningham's Church Hist, i. 351; Row's Hist, of the Kirk of Scotland;
Stephen's Hist, of the Church of Scotland; Buckie's Hist, ii. ch. 3.
2 In the Book of Polity, it is laid down that " the power ecclesiastical
flows immediately from God and the Mediator Jesus Christ, and is spiritual,
not having a temporal head on earth, but only Christ, the only spiritual
governor and head of his kirk."
« Cunningham's Church Hist, 535; Calderwood's Hist, v. 457-460, 475;
Spottiswood's Hist, iii. 21; Tytler's Hist, vii. 326.
* Mr. Cunningham, comparing the churches of Rome and Scotland,
says: — " With both there has been the same union and energy of action,
the same assumption of spiritual supremacy, the f>ame defiance of law
courts, parliaments, and kings." — Pre/, to Church Hist, of Scotland.
• " When the church was Roman, it was the duty of the magistrate to
reform it When the church was Protestant, it was impiety in the magis<
tratc to touch it." — Cunningham'a Church Hist., i. 637.
REFORMATION IN IRELAND. 299
assembly were bold and earnest men, with high notions of
ecclesiastical authority, a democratic temper, and habitual re-
liance upon popular support. A cliurch so constituted was,
indeed, endowed and acknowledged by the state ; but was
more likely to withstand the power of the crown and aris-
tocracy, than to uphold it.
The formal connection of the church with the state was,
nevertheless, maintained with scarcely less strict- „
•' Her connec-
ness than in England. The new establishment tion with
1 1 /• 1 1 • 1 , -r. *li« State.
was the work oi the legislature : the Jrrotestant
religion was originally adopted : the church's confession of
faith ratified ; and the entire Presbyterian polity established
by statute,^ And further, the crown was represented in her
assembly by the Lord High Commissioner.
The Reformation had also been extended to Ireland : but
in a manner the most extraordinary and excep- ReformatioQ
tional. In England and Scotland, the clergy and ^ ^"'^^'^
people had unquestionably been predisposed to changes in
the Catholic church ; and the reforms effected were more or
less the expression of the national will: But in Ireland, the
Reformation was forced upon an unyielding priesthood, and
a half-conquered people. The priests were driven from their
churches and homes, by ministers of the new faith, — gen-
erally Englishmen or strangers, — who were ignorant of the
language of their flocks, and indifferent to their conversion
or teaching. Conformity was exacted in obedience to the
law, and under severe penalties : not sought by appeals to
the reason and conscience of a subject race. Who can won-
der that the Reformation never took root in Ireland? It
was accepted by the majority of the English. colonists ; but
many who abjured the Catholic faith, declined to join the
new establishment, and founded Presbyterian communions of
their own. The Reformation added a new element of dis-
cord between the colonists and the natives : embittered the
chronic discontents against the government ; and founded a
1 Scots Acts, 1560; 1567, c. 4, 6, 7, 1592, c. 116; Ibid., 1690, c. 5, 23.
300 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
foreign church, with few communicants, in the midst of a
hostile and rebelHous people. It was a state church : but, in
no sense, the church of the nation.^
Such having been the results of the Reformation, the acces-
The three sion of James united the three crowns of these
unaM**** realms ; and what were his relations to the church ?
James I. !„ England, he was the head of a state church,
environed by formidable bodies of Catholics and Puritans.
In Scotland, a Presbyterian church had been founded upon
the model approved by English Puritans. In Ireland, he
was the head of a church maintained by the sword. This
incongruous heritage, unwisely used, brought ruin on his
royal house. Reared among a Presbyterian people, he vexed
the English Puritans with a more rigorous conformity ; and
spurning the religion of his own countrymen, forced upon
them a hated episcopacy, the supremacy of the crown,
and observances repugnant to their creed. No less intolerant
of his own mother's church, he hastened to aggravate the
penalties against Popish recusants. Such was his rancor that
he denied them the right of educating their children in the
Catholic faith.^ The laws against them were also enforced
with renewed severity.' The monstrous plot of Guy
Fawkes naturally incensed Parliament and the people
against the whole body of Catholics, whose religion was
still associated with imminent danger to the state ; and
again were treason and Popery scourged with the same
rod. Further penalties were imposed on Popish recusants,
not attending the services and sacraments of the church ;
and a new oath of allegiance was devised to test their loy-
alty.* In Ireland, Catholic priests were banished by procla-
mation ; and the laws rigorously enforced against the laity
1 Leliind's Hist., n. 165, 224, &c.; Lnnigan's Eccl. Hist, iv. 207, &c.;
Maiit's Hist, of the Church of Ireland, i. eh. 2, 3, 4; Goldwin Smith's Irish
Historj' and Irish Character, 83, 88, 92, 100.
'^ 1 Jac. I. c. 4.
• Lingard's Hist., ix. 41, 55.
* 3 Jac. I. c. 4, 5.
THE COMMONWEALTH. 301
who absented themselves from Protestant worship. The
king's only claim upon the favor of the Puritans was his per-
secution of Papists ; and this he suddenly renounced. In
compliance with engagements entered into with foreign pow-
ers, he began openly to tolerate the Catholics ; and granted a
pardon to all who had incurred the penalties of recusancy.
The breach was ever widening between the Puritans and the
throne ; and while the monarch was asserting the divine right
of kings, his bishops were exalting prelacy, and bringing the
Reformed church nearer to the Romish model.
Charles continued to extend an indulgence to Catholics, at
once offensive to the Puritan party, and in violation ^^^^^^ ^f
of laws which his prerogative could not rightfully charies i.
suspend. Even the toleration of the Stuarts, like thoUcsand
... , 111 rr<i • Puritans.
their rigor, was beyond the law. 1 he prerogatives
and supremacy of the crown were alike abused. Favoring
absolutism in the state and domination in the church, Charles
found congenial instruments of tyranny in the Star Chamber
and High Commission, — in Strafford and in Laud. In Eng-
land he oppressed Puritans : in Scotland he introduced a high
church liturgy, which provoked rebellion. Arbitrary rule in
church and state completed the alienation of the Puritan
party ; and their enmity was fatal. The church was over-
thrown ; and a republican commonwealth established on the
ruins of the monarchy. The polity of the Reformation was
riven, as by a thunderbolt.
The Commonwealth was generally favorable to religious
liberty. The intolerance of Presbyterians, indeed, iieii<Ton
was fanatical.^ In the words 'of Milton, " new Ji"'*^'' "^«
' Common-
Presbyter was but old Priest, — writ large." Had 'health.
1 Life of Baxter, 103. Their clergy in London protested against tolera-
tion to the Westminster Assembly, Dec. 18th, 1645, saying, " we cannot
dissemble how we detest and abhor this much endeavored toleration." —
Price's Hist, of Nonconformity, ii. 329. Edwards, a Presbyterian minister,
denounced toleration as " the grand design of the devil," and " the most
ready, compendious, and sure way to destroy all religion," — "all the
devils in hell and their instruments being at work to promote it." — Gtat^
graena, part •. 58.
302 RELIGIOUS LIBERTT.
tbey been suffered to exercise uncontrolled dominion, they
would have rivalled Laud himself in persecution. But Crom-
well guaranteed freedom of worship to all except Papists and
Prelatists ; declaring " that none be compelled to conform to
the public religion, by penalties or otherwise."^ Such was
his policy as a statesman and an Independent.^ He extended
toleration even to the Jews.' Yet was he sometimes led, by
political causes, to put his iron heel upon the bishops and
clergy of the Ciiurch of England, upon Roman Catholics,
and even upon Presbyterians.* The church party and Ro
man Catholics had fought for the king in the civil war ; and
the hands of churchmen and Puritans were red with each
others' blood. To religious rancor was added the vengeance
of enemies on the battle«-field.
Before the king's fall, he had been forced to restore the
Pmby. Presbyterian polity to Scotland ; ^ and the Cove-
teriaMta nanters, in a furious spirit of fanaticism, avenjred
Scotland. T^ . 1. 1 ' o
upon Episcopalians the wrongs which their cause
had suffered in the last two reigns. Every age brought
new discords ; and religious differences commingled with civil
strifes.
After the Restoration, Roundheads could expect no mercy
from Cavaliers and churchmen. They were
under spumed as dissenters and republicans. While in
Charles n. . ^
the ascendant, their gloomy fanaticism and joyless
1 Whitelock's Mem., 499, 576, 614; Neal's Hist, of the Puritans, iv, 28,
138, 338, &c.
2 Hume affirms, somewhat too broadly, that "of all the Christian sects
this was the first which, during its prosperity as well as its ad%-ersity, al-
ways adopted the principles of toleration. — Hist., v. 168. See also Neal's
Hist, of the Puritans, ii. 98; iv. 144; Collier, 829; Hallam's Const Hist,
i. 621; Short's Hist, 425; Brook's Hist of Religious Liberty, i. 504, 513-
528.
• Bate's Elen., part ii 211.
• Lord Clarendon's Hist, vii. 253, 254; Baxter's Life, i. 64; Rennet's
Hist, iii. 206; Neal's Hist of the Puritans, iv. 39, 122, 138, 144; Hume's
Hist., V. 368; Butler's Rom. Cath., U. 407; Parr's Life of Archbishop
Usher; Rush worth, vii. 308, &c.
• In 1641.
REIGN OF CHARLES H. 303
discipline had outraged the natural sentiments and taste of
the people, and there was now a strong reaction against them.
And first the church herself was to be purged of Puritans.
Their consciences were tried by a new Act of Uniformity,
which drove forth two thousand of her clergy, and further
recruited the ranks of Protestant nonconformists.* This
measure, fruitful of future danger to the church, was fol-
lowed by a rigorous code of laws, proscribing freedom of
worsliip, and multiplying civil disabilities as penalties for
dissent.
By the Corporation Act, no one could be elected to a corpo-
rate office who had not taken the sacrament within ^
OppressiTO
the year.^ By another Act, no one could serve as laws of this
a vestryman, unless he made a declaration against '^ ^°'
taking up arms and the covenant, and engaged to conform to
the Liturgy.^ The Five Mile Act prohibited any noncon-
formist minister from coming within five miles of a corporate
town ; and all nonconformists, whether lay or clerical, from
teaching in any public or private school.* The monstrous
Conventicle Act punished attendance at meetings of more
than five persons, in any house, for religious worship, with
imprisonment and transportation.^ This, again, was suc-
ceeded by a new test, by which the clergy were required to
Bwear that it was not lawful, on any pretence whatever, to
take up arms against the king.® This test, conceived in the
spirit of the high church, touched the consciences of none but
the Calvinisfic clergy, many of whom refused to take it, and
further swelled the ranks of dissent.
While the foundations of the church were narrowed by
Buch laws as these, nonconformists were pursued Persecution
by incessant persecutions. Eight thousand Prot- fo^^ts!*'
1 13 & 14 Car. II. c. 4. Calamy's Nonconformist's Memorial, Intr. 31
fee; Baxter's Life and Times, by Calamy, i. 181.
2 13 Car. IL stat. 2, c. 1.
« 15 Car. II. c. 5. < 13 & 14 Car. II. a 4.
6 16 Car. II. c. 4, continued and amended by ^2 Car. II. c 1.
• 17 Car. II. c. 2.
304 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
estants are said to have been imprisoned, besides great
numbers of Catholics.^ Fifteen hundred Quakers were
confined : of whom three hundred and fifty died
Attempts . o -r-.. . . • ••11 1
atcompre- m prison.'^ Duruig this reign, indeed, several
enMoa. attempts were made to effect a reconciliation be-
tween the church and nonconformists ; ' but the irreconcilable
differences of the two parties, the unyielding disposition of
churchmen, and the impracticable temper of nonconform
ists, forbade the success of any scheme of comprehension.
Nonconformists having been discouraged at the beginning
The Catho- °^ '''''^ ^cign, Catholics provoked repression at the
lies under gfid. In 1673, Parliament, impelled by apprehen-
CUarles II. , .
sions for the Protestant religion and civil liberties
of the people, passed the celebrated Test Act.* Designed
to exclude Roman Catholic ministers from the king's coun-
tils, its provisions yet embraced Protestant nonconformists.
That body, for the sake of averting a danger common to all
Protestants, joined the church in supporting a measure
fraught with evil to themselves. They were, indeed, prom-
ised further indulgence in the exercise of their religion, and
even an exemption from the Test Act itself; but the church
party, having secured them in its toils, was in no haste to re-
lease them.*
The Church of Scotland fared worse than the English
Ch rch of nonconformists, after the Restoration. Episcopacy
Scotund was restored : the kinjj's supremacy reasserted :
after Itesto- . o t J
ration. the entire polity of the church overthrown;"
1 Delaune's Plea for Nonconformists, preface; Short's Hist, 559. Old-
mixon goes so far as to estimate the total number who suffered on account
of their religion, during this reign, at 60,000! — Historj'of the Stuarts, 715.
2 Neal's Hist, of the Puritans, v. 17.
8 The Savoy Conference, 1661; Baxter's Life and Times, i. 139; Bur-
net's Own Time, i. 309; Collier's Church Hist., ii. 879; Perry's Hist., ii.
317. In 1669; Baxter's Life, iii. 23; Burnet's Own Time, i. 439; Scheme
of Tillotson and Stilljngfleet, 1674; Burnet's Life of Tillotson, 42.
* 25 Car. II. c. 2.
« Kennel's Hist., iii. 294; Burnet's Own Time, i. 348, 516.
« Scots Acts, 1661, c. 11; 1669, c. 1; 1681, c. 6; Wodrow's Church Hist.,
1. 190.
THE TOLERATION ACT. 305
while the wrongs of Episcopalians, under the Common-
wealth, were avenged, with barbarous cruelty, upon Presby-
terians.^
The Protestant faith and civil liberties of the people being
threatened by James II., all classes of Protestants
' . Union of
combined to expel him from his throne. Again church and •
, r • • 1 • 1 1 1 1 dissenters
the nonconformists united with the cliurch, to re- against
. . 1 rrii . James II.
sist a common danger, ihey were not even con-
ciliated by his declarations of liberty of conscience and in
dulgence, in which they perceived a stretch of preroga
tive and a dangerous leaning towards the Catholic faith,
under the guise of religious freedom. The revolution was
not less Protestant than political ; and Catholics were thrust
further than ever beyond the pale of the constitution.
The recent services of dissenters to the church and the
Protestant cause, were rewarded by the Tolera- ^he Toie-
tion Act.^ This celebrated measure repealed none ratioaact.
of the statutes exacting conformity with the Church of Eng-
land ; but exempted all persons from penalties, on taking the
oath of allegiance and supremacy, and subscribing a declara-
tion against transubstantiation. It relieved dissenting minis-
ters from the restrictions imposed by the Act of Uniformity
and the Conventicle Act upon the administration of the sac-
rament and preaching in meetings ; but required them to
subscribe the thirty-nine articles, with some exceptions.* The
dissenting chapels were to be registered ; and their congre-
gations protected from any molestation. A still easier in-
dulgence was given to the Quakers ; but toleration was with-
lield from Roman Catholics and Unitarians, who found no
favor either with the church or nonconformists.
The Toleration Act, whatever its shortcomings, was at
i Wodrow's Church Hist., i. 57, 236, 390, &c.; Buraet's Own Time, i,
365, ii. 416, &c.; Crookshank's Hist, i. 15-t, 204, &c.; Buckle's Hist., ii.
281-292; Cunningham's Ch. Hist., ii. ch. i.-vi.
2 1 Gul. & Mar., c. 8; Bogue and Bennett's Hist, of Dissentera i. 187-
204.
« All " except three and part of a fourth."
vol,. II. 20
306 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
least the first recognition of the right of public worship,
lUehtof beyond the pale of the state church. It was the
worehip great charter of dissent. Far from granting re-
conceded. Hgious liberty, it yet gave indulgence and security
from persecution.
The age was not ripe for wider principles of toleration.
Catholics and Unitarians were soon afterwards
Fnrtbep
meiuures pursued with severer penalties;^ and in 1700, the
tarUnaaud intolerant spirit of Parliament was displayed by
*' ° ^' an Act against the former, which cannot be read
without astonishment. It offered a reward of 100/. for the
discovery of any Catholic priest performing the offices of his
church : it incapacitated every Roman Catholic from inherit-
ing or purchasing land, unless he abjured his religion upon
oath; and on his refusal, it vested his property during his
life in his next of kin, being a Protestant. He was even
prohibited from sending his children abroad, to be educated
in his own faith.^ And while his religion was thus pro-
scribed, his civil rights were further restrained by the oath
of abjuration.*
Again tlie policy of comprehension was favored by Wil-
Schcmeof lif»m III.: but it was too late. The church was
Bio" u^der ^^^ **^ Strong to be willing to sacrifice her own
William in. convictions to the scruples of nonconformists. Nor
was she forgetful of her own wrongs under tlie Common-
wealth, or insensible to the sufferings of Episcopalians in i
Scotland. On the other side, the nonconformists, con-
firmed in their repugnance to the docti-ines and ceremonies
of the church by the persecutions of a hundred and fifty
years, were not to be tempted by sfnall concessions to tlieir
consciences, or by the doubtful prospects of preferment in an
establishment from which they could expect little favor.*
1 1 Will. & M. c. 9, 15, 20; 9 & 10 Will. III. c. 32.
2 11 & 12 Will. III. c. 4; Butler's Hist. Mem. of the Catholics, iii. 134-
138, 279.
8 13 Will. III. c. 6.
* D'Oyley's Life of Sancroft, 327, 520; Burnet's Owr Time, ii. 1033.
REIGNS OF GEORGE I. AND IL 307
To the Church of Scotland the Revolution brought free-
dom and favor. The king's supremacy was finally church of
renounced ; Episcopacy, against which she had ff^"*",g
vainly struggled for a hundred years, forever Revolution,
abolished ; her confession of faith recognized by statute ;
and the Presbyterian polity confirmed.* But William III.,
in restoring the privileges of the church, endeavored to
impress upon her rulers his own moderation and tol-
erant spirit. Fearing the persecution of Episcopalians at
their hands, he wrote thus nobly and wisely to the General
Assembly: " We expect that your management shall be such
that we may have no reason to repent what we have done.
We never could be of the mind that violence was suited to
the advancing of true religion : nor do we intend that our
authority shall ever be a tool to the irregular passions of any
party." ^ And not many years afterwards, when Presby-
terian Scotland was united to Episcopalian England, the
rights of her church, in worship, discipline, and government,
were confirmed and declared unalterable.'
To the Catholics of Ireland, the reign of William was
made terrible by new rigors and oppression. They cathoUcsof
were in arms for the exiled king ; and again was u™^*"**
their faith the symbol of rebellion. Overcome by ^'UJam nr.
the sword, they were condemned to proscription and outlawry
It was long before Catholics were to enjoy indulgence
In 1711, a proclamation was published for en-
forcing the penal laws against them in England.* under Anne,
And in Ireland, the severities of former reigns
were aggravated by Acts of Queen Anne.* After the re
bellion of 1715, Parliament endeavored to strengthen the
Protestant interest, by enforcing the laws against Papists.*
&'c ; Rennet's Hist., iii. 483, 551, et seq. ; Lord Macaulay's Hist, iii. 89, 468-
195; Bogue and Bennett's Hist., i. 207.
1 Scots Acts, 1689, c. 2; 1690, c. 5; 1692', c. 117.
2 Lord Macaulay's Hist., iii. 708.
8 Act of Union, 5 Anne, c. 8; Scots Acts, 1705, c. 4; 1706, c 7.
< Boyce's Reign of Queen Anne, 429, &c.
6 2 Anne, c. 3, 6 ; 8 Anne, c. 3.
8 1 Geo. I. c. 55.
308 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Again, in 1722, the estates of Roman Catholics and non-
jurors were made to bear a special financial burden, not
charged upon other property.' And, lastly, the rebellion of
1745 called forth a prochimation, in the spirit of earlier times,
offering a reward of 100/. for the disfON'ery of Jesuits and
popish priests, and chilling upon magistrates to bring them to
justice-
Much of the toleration which had been conceded to Prot-
Koncon- estant nonconformists at the Revolution, was again
nnlkr Anne, withdrawn during the four last years of Queen
Geo. 1. & II. ^i^ng. Having found tiieir way into many offices,
by taking the sacrament, an Act was passed, in 1711, against
occasional conformity, by whicli dissenters were dis[>ossessed
of their employments, and more rigorously disqualified in
future.* Again were nonconformists repelled, with contume-
ly, from honorable fellowship with the state. Two years
afterwards the Schism Bill was passed, prohibiting the ex-
ercise of the vocation of schoolmaster or private teacher,
without a declaration of conformity, and a license from a
bishop.' Both these statutes, however, were repealed in the
following i-eign.* Wiih the reign of George II. a wider
toleration was commenced, in another form. The time was
not yet come for repealing the laws imposing civil disabilities
upon dissenters ; but annual Acts of Indemnity were passed,
by which persons who had failed to qualify themselves for
office were protected.'
The reign of George III. opened under circumstances
favorable to religious liberty. The intolerant spirit
church and of the high church party had been broken since
t!ie^"e^"on the death of Anne. Tlie frenzies of Sacheverell
cf George ui. ^^^ Atterbury had yielded to the liberal philoso-
1 9 Geo. I. c. 18; Pari. Hist., viii. 51, 353.
* 10 Anne, c. 2; Burnet's Own Time, ii. 364, 585, &c. ; Bogue and Ben-
nett's Hist, i. 228, 262.
8 12 Anne, c. 7; Pari. Hist., vi. 1349; Bogae and Bennett's Hist., 268.
* 5 Geo. 1. c. 4.
» The first of these Acts was in 1727; 1 Geo. II. c. 23. Hallara's Const.
Hist., ii. 412.
STATE OF RELIGION IN 1760. 309
phy of Milton and Locke, of Jeremy Taylor, Hoadley, War
burton, Montesquieu. The angry disputations of convoca
tion were silenced. The church was at peace ; and the state
had ceased to disti-ust either Roman Catholics or nonconform-
ists. Never since the Reformation, had any monarch suc-
ceeded to the throne, at a period so free from religious dis-
cords and embarrassments. In former reigns, high church-
men had been tainted with Jacobite sympathies : now all
parties vied in attachment and loyalty. Once more the
church was wholly with the king ; and added all her weight
to the influence of the crown. Many English Catholics,
crushed by persecution and losing hopes of the restoration of
their own faith, had gradually conformed to a church, already
beginning to boast a certain antiquity, enshrined in the
ancient temples of their forefathers, respecting their tradi-
tions, allied to the state, and enjoying the power, wealth,
fashion, and popularity of a national establishment. Some
of this body had been implicated in both the Jacobite rebel-
lions ; but their numbers had ceased to be formidable ; and
they were now univei'sally well-disposed and loyal.^ The
dissenters had been uniformly attached to the House of Han-
over ; and, having ceased to be oppressed, quietly prospered,
without offence to the church. The old nonconformist bodies,
— the offspring of the Reformation and the Act of Uniform-
ity, — so far from making progress, had declined in numbers
and activity, since the time of William IH.'^ There had
been little religious zeal, either within or without the
church. It was an age of spiritual indifference and leth-
1 In 1767, there appeared to have been no more than 67,916; and, in
1780, 69,376. They had 200 chapels. — Census, 1851 : Report on Religious
Worship, ci. In 1G96, out of 2,599,786 freeholders in England and Wales,
there had been 1.3,856 Catholics. — Ibid., c. Dalrymple, book i. part ii.
App.; Butler's Historical Mem. of the Catholics, iii. 162.
2 Calamy's Life & Times, ii. 529; Lord Mahon's Hist., ii. 372; Bogue
and Bennett's Hist., iii. .314-3.3-t. In 1696, it appeared that 108,676 free-
holders in England and Wales were nonconformists (Census Report, 1851,
c); but as dissent chiefly prevaileii in the towns, tliis return must have
•alleu very far short of the total numbers.
310 RELIGIOUS LIBEKTY.
argy.* With many noble exceptions, the clergy had been in-
ert and apathetic. A benefice was regarded as an estate, to
which was attached the performance of certain ecclesiastical
duties. These once performed, — the service read, the weekly
sermon preached, the child christened, the parishioner buried,
— and the parson differed little from the squire". He was
generally charitable, kindly, moral ; and well educated — ac-
cording to the standard of the age — in all but theology.*
But his spiritual calling sat lightly upon him. Zealous for
church and king, and honestly hating dissenters, he was un-
conscious of a mission to spread the knowledge of the gospel
among the people, to solve their doubts, to satisfy their spirit-
ual longings, and to attach their religious sympathies to the
church.' The nonconformist ministers, comfortably estaV)-
lished among their flocks and enjoying their modest tempo-
ralities, shared the spiritual ease of churchmen. They were
ruffled by no sectarian zeal or restless spirit of encroachment
Many even conformed to the Church of England. The ago
was not congenial to religious excitement and enthusiasm ; a
lull had succeeded to storms and agitations.
But this religious calm had lately been disturbed by Wes-
Wesieyand ^^7 ^"'^ Whilefleld, the apostles of modern dissent.
wiiitefleid. These eminent men were both brought up as faith-
ful disciples of the church, and admitted to holy orders. Not
impelled to their extraordinary mission by any repugnance
1 Bishop Gibson's Pastoral Letters, 2d Ed., 1728, p. 2; Butler's Adver-
tisement to Analogy of Revealed Religion, 1736; Archbishop Seeker's
Eight Charges, 1738, p. 4; Southey's Life of Wesley, i. 324, &c.
2 Bishop Burnet thus speaks of candidates for ordination : — " Those
■who have read some few books, yet never seem to have read the scrip-
tures." " The case is not much better in many, who, having got into
orders, come for instruction, and cannot make it appear that they have
read the scriptures, or any one good book, since they were ordained." — •
Pastoral Care, 3d Ed., 1713: Preface.
• " A remiss, unthinking course of life, with little or no application la
study, and the bare perfonning of that, which, if not done, would draw
censures when complained of, without even pursuing the pastoral care in
any suitable degree, is but too common, as well as too evideuU" — Ibid
See also Intr. to last volume of Burnet's Hist
THE METHODISTS. 311
to her doctrines and discipline, they went forth to rouse the
people from their religious apathy, and awaken them to a
sense of sin. They penetrated the haunts of ignorance and
vice ; and braved ridicule, insults, and violence. They
preached in the open air to multitudes who had scarcely
heard of tlie gospel. On the hill-side, by ruins, on the sea-
shore, they appealed to the imagination as well as to the de-
votional sentiments of their hearers. They devoted their
lives to the spiritual instruction of the middle and lower
classes : preached to them everywhere : prayed with them :
read the scriptures in public and private ; and addressed
them with familiar speech and homely illustration.^ Wesley,
still in communion with the church and holding her in love
and reverence, became the founder of a new sect.^ He
preached to reclaim men from sin : he addressed the neg-
lected heathens of society, whom the church knew not : he
labored as a missionary, not as a sectarian. Schism grew
out of his pious zeal : but his followers, like their revered
founder, have seldom raised their voices, in the spirit of
schismatics, against their parent church,* Whitefield, for a
time the fellow-laborer of Wesley, surpassed that great man
as a preacher ; and moved the feelings and devotion of his
hearers with the inspiration of a prophet; but, less gifted
1 " I design plain truth for plain people ; therefore, of set purpose I ab-
stain from all nice and philosophical speculations, from all perplexed and
intricate reasonings; and, as far as possible, from even the show of learn-
ing, unless in sometimes citing the original scriptures. I labor to avoid all
words which are not easy to be understood, — all which are not used in
common life, — and in particular those kinds of technical terms that so fi-e-
quently occur in bodies of dinnity." — Wesley's Pref. to Sermons, 1746. —
In another place Wesley Avrote: — " I dare no more write in a fine style,
than wear a fine coat." — Pre/, to 2d Ser. of Sermons, 1783.
•^ Rev. J. Wesley's Works, i. 185; ii. 515; vii. 422,423; viii. Ill, 254,
269, 311; Southey's Life of Wesley, ch. xii., xx., &c.
8 Wesley's W^orks, viii. 205. 321; Centenary of Wesleyan Methodism,
183; Lord Mahon's Hist., ii. 365, 366. Wesley himself said: — " We are
not seceders; nor do we bear any resemblance to them:" and after his
sect had spread itself over the land, he continually preached in the
chu robes of the establishment.
312 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
with powers of organization and government, he left fewer
monument.s of his labors, as the founder of a religious sect.*
Holding to the doctrine of absolute predestination, he be-
came the leader of the Calvinisitic Methodists and Lady
Huntingdon's connection.* The Methodists were regarded
by churchmen as fanatical ertthusiasts rather than dissenters;
while their close relations with the church repelled the favor
of other sects. They suffered ridicule, but enjoyed tolera-
tion ; and, laboring in a new field, attracted multitudes to
their communion.*
The revival of the religious spirit by the Methodists grad-
RcviTai of ually stimulated the older sects of nonconformists,
dissent. Presbyterians, Independents, and Baptists, awak-
ened by "Wesley and Whitefield to a sense of the spiritual
wants of the people, strove, with all their energies, to meet
them. And large numbers, whose spiritual care had hitherto
been neglected alike by the church and by nonconformists,
were steadily swelling the ranks of dissent. The cliurch
caught the same spirit more slowly. She was not alive to
the causes which were undermining her influence, and in-
vading her proper domain, — the religious teaching of the
people, — until chapels and meeting-houses had been erected
in half the parishes of England.*
The church of Scotland, which in former reigns had often
Church of been at issue with the civil power, had now fallen
Scotland. under the rule of the moderate party, and was as
tractable as the church of England hei'self. She had ever
been faithful to the Revolution settlement, by which her own
privileges were assured ; and, when free from persecution,
1 Dr. Adam Clarke's Works, xiii. 257; Southey's Life of Wesley, ch.
sxi.
2 Wesley's Works, iii. 84; Philip's Life of Whitefield, 195, &c.; South-
ey's Life of Wesley, ch. xxv.; Life of Countess of Huntingdon, 8vo. 1840.
* Southey's Life of Wesley, ch. xxix. ; Watson's Observations on
Southey's Life, 138; Lord Mahon's Chapter on Methodism, Hist., ii. 354
Brook's Hist, of Relig. Lib., ii. 326-333.
* See infra, p. 419.
tMe penal code. 313
had cast off much of her former puritanism. Her spii*it had
been tempered by learning, cultivation, society, and the gen-
tle influences of the South, until she had become a stanch
ally of the crown and aristocracy.^
In Ireland, the Protestant church had made no progress
since the days of Elizabeth. The mass of the church of
population were still Catholics. The clergy of^'^'*"'^'
the state church, indifferent and supine, read the English
liturgy in empty churches, while their parishioners attended
mass in the Catholic chapels. Irish benefices afforded con-
venient patronage to the crown and the great families. The
Irish church was a good rallying point for Protestant ascen-
dency ; but instead of fulfilling the mission of a national es-
tablishment, it provoked religious animosity and civil dissen-
sions. For the present, however, Protestant rule was abso-
lute ; and the subjection of the Catholics undisturbed.''
Such being the state of the church and other religious
bodies, the gradual relaxation of the penal code
was, at length, to be commenced. This code, the relaxation of
growth of more than two centuries, was wholly code^'com-
inconsistent with the policy of a free state. Lib- ^^'^^ '
erty of thought and discussion was allowed to be a constitu-
tional right : but freedom of conscience was interdicted.
Religious unity was still assumed, while dissent was notori-
ous. Conformity with the state church was held to be a
duty, the neglect of which was punishable with penalties and
disabilities. Freedom of w^orship and civil rights were de-
nied to all but members of the church. This policy, origi-
nating in the doctrines of a church pretending to infallibility
and admitted to our laws in the plenitude of civil and eccle-
siastical power, grew up amid rebellions and civil wars, in
which religion became the badge of contending parties. Re-
1 Cunningham's Church Hist, of Scotland, ii. 491, 578, &c.
2 Bishop Berkeley's Works, ii. 381;' Wesley's Works, x. 209, &c.;
Mant's Hist, of the Church of Ireland, ii. 288-294, 421-429, Ike ; Lord
Malion's Hist., ii. 374.
314 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
ligious intoleranco was its foundation : political expediency
its occasional justification. Long after the state had ceased
to be threatened by any religious sect, the same policy wan
maintained on a new ground, — the security of the estab-
lished church.
The penal code, with all its anomalies and inconsistencies,
General admitted of a simple division. One part imposed
of t^*^**' restraints on religious worship : the other attached
peo&i code, gjyji disabilities to faith and doctrine. The former
was naturally the first to be reviewed. More repugnant
to religious liberty, and more generally condemned by the
enlightened thinkers of the age, it was not to be defended
by those political considerations which were associated with
the latter. Men, earnest in upholding securities to our
Protestant constitution, revolted from the persecution of con-
science. These two divisions, however, were so intermixed
in the tangled web of legislation : principles had been so little
observed in carrying out the capricious and impulsive policy
of intolerance ; and the temper of Parliament and the
country was still so unsettled in regard to the doctrines of
religious liberty, that the labor of revision proceeded with no
more system than the original code. Now a penalty affect-
ing religion was repealed: now a civil disability removed.
Sometimes Catholics received indulgence ; and sometimes a
particular sect of nonconformists. First one grievance was
redressed, and then another; but Parliament continued to
shrink from the broad assertion of religious liberty, as the
right of British subjects and the policy of the state. Tol-
eration and connivance at dissent had already succeeded to
active persecution : society had outgrown the law : but a
century of strife and agitation had yet to pass, before the
penal code was blotted out, and religious liberty estab-
lished. We have now to follow this great cause through
iU5 lengthened annals, and to trace its halting and unsteady
progress.
Early in this reign, the broa^ principles of toleration wero
TOLERATION RECOGNIZED. 315
judicially affirmed by the House of Lords. The city of
London had perverted the Corporation Act into an
' , , . ,. Corporation
instrument of extortion, by electmg dissenters to of LonUoa
the office of sheriff, and exacting fines when Dissenters,
tliey refused to qualify. No less than 15,000/. ^''''•**'"^'
had thus been levied before the dissenters resisted this
imposition. The law had made them ineligible : then how
could they be fined for not serving? The City Courts up-
held the claims of the Corporation : but the dissenters ai>-
pealed to the Court of Judges or commissioners' delegates,
and obtained a judgment in their favor. In 1759 the Cor-
poration brought the cause before the House of Lords, on a
writ of error. The judges being consulted, only one could
be found to support the claims of the Corporation ; and the
House of Lords unanimously affirmed tiie judgment of the
Court below. In moving the judgment of the House, Lord
Mansfield thus defined the legal rights of dissenters: — '*It
is now no crime," he said, ** for a man to say he is a dissent-
er ; nor is it any crime for him not to take the sacrament ac
cording to the rites of the Church of England : nay, the
crime is if he doe., it, contrary to the dictates of his con-
science." And again : — " The Toleration Act renders that
which was illegal before, now legal ; the dissenters' way of
worship is permitted and allowed by this Act. It is not only
exempted from punishment, but rendered innocent and law-
ful ; it is established ; it is put under the protection, and is
not merely under the connivance, of the law.** And in con-
demning the laws to force conscience, he said : — " There
is nothing certainly more unreasonable, more inconsistent
with the rights of human nature, more contrary to the spirit
and precepts of the Christian religion, more iniquitous and
unjust, more impolitic, than persecution. It is against natu-
ral religion, revealed religion, and sound policy."^ In his
1 Pari. Hist., xvi. 316. — Horace Walpole unjustly sneers at this speech
as "another Whig oration" of Lord Mansfield's. — Mem., ii 41't. Lord
Campbell's Chief Justices, ii. 512. Brook's Hist of Relig. Lib., ii. 432.
316 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
views of toleration the judge was in advance of the legis
lature.
Several years elapsed before Parliament was invited to
Subscrip- consider matters affecting the church and dissent-
^"^ksft'eb. ers. In 1772, Sir William Meredith presented a
6th, 1772. petition from several clergymen and others, com-
plaining that subscription to the thirty-nine articles was re-
quired of the clergy and at the universities. So far as this
complaint concerned the clergy, it was a question of compre-
hension and church discipline ; but subscription on matricula-
tion affected the admission of dissenters to the University of
Oxford ; and subscription on taking the degrees of Doctor of
Laws and Doctor of Medicine excluded dissenters from the
practice of the civil law, as sfdvocates, and the practice of
medicine, as physicians. In debate this complaint was treat-
ed chiefly as a question affecting the discipline of the church
and universities ; but sentiments were expressed marking a
growing spirit of toleration. It being objected that if sub-
scription were relaxed, sectaries might gain admission to the
church. Sir G. Savile said, finely, " sectaries. Sir ! had it not
been for sectaries, this cause had been tried at Rome. Tliank
God, it is tried here." The motion for bringing up the pe-
tition found no more than seventy-one supporters.* The
University of Cambridge, however, made a concession to the
complaints of these petitioners, by admitting bachelors of
arts, on subscribing a declaration that they were bond Jide
members of the church of England, instead of requiring
their subscription to the thirty-nine articles.' Sir W. Mere-
dith renewed the discussion in the two following years, but
found little encouragement.'
In 1772, Sir H. Hoghton brought in a bill, with little oppo-
sition, for relieving dissenting ministers and schoolmasters
1 Ayes, 71; Noes, 217. Pari. Hist., xvii. 245; Clarke, iii. 261; Brook's
Hist of Relig. Lib., ii. 365.
« Hnghes' Hist., ii. 50.
» Feb. 23d, 1773; May 5th, 1774; Pari. Hist., xvii. 742, 1326; Fox Mem.
i. 92.
DISSENTING MINISTERS' ACT. 317
from the subscription required by the Toleration Act.*
Dissenters conceived it to be a just matter of sabscrip-
coraplaint that the law should recognize such a test, cu^nting
after dissent had been acknowledged to be lawful, "nd «:hooi-
No longer satisfied with connivance at a breach of f'^'f,*'"'
the law, they prayed for honorable immunity. i'^'?2.
Their representations were felt to be so reasonable by the
Commons, that the bill was passed with little opposition. In
the Lords it was warmly supported by Lord Chatham,^ the
Duke of Richmond, Lord Camden, and Lord Mansfield ;
but was lost on the second reading by a majority of seventy-
three.*
In the next year, Sir H. Hoghton introduced an amended
measure, and passed it through all its stages, in the pg^, ^-^^
Commons, by large majorities. Arguments were ^^'^
still heard that connivance was all that dissenters could ex
pect ; in reply to which Mr. Burke exclaimed, *' What, Sir,
is liberty by connivance but a temporary relaxation of sla-
very?" In the Lords, the bill met with the same fate as in
the previous year.*
In 1779, however, Sir Henry Hoghton at length succeeded
in passing his measure. Dissenters were enabled _.
' ^ Dissenting
to preach and to act as schoolmasters, without sub- ministers'
scribing any of the thirty-nine articles. No other
subscription was proposed to be substituted ; but, on the mo-
tion of Lord North, a declaration was required to be made, i
1 The 34th, 3oth, 36th, and part of the 20th articles had been excepted
by the Toleration Act, as expressing the distinctive doctrines of the church.
2 See outline of his speech, Chatham Corr., iv. 219.
3 Ayes, 29; Noes, 102. Pari. Hist., xvii. 431-446.
* /6t</., 759-791. With reference to this bill, Lord Chatham wrote: —
" 1 hear, in the debate on the dissenters, the ministry avowed enslaving
them, and to keep the cruel penal laws, like bloodhounds coupled up, to be
\& loose on the heels of these poor conscientious men, when government
pieases; i.e. if they dare to dislike some ruinous measure, or to disobey
orders at an election. Forty years ago, if any minister had avowed such
a doctrine, the Tower ! the Tower ! would have echoed round the benches
of the House of Lords; hut fuii Ilium, the whole constitution is a shadow."
— Ltlur to Lord Slielburne, April 14th. 1773; Chatham Corr., iv. 259.
318 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
that the person taking it was a Christian and a Protestant
dissenter ; and that he took the scriptures for the rule of his
faith and practice. Except upon the question of this declara-
tion, the bill passed tlirough both Houses with little oppo-
sition.*
In Ireland, a much greater advance was made, at this time,
in the principles of toleration. An Act was passed
Dissenters . . ... . .
Rdmitted admitting Protestants to civil and military offices
to office) 111 1 1
In Ireland, who had not taken the sacrament, — a measure
" ■ nearly fifty years in advance of the policy of the
British Parliament.'' It must, however, be confessed that the
dissenters owed this concession less to an enlightened tolera-
tion of their religion, than to the necessity of uniting all
classes of Protestants in the cause of Protestant ascendency-
At this period, the penal laws affecting Roman Catholics
PreTsient ^Iso Came Under review. By the government the
concerning English Catholics were no longer regarded with
Catholics political distrust. Neither in numbers, nor in in-
fluence, could they be dangerous to church or state. Their
religion, however, was still held in aversion by the great body
of the people ; and they received little favor from any polit-
ical party. With the exception of Fox, Burke, and Sir G.
Savile, few of the Whigs felt any sympathy for their griev-
ances. The Whigs were a party strongly influenced by tra-
ditions and hereditary sympathies. In struggling for civil
and religious liberty at the Revolution, they had been leagued
with the Puritans against the Papists : in maintaining the
House of Hanover and the Protestant succession, they had
still been in alliance with dissenters and in opposition to Cath-
olics. Toleration to the Catholics, therefore, formed no part
of the traditional creed of the Whig party.' Still less indul-
gence was to be expected from the Tories, whose sympathies
1 Pari. Hist., XX. 239, 306-322. See 19 Geo. HI. c. 44; Clarke, iii. 269,
355; Brook's Hist, of Relig. Lib., ii. 369.
2 19 & 20 Geo. III. c. 6 (Ireland).
8 Fox's Mem., i. 176,203,204; Rockingham Mem., i. 228; Macaalay's
Hist., jv. 118.
RELIEF OF CATHOLICS, 1778. 319
i^ere wholly with the church. Believing penal laws to be
necessary to her interests, they supported them, indifferently,
against dissenters and Catholics. But the growing enlight-
enment of the time made the more reflecting statesmen, of all
parties, revolt against some of the penal laws still in force
against the Catholics. They had generally been suflered to
sleep ; but could, at any time, be revived by the bigotry of
zealots, or the cupidity of relatives and informers. Several
priests had been prosecuted for saying mass. Mr. Maloney,
a priest, having been informed against, was unavoidably con-
demned to perpetual imprisonment. The government were
shocked at this startling illustration of the law ; and the king
being afraid to grant a pardon, they ventured, on their own
responsibility, to give the unfortunate priest his liberty.^
Another priest owed his acquittal to the ingenuity and toler-
ant spirit of Lord Mansfield.^ In many cases, Roman Cath-
olics had escaped the penalties of the law, by bribing informers
not to enforce tliem.^ Lord Camden had protected a Catholic
lady from spoliation, under the. law, by a private Act of Par-
liament.*
To avert such scandals as these, and to redeem the law
from the reproach of intolerance, Sir George Sa- Roman
vile, in 1778, proposed a measure of relief for Reiw Act
English Catholics. Its introductio"h was preceded ^^'^•
by a loyal address to the king, signed by ten Catholic Lords
and one hundred and sixty-three Commoners, giving assur-
ance of their affection for His Majesty and attachment to the
civil constitution of the country, and expressing sentiments
calculated to conciliate the favor of Parliament and ministers.
When it was explained that the penalties, imposed in 1700
and now to be repealed, were the perpetual imprisonment of
priests for officiating in the services of their church, the for-
1 Lord Shelburne's Speech, May 25th, 1773; ParL Hist , xix. 1145; Bit.
ler's Hist. Mem., iii. 276.
2 HoIL, 176; Lord Campbell's Chief Justices, ii. 514.
8 Pari. Hist., xix. 1137-1145.
* Butler's Hist. Mem., iii. 284.
820 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
feiture of the estates of Eomnn Catholic heirs, educated
abroad, in favor of the next Protestant heir, and the prohibi-
tion to acquire hind by purcha!>c',' — the bill was allowed to
be introduced without a dis entient voice ; and Wiis alter-
w.irds passed through both Houses, with general approbation.'
Such was the change in the feelings of the legislature, since
the beginning of the century !
But in its views of religious liberty, Parliament was far
Riots in Scot- >» advance of considerable classes of the people,
laud, 1778. 'pi^g fanaticism of the Puritans was not yet ex-
tinct. Any favor extended to the Roman Catholics, how-
ever just and moderate, aroused its latent flames. This bill
extended to England only. The laws of Scotland relating to
Roman Catholics, having been j^assed before its union with
£ngland, required further consideration and a different form
of treatment. The lord-advocate had, therefore, promised to
introduce a similar measure, applicable to Scotland, in the
ensuing session. But in the meantime, the violent fanatics
of a country which had nothing to fear from Catholics, were
alarmed at the projected measure. They had vainly en-
deavored to oppose the English bill, and were now resolved
that, at least, no relief should be granted to their own fellow-
countrymen. They banded together in " Protestant Associa-
tions ; " * and by inflammatory language incited the people
to dangerous outrages. In Edinburgh, the mob destroyed
two Roman Catholic chapels and several houses of reputed
Papists. In Glasgow, there were no chapels to desti'oy ;
but the mob were able to show their zeal for religion, by
sacking the factory of a Papist. The Roman Catholics
trembled for their property and their lives. Few in num-
bers, they found little protection from Presbyterian magis-
trates ; and were at the mercy of the rioters. Preferring in-
demnity for their losses, and immediate protection for their
2 11 & 12 Will. in. c. 4.
' Pari. Hist., xix. 1137-1145; 18 Geo. IIL c 60; Butter's Hist Mem.
iii. 286-297.
• Supra, p. 123.
ANTI-CATHOLIC BIGOTRY, 177U-1780. 321
persons, to a prospective relief from penal statutes, they con-
curred with tlie government in the postponement of the con-
templated measure, till a more f'avorahle occasion.* M-^rcii
In an kdmirable petition to the Ilonse of Com- ^^'**' ^'^'^^•
n)ons, they described the outrages which had been committed
against them, and expi-essed their loyalty and attachment to
the constitution. While they readily forbore to press for a
revision of the penal statutes, they claimed a present com-
pensation for the damages inHicted upon their property
Such compensation was at once promised by the government."
The success of the fanatical rioters in Scotland, who had
accomplished an easy triumph over the Roman Riots in liou-
Catholics and the government, encouraged the anti- '*°°' ^'^
Catholic bigotry of England. If it was wrong to favor Pa-
pists in Scotland, the recent English Act was also an error,
of which Parliament must now repent. The fanatics found
a congenial leader in Lord George Gordon ; and the metrop-
olis of England soon exceeded the two first cities of the
North in religious zeal, and outrage. London was in flames,
and Parliament invested by the mob, because some penalties
against Roman Catholics, condemned by sober men of all
parties, had lately been repealed. The insensate cry of "No
Popery " resounded in the streets, in the midst of plunder
and the torches of incendiaries.'
Petitions praying for the repeal of the recent Act were
met by resolutions of the House of Commons, vindicating its
provisions from misrepresentation.* One unworthy conces-
sion, however, was made to the popular excitement. Sir
George Savile, hitherto the foremost friend of toleration, con-
sented to introduce a bill to restrain Papists from teaching
the children of Protestants. It was speedily passed through
the House of Commons.^ In the House of Lords, however,
1 March 15th, 1779; Pari. Hist, xx. 280; Aun. Reg., 1780, p. 26.
2 Pari. Hist., xx. 322.
• See supra, p. 1-30.
< Juue 20th, 1780; Pari. Hist., xxl. 713.
« Pari. Hist., xxi. 726.
TOL. II. 21
S22 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
the lord chancellor inserted an amendment limiting the bill to
boarding-schools ; and this limitation, being afterwards op-
posed hy the bishops, led to the loss of the bill.^
For several years, the grievances of Catholics were per-
mitted to rest in oblivion ; but the claims of Protestant dis-
senters to further toleration elicited ample discussion.
The grievances suffered by dissenters, under the Corpora-
tion and Test Acts, had not been urged upon Par-
ana'rest_ liament since the days of Sir Robert Walpole ; *
' ' * but in 1787, the time seemed favorable for obtain-
ing redress. In Mr. Pitt's struggle with the coalition, the
dissenters, having sided with the minister and contributed to
his electoral triumphs, expected a recognition of their ser-
vices at his hands.* Having distributed a printed case,* in
which the history and claims of nonconformists were ably
Mr.Beaufoy's Stated, they intrusted their cause to Mr. Beaufoy,
Maroh28th ^^'^'° movcd for a bill to repeal the Coiporation
1787. j^nj Test Acts. He showed how the patriotism of
a nonconformist soldier might be rewarded with penalties
and proscription ; and how a public-spirited merchant would
be excluded from municipal offices, in the city which his
enterprise had enriched, unless he became an apostate from
his faith. The annual indemnity acts proved the inutility of
penal laws, while they failed effectually to pi'Otect dissenters.
Members were admitted to both Houses of Parliament with-
out any religious test: then why insist upon the orthodoxy of
an exciseman ? No danger to the state could be apprehended
from the admission of dissenters to office. Who, since the'.
Revolution, had been more faithful to the constitution and',
1 Pari. Hist., xxi. 754-766. In this year (1780) the Earl of Surrey,
eldest son of the Duke of Norfolk, and Sir 'I'homas Gascoigne, abjured
tlie Roman Catholic faith, and were immediately returned to Parliament.
— Lord Malion's Hist., vii. Ill,
2 Pari. Hist., ix. 1046.
8 Tomline's Life of Pitt, ii. 254; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 337,
&c.
* Case of tlie Protestant Dissenters, with reference to the Te»t and Cor-
poration Acts. — Pari. Hist., xxvi. 780, ».
CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS, 1787. 323
monarchy than they ? "Was there danger to the churc-h ?
The church was in no danger from dissenters before the Test
Act : the church of Scotland was in no danger where no Test
Act had ever existed : the church of Irehmd was in no dan-
ger now, though dissenters had for the last seven years been
admitted to office in that country.^ But danger was to be
apprehended from oppressive laws which united different
bodigs of dissenters, otherwise hostile, in a common resent-
ment to the church. Howard, the philanthropist, in serving
his country, liad braved the penalties of an outlaw, which
any informer might enforce. Even members of the church
of Scotland were disqualified for office in England. Belong-
ing to the state church, they were treated a>s dissenters. In
conclusion, he condemned the profanation of the holy sacra-
ment itself: that rite should be administered to none un-
worthy to receive it; yet it had become the common test of
fitness for secular employments. Such was the case pre-
sented in favor of dissenters. Mr. Beaufoy was not in the
first rank of debaters, yet from the force of truth and a good
cause, his admirable speech puts to shame the arguments
with which the first statesmen of the day then ventured to
oppose him.
Lord North regarded the Test Act as " the great bulwark
of the constitution, to which we owed those inestimable bless-
ings of freedom, which we now happily enjoyed." He con-
tended that the exclusion of dissenters from office was still
as necessary as when it was first imposed by the legislature ;
and denied that it involved the least contradiction to the
principles of toleration. The state had allowed all persons
to follow their own leligion freely ; but might decline to em-
ploy them unless they belonged to the established church.
Mr. Pitt was no friend to the penal laws : his statesman-
ship was superior to the narrow jealousies which favortd
them.^ On this occasion he had been disposed to support
1 Supi-a, p. 318.
2 " To tlie mind of Pitt the whole system of penal laws was utterly
abhorrent." — Lord ikatihopc^s Life, ii. 276.
324 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
the claims of vhe dissenters ; but yielding to the opinion of
the bishops/ he was constrained to oppose the motion. His
speech betrayed the embarrassment of his situation. His
accustomed force and clearness forsook him. He drew dis-
tinctions between political and civil liberty : maintained the
light of the state to distribute political power to whom it
pleased ; and dwelt upon the duty of upholding the estab-
lished church. Mr. Fox supported the cause of the dissent
ers ; and promised them success if they persevered in de-
manding the redress of their grievances. The motion was
lost by a majority of seventy-eight.*
In 1789, Mr. Beaufoy renewed his motion; and to a re-
Corporation Capitulation of his previous arguments added some
Acts^May striiiing illustrations of the operation of the law.
8th, 1789. The incapacity of dissenters extended not only to
government employments, but to the direction of tlie Bank
of England, the East India Company, and other chartered
companies. When the Pretender had marched to the very
centre of P^ngland, the dissenters had taken up arms in de,-
fence of the king's government ; but instead of earning re
wards for their loyalty, they were obliged to shelter them-
selves from penalties, under the Act of Grace, intended for
the protection of rebels.
Mr. Fox supported the motion with all his ability. Men
were to be tried, he said, not by their opinions, but by their
actions. Yet the dissenters were discountenanced by the
state, — not for their actions, which were good and loyal, but
for their religious opinions, of which the state disapproved.
No one could impute to them opinions or conduct dangerous
to the state ; and Parliament had practically admitted the in-
justice of the disqualifying laws, by passing annual acts of
indemnity. To one remarkable observation later times have
given unexpected significance. He said: "It would per-
1 See Tomline's Life of Pitt, ii. 255; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, I
837; Life of Bishop Watson, written by himself, i. 261.
=« Ayes, 08; Noes, 176. Pari, llist. xxvi. 780-832.
CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS, 1790. 325
haps be contended that the repeal of the Corporation and ^
Test Acts might enable the dissenters to obtain -a majority
This he scarcely thought probable ; but it appeared fully
sufficient to answer, that, if the majority of the people of
England should ever be for the abolition of the established
church, in such a case the abolition ought immediately to
follow." 1
Mr. Pitt opposed the motion in a temperate speech.
"Allowing that there is no natural right to interfere with
religious opinions," he contended that " when they are such
as may produce a civil inconvenience, the government has a
right to guard against the probability of the civil inconven-
ience being produced." He admitted the improved intelli-
gence and loyalty of Roman Catholics, whose opinions had
formerly been dangerous to the state ; and did justice to the
character of the dissenters : while he justified the main-
tenance of disqualifying laws, as a precautionary measure, in
the interests of the established church. The motion was lost
by the small majority of twenty.^
Encouraged by so near an approach to success, the dis-
senters continued to press their claims ; and at corporation
their urgent solicitation, Mr. Fox himself under- T^'^^r.
took to advocate their cause. In March, 1790, he Ma^h'2d"°"'
moved the consideration of the Test and Corpora- ^^^'
tion Acts, in a committee of the whole House. He referred
to the distinguished loyalty of the dissenters, in 1715 and
1745, when the high church party, who now opposed their
claims, had been " hostile to the reigning family, and active
in exciting tunfblts, insurrections, and rebellions." He urged
the repeal of the test laws, with a view to allay the jealousies
of dissenters against the church ; and went so far as to afiirm
that " if this barrier of partition were removed, the very
name of dissenter would be no more."
1 " If the dissenters from the establishment become a majority of the
people, the establishment itself ought to be altered or qualified." — Paley'a
Moral and Political Philosophy, book vi. c. x.
2 Ayes, 102; Noes, 122. Pari. Hist., xxviii. 1-41. See Tomline's Lift
»f Pitt, iii. 18.
326 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
, Mr. Pitt's resistance to concession was now more decided
than on any previous occasion. Again he maintained the
distinction between religious tolei-ation and the defensive pol-
icy of excluding from office tlio?e who were likely to prejt -
dice the established church. No one had a right to demand
public offices, which were distributed by the government for
the b.enefit of the state ; and wliich might properly be with-
held from persons opposed to the constitution. The estab-
lishment would be endangered by the repeal of the test laws,
as dissenters, honestly disapproving of the church, would use
all legal means for it^ subversion.
Mr. Beaufoy replied to Mr. Pitt in a speech of singular
force. If the test laws were to be maintained, he said, as
part of a defensive policy, in deference to the fears of the
church, the same fears might justify the exclusion of dissent-
ers from Parliament, their disqualification to vote at elec-
tions, their right to possess property, or even their residence
within the realm. If political fears were to be the measure
of justice and public policy, what extremities might not be
justified ?
Mr. Burke, who on previous occasions had absented him-
self from the House when this question was discussed, and
who even now confessed '• that he had not been able to sat-
isfy himself altogether" on the subject, spoke with character-
istic warmth against the motion. His main arguments were
founded upon the hostility of the dissenters to the established
church, of which he adduced evidence from the writings of
Dr. Priestley and Dr. Price, and from two nonconformist
catechisms. If such men had the power, tlfHy undoubtedly
nad the will to overthrow the church of England, as the
church of France had just been overthrown. Mr. Fox, in
reply, deplored the opposition of Mr. Burke, which he re-
ferred to its true cause, — a horror of tlie French Revolu-
tion,— which was no less fatal to the claims of dissenters
tlmn to the general progress of a liberal policy. Mr. Fox'a
motion, which, in the previous year, had been lost by a nar-
RELIEF TO CATHOLICS, 1791. 327
row majority, was now defeated by a majority of nearly
three to one.*
The further discussion of the test laws was not resumed
for nearly forty years ; but other questions affect- protesting
ing religious liberty were not overlooked. In Dissenters
1791, Mr. Mitford brought in a bill for the relief i'^^-
of " Protesting Catholic Dissenters," — a sect of Catholics
who protested against the pope's temporal authority, and his
right to excommunicate kings and absolve subjects from their
allegiance, as well as the right alleged to be assumed by
Koraan Catholics of not keeping faith with heretics. It was
proposed to relieve this particular sect from the penal stat-
utes, upon their taking an oath to this effect. The proposal
was approved by all but Mr. Fox, who, in accepting the
measure, contended that the relief should be extended gen-
erally to Roman Catholics. Mr. Pitt also avowed his wish
that many of the penal statutes against the Catholics should
be repealed.^
The bill was open to grave objections. It imputed to the
Catholics, as a body, opinions repudiated by the most enlight-
ened professors of their faith. Mr. Pitt received an explicit
assurance from several foreign universities that Catholics
claimed for the pope no civil jurisdiction in England, nor
any power to absolve British subjects from their allegiance ;
and that there was no tenet by which they were justified in
not keeping faith with heretics.' Again, this proposed oath
required Catholics to renounce doctrines, in no sense affecting
1 294 to 105. Pari Hist., xxviii. 387-452; Lord Sidmouth's Life, i. 73;
Tomlines Life of Pitt, ill. 99 ; Fox's Mem., ii. 361, 362. The subject gave
rise, at this time, to much written controversy. Tracts by Bishops Sher-
lock and Hoadley -were republished. One of the best pamphlets on the
side of the dissenters was " The Rights of Protestant Dissenters, by a Lay-
man, 178D." The Bishop of Oxford, writing to Mr. Peel in 1828, speaks
of fourteen volumes on the subject, written in 1789 and 1790. — Peefs
Mem., i. 65.
2 Pari. Hist., xxviii. 1262, 1364; Tomline's Life of Pitt, Hi. 249; Lord
Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 100.
8 See liis questions and tile answers, Plowden's Hist., ii. 199, App. So.
91; Butler's Hist. Mem., iv. 10.
828 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
the state. In the House of Lords, these objections were
forcibly urged by the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr.
Horsley, bishop of St. David's; and to the credit of the epis-
copal bench, the hitter succeeded in giving to the measure a
more liberal and comprehensive character, according to the
views of Mr. Fox. An oath was framed, not obnoxious to
the general body of Catholics, the taking of which secured
them complete freedom of worship and education ; exempted
their property from invidious regulations ; opened to them
the practice of the law in all its branches ; and restored
to peers their ancient privilege of intercourse with the
king.*
In the debates upon the Test Act, the peculiarity of the
Test Act ^^^^^ ^^ affecting members of the church of Scot-
(Scotiand), \sind, had often been alluded to ; and in 1791, a
April 18th, petition was presented from tlie General Assem-
^'^^" bly, praying for relief. On the 10th of May, Sir
Gilbert Elliot, moved for a committee of the whole House
upon the subject. To treat the member of an established
church as a dissenter, was an anomaly too monstrous to be de-
fended. Mr. Dundas admitted that, in order to qualify him-
self for office, he had communicated with the church of Eng-
land,— a ceremony to which members of his church had no
objection. It would have been whimsical indeed to contend
that the Scotch were excluded from office by any law, as their
undue share in the patronage of the state had been a popular
subject of complaint and satire ; bat whether they enjoyed
office by receiving the mast solemn rites of a church of which
they were not members, or by the operation of acts of in-
demnity, their position was equally anomalous. Bat as their
case formed part of the general law affecting dissenters,
which Parliament was in no humor to entertain, the motion
•was defeated by a large majority.'
1 Pari. HUt, xxix. 113-115, 664; 31 Geo. IH. c 32; Butler's Hkt
Mem. iv. 44, 52; Quarterly Rev., Oct. 1852, p. 555. •
Ayes, G2; Noes, 149. Pari. Hist., xxix. 48a-510.
UNITARIAXS, 1792. 329
In 1792, Scotch Episcopalians were relieved from re-
filraints which had been provoked by the disaffec- Restraints
tion of the Episcopalian clergy in the reigns of °°4^°J«^^^
Anne and George II. As they no longer pro- repealed,
fessed allegiance to the Stuarts, or refused to pray for the
reigning king, there was no pretext for these invidious laws ;
and they were repealed with the concurrence of all parties.^
In the same year Mr. Fox, despairing, for the present, of
any relaxation of the test laws, endeavored to ob-
tain the repeal of certain penal statutes affecting «tes respect-
religious opinions. His bill proposed to repeal opinions
several Acts of this nature ; ^ but his main object Ma°v lUh,
was to exempt the Unitarians, who had petitioned ' ""
for relief, from the penalties specially affecting their particu-
lar persuasion. They did not pray for civil enfranchisement,
but simply for religious freedom. In deprecating the preju-
dices excited against this sect, he said, " Dr. South had
traced their pedigree from wretch to wretch, back to the
devil himself. These descendants of the devil were his cli-
ents." He attributed the late riots at Birmingham, and the
attack upon Dr. Pi-iestley, to religious bigotry and persecu-
tion ; and claimed for this unpopular sect, at least the same
tolei'ation as other dissenting bodies. Mr. Burke, in oppos-
ing the motion, made a fierce onslaught upon the Unitarians.
They were hostile to the church, he said, and had combined
to effect its ruin : they had adopted the doctrines of Paine,
and approved of the revolutionary excesses of the French
Jacobins. The Unitarians were boldly defended by Mr.
William Smith, — a constant advocate of religious liberty,
who, growing old and honored in that cause, lived to be the
Father of the House of Commons. Mr. Pitt declared his
reprobation of the Unitarians, and opposed the motion, which
was lost by a majority of seventy-nine.' Mr. Pitt and other
1 Pari. Hist., xxix. 1372.
" Viz. 9 & 10 Will. c. 32 (for suppressing blasphemy and profaneness)
1 Edw. VI. c. 1; 1 Mary, c. 3; 13 Eliz. c. 2.
3 Aves, 63; Noes, 142. Pari. Hist., xxix. 1372; Tomline's Life of Pitt
lii. 317.
i330 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Statesmen, in withholding civil rights from dissenters, had
been careful to admit their title to religious freedom ; but
this vote unequivocally declared that doctrines and opinioiiEi
might justly be punished as an offence.
Meanwhile the perilous distractions of Ireland, and a for
midable combination of the Catholic body, forced
Oatholio , . P 1 1
relief; Ire- upon the attention oi the government the wrongs
' ' ' of Irish Catholics. The great body of the Irish
people were denied all the rights of citizens. Their public
worship was still proscribed : their property, their social and
domestic relations, and their civil liberties, were under inter-
dict: they were excluded from all offices civil and military,
and even from the professions of law and medicine.^ Al-
ready the penal code affecting the exercise of their religion
had been partially relaxed : ^ but they still labored under all
the civil disqualifications which the jealousy of ages had ino-
posed. Mr. Pitt not only condemned the injustice of such
disabilities ; but hoped, by a policy of conciliation, to heaJ
some of the unhappy feuds by which society was divided.
Ireland could no longer be safely governed upon the exclu-
sive principles of Protestant ascendency. Its people must
not claim in vain the franchises of British subjects. And
accordingly in 1792, some of the most galling disabilities
were removed by the Irish Parliament. Catholics were ad-
mitted to the legal profession on taking the oath of allegiance,
and allowed to become clerks to attorneys. Restrictions on
the education of their children and on their intermarriages
with Protestants were also removed.*
In the next year more important privileges were conceded
All remaining restraints on Catholic worship and education.
^ Some restrictions had been added even in this reign. Butler's Hist.
Mem., iii. 367, et »eq.; 467-477, 484; O'Conor's Hi.^t. of the Irish Catho-
lics; Sydney Smith's Works, i. 209; Goldwin Smith's Irish Hist., &c., 124
2 Viz. in 1774, 1778, and 1782; 1-3 & 14 Geo. IH. c. .35; 17 & 13 Geo
III. c.4»; 22 Geo. III. c. 24 (Irish); Darnell's Hist, of the Penal Lawe.
84, &c.; Butler's Hist. Mem., iii. 486.
« 32 Geo. III. c. 21 (Irish); Debates (Iseland), xii. 39, &c.; Life of Grat-
tan, ii. 53.
RELIEF TO CATHOLICS, 1793. 331
and the disposition of property, were removed. Catholics
were admitted to vote at elections, on taking the gathoUc
oaths of allejrianee and abjuration ; to all but the ^^'^^^}^
° •' land, 1793.
higher civil and military offices, and to the honors
and emoluments of Dublin University, In the law they could
not rise to the rank of king's counsel ; nor in the army be-
yond the rank of colonel : nor, in their own counties, could
they aspire to the offices of sheriff and sub-sheriff:^ their
highest ambition was still curbed ; but they received a wide
enfranchisement, beyond their former hopes.
In this year tardy justice was also rendered to the Roman
Catholics of Scotland. All excitement upon the „ ,, ,.
^ Catholic
subject having passed away, a bill was brought in relief, Scot-
1 1 • 1 • • T 1 I'l land, 1793.
and passed without opposition, to relieve them, like
their English brethren, from many grievoua penalties to
which they were exposed. In proposing the measure, the
lord-advocate stated that tlie obnoxious statutes were not so
obsolete as might be expected. At that very time a Roman
Catholic gentleman was in danger of being stripped of his
estate, — which had been in his family for at least a century
and a half, — by a relation having no other claim to it, than
that which he derived, as a Protestant, from the cruel pro-
visions of the law.^
The Quakers next appealed to Parliament for relief. In
1796, they presented a petition describing their Quakers,
sufferings on account of religious scruples; and April ast,
Mr. Sergeant Adair brought in a bill to facilitate
the recovery of tithes from members of that sect, without
subjecting them to imprisonment ; and to allow them to be
examined upon affirmation in criminal cases. The remedy
proposed for the recovery of tithes had already been pro-
1 33 Geo. III. c. 21 (Irish); Debates of Irish Pariiament, xiii. 199;
Plowden's Hist., ii. 421; Adolphus' Hist., vi. 2-19-256; Lord Stanhope's
Life of Pitt, ii. 277; Butler's Hist. Mem., iv. 62; Life of Grattan, iv. 87
Parneil's Hist, of the Penal Laws, 124.
2 Pari. Hist., xxx. 766; 33 Geo. III. c. 44; Butler's Hist. Mem., iv
103.
332 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
vided by statute, in demands not exceeding 10/.;* and the
sole object of this part of the bill was to insure the lecovery
of all tithes without requiring the consent of the Quakers
themselves, to which they had so strong a religious scruple,
that they preferred perpetual imprisonment. At that very
time, seven olf' their brethren were lying in the jail at York,
'without any prospect of relief. This bill was passed by the
Commons, but was lost in the Lords, upon the representation
of the Archbishop of Canterbury that it involved a questioa
of right of very great importance, which there was not then
time to consider.*
In tlie next session, the bill was renewed,' when it en-
Quaken Countered the resolute opposition of Sir William
^ii^'' Scott.* " The opinions held by the Quakers," he
said, " were of such a nature as to affect the civil rights of
property, and therefore he considered them as unworthy of
legislative indulgence." If one man had conscientious scruples
against the payment of tithes to which his property was
legally liable, another might object to the payment of rent
as sniful, while a third miglit hold it irreligious to pay his
debts. If the principle of indulgence were ever admitted,
" the sect of anti-tithe Christians would soon become the
most numerous and flourishing in the kingdom." He argued
that the security of property in tithes would be diminished
by the bill, and tliat " the tithe-owner would become an
owner, not of property, but of suits." It was replied that
the tithe-owner would be enabled by the bill to recover his
demands by summary distress, instead of punishing the
Quaker with useless imprisonment. The very remedy, in-
deed, was provided, which the law adopted for the recovery
of rent. The bill was also opposed by the solicitor-general.
Sir John Mitford, who denied that Quakers entertained any
conscientious scruples at all against the payment of tithes.
The question for going into committee on the bill was decided
1 7 & 8 Will. TIL c. 34; 1 Geo. I., st. 2, c. 6; Pari. Hist., ix. 1220.
2 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 1022. * Afterwards Loid StoweU.
• JbUl., 1206.
UNION WITH IRELAND. 333
by the casting vote of the speaker ; but upon a subsequent
day, the bill was lost by a majority of sixteen.^
Such Jiad been the narrow jealousy of the state, that Ro-
man Catholics and dissenters, however loyal and ^ .. ,.
patriotic, were not permitted to share in the de- »".d the
fence of their country. They could not be trusted
with arms, lest they should turn them against their own coun-
trymen. In 1797, Mr. Wilberforce endeavored to redress a
part of this wrong, by obtaining the admission of Roman
Catholics to the militia. Supported by Mr. Pitt, he suc-
ceeded in passing his bill through the Commons. In the
Lords, however, it was opposed by Bishop Horsley and other
peers ; and its provisions being extended to dissenters, its
fate was sealed.'*
The English ministers were still alive to the importance
of a liberal and concih'atory policy, in the govern- , „.
raent of Ireland. In 1795, Lord Fitzwilliam ac- wiUiam'a
policy, 1795.
cepted the office of lord-lieutenant, in order to
carry out such a policy. He even conceived himself to have
the authority of the cabinet to favor an extensive enfran-
chisement of Catholics ; but having committed himself too
deeply to that party, he was recalled.' There were, indeed,
insurmountable ditfieulties in reconciling an extended tolera-
tion to Catholics with Protestant ascendency in the Irish
Parliament.
But the union of Catholic Ireland with Protestant Great
Britain introduced new considerations of state
policy. To admit Catholics to the Parliament of Ireland, ia
the United Kingdom would be a concession full of w'ltircathoiio
popularity to the people of Ireland, while their ^'s^''^^''^^-
1 Pari. Hist., xxxii. 1508.
2 Wilberforce's Life, ii. 222. The debates are not to be found in the
Parliamentaty Hi.story. " No power in Europe, but yourselves, has ever
thought, for these hundred j'ears past, of asking whether a bayonet ia
Catholic, or Fresbj'terian, or Lutheran ; but whether it is sharp and well-
tempered." —Pe/tr Plyinhy's Letters; Sydney Smith's Works, iii. 63.
3 Pari. Hist, xxxiv. 672, &c.; Plowden's Hist., ii. 467; Butler's Hist
Mem iv. 65.
334 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
admission to a legislature comprising an overwhelming Prot-
estant majority, would be free from danger to the established
church or to the Protestant character of Piirliament. In
buch a union of the two countries, tlie two nations would
al.'o be embraced. In the discussions relating to the Union,
the removal of Catholic disabilities, as one of its probable
Jan. 23d, 1799. cansequences, was frequently alluded to, Mr.
Canning argued that the Union " would satisfy the friends
of the Protestant ascendency, without passing laws against
Jan. Slst the Catholics, and without maintaining those which
are yet in force." * And Mr. Pitt said : " No man can say
that in the present state of things, and while Inland remains
a separate kingdom, full concessions could be made to the
Catholics, witiiout endangering the state and shaking the con-
stitution of Irehind to its centre." .... But " when the
conduct of the Catholics shall be such as lo make it safe for
the government to admit them to a participation of the privi-
leges granted to those of the established religion, and when
the temper of the times shall be favorable to such a meas-
ure, it is obvious that such a question may be agitated in a
united Imperial Parliament, with much greater safety than it
could be in a separate legislature." ^ He also hinted at the
expediency of proposing some mode of relieving the poorer
classes from the pressure of tithes, and for making a pro-
vision for the Catholic clergy, without affecting the security
of the Protestant establishment.'
1 Pari. Hist, xxxiv., 230; Lord Holland's Mem., i. 161.
2 Pari. Hist., xxxiv., 272.
' Mr. Pitt and Lord Grenville agreed generally upon the Catholic claims.
" Previously to the Union with Ireland, it had never entered into the mind
of the latter that there could be any furtlier relaxation of the laws against
I'apiits: but from that time he hud been convinced that everything neces-
sary for them might be granted without the slightest danger to the Prot-
estant interest"— Abstract of Lord Grenviile's Letter to the Principal of
Urazenose, 1810. — Lord Colchester''s Diary, ii. 224.
" Lord Camden told me that, being a member of Mr. Pitt's government
in 1800, he knev.- that Mr. Pitt had never matured any phm for givirg
what is called emancipation to the Roman Catholics." — yi/rf., iii. 326.
UNION WITU IRELAND. 335
In securing the support of different parties in Ireland t«
the Union, the question of Catholic disabilities was Theinsh
one of great delicacy. Distinct promises, which auT"he^^
might have secured the hearty support of the Cathoucs.
Catholics, would have alienated the Protestants, — by far the
most powerful party, — and endangered the success of the
whole measure. At the same time, thei'e was hazard of th*
Catholics being gained over to oppose the Union, by expecta*
tions of relief from the Irish Parliament.^ Lord Cornwallia.
alive to these difficulties, appears to have met them with con
summate address. Careful not to commit him.-elf or the gov
ernment to any specific engagements, he succeeded in en
ecu raging the hopes of the Cathohcs, without alarming the
Protestant party.^ The sentiments of the government were
known to be generally favorable to measures of relief; but
Mr. Pitt had been forbidden by the king to offer any conces-
sions whatever,'' nor had he himself detennined upon the
measures which it would be advisable to propose.* lie was,
1 Comwallis's Coir., iii. 51.
2 Jan. 2il, 1799, he writes: — " I shall endeavor to give them (the Cath-
olics) the most favorable impressions, without holding out to them hopes of
any relaxation on the part of government, and shall leave no effort untried
to prevent an opposition to the Union being made the measure of that
party." — Corr., iii. 29.
And again, Jan. 28th, 1799: — "I much doubt the policy of at present
holding out to them any decided expectations: it might weaken us with
the Protestants, and might not strengthen us with the Catholics, whilst
they look to carry their question unconnected with Union." — Ibid., 55.
See also ih'uL, 03, 149, 327, 344, 347.
3 June 11th, 1798, the king writes to Mr. Pitt: — "Lord Comwallis
must clearly understand that no indulgence can be granted to the Catho-
lics farther thnn has been, I am afraid unadvisedly, done in former ses-
sion*, and that he must by a steady conduct effect in future the union ot
tliat kingdom with this." — Lord SUinhopt's Lift of Pill, iii. App. xvi.
Again, Jan. 24th, 1799, having seen in a letter from Lord Castlereagh
" an idea of an established stipend by the autliority of government for the
Catholic clergy of Ireland," he wrote: — "I am certain any encouragement
to such an idea must give real offence to the established church in Ireland,
as well as to the true friends of our constitution ; for it is certainly creating
a second church establishment, which could not but be highly injurious."
— Jbid., xviii.
* Mr. Pitt wrote to Lord Comwallis, Nov. 17th, 1798: — "Mr. Elliot,
836 RELIGIOUS LIBEliTY.
therefore, able to deny that he had given any pledge upon
tlie subject, or that the Catholics conceived themselves to
have received any sucli pledge;* but he admitted tliat
they had formed strong expecUitions of remedial measures af-
ter the Union ; of which indeed there is abundant testimony.'
These expectations Mr. Pitt and his colleagues were pre-
i:once«sion8 pared to satisfy. When tiie Union had been ac-
projw^l'af. complished, they agreed tiuit the altered relations
ter tbe Union. ^j£ ^^^^ ^^^^ countries would allow tliera to do full
justice to the Catholics, without any danger to the established
church. Tliey were of opinion that Catholics might now be
safely admitted to office and to the privilege of sitting in
Parliament ; and that dissenters should, at the same time, be
relieved from civil disabilities. It was also designed to at-
tach the Catholic clergy to the state, by making them de-
pendent upon public funds for a part of their provision, and
to induce them to submit to superintendence.^ It was a meas-
ure of high and prescient statesmansliip, — worthy of the
genius of the great minister who had achieved the Union.
But toleration, which had formerly been resisted by Par-
liament and the people, now encountered the in-
forbidden by vincible Opposition of the king, who refused his
assent to further measures of concession, as incon-
whcn he brought me your letter, stated very strongly all the arguments
which he thouglit might induce us to admit the Catholics to Parliament
and office ; but I confess he did not satisfy me of the practicability of such
a measure at this time, or of the propriety of attempting it. With respect
to a provision for the Catholic clergy, and some aiTangement respecting
tithes, I am happy to find an uniform opinion in favor of the proposal,
among all the Irish I have .seen." — Lord Stanhope^s Life of Pitt, iii. 161.
See also Castlereagh Corr., i. 73; Lord Colchester's Mem., i. 2.^0, 511.
1 March 25th, 1801; ParL Hist, xxxv. 1124; and see Cornwallis's Corr.,
iii. 343-350.
2 I^rd Liverpool's Mem., 128; Castlereagh Corr., iv. 11, 13, 34; Lord
Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iii. 2G3, 281-288, &c., App. xxiii. et seq.; Lord
Miilmesbury's Corr., iv. 1, tl seq.; Cornwallis's Corr., ii. 436; Butler's
Hist. Mem., iv. 70; see also Edinb. Rev., Jan. 18.58.
« Mr. Pitt's Letter to tlie King, Jan. 31st, 1801 ; Lord Sidmouth's Life, i.
289; Lord Cornwallis's Corr., iii. 325, 335, 344; Court and Cabinets of
Geo. III., iii. 129. The Irish Catholic bishops had consented to allow the
crown a veto ou their nomination. — Butler's Hist. Mem., iv. 112-134.
AGITATION FOR CATHOLIC RELIEF. 337
Ristent with the obligations of his coronatioa oatli. To his un-
founded scruples weie sacrificed the rights of millions and the
peace of Ireland. The measure was arrested at its inception.
Tiie minister fell ; and, in deference to the king's feeling?^
was constrained to renounce his own wise and liberal policy.
But the question of Catholic disabilities, in connection
with the government of Ireland, was too moment- „ ... ,
f ' Cntical
ous to be set at rest by the religious scruples of conditioner
•' ° ' Ireland
the king, and the respectful forbearance of states-
men. In the rebellion of 1798, the savage hatred of Pi"ot
estants and Catholics had aggravated the dangers of that
critical period. Nor were the difficulties of administering
the government overcome by the Union. The abortive re-
bellion of Robert Emmett, in 1803, again exposed the alarm-
ing condition of Ireland ; and suggested that the social dis-
location of that unhappy country needed a more statesman-
like treatment than that of Protestant ascendency The
and irritating disabilities. For the present, how- ^^^n in
ever, the general question was in abeyance in »*>«>■»"«:«•
Parliament. Mr. Pitt had been silenced by the king ; and
Mr. Addington's administration was avowedly anti-Catholic
Yet in 1803, Catholics obtained a further instalment of relief,
— being exempted from certain penalties and disabilities, on
taking the oath and subscribing the declaration prescribed by
the Act of 1791.2
In 1804, a serious agitation for Catholic relief commenced
in Ireland : but as yet the cause was without hope, jjj, p^j
On Mr. Pitt's restoration to power, he was still re- i^^^*^-
^trained by his engagement to the king from proposing any
measure for the relief of Catholics himself; and was con
strained to resist their claims when advocated by others.
In 1805, the discussion of the general question cathoUc
was resumed in Parliament- Lord Grenville ^f'^'^^oVtu
.Mai-en ^tb,
presented a petition from the Roman Catholics of i'^^-
1 Supra, Vol. I. 85-89. 2 43 Geo. III. c. 30.
8 Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iv. 297, 391.
vol.. II. 22
338 . RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Ireland, recounting the disabilities under which they still
suffered.*
On the 10th May, his lordship moved for a committee of
LordGren- the wliole Ilouse to consider this petition. He
May'ioth"''"' urgetl that three fourths of the people of Ireland
1805. wera Koraan Catholics, whose existence the state
could not ignore. At the time of the Revolution they had
been excluded from civil privilege?, not on account of their
reli'Mon, but for their political adhesion to the exiled sov-
ereign. In the present reign they had received toleration in
the exercise of their religion, power to acquire land, the en
joyment of the elective franchise, and the right to fill many
offices from which they had previously been excluded,
Whatever objections might have existed to the admission of
Roman Catholics to the Parliament of Ireland, had been re-
moved by the Union ; as in the Parliament of the United
Kingdom there was a vast preponderance of Protestants.
This argument had been used by those who had promoted
the Union. It had encouraged the hopes of the Roman
Catholics ; and now, for the first time since the Union, that
body had appealed to Parliament. His lordship dwelt upon
their loyalty, as frequently declared by the Irish Parliament;
exonerated them from participation, as a body, in the Rebel-
lion ; combated the prejudice raised against them on account
of the recent coronation of Napoleon by the pope ; and illus
trated the feelings which their exclusion from lawful objects
of ambition naturally excited in their minds. He desired to
unite all classes of the people in the common benefits and
common interests of the state.
This speech, which ably presented the entire case of the
Koman Catholics, opened a succession of debates, in which
all the arguments relating to their claims were elicited.^ As
regards the high offices of state, it was urged by Lord
Hawkesbury, that while the law excluded a Romaa Catholic
1 Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., iv. 97.
a Ibid., iv. esi-'QS; 742.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS, 1805. 839
sovereign from the throne of his inheritance, it could scarcely
be allowed that the councils of a Protestant king should be
directed by Roman Catholics. Roman Catholics, it was ar-
gued, would not be fit persons to sit in Parliament, so long as
they refused to take the oath of supremacy, which merely
renounced foreign dominion and jurisdiction. In Ireland,
their admission would increase the influence of the priest-
hood in elections, and array the property of the country on
one side, and its religion and numbers on the other. The
Duke of Cumberland opposed the prayer of the petition, as
fatal to all the principles upon which the House of Hanover
had been called to the throne. Every apprehension and
prejudice which could be appealed to, in opposition to the
claims of the Roman Catholics, was exerted in this debate.
The pope, their master, was the slave and tool of Napoleon.
If intrusted with power, they would resist the payment of
tithes, and overthrow the established church. Nay, Catholic
families would reclaim their forfeited estates, which for five
generations had been in the possession- of Protestants or had
since been repurchased by Catholics. After two nights' de-
bate, Lord Grenville's motion was negatived by a majority
of 129.1
Mr. Fox also offered a similar motion to the Commons,
founded upon a petition addressed to that House. „ „ ,
Ihe people whose cause he was advocating, motion in the
amounted, he said, to between a fourth and a May i3th,'
fifth of the entire population of the United King- °'
dom. So large a portion of his fellow-subjects had been
excluded from civil rights, not on account of their religion,
but for political causes which no longer existed. Queen
Elizabeth had not viewed them as loyal subjects of a Prot-
estant queen. The character and conduct of the Stuarts had
made the people distrustful of the Catholics. At the time
of the Revolution " it was not a Catholic, but a Jacobite, you
wished to restrain." In Ii-eland, again, the restrictions upon
1 Contents, 49; Non-contents, 178. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., iv. 843.
340 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Catholics were political and not religious. In the civil war
which had raged there, the Catholics were the supporters of
James, and as Jacobites were discouraged and restrained.
The Test Act of Charles II. was passed because the sov-
ereign himself was suspected ; and Catholic officers were
excluded, lest they should assist him in his endeavors to sub-
vert the constitution. There was no fear, now, of a Protes-
ant king being unduly influenced by Catholic ministers. The
langer of admitting Catholics to Parliament was chimerical.
Did any one believe that twenty Catholic members would be
returned from the whole of Ireland?* In reply to this
question. Dr. Duigenan asserted that Ireland would return
upwards of eighty Catholic members, and the English
boroughs twenty more, — thus forming a compact confed-
eracy of 100 members, banded together for the subversion
of all our institutions in church and state.
He was answered eloquently and in a liberal spirit by Mr.
Grattan, in the first speech addressed by him to the Imperial
Parliament. The general discussion was not distinguished,
on either side, by much novelty.
The speech of Mr. Pitt serves as a landmark, denoting
the position of the question at that time. He frankly ad-
mitted that he retained his opinion, formed at the time of the
Union, that Catholics might be admitted to the united Par-
liament, "under proper guards and conditions," without "any
danger to the established church or the Protestant constitu-
tion." But the circumstances which had then prevented him
from proposing such a measure " had made so deep, so last-
ing an impression upon his mind, that so long as those cir-
cumstances continued to operate, he should feel it a duty im-
j)Osed upon him, not only not to bring forward, but not in
any manner to be a party in bringing forward or in agitating
this question." At the same time he deprecated its agitation
by others under circumstances most unfavorable to its settle-
ment. Such a measure would be generally repugnant to
1 Hans. Deb., lat Ser., iv. 834-854.
THE WHIG MINISTRY, 1806. 341
members of the established church ; to the nobility, gentry,
and middle classes, both in England and Ireland ; assuredly
to the House of Lords, which had just declared its opinion ;^
and, as he believed, to the great majority of the House of
Commons. To urge forward a measure, in opposition to
obstacles so insuperable, could not advance the cause ; while
it encouraged delusive hopes, and fostered religious and po-
litical animosities.^
Mr. Windham denied that the general sentiment wad
against such a measure ; and scouted the advice that it
should be postponed until there was a general concurrence
in its favor. " If no measure," he said, " is ever to pass in
Parliament which has not the unanimous sense of the coun-
try in its favor, prejudice and passion may forever triumph
over reason and sound policy." After a masterly reply by
Mr. Fox, which closed a debate of two nights, the House
proceeded to a division, when his motion was lost by a deci-
sive majority of one hundred and twelve.'
The pi-eseot temper of Parliament was obviously unfa
vorable to the Catholic cause. The hopes of the ,pjjg-,^j
Catholics, however, were again raised by the death ministry of
' ° ■' 1806, and
of Mr. Pitt and the formation of the Whig Min- the Catho-
lies.
istry of 1806. The cabinet comprised Lord
Grenville, Mr. Fox, and other statesmen who had advocated
Catholic relief in 1801, and in the recent debates of 1805 ;
and the Catholics of Ireland did not fail to press upon them
the justice of renewing the consideration of their claims.
This pressure was a serious embarrassment to ministers. Af-
ter the events of 1801, they needed no warning of the dif-
ficulty of their position, which otherwise was far from secure.
No measure satisfactory to the Catholics could be submitted
to the king ; and the bare mention of the subject was not
1 The debate had been adjourned till the day after the decision in the
Lords.
2 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., iv. 1013.
8 Ayes, 124; Noes, 236. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., iv. 1C60; Grattan's Life
V. 253-264.
342 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
without danger. They were too conscious not only of His
Majesty's inflexible opinions, but of his repugnance to thera-
seh'es. Mr. Fox perceived so clearly the impossibility of
approaching the king, that he persuaded the Catholic lead-
ers to forbear their claims for the present. They had recent-
ly been rejected, by large majorities, in both Houses ; and
to repeat them now would merely embarrass their friends,
and offer another easy triumph to their enemies.^ But it is
hard for the victims of wrong to appreciate the difficulties of
statesmen f and the Catholics murmured at the apparent de-
sertion of their friends. For a time they were pacified by
the liberal administration of the Duke of Bedford in Ire-
land ; but after Mr. Fox's death-, and the dissolution of Par-
liament in 1806, they again became impatient.*
At length Lord Grenville, hoping to avert further press-
ure on the general question, resolved to redress a
Navy Seryioe grievance which pressed heavily in time of war, not
, ' upon Catholics only, but upon the public service.
By the Irish Act of 1793, Catholics were allowed to hold
any commission in the army in Ireland, up to the rank of
colonel: but were excluded from the higher staff appoint-
ments of commander-in-chief, master-general of the ord-
nance, and general of the staff. As this Act had not been
extended to Great Britain, a Catholic officer in the king's
service, on leaving Ireland, became liable to the penalties of
the English laws. To remove this obvious anomaly, tlie
government at first proposed to assimilate the laws of both
countries by two clauses in the Mutiny Act ; and to this pi'o-
posal the king reluctantly gave his consent. On further con-
sideration, however, this simple provision appeared inade-
quate. The Irish Act applied to Catholics only, as dissent-
ers had been admitted by a previous Act to serve in civil
and military offices ; and it was confined to the army, as Ire-
1 Lord Sidmooth's Life, ii. 436; Ann. Reg., 1806, p. 25; Lord Holland's
Mem. of the Whig Party, i. 213, et seq.; Butler's Hist. Mem., W. 184-187.
2 Butler's Hist. Mem., iv. 188; GratUn's Life, v. 282-296, 334.
ARMY AND NAVY SERVICE BILL, 1807. 343
land had no navy. The exceptions in the Irish Act were
considered unnecessary ; and it was further thought just to
grant indulgence to soldiers in the exercise of their religion.
As these questions arose, fiom time to time, ministers cora-
munictited to the king their correspondence with the lord-
lieutenant, and explained the variations of their proposed
measure from that of the Irish Act, with the grounds upon
which they were recommended. Throughout these commu-
nications His Miijesty did not conceal his general dislike and
disapprobation of the measure; bat was understood to give
his reluctant assent to its introduction as a separate bill.*
In this form the bill was introduced by Lord Howick.
He explained that when the Irish Act of 1793 Biu
had been passed, a similar measure had been b.^Lord °
promised for Great Britain. That promise was Mareh^s'th,
at length to be fulfilled ; but as it would be unrea- ^^^•
sonable to confine the measure to Catholics, it was proposed
to embrace dissenters in its provisions. The Act of 1793
had applied to the army only; but it was then distinctly
stated that the navy should be included in the Act of the
British Parliament. If Catholics were admitted to one branch
of the service, what possible objection could there be to their
admission to the other ? He did not propose, however, to
continue the restrictions of the Irish Act, which disqualified
a Catholic from the offices of commander-in-chief, master-
general of the ordnance, or general on the stafi\. Such re-
strictions were at once unnecessary and injurious. The
appointment to these high offices was vested in the crown,
which would be under no obligation to appoint Roman Cath-
olics ; and it was an injury to the public service to exclude
by law a man "who might be called by the voice of the
army and the people" to fill an office, for which he had
1 Explanations of Lord Grenville and Lord Howick, March 26th, 1807 ;
Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., ix. 231, 261-2T9; Lord Castlereagh Corr., iv. 374;
Lord Sidmouth's Life, ii. 436; Lord Grenville's Letter, Feb. 10th, 1807
Court and Cabinets of Geo. III., iv. 117; Lord Holland's Mem., ii. 159-199
App. 270; Lord Malmesbuiy's Corr., p. 365.
344 EELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
proved his fitness by distinguished services. Lastly, he pro-
posed to provide that all who should enter His Majesty's ser-
vice should enjoy " the free and unrestrained exercise of
their religion, so far as it did not inteifure with their milita-
ry duties."^ Mr. Spencer Perceval sounded the note of
alarm at these proposals, which, in his opinion, involved all
the principles of complete emancipation. If military equal-
ity were conceded, how could civil equality be afterwards
resisted ? His apprehensions were shared by some other
members ; but the bill was allowed to be introduced without
opposition.
Its further progress, however, was suddenly arrested by
Withdrawal ^'^^ king, who refused to admit Catholics to tho
Mof *°^ staff", and to include dissenters in the provisions
ministers. of the bill.'* He declared that his previous assent
had been given to the simple extension of the Irish Act to
Great Britain ; and he would agree to nothing more. Again
a ministry fell under the difficulties of the Catholic ques-
tion.* The embarrassments of ministers had undoubtedly
been great. They had desii-ed to maintain their own charac-
ter and consistency, and to conciliate the Catholics, without
shocking the well-known scruples of the king. Their scheme
was just and moderate : it was open to no rational objection ;
but neither in the preparation of the measure itself, nor in
their communications with the king, can they be acquitted
of errors which were turned against themselves and the un-
lucky cause they had espoused.*
Again were the hopes of the Catholics wrecked, and
Anti-Cathoiio ^^'''^ them the hopes of a liberal government in
^"tbrnew Enghind. An anti-Catholic administration was
ministers. formed undcF the Duke of Portland and Mr. Per-
1 Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, ix. 2-7.
a Ibid., ix. 149, 173.
• The constitutional questions involved in their removal from office have
been related elsewhere; Vol. I. 93.
< Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., ix. 231, 247, 261, 340, &c.; Lord Holland's Mem.,
ii. 160, ei seq.; App. to vol. ii. 270; Lord Malmesbury's Corr., iv. 3G7, 379;
IiOrd Sidmouth's Life, ii. 448-472.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS, 1808-1810. 345
ceval ; and cries of " No Popery," and " Church and King,"
were raised throughout the land.^ Mr. Perceval in his
address to the electors of Northampton, on vacating his seat,
took credit for " coming forward in the service of his sov-
ereign, and endeavoring to stand by him at this important
crisis, when he is making so firm and so necessary a stand
for the religious establishment of the country." ^ The Duke
of Portland wrote to the University of Oxford, of which he
was Chancellor, desiring them to petition against the Catho-
lic bill; and the Duke of Cumberland, Chancellor of the
University of Dublin, sought petitions from that university.
No pains were spared to arouse the fears and prejudices of
Protestants. Thus Mr. Perceval averred that the measure
recently withdrawn would not have " stopped short till it had -
brought Roman Catholic bishops to the House of Lords."*
Such cries as these were reiichoed at the elections. An
ultra-Protestant Parliament was assembled; and the Catho-
lic cause was hopeless.*
Tiie Catliolics of Ireland, however, did not suffer their
claims to be forgotten ; but by frequent petitions, Roman
and the earnest support of their friends, continued petuio'j^
to keep alive the interest of the Catholic question, i^^-
in the midst of more engrossing subjects. But discussions,
however able, which were unfruitful of results, can claim no
more than a passing notice. Petitions were, fully discussed
in both Houses in 1808.^ And again, in 1810, Earl Grey
1 Mr. Henry Erskine said to the Duchess of Gordon: — " It was much
to be lamented that poor Lord George did not live in these times, when he
would have stood a chance of being in the cabinet, instead of being in
N^ewgate." — Romilly^s Mem., ii. 193.
2 Rorailly's Mem., ii. 192.
3 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., ix. 315.
* Lord Malniesburj' savs: — " The spirit of the whole country is with the
king; and the idea of the church being in danger (perhaps not quite un-
true) makes Lord Grenville and the Foxites most unpopular." — Con:
iv. 394.
5 Lords' Debates, May 27th, 1803; Commons' Debates, May 25th, 1803
Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xi. 1, 30, 489, 549-638, 643-694; Grattan's Life.T
376.
346 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
presented two petitions from Roman CatlioHcs in England,
CathoUo complaining that they were denied many priv-
pr^ented ilcgcs which Were enjoyed by their Roman Catholic
Feb^d^'*^' brethren in other parts of the empire. He stated
1810. that in Canada Roman Catholics were eligible to
all oflBces, in common with their Protestant fellow-subjects.
In Ireland, they were allowed to act as magistrates, to bo-
come members of lay corporations, to take degrees at Trinity
College, to vote at elections, and to attain to every rank in
the army except that of general of the staff. In Eng-
land, they could not be included in the commission of the
peace, nor become members of corporations, were debarred
from taking degrees at the universities, and could not legally
Mr. Grat- hold any rank in the army.* The Roman Cath-
May'isth*"'' ^^^^ ^^ Ireland also presented petitions to the
^^^- House of Commons through Mi'. Grattan, in this
session.' But his motion to refer them to a committee was
defeated, after a debate of three nights, by a majority of one
hundred and four.'
In the same session, Lord Donoughmore moved to refer
Lord Don- Several petitions from the Roman Catholics of Ire-
ttoCji^e land to a committee of the House of Lords. But
eth, 1810. ag Ixjrd Grenville had declined, with the concur-
rence of Lord Grey, to bring forward the Catholic claims,
the question was not presented under favorable circum-
stances ; and the motion was lost by a majority of eighty-six.*
One other demonstration was made during this session in
Earl Grey's Support of the Catholic cause. Lord Grey, in his
the'stateof Speech on the state of the nation, adverted to the
june^iath' continued postponement of concessions to the Cath-
1810. olics, as a source of danger and weakness to the
Btate in the conduct of the war ; and appealed to ministers to
1 Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., xv. 503.
2 Feb. 27th, ibid., 634.
« Ibid., xvii. 17, 183, 235. Aye8, 109; Noes, 213. Grattan's Life, v.
410.
* Contents, 68; Non-contenta, 154. Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., xviL 353-440.
APPROACH OF THE REGENCY. 847
" unite the hearts and hands of all classes of the people, in
defence of their common country." An allusion to this ques-
tion was also made in the address which he proposed to the
crown.^
In the autumn of this year, an event fraught with sadness
to the nation once more raised the hopes of the
„ , ,. „,, , , . .,.,,. Approach
Catholics, ihe aged king was stricken with his of the
last infirmity ; and a new political era was opening,
full of promise to their cause.
1 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser.. xvii. 553, 577.
348 EELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
CHAPTER Xm.
History of Catholic Claims from the Regencj': — Measures for the Relief
of Dissenters : — MaiTiages of Catholics and Dissenters : — Repeal of the
Corporation and Test Acts in 1828: — Passing of the Catholic Relief Act
in 1829 : — Its Results : — Quakers, Moravians, and Separatists : — Jewish
Disabilities.
The regency augured well for the commencement of a more
_ - liberal policy in church and state. The venerable
the regency monarch, whosc sccotre was now wielded by a
disappoiuttid. \ ''
feebler hand, had twice trampled upon the peti
tions of his Catholic subjects ; and, by his resolution and in-
fluence, had united against them ministers, Parliament, and
people. It seemed no idle hope that Tory ministers would
now be supplanted by statesmen earnest in the cause of dvil
and religious liberty, whose policy would no longer be thwart-
ed by the influence of the crown. The prince himself, once
zealous in the Catholic cause, had, indeed, been, for some
years, inconstant, — if not untrue, — to it. His change of
opinion, however, might be due to respect for his royal father,
or the political embarrassments of the question. None could
suspect him of cherishing intractable religious scruples.^
Assuredly he would not reject the liberal counsels of the
ministers of his choice. But these visions were soon to col-
lapse and vanish, like bubbles in the air ; ^ and the weary
struggle was continued, with scarcely a change in its pros-
pects.
1 Moore's Life of Sheridan, ii. 333 ; Lord Brougham's Statesmen, i. 186 5
Lord Holland's Mem., ii. 196.
a Vol. 1. 106.
DISSENTING MINISTERS' BILL, 1811. 349
The first year of the regency, however, was marked by
the consummation of one act of toleration. The freedom of
Grenville ministry had failed to secure freedom of ^orshSp to
relifjious worship to Catholic soldiers by lejrisla- Catholic
, , . , . soldiers.
tion . but they had partially secured that object
by a circular to commanding officers. Orders to the same
effect had since been annually issued by the commander-
in-chief. The articles of war, however, recognized no right
in the soldier to absent himself from divine service ; and
in ignorance or neglect of these orders, soldiers had been
punished for refusing to attend the services of the established
church. To repress such an abuse, the commander-in-chief
issued general orders, in January 1811 ; and Mr. Parnell
afterwards proposed a clause in the Mutiny Bill, to March
give legal effect to them. The clause was not '**'
agreed to ; but, in the debate, no doubt was left that, by the
regulations of the service, full toleration would henceforth
be enjoyed by Catholic soldiers in the exercise of their
religion.^
Another measure, affecting dissenters, was conceived in
a somewhat different spirit. Lord Sidmouth protestant
complained of the facility with which dissenting Minsters?
ministers were able to obtain certificates under ^'"' ^^^^'
the Act of 1779,' without any proof of their fitness to
preach, or_ of there being any congregation requiring their
ministrations. Some had been admitted who could not even
read and write, but were prepared to preach by inspiration.
One of the abuses resulting from this facility was the exemp-
tion of so many preachers from serving on juries, and from
other civil duties. To correct these evils, he proposed cer-
tain securities, of which the principal was a certificate of
fitness from six reputable householdei's, of the same persua-
sion as the minister seeking a license to preach.* ^^^ q^^
His bill met with little favor. It was, at best, ^^^^•
a trivial measure ; but its policy was in the wrong direction.
1 Si^a, p. 343. 2 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xix. 350.
« Supra, p. 317. * Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xix. 1128-1140.
350 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
It ill becomes a state, which disowns any relations with dis-
senters, to intermeddle with their discipline. The dissenters
rose up against the bill ; and, before the second reading, the
House was overwhelmed with their petitions. The govern-
ment discouraged it: the Archbishop of Canterbury coun-
selled its withdrawal : the leading peers of the liberal party
denounced it ; and Lord Sidmouth, standing almost alone,
was obliged to allow his ill-advised measure to be defeated,
without a division.*
Lord Sidmouth's bill had not only alarmed the dissent
Protestant crs, but had raised legal doubts, which exposed
^^^? them to further molestation.^ And, in the next
Biu, 1812. year, another bill was passed, with the grateful ap-
proval of the dissenters, by which they were relieved from
the oaths and declaration required by the Toleration Act
Unitarians' ^^^ ^^^^ -^^^ ^^ 1779, and from other vexatious
reUef, 1813. restrictions." And in the following year, Mr. "W".
Smith obtained for Unitarians that relief which, many years
before, Mr. Fox had vainly sought from the legislature. *
Nothing distinguished the tedious annals of the Catholic
question in 1811, but a motion in one House, by Mr.
Catholic Grattan, and in the other, by Lord Donoughmore,
£ay3i^t which met with their accustomed fate.* But, in
^eisth, 1812, the aspect of the Catholic question was, in
CathoUo some degree, changed. The claims of the Catho-
jyestion, licg^ always associated with the peace and good
8tat«of government of Ireland, were now brougiit forward,
Ireland. jn the form of a motion, by Lord Fitzwilliam, for
Jan. 8i«t g committee on the state of Ireland; and were urged
» Hans. Deb., 1st Ser. xx. 233; Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 38-65; Brook's
Hist, of Relig. Lib., ii. 386.
2 Brook's Hist, of Relig. Lib., ii. 394.
« 52 Geo. HI. c. 155; Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, xxiii. 994, 1105, 1247; Lord
Sidmouth's Life, iii. 65; Brook's Hist, of Relig. Lib., ii. 394.
* 53 Geo. III. c. 160; Brook's Hist, of Relig. Lib., ii. 395.
» Ayes, 83 ; Noes, 146, in the Commons. Hans. Deb., Ist Sen, xx. 369-
427. Contents, 62; Non-contents, 121, in the Lords. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser.i
XX. 645-685 ; GratUn's Life. v. 376.
PROTESTANT SYMPATHY. 351
more on the ground of state policy than of justice. The de-
bate was chiefly remarkable for a wise and statesmanlike
speech of the Marquess of Wellesley. The motion was lost by
a majority of eighty-three.* A few days afterwards, a similar
motion was made in the House of Commons by Feb. ai.
Lord Morpeth. Mr. Canning opposed it in a masterly
speech, — more encouraging to the cause than the support
of most other men. Objecting to the motion in point of time
alone, he urged every abstract argument in its favor ;
declared that the policy of enfranchisement must be progres-
sive ; and that since the obstacle caused by the king's con-
scientious scruples had been removed, it had become the
duty of ministers to undertake the settlement of a question
vital to the interests of the empire.^ The general tone of
the discussion was also encouraging to the Catholic cause ;
and after two nights' debate, the motion was lost by a ma-
jority of ninety-four, — a number increased by the belief
that the motion implied a censure upon the executive
government of Ireland.^
Another aspect in the Catholic cause is also observable in
this year. Not only were petitions from the Catho- protestant
lies of England and Ireland more numerous and im- «J™P^'*»y-
posing : but Protestant noblemen, gentlemen of landed prop-
erty, clergy, commercial capitalists, officers in the army and
navy, and the inhabitants of large towns, added their prayers
to those of their Catholic fellow-countrymen.* Even the
universities of Oxford and Cambridge, which presented pe-
titions against the Catholic claims, were much divided in
opinion ; and minorities, considerable in academic rank,
earning, and numbers, were ranged on the other side.®
1 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxi. 408-483. House adjoomed at half-past six
n the morning.
- It was in this speech that he uttered his celebrated exclamation, " Re-
peal the Union ! restore the Heptarchy ! "
* Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, xxi., 494, 605. The House adjourned at htH-
past fire.
* Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxii. 452, 478, 482-706, &c
* Jbid., 462, 507; Grattan's Life, v. 467.
852 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Thus fortified, motions in support of the Catholic clairaa
Lord Don- ^'^I'Q renewed in both Houses ; and being now
oughiiiore'8 f,.pg from any imnlication of censure upon the
motion, April -^ * '
21st, 1612. government, were offered under more favorable
auspices. Tliat of- the Earl of Donoughmore, in (he House
of Lords, elicited from the Duke of Sussex an elaborate
speech in favor of the Catholic claims, which His Royal
Highness afterwards edited with many learned notes. "\V1k
that heard the arguments of Lord Wellesley and Lord Gren
ville, could have believed that the settlement of this great
question was yet to be postponed for many years ? Lord
Grenville's warning was like a prophecy. " I ask not," he
said, ** what in this case will be your ultimate decision. It
is easily anticipated. We know, and it has been amply shown
in former instances, — the cases of America and of Ireland
have but too well proved it, — how precipitately necessity
extorts what power has pertinaciously refused. We shall
finally yield to these petitions. No man doubts it. Let us
not delay the concession, until it can neither be graced by
spontaneous kindness, nor limited by deliberative wisdom."
The motion was defeated by a majority of seventy-two.*
Mr. Grattan proposed a similar motion in the House of
Mr. Grattan's Commons, in a speech more than usually earnest
Aprii'lad ^"^ impassioned. In this debate, Mr. Brougham
1812. raised his voice in support of the Catholic cause,
— a voice ever on the side of freedom.* And now Mr. Can-
ning supported the motion, not only with his eloquence, but
with his vote ; and continued henceforth one of the foremost
advocates of the Catholic claims. After two nights' debate
Mr. Grattan's motion was submitted to the vote of an un
usual number of members, assembled by a call of the House,
and lost by a majority of eighty-five.'
1 Contents, 102; Non-contents, 174. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxii. 509-
703. The House divided at five in the morning.
2 Mr. Brougham had entered Parliament in 1810.
8 Ayes, 215; Noes, 300. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxii. 728, 860. The
House adjourned at half-past six in the morning.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS, 1812. 353
But tliis session promised more than the barren triumphs
of debate. On the death of Mr. Perceval, the Marquess of
Wellesley, being cliarged with the formation of a new ad-
ministration, assumed, as the very basis of his negotiation,
the final adjustment of the Catholic claims. The negotiation
failed, indeed;^ but the Marquess and his fi'iends, encour
aged by so unprecedented a concession from the throne.
sought to pledge Parliament to the consideration of this ques
tion in the next session. First, Mr. Canning, in jj^ p^j^.
the House of Commons, gained an unexampled """s"*
' o ' motion. June
victory. For years past, every motion favorable 22d, I812.
to this cause had been opposed by large majorities ; but now
his motion for the consideration of the laws affecting His
Majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in Great Britain and Ire-
land, was carried by the extraordinary majority of one hun-
dred and twenty-nine.^
Shortly after this most encouraging resolution, the Mar-
quess of Wellesley made a similar motion in the Lord Wei-
House of Lords,* where the decision was scarcely J^nf jy'Jl**'
less remarkable. The lord chancellor had moved 1*'' i^^-
the previous question, and even upon that indefinite and
evasive issue, the motion was only lost by a single vote.*
Another circumstance, apparently favorable to the cause,
was also disclosed. The Earl of Liverpool's ad- ^^ „ j^ ^
ministration, instead of uniting their whole force di^biuties
_ . ^'° open
against the Catholic cause, agreed that it should question
in 1812.
be an " open question ; " and this freedom of ac-
tion, on the pai't of individual members of the government,
was first exercised in these debates. The introduction of
this new element into the contest was a homage to the justice
and reputation of the cause ; but its promises were illusory
Had the statesmen who espoused the Catholic claims stead-
1 Supra, VoL I. 109.
2 Ayes, 235; Noes, 129. Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, xxiii. 633-710.
8 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxiii. 711, 814.
* Xoii-cor tents, 126; Contents, 125. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxiii. 814-
868.
VOL. II. 23
854 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
fastly refused to act with nunisters who continued to oppose
them, it may be doubted whether any competent ministry
could much longer have been formed upon a rigorous policy
of exclusion. The influence of the crown and church might,
for some time, have sustained such a ministry : but the in-
evitable conflict of principles would sooner have been precip-
itated.
Alarmed by the improved position of the Catholic ques-
tion in Parliament, the clergy and strongr Protes-
Catholio , ' °-' . *=
ciaimg, lant party hastened to remonstrate agamst ccmces-
1812-13 * •' o
sion. The Catholics responded by a renewal ot
their reiterated appeals. In February, 1813, Mr. Grattan,
Mr. Grattan'8 J^ pursuance of the resolution of the previous ses-
Feb'.'ssth ^•*'"' movcd the immediate consideration of the
I8ia ]aws affecting the Roman Catholics, in a committee
of the whole House. He was supported by Lord Castle-
reagh, and opposed by Mr. Peel. After four nights' debate,
rich in maiden speeches, well suited to a theme which had
too often tried the resources of more practised speakers, the
motion was carried by a majority of forty.^
In committee, Mr. Grattan proposed a resolution affirming
March 9th, that it was advisable to remove the civil and mili-
tary disqualifications of the Catholics, with such
exceptions as may be necessary for preserving the Protestant
succession, the church of England and Ireland, and the
church of Scotland. Mr. Speaker Abbot, free, for the first
time, to speak upon this question, opposed the resolution.
It was agreed to by a majority of sixty-seven.*
The bill founded upon this resolution provided for the ad-
Mr. Grattan's mission of Catholics to either House of Parlia-
' ment, on taking one oath, instead of the oaths of
allegiance, abjuration and supremacy, and the declaiations
against transubstantiation and the invocation of saints. On
taking this oath, and without receiving the sacrament, Catho-
1 Ayes. 264; Noes, 224. Hans. Deb., Ist Ser., xxiv. 747, 849, 879, 985.
> Ayes, 186; Noes, 119. Haas. Deb., Ist Sen, xxiv. 1194-1248.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS, 1813. 355
lies were also entitled to vote at elections, to hold any civil
and military office under the crown, except that of lord
chancellor or lord-lieutenant of Ireland, and any lay corporate
office. No Roman Catholic was to advise the crown, in the
disposal of church patronage. Every person exercising
spiritual functions in the church of Rome was required to
take this oath, as well as another, by which he bound him-
self to approve of none but loyal bishops ; and to limit his
intercourse with the pope to matters purely ecclesiastical. It
was further provided, that none but persons born in the
United Kingdom, or of British parents, and resident there
in, should be qualified for the episcopal office.^
After the second reading,'^ several amendments were in-
troduced by consent,' mainly for the purpose of establishing
a government control over the Roman Catholic bishops, and
for regulating the relations of the Roman Catholic church
•with the see of Rome. These latter provisions were pecul-
iarly distasteful to the Roman Catholic body, who resented
the proposal as a surrender of the spiritual freedom of their
church, in exchange for their own civil liberties.
The course of the bill, however, — thus far prosperous, —
was soon brought to an abrupt termination. The „.„ ,
'^ . '^ , BiU defeated,
indefatigable speaker, again released from his chair. May aitix,
moved, in the first clause, the omission of the
words, " to sit and vote in either House of Parliament ; " and
carried his amendment by a majority of four.* The bill,
having thus lost its principal provision, was immediately
abandoned ; and the Catholic question was nearly as far from
a settlement as ever.®
1 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxv. 1107 ; Peel's Mem., i. 354.
2 Ibid., xxvi. 171; Ayes, 245; Noes, 203.
8 The bill as thus amended is printed in Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxvi. 271.
* Ibid., 312-361; Ayes, 247; Noes, 251; Grattan's Life, v. 489-496.
5 The speaker, elated by his victory, could not forbear the further satis-
faction of alluding to the failure of the bill, in his speech to the Prince
Regent, at the end of tlie session, — an act of indiscretion, if not disorder,
•which placed him in the awkward position of defending himself, in the
chair, &om a proposed vote of censure. From this embarrassment he was
856 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
This session, however, was not wholly unfruitful of benefit
Roman '^ the Catliolic cause. The Duke of Norfolk suc-
CathoiicOffl- ceydjjj jn passinj; a bill, enabling Irish Roman
cers' Keliei t n ' o
BUI, 1813. Catholics to hold all such civil or military offices in
England, as by the Act of 1793 they were entitled to hold iu
Irehmd. It removed one of the obvious anomalies of the law,
which had been admitted in 1807 even by .the king himself.*
This measure was followed, in 1817, by the Military and
Wiiitaryand ^''^''^ Officers' Oaths Bill, which virtually opened
Naval offl- q\\ j-anks in the army and navy to Roman Cath-
cers' Oaths •' •'
Bill, 1817. olics and Dissenters.'* Introduced by Lord Mel-
villes imply as a measure of regulation, it escaped the ani-
madversion of the Protestant party, — ever on the watch
to prevent further concessions to Catholics. A measure,
denounced in 1807, as a violation of the constitution and
the king's coronation oath, was now agreed to with the
acquiescence of all parties. The church was no longer in
danger : " no popery " was not even whispered. " It was
Kome consolation for him to reflect," said Earl Grey, " that
what was resisted, at one period, and in the hands of one
man, as dangerous and disastrous, was adopted at another,
and from a different quarter, as wise and salutary." '
In 1815, the Roman Catholic body in Ireland being at
^ , „ issue with their parliamentary friends, upon the
Catholic . t. • ' r
ciaimg, question of "securities," their cause languished
and declined.* Nor, in the two following years,
did it meet with any signal successes.*
delivered by the kindness of his friends, and the good feeling of the House,
rather than by the completeness of his own defence. — Hans. Deb., 1st Ser.,
xxvi. 1224; Ibid., xxvii. 465; Lord Colchester's Diary, ii. 453-458, 483-
49G; Roniilly's Life, iii. 133.
1 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxvi. 639; 53 Geo. IIL c. 128.
2 57 Geo. III. c. 92; Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, xxxvi. 1208; Ibid., xl. 24^
Butler's Hist. Mem., iv. 257.
8 June 10th, 1819; Hans. Deb., 1st Sen, xl. 1042.
* May 18th and 30th; June 8th, 1815; Hans. Deb., Ist Sen, xxxi. 258,
474, 666.
• May 21st and June 21st, 1816; Hans. Deb., Ist Sen, Toxiv. 655, 1239|
DEATH OF GRATTAN^. 357
In 1819, the general question of Catholic emancipation
found no favor in either House ; ^ and in vain Earl 1819.
Grey submitted a modified measure of relief. He introduced
a bill for abrotratin"; the declarations ajfiiinst the ^^ , ..
CO n Declaration
doctrines of transubstantiation and the invocation "gainst tran-
_ 1 o substautia-
of saints, required to be taken ^ by civil and mil- tion, May,
ifary oflficers, and members of both Houses of
Parliament.' This measure was offered on the ground, that
these declarations were simply tests of faith and doctrine,
independent of any question of foreign spiritual supremacy.
It had been admitted, on all hands, that no one ought to be
excluded from office merely on account of his religious be-
lief, — and that nothing would warrant such exclusion, but
political tenets connected with religion which were, at the
same time, dangerous to the state. The oath of supremacy
guarded against such tenets ; but to stigmatize purely relig-
ious doctrines a^ " idolatrous and superstitious," was a relic
of offensive legislation, contrary to the policy of later times.
As a practicjil measure of relief the bill was wholly inoper-
ative ; but even this theoretical legislation, — this assertion
of a principle without legal consequences, — was resisted, as
fraught with danger to the constitution ; and the second
reading of the bill was accordingly denied by a majority of
fifty-nine.*
The weary struggle for Catholic emancipation survived
its foremost champion. In 1820, Mr. Grattan was ©path of
about to resume his exertions in the cause, when ^'^'**°-
death overtook him. His last words bespoke his earnest
convictions and sincerity. " I wished," said he, " to go to
ihe House of Commons to testify with my last breath my
May 9th and 16th, 1817; JbU., xxxvi. 301, 600; Mr. Grattan's motion oa
May 21st, 1816, was the only one carried — by a majority of 31.
1 Commons, May 4th, Ayes, 241; Noes, 243. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser.,
xl. 6. Lords, May 17th, Contents, 106; Non-contents, 147. Hans. Deb,
1st Ser., xl. 386.
2 By 25 Car. II. c. 2; and 30 Car. II. st. 2, c. 2.
8 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xl. 748.
* Contents, 82 ; Non-contents, 141. Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xl. 1034.
858 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
opinions on the question of Catholic emancipation : but I
cannot. The hand of death is upon me." .... "I wish
the question to be settled, because I believe it to be essential
to the permanent tranquillity and happiness of the country,
•which are, in fact, identified with it." He also counselled
the Catholics to keep aloof from the democratic agitations
of that period.*
The mantle of Mr. Grattan descended upon a fellow-
,,.,.,, countryman of rare eloquence and ability, — Mr.
Mr. Plunket'8 _, , ^ t
bill, Feb. Plunket, who had already distinguished himself
28th 1821
in the same cause. His first efforts were of happy
augury. In February, 1821, in a speech replete with
learning, argument, and eloquence, he introduced the familiar
motion for a committee on the Roman Catholic oaths, which
was carried by a majority of six.* His bill, founded upon
the resolutions of this committee,' provided for the abroga-
tion of the declarations against transub.^tantiation and the
invocation of saints, and a legal interpretation of the oath of
supremacy, in a sense not obnoxious to the consciences of
Catholics. On the 16th of March the bill, after an animated
debate, illustrated by one of Mr. Canning's happ'est efforts,
and generally characterized by moderation, was read a sec-
ond time, by a majority of eleven.* In committee, provis-
ions were introduced to regulate the relations of the Roman
Catholic church with the state and with the see of Rome.'
And at length, on the 2d of April, the bill was read a third
time, and passed by a majority of nineteen.' The fate of
Rejected by this measure, thus far successful, was soon deter-
Aprii leth mined in the House of Lords. The Duke of
I82l!'"*' York stood forth as^its foremost opponent, saying
1 Statement by Mr. Becher, June 14th, 1820; Han». Deb., 2d Ser. 1
1065; Life of Grattan, by his Son, v. 541, 544, 549.
a Ayes, 227; Noes, 221. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., iv. 96L
» Ibiil, 1066.
* 76iV/., 1209; Ayes, 254; Noes, 243.
« IbUL, 1412-1489.
• Ayes, 216; Noes, 197. Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, iv. 1533.
CATHOLIC PEERS' BILL, 1822. 3o9
that "his opposition to the bill arose from principles which
he had embraced ever since he had been able to judge for
himself, and which he hoped he should cherish to the last
day of his life." After a debate of two days, the second
reading of the bill was refused by a majority of thirty-nine.*
Before the next session, Ireland was nearly in a state of
revolt ; and the attention of Parliament was first „. ^ ^
Distnrbed
occupied with urgent measures of repression, — state of ii».
T • T?-„ n ., • r\ land, 1822.
an Insurrection Uill, and the suspension or the
Habeas Corpus Act. The Catholic question was now pre-
sented in a modified and exceptional form. A Roman
general measure of relief having failed again and p^rg'^m
again, it occurred to Mr. Canning that there were ^^^2.
special circumstances affecting the disqualification of Catholic
peers, which made it advisable to single out their case
for legislation. And accordingly, in a masterly April 30th.
speech, — at once learned, argumentative, and eloquent, —
he moved for a bill to relieve Roman Catholic Peers from
their disability to sit and vote in the House of Lords. Peers
had been specially exempted from taking Queen Elizabeth's
oath of supremacy, because the queen was " otherwise suffi-
ciently assured of the faith and loyalty of the temporal lords
of her high court of parliament." ^ The Catholics of that
order had, therefore, continued to exercise their right of sit-
ting in the Upper House unquestioned, until the evil times
of Titus Gates. The Act of 30 Charles II. was passed in
the very paroxysm of excitement, which marked that period.
It had been chiefly directed against the Duke of York,
who had escaped from its provisions ; and was forced upon
the Lords by the earnestness and menaces of the Commons.
Eighteen Catholic Peers had been excluded by it, of whom
five were under arrest on charges of treason ; and one, Lord
Stafford, was attainted — in the judgment of history and
posterity — unjustly. " It was passed under the same delu-
sion, was forced through the House of Lords with the same
1 Contents, 120; Non-contents, 159. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., v. 220, 279.
« 5 Eliz. c. 1, s. 17.
iJbU RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
impulse,- as it were, which brought Lord Stafford to the
block." It was only intended as a temporary Act ; and
with that understanding was assented to by the king, as
being " thought fitling-at that time." Yet it had been suttered
to continue ever since, and to deprive the innocent descend-
ants of those peers of their riglit of inheritance. The Act
of 1791 had already restored to Catholic peers their priv-
ilege of advising the crown, as hereditary councillors, of
which the Act of Charles II. had also deprived them ; and
it was now sought to replace them in their seats in Parlia-
ment. In referring to the recent coronation, to which the
Catholic peers had been invited, for the first time for up-
wards of 130 years, he pictured, in the most glowing elo-
quence, the contrast between their lofty position in tliat cer-
emony, and their humiliation in the senate, where " he who
headed the procession of the peers to-day, could not sit
among them as their equal on the morrow." Otiier Catho-
lics might never be returned to Parliament ; but the peer
had the inherent hereditary right to sit with his peers ; and
yet was personally and invidiously excluded on account of
his religion. Mr. Canning was opposed by Mr. Peel, in an
able and temperate argument, and supported by the accus-
tomed power and eloquence of Mr. Plunket. It was obvi-
ous that his success would carry the outworks, — if not the
very citadel, — of the Catholic question ; yet he obtained
leave to bring in his bill by a majority of five.^
He carried the second reading by a majority of twelve ; '
after which he was po'mitted, by the liberality of Mr. Peel,
to pass the bill through its other stages, without opposition.'
But the Lords were still inexorable. Their stout Protestant-
sm was not to be beguiled even by sympattiy for their own
order; and they refused a second reading to the bill, by a
majority of forty-two.*
I Ayes, 249; Noes, 244. Hans. Deb. 2d Ser., vii. 211.
« Ibid, 475. 8 yWrf.,673.
* Ibid., 1216; Court and Cabinets of Geo. IV., i. 306.
THE CATHOLIC QUESTION, 1823. 361
After po many disappointments, the Catholics were losing
patience and temper. Their cause was supported position of
by the most eminent members of the government ; questfen°ia'
yet was it invariably defeated and lost. Neither ^°^^-
argument nor numbers availed it. Mr. Canning was secre-
tary of state for foreign affairs and leader of the House of
Commons, and Mr. Plunket attorney-general for Ireland.
But it was felt that so long as Catholic emancipation contin-
ued to be an open question, there would be eloquent debates,
and sometimes a promising division, but no substantial re-
dress. In the House of Commons, one secretary of state
Wife opposed to the other ; and in the House of Lords, the
premier and the chancellor were the foremost opponents of
every measure of relief. The majority of the cabinet, and
the great body of the ministerial party, in both Houses, were
adverse to the cause. This irritation burst forth on the
presentation of petitions, before a motion of Mr. ^prji jytjj
Plunket's. Sir Francis Burdett first gave ex- ^^^
pression to it. He deprecated " the annual farce," which
trifled with the feelings of the people of Ireland. He would
not assist at its performance. The Catholics would obtain
no redress, until the government were united in opinion as to
its necessity. An angry debate ensued, and a fierce passage
of arms between Mr. Brougham and Mr. Canning. At
length, Mr. Plunket rose to make his motion ; when Sir
Francis Burdett, accompanied by Mr. Hobhouse, Mr. Grey
Bennet, and several other members of the opposition, left the
House. Under these discouragements Mr. Plunket proceed-
fd with his motion. At the conclusion of his speech, the
House becoming impatient, refused to give any other mem-
bers a fair hearing; and after several divisions, ultimately
agreed, by a majority of upwards of two hundred, to an ad-
journment of the House.* This result, however unfavorable
to the immediate issue of the Catholic question, was yet a
significant warning that so important a measure could not
much longer be discussed as an open question.
1 Ayes, 313 ; Noes, 111. Hana. Deb., 2d Ser., viii. 1070-1123.
362 RELIGIOUS LIBER'TY.
A smaller measure of relief was next tried in vain. liord
Lord Nu- Nugent sought to extend to English Catholics the
Ii»y28^'' elective franchise, the commission of the peace,
1828. Qp^i other offices to which Catholics in Ireland
were admissible by the Act of 1793. Mr. Peel assented to
the justice and moderation of this proposal.* The bill was
afterwards divided into two,* — the one relating to the elec-
tive franchise, and the other to the magistracy and corporate
offices.' In this shape they were agreed to by the Commons,
but both miscarried in the House of Lords.* In the follow-
ing year, they were revived in the House of Lords by Lord
Lansdowne, with no better success, though supported by five
cabinet ministers.*
Ineffectual attempts were also made, at this period, to
Marria<^iaw a™end the law of marriage, by which Catholics
1819^1^7°'' ^"^ dissenters were alike aggrieved. In 1819,*
Mr. w. and again in 1822, Mr. William Smith presented
April 18th, ' the case of dissenters, and particularly of Unitari-
ans. Prior to Lord Hardwicke's Marriage Act,
dissenters were allowed to be married in their own places
of worship; but under that Act the marriages of all but Jews
and Quakers were required to be solemnized in church, by
ministers of the establishment, and according to its ritual.
At that time the Unitarians were a small sect, and had not
a single place of worship. Having since prospered and
multiplied, they prayed that they might be married in their
own way. They were contented, however, with the omis-
sion from the marriage service, of passages relating to the
Trinity ; and Mr. Smith did not venture to propose a more
rational and complete i-elief, — the marriage of dissenters
in their own chapels.'
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, ix. 673.
s Ibid., 1031. 8 ihid., 1341.
♦ Jbid., 1470; Lord Colchester's Diary, iii. 292, 299.
6 May 24th, 1824; Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xi. 817, 842; Lord Colchester'i
Diary, iii. 326.
« June IGth, 1819; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xl. 1200, 1503.
» Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., vi. 1400.
ROMAN CATHOLIC MARRIAGES, 1824. 363
In 182^, the Marquess of Lansdowne proposed a more
comprehensive measure, embracing Roman Catho- Lord lans-
lics as well as dissenters, and permitting the sol- ju'^^ilth'"'
eranization of their marriages in their own places ^^^
of worship. The chancellor, boasling " that he took as ju<t
a view of toleration as any noble Lord in that House could
do," yet protested against " such migiity changes in the law
of marriage." The Archbishop of Canterbury regarded the
measure in a more liberal spirit ; and merely objected to any
change in the church service, which had been suggested by
Lord Liverpool. The second reading of the bill was refused
by a majority of six.^
In the following session, relief to Unitarians was again
sought, in another form. Lord Lansdowne intro- unitarian
duced a bill enabling Unitarians to be married in ™*"i*ges.
their own places of worship, after publication of bans in
church and payment of the church fees. This j^^ j^^^
proposal received the support of the Archbishop ^°"^.°^oh ^''^
of Canterbury and the Bishop of London : but May 4th,
11 ..... , , 1824.
the cliancellor, more sensitive m lus orthodoxy,
denounced it as " tending to dishonor and degrade the church
of England." To the Unitarians he gave just offence, by
expressing a doubt whether they were not still liable to pun-
ishment, at common law, for denying the doctrine of the
Trinity.'^ The bill passed the second reading by a small ma-
jority : but was afterwards lost on going into committee, by a
majority of thirty-nine."
Dr. Phillimore, with no better success, brought in another
bill to permit tlie solemnization of marriages be- Roman Cuth-
tween Catholics, by their own priests, — still re- riagS^Apni
taining the publication of bans or licenses, and the i^th, 1824
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., ix. 967.
2 See also Rex r. Curl, Strange, 789; State Tr., xvii. 154.
8 Haus. Deb., 2d Ser., xi., 75, 434; Twiss's Life of Eldon, ii. 512. Mr.
C. Wynn, writing to the Duke of Buckingbam, May 6th, 1824, said: —
" You will, I am sure, though you doubted the propriety of the Unitarian
Marriage Act, regret the triumphant majority of the intolerant party, who
3G4 RELIGIOUS LIBKHTY.
payment of fees to the Protestant clergymen. Such a
change in the law was particularly desirable in the case of
Catholics, on grounds distinct from toleration. In the poorer
parishes, large numbers were married by their own priests :
their marriages were illegal, and their children, being illegiti-
mate, were chargeable upon the parishes in which they were
born.^ This marriage law was even more repugnant to prin-
ciples of toleration, than the code of civil disabilities. It
treated every British subject, — whatever his faith, — as a
member of the church of England ; ignored all religious
differences ; and imposed, with rigorous uniformity, upon all
communions alike, the altar, the ritual, the ceremonies, and
the priesthood of the state. And under what penalties ? -—
celibacy, or concubinage and sin !
Three years later, Mr. W. Smith renewed his measure, in
a new form. It permitted Unitarian dissenters,
Unitarian i i- • ,. , , . , , ,.
marriages, alter the publication ot bans, to be married before
1827 .
a magistrate, — thus reviving the principle of a
civil contract, which had existed before Lord Hardwicke's
Act of 1752. This bill passed the Commons ;■' but failed in
the Lords, by reaso'n of the approaching prorogation.' And
the revision of the law of marriage was left to await a more
favorable opportunity.*
In 1824, Lord Lansdowne vainly endeavored to obtain for
i>ord Laos- English Catholics the elective franchise, the right
downe's to scrvB as justiccs of the peace, and to hold offices
Catholic _ "' ' '
rHjef biiig, in the revenue.* But in the same year Parlia-
Ma.v24th, , „ , , , ,
1824. ment agreed to one actot courtly acknowledgment
M»rTha™ to a distinguished Catholic peer. An Act was
1824. passed, not without opposition, to enable tlie Duke
boast of it as a dis^play of their strengtli, and a proof liow little any power
in the country can cope with them." — Court and Cabinets of Geo. I V. ii. 72,
J Hans. Deb., 2(1 Ser., xi. 408.
2 Ibid., xvii. 1343.
« Uml, 1407, 142G; Lord Colchester's Diary, iii. 520.
4 hfra. p. 392.
• Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, xi. 842; Twiss's Life of Eldon, ii, 518.
CATHOLIC CLAIMS, 1825. 365
of Norfolk to execute his hereditary ofBce of Earl Marshal,
without taking the oath of supremacy, or subscribing the decla-
rations against transubstantiation and the invocation of saints.^
Meanwhile, the repeated failures of the Catholic cause had
aroused a dangerous spirit of discontent in Ireland. . ., ,. .
° ' _ ^ Aptation in
The Catholic leaders, despairino; of succeps over Ireland,
1823-25
majorities unconvinced and unyielding, were ap-
pealing to the excited passions of the people ; and threatened
to extort from the fears of Parliament what they hud vainly
sought from its justice. To secure the peace of Ireland, the
legislature was cjilled upon, in 1825, to dissolve the Catholic
Association : ^ but it was too late to check the progress of
the Catholic cause itself, by measures of repression ; and
ministers disclaimed any such intention.
While this measure was still before Parliament, the dis-
cussion of the Catholic question was revived, on sir Francis
the motion of Sir Francis Burdett, with unusual motkm'Feb.
spirit and effect. After debates of extraordinary ^"^' ^^^•
interest, in which many members avowed their conversion to
the Catholic cause,' a bill was passed by the Commons,
framing a new oath in lieu of the oath of supremacy, as
a qualification for office ; and regulating the intercourse of
Roman Catholic subjects, in Ireland, with the see of Rome.
On reaching the House of Lords, however, this bill met the
same fate as its predecessors ; the second reading being re-
fused by a majority pf forty-eight.^
With a view to make the Catholic Relief Bill more accept-
able, and at the same time to remove a great elec- Irish 40*.
11 m T • 1 11- 11 freeholders,
toral abuse, Mr. Littleton had introduced a meas- 1825.
1 Hans. Deb., 2(1 Sen, xi. 1455, 1470,1482; 5 Geo. IV. c. 109; Lord Col-
cliester's Diary, iii. 326; Twiss's Life of Eldoii, ii. 521.
2 Supra, p. 20G.
8 Feb. 28th, April 19th and 21st, May 10th, 1825.
* Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xii. 764, 1151; Ibid., xiii. 21, 71, 486. The sec-
ond reading was carried by a majority of twenty-seven, and the third read-
ing b}' twenty-one.
6 May 17th. Contents, 130; Non-contents, 178. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser.,
xiii. 6G2.
866 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
ure for regulating the elective franchise in Ireland. Re«
specting vested interests, he proposed to raise the qualifi-
cation of 40s. freeholders ; and to restrain the creation of
fictitious voters, who were entirely in the power of their
landlords. By some this bill was regarded as an obnoxious
measure of disfranchisement ; but being supported by several
of the steadiest friends of Ireland, and of constitutional
rights, its second reading was agreed to. When the Catholic
Relief Bill, however, was lost in the House of Lords, this
bill was at once abandoned.*
In April of this year, Lord Francis Leveson Gower car-
Lord F. her- ried a resolution, far more sUirtling to the Prot-
motion* April ^^^ant party than any measure of enfranchisement.
29tii, ikio. He prevailed upon the Commons to declare the
expediency of making provision for the secular Romaa
Catholic clergy, exercising religious functions in Ireland.
It was one of those capricious and inconsequent decisions,
into which the Commons were occasionally drawn in this
protracted controversy, and was barren of results.
In 1827, the hopes of the Catholics, raised for a time by
%ir. Canning's the accession of Mr. Canning to the head of
** ' affairs, were suddenly cast down by his untimely
death.
At the meeting of Parliament in 1828,' the Duke of
fheDukeof Wellington's administration had been formed.
•i\m?^^°* Catholic emancipation wassti^ an open question ;*
tration. y^^^^ j}jg cjibinct, represented in one House by the
Duke and in the other by Mr. Peel, promised little for the
cause of religious liberty. If compliance was not to be ex-
pected, still less was such a government likely to be coerced
by fear. The great soldier at its head retained, for a time,
the command of the army ; and no minister knew so well as
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xiii. 126, 176, &c., 903.
a Ayes, 205; Noes, 162. Ibid., 308.
' Lord Goderich's ministry bad been formed and dissolved daring tiM
recess.
* Peel's Mem., i. 12, 16.
CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS, 1828. 3G7
he, how to encounter turbulence or revolt. In politics he
had been associated with the old Tory school ; and unbend-
ing firmness was characteristic of his temper and profession. I
Yet was this government on the very eve of accomplishing /
more for religious liberty, than all the efforts of its champions
had effected in half a century.
The dissenters were the first to assault the Duke's strong cita-
del. The question of the repeal of the Corporation ^ ^^ y \
nd Test Acts had slumbered for nearly forty and Test
•' '' Acts, 1828.
years,^ when Lord John Russell worthily suc-
ceeded to the advocacy of a cause, which had been illustrated
by the genius of Mr. Fox. In moving for a com- Yeh. 26th,
mittee to consider these Acts, he ably recapitulated ^^^'
their history, and advanced conclusive arguments for their
repeal. The annual indemnity acts, though offering no more
than a partial relief to dissenters, left scarcely an argument
against the repeal of laws, which had been so long virtually
suspended. It could not be contended that these laws were
necessary for the security of the church ; for they extended
neither to Scotland nor to Ireland. Absurd were the num-
ber and variety of offices embraced by the Test Act ; non-
commissioned officers as well as officers, — excisemen, tide-
waiters, and even pedlers. The penalties incurred by these
different classes of men were sufficiently alarming, — forfeit-
ure of the office, disqualification for another, incapacity to
maintain a suit at law, to act as guavdian or executor, or to
inherit a legacy ; and, lastly, a pecuniary penalty of 500Z.
Even if such penalties were never enforced, the law which
mposed them was wholly indefensible. Nor was it forgotten
igain to condemn the profanation of the holy sacrament
y reducing it to a mere civil form, imposed upon persons
who either renounced its sacred character, or might be spirit
ually unfit to receive it. Was it decent, it was asked,
" To make the symbols of atoning grace
An office key, a pick-lock to a place ? " *
I Supra, p. 324.
' Cowper's Expostulation, Works, i. p. 80, Pickering.
368 BELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Nor was this objection satisfactorily answered by citing
Bishop Sherlock's version, that receiving the sacrament was
not the qualitication for office, but the evidence of qualifica-
tion. The existing law was defended on the grounds so
often repeated: tiiat the state had a right to disqualify per-
sons on the ground of their religious opinions, if it were
deemed expedient ; that there was an estiiblished church
inseparable from the state, and entitled to its protection ; and
that the admission of dissenters would endanger the security
of that church.
Mr. Peel, — always moderate in his opposition to measures
for the extension of religious liberty, — acknowledged that
the maintenance of the Corporation and Test Acts was not
necessary for the protection of the church ; and opposed
their repeal mainly on the ground that they were no practi-
cal grievance to the dissenters. After a judicious and tem-
perate discussion on both sides, the motion was affirmed by a
njajority of forty-four.^ The bill was afterwards brought in,
and read a second time without discussion.''
The government, not being prepared to resign office in
consequence of the adverse vote of the Commons,
Concurrence ^
of the endeavored to avoid a conflict between the two
Houses. The majority had comprised many of
their own supporters, and attached friends of the established
church ; and Mr. Peel undertook to communicate with the
Archbishop of Canterbury and other prelates, in order to
persuade them to act in concert with that party, and share
in the grace of a necessary concession.* These enlightened
churchmen met him with singular liberality, and agreed to
the substitution of a declaration for the sacramental test.*
Lord John Russell and his friends, though satisfied that no
such declaration was necessaiy, accepted it as a pledge that
tbb important measure should be allowed to pass with the
1 Ayes, 237; Noes, 193. Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, xviii. 676.
a Ibid., 816, 1137.
• Peel's Mem., i. 69, 79. « iJW., 70-98.
CORPORATION AND TEST ACTS, 1823. 3G9
general acquiescence of all parties ; * and the bill now pro-
ceeded through the House, without further opposition.*
In the Hou.se of Loi-ds, the Archbishop of York, express-
ing the opinion of the primate as well as his own, The bill ia
" felt bound, on evci-y principle, to give his vote for ^prii iTtiL
the repeal of an Act which had, he feared, led, in ^^^"
too many instances, to the profanation of the most sacred
ordinance of our religion." " Religious tests imposed for
political purposes must in themselves be always liable, more
or less, to endanger religious sincerity." His grace accepted
the proposed declaration as a sufficient security for the
church. The bill was also supjwrted, in the same spirit, by
the Bishops of Lincoln, Durham, and Chester.
But there were lay peers, more alive to the interests of
the church than the bench of bishops. Lord Winchelsea
foresaw dangers, which he endeavored to avert by further
securities ; and Lord Eldon denounced the entire principle
of the bill. Pie had little expected " that such a bill as that
proposed would ever have been received into their Lordships'
House ; " and rated those who had abandoned their opposition
to its progress in the Commons. This stout champion of the
church, however, found no supporters to the emphatic "Not
content," with which he encountered the bill ; and its second
reading was affirmed without a division.*
In committee, the declaration was amended by the inser-
tion of the words " on the true faith of a Chris- Apni 2lst
tian," — an amendment which pointedly excluded ^"'^ "'^'^'
the Jews, and gave rise to further legislation, at a later
[)eriod.* Some other amendments were also made. Lord
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Sen, xviu. 1180. « Ibid., 1330.
8 Jbld., 14.50. Lord Eldon, ia his private correspondence, called it " a
most i^hameful bill," — " a.s bad, as mischievous, and as revolutionary as
the most captious dissenter could wish it to be." And again: — "The
administration have, to their shame be it s:iid, got the archbishops and
most of the bishops to support this revolutionary bill." — Twiss's Life, of
lAjrd k'klon, iii. 37-45; Peel's Mem., i. 99.
* On the third reading. Lord Holland desired to oniit the words, but
without success.
VOL. It. S4
370 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Winchelsea endeavored to exclude Unitarians ; and Lord
Eldon to substitute an oath for a declaration, and to pro-
vide more effectual securities against the admission of
Catholics ; but these and other amendments, inconsistent
April 28th. with the liberal design of the measure, were re-
May 2d. jected, and the bill passed.^ The Lords' amend-
ments, though little approved by the Commons, were agreed
to, in order to set this long-vexed question at rest by an act
of enlightened toleration.
This measure was received with gratitude by dissenters ;
The Act ^"d *he grace of the concession was enhanced by
passed. ^|jg liberality of the bishops, and the candor and
moderation of the leading statesmen who had originally op-
posed it. The liberal policy of Parliament was fully sup-
ported by public opinion, which had undergone a complete
revulsion upon this question. " Thirty years since," said
Alderman Wood, " there were only two or three persons in
the city of London favorable to the repeal : the other day,
when the corporation met to petition for the repeal, only two
hands were held up against the petition."
The triumph of dissenters was of happy augury to the
Catholic Catliolic claims, which in a few days were again
tiaiius. presented by Sir Francis Burdett. The prepon-
derance of authority as well as argument was undeniably in
Sir Francis favor of the motion. Several conversions were
motfon'May ^^owed ; and the younger members especially
8th, 1828. showed an increasing adhesion to the cause of relig-
ious liberty.* After a debate of three nights, in which the prin-
cipal supporters of the measure expressed the greatest confi-
dence in its speedy triumph, the motion was carried by a ma-
jority of six.* A resolution was agreed to, that it was expe-
dient to consider the laws affecting Roman Catholics, with a
view to a final and conciliatory adjustment. Resolutions of this
I Hans. Deb., 2d Scr., xviu. 1571; xi.x. 39, 110, 156, 186.
a Peel's Mem., i. 102.
• Ayes. 272; Noes, 266. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xix. 375-675.
STATE OF IRELAND, 1828. 871
kind had, on former occasions, preceded the introduction of
bills which afterwards miscarried ; but Sir Francis Burdett
resolved to avoid the repetition of proceedings, so tedious and
abortive. This resolution was accordingly oommu- j^^^ q^^^
nicated to the Lords, at a cmiference.^ The Mar- 1^28
quess of Lansdowne invited their Lordships to concur in this
resolution, in a most forcible speech ; and was supported in
the debate by the Dukes of Sussex and Gloucester, by Lord
Goderich, the Marquess of Londonderry, Lord Plunket, the
Marquess of Wellesley, and otlier peers. It was opposed by
the Duke of Cumberland, the powerful Chancellor, — Lord
Lyndhurst, — the ever-consistent Lord Eldon, the Duke of
Wellington, and an overpowering number of speakers. After
two nights' debate, the Lords refused to concur in this reso-
lution, by a majority of forty-four.^
But while these proceedings seemed as illusory as those
of former years, popular agitation was approach-
ins a crisis in Ireland,^ which convinced the lead- Ireland,
. , ^ , ' . . . , . 1828.
ing members or the admmistration that concessions
could no longer be safely withheld.* Soon after this discus
sion, an event of striking significance marked the ciareeiec-
power and determination of the Irish people. Mr. a^ndJuVy*
Yesey Fitzgerald having vacated his seat for the ^^^'
county of Clare, on accepting office, found his reelection
contested by an opponent no less formidable than Mr. O'Con-
nell. Under other circumstances, he could have confidently
I'elied upon his personal popularity, his uniform support of the
Catholic claims, his public services, and the property and in-
fluence which he enjoyed in his own county. But now all
his pretensions were unavailing. The people were resolved
that he should succumb to the champion of the Catholic
cause; and, after scenes of excitement and turbulence which
i Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xix. 680, 767.
2 Ibid., 1133, 1214.
« Supi-a, p. 208.
* Peel's Mem., i. 129.
372 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
threatened a disturbance of the public peace, he was signally
defeated.*
Perhaps no one circumstance contributed more than this
election, to extort concessions from the "jovern-
Doubtftil ' , , , ,
fidelity of the mcnt. It provcd the dangerous power and or-
noiuicre in ganization of the Roman Catholic party. A gen-
eral election, while such excitement prevailed,
could not be contemplated without alarm.'* If riots should
occur, the executive were not even assured of the fidelity
of Catholic soldiers, who had been worked upon by their
priests. They could not be trusted against rioters of their
Catholic own faith.' The Catholic Association, however,
AssociaUon. continued to be the chief embarrassment to the gov-
ernment. It had made Ireland ripe for rebellion. Its leaders
h;id but to give the word ; but, believing their success assured,
they were content with threatening demonstrations.* Out of
an infantry force of 30,000 men, no less than 25,000 were held
in readiness to maintain the peace of Ireland.® Such was the
crisis, that there seemed no alternative between martial law
and the removal of the causes of discontent. Nothing but
open rebellion would justify the one ; and the Commons had,
again and again, counselled the other.®
1 Sir. Vesey Fitzgerald, writing to Sir R. Peel, July 5th, 1828, said : -
"I have polled all the gentry and all the fifty-pound freelioklers, — the
gentry to a man." ..." All the great interests broke down, and the deser-
tion has been universal. Such a scene as we have had! such a tremendous
prospect as it opens to us! ". . .'' The conduct of the priests has passed all
that you could picture to yourself." — Peel's Mem., i. 113.
2 Peel's Mem., i. 117-122, et seq.
*' This business," wrote Lord Eldon, " must bring the Roman Catholic
question, which has been so often discussed, to a crisis and a conclusion.
The nature of that conclusion I do not think likely to be favorable to Prot-
estantism." — Tuits's Life, iii- S't-
8 Lord Anglesey's Letters, July 20th, 26th, 1828; Peel's Mem., i. 127
158, Wi.
* Lord Anglesey's Letter, July 2d, 1828; Peel's Mem., i. 147; Hid., 207,
243-2G2; supra, p. 209.
6 Peel's Mem., i. 2U3.
6 In each of " the five parliaments elected since 1807, with one exception,
the House of CJommons had come to a decision in favor of a consideration
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION, 1829. 373
In the judgment of Mr. Peel, the settlement of the Catho-
lic question had, at length, become a political Neoessit- of
necessity ; and this conviction was shared by the CathoUe
•' •' relief ac-
Duke of Wellington, the Marquess of Anglesey, knowiedged
1 T T 1- 1 1 t T-. 1 • • ^y miDisters.
and Lord l^yndhurst.* isut how were mmisters
to undertake it ? The statesmen who had favored Catholic
claims had withdrawn from the ministry ; and Lord Anglesey
had been removed from the government of Ireland.^ It was
reserved for the Protestant party in the cabinet, to devise a
measure which they had spent their lives in opposing. They
would necessarily forfeit the confidence, and provoke the hos-
tility, of their own political adherents ; and could lay no
claim to the gratitude or good will of the Catholics.
But another dithculty, even more formidable, presented
itself, — a difficulty which, on former occasions, Repagnance
had alone sufficed to paralyze the efforts of minis- °f t»»e''i°«;
ters. The king evinced no less repugnance to the measure
than his '' revered and excellent father " had displayed,
nearly thirty years before ; ' and had declared his determi-
nation not to assent to Catholic emancipation.*
The Duke of Wellington, emboldened by the success of
Mr. Peel's former communications with the bishops andofth*
on the Sacramental Test, endeavored to persuade *>'*'i°p*-
them to support concessions to the Catholics. Their concur-
rence w^ould secure the cooperation of the church and the
House of Lords, and influence the reluctant judgment of the
of the Catholic question;" and Mr. Peel had long been impressed with the
great preponderance of talent and influence on that side. — Peeft Menu,
L 146; /ii</., 61,288, 289.
1 Peel's Jlem., i. 180, 181, 188, 284.
2 The circumstances of his removal were fnlly discussed in the House of
Lords, May 4th, 1829. — Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xx. 990.
8 Peel's Mem., i. 274, 276. The king assured Lord Eldon that Mr. Can-
ning had engaged that he would never allow his majesty " to be troubled
about the Roman Catholic question." — Peels Mem., i. 275. But Sir R.
Peel expresses his conviction that no such pledge had been given by Mr.
Canning {Jbid.); and even Lord Eldon was satisfied that the king's state-
ment was unfounded. — Timss's Life of Eldon, 82.
* ord Colchestei's Diary, iii. 380, 473,
574 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
king. But he found tliem resolutely opposed to his views ;
and the government were now alarmed, lest their opinions
should confirm the objections of his majesty.
It was under these unpromising circumstances that, ii
January 1829, the time had arrived at whit i
JSmbarrass-
mentof some definite course must be submitted to the king,
in anticipation of the approaching session. It is
not surprising that Mr. Peel should have thought such diffi-
culties almost insuperable. " There was the declared opin-
ion of the king, the declared opinion of the House of
Lords, the declared opinion of the church, unfavorable to the
measures we were about to propose ; " and, as he afterwards
added, " a majority, probably, of the people of Great Brit-
ain was hostile to concession." *
Mr. Peel, considering the peculiarity of his own position,
Proffered ^^^ Contemplated the necessity of retirement ; '■^ but
resignation viewinjj with deep concern the accumulatinfj em-
of Mr. Peel. = ' '^
barrassments of the government, he afterwards
placed his service at the command of the Duke of Wel-
lington.'
At length, an elaborate memorandum by Mr. Peel having
„ , been submitted to the king. His Majesty gave au-
conaenta to dicnce to tliose members of his cabinet who had
the measure. , t , r^ ^ ^• ^ • ■, ,
always opposed the L/atholic claims ; and then
consented that the cjibinet should submit their views on the
state of Ireland, without pledging himself to concur in them,
even if adopted unanimously.* A draft of the king's speech
was accordingly prepared, referring to the state of Ireland,
the necessity of restraining the Catholic Association, and of a
review of the Catholic disabilities. To this draft the king
gave a " reluct-xnt consent ; " ^ and it was, accordingly, deliv-
ered at the commencement of the session.
1 Peel's Mem., i. 278, 308.
a Letter to Duke of Wellington, Aug. 11th, 1828. Peel's Mem., i. 184.
s Letter, Jan. 12th, 1829. Peel's Mem., i. 28-3, 294, 295.
* Ibid., 297. 6 Jbid,, 310.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION, 1829. 375
The government projected three measures, founded upon
this speech, — the suppression of the Catholic Qoyemment
Association, a Relief Bill, and a revision of the measures,
elective franchise in Ireland.
The first measure submitted to Parliament was a bill foi
the suppression of dangerous associations or as- Associations
semblies in Ireland. It met with general support, g'inj'yjb!""
The opponents of emancipation complained tiiat ^'^"'' ^''^•
the suppression of the Association had been too long de-
layed. The friends of the Catholic claims, who would
have condemned it separately, as a restraint upon pub-
lic liberty, conseifted to it, as a necessary part of the
measures for the relief of the Catholics and the pacification
of Ireland.^ Hence the bill passed rapidly through both
Houses.* But before it became law, the Catholic Associa-
tion was dissolved. A measure of relief having been prom-
ised, its mission was accomplished.'
When this bill had passed the Commons, Mr. Peel ac-
cepted the Chiltern Hundreds, in order to give liis Mr. Peel
constituents at Oxford an opportunity of express- JiMdon at
ing their opinion of his new policy. The Protes- ^^^°^^-
tant feeling of the university was unequivocally pronounced.
He was defeated by Sir Robert Inglis, and obliged to take
refuge at Westbury.
The civil disabilities of the Catholics were about to be
considered, on the 5th of March, when an unex- Further
pected obstacle arose. On the 3d, the king ^^j^'jj^^®*
commanded the attendance of the Duke of Wei- ''>°8-
lington, tlie Lord Chancellor, and Mr. Peel on the following
day. He then desired a more detailed explanation of the
proposed measure. On finding that it was proposed to alter
the oath of supremacy, his majesty refused his consent : and
bis three ministers at once tendered their resignation, which
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xx. 177.
a Jbid., 280, 519, &c.
* Oa Feb. 24th, Lord Anglesey said it was " defunct."
376 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
was accepted. Late the same evening, however, he desired
them to withdraw their resignation, and gave his consent,
in writing, to their proceeding with the proposed meas-
ure.^
This last obstacle being removed, Mr. Peel opened his
Catholic measure of Catholic emancipation to the House
Mlroh^'th o^ Commons. In a speech of four hours, he ex
^*^" plained the various circumstances, already de-
scribed, which, in the opinion of the government, had
made the emancipation of the Catliolics a necessity. The
measure itself was complete : it admitted. Roman Catholics, —
on taking a new oath, instead of the oath of supremacy, — to
both Houses of Parliament, to all corporate offices, to all judi-
cial offices, except in the ecclesiastical courts ; and to all civil
and political offices, except those of regent, lord chancellor
in England and li'eland, and lord-lieutenant of Ireland. Re-
straints, however, were imposed upon the interference of
Roman Catholics in the dispensation of church patronage.
The government renounced the idea of introducing any
securities, as they were termed, in regard to the Roman
Catholic church and its relations to the state. When pi'o-
posed at an earlier period, in deference to the fears of the
opponents of emancipation,^ they had offended Roman Catho-
lics, without allaying the apprehensions of the Protestant
party. But it was proposed to prevent the insignia of cor-
porations from being taken to any place of religious worship
except the established church, to restrain Roman Catholic
bishops from assuming the titles of existing sees, to prevent
the admission of Jesuits to this country, to insure the regis-
tration of those already here, and to discourage the ex ten-
don of monastic orders. After two nights' debate, Mr. Peel's
motion for going into committee of the whole House was
1 Peel's Mem., i. 343-349. The king pave Lord Eldon a different ver-
sion of this interview, evidently to excuse himself from consenting to a
measure of which his old councillor disapproved so strongly. — Twis8'$ Lif«
ofEldm, iii. 83.
a In 1813. Suin-a, p. 354.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION, 1829. 377
agreed to by a majority of one hundred and eighty-eight.'
Such was the change which the sudden conversion of the
government and the pressure of circumstances had effected
in the opinions of Parliament. Meanwhile, the church and
the Protestant party throughout the country were in the
greatest alarm and excitement. They naturally resented the
sudden desertion of their cause by ministers in whom they
had confided.^ The press overflowed with their indignant
remonstrances ; and public meetings, addresses, and petitions
gave tokens of -their activity. Their petitions far outnum-
bered those of the advocates of the measure ; * and the
daily discussions upon their presentation served to increase
the public excitement. The higher intelligence of the coun-
try approved the wise and equitable policy of the govern-
ment ; but there can be little question, that the sentiments of
a majority of the people of Great Britain were opposed to
emancipation. Churchmen dreaded it, as dangerous to their
church ; and dissenters inherited from their Puritan fore-
fathers a pious horror of Papists. But in Parliament, the
union of the ministerial party with the accustomed supporters
of the Catholic cause easily overcame all opposition ; and
the bill was passed through its further stages, in the Com-
mons, by large majorities.*
On the second reading of the bill in the House of Lords,
the Duke of AVellington justified the measure. The biiiin
ii-respective of other considerations, by the neces- xpruaa^'
sity of averting a civil war, saying, " 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 oi'der to do it." He added, that when
tlie Irish rebellion of 1798 had been suppressed, the Legis-
lative Union had been proposed in the next year, mainly for
1 Ayes, 348; Noes, 160. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xx. 727-892.
2 Supra, p. 66.
8 See supra, Vol. I. 415.
* On the second reading — Ayes, 353; Noes, 173. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser.,
XX. 1115-1290. On the third reading — Ayes, 320; Noes, 142. Ibid., 1633.
378 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
the purpose of introducing this very measure of oonce.'sion ;
and that had the civil war, which he had lately striven to
avert, broken out, and been subdued, — still such a measure
would have been insisted upon by one, if not by both Houses
of Parliament.
The bill was opposed by the Archbishop of Canterbury,
— Dr. Howley, — in a judicious speech, in which he pointed
out the practical evils to which the church and the Protes-
tant religion miglit be exposed, by the employment of Ro-
man Catholics as ministers of the crown, — especially in the
office of secretary of state. It was also opposed in debate
by the Archbishops of York and Armagh, the Bishops of
Durham and London, and several lay peers. But of the
Protestant party Lord Eldon was still the leader. Sur-
rounded by a converted senate, severed from all his old col-
leagues, deserted by the peers who had hitherto cheered
and supported him, — he raised his voice against a measure
which he had spent a long life in resisting. Standing almost
alone among the statesmen of his age, there was a moral
dignity in his isolation, which commands our respect. The
bill was supported by Mr. Peel's constant friend, the Bishop
of Oxford, the Duke of Sussex, the Lord Chancellor, Lord
Goderich, Earl Grey, Lord Plunket, and other peel's. The
second reading was affirmed by a majority of one hundred
and five.* The bill passed through committee without a
single amendment; and on the 10th of April the third read-
ing was affirmed by a majority of one hundred and four.^
Meanwhile the king, whose formal assent was still to be
The Royal given, was as strongly opposed to the measure as
^*ent- j.ygj . jjf,(j gygp, discussed with Lord Eldon the
possibility of preventing its further progress, or of refusing
his assent. But neither the king nor his old minister could
seriously have contemplated so hazardous an exercise of
prerogative ; and the Royal assent was accordingly given,
1 Contents, 217; Non-contents, 112. Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xxi. 42-394.
« Ck)nteut«, 213; Non-contents, 109. Ibid., 614-694.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION, 1829. 379
without further remonstrance.^ The time had passed, when
the word of a king could overrule his ministers and Parlia
ment.
The third measure of the government still remains to be
noticed, — the regulation of the elective franchise „ ^
' ° Elecbve
in Ireland. The abuses of the 405. freehold fran- franchise in
chise had already been exposed ; and were closely
connected with Catholic emancipation.* The Protestant
landlords had encouraged the multiplication of small free-
holds, — being, in fact, leases held of middlemen, — in order
to increase the number of dependent voters, and extend
their own political influence. Such an abuse would, at any
time, have demanded correction ; but now these voters had
transferred their allegiance from the landlord to the Catholic
priest. " That weapon," said Mr. Peel, " which the landlord
has forged with so much care, and has heretofore wielded
with s»ch success, has broke short in his hand." To leave
such a franchise without regulation, was to place the county .
representation at the mercy of priests and agitators. It was /
therefore proposed to raise the qualification of a freeholder j
from 40s. to lOL, to require due proof of such qualification,'
and to introduce a system of registration.
So large a measure of disfranchisement was, in itself, open
to many objections. It swept away existing rights without
proof of misconduct or corruption, on the part of the voters.
So long as they had served the purposes of Protestant land-
lords, they were encouraged and protected ; but when they
asserted their independence, they were to be deprived of
their franchise. Strong opinions were pronounced that the
measure should not be retrospective ; and that the bondjide
40s. freeholders, at least, should be protected ; * but the con-
1 Twiss's Life of Eldon, iii. 84, et seq.
2 Supra, p. 365; and Reports of Committees in Lords and Commons,
1825.
8 See especially tlie Speeches of Mr. Huskisson, Viscount Palmerston,
and the Marquess of Lansdowne, Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xx. 1373, 1468;
zxi. 407, 574.
380 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
nection between this and the greater measure, then in prog-
ress, saved it from any effective opposition ; and it was
passed rapidly through both Houses.* By one party, it was
hailed as a necessary protection against the Catholic priests
and leaders ; and by the other, it was reluctantly accepted as
the price of Catholic emancipation.
On the 28th April, the Duke of Norfolk, Lord Clifford,
itoman Cath- ^^^ Lord Dormer came to the House of Lords,
ukethe* ^"*^ claimed their hereditary seats among theif
Sth'^M '"^' peers, from which they had been so long excluded
ist, 1829. and were followed, a few days afterwards, by Lord
Stafford, Lord Petre, and Lord Stourton.^ Respectable in
the antiquity of their titles and their own character, they
were an honorable addition to the Upper House ; and no
one could affirm that their number was such as to impair the
Protestant character of that assembly.
Mr. O'Connell, as already stated, had been returned in the
Mr. O'Con- previous year for the county of Clare ; but the
Bell and the privilege of taking the new oath was restricted to
Clare elec- i o o
tion. members returned after the passing of the Act.
That Mr. O'Connell would be excluded from its immediate
benefit, had been noticed while the bill was in progress ; and
there can be little doubt that its language had been framed
for that express purpose. So personal an exclusion was
a petty accompaniment of this great remedial measure. By
Mr. O'Connell it was termed "an outlawry" against himself.
May 16th, ^^ contended ably, at the bar, for his right of ad-
18th. mission : but the Act was too distinct to allow of
an interpretation in his favor. Not being permitted to take
May 19th ^^^ "^^ oath, and refusing, of course, to take the
^*- oath of supremacy, — a new writ was issued for
the county of Clare.' Though returned again without opposi-
tion, Mr. O'Connell made his exclusion the subject of unmeas-
1 Haiw Deb., 2d. Scr., xx. 1329.
2 Lords Joum., Ixi. 402, 408.
» Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xxi. 1395, 1459, 161.
CATHOLIC MEMBERS IN HOUSE OF COMilONS. 381
ured invective ; and he entered the House of Commons, im«
bittered against those by whom he liad been enfranchised.
At length this great measure of toleration and justice was
accomplished. But the concession came too late. „
' Emancipa-
Accorapanied by one measure of repression and tion too long
. /•!•,.,• • . . deferrtd.
another ot distranchisement, it was wrung by vio-
lence from reluctant and unfriendly rulers. Had the coun-
sels of wiser statesmen prevailed, their |X)liiical foresight
would have averted the dangers before which the govern-
ment, at length, had quailed. By rendering timely justice,
in a spirit of conciliation and equity, they would have spared
their country the bitterne?s, the evil passions, and turbulence
of tliis protracted struggle. But thirty years of hope de
ferred, of rights withheld, of discontents and agitation, had
exasperated the Catholic population of Ireland against the
English government. They had overcome their rulers ; and
owing them no gratitude, were ripe for new disorders.^
Catholic emancipation, like other great measures, fell short
of the anticipations, alike of supporters and oppo- sequei of
nents. The former were disappointed to observe •"°*""p**'"''-
the continued distractions of Ireland, the fierce contentions
between Catholics and Orangemen, the coarse and truculent
agitation by which the ill-will of the people was excited
against their rulers, the perverse spirit in which every eflFort
for the imjirovement of Ireland was received, and the un-
manageable elements of Irish representation. But a just
and wise policy had been initiated ; and henceforth states-
men strove to correct those social ills, which had arrested the
prosperity of that hopeful country. "With the Catholic Re-
lief Act commenced the regeneration of Ireland.
On the other hand, the fears of the anti-Catholic party for
the safety of the church and constitution, have
■ . Number of
been faintly realized. They dreaded the introduc- CathoUc
tion of a dangerous proportion of Catholic mem- tiie House
bers into the House of Commons. The results, °^ Common*.
however, have fairly corresponded with the natural repre-
* See st^a, p. 909.
Sb2
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Bentation of the three couiitrie-*. No more than six Catho-
lics have sat, in any parliament, for English constituencies.
Not one has ever been relunied for Scotland. The largest
number representing Catholic Ireland, in any parliament,
amounted to fifty-one, — or less than one half the represen-
tation of that country, — and the average, in the last seven
parliaments, to no more than thirty-seven.^ In these parlia-
ments again, the total number of Roman Catholic members
may be computed at about one sixteenth of the House of
Commons. The Protestant character of that assembly it
unchanged.
To complete the civil enfranchisement of dissenters, a
Quakers, f^w Supplementary measures were still required.
JJj'™^'*^*' They could only claim their rights on taking an
ratists. path ; and some sects entertained conscientious ob-
jections to an oath, in any form. Numerous statutes had
been passed to enable Quakers to make affirmations instead
of oaths ; * and in 1833, the House of Commons, giving a
wide interpretation to these statutes, permitted Mr. Pease, —
the first Quaker who had been elected for 140 years, — to
take his seat on making an affirmation.' In the same year,
Acts were passed to enable Quakers, Moravians, and Sep-
aratists, in all cases, to substitute an affirmation for an
1 Number of Roman CatJioUc Members returned for England and Ireland
tince the year 1835 ; Jrom the Test Bolls of the House of Commons ; the
earlier Test Rolls having been destroyed by fire, in 1834.
ENGLAND.
IRELAND. •
New Parliament 1835
Do. 1837
Do. 1841
Do. 1847
Do. 1852
Do. 1857 to 1858
Do. 1859
2
2
6
5
3
J Arundel
38
27
33
44
51
34
34
These numbers, including members returned for vacancies, are some-
times slightly in excess of the Catholics sitting at the same time.
2 6 Anne, c. 23; I Geo. 1. st. 2, c. 6 and 13 ; 8 Geo. L c. 6 ; 22 Geo. II.c.4€
• Se« Report of the Select Committee on his Case, Sess. 1833, No. 6.
JEWISH DISABILITIES, 1830. 883
oath.^ The same privilege was conceded, a few yeais later,
to dissenters of more dubious denomination, who, having been
Quakers or Moravians, had severed their connection with
those sects, but had retained their scruples concerning the
taking of an oath.^ Nor have these been barren conces-
sions ; for several members of these sects have since been
admitted to Parliament ; and one, at least, has taken a dis-
tinguished part in its debates.
Relief to dissenters and Roman Catholics had been claimed
on the broad ground that, as British subjects, Jewish
they were entitled to their civil rights, without the 'I'^wuties
condition of professing the religion of the state. And in
1830, Mr. Robert Grant endeavored to extend jir. r.
this principle to the Jews. The cruel persecu- ^^*j°q„ j^^ ^
tions of that race form a popular episode in the ^"'' ^^**-
early history of this country ; but at this time they merely
suffered, in an aggravated form, the disabilities from which
Christians had recently been liberated. They were unable
to take the oaih of allegiance, as it was required to be sworn
upon the Evangelists. Neither could they take the oath of
abjuration, which contained the words, "on tiie true faith of
a Christian." Before the repeal of the Corporation and
Test Act^, they had been admitted to corporate offices, in
common with dissenters, under cover of the annual indemni-
ty acts ; but that measure, in setting dissenters free, had
forged new bonds for the Jew. The new declaration was
required to be made "on the true faith of a Christian."
The oaths of allegiance and abjuration had not been de-
signed, directly or indirectly, to affect the legal position of
the Jews. The declaration had, indeed, been sanctioned
with a forecast of its consequences ; but was one of several
amendments which the Commons were constrained to accept
fj-om the Lords, to secure the passing of an important meas-
ure.' The operation of the law was fatal to nearly all the
I 3 & 4 Wm. IV. c. 49, 82. 2 1 & 2 Vict. c. 77
8 See supra, p. 369.
884 RELIGIOUS LIBERTr.
rights of a citizen. A Jew could not hold any office, civil,
military, or corporate. He could not follow the profession
of the law, as barrister or attorney, or attorney's clerk : he
could not be a schoolmaster, or usher at a school. He could
not sit as a member of either House of Parliament ; nor
even exercise the elective franchise, if called upon to take
the electors' oath.
]Mr. Grant advocated the removal of these oppressive dis-
Argumentson*ibilities in an admirable speech, embracing nearly
eituersjde. ^very argument which was afterwards repeated,
again and again, in support of the same cause. He was
brilliantly supported, in a maiden speech, by Mr. Macaulay,
who already gave promise of his future eminence. In the
hands of his opponents, the question of religious liberty now
assumed a new aspect. Those who had resisted, to the last,
every concession to Catholics, had rarely ventured to justify
their exclusion from civil rights on the ground of their re-
ligious faith. They had professed themselves favorable to
toleration ; and defended a policy of exclusion, on political
grounds alone. The Catholics were said to be dangerous to
the state : their numbers, their organization, their allegiance
to a foreign power, the ascendency of their priesthood, their
peculiar political doctrines, their past history, — all testified
to the political dangers of Catholic emancipation. But noth-
ing of the kind could be alleged against the Jews. They
•were few in number, being computed at less than 30,000, in
the United Kingdom. They were harmless and inactive in
their relations to the state, and without any distinctive politi-
cal character. It was, indeed, difficult to conceive any politi-
•al objections to their enjoyment of civil privileges; — yet
ome were found. They were so rich, that, like the nabobs
of the last century, they would buy seats in Parliament ; —
an argument, as it was well replied, in favor of a reform in
Parliament, rather than against the admission of Jews. If
of any value, it applied with equal force to all rich men,
whether Jews or Christians. Again, they were of no coun-
JEWISH DISABILITIES, 1830. 385
try ; — they were strangers in the land, and had no sympa-
thies with its people. Relying upon the scriptaral promises
of restoration to their own Holy Land, they were not citizens,
but sojourner^i, in any other. But if this were so, would they
value the rights of citizenship, which they were denied ?
Would they desire to serve a country, in which they were
aliens ? And was it the fact that they were indifferent to
any of those interests, by which other men were moved ?
Were they less earnest in business, less alive to the wars,
policy, and finances of the state ; less open to the refining in-
fluences of art, literature, and society ? How. did they differ
from their Christian fellow-citizens, " save these bonds " ?
Political objections to the Jews were, indeed, felt to be un-
tenable ; and their claims were therefore resisted on religious
grounds. The exclusion of Christian subjects from their
civil rights had formerly been justified because they were
not members of the established church. Now that the law
had recognized a wider toleration, it was said that, the state,
its laws, and institutions being Christian, the Jews, who denied
Christ, could not be suffered to share with Christians the
government of the state. Especially was it urged, that to
admit them to Parliament would unchristianize the legisla-
ture-
The House of Commons, which twelve months before had
passed the Catholic Relief Bill by vast majorities, Jewish Relief
permitted Mr. Grant to bring in his bill by a ma- fi^id'r^
jorit}^ of eighteen only ; ^ and afterwards refused '"S-
it a second reading by a majority of sixty-three.^ The argu-
ments by which it was opposed were founded up- MayiTth,
on a denial of the broad principle of religious lib-
erty ; and mainly on that ground were the claims of the Jews
for many years resisted. But the history of this long and
1 Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xxiii. 1287.
2 Ibid., xxiv. 785. See also Macaulaj''s Essays, i. 308; Goldsmid'g
Civil Disabilities of British Jews, 1830 ; Blunt's Hist, of the Jews ;n Eng-
land; First Report of Criminal Law Commissicm, 1845, p. 13.
VOL. II. 25
386 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY
tedious controversy must be briefly told. To pursue it
through its weary annals were a pro6tless toil.
In 1833, Mr. Grant renewed his measure, and succeeded
J wish d's *" passing it through the Commons ; but the Lords
abilities bills, rejected it by a large majority.^ In the next year,
the measure met a similar fate.^ The determina-
tion of the Lords was clearly not to be shaken ; and, for some
years, no further attempts were made to press upon them tlie
reconsideration of similar measures. The Jews were, polit-
ically, powerless : their race was unpopular, and exposed to
strongly rooted prejudice ; and their cause, — however firmly
supported on the ground of religious liberty, — had not been
generally espoused by the people, as a popular right.
But while vainly seeking admission to the legislature, the
Jews were relieved from other disabilities. In
Jews ad-
mitted to 1839, by a clause in Lord Denman's Act for
amending the laws of evidence, all persons were
entitled to be sworn in the form most binding on their con-
science.' Henceforth the Jews could swear upon the Old
Testament the oath of alhqgiance, and every other oath not
containing the words "on the true faith of a Christian."
These words, however, still excluded them from corporate
offices and from Parliament. In 1841, Mr. Divett succeeded
in passing through the Commons a bill for the admission of
Jews to corporations ; but it was rejected by the Lords.* In
1845, however, the Lords, who had rejected this bill, accepted
another, to the same effect, from the hands of Lord Lynd-
hurst.*
Pjirliament alone was now closed against the Jews. In
1 Contents, 54; Non-contents, 1D4. Hans. Deb., 8d Ser., xvii. 205;
xviii. 59; xx. 249.
2 The second reading was lost in the Lords by a majority of 92. Hans.
Deb., 3d Ser., xxii. 1372; Ibid., xxiii. 1158, 1349; Jbid., xxiv. 382, 720.
« 1 & 2 Vict. c. 105.
* Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ivi. 504; Ivii. 99; Iviii. 1468.
« 8 & 9 Vict. c. 52; Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, Ixxviii. 407, 415; First Report
of Criminal Law Commission, 1845 (Religious Opinions), 43.
JEWISH DISABILITIES, 1849, 1850. 387
1848, efforts to obtain this privilege were renewed without
effect. The Lords were still inexorable. Enfranchisement
by legijilative authority appeared as remote as ever ; and at-
tempts were therefore made to bring the claims of Jewish
subjects to an issue, in another form.
In 1849, Baron Lionel Nathan de Rothschild was returned
as one of the members for the city of London. Baron Lionel
The choice of a Jew to represent such a constitu- returaerfM*
ency attested the state of public opinion, upon the J^n^on °^
question in dispute between the two Houses of i^*^-
Parliament. It may be compared to the election of Mr.
O'Connell, twenty years before, by the county of Clare. It
gave a more definite and practiciil character to the contro-
versy. The grievance was no longer theoretical : there now
sat below the bar a member legally returned by the wealthi-
est and most important constituency in the kingdom ; yet he
looked on as a stranger. None could question his return ;
no law affirmed his incapacity : then how was he excluded ?
by an oath designed for Roman Catholics, whose disabilities
had been removed. He sat there, for two sessions, in expec-
tation of relief from the legislature ; but being again disap-
pointed, he resolved to try his rights under the existing law.
Accordingly, in 1850, he presented himself at the claims to
table, for the purpose of taking the oaths. Hav- juiy^26th,
ing been allowed, after discussion, to be sworn ^'^^^^'^stj,
upon the Old Testament, — the form most binding i*^-
upon his conscience, — he proceeded to tJike the oaths. The
oaths of allegiance and supremacy were taken in the accus-
tomed form ; but from the oath of abjuration he omitted the
words " on the true faith of a Christian," as not binding on
his conscience. He was immediately directed to withdraw ;
when, after many learned arguments, it was resolved that he
was not entitled to sit or vote until he had taken the oath of
abjuration in the form appointed by law.*
1 Commons' Joum., cv. 584, 590, 612; Hans. Dfjb., 3d Ser., cxiii. 2»7
536, 486, 7i>9
388 RELIGIOUS LIBEHTY.
In 1851, a more resolute effort was made to overcome thfl
Mr. Alder- obstacle offered by the oath of abjuration. Mr.
I'lions^'uiy Alderman Salomons, a Jew, having been returned
isth, 1851. fy,. (jjg borough of Greenwich, omitted from the
oath the words which were the Jews' stumbling-block.
Treating these words as immaterial, he took the entire sub-
stance of the oath, with the proper solemnities. He was
directed to withdraw ; but on a later day, while his case was
under discussion, he came into the House, and took his seat
within the bar, whence he declined to withdraw, until he was
removed by the Sergeant-at-Arms. The House agreed to a
resolution, in the same form as in the case of Baron de
Rothschild. In the mean time, however, he had^not only sat
in the House, but had voted in three divisions;* and if the
House had done him injustice, there was now an opportunity
for obtaining a judicial construction of the statutes by the
courts of law. By the judgment of the Court of Exche-
quer, affirmed by the Court of Exchequer Chamber, it was
poon placed beyond further doubt, that no authority, short
of a statute, was competent to dispense with those words
which Mr. Salomons had omitted from the oath of abjura-
tion.
There was now no hope for the Jews, but in overcoming
I'nrther legis- the Steady rcpugnauce of the Lords ; and this was
liiUve efforts, vainly attempted, year after year. Recent con-
cessions, however, had greatly strengthened the position of
the Jews. When the Christian character of our laws and
constitution were again urged as conclusive against their full
participation in the rights of British subjects,^ Lord John
Russell, and other friends of religious liberty were able to
reply: — Let us admit to the fullest extent that our country
is Christian, — as it is ; that our laws are Christian, — ^ as
1 Commons' Jovirn., cvi. 372, 373, 381, 407; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxviii.
979, 1320.
2 See especially the speeches of Mr. Whiteside and Mr. Walpole, Apri^
15th, 1853, on this view of the question.— .ffow. Deb., 3d Ser., cxxv. 1230.
1263.
JEWISH DISABILITIES, 1857. 889
they are; that our government, as representing a Christian
country, is Christian, — as it is: — what then? Will the re-
moval of civil disabilities from the Jews unchristianize our
country, our laws, and our government ? They will all con-
tinue the same, unless you can argue that because there are
Jews in England, therefore the English people are not Chris-
tian ; and that because the laws permit Jews to hold land and
houses, to vote at elections, and to enjoy municipal offices,
therefore our laws are not Christian. We are dealing with
civil rights ; and if it be unchristian to allow a Jew to sit in
Parliament, — not as a Jew, but as a citizen, — it is equally
unchristian to allow a Jew to enjoy any of the rights of cit-
izenship. Make him once more an alien, or cast him out
from among you altogether.^
Baron de Rothschild continued to be returned again and
again for the city of London, — a testimony to the Attempt to
settled purpose of his constituents ; ^ but there ap- jewsby'a
peared no prospect of relief. In 1857, however, x^g^sd'"'"'
another loophole of the law was discovered, through ^^'^•
which a Jew might possibly find his way into the House of
Commons. The annual bill for the removal of Jewish disa-
bilities had recently been lost, as usual, in the House of
Lords, when Lord John Kussell called attention to the pro-
visions of a statute,' by which it was contended that the
Commons were empowered to substitute a new form of
declaration for the abjuration oath. If this were so, the
words " on the true faith of a Christian " might be omitted ;
and the Jew would take his seat, without waiting longer for
the concurrence of the Lords.* But a committee, to whom
the matter was referred, did not support this ingenious con-
1 See especially Lord J. Russell's Speech, April 15th, 1853. — Ibid., 1283.
2 In 1857 he placed his seat at the disposal of the electore, by accepting
the Chiltem Hundreds, but was immediately reelected. Commoas' Joiiru.
oxii. 343; Ann. Reg. Chron. 141.
8 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 62.
* Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., clvii. 933.
390 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
struction of the law ; ^ and again the case of the Jews was
remitted to legishition.
In the following year, however, tjjis tedious controversy
was nearly brouajlit to a close. The Lords, yield-
Relief Act, ing to the persuasion oi the Conservative premier,
Lord Derby, agreed to a concession. The bill, as
passed by the Commons, at once removed the only legal ob-
stacle to the admission of the Jews to Parliament. To this
general enfranchisement the Lords declined to assent ; but
they allowed either house, by resolution, to omit the ex-
cluding words -from the oath of abjuration. The Commons
would thus be able to admit a Jewish member, the Lords to
exclude a Jewish peer. The immediate object of the law
was secured ; but what was the principle of this compromise ?
Other British subjects held their rights under the law : the
Jews were to hold them at the pleasure of either House of
Parliament. The Commons might admit them to-day, and
capriciously exclude them to-morrow. If the crown should
be advised to create a Jewish peer, assuredly the Lords would
deny him a place amongst them. On these grounds, the
Lords' amendments found little favor with the Commons ;
but they were accepted, under protest, and the bill was
passed.* The evils of the compromise were soon apparent.
The House of Commons was, indeed, opened to the Jew ;
but he came as a suppliant. Whenever a resolution was
proposed, under the recent Act,' invidious discussions were
renewed, — the old sores were probed. In claiming his new
franchise, the Jew might still bfe reviled and insulted. Two
years later, this scandal was corrected ; and the Jew, though
still holding his title by a standing order of the Commons
» Report of Committee, Sess. 2, 1857, No. 253.
2 21 & 22 Vict. c. 48, 49; Comm. Joum., cxiii. 338; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser ,
cli. 1905.
8 A resolution was held not to be in force after a prorogation; Report of
Committee, Sess. 1, 1859, No. 205.
JEWISH RELIEF ACT, 1858. 391
and not under the law, acquired a permanent settlement.*
Few of the ancient race have yet profited by their enfran-
chisement ; ^ but their wealth, station, abilities, and charac-
ter have amply attested their claims to a place in the legis-
lature.
1 23 & 24 Vict. c. 63. B}' this Act a standing order, which continues in
foice until repealed, took the place of a resolution which required to be re-
newed sessionally.
^ Four Jews were returned to the Parliament of 1859.
ft92 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
CHAPTER XIV.
Furtber Measures of Relief to Dissenters: — Church Rates: — Later Histoid
of the Church of England: — Progress of Dissent: — The Papal Aggres-
sion, 1850: — The Church of Scotland: — The Patronage Question: —
Conflict of Civil and Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions: — The Secession, 1843:
— The Free Church of Scotland: — The Church in Ireland.
The code of civil disabilities had been at length condemned .
other ques- b"^ during the protracted controversy which led
to^chureh"*' to this Tcsult, many other questions affecting relig-
andreUgion. jqus liberty demanded a solution. Further re-
straints upon religious worship were renounced ; and the
relations of the church to those beyond her communion
reviewed in many forms. Meanwhile, the later history
of the established churches, in each of the three kingdoms,
was marked by memorable events, affecting their influence
and stability.
When Catholics and dissenters had shaken off their civil
Dissenters' disabilities, they were still exposed to grievances
riagra'anY* affecting the excrcise of their religion and their
burials. domestic relations, far more galling, and savoring
more of intolerance. Their marriages were announced
by the publication of bans in the parish church ; and
solemnized at its altar, according to a ritual which they
repudiated. The births of their children were without
legal evidence, unless they were baptized by a clergyman
of the church, with a service obnoxious to their conscien-
ces ; and even their dead could not obtain a Cliristian burial,
except by the offices of the church. Even apart from re
ligious scruples upon these matters, the enforced attendance
DISSENTERS' MARRIAGES, 1834. 393
of dissenters at the services of the church was a badge of in-
feriority and dependence, in the eye of the law. Nor was
it without evils and embarrassments to the church herself.
To perform her sacred offices for those who denied their sanc-
tity, was no labor of love to the clergy. The marriage cere-
mony had sometimes provoked remonstrances ; and the sacred
character of all these services was impaired when addressed
to unwilling ears, and used as a legal form, rather than a
religious ceremony. It is strange that such grievances had
not been redressed even before dissenters had been invested
with civil privileges. The law had not originally designed
to inflict tiiem; but simply assuming all the subjects of the
realm to be members of the Church of England, had made no
provision for exceptional cases of conscience. Yet when the
oppression of the marriage law had been formerly exposed,^
intolerant Parliaments had obstinately refused relief. It was
reserved for the reformed Parliament to extend to all relig-
ious sects entire freedom of conscience, coupled with great
improvements in the general law of registration. As the
church alone performed the religious services incident to all
baptisms, marriages, and deaths ; so was she intrusted with
the sole management and custody of the registers. The re-
lief of dissenters, therefore, involved a considerable inter-
ference with the privileges of the church, which demanded
a judicious treatment.
The marriage law was first approached. In 1834, Lord
John Russell — to whom dissenters already owed Dissenters'
so much — introduced a bill to permit dissenting JJ^''jJ'"^g^^''^»
ministers to celebrate marriages in places of wor- 1834.
ship licensed for that purpose. It was proposed, however, to
retain the accustomed publication of bans in church, or a
license. Such marriages were to be registered in the chapels
where they were celebrated. There were two weak points in
this measure, — of which Lord Joiin himself was fully sensi-
ble,— the publication of bans, and the registry. These
I Supra, p. 362.
394 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
difficulties could only be completely overcome by regarding
marriage, for all legal purposes, as a civil contract, accom-
panied by a civil registry ; but he abstained from making
such a proi>osal, in. deference to the feelings of tlie churcli
and other religious bodies.* The bill, in such a form as this,
could not be expected to satisfy dissenters ; and it was laid
aside.* It was clear that a measure of more extensive
scope would be required, to settle a question of so much
delicacy.
In the next session, Sir Robert Peel, having profited by
sirEobert this unsucccssful experiment, offered another meas-
tere' M^^*^ ure, based on different principles. Reverting to
MMciflTth *'*^ principle of the law, prior to Lord Hard-
1886. wicke's Act of 1754, which viewed marriage, for
certain purposes at least, as a civil contract, he proposed that
dissenters objecting to the services of the church should enter
into a civil contract of marriage before a magistrate, — to be
followed by such religious ceremonies elsewhere, as the parties
might approve. For the publication of bans he proposed to
substitute a notice to the magistrate, by whom also a certifi-
cate was to be transmitted to the clergyman of the parish, for
registration. The liberal spirit of this measure secured it a
favorable reception ; but its provisions were open to insu-
perable objections. To treat the marriage of members of
the church as a religious ceremony, and the marriage of
dissenters as a mere civil contract, apart from any religious
sanction, raised an offensive distinction between the two
classes of marriages. And again, the ecclesiastical registry
of a civil contract, entered into by dissenters, was a very ob-
vious anomaly. Lord John Russell expressed his own con-
viction that no measure would be satisfactory until a general
system of civil registration could be established, — a subject
to which he had already directed his attention.' The progress
of this bill was interrupted by the resignation of Sir R. Peel.
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxi. 776. » Com. Journ., Ixxxix. 226.
8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxvi. 1073.
DISSENTERS' MARRIAGE BILL, 1836. 395
The new ministry, having consented to its second reading,
allowed it to drop ; but measures were promised May 22d,
in the next session for tlie civil registry of births, ^^^"
marriages, and deaths, and for the marriage of June 29th.
dissenters.^
Early in the next session, Lord John Russell introduced
two bills to carry out these objects. The first was jj^-j^tg^of
for the registration of births, marriages, and deaths, births, mar-
. '^ ' = ' riages, and
Its immediate purpose was to facilitate the grant- deaths. Feb.
^ T n \. , • , , , 12th, 1836.
ing or relief to dissenters ; but it also contemplated
other objects of state policy, of far wider operation. An ac-
curate record of such events is important as evidence in all
legal proceedings ; and its statistical and scientific value can-
not be too highly estimated. The existing registry being
ecclesiastical took no note of births, but embraced the bap-
tisms, marriages, and burials, which had engaged the services
of the church. It was now proposed to establish a civil
registration of births, marriages, and deaths, for which the
officers connected with the new poor-law administration
afforded gi-eat facilities. The record of births and deaths
was to be wholly civil ; the record of marriages was to be
made by the minister performing the ceremony, and trans-
mitted to the registrar. The measure further provided for a
general register office in London, and a division of the coun-
try into registration districts.^
The Marriage Bill was no less comprehensive. The mar-
riages of members of the Church of England were DLssonters'
not affected, except by the necessary addition of a Baulplb.
civil registry. The publication of bans, or license, ■^'^' ^^^
was continued, unless the parties themselves preferred giving
notice to a registrar. The marriages of dissenters were
allowed to be solemnized in their own chapels, registered for
mat purpose, after due notice to the registrar of the district ;
while those few dissenters who desired no religious ceremony,
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxix. 11.
» Jbid., xxxi. 367.
390 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
were enabled to enter into a civil contract before the super-
intendent registrar.^ Measures, so comprehensive and well
considered, could not ftiil to obtain the approval of Parlia-
ment. Every reli}:!;iou3 sect was satisfied : every object of
state policy attained. The church, indeed, was called upon
to make great sacrifices ; but she made them with noble
liberality. Her clergy bore their pecuniary losses with-
out a murmur, for the sake of peace and concord. Fees
were cheerfully renounced with the services to which they
were incident. The concessions, so gracefully made, were
such as dissenters had a just right to claim, and the true
interests of the church were concerned in no longer with-
holding.
In baptism and marriage, the offices of the church were
Disoentew' "*^^^ Confined to her own members, or to such as
buriaiii. sought them willingly. But in death, they were
still needed by those beyond her communion. The church
claimed no jurisdiction over the graves of her nonconformist
brethren ; but every parish burial-place was hers. The
churchyard, in whicli many generations of churchmen slept,
was no less sacred than the village-church itself; yet herti
only could the dissenter find his last resting-place. Having
renounced the communion of the church while living, he was
restored to it in death. The last offices of Christian burial
were performed over him, in consecrated ground, by the
clergyman of the parish, and according to the ritual of the
church. Nowhere was the painfulness of schism more deep-
ly felt, on either side. The clergyman reluctantly performed
ti)e solemn service of his church, in presence of mourners
who seemed to mock it, even in their sorrow. Nay, some of
the clergy, — having scruples, not warranted by the laws of
their church, — even refused Christian burial to those wlr*
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxxi. 367; 6 & 7 WilL IV. c. 85, 80, amenaed
by 1 \' ict. c. 22. In 1852 the registration of chapels for all other purposes
aa well as niarriaijes was transferred to the registrar- general. — 15 & 16
Vict. c. 30.
DISSENTERS AND UNIVERSITIES. 397
had not received baptism at the hands of a priest in holy
orders.* On his side the dissenter recoiled from the conse-
crated ground and the offices of the church. Bitterness and
discord followed him to the grave, and frowned over his
ashes.
In country parishes this painful contact of the church with
nonconformity was unavoidable ; but in populous towns, dis-
senters were earnest in providing themselves with sjparate
burial-grounds and unconsecrated parts of cemeterie>.^ And
latterly they have further sought for their own ministers the
privilege of performing the burial-service in the parish
churchyard, with the permission of the incumbent.' In Ire-
land, ministers of all denominations have long had access to
the parish burial-grounds.* Such a concession was necessary
to meet the peculiar relations of the population of that coun-
try to the church ; but in England, it has not hitherto found
favor with the legislature.
In 18^, another conflict arose between the church and dis-
senters, when the latter claimed to participate. Admission of
with churchmen, in the benefits of those great ^''^u^ver*^
schools of learning and orthodoxy, — the English "''**' ^^**-
universities. The position of dissenters was not the same in
both universities. At Oxford, subscription to the thirty-nine
articles had been required on matriculation, since 1581 ; and
dissenting students had thus been wholly excluded from that
university. It was a school set apart for members of the
church. Cambridge had been less exclusive. It had admit-
ted nonconformists to its studies, and originally even to its
degrees. But since 1616, it had required subscription on
1 Kemp r. Wickes, 1809, Phil., iii. 264; Escott v. Hasten, 1842; Notes
of Eccl. Cases, i. 552; Titcbmarsh v. Chapman, 1844; Jbid., iii. 370.
2 Local Cemeterj' Acts, and 16 & 17 Vict c. 134, § 7. The Bishop of
Carlisle having refused to consecrate a cemetery unless the unconsecrated
part was separated by a wall, the legislature interfered to prevent so in-
vidious a separation. — 20 & 21 Vict. c. 81, § 11.
8 Feb. 19tb and April 24th, 1861 (Sir Morton Peto); Hans. Deb., 3d
Ser., clxi. 650; clxii. 1051; May 2d, 1862; Jbid., clxvi. 1189.
* 5 Geo. IV. c. 25.
398 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
proceeding to degrees. Dissenters, while participating in all
its studies, were debarred from its lienors and endowments,
— its scliolarpliips, degrees, and fellowships, — and from any
share in the government of the university. From this ex-
clusion resulted a quasi civil disability, for which tlie uni-
versities were not responsible. The inns of court admitted
graduates to the bar in three years, instead of five ; graduates
urticled to attorneys were admitted to practise after three
years ; the Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons admitted
none but graduates as fellows. The exclusion of dissenters
from universities was confined to England, Since 1793, the
University of Dublin had been thrown open to Catholics and
dissenters,^ who were admitted to degrees in arts and medi-
cine ; and in the universities of Scotland there was no test
to exclude dissenters.
Several petitions concerning these claims elicited full dis-
PeUHons to cussion in both Houses. Of these petitions, the
both Homea. j^^g^^ remarkable was signed by sixty-three mem-
bers of the senate of the University of Cambridge, distin-
guished in science and literature, and of eminent position in
the university. It prayed that dissenters should be admitted
to take the degrees of bachelors, masters, or doctors in arts,
March 21st, ^***» ^^^ physic Earl Grey, in presenting it to
1834. the House of Lords, opened the case of the dis-
senters in a wise and moderate speech, which was followed
by a fair discussion of the conflicting rights of the church
and dissenters.* In the Commons, Mr. Spring Rice ably
March 24th. represented the case of the dissenters, which was
also supported by Mr. Secretary Stanley and Lord Palmers-
Ion, on behalf of the Government ; and opposed by Mr.
Goulburn, Sir R. Inglis, and Sir Robert Peel.' Petitions
against the claims of dissenters were also discussed, particu-
larly a counter-petition, signed by 259 resident members of
the University of Cambridge.*
1 33 Geo. III. c. 21 (Irish). 8 Jbid., 570, 623, 674.
a Hans. Deb.. 3d Ser., xxii. 497. * Ibid., 1009.
UNIVERSITIES BILL, 1834. 3y?i
Apart from the discussions to which these petitions gave
rise, the case of the dissenters was presented in „ . ^. ,
' ' UniTersKies'
the more definite shape of a bill, introduced by Bj", April
IMr. George Wood.^ Against the admission of
dissenters, it was argued that the religious education of the
universities must either be interfered with, or else imposed
upon dissenters. It would introduce religious discord and
controversies, violate the statutes of the universities, and
clash with the internal discipline of the different colleges.
The universities were instituted for the religious teaching of
the Church of England ; arid were corporations enjoying
charters and Acts of Parliament, under which they held their
authority and privileges, for that purpose. If the dissenters
desired a better education for themselves, they were rich and
zealous, and could found colleges of their own, to vie with
Oxford and Cambridge in learning, piety, and distinction.
On the other hand, it was contended that the admission of
dissenters would introduce a better feeling between that
body and the church. Their exclusion was irritating and
invidious. The religious education of the universities was
one of learning rather than orthodoxy ; and it was more
probable that dissenters would become attracted to the church,
than that the influence of the church and its teachings would
be impaired by their presence in the universities. The ex-
perience of Cambridge proved that discipline was not inter-
fered with by their admission to its studies ; and the denial
of degrees to students who had distinguished themselves was
a galling disqualification, upon which churchmen ought not to
insist. The example of Dublin University was also relied on,
whose Protestant character had not been affected, nor its dis-
cipline interfered with, by the admission of Roman June 20th.
Catholics. This bill being warmly espoused by the entire
liberal party, was passed by the Commons, with July 28th.
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, xxii. 900. Ayes, 185; Noes, 44. Colonel Wil-
liams having moved for an address, the bill was ordered as an amendment
to that question.
400 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
large majorities.^ In the Lords, however, it was received
Aug. 1st. with marked disfavor. It was strenuously opposed
by tlie Archbi?hop of Canterbury, the Duke of Gloucester,
the Duke of Wellington, and the Bishop of Exeter; and
even the new premier. Lord Melbourne, who supported the
second reading, avowed that he did not entirely approve of
the measure. In his opinion its objects might be better ef-
fected by a good understanding and a compromise between
both parties, than by the force of an Act of Parliament.
The bill was refused a second reading by a majority of one
hundred and two.^
Kot long afterwards, however, the just claims of dissenters
to academical distinction were met, without trench-
London TJnl- . 1 1 I I • /> 1
Tersjty estab- ing upon the church or the ancient seats ot learn-
' ' ing, by the foundation of the University of London,
— open to students of every creed.* Some years later, the
Oxford and education, discipline, and endowments of the older
UnWerefuM' Universities called for the interposition of Parlia-
Acts. ment; and in considering their future regulation,
the claims of dissenters were not overlooked. Provision
M'as made for the opening of halls, for their collegiate resi-
dence and discipline ; and the degrees of the universities
were no longer withheld from their honorable ambition.*
The contentions hitherto related have been between the
„ . , church and dissenters. But rival sects have had
ctwipeisBUi, their contests; and in 1844 the legislature inter.-
posed to protect the endowments of dissenting
communions from being despoiled by one another. Decisions
of the Court of Chancery and the House of Lords, in the
1 On second reading — Ayes, 321; Noes, 147. On third reading — Ayes
164; Noes, 75. Hans. Deb.', 3d Ser., xxiii. 632, 635.
2 Contents, 85; Non-contents, 187. Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxv. 815.
« Debates, March 26th, 1835; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxvii. 279; London
fTniversity Charters, Nov. 1836, and Dec. 1837.
* Oxford University Act, 17 & 18 Vict. c. 81, s. 43, 44, &c.; Cambridge
University Act, 19 & 20 Vict. c. 88, s. 45, &c. These degrees, however,
did not entitle them to ofiices hitherto held by ciiurchmen.
ENDOWED SCHOOLS ACT, 1860. 401
case of Lady Hewley's charity, had disturbed tho security
of all property held in trust by nonconformists, for reli^ous
purposes. The faith of the founder, — not expressly de-
tined by any will or deed, but otherwise collected frcu
evidence, — was held to be binding upon succeeding genei-
ations of dissenters. A change or development of cree"!.
forfeited the endowment; and what one sect forfeited, another
might claim. A wide field was here opened for liligatioi.
Lady Hewley's trustees had been dispossessed of their prjp
erty, after a ruinous contest of fourteen years. In the
obscure annals of dissent, it was difficult to trace out the
doctrinal variations of a religious foundation ; and few trus-
tees felt themselves secure against the claims of rivals
encouraged at once by the love of gain and by religious
hostility. An unfriendly legislature might have looked with
complacency upon endowments wasted and rivalries embit-
tered. Dissent might have been, put into chancery, without
a helping hand. But Sir Robert Peel*s enlightened chan-
cellor, Lord Lyndhurst, came forward to stay further strife.
His measure provided that where the founder had not ex-
•pressly defined the doctrines or form of worship to be
observed, the usage of twenty-five years should give trustees
a title to their endowment ; ^ and this solution of a painful
difficulty was accepted by Parliament. It was not passed
without strong opposition on religious grounds, and fierce
jealousy of Unitarians, whose endowments had been most
.endangered; but it was, in truth, a judicious legal reform
rather than a measure aflfecting religious liberty.^
In the same spirit, Parliament has lately empowered the
trustees of endowed schools to admit children of
different religious denominations, unless the deed Schools Act,
of foundation expressly limited the benefits of the
endowment to the church, or some other religious communion.'
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxiv. 579, 821.
2 Jbid., Ixxv. 321, 383; Lxxvi. 116; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 45
8 23 Vict. c. 11.
VOL. II. 26
402 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
Long after Parliament had frankly recognized complete
Repeal of freedom of religious worship, many intolerant
pt-naities oa enactments still bore witness to the rigor of our
religious ^
worship. laws. Liberty had been conceded so grudgingly,
and clogged with so many conditions, that the penal code had
not yet disappeared from the statute-book. Li 1845, the
Criminal Law Commission enumerated the restraints and
penalties which had hitherto escaped the vigilance of the
legislature.^ And Parliament has since blotted out many
repulsive laws affecting the religious worship and education
of Roman Catholics, and others not in communion with the
church.*
The church honorably acquiesced in those just and neces-
Chnrch rates, sary measures, which secured to dissenters liberty
in their religious worship and ministrations, and exemption
from civil disabilities. But a more serious contention had
arisen affecting her own legal rights, her position as the
national establishment, and her ancient endowments. Dis-
senters refused payment of church-rates. Many suffered
imprisonment or distraint of their goods, rather than satisfy
the lawful demands of the church.' Others, more practical
and sagacious, attended vestries, and resisted the imposi-
tion of the annual rate upon the parishioners. And during
the progress of these local contentions. Parliament was ap-
pealed to by dissenters for legislative relief.
The principles involved in the question of church-rate,
Principles while differing in several material points from
luvoived. those concerned in other controversies between the
church and dissenters, may yet be referred to one common
1 First Report of Crim. Law Commission (Religious Opinions), 1845.
2 7 & 8 Vict. c. 102; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxiv. 691; Lxxvi. 11(!5; 9 &
10 Vict. c. 59; /bid., Ixxxiii. 495. Among the laws repealed by tliis Act
was the celebrated statute or ordinance of Henry HI., " pro expulsione
Judaiorum."
« See Debates, July 30th, 1839; July 24th, 1840 (Thorogood's case);
Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xlix. 998; Iv. 939. Appendix to Report of Commit-
tee on ChurcL Rates, 1851, p. 006-645.
CHURCH RATES. 403
origin, — the legal recognition of a national church, with all
the rights incident to such an establishment, in presence of
a powerful body of nonconformists. By the common law,
the parishioners were bound to maintain the fabric of the
parish church, and provide for the decent celebration of its
services. The edifice consecrated to public worship was
sustained by an annual rate, voted by the parishioners them-
selves assembled in vestry, and levied upon all occupiers of
land and houses within the parish, according to their ability.* \
For centuries, the parishioners who paid this rate were mem- \
bers of the church. They gazed with reverence on the '
antique tower ; hastened to prayers at the summons of the
sabbath-bells; sat beneath the roof which their contributions
had repaired ; and partook of the sacramental bread and
wine which their liberality bad provided. The rate was
administered by lay churchwardens of their own choice; and
all cheerfully paid what was dispensed for the common use
and benefit of all. But times had changed. Dissent had
grown, and spread and ramified throughout the land. In
some parishes, dissenters even outnumbered the members of
the church. Supporting theit own ministers, building and
repairing their own chapels, and shunning the services and
clergy of the parish church, they resented the payment of
the church-rate as at once an onerous and unjust tax and an
offence to their consciences. They insisted that the burden
sjiould be borne exclusively by members of the church.
>5uch, they contended, had been the original design of church-
rate ; and this principle should again be recognized, under
altered conditions, by the state. The church stood firmly
upon her legal rights. The law had never acknowledged :
su«;h a distinction of persons as that contended for by dissent-
ers; nay, the tax was chargeable, not so much upon {)ersons,
as upon property ; and having existed for centuries, its '
1 Ljnidwood, 53; Wilkins's Concil., i. 253; Coke's 2d Inst., 489, 653; 13
Edw. 1. istatute, Circumspccte ayatis); Sir J. Campbell's Letter to Lord
Stanley, 1837 ; Report of Commission on Eccl. Court-, 1832.
404 KELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
amount was, in truth, a deduction from rent. If dissenting
tenants were relieved from its payment, their landlords
would immediately claim its equivalent in rental. But, above
nil, it was maintained (hat the fabric of the church was
national property, — an edifice set apart by law for public
worship according to the religion of the state, open to all,
inviting all to its services, and as much the common prop-
erty i)f all, as a public museum or picture-gallery, which
many might not care to enter, or were unable to appreciate.
Such being the irreconcilable principles upon which each
Lord party took its stand, contentions of increasing bit-
Bchemaot tcmess became rife in many parishes, — painful
A^T2i*t''^' ^ churchmen, irritating to dissenters, and a re-
1834. proach to religion. In 1834, Earl Grey's minis-
try, among its endeavors to reconcile, as far as possible, all
differences between the church and dissenters, attempted a
solution of this perplexing question. Their scheme, as ex-
j)lained by Lord Althorp, was to substitute for the existing
church-rate an annual grant of 250,000/. from ^he consoli-
dated fund, for the repair of churches. This sum, equal to
about half the estimated rate, was to be distributed ratably
to the several parishes. Church-rate, in short, was to become
national instead of parochial. This expedient found no
favor with dissenters, who would still be liable to pay for the
support of the church, in another form. Nor was it acceptable
to churchmen, who deemed a fixed parliamentary subsidy,
of reduced amount, a poor equivalent for their existing rights.
The bill was, therefore, abandoned, having merely served to
exemplify the intractable difficulties of any legislative remedy.^
In 1837, Lord Melbourne's government approached this
»ir. Spring embarrassing question with no better success.
for^*ttilng"" Their scheme provided a fund for the repair of
Miu^h'aa'*'' churches out of surplus revenues, to arise from an
1837. improved administration of church lands.' Thia
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xx. 1012; Comm. Journ., Ixxxix. 203, 207
2 Haus. Deb., 3d Ser., xxxvi. 1207 ; xxxviii. 1073.
CHURCH RATES. 405
measure might well satisfy dissenters : but was wholly re-
pudiated by the church.^ It abandoned church-rates, to
which she was entitled ; and appropriated her own revenues
to purposes otherwise provided for by law. She enjoyed
both sources of income, and it was simply proposed to dt-
prive her of one. If her revenues could be improved, she
was herself entitled to the benefit of that improvement, for
other spiritual objects. If church-rates were to be sur-
rendered, she claimed from the state another fund, as a
reasonable equivalent.
But the legal rights of the church, and the means of en
forcinw thwn, were about to be severely contested „^ ^ ^
" ' •' The first
by a long course of litigration. In 1837, a ma- Braiatree
jority of the vestry of Braintree having post-
poned a church-rate for twelve months, the churchwardens
took upon themselves, of their own authority, and in defiance
of the vestry, to levy a rate. In this strange proceeding
they were supported, for a time, by the Consistory Court,'
on the authority of an obscure precedent.' But the Court
of Queen's Bench restrained them, by prohibition, from col-
lecting a rate, which Lord Denman emphatically declared
to be '' altogether invalid, and a church-rate in nothing but
the name." * In this opinion the Court of Exchequer
Chamber concurred.® Chief Justice Tindal, however, in
giving the judgment of this court, suggested a doubt whether
the clmrchwardens, and a minority of the vestry together,
might not concur in granting a rate, at the meeting of the
parishioners assembled for that purpose. This suggestion
M'as founded on the principle that the votes of the majority,
who refused to perform their duty, were lost and thrown
1 Ann. Reg., 1837, p. 85.
2 Veley r. Burder, Nov. 15th, 1837; App. to Report of Church Rates
Co., 1851, p. 601.
3 Gaudern v. Selby in the Court of Arches, 1799.
4 Lord Denman's Judgment, May 1st, 1840; Burder e. Veley; Adolph.
ind Ellis, xii. 244.
6 Feb. 8th, 1841; Ibid., ZOO.
406 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
away ; while the minority, in the performance of the pre-
scribed duty of the meeting, represented the whole number.
This subtle and technical device was promptly tried at
The second Braintree. A rate being again refused by t! a
al«>"i84l- majority, a monition was obtained from the Coi -
1853. sistory Court, commanding the churchwardens
and parishioners io make a rate according to law.* In obe-
dience to this monition, another meeting was assembled ;
and a rate being again refused by the majority, it was imme-
diately voted in their presence by the churchwardens and
minority.* A rate so imposed was of course resisted. The
Consistory Court pronounced it illegal : the Court'of Arches
adjudged it valid. The Court of Queen's Bench, which
had scouted the authority of the churchwardens, respectetl
the right of the minority, — scarcely less equivowil, — to
bind the whole parish ; and refused to stay the collection of
the rate, by prohibition. The Court of pjxchequer Cham-
ber affirmed this decision. But the House of Lords, — su-
perior to the subtleties by which the broad principles of the
law had been set aside, — asserted the unquestionable rights
of a majority. Tlie Braintree rate which the vestry had
refused, and a small minority had assumed to levy, was pro-
nounced invalid.'
This construction of the law gravely affected the relations
Its effect of the church to dissenters. From this time,
rights of*the church-rates could not practically be raised in any
church. parish, in which a majority of the vestry refused
to impose them. The church, having an abstract legal title
to receive them, was powerless to enforce it. The legal
obligation to repair the parish church continued ; but church-
rates assumed the form of a voluntary contribution, ratlier
than a compulsory tax. It was vain to threaten parishioners
with the C(Misures of ecclesiasticJil courts, and a whole parish
1 June 22d, 1841.
2 July 15th. 1841.
» Jurist, xvii. 939. Clark's House of Lords' Cases, iv. 679-814.
CHURCH RATES. 407
with excommunication.^ Such processes were out of date.
Even if vestries had lost their rights by any forced con-
struction of the law, no rate could have been collected asrain^t
the general sense of the parishioners. Tlie example of Brain-
tree was quickly followed. Wherever the dissenting body
was powerful, canvassing and agitation were actively con-
ducted, until, in 1859, church-rates had been refused in no
less than 1525 parishes or districts.^ This was a serious
inroad upon the rights of the church.
While dissenters were thus active and successful in their
local resistance to church-rates, they were no less „.„ , .^
' _ -^ _ Bills for the
strenuous in their appeals to Parliament for legis- abolition of
lative relief. Government having vainly sought
the means of adjusting the question, in any form consistent
■with the interests of the church, the dissenters organized aa
extensive agitation for the total repeal of church-rates.
Proposals for exempting dissenters from payment were re-
pudiated by both parties.' Such a compromise was regard-
ed by churchmen as an^ encouragement to dissent, and by
nonconformists as derogatory to their rights and pretensions
as independent religious bodies. The first bill for tiie aboli-
tion of church-rates was introduced in 1841 by Sir John
Easthope, J)ut was disposed of without a division.* For sev-
eral years similar proposals were submitted to the Commons
without success.^ In 1855, and again in 1856, bills for this
purpose were read a second time by the Commons,^ but pi-o-
1 Church Rates Committee, 1831; Dr. Lushington's Ev., Q. 2358-2365;
Courtald's Ev., Q. 489-491; Pritchard's Ev., Q. 660, 6G1; Terrell's Ev., Q.
1975-1982; Dr. Lushington's Ev. before Lords' Committee, 1859.
2 Pari. Return, Sess. 2, 1859, Xo. 7.
8 On Feb. 11th, 1840, a motion by Mr. T. Duncombe to this effect waa
negatived by a large majority. -\ves, 62; Noes, 117. — Comm. Journ.,
xcv. 74. Again, on March 1.3th, 1849, an amendment to the same purpose
found only twenty supporters. In 1852 a bill to relieve dissenters from
the rate, brought in by Mr. Packe, was withdrawn..
* May 26th, 1841 ; Comm. Joum., scvi. 345, 414.
5 June 16th, 1842; Comm. Journ., xcvii, 385; March 13th, 1849; Ibid^
civ. 134; May 26th, 1853; IbUL, eviii. 516.
6 May 16th, 1855; Ayes, 217; Noes, 189. Feb. 8th, 1856; Ayes, 221;
Noes, 178.
408 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
ceeded no further. In the latter year Sir George Grey, on
behalf of ministers, suggested as a compromise between the
contending parties, that where church-rates had been discon-
tinued in any j)arish for a certain i)enod, — sufficient to indi-
cate the settled purpose of the inhabitants, — the parish
should be exempted from further liability.^ This suggestion,
however, founded upon the anomalies of the existing law
was not submitted to the decision of Parliament. The con
roversy continued ; and at length, in 1858, a measure
brought in by Sir John Trelawny, for the total abolition of
church-rates, wjis passed by the Commons, and rejected by
the Lords.^ In 1859, another compromise was suggested,
when Mr. Secretary Walpole brought in a bill to facilitate
a voluntary provision for church-rates : but it was refused a
second reading by a large majority.* In 1860, another aboli-
tion bill was passed by one House and rejected by the other.*
Other compi-omises were suggested by friends of the
church:* but none found favor, and total aboli-
fikToroftbe tion was Still msisted upon by a majority or the
church. f~. -rrr- 1 • •
Commons. With ministers it was an open ques-
tion ; and between members and their constituents, a source
of constant embarrassment. Meanwhile, an active counter-
agitation, on behalf of the church, began to exercise an in-
fluence over the divisions ; and from 1858 the a>^cendency
of the anti-church-rate parly sensibly declined.® Such a re-
action was obviously favorable to the final adjustment of the
claims of dissenters, on terms more equitable to the church ;
1 March 5th, 1856; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxl. 1900.
2 The third reading of this bill was passed on June 8th by a majority
of 63: Ayes, 266: Noes, 203. — Comm. Journ., cxiii. 216.
8 March 9tli, 1859. Ayes, 171 ; Noes, 254. — Comm. Joum., cxiv. 66.
* The third reading of this bill was passed by a majority of nine only
Ayes, 2.35; Noes, 226. — Comm. Journ., cv. 208.
6 Viz. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Mr. Alcock, Mr. Cross, Mr. New-
degate, and Mr. Hubbard.
« In 1861 (beyond the limits of this history) the annual bill was lost on
the third readinij hy the casting vote of the Speaker; and in 1862 by a
majority of 17.
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 409
but as yet the conditions of such an adjustment have baffled
the sagacity of statesmen.
While these various contentions were raging between
the church and other religious bodies, important gtate of the
changes were in progress in the church and in the t^e «id of
religious condition of the people. The churcli ia«' century.
was growing in spiritual influence and temporal resources.
Dissent was making advances still more remarkable.
For many years after the accession of George III. the
church continued her even course, with little change of con-
dition or circumstances.* She was enjoying a tranquil, and
apparently prosperous, existence. Favored by tiie state and
society ; threatened by no visible dangers ; dominant over
Catholics and dissenters ; and fearing no assaults upon her
power or privileges, she was contented with the dignified
security of a national establishment. The more learned
churclimen devoted themselves to classical erudition and
scholastic theology : the parochial clergy to an easy but de-
corous performance of their accustomed duties. The disci-
pline of the church was facile and indulgent. Pluralities
and nonresidence were freely permitted, the ease of the
clergy being more regarded than the spiritual rtXifare of the
people. The parson farmed, hunted, shot the squire's par-
tridges, drank his port-wine, joined in the tnendly rubber,
and frankly entered into all the enjoymenta of a country-life
He was a kind and hearty man ; and jf ".le Lad the means,
his charity was open-handed. Ready at the call of those
who sought religious consolation, he was not earnest in
searching out the spiritual needs of his duck. Zeal was not
expected of him : society was not yet prepared to exact it.
While ease and inaction characterized the church, a great
change was coming over the religious and social
°. „ , 1 m, 1- • Changes in
condition of the people. Ihe lelig'ious movement, the coudUjon
commenced by Wesley and Whitefield, ^ was" ^peope-
spreading widely among the middle and humbler classes
An age of spiritual lethargy was passing away ; and a period
1 Supra, 310. a Supra, p. 311
410 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
of religious emotion, zeal, and activity commencing. At the
same time, the population of the country was attaining an
extraordinary and unprecedented development. The church
•was ill prepared to meet these new conditions of society.
Her clergy were slow to perceive them ; and when pressed
by the exigencies of the time, they could not suddenly assume
the character of missionaries. It was a new calling, for
which their training and habits unfitted them ; and they had
s dde *^ ^'^P*^ ^^**'' unexampled difficulties. A new so-
KTowthof ciety was ffrowing up around them, with startling:
suddenness. A country-village often rose, as if
by magic, into a populous town : a town was swollen into a
huge city. Artisans from the loom, the forge, and the mine
were peopling the lone valley and the moor. How was the
church at once to embrace a populous and strange com-
munity in her ministrations ? The parish church would not
hold them, if they were willing to come : the parochial clergy
were unequal, in number and in means, to visit them in their
own homes. Spoliation and neglect had doomed a large
proportion of the clergy to poverty ; and neither the state
nor society had yet come to their aid. If there were short-
comings on their part, they were shared by the state and the
laity. There was no organization to meet the pressure of
locjil wants, while population was outgrowing the ordinary
agencies of the church. The field which was becoming too
wide for her, was entered upon by dissent ; and hitherto it
has proved too wide for both.^
In dealing with rude and industrial populations, the clergy
Cansetad- labored under many disadvantages compared with
ctergy in Other sccts, — particularly the Methodists, — by
dC«nt.***' whom they were environed. However earnest in
1 It is computed that on the census Sunday, 1851, 5,288,294 persons able
to attend religious ■worship once at least, were wholly absent. And it has
been reckoned that in Southwark 68 per cent, of the population attend no
place of worship whatever; in Sheffield, 62; in Oldham, 61j. In thirty-
four preat towns, embracing a population of 3,993,467, no less than
2,197,388, or 52i per cent , are said to attend no places of worship. — ZV.
Uume'i Ev. before Lord* Co. on Church Rules, 1859, Q. 1290-1300.
CHURCH OF EKGLAND. 411
their calling, they were too much above worklngraen in
rank and education, to gain their easy confidf^nce. They
were gentlemen, generally allied to county families, trained at
the universities, and mingling in refined society. They read
the services of the church with grave propriety, and preached
scholarlike discourses without emphasis or passion. Their
well-bred calmness and good taste ministered little to religious*
excitement. But hard by the village-church, a Methodist
carpenter or blacksmith would address his humble flock with
passionate devotion. He was one of themselves, spoke their'
rough dialect, used their wonted phrases ; and having been
himself converted to Methodism, described his own experi-
ence and consolations. Who can wonder that numbers for-
sook the decorous monotony of the church-service for the
fervid prayers and moving exhortations of the Methodist ?
Among the more enlightened population of towns, the clergy
had formidable rivals in a higher class of nonconformist min-
isters, who attracted congregations, not only by doctrines con-
genial to their faith and sentiments, but by a more impas-
sioned eloquence, greater warmth and earnestness, a plainer
language, and closer relations with their flocks. Again, in
the visitation of the sick, dissent had greater resources than
the church. Its ministers were more familiar with their
habits and religious feelings ; were admitted with greater
freedom to their homes ; and were assisted by an active lay
Agency, which the church was slow to imitate.
Social causes further contributed to the progress of dissent.
Many were not unwilling to escape from the pres- social causes
ence of their superiors in station. Farraere and ° **°*'
shopkeepers were greater men in the meeting-house, than un-
der the shadow of the pulpit and the squire's pew. Work-
ingmen were glad to be free, for one day in the week, from
the eye of the master. It was a comfort to be conscious of
independence, and to enjoy their devotions, — like their
sports, — among themselves, without restraint or embarrass-
ment. Even their homely dress tempted them from the
412 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
church ; as rags shut out a lower grade frora public worship
altogether.
In Wales, there was yet another inducement to dissent.
Dissent In ^'^^ ^''*^ Irish at the Reformation, the people were
Wales. ignorant of the languMge in which the services of
the church were too often performed. In many parishes, the
English liturgy was read and English sermons preached to
"Welshmen. Even religious consolations were ministered
with difficulty, in the only language familiar to the people.
Addressed by nonconformist teachers in their own tongue,
numbers were soon won over. Doctrines and ceremonies
were as nothing compared with an intelligible devotion.
They followed Welshmen, rather than dissenters : but found
themselves out of communion with the church.
From these combined causes, — religious and social, — dis-
Ttie church Sent marched onwards. The church lost numbers
Engiii'h from her fold ; and failed to embrace multitudes
society. among the growing population, beyond her minis-
trations. But she was never forsaken by the rank, wealth,
intellect, and influence of the country ; and the poor remained
her uncontested heritage. Nobles, and proprietors of the
soil, were her zealous disciples and champions ; the profes-
sions, the first merchants and employers of labor, continued
faithful. English society held fast to her. Aspirants to re-
spectability frequented her services. The less opulent of
the middle classes, and the industrial population, thronged
the meeting-house ; men who grew rich and prosperous for-
sook it for the church.
It was not until early in the present century, that the rulers
Regeneration ^"^ clcrgy of the church were awakened to a sense
orthechurch. jjf j_]^gjj. j-egponsibilities, Under these new conditions
of society and religious feeling. Startled by the outburst of
infidelity in France, and disquieted by the encroachments of
dissent, — they at length discovered that the church had a
new mission before her. More zeal was needed in her min-
isters : better discipline and organization in her government :
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 418
new resources in her establishment. The means she had
must be developed; and the cooperation of the state and
laity must be invoked, to combat the difficulties by which
she was surrounded. The church of the sixteenth century
must be adapted to the population and needs of the nine
teentli.
The first efforts made for tlie regeneration of the church
were not very vigorous, but they were in the right direction.
In 1803, measures were passed to restrain clerical farming,
to enforce the residence of incumbents, and to encourage the
building of churches.*
Fifteen years later, a comprehensive scheme was devised
for the buildin": and endowment of churches in ,
° Church
populous places. The disproportion between the Building Act,
means of the church and the growing population
M'as becoming more and more evident ; ^ and in 1818 pro-
vision was made by Parliament for a systematic extension
of church accommodation. Relying mainly upon local lib-
erality, Pai-liament added contributions from the public rev-
enue, in aid of the building and endowment of additional
churches.' Further encouragement was also given by the
remission of duties upon building materials.*
The work of church extension was undertaken with ex-
emplary zeal. The piety of our ancestors, who
^ •' . . Church ex-
had raised churches in every village throughout tenMoa,
the land, was emulated by the laity, in the present ^ "^
century, who provided for the spiritual needs of their own
time. New churches arose everywhere among a growing
1 43 Geo. III. c. 84, 108; and see Stephen's Ecclesiastical Statutes, 892,
985.
2 Lord Sidmouth's Life, iii. 138 ; Returns laid before the House of Lords,
1811.
3 58 Geo. III. c. 45; 3 Geo. IV. c. 72, &c. One million was voted in
1813, and 500,000/. in 1824. Exchequer bill loans to about the same
amount were also made. — Por(er-'s Progress, 619.
* In 1837 these remissions had amounted to 170,561^ ; and from 1837 to
1845, to 165,778/. — Pari. Papers, 1838, No. 325; 1845, No. 322.
414 CHUKCH OF ENGLAND.
and prosperous population ; parishes were divided ; and en-
dowments found for thousands of additional clergy.^
The poorer clergy ha\e also received much welcome as-
sistance from aujjinentations of the fund known as
Other en- ^ ... .7 -v • • . ,■
dowmentsof Queen Anues bounty. iSor is it unworthy or re-
mark, that the general opulence of the country
has contributed, in another form, to the poorer beneiices.
Large numbers of clergy have added their private resources
to the scant endowments of their cures ; and with a noble
spirit of devotion and self-sacrifice, have dediciited their lives
and fortunes to the service of the church.
While the exertions of the church were thus encouraged
Kcciesiasticai ^Y public and private liberality, the legislature
reveuuM. ^^j^g dgyising means for developing the existing
resources of the establishment. Its revenues were large,
but ill administered and unequally distributed. Notwith-
standing the spoliations of the sixteenth century, the net rev-
enues amounted to 3,490,497/. ; of which 435,046/. was ap-
propriated by the bishops and other dignitaries ; while many
incumbents derived a scanty pittance from the ample patri-
mony of the church.* Sound policy, and the interests of the
Ecciosiagticai church herself, demanded an improved manage-
183^. ' ment and distribution, of this great income; and
1 Between 1801 and 1831 about five hundred churches were built at an
expense of 3,000,000/. « In twenty years, from 1831 to 1851, more than two
thousand new churches were erected at an expense exceeding 6,000,000/.
In this whole period of fifty years, 2,529 churches were built at an expense
of 9,087,000/., of which 1,663,429/. were contributed from public funds,
and 7,423,571/. from private benefactions. — Census, 1851, Religious Wor-
ship, p. xxxix. ; see also Lords' Debate, May 11th, 1854. — Hans. Deb., 3d
Ser., cxxxiii. 153. Between 1801 and 18.58, it appears that 3150 churches
had been built at an expense of 11,000,000/. — Lords' Report on Spiritual
Destitution, 1858; Cotton's Ev., Q. 141.
2 2 & 3 Anne, c. 11; 1 Geo. L st. 2, c. 10; 45 Geo. IIL c. 84; 1 & 2
Will. IV. c 45, &c. From 1809 to 18-20, the governors of Queen Anne's
bounty distributed no less than 1,000,000/. to the poorer clergy. From
April 5!h, 1831, to Dec. 31st, 1835, they disbursed 687,342/. From 1850
to 1360 inclimive, they distributed 2,502,747/.
* Beport uu Ecclesiastical Duties and Revenues Couun., 1831.
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 416
in 1835 a commission was constituted, which, in five suc-
cessive reports, recommended numerous ecclesiastiail re-
forms. In 1836, tlie ecclesiastical commissioners were incor-
porated,^ with power to prepare schemes for carrying these
recommendations into effect. Many reforms in the church
establishment were afterwards sanctioned by Parliament.
The boundaries of the several dioceses were revised : the
sees of Gloucester, Bristol, Bangor, and St. Asaph were con-
solidated into two, and the new sees of Manchester and Ripon
created : the episcopal revenues and patronage were read-
justed.^ The establishments of cathedral and collegiate
churches were reduced, and their revenues appropriated to
the relief of spiritual destitution. And the surplus revenues
of the church, accruing from all these reforms, have since
been applied, under the authority of the commissioners, to
the augmentation of small livings, and other purposes de-
signed to increase the efficiency of the church.^ At the same
time pluralities were more effectually restrained, and resi-
dence enforced, among the clergy.*
In extending her ministrations to a growing community,
the church has further been assisted from other p^^^jg
sources. Several charitable societies have largely munificence,
contributed to this good work,^ and private munificence —
1 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 77. The constitution of the commissioners was
altered in 1840 by 3 & 4 Vict. c. 113; 14 & 15 Vict c. 104; 23 & 24 Viot.
c. 124.
2 See 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 77; 3 & 4 Vict. c. 113.
3 In 18C0, no less than 1388 benefices and districts had been augmented
and endowed, out of the common fund of the commissioners, to the extent
of 98,900/. a year; to which had been added land and tithe rent-charge
amounting to 9G00/. a year. — 14th Report of Commissioners, p. 5.
* 1 & 2 Vict. c. 106.
5 lu twenty-live years the Church Pastoral Aid Society raised and ex-
pended 715,624/., by which 1015 parishes were aided. In twenty-four
years the Additional Curates Society raised and expended 531,110/. In
thirty-three years the Church Building Society e.\peuded 680,233/., which
was met by a further expenditure, on the part of the public, of 4,451,405/.
— Reports of these Societies for 1861.
Independently of diocesan and other local societies, the aggregate funds
416 , CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
in an age not less remarkable for its pious charity than for
its opulence — has nobly supported the zeal and devotion of
the clergy.
The principal revenues of the church, however, were de-
rivi'd from tithes; and these continued to be col-
Tithes com- , , , , , !•
mutetiou, lected by the clergy, according to ancient usage,
"* " ■ " in kind." The parson was entitled to the farrn-
j er's tenth wheat-sheaf, his tenth pig, and his tenth sack of
potatoes ! This primitive custom of the Jews was wliolly
unsuited to a civilized age. It was vexatious to the farmer,
discouraging to agriculture, and invidious to the clergy. A
large proportion of the land was tithe-free : and tithes were
often the property of lay impropriators : yet the cliurch sus-
tained all the odium of an antiquated and anomalous law.
The evil had long been acknowledged. Prior to the Acts of
Elizabeth restraining alienations of church property,* land-
owners had purchased exemption from titiies by the transfer
of lands to the church ; and in many parishes a particuhir
custom prevailed, known as a modtis, by whicii payment of
tithes in kind had been commuted. The Long Parliament
had designed a more general commutation.^ Adam Smith
and Paley had pointed out the injurious operation of tithes ;
and the latter had recommended their conversion into corn-
rents.' This suggestion having been carried out in some
local enclosure bills, Mr. Pitt submitted to the Archbisiiop
of Gmterbury, in 1791, the propriety of its general adop-
tion: but unfortunately for the interests of the church, his
wise counsels were not accepted.* It was not for more
tiian forty years afterwards, that Parliament perceived the
necessity of a general measure of commutation. In 1833
f religions societies cpnnected with the church amounted, in 1851, to up-
wards of 400,000/. a year, of which 250,000/. was applied to foreign mis-
Bioiis. — Cen.sus of 1851, Religious Worship, p. xli.
* 1 Eliz. c. 19; 13 Eliz. c. 10.
» Collier's Eccl. Hist., ii. 861.
* Moral and Political Philosophy, ch. xii-
* Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii 131.
CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 417
and 1834, Lord Althorp submitted imperfect schemes for con-
sideration ;^ and in 1835 Sir Robert Peel proposed a meas-
ure to facilitate voluntary commutation, which was obviously
madequate.''^ But in 1836 a measure, more comprehensive,
was framed by Lord Melbourne's government, and accepted
by Parliament. It provided for the general commutation of
tithes into a rent-charge upon the land, payfible in money,
but varying according to the average price of corn for seven
preceding years. Voluntary agreements upon this principle
were first encouraged ; and where none were made, a com-
pulsory commutation was effected by commissioners appointed
for that purpose.^ The success of this statesmanlike measure
was complete. In fifteen years, the entire commutation of
tithes was accomplished in nearly every parish in England
and Wales.* To no measure, since the Reformation, has the
church owed so much peace and security.' All disputes be-
tween the clergy and their parishioners, in relation to tithes,
were averted ; while their rights, identified witli those of the
lay impropriators, were secured immutably upon the land
itself.
Throughout the progress of the,-e various measures the
church has been gaining strength and influence by „ .
. . ... Continued
her own spiritual renovation. While the judicious zeai of the
policy of the legislature has relieved her from
many causes of jealousy and ill-will, and added to her tem-
poral resources, she has displayed a zeal and activity worthy
of her high calling and destinies. Her clergy, — earnest, in-
tellectual, and accomplished, — have kept pace with the ad-
1 April 18th, 1833; April 15th, 1834; Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, xvii. 281;
xxii. 834.
2 Jtarch 2-ith, 1835; Ibid., xxvii. 183.
3 Feb. 9th, 1836. Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxxi. 185; 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 71;
7 Will. IV. and 1 Vict. c. 6'J; 1 & 2 Vict. c. 64; 2 & 3 Vict. c. 32; 5 & 6
Vict. c. 54; 9 & 10 Vict. c. 73; 10 & 11 Vict. c. 104; 14 & 15 Vict. c. 53.
* In Feb. 1851, tlie commissioners reported that " the great work of com-
mutation is substantially achieved." — 1851, No. [1325]. In 1852, they
»peak of formal dlfliculties in about one hundred cases. — 1852, No. [1447].
VOL. II. 27
418 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
vancing eiiliglitennient of their age. They have labored,
wilh all their means and influence, in the education of the
people ; and have joined lieartily with hiymen in promoting,
by secular agencies, the cuhivation and moral welfai'e of so-
ciety. At one time there seemed danger of further schisms,
springing from controversies which had been fruitful of evil
at the Bef'onflation. The high chui'ch party leaning, as of
old, to the imposing ceremonial of Catholic worship, aroused
the apprehensions of those who perceived in every symbol
of the Romish church a revival of her errors and supersti-
tious. But the extravagance of some of tlie clergy was liap-
pily tempered by the moderation of others, and by the gen-
eral good sense and judgment of the laity ; and schism was
averted. Another schism, arising out of the Gorham con-
troversy, was threatened by members of the evangelical, or
low church party ; but was no less happily averted. The
fold of the church has been found wide enough to embrace
many diversities of doctrine and ceremony. The convic-
tions, doubts, and predilections of the sixteenth century still
prevail, with many of later growth ; but enlightened church-
men, without absolute identity of opinion, have been proud
to acknowledge the same religious communion, — just as citi-
zens, divided into political parties, are yet loyal and patriotic
members of one state. And if the founders of the reformed
church erred in prescribing too strait an uniformity, the
wisest of her rulers, in an age of active thought and free
discussion, have generally shown a tolerant and cautious
spirit in dealing with theological controvei-sies. The ecclesi-
asticid courts have also striven to give breadth to her articles
and liturgy. Never was comprehension more politic. The
time has come, when any serious schism might bring ruin on
the church.
Such having been the progress of the church, what have
Progress o/ been the advances of dissent ? We have seen how
diesent. ^j^g ^ g^jj |.^y ^^^^ ^^ jj^^ labors of pious men.
A struggle had to be maintained between religion and
PROGRESS OF DISSENT. 419
heathenism in a Christian land ; and in this struggle dis«
senters long bore the foremost part. They were at once
preachers and missionaries. Their work prospered, and in
combating ignorance and sin, they grew into formidable
rivals of the church. The old schisms of the Reformation
had never lost their vitality. There had been prosecution
enough to alienate and provoke nonconformists : but not
enough to repress them. And when they started on a new
career in the last century, they enjoyed toleration. The doc-
trines for which many had formerly suffered were now freely
preached, and found crowds of new disciples. At the same
time, freedom of worship and discussion favored the growth
of other diversities of faith, ceremonial, and discipline.
The later history of dissent, of its rapid growth and de-
velopment, its marvellous activity and resources, statistics ot
is to be read in its statistics. The church in ex- dissent,
tending her ministrations had been aided by the state, and by
the liberality of her wealthy flocks. Dissent received no
succor or encouragement from the state ; and its disciples
were generally drawn from the less opulent classes of society.
Yet what has it done for the religious instruction of the peo-
ple ? In 1801, the Wesleyans had 825 chapels or places of
worship : in 1851, they had the extraordinary number of
11,007, with sittings for 2,194,298 persons! The original
connection alone numbered 1034 ministers, and upwards of
13,000 lay or local preachers. In 1801, the Independents
had 914 chapels: in 1851, they had 3244, with sittings for
1,067,760 members. In 1801, the Baptists had 652 places
of worship : in 1851, they had 2789, with sittings for 752,-
346. And numerous other religious denominations swelled
the ranks of Protestant dissent.
The Roman Catholics, — forming a comparatively small
body, — have yet increased of late years in numbers and
activity. Their chapels grew from 346 in 1824, to 574 in
1851, with accommodation for 186,111 persons. Between
1841 and 1853 their religious houses were multiplied from
420 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
17 to 88 ; and their priests from 557 to 875. Their flocks
have naturally been enlarged by considerable numbers of
Irish and foreigners who have settled, with their increasing
families, in the metro{)olis and other large towns.
For the population of England and Wales, amounting in
1851 to 17,927,609, there were 34,467 places of
Statistics of . _ ' r
places of worship, of which 14,077 belonged to the church
of England. Accommodation was provided for
9,467,738 persons, of whom 4,922,412 were in the establish-
ment. On the 30th of March, 4,428,338 attended morning
service, of whom 2,371,732 were members of the church.*
Hence it has been computed that there were 7,540,948 mem-
bers of the establishment habitually attending religious wor-
ship ; and 4,466,266 nominal members rarely, if ever,
attending the services of their church. These two classes
united, formed about G7 per cent, of the population. The
same computation reckoned 2,264,324 Wesleyans, and 610,-
786 Roman Catholics.* The clergy of the established church
numbered 17,320 : ministers of other communions, 6405.'
So vast an increase of dissent has seriously compromised
the position of the church as a national establish
Relations of -».t i i • i c i
the church mcnt. JN early one third or the present generation
have grown up out of her communion. But her
power is yet dominant. She holds her proud position in the
state and society : she commands the parochial organization
of the country : she has the largest share in the education of
the people ; * and she has long been straining every nerve to
1 Census of Great Britain, 1851, Reli^ous Worsliip. The progressive
'ncrease of dissent is curiously illustrated by a return of temporary and
permanent places of worship registered in decennial periods. — Pari. I'aper,
1853, No. 156.
2 IJr. Hume's Ev. before Lords' Co. on Church Rates, 1859, Q. 1291, and
map. Independents and Baptists together are set down as 9i per cent,
and other sects 6| on the population.
3 Census 1851: occupations, table 27.
* In 18G0 she received about 77 per cent, of the education grant from
the Privy Council; and of 1,549,312 pupils in day-schools, she had no less
than 1,187,086; while of Sunday-school pupils dissenters had a majority of
PROGRESS OF DISSENT. 421
extend her influence. The traditions and sentiment of the
nation are on her side. And while she comprises a unite<l
body of faithful members, dissenters are divided into upwards
of one hundred different sects, or congregation?, without sym-
pathy or cohe.-ion, and differing in doctrines, polity and forms
of worship. Sects, not bound by subscription to any articles
of faith, have been rent asunder by schisms. The Wesley-
ans have been broken up into nine divisions:^ the Baptists
into five.^ These discordant elements of dissent have often
been united in opposition to the church, for the redress of
grievances common to them all. But every act of toleration
and justice, on the part of the state, has tended to dissolve the
combination. The odium of bad laws weighed heavily upon
the church ; and her position has been strengthened by the
reversal of a mistaken policy. Nor has the church just cause
of apprehension from any general sentiment of hostility
on the part of Protestant nonconformists. Numbers fre-
quent her services, and are still married at her altars.' The
We.^leyans, dwelling just outside her gates, are friends and
neighbors, rather than adversaries. The most formidable
and aggressive of her opponents are the Independent^.
With them the "voluntary principle" in religion is a pri-'
raary article of faith. They condemn all church establish-
ments ; and the Church of England is the foremost example
to be denounced and assailed.
Whatever the future destinies of the church, the gravest
reflections arise out of the later development of 5^,^^^^^ ^^
the Reformation. The church was then united the«*»)?rch
to Parlm-
to the state. Her convocation, originally depen- n^*"*-
200,000. — Rep. of Education Com., 1861, p. 593, 594; Bishop of Londou's
Charge, 1862, p. 35.
1 The Orifiinal Connection, New Connection, Primitive Methodists, Bible
Cljistians, Wesleyan Methodist Association, Independent Methodists,
WesKyan Reformers, Welsh Calvinistic Jlethodists, and Countess of Hunt-
mffdoirs Connection.
2 General, Particular, Seventh-day, Scotch, New Connection General.
* Eighty per cent, of all marriages are celebrated by the church. — Rejk
of Regis^trar Gen., 1862, p. ^nii.
422 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
dent, has wince lost all but a nominal place in the ecclesias-
tical polity of the realm. And what have become the com-
ponent parts of the legislature, which directs the government,
discipline, revenues, nay even the doctrines, of the churcli ?
The Commons, who have attained a dominant authority, nre
representatives of England, — one third nonconformist, —
of Presbyterian Scotland, and of Catholic Ireland. In the
union of church and state no such anomaly had been fore-
seen; yet has it been the natural consequence of the Refor-
mation, followed by the consolidation of these realms and the
inevitable recognition of religious liberty in a free state.
However painful the history of religious schisms and con-
influence of flicts, they have not been without countervailing
^!ti°ia"'^° uses. They have extended religious instruction,
liberty. j^^j favorcd political liberty. If the church and
dissenters, united, have been unequal to meet the spiritual
needs of this populous land, — what could the church, alone
and unaided, have accomplished ? Even if the resources
of dissent had been placed in her hands, rivalry would have
Veen wanting, which has stimulated the zeal of both.
Liberty owes much to schism. It brought down the high
prerogatives of the Tudors and Stuarts ; and in later times,
has been a powerful auxiliary in many popular movements.
The undivided power of the church, united to that of the
crown and aristoci'acy, might have proved too strong for the
people. But while she was weakened by dissent, a popular
party was growing up, opposed to the close political organiza-
tion with which she was associated. This party was naturally
ioined by dissenters ; and they fought side by side in the
long struggle for civil and religious liberty.
The church and dissenters, generally opposed on political
questions affecting religion, have been prompt to
a^KTB-sion, make common cause against the church ot Kome.
The same strong spirit of Protestantism which
united them in resistance to James II. and his House, ha»
since brought them together on other occasions. Dissenters
PAPAL AGGRESSION, 1850. 423
while seeking justice for themselves, had been no friends
to Catholic emancipation ; and were far more hostile than
churchmen to tlie endowment of Maynooth.^ And in 1851,
they joined the church in resenting an aggressive movement
of the Pope, which was felt to be an insult to the Protestant
people of England.
For some lime irritation had been growing, in the popular
mind, against the church of Rome. The activity of the
pi'iesthood was everywhere apparent. Cliapels were built,
and religious houses founded." A Catholic cathedral was
erected in London. Sisters of mercy, in monastic robes,
offended the eyes of Protestants. Tales of secret proselyt-
ism abounded. No family was believed to be safe from the
designs of priests and Jesuits. Protestant heiresses had
taken the veil, and endowed convents : wives of Protestant
nobles and gentlemen had secretly renounced the faith in
which their marriage vows were given : fathers, at the point
of death, had disinherited their own flesh and blood, to satisfy
the extortion of confessors. Young men at Oxford, in train-
ing for the church, had been perverted to Romanism. At
the same time, in the church herself, the tractariau, or high
church clergy, were reverting to ceremonies associated with
that faith ; and several had been gained over to the church
of Rome. While Protestants, alarmed by these symptoms,
were disposed to over-estimate their significance, the ultramon-
tane party among the Catholics, encouraged by a trifling and
illusory success, conceived the extravagant design of reclaim-
ing Protestant England to the fold of the Catholic church.
In September, 1850, Pope Pius IX., persuaded that the
time had come for asserting his ancient pretensions xhe Pope's
within this realm, published a brief, providing for '*™^' ^^^•
the ecclesiastical government of England. Hitherto the
church of Rome in England had been superintended by eight
vicars apostolic ; but now the Pope, considering the " already
large number of Catholics," and " how the hindrances which
1 See infra, p. 455. * See supra, p. 419.
424 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
stood in the way of the spreading of the Catholic faith arts
daily being removed," saw fit to establish " the ordinary form
of episcopal rule in that kingdom ; " and accordingly divided
the country into one metropolitan, and twelve episcopal sees.
And to his archbishop and bishops he gave " all the rights
and privileges which the Catholic archbishops and bishops,
in other states, have and use, according to the common or-
dinances of the sacred canons and apostolic constitutions."
Nor did the brief omit to state that the object of this change
was " the wellbeing and advancement of Catholicity through-
out England."^
This was followed by a pastoral of Cardinal "Wiseman, on his
appointment as Archbishop of "Westminster, exult-
wisenian's ing in the supposed triumph of his church. "Your
beloved country," said lie, " has received a place
among the fair churches which, normally constituted, form the
splendid aggregate of Catholic communion : Catholic England
has been restored to its orbit in the ecclesiastical' firmament,
from which its light had long vanished, and begins now anew
its course of regularly adjusted action round the centre of
unity, the source of jurisdiction, of light, and of vigor." -
The enthionization of the new bishops was celebrated
with great pomp ; and exultant sermons were
C&tboUo , ' , , „ ^
bishops preached on the revival of the Catholic church.
enthroned. -» ,, , _~ _.. , . , ^
In one or these. Dr. iSewman, — himself a recunt
convert, — declared that "the people of England, who for
80 many years have been separated from the see of Rome,
ai-e about, of their own will, to be added to the holy church."
No acts or language could have wounded more deeply the
Pipniar traditional susceptibilities of the English people,
indignation, p^j. jijj,gg hundred years, the papal supremacy
bad been renounced, and the Romish faith held in abhor-
rence. Even diplomatic relations with the sovereign of the
Roman States, — as' a temporal prince, — had until lately
1 Papal Brief, Sept. .30th, 1850; Ann. Reg., 18.50, App. 405.
8 Pastoral, Oct. 7th, 1850; Ann. Reg., 1850, App. 411.
PAPAL AGGRESSION, 1850. 425
been forbidden.* And now the Pope had assumed to parcel
out the realm into Romish bishoprics, and to embrace the
whole community in his jurisdiction. Never, since the Popish
plot, had the nation been so stirred with wrath and indigna-
tion. Early in November, Lord John Russell, the Premier,
increased the public excitement by a letter to the Bishop of
Durham, denouncing " the aggression of the Pope as in-
solent and insidious," and associating it with the practices of
the tractarian clergy of the Church of England.* Clergy
and laity, chui-chmen and dissenters, vied with one another
in resentful demonstrations ; and in the bonfires of the 5tli
of November, — hitherto the sport of children, — the obnox-
ious effigies of the Pope and Cardinal Wiseman were im-
molated, amidst the execrations of the multitude. No one
could doubt the Protestantism of England. Calm observers
saw in these demonstrations ample proof that the papal pre-
tensions, however insolent, were wholly innocuous ; and Car-
dinal Wiseman, perceiving that in his over-confidence he
had mistaken the temper of the people, sought to moderate
their anger by a conciliatory address. The ambitious episco-
pate now assumed the modest proportions of an arrangement
for the spiritual care of a small body of Roman Catholics.
Meanwhile, the government and a vast majority of the
people were determined that the papal aggression Difficulties
shall be repelled; but how? If general scorn °^ "^^ '^'^•
and indignation could repel an insult, it had already been
amply repelled ; but action was expected on the part of the
state ; and how was it to be taken ? Had the laws of Eng-
land been violated? The Catholic Relief Act of 1829 for-
bade the assumption of any titles belonging to the bishops
of the Church of England and Ireland ; ' but the titles of
these new bishops being taken from places not appropriated
^ In 1S48 an Act was passed, with some difficulty, to allow diplomatic
rslatioas with the sovereign of the Roman States. — 11 & 12 Vict. c. 108;
Hans. Deb., .3d Ser., xcvi. I(i9; ci. 227, 23-t.
2 Nov. 4th, 18-50; Ann. Reg., 1850, p. 198.
» 10 Geo. IV. c. 7, s. 24.
426 CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
by existing sees, their assumption was not illegal. Statutes,
indeed, were still in force prohibiting the introduction of
papal bulls or letters into this country.* But they had long
since fallen into disuse ; and such coraraunications had been
suffered to circulate, without molestation, as natural incidents
to the internal discipline of the church of Rome. To prose-
cute Cardinal Wiseman for such an offence would have been
an act of impotent vengeance. Safe from punishment, lie
would have courted martyrdom. The Queen's supremacy in
all matters, ecclesiastical and temporal, was undoubted ; but
had it been invaded ? When England professed the Cath-
olic faith, the jurisdiction of the Pope had often conflicted
with that of the crown. Both were concerned in the gov-
ernment of the same church ; but now the spiritual suprem-
acy of the crown was exercised over the church of E)ngland
only. Roman Catholics, — in common with all other sub-
jects not in communion with the church, — enjoyed full tol-
eration in their religious worship ; and it was an essential
part of their faith and polity to acknowledge the spiritual
authority of the Pope. Could legal restraints, then, be im-
posed upon the internal government of the church of Rome,
without an infraction of religious toleration ? True, tlie
papal brief, in form and language, assumed a jurisdiction
over the whole realm ; and Cardinal Wiseman had said of
himselt, '• We govern, and shall continue to govern, the
counties of Middlesex, Hertford, and Essex." But was this
more than an application of the immutable forms of the
church of Rome to altered circumstances ? In governing
Roman Catholics, did the Pope wrest from the Queen any
part of her ecclesiastical supremacy ?
Such were the difficulties of the case ; and ministers en-
Ecciesianticai <5<^avored to solvc thcm by legislation. Drawing
Titles Bill, a broad distinction between the spiritual iurisdic-
Feh 7th, ' ''
I8ui. tion of the Pope over the members of his church
1 In 1840, th'.t Art of the I3th Eliz. wliich attaclied the penalties of
trea!K>n lo this of.''' ce liad been lepealed, but the law continued in force.
PAPAL AGGRESSIOX, 1850. 427
and an assumption of sovereignty over the realm, they pro-
posed to interdict all ecclesiastical titles derived from places
in the United Kingdom. Let the Catholics, they argued, be
governed by their own bishops : let the Pope freely appoint
them : leave entire liberty to Catholic worship and polity:
but reserve to the civil government of this country alone the
right to create territorial titles. Upon this principle a bill
was introduced into the House of Commons by Lord John
Russell. The titles assumed by the Catholic bishops were
prohibited : the brief or rescript creating them was declared
unlawful : the acts of persons bearing them were void ; and
gifts or religious endowments acquired by them, forfeited
to the crown.* These latter provisions were subsequently
omitted by ministers ; ^ and the measure was confined to the
prohibition of territorial titles. It was shown that in no
country in Europe, — whether Catholic or Protestant, —
would the Pope be suffered to exercise such an authoi'ity,
without the consent of the state ; and it was not fit that
Kngland alone should submit to his encroachments upon the
civil power. . But as the bill proceeded, the difficulties of
legislation accumulated. The bill embraced Ireland, where
such titles had been permitted, without objection, since the
Relief Act of 1829. It would, therefore, withdraw a privi-
lege already conceded to Roman Catholics, and disturb that
great settlement. Yet, as the measure was founded upon the
necessity of protecting the sovereignty of the crown, no part of
:he realm could be excepted from its operation. And thus,
for the sake of repelling an aggression upon Protestant Eng-
tnnd, Catholic Ireland was visited with this new prohibition.
The bill encountered objection*, the most opposite and
«ontradictory. On one side, it was condemned as objections to
a violation of religious liberty. The Catholics, it **»* ''*"•
W51S said, were everywhere governed by bishops, to whom
listricts were assigned, universally known as dioceses, and
J Feb. 7th, 1851. Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, cxiv. 187.
2 March 7th; /6iei, 1123.
i-2S CHURCH OF ENGLAND.
distinguished by some local designation. To interfere with
the internal polity of the church of Rome was to reverse the
policy of toleration, and might eventually lead to the revival
of penal laws. If there was indolence in the traditional lan-
guage of the Court of Rome, let it be repelled by a royal
proclamation, or by addresses from both Houses, maintaining
Her Majesty's undoubted prerogatives ; but let not Parlia-
ment renew its warfare with religious liberty. On the
other hand, it was urged that the encroachments of the
church of Rome upon the temporal power demanded a more
stringent measure than that proposed, — severer penalties,
and securities more effectual.
These opposite views increased the embarrassments of the
government, and imperilled the success of the measure.
For a time, ministers received the support of large majori-
ties who, — differing upon some points, — were yet agreed
upon the necessity of a legislative condemnation of the re-
cent measures of the church of Rome. But on the report
of the bill, amendments were proposed by Sir F. Thesiger,
to increase the stringency of its provisions. They declared
illegal, not only the particular brief, but all similar briefs ;
extended to every person the power of prosecuting for
offences, with the consent of the attorney-general ; and made
the introduction of bulls or rescripts a penal offence.
Such stringency went far beyond the purpose of rainistei-s,
and they resisted the amendments ; but a considerable num-
ber of members, — chiefly Roman Catholics, — hoping tliiit
ministers, if overborne by the opposition, would abandon the
bill, retired from the House and left ministers in a minority.
The amendments, howevef, were accepted, and the bill wjis
ultimately passed.^
It was a protest against an act of the Pope which had out-
» w . raged the feelings of the people of England : but
Resnltg of ° , ^ '^ f f n
the bill. as a legislative measure, it was a dead letter. The
1 14 & 15 Vict. c. 60; Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, cxiv. cxv. cxvi., passim
Ann. Heg., 1851, ch. ii. iii.
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. 429
church of Rome receded not a step from her position ; and ^
Cardinal Wiseman and the Catholic bishops, — as well in 1
England as in Ireland, — continued to bear, without molesta i
tion, the titles conferred upon them by the Pope. The ex- '
citement of the people, and acrimonious discussions in Par-
liament, revived animosities which recent legislation had
tended to moderate : yet these events were not unfruitful of
good. They dispelled the wild visions of the ultramontane j
party : checked the tracUirian movement in the Church of <
England ; and demonstrated the sound and faithful Protes- \
tantism of the people. Nor had the ultramontane party any \
cause of gratulation, in their apparent triumph over the state.
They had given grave offence to the foremost champions of
the Catholic cause : their conduct was deplored by the laity
of their own church ; and they had increased the repugnance
of the people to a faith, which they had scarcely yet learned
to tolerate.
The church of Scotland, like her sister-church of England,
has also been rent by schisms. The protracted church of
efforts of the English government to sustain epis- ^wi^'^nd
copacy in the establishment,* resulted in the foun- "dissent.
dation of a distinct episcopalian church. Comparatively
small in numbers, this communion embraced a large pi-opor- !
tion of the nobility and gentry who affected the English con-
nection and disliked the democratic spirit and constitution of
the Presbytei'ian church. In 1732, the establishment was
further weakened by the retirement of Ebenezer Erskine,
and an ultra-puritanical sect, who founded the Secession
Church of Scotland.^ This was followed by the foundation
of another seceding church, called the Presbytery of Relief,
under Gillespie, Boston, and Colier ; * and by the growth of
1 Supra, i>. 300.
2 Cunninfjhain's Church Hist of Scotland, ii. 427-i40, 450-455; Mon-
criefF's Life of Erekine; Fraser's Life of Erskine; Thomson's Hist of the
Secession Church.
3 Cunningham's Ch. Hist., ii. 501, 513. In 1847 the Secession Church
and the Relief Synod were amalgamated under the title of the " United
Presbjterian Church."
430 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
independents, voluntaries, and other sects. But the widest
schism is of recent date ; and its causes illustrate the settled
principles of Presbyterian polity, and the relations of the
church of Scotland to the state.
Lay patronage had been recognized by the Catholic church
Higtoryof if* Scotland, as elsewhere; but the Presbyterian
patronage, cliurch tooH evinced her repugnance to its contin-
uance. Wherever lay patronage has been allowed, it has
been the proper office of the church to judge of the qualifica
tions of the clergy presented by patrons. The patron nonii
nates to a benefice ; the church approves and inducts the
nominee. But this limited function, wliich has ever been ex-
ercised in the church of England, did not satisfy the Scottish
reformers, who, in the spirit of other Calvinislic churches,
claimed for the people a voice in the nomination of their own
ministers. Knox went so far as to declare, in his First Book
of Discipline, — which, however, was not adopted by the
church, — " that it appertaineth unto the people, and to every
several congregation, to elect their minister." * The Second
Book of Discipline, adopted as a standard of the church in
1578, qualified this doctrine ; but declared " tliat no person
should be intruded in any offices of the kirk contrary to the
will of the congregation, or without the voice of the elder-
ship." * But patronage being a civil right, the state under-
took to define it, and to prescribe the functions of the cliurch.
In loC7, the Parliament declared that the presentation to
benefices " was reserved to the just and ancient patrons,"
while the examination and admission of ministers belonged
to the church. Should the induction of a minister be refused,
the patron might appeal to the General Assembly.* And
again, by an Act of 1592, presbyteries were required to re-
ceive and admit whatever qualified minister was presented by
the crown or lay patrons.* In the troublous times of 1649,
1 A. T>. 1560, ch. iv. 8. ii. Robertson's Auchterarder Case, i. 22 (Mr.
Whighnm's argument), &c.
3 Ch. iii. 8. 4 & 5; and again, in other words, ch. xii. s. 9 & LO.
« Scota Acts, 1567, c. 7.
* James VI. Pari., xii. c. 116.
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. 431
the church being paramount, Parliament swept away all lay
patronage as a '• popish custom." ^ On the Restoration it
was revived, and rendered doubly odious by the persecutions
of that period. Tl;e Revolution restored the ascendency of
the Presbyterian Church and party; and. again patronage
was overthrown. By an Act of 1690, the elders and heri-
tors were to choose a minister for the approval of the con-
gregation ; and if the latter disapproved the choice, they i
were to state their reasons to the presbytery, by whom the '
matter was to be determined.*^ Unhappily this settlement,
so congenial to Presbyterian traditions and sentiment, was
not suffered to be permanent. At the Union, the constitution
and existing rights of the church of Scotland were guaran-
teed : yet within five years, the heritors determined to re-
claim their patronage. The time was favorable : Jacobites
and high church Tories were in the ascendant, who hated
Scotch Presbyterians no less than English dissenters ; and
an Episcopalian Parliament naturally favored the claims of
patrons. An Act was therefore obtained in 1712, repealing
the Scotch Act of 1690, and restoring the ancient rights of
patronage.' It was an untoward act, conceived in the spirit i
of times before the Revolution. The General Assembly
then protested against it as a violation of the treaty of union ;
and long continued to recoi-d their protest.* The people of
Scotland were outraged. Their old strife with Episcopalians
was still raging; and to that communion most of the patrons
belonged. For some time patrons did not venture to exer-
cise their rights : ministers continued to be called by congre-
gations ; and some who accepted presentations from lay pa-
trons were degraded by the church.^ Patronage, at first a
1 Scots Acts, 1649, c. 171.
2 Ibid., 1690, c. 23.
5 10 Anne, c. 12.
* Carstares State Papers, App. 796-800; Cunningham's Chmch Hist, of
Scotland, ii. 362. Claim of Rights of the Church of Scotland, May, 1842.
p. 9; D'Aubigne's Germany, England, and Scotland, 37~-385.
• Cunningham's Church Hist, ii. 420.
432 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
cause of contention with the state and the laity, afterwards
brought strifes into the church herself. The Assembly was
frequently at issue with presbyteries, concerning the induc-
tion of ministers. The church was also divided on the ques-
tion of presentations ; the moderate party, as it was called,
favoring the rights of patrons, and the popular party the calls
of the people. To this cause was mainly due the secession
of Ebenezer Erskine^ and Gillespie,^ and the foundation of
their rival churches. But from about the middle of the last
century the moderate party, having obtained a majority in
the Assembly, maintained the rights of patrons ; and thus,
without any change in the law, the Act of 1712 was, at
length, consistently enforced.' A call by the people had
always formed part of the ceremony of induction ; and during
the periods in which lay patronage had been superseded, it
had unquestionably been a substantial election of a minister
by his congregation.* A formal call continued to be I'ecog-
nized ; but presbyteries did not venture to reject any quali-
fied person duly presented by a patron. At the end of the
century, the patronage question appeared to have been set at
rest*
But the enforcement of this law continued to be a fertile
Lay patron- <^*"S6 of disscnt from the establishment. When a
^ a cause minister was forced upon a congregation by the
of dissent. . ^ r>
authority of the Pi*esbytery or General Assembly,
the people, instead of submitting to the decision of the
church, joined the Secession Church, the Presbytery of
1- Cunningham's Cliurch Hist, of Scotland, ii. 419-446, 450-455 * hoiu-
eon's Hist, of the Secession Church; MoncrielT's Life of Erskine, Eraser's
Life of Krskine.
2 Ciinningliam's Church Hist, ii. 501, 613.
« Cunningham's Church Hist of Scotland, ii. 491-500, 511, 537, 558;
D'Aubignii's Gennany, Englapd, and Scotland, 388-394; Judgments in
first Auchtcrardur case.
* Judgments of Lord Brougham and the Lord Chancellor in the first
Auchterarder case, p. 239, 334, 335.
* Cunningham's Church Hist of Scotland, ii. 581.
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. 433
Relief, or the Voluntaries.^ No people in Christendom ,
are so devoted to the pul{)it as the Scotch. There all the
services of their churcii are centred. No liturgy directs
their devotion : the minister is all in all to them, — in prayer,
in exposition, and in sermon. If acceptable to his flock, they
join devoutly in his prayers, and are never weary of his
discourses : if lie tinds no favor, the Services are without
interest or edification. Hence a considerable party in the
church were persuaded that a revival of the ancient princi-
ples of their faith, which recognized the potential voice of
the people in the appointment of ministers, was essential to
the security of the establishment.
Hostility to lay patronage was continually increasing, and
found expression in petition* and parliamentary ^he veto
discussion.^ Meanwhile the " non-intrusion party," ^*'' ^^^* I
led by Dr. Chalmers, was gaining ground in the General
Assembly. In 1834, they had secured a majority ; and,
without awaiting remedial measures from Parliament, they ;
succeeded in passing the celebrated " Veto Act." * This act I
declared it to " be a fundamental law of the church that no \
pastor sliall be intruded on a congregation, contrary to the \
will of the people ; " and provided that if, without any special |
objections to the moral character, doctrine, or fitness of a /
presentee, the majority of the male heads of families signified
their dissent, the presbytery should, on that ground alone,
reject him. Designed, in good faith, as an amendment of
the law and custom of the church, which the Assembly was
competent to make, it dealt with rights already defined by
Pai-liament. Patronage was border land, which the church
had already contested with the state ; and it is to be lamented •
that the Assembly should thus have entered upon it, with
1 Cunningham's Church Hist, of Scotland, ii. 581; Report on Church
Patronage (Scotland), 1834, Kvidence.
^ July 16th, 1833, on Mr. Sinclair's motion. — Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, xix.
704.
8 It wa-s termed " Overture and Interim- Act on Calls," May Slst; with
regulations, .Tune 2d. It was confirmed May 29th, 1835.
vui.. II. 28
431 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
out the concurrence of Parliament. Never was time sc
propitious for the candid consideration of religious questions.
Reforms were being introduced into the churcli ; the griev-
ances of dissenters were being redressed ; a popular party
were in the ascendant; and agitation had lately shown its
power over the deliberations of the legislature. A Veto Act.
or other compromise sanctioned by Parliament, would have
brought peace to the church. But now the state had made
one law : the church another ; and how far they were com-
patible was soon brought to a painful issue.
In the same year, Lord KinnouU presented Mr. Young to
the vacant parish of Auchterarder ; but a major-
Auchterarder '■ . *'
case, 1834- ity of the male heads of families having objected
to his presentation^ without stating any special
grounds of objection, the presbytery refused to proceed with
his trials, in the accustomed form, and judge of his qualirica-
tions. Mr. Young appealed to the synod of Perth and
Stirling, and thence to the General Assembly ; aud the
presbytery being upheld by both these courts, rejected Mr
Young.
Having vainly appealed to the superior church courts,
Advene Lord Kinnoull and Mr. Young claimed from the
jf'ui'e civil Court of Scssion an enforcement of their civil rights,
courts. They maintained that the presbytery, as a church
court, were bound to adjudge the fitness of the presentee,
and not to delegate that duty to the people, whose right was
not recognized by law ; and that his rejection, on account of
the veto, was illegal. The presbytery contended that, admis-
sion to the pastoral office being the function of the church,
she had a right to consider the veto of the congregation as a
test of fitness, and to prescribe rules for the guidance of
presbyteries. In the exercise of such functions the jurisdic
tion of the church was supreme and beyond the control of
the civil tribunals. The court, however, held that neither
the law of the church, prior to the Veto Act, nor the law
01 the land, recognized the right of a congregation to reject
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. 435
a qualified minister. It was the duty of the i/resbytery to
judge of his fitness, on grounds stated and examined ; and
the Veto Act, in conferring such a power upon congregations,
violated the civil and patrimonial rights of patron.*, secured
to them by statute, and hiiherto protected by the church her-
self. Upon the question of jurisdiction, the court maintained
its unquestionable authority to give redress to suitors who
complained of a violation of their civil rights ; and while
admitting the competency of the church to deal with matters
of doctrine and discipline, declared that in trenching upon
civil rights she had transgressed the limits of her jurisdic-
tion. To deny the right of the Court of Session to give
effect to the provisions of the statute law, when contravened
by church courts, was to eetablish the supremacy of the
church over the state.^ From this decision the Presbytery
appealed to the House of Lords, by whom, after able argu-
ments at the bar, and masterly judgments fi'om Lord Chan-
cellor Cottenham and Lord Brougham, it was, on every
point, alfirmed.^
Submission to the law, even under protest, and an appeal
to the remedial equity of Parliament, might now Reastance
have averted an irreconcilable conflict between eLi'xssem-
the civil and ecclesiastical powers, without an '''y-
absolute surrender of the principles for which the church
was contending. But this occasion was lost. The Assembly,
indeed, suspended the operation of the Veto Act for a year ;
and agreed that, so far as the temporalities of Auchterarder
were concerned, the case was concluded against the church.
The manse, the glebe, and the stipend should be given up ;
hut whatever concerned the duties of a presbytery, in regard-
to the cure of souls and the ministry of the gospel, was
purely ecclesiastical and beyond the jurisdiction of any
civil court. A presbytery being a church court, exercising
1 Robertson's Report of the Auchterarder Case, 2 vols. 8vo., 1838.
^ Macleau and Robinsoa's cases decided in the House of Lords, 1839, L
830.
436 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
npirhual powers, was amenable to the Assembly only, and
was not to be coerced by the civil power. On these grounds
it was determined to refuse obedience to the courts; and the
hopeless strife continued between the two jurisdictions, em-
bittered by strong party differences in the Assembly and
among the laity of Scotland. Parliament alone could have
stayed it : but the resistance of the church forbade its inter-
josition; and a compromise, proposed by Lord Aberdeen
vas rejected by the Assembly.
The judgment of the Court of Session having been af-
Second Aueh- firmed, the presbytery were directed to make trial
terardercase. ^f ^jj^, qualifications of Mr. Young ; but they
again refused. For this refusal Lord KinnouU and Mr.
Young brought an action for damages, in the Court of
Session, against the majority of the presbytery ; and ob-
tained an unanimous decision that they were entitled to
pecuniary redress for the civil wrongs they had sustained. On
appeal to the House of Lords, this judgment also was unani-
mously affiinied.* In another case, the Court of Session
interfered in a more peremptory form. The
Daviotcase, , ,, nr , . , , ,• • r
Dec. 17th, crown presented Mr. Mackintosh to the livmc: oi
1889.
Daviot and Dunlichity : when several parish-
ioners, who had been canvassing for another candidate,
whose claims they had vainly pressed upon the secretary
of state, prepared to exercise a veto. But as such a pro-
ceeding had been pronounced illegal by the House of Lords,
Mr. Mackintosh obtained from the Court of Session a
decree, interdicting the heads of families from appearing
before the presbytery and declaring their dissent without
"assigning special objections.*
While this litigation was proceeding, the civil and ecclesi-
TheStnith- astical authorities were brought into more direct
bogiu cases. jjQ(j violent collision. Mr. Edwards was pre-
sented, by the trustees of Lord Fife, to the living of
1 .Tuly 11th, 1842. Bell's Cases decided in the House of Lords, i. 662.
» Duulop, Bell, aud Murray's Reports, ii. 253.
CHURCH OF SCOTLA.ND. 437
Marnoch, in the presbytery of Strathbogie ; but a majority
of the male heads of families having signified their veto, the
seven ministers constituting the presbytery, in obedience
to the law of the church and an order of the General
Assembly, refused to admit him to his trials. Mr. Edwards
appealed to the Court of Session, and obtained a decree
directing the presbytery to admit him to the living, if found
qualified. The ministers of the presbytery were now placed
in the painful dilemma of being obliged to disobey either
the decree of the civil court, or the order of the supreme
court of the church. In one case they would be punished
for contempt ; in the other for contumacy. Prohibited by
a commission of Assembly from proceeding further before
the next General Assembly, they nevertheless resolved, as
ministers of the established church sworn to pay allegiance
to the crown, to render obedience to the law, constitutionally
interpreted and declared. For this offence against the
church tliey were suspended by the commission of Assem-
bly ; and their proceedings as a presbytery were annulled.^
The Court of Session, thus defied by the church, sus-
pended the execution of the sentence of the com- The strath-
mission of Assembly against the suspended min- ^^'^^b?*^
isters, prohibited the service of the sentence of i*"*' ^^**^-
suspension, and forbade other ministers from preaching
or intruding into their churches or schools.^ These pro-
ceedings being reported to the General Assembly, that body
approved of the acts of the commission, further suspended
the ministers, and again provided for the performance of
their parochial duties. Again the Court of Session inter-
fered, and prohibited the execution of these acts of the
1 Dec. 11th, 1839.
2 Dunlop, Bell, and Murray's Reports, ii. 258, 585. Lord Gillies on the
question of jurisdiction, said: — "The pretensions of the church of Scot-
land, at present, are exactly those of the Papal See a few centuries ago.
They not only decline the jurisdiction of the civil courts, but the}- deny
that Parliament can bind them by a law which they choose to say is incna*
•istent with the law of Christ."
438 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
Assembly, which were in open defiance of its previous
interdicts.' The church was in no mood to abate her pre-
tensions. Hitherto the members of tlie Strathbogie pres-
bytery had been under sentence of suspension only. The;'
had vainly sought protection from Parliament ; and on t\\>^
27th of May, 1841, the General Assembly deposed them
from tiie ministry. Dr. Chalmers, in moving their depo-
sition, betrayed the spirit which animated that Assembly,
and the dangers which were now threatening the establish-
ment. " The church of Scotland," he said, " can never give
way, and will sooner give up her existence as a national
establishment, than give up her powers as a self-acting
and self-regulating body to do what in her judgment is
best for the honor of the Redeemer and the interest of his
kingdom upon earth." ^ It was evident that the ruling party
in the Assembly were prepared to resist the civil authority,
at all hazards.
The contest between the civil and ecclesiastical jurisdic-
tions was now pushed still further. The maiority
The strath- „, . ^ .„ ,,. .uii
bogie com- oi the presbytery oi btrathbogie, who had been
deposed by the General Assembly but reinstated
by the Court of Session, elected commissioners to the
General Assembly : the minority elected others. The Court
of Session interdicted the commissioners elected by the
minority from taking their seats in the Assembly.' And in
restraining the contumacy of these refractory commissioners,
the civil court was forced to adjudge the constitution and
rights of the Ecclesiasticiil Assembly. All these decisions
were founded on the principle that ministers and members
of the Church of Scotland were not to be permitted to refuse
1 June 11th, 1840. Dunlop, Bell, and Murray's Reports, ii. 1047, 1380.
8 Ann. Rj'K-, 1841, p. 71-73; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ivii. I.r7; Iviii. 1503.
» Jlay 27th, 1842. Dunlop, Bell, and Murray's Reports, iv. 1298. Lord
FuUerton, who differed from the niajoritj' of the court, said: — "According;
to my present impression, this court has no more rigiit to grant such an
interdict, than to interdict any persons from taking their seats and acting
•nd voting as members of the House of Commons." — Ibid.
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. ' 439
obedience to the decrees of the civil courts of the realm,
or to claim the exercise of rights which those courts had
pronounced illegal. The church regarded lliera as encroach-
ments upon her spiritual functions.
It was plain that such a conflict of jurisdictions could not
endure much longer. One or the other must „, ,
" Claim aad
yield ; or the legislature must interfei'e to prevent declaration
confusion and anarchy. In May 1842, the Gen- Assembiv.
eral Assembly presented to Her INIajesty a claim, ^^'
declaration, and protest, complaining of encroachments by
the Court of Session ; and also an address, praying for the
abolition of patronage. These communications were fol-
lowed by a memorial to Sir Robert Peel and the other
members of his government, praying for an answer to the
complaints of the church, which, if not redressed, would
inevitably result in the disruption of the establishment. On
behalf of the government, Sir James Graham. Answer of
Secretary of State for the Home Department, re- Graham^jan.
turned a reply, stern and unbending in tone, and ^"^'is^-
with more of rebuke than conciliation. The aggression,
be said, had originated with the Assembly, who had passed
the illegal Veto Act, which was incompatible with the rights
of patrons as secured by statute. By the standards of the
church, the Assembly were restrained from meddling with
civil jurisdiction : yet they had assumed to contravene an
Act of Parliament, and to resist the decrees of the Court of
Session, the legal expositor of the intentions of the legis-
lature. The existing law respected the rights of patrons to
present, of the congi-egation to object, and of the church
courts to hear and judge, — to admit or reject the candidate.
But the Veto Act deprived the patrons of their rights, and
transferred them to the congregations. The government
were detennined to uphold established rights and the juris-
diction of the civil courts ; and would certainly not consent
to the abolition of patronage. To this letter the General
Assembly returned an answer of extraordinary logical
440 CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
force ; but the controversy had reached a point beyond the
domain of argument.*
The church was hopelessly at issue with the civil power.
Quoad sacra ^or was patronage the only ground of conflict.
j'an20th' '^'*^ General Assembly had admitted the ministers
1843. yf quoad sacra parishes and citapels of ease to the
privileges of the parochial clergy, including the right of
sitting in the assembly and otiier ciuirch courts.^ The
legality of the acts of the Assembly was cjilled in question;
and in January 1843, the Court of Session adjudged tliem to
be illegal.' On the meeting of the Assembly on the 31st of
January, a motion was made, by Dr. Cook, to exclude the
quoad sacra ministers from that body, as disqualified by law ;
but it was lost by a majority of ninety-two. Dr. Cook and
the minority, protesting against the illegal constitution of the
Assembly, witlidrew ; and the quoad sacra ministers retained
their seats, in defiance of the Court of Session. The conflict
was approaching its crisis ; and, in the last resort, tlie Assem-
bly agreed upon a petition to Parliament, complaining of tiie
encroachments of the civil courts upon the spiritual jurisdic-
tion of the church, and of the grievance of patronage.
This petition was brought under the consideration of the
PeUtioDof Commons by Mr. Fox Maule. He ably presented
^bw'.March '''*^ entire case for the church ; and the debate
7th, 1843. elicited the opinions of ministers and the most
eminent members of all parties. Amid expressions of
respect for the church, and appreciation of the learning,
piety, and earnestness of her rulers, a sentiment prevailed
that, until the General Assembly had rescinded the Veto
Act in deference to the decision of the House of Lords, the
interposition of Parliament could scarcely be claimed on her
behalf. She had taken up her position, in open defiance of
the civil authority ; and nothing would satisfy her claims but
^ Papers presented in answer to addresses of the House of Cocimoiis,
Feb. 9th and 10th, 1843.
a Acts of Assembler, 1833, 1834, 1837, and 1839.
• Stewarton Case, Bell, Murray, &c.. Reports, iv. 427.
CHUEfH OF SCOTLAND. 441
submission to her spiritual jurisdiction. Some legislation
might yet be possible ; but this petition assumed a recognition
of the claims of tlie church, to which the majority of the
House were not prepared to assent. Sir Robert Peel
regarded these claims as involving "the establishment of an
ecclesiastical domination, in defiance of law," which "could
not be acceded to without the utmost ultimate danger, both
to the religious liberties and civil rights of the people." The
House concurred in this opinion, and declined to entertain
the claims of the church by a majority of one hundred and
thirty-five.^
This decision was accepted by the non-intrusion party as
conclusive ; and preparations were immediately
made for their secession from the church.^ The sion, May
/~\ Ik 11 itr.ip-»r 18th, 1843.
Oreneral Assembly met on the loth or May, when
a protest was read by the moderator, signed by 169 commis-
sioners of the Assembly, including quoadsacra ministers and
lay elders. This protest declared the jurisdiction assumed by
the civil courts to be "inconsistent with Christian liberty, and
with the authority which the Head of the church hath con-
ferred on the church alone." It stated that, the word and
will of the state having recently been declared that submission
to the civil courts formed a condition of the establishment,
they could not, without sin, continue to retain the benefits of
the establishment to which such condition was attached, and
would therefore withdraw from it, — retaining, however, the
confession of faith and standards of the church. After the
reading of this protest, the remonstrants withdrew from the
Asseml)ly ; and, joined by many other ministers, constituted
the " Free Church of Scotland." Their schism was founded
on the first principles of the Presbyterian polity, — repug-
nance to lay patronage, and repudiation of the civil
1 Ayes, 76; Noes, 211. Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixvii. 354, 441. See also
debate in the Lords on Lord Campbell's resolutions, March 31st; Ibid,.
Ixviii. 218; Debate on Quoad Sacra Ministers, May 9th; Ib'uJ., Ixix. 12.
2 Minute of Special Commission of the General Assembly, March •20th;
Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 245.
442 FREE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.
jurisdiction in ecclesiastical affairs. These principles, — at
issue from the very foundation of the church, — had now
torn her asunder.*
A few days afterwards, the General Assembly rescinded
Veto Act ^''*^ Veto Act, and the act admitting quoad sacra
rescinded. ministers to that court ; and annulled the sentences
upon the Strathbogie ministers. The seceders were further
declared to have ceased to be members of the church, and
their endowments pronounced vacant.^ The church thus
submitted herself, once more, to the authority of the law ; and
renewed her loyal alliance with the state.
The secession embraced more than a third of the clergy of
the church of Scotland ; and afterwards received
Church of Considerable accessions of strength.' Some of
the most efninent of the clergy, — including Dr.
Chalmers and Dr. Candlish, — were its leaders. Their
eloquence and character insured the popularity of the move-
ment ; and those who denied the justice of their cause, and
blamed them as the authors of a grievous schism, could not
but admire their earnestness and 'noble self-denial. Men,
highly honored in the church, had sacrificed all they most
valued to a principle which they conscientiously believed to
demand that sacrifice. Their once crowded churches were
surrendered to others, while they went forth to preach on
the hillside, in tents, in barns, and stables. But they relied,
•with just confidence, upon the sympathies and liberality of
their flocks;* and in a few years the spires of their free
1 Sydow'B Scottish Church Question, 1845 ; D'Aubign^'s Germany, Eng-
land, and Scotland, 377-459; Buchanan's Ten Years' Conflict.
2 Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 250; D'Aubign^'s Gemianv, England, and Scot-
land, 443-459.
* Of 947 parish ministers, 214 seceded; and of 246 quoad sacra ministers,
144 seceded. — Ann. Reg., 1843, p. 255; Speech of Lord Aberdeen, June
13th, 1843: Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., l.xix. 1414; Ilannays Life of Dr. Chal-
mers.
* In eighteen years they contributed 1,251,458/. for the building of
churches, m.inses, and schools; and for all the purposes of their new estab-
lishment no less a sum than 6,229,631/. Tabular abstracts of sums con-
CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. 443
kirks were to be seen in most of the parishes of Scot-
land.
When this lamentable secession had been accomplished,
the government at length undertook to legislate patronage
upon the vexed question of patronage. In 1840, *'^'' ^^'^^
Lord Aberdeen had proposed a bill, in the vain hope of
reconciling the conflicting views of the two parties in the
church ; and this bill he now offered as a settlement of the
claims of patrons, the church, and the people. The Veto
Act had been pronounced illegal, as it delegated to the peo-
ple the functions of the church courts ; and in giving the
judgment of the House of Lords, it had been laid down that
a presbytery, in judging of the qualifications of a minister,
were restricted to an inquiry into his " life, literature, and
doctrine." The bill, while denying a capricious veto to the ^
people, recognized their right of objecting to a presentation, ;
in respect of " ministerial gifts and qualities, either in gen-
eral, or with reference to that particular parish ; " of which
objections the presbytery were to judge. In other words,
they might show that a minister, whatever his general qoaii-
fications, was unfitted for a particular parish. He might be
ignorant of Gaelic, among a Gaelic population : or too weak
in voice to preach in a large church : or too infirm of limb
to visit the sick in rough Highland glens. It was argued
that, with so wide a field of objection, the veto was practical-
ly transferred from the people to the presbytery ; and that
the bill being partly declaratory amounted to a partial re-
versal of the judgment of the Lords in the Auchterarder
case. But, after learned discussions in both Houses, it was
passed by Parliament, in the hope of satisfying the reason-
able wishes of the moderate party in the church, who re-
spected the rights of patrons, yet clung to the Calvinistic
principle which recognized the concurrence of the people.^
tributed to Free Church of Scotland to 1858-1859, with MS. additions for
the two following years, obtained through the kindness of Mr. Dunlop, M.P
1 Lords' Deb., June 13th, July 3d, 17th, 1843 ; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixix.
1400; Ixx. 534, 1202; Commons' Deb., July 31st, Aug. 10th, 1843; Hana.
Deb., Ixxi. 10, 517; 6 & 7 Vict c. 61.
444 CHURCH IN niELAND.
To the people was now given the full privilege of objection ;
and to the church judicatories the exclusive right of judg-
ment.
The secession of 1843, following prior schisms, augmented
the religious disunion of Scotland ; and placed a
Religions *= . ^
disniiion in large majority of the people out of communion
ScoUand. . , , , , , • , , . ■ ■,,
With the state church, — which the natioa itself
had founded at the Reformation.^
Let us now turn, once more, to the history of the church
Church in '" Ireland. Originally the church of a minority,
Ireland. gjjg j^j^j never extended her fold. On the con-
trary, the rapid multiplication of the Catholic peasantry had
increased the disproportion between the members of her com-
munion and a populous nation. At the Union, indeed, she
had been united to her powerful sister church in England ; '
and the weakness of one gained support from the strength of
the other. The law had joined them together ; and constitu-
tionally they became one church. But no law could change
the essential character of the Irish establishment, or its rela-
tions to the people of that country. In vain were English
Protestants reckoned among its members. No theory could
disturb the proportion of Protestants and Catholics in Ire-
land. While the great body of the people were denied
the rights of British subjects, on account of their religion,
that grievance had caused the loudest complaints. But in
the midst of the sufferings and discontents of that unhappy
land, jealousy of the Protestant church, aversion to her en-
dowed clergy, and repugnance to contribute to the mainte-
nance of the established religion, were ever proclaimed as
prominent causes of disaffection and outrage.
1 In 1851, of 3395 places of worship 1183 belonjjed to the Established
Church; 839 to the Free Church; 465 to the United Presbyterian Church;
112 to the Episcopal Church; 104 to Roman Catholics; and 642 to other
religions denominations, embracing most of the sects of English dissenters.
On the census Sunday 228,757 attended the nioining service of the Estab-
lished Church; and no le^s than 255,482 that of the Free Church (CensM
Returns, 1851 ). In 18G0, the latter had 234,953 communicants.
* Act of Union, Art. 5.
CHURCH IN IRELAND. 445
Foremost among the evils by which the church and the
people were afflicted, was the law of tithes. How- Resistance to
ever impolitic in England/ its impolicy was ag- "'^**-
gravated by the peculiar condition of Ireland. In the one
country, tithes were collected from a few thriving farmers, —
generally members of the church : in the other, they were
levied upon vast numbers of cottier tenants, — miserably
|)oor, and generally Catholics.* Hence, the levy of tithes, in
kind, provoked painful conflicts between the clergy and the
pea-antry. Statesmen had long viewed the law of tithes
with anxiety. So far back as 1786, Mr. Pitt had suggested
the propriety of a general commutation, as a measure cal-
culated to remove grievances and strengthen the interests of
the church.' In 1807, the Duke of Bedford, attributing
most of the disorders of the country to the rigid exaction of
tithes, had recommended their conversion into a land tax, and
ultimately into land.* Repeated discussions in Parliament
had revealed the magnitude of the evils incident to the law.
Sir John Newport, in 1822,^ and Sir Henry Parnell in 1823.^
had exposed them. In 1824, Lord Althorp and Mr. Hume
had given them a prominent place among the grievances of
Ireland.' The evils were notorious, and, remaining without
correction, grew chronic and incurable. The peasants were
taught by their own priesthood, and by a long course of politi-
cal agitation, to resent the demands of the clergy as unjust :
1 Supra, p. 416.
2 In one parish 200/. were contributed by 1600 persons; in another
700/., by no less than two thoasand. — Second Report of Commons' Coni-
nittee, 1832. In a parish in the county of Cariow, out of 446 tithe-payers
221 paid sums under 9fl.; and out of a body of 7005, in several parislies,
one third paid less than 9d. each. — J/r. Littleton's Speech, Feb. 20th,
1834.
3 Letter to the Duke of Rutland; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 319.
See also Lord Castlereagh's Corr., iv. 193 (1801).
* Speech of Lord John Russell, June 23d, 1834; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser.,
x.xiv. 798.
& Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., vi. 1475; Mr. Hume also, March 4th, 1823; Ibid,
Viii. 367.
« Ibid., ix. 1175 f Ibid., xi. 547, 660.
446 CHURCH IN IRELAND.
theii poverty aggravated the burden ; and their numbers ren-
dered the collection of tithes not only difficult but dangerous.
It could only be attempted by tiihe-pioctors, — men of des-
perate character and fortunes, wiiose hazardous services hard-
ened their hearts against the people, and whose rigorous ex-
ecution of the law increased its unpopularity. To mitigate
these disorders, an Act was passed, in 1824, for the voluntary
composition of tithes : but the remedy was partial; and ie.si>t-
ance and conHicts continued to increase with (lie bitterness of
the strife that raged between Protestants and Catholics. A
length, in 1831, the collection of tithes in many parishes be-
came impracticable. The clergy received the aid of the
police, and even of the military ; but in vain. Tithe-proctors
were murdered ; and many lives were lost, in collisions be-
tween the police and the peasantry. Men, not unwilling to pay
what they knew to be lawful, were intimidated and coerced
by the more violent enemies of the church. Tithes could
only be collected at the point of the bayonet; and a civil
war seemed impending over a country, which for centuries
iiad been wasted by conquests, rebellions, and internecine
strife. The clergy shrank from the shedding of blood in their
service ; and abandoned their claims upon a refractory and
desperate people.
The law was at fault ; and the clergy, deprived of their
legal maintenance, were starving, or dependent
ProvUion for » . , • i r,., , , ,
thecier^, upon private chanty.* Ihat the law must be re-
viewed, was manifest ; but in the mean time, imme-
diate provision was needed for the clergy. The state, unable
to protect them in the enforcement of their rights, deemed
Itself responsible for their sufferings, and extended its helping
band. In -1832, the Lord-lieutenant was empowered to ad
vance 60,000/. to the clergy who had been unable to collect
the tithes of the previous year ; ^ and the government rashly
^ Reports of Committees in Lords and Commons, 1832. Ann. Keg
1831, p. 324; 1832, p. 281.
2 Act 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 41.
CHURCH IN IRELAND. 447
undertook to levy the arrears of that year, in repayment of
the advance. Tlieir attempt was vain and hopeless. They
went forth, with an array of tithe-proctors, police, and mili-
tary ; but the people resisted. Desperate conflicts ensued :
many lives were lost: the executive became as hateful as tiie
clergy ; but the arrears were not collected. Of 100,000/.,
no more than 12,000/. were recovered, at the cost of tumults
and bloodshed.^ The people were in revolt against the law ;
and triumphed. The government, confessing their failure,
abandoned their fruitless eflTorts : and in 1833, obtained from
Parliament the advance of a million, to maintain the destitute
clergy, and cover the arrears of tithes for that and the two
previous years. Indemnity for this advance, however, was
sought in the foi"m of a land tax, which, it needed little fore-
Bight to conjecture, would meet with the same resistance as
tithes.^ These were temporary expedients, to meet the
immediate exigencies of the Irish clergy ; and hitherto the
only general measure which the legislature had sanctioned,
was one for making the voluntary tithe compositions compul-
sory and permanent.'
Meanwhile, the difficulties of the tithe question were bring-
ing into bold relief the anomalous condition of the insh church
Irish church. Resistance to the payment of tithes "^°""-
was accompanied by fierce vituperation of the clergy, and
denunciations of a large Protestant establishment in the
midst of a Catholic people. The Catholic priests and agita-
tators would have trampled upon the church as an usurper:
the Protestants and Orangemen were prepared to defend her
rights with the sword. Lord Grey's government, leaning to
neither extreme, recognized the necessity of extensive re-
forms and reductions in the establishment. Notwithstanding
the spoliations of Henry VIII. and Elizabeth, its endow-
ments were on the ambitious scale of a national church.
With fewer members than a moderate diocese in England, it
1 Speech of Mr. Littleton; Hans. Deb., 3d Set., xx. 342.
2 3 & 4 Will. IV. c. 100; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser,, xx. 350.
3 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 119.
448 CHURCH IN^ IRELAND.
was governed by no less than four archbishops and eighteen
bishops. Other dignitaries enjoyed its temporalities in tho
same proportion ; and many sinecure benefices were without
even Protestant flocks.
Such an establishment could not be defended ; and in
Church 1833, ministers introduced an extensive measure
Sreffi""** of reform. It suppressed, after the interests of
Biu, 1333. existing incumbents, two archbishoprics and eight
separate sees ; and reduced the incomes of some of the re-
maining bishops. All sinecure stalls in cathedrals were
abolished, or associated with effective duties. Livings, in
which no duties had been performed for three years, were not
to be filled up. First fruits were abolished. Church cess, —
an unpopular impost, similar to church-rates in England,
— levied upon Catholics, but manjiged by Protestant vestries,
— was discontinued; and the repair of churches provided
for out of a graduated tax upon the clergy. Provision was
made for the improvement of church lands ; for the augmen-
tation of small livings, and for the building of churches and
glebe houses, under the superintendence of a commission, by
whom the surplus revenues of the church were to be admin-
istered.^
So bold were these reforms, that even Mr. O'Connell at
first expressed his satisfaction : yet while they discontinued
the most prominent abuses of the establishment, they in-
creased its general efficiency. In the opinion of some extreme
Tories, indeed, the measure was a violation of the <;oronation
oath and the stipulations of the Union with Ireland : it was
an act of spoliation : its principles were revolutionary. But
by men of more moderate views, its justice and necessity
were generally recognized.'
One principle, however, involved in the scheme became
Principle of *'*^ ground of painful controversy; and long in-
•ppropriation. terfered with the progress of other measures con-
» Lord Allhorp's Speech, Feb. I'ith, 183.3; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xv. 501.
3 Debate on second reading, May 6rh; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xvii. 966.
CHURCH IN IRELAND. 449
ceived in the interests of the church. A considerable sum
was expected to be derived from the grant of perpetual leases
of church lands ; and the question was naturally raised, how
■was it to be disposed of? Admitting the first claims of the
church, — what was to become of any surplus, after satisfy-
ing the needs of the establishment? On one side, it was
maintained that the property of the church was inalienable ;
and that nothing but its redistribution, for ecclesiastical pur-
poses, could be suffered. On the other, it was contended
that the church had no claim to the increased value given
to her lands by an Act of Parliament ; and that, in any
case, the legislature was free to dispose of church revenues
for the public benefit. The bill provided that the moneys
accruing from the grant of these pei-petuities should be ap-
plied, in the first instance, in redemption of charges upon
parishes, for building churches ; and any surplus, to such
purposes as Parliament might hereafter direct.^ Ministers,
fearing that the recognition of this principle of appropria-
tion, even in so vague a form, would endanger their measure
in the House of Lords, abandoned it in committee, june2lst,
— to the disgust of Mr. O'Connell and his follow- ^'*^-
ers, and of many members of the liberal party. Mr. O'Con
nell asked what benefit the Irish people could now hope to
derive from the measure, beyond the remission of the church
cess? The church establishment would indeed be reduced ;
but the people would not save a single shilling by the reduc-
tion.^ In truth, however, the clause had not expressly
declared that the revenues of the church were applicable to
state purposes. Its retention would not have affirmed the
principle : its omission did not surrender any rights which the
legislature might, hereafter, think fit to exercise. Whenever
the surplus should actually arise. Parliament might deter-
mine its appropriation. Yet both parties otherwise inter-
preted its significance ; and it became the main question at
1 Clause 147.
2 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xviii. 1073; Ann. Reg., 1833, p. 104.
VOL. II. 39
450 CHURCH LV IRELAND.
issue between the friends and opponents of the church, who
each foresaw, in the recognition of an abstract principle, the
ultimate alienation of the revenues of the Irish establish-
ment. For the present, a concession being made to the fears
of the church party, the bill was agreed to by both Houses.*
But the conflict of parties, upon the controverted principle,
■was by no means averted.
In the next session, Mr. Ward, in a speech of singular
Church in ability, called upon the House of Commons to
Ireland: affirm a resolution that the church establishment
air. Ward s
mot'on,May jn Ireland exceeded the spiritual wants of the
Protestant population ; and that, it being the right
of the state to regulate the distribution of church property,
the temporal possessions of the church in Ireland ought to
be reduced.^ This resolution not only asserted the principle
of appropriation, but disturbed the recent settlement of the
ecclesiastical establishment in Ireland. It was fraught with
political difficulties. The cabinet had already been divided
upon the principles involved in this motion ; and the discus-
sion was interrupted for some days by the resignation of Mr.
Stanley, Sir James Graham, the Duke of Richmond, and
the Earl of Ripon. The embarrassment of ministers was
increased by a personal declaration of the King against in-
novations in the church, in reply to an address of the Irish
Superseded bishops and clergy.* The motion, however, was
nient'S'a'^ successfully met by the appointment of a commis-
Jn'Sraa"*"' ^^^^ *^ inquire into the revenues and duties of the
1834. church, and the general state of religious instruc-
tion in Ireland. Hitherto there had been no certain infor-
mation either as to the revenues of the church, or the num-
bers of different religious communions in the country ; and
ministers argued that, until these facts had been ascertained,
it could not with propriety be affirmed that the establishmenl
» Church Temporalities (Ireland) Act, 3 & 4 Will. IV. c 37.
9 Hans. Deb., 3cl Ser., xxiii. 1368.
» May 28th, 1834; Ann. Reg., 1834, 43.
CHURCH IN IRELAND. 451
was excessive. At the same time, the appointment of the
commission implied that Parliament would be prepared to
deal with any surplus which might be proved to exist after
providing for the wants of the Protestant population. Op
these grounds the previous question was moved, and cai-
ried by a large majority.*
A few days afterwards, the propriety of issuing this
commission, and the rights of the state over the LordgjeUite
disti'ibution of church property, were warmly de- a^o^n "j^u"
bated in the House of Lords. While one party 6th, 1831.
foresaw spoliation as the necessary result of the proposed
inquiry, and the other disclaimed any intentions hostile
to the church, it was agreed on all sides that such an in-
quiry assumed a discretionary power in the state over the
appropriation of church property.^ Earl Grey boldly avowed
that, if it should appear that there was a considerable excess
of revenue beyond what was required for the efficiency of the
church and the propagation of divine truth, " the state would
have a right to deal with it with a view to the exigencies of
the state and the general interests of the country." '
Meanwhile, the difficulties of the question of Irish tithes
■were pressing. Ministers had introduced a bill, i^ish tuhea
early in the session, for converting tithes into a ^^'ap'^
land tax, payable to the government by the land- priation.
lords, and subject to redemption. When redeemed, the pro-
ceeds were to be invested in land for the benefit of the
church.'* The merits of this measure were repeatedly dis-
cussed, and the scheme itself materially modified in its prog
ress ; but the question of appropriation bore a foremost
place in the discussions. Mr. O'Connell viewed with alarm
a plan securing to the church a perpetual vested interest in
1 For the motion, 120; for the previoos question, 396. — Hans. Deb., 3d
Ser., xxiv. 10.
2 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxiv. 243.
8 Ibid., 254.
* Jlr. Littleton's Explanation, Feb. 20th, 1834. — Hans. Deb., 31 Ser.,
xxi. 572.
452 CHURCH IX IRELAND.
tithes, which could no longer be collected ; and threatened
the landlords with a resistance to rent, when it embraced a
covert charsje for the maintenance of the Protestant clinrch.
June28d, Having opposed the measure itself, on its owu
^^^- merits, he endeavored to pledge the House to n
resolution, that any surplus of the funds to bo raised in lieu
of tithes, after providing for vested interests and the spirit-
ual wants of the church, should be appropriated to objects of
public utility.* Disclaiming any desire to appropriate these
funds for Catholic or other religious uses, he proposed that
they should be applied to purposes of charity and education.
On the part of ministers. Lord Althorp and Lord John Rus-
sell again upheld the right of the state to review the dis-
tribution of church property, and apply any surplus accord-
ing to its discretion. Nor did they withhold their opinion,
that the proper appropriation would be to kindred purposes,
connected with the moral and religious instruction of the
people. But they successfully resisted the motion as an
abstract proposition, prematurely offered.^ Soon afterwards.
Lord Grey's administration was suddenly dissolved ; but the
Tithe Bill was continued by Lord Melbourne. Many amend-
ments, however, were made, — including one forced upon
ministers by Mr. O'Connell, by which the tithe-payer was
immediately relieved to the extent of forty per cent. After all
these changes, the bill was rejected, on the second reading, by
the House of Lords.' Again the clergy were left to collect
their tithes, under increased difficulties and discouragement.
In the next session. Sir Robert Peel had succeeded to the
Sir Robert embarrassments of Irish tithes and the appropria-
Peei-B meas- ^jon question. As to the first, he offered a practical
ure for com- ^ *^
muting Irish measure for the commutation of tithes into a rent-
titlies,
1835. charge upon the land, with a deduction of twenty-
1 Amendment on going into committee. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxiv.
734.
* It was negatived by a majority of 261. Ayes, 99; Noes, 360. — Han»
Deb., 3d Ser, xxiv. 805.
8 Aug. 11th, 1834. Ibid., xxv. 1143.
CDUKCH m IRELAND. 453
five per cent. Provision was also made for its redemption,
and the investment of the value in land for the benefit of
tlje church. He further proposed to make up the arrears of
tithes in 1834, out of the million already advanced to the
clergy.* But the commutation of tithes was not yet destined
to be treated as a practical measure. It had been associated,
in the late session, with the controverted principle of appro-
ju'iation, — which now became the rallying point of parties.
It had severed troin Lord Grey some of his ablest colleagues,
and associated tl>em with the opposite party.
Gir Robert Peel, on accepting office, took an early appor-
tunity of stating tiiat he would not give his " con- Appropria-
sem to the alienation of church property, in any adopted^y*"*
part of the United Kingdom, from strictly ecclesi- '*'* vviiigsia
« " ' •' oppogiuon,
astical purposes." On the other band, in the first 1836.
discussion upon Irish tithes, Lord John Russell expressed
his doubts whether any advantage would result from the
abolition of tithe, without a prior decision of the appropria-
tion question ; and Mr. O Connell proclaimed that the word
"appropriation would exert a magical influence in Ireland."
The Whigs, exasperated by their sudden dismissal,^ were
burning to recover their ground ; but the liberal measures
of the new ministry afibrded few assailable points. Sir
Robert Peel, however, had taken his stand upon the inviola-
bility of church property ; and the assertion of the contrary
doctrine served to unite the various sections of the oppo-
sition. The Whigs, indeed, were embarrassed by the fact
that they had themselves deprecated the adoption of any
resolution, until the commission had made its report ; and this
report was not yet forthcoming. But the exigencies of party
demanded a prompt and decisive trial of strength. Lord
John Russell, therefore, pressed forward with resolutions af-
firming that any surplus revenues of the church of Ireland,
not required for the spiritual care of its members, should be
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxv i. 13.
3 Hupra, Vol. I., p. 125.
454 CHURCH IN IRELAND.
applied to the moral and religious education of all classes of
ihe people ; and that no measure on the subject of tithea
•would be satisfactory whicli did not embody that pi-inciple.
These resolutions were atfirmed by small majorities ; ^ aii('
Sir Robert Peel was driven from power.
It was an untoward victory. The Whigs had pledged
Appropria themselves to connect the settlement of tithes
i!or.i"siei*' ^^'^'^ ^^^' appropriation of the surplus revenues
bouiue. Qf jjjg church of Ireland. The Conservatives
were det"»-o\ined to resist that principle ; and having a large
majority ir «be House of Lords, their resistance was not to
be overcome
Meanwhile, the position of ministers was strengthened by
the disclosure of the true state of the church.
Rerenties
01 t!ic church Qut of R populatioti of 7,943,940 persons, there
of Irelaud. .
were 852,064 members of the establishment ;
6,427,712 Roman Catholics, 042,356 Presbyterians, and
21,808 Protestant dissenters of other denominations. The
state church embraced little more than a tenth of the people.'
Her revenues amounted to 805,525/. In 151 parishes there
was not a single Protestant : in 194 there were less than
ten: in 198 less than twenty; and in 860 parishes there
were less than fifty.*
These facts \^ere dwelt upon in support of appropriation
. . which formed part of every bill for the commuta-
tion aban- tion of tithes. Rut the lords had taken their
doned, 1838.
Stand upon a principle ; and were not to ba
shaken. Tithes were still withheld from the clergy ; anil
1 On April 2d a committee of the whole House was obtained by a major
Uy of 33. — Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, xxvii. 362, 770, &c. On April 6th, the
lirst resolution was agreed to in committee by a majority of 25; and on the
7tli. the second resolution wa-s athrmed by the House on the report by a
majority of 27. — Comm. Joum., xc. 202, 208; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxvii.
790, 837, 878.
'^ Ist Report of Commissioners on Public Instruction, Ireiona 11835),
p. 7.
8 Lord Morpeth's Si)cech, 1835; Hans. Deb.. ?^ L' r._ .x-ii5. l^VJ. The
latter number comprises the parishes previously euunv 'Htc'l.
CHURCH IX IRELAND. 455
the feelings of the people were embittered by continual dis-
cussions relating to the church ; while bill after bill was Sacri-
ficed to clauses of appropriation. This mischievous contest
between the two Houses was brought to a close in 1838, by
the abandonment of the appropriation clause by ministers
themselves. It was, indeed, bitter and humiliating : but it
was unavoidable. The settlement of titiies could no longer
be deferred ; and any concession from the Lords was hope-
less. But the retirement of the Wliigs from a position, which
they had chosen as their own battle-field, was a grievous
shock to their influence and reputation. They lost the con-
fidence of many of their own party, forfeited public esteem, and
yielded to the opposition an exultant triumph which went far
to restore them to popular favor, and ultimately to powxr.*
But if ruin awaited the Whigs, salvation was at hand for
the church of Ireland. Tithes were at length „
'^ Commutation
commuted into a permanent rent-charge upon the of irUh
land ; and the clergy amply indemnified for a sac-
rifice of one fdurih the amount, by unaccustomed security
and the peaceable enjoyment of their rights. They were
further compensated for the loss of arrears, out of the bal-
ance of the railhon, advanced by Parliament as a loan in 1833,
and eventually surrendered as a free gift.^ The chui'ch bad
passed through a period of trials and danger ; and was again
at peace. The grosser abuses of her establishment were grad-
ually corrected, under the supervision of the ecclesiastical
commissioners: but its diminished revenues were devoted
exclusively to tlie promotion of its spiritual efficiency.
AVhile the state protected the Protestant church, it had
not been unmindful of the interests of the great
, National
body of the people, who derived no benefit from education in
her ministrations. In 1831, a national system
of education was established, embracing the children of per-
1 See especially Debates, May 14th and July 2d, 1833. Hans. Deb., 3d
8er., xlii. 1203; xliii. 1177.
2 1 & 2 Vict. c. 109.
456 CHURCH IN IRELAND.
sons of all religious denominations.* It spread and flourished,
until; in 1860, 803,364 pupils received instruction, — of
whom 063,145 were Catholics,^ — at an annual cost to the
suite of 270,000/."
In 1845, Sir Robert Peel adventured on a bold measu;e
for promoting the education of Catholic priests in
College, Ireland.* Prior to 1795, the laws forbade the en-
dowment of any college or seminary for the edu-
cation of Roman Catholics in Ireland ; and young men in
training for the priesthood were obliged to resort to colleges
on the continent, and chiefly to France, to prepare them-
selves for holy orders. But the French revolutionary war
having nearly closed Europe against them, the government
were induced to found the Roman Catholic College of May-
nooth.* It was a friendly concession to the Catholics ; and
promised well for tlie future loyalty of the priesthood. The
college was supported by annual grants of the Parliament
of Ireland, which were continued by the United Parliament,
after the Union. The connection of the state with this
college had been sanctioned in the days of Protestant as-
cendency in Ireland ; and was continued without objection
by George III., — the most Protestant of kings, — and by
the most Protestant of his ministers, at a time when prej-
udices against the Catholics had been fomented to the
utmost. But when more liberal sentiments prevailed con-
cerning the civil rights of the Catholics, a considerable
number of earnest men, both in the church and in other
religious bodies, took exceptions to the endowment of an in-
stitution, by the state, for teaching the doctrines of the
1 On Sept. 9th, 1831, 30,000?. were first voted for this purpose. — Hans.
Deb., 3d Ser., vi. 1249. Commissioners were appointed by the lord-lieu-
tenant to administer the system in 1832, and incorporated by letters-patent
in 1845.
2 28th Report of Commissioners, 1861, No. [3026], p. 10, 11, &c.
8 The sum voted in 1860 was 270,722/. *
* April 3d, 1845. Hans. Deb., Ixxix. 18.
6 Irish .Act 35 Geo. HI. c. 21 ; Comwallifl's Corr., iil. 365-375; Lord Stan
iKpe's Life of Pitt, ii. 311.
CHURCH IN IRELAND. 457
church of Rome. " Let us extend to Catholics," they said,
" the amplest toleration : let us give them every encourage-
ment to found colleges for themselves: but let not a Protes-
tant state promote eiTors and superstitions: ask not a Protes-
tant people to contribute to an object abhorrent to their feelings
nd consciences." On these grounds the annual grant had
been for some time opposed, while the college, — the unfor-
tunate object of discussion, — was neglected and f^dling into
decay. In these circumstances, Sir Robert Peel proposed to
grant 30,000^. for buildings and improvements, to allow the
trustees of the college to hold lands to the value of 3000^
a year, and to augment the endowment from less than 9000/.
a year to 26,360/. To give permanence to this endowment,
and to avoid irritating .discussions, year after year, it was
charged upon the Consolidated Fund.*
Having successfully defended the revenues of the Protes-
tant cliurch, he now met the claims of the Catholic clergy in
a liberal and friendly spirit. The concession infringed no
principle which the more niggardly votes of former years
had not equally infringed ; but it was designed at once to
render the college worthy of the patronage of the state and
to conciliate the Catholic body. He was supported by the
first statesmen of all parties^ and by large majorities in both
Houses : but the virulence with which his conciliatory policy
was assailed, and the doctrines of the church of Rome
denounced, deprived a beneficent act of its grace and
courtesy.
If the consciences of Protestants were outraged by con-
tributing, however little, to the support of tiie Catholic faith,
what must have been the feelings of Catholic Ireland towards
n Protestant church, maintained for the use of a tenth of the
people ! It would have been well to avoid so painful a con-
troversy : but it was raised ; and the Act of 1845, so fai
from being accepted as the settlement of a vexed question
appeai'ed for several years to aggravate the bitterness of th6
1 April 3d, 1846. Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxix. 18.
458 RELIGIOUS LIBERTY.
strife. But the state, superior to sectarian animosities, calmly
state aid acknowledged the claims of Catholic subjects upon
^tliorre- its justice and liberality. Governing a vast em-
ligions. pjj.g^ j^„j ruling over men of different races and
religions, it Lad already aided the propagation of doctrines
which it disowned. In Ireland itself, the state has provided
lor the maintenance of Roman Catholic chaplains in prisons
and workhouses. A different policy would have deprived
the inmates of those establishments of all the offices and
consolations of religion. It lias provided for the religious
instruction of Catholic soldiers ; and since the reign of
William III. the Presbyterians of Ireland have received
aid from the state, known as the Regium Donum. In
Canada, Malta, Gibraltar, the Mauritius and other pos-
sessions of the crown, the state has assisted Catholic wor-
ship. Its policy has been imperial and secular, — not re-
ligious.
In the same enlarged spirit of equity, Sir Robert Peel se-
rt . , cured, in 1845, the foimdation of three new col-
Queens col- ' '
leges, Ire- leges in Ireland, for the improvement of acaderai-
land, 1845. . . .
cal education, without religious distinctions. These
liberal endowments were mainly designed for Catholics, as
composing the great body of the people ; but they who had
readily availed themselves of the benefits of national educa-
tion, — founded on the principle of a combined literary and
separate religious instruction, — repudiated these new insti-
tutions. Being for the use of all religious denominations,
the peculiar tenets of no particular sect could be allowed to
form part of tiie ordinary course of instruction ; but lecture-
rooms were assigned for the purpose of religious teaching,
according to the creed of every student.* The Catholics,
however, withheld their confidence from a system in which
their own fjiith was not recognized as predominant ; and de-
nounced the new colleges as " godless." The Roman Catho-
lic Synod of Thurles prohibited the clergy of their commun-
> Haus. Deb., 3d Ser., Ixxx. 345; 8 & 9 Vict c. 6'6.
RELIGIOUS LIBERTY. 4/)G
ion from being concerned in the administration of thest
establishments ; ^ and their decrees were sanctioned by a re-
script of ihe Pope."^ The colleges were everywliere dis-
countenanced as seminaries for the sons of Catholic parents.
T!ie liberal designs of Parliament were so far thwarted ; ye',
even under these discouragements, the colleges have enjoyer
a fair measure of success. A steady increase of pupils of ai
denominations has been maintained;^ the education is excel-
lent ; and the best friends of Ireland are still hopeful that a
people of rare aptitude for learning will not be induced, by
religious jealousies, Ho repudiate the means of intellectual
cultivation, which the state has invited them to accept.
1 August, 1850.
2 Muy 23d, 1851.
8 In 1858 the commissioners of inquiry reported : — "The colleges can-
not be reganled otherwise than as successful." — Report of Commisiionera,
1858, Xo. [-2413]. In 1S60, the entrances had increased from 168 to 309;
and the numbers attending lectures, from 454 to 752. Of the latter num-
ber, 207 were members of the Established Church; 204, Roman Catholics;
247, Presbj'terians; and 94 of other persuasions. — Meporl of President foi
1860-61, 1862, No. [2999].
460 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
CHAPTER XV.
Local Government the Basis of Constitutional Freedom: — Vestries: —
Municipal Corporations in England, Scotland, and Ireland: — Local Im-
provement and Police Acts: — Local Boards constituted under General
Acts: — Courts of Quarter Sessions.
That Englishmen have been qualified for the enjoyment of
. , political ffeedoin, is mainly due to those ancient
Local govern- ' ' •'
menttho local institutions by which they have been trained
bitsis of con- m ly • r t
stitutionai to self-government. Ihe ariairs of the people have
been administered, not in Parliament only, but in
the vestry, the town-council, the board-meeting, and the
Court of Quarter Sessions. England alone among the na-
tions of the earth has maintained for centuries a constitu-
tional polity ; and her liberties may be ascribed, above all
things, to her free local institutions. Since the days of their
Saxon ancestors,* her sons have learned, at their own gates,
the duties and responsibilities of citizens. Associating for
the common good, they have become exercised in public
affairs. Thousands of small communities have been sepa
rately trained to self-government : taxing themselves, through
their representatives, for local objects : meeting for discussion
and business ; and animated by local rivalries and ambitions.
The history of local government affords a striking paralh^l to
the general political history of the country. While the aris-
tocracy was encroaching upon popular power in the govern-
ment of the state, it was making advances, no less sure, in
local institutions. The few were gradually appropriating the
franchises which were the birthright of the many ; and again,
1 Palgrave's English Commonwealth, i. 628; Allen's I'rerog., 128.
CORPORATIONS IN ENGLAND. 461
as political liberties were enlarged, the rights of self-govern-
ment were recovei'ed.
Every parish is the image and reflection of the state.
The land, the church, and the commonalty share in The parish,
its government : the aristocratic and democratic elements aB
combined in its society. The common law, — in its grand sin>
plicity, — recognized the right of all the. rated pa- The vestry,
rishioners to assemble in vestry, and administer parochial af-
fairs.^ But in many parishes this popular principle j^g g^iggj
gradually fell into disuse ; and a few inhabitants, — 'e-try
self-elected and irresponsible, — claimed the right of imposing
taxes, administering the parochial funds, and exercising all
local authority. This usurpation, long acquiesced in, grew
into a custom, which the courts recognized as a legal exception
from the common law. The people had forfeited their rights ;
and select vestries ruled in their behalf. So absolute was
their power, that they could assemble without notice, and bind
all the inhabitants of the parish by their vote.^
This single abuse was coiTected by Mr. Sturges Bourne's
Act in 1818:' but this same act, while it left „ „,
' Mr. Sturges
select vestries otherwise unreformed, made a fur- Bourae's
• • £. Act, 1818.
ther mroad upon the popular constitution ot open
vestries. Hitherto every person entitled to attend had en-
joyed an equal right of voting ; but this act multiplied the
votes of vestrymen, according to the value of their rated prop-
erty : one man could give six votes : others no more than one.
An important breach, however, was made in the exclusive
system of local government, by Sir John Hob- „. , .
house's Vestry Act, passed during the agitation Hobhouse'g
Act 1831.
for parliamentary reform.* The majority of rate-
1 Shaw's Par. Law, c. 17; Steer's Par. Law, 253; Toulmin Smith'ii
Parish, 2d ed., 15-23, 46-52, 288-330.
•* Gibson's Codex, 219; Burn's EccL Law, iv. 10, &c. ; Steer, 251.
8 58 Geo. in. c. G9, amended bj- 59 Geo. III. c. 85, 7 WiU. IV., and 1
Vict c. 35; Report on Poor Laws, 1818. — Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxviii.
673.
* 1 & 2 WilL IV. c. 60; Oct, 20th, 1831; Toulmin Smith's Parish, 240.
462 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
payers, in any parish within a city or town, or any other
parish composing 800 householders rated to the poor, were
empowered to adopt this act. Under its provisions, vestries
were elected by every ratiid parishioner : the votes of the
electors were taken by ballot : every ten pound householder,
except in certjiin cases,^ was eligible as a vestryman ; and
no member of the vestry was entitled to more than a sin-
gle vote. This measure, however democratic in principle,
did little more than revert to the policy of the corainou
law. It was adopted in some populous parishes in the me-
tropolis and elsewhere : but otherwise has had a limited
operation.'
The history of municipal corporations affords another
. . example of encroachments upon popular rights.
Municipal ' f f f o
corporations, The government of towns, under the Saxons, was
no less popular than the other local institutions of
that race ; ' and the constitution of corporations, at a later
period, was founded upon the same principles. All the set-
tled inhabitants and traders of corporate towns, who contrib-
uted to the local taxes, had a voice in the management of
their own municipal affairs.* The community, enjoying cor-
porate rights and privileges, was continually enlarged by the
admission of men connected with the town by birth, mar-
riage, apprenticeship, or servitude, and of others, not so con-
nected, by gift or purchase. For some centuries after the
conquest, the burgesses assembled in person, for the transac-
tion of business. They elected a mayor, or other chief mag-
' In the metropolis, or in any parish having more than 3000 inhabitants
a 40/. qualification was required. In the metropolis, however, the act wa
superseded bj- the metropolis local management act, 18.55. — Infra, 477.
* lu 1842, nine parishes only had adopted it. — Pari. Paper, 1842, No.
564.
* Palgrave'.* English Commonwealth, i. 629; Merewether and Stephens's
Hist, of Boroughs, Introd. viii.; Kemble's Hist, ii. 262; Lappenberg's
England, App. ; Hallam's Middle Ages, ii. 153.
* Report of Comniigsioners on Municipal Corporations, 1835, p. 16;
Merewether and Stephens's Hbt., Introd., v. 1, 10, &c.; Hallait's Middle
Ages, ii. 155.
CORPORATIOXS IN ENGLAND. 4C3
istrate : but no governing body, or town council, to wliom
their authority was delegated. The burgesses only were
known to the law. But as towns and trade increased, the
more convenient practice of representation was introduced
lor municipal as well as for parliamentary govermnent. The
most wealthy and influential inhabitants being chosen gradu-
ally encroached upon the privileges of the inferior towns-
men, assumed all municipal authority, and substituted self-
election for the suffrage<5 of burgesses and freemen. This
encroachment upon popular rights was not submitied to with-
out many struggles ; but, at the close of the fifteenth cen-
tury, it had been successfully accomplished in a large pi"0-
portion of the corporations of England.
Until the reign of Henry VII., these encroachments had
been local and spontaneous. The people had sub- charters from
mitted to them ; but the law had not enforced P'^flf^ J"'
' to tho Key-
them. From this time, however, popular rights oiuUon.
were set aside in a new form. The crown began to grant
charters to boroughs, — generally conferring or reviving the
privilege of returning members to Parliament ; and most of
these charters vested all the powers of municipal govern-
ment in the mayor and town-council, — nominated in the
first instance by the crown itself, and afterwards self-elected.
Nor did the contempt of the Tudors for popular rights stop
here. By many of their charters, the same governing body
was intrusted with the exclusive right of returning members
to Parliament. For national as well as local government,
the burgesses were put beyond the pale of the constitution.
And in order to bring municipalities under the direct influ-
ence of the crown and the nobility, the ofiice of high steward
was often created : when the nobleman holding that office
became the patrun of the borough, and returned its members
to Parliament. The power of the crown and aristocracy
was increased, at the expense of the liberties of the people.
The same policy was pursued by the Stuarts ; and the two
last of that race violated the liberties of the few corporations
i64 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
which still retained a popular constitution after the encroach*
raents of centuries.^
After the Revolution, corporations were free from the
Corporations iiit'Uj^ion of prerogative ; but the policy of mu-
TOiutio'irto* nicipal freedom was as little respected as in for-
Oeorgeiii. mer times. A corporation had come to be regarded
as a close governing body with peculiar privileges. The
old model was followed ; and the charters of George III.
favored the municipal rights of burgesses no more than the
charters of Elizabeth or James I.* Even where they did
Hot expressly limit the local authority to a small body
of persons, custom and usurpation restricted it either to
the town council or to that body and its own nominees, the
freemen. And while this close form of municipal gov-
ernment was maintained, towns were growing in wealth
and population, whose inhabitants had no voice in the
management of their own aifairs. Two millions of peo-
ple were denied the constitutional privilege of self-govern-
ment.
Self-elected and irresponsible corporations were suffered
to enioy a long dominion. Composed of local
Abuses of , ,. , f. ,. , ,r .,
close cor- and often hereditary cliques and lamily connec-
tions, they were absolute masters over their own
townsmen. Generally of one political party, they excluded
men of different opinions, — whether in politics or religion,
— and used all the influence of their office for maintaining
the ascendency of their own party. Elected for life, it was
not difficult to consolidate their interest ; and they acted
without any sense of responsibility.* Their proceedings
were generally secret : nay, secrecy was sometimes enjoined
by an oath.*
Despite their narrow constitution, there were some corpo-
1 Case of Quo Warranto, 1683; St. Tr., viii. 1039; Hume's Hist., vi
901 ; ri'niodelling the corporations, 1687; Uallam's Const Hist., IL 238.
2 Report of Commissioners, p. 17.
B Ib'vl., p. 36.
« Ibid., 36.
CORPORATIONS IN ENGLAND. 465
rations which performed tlieir functions worthily. Maintain-
ing a raediasval dignity and splendor, their rule was graced
by public virtue, courtesy, and refinement. Nobles shared
their councils and festivities : the first men of the country
were associated with townsmen ; and while ruling without
responsibility, they retained the willing allegiance of the
people, by traditions of public service, by acts of munificence
and charity, and by tiie respect due to their eminent station.
But the greater number of corporations were of a lower
type. Neglecting their proper functions, — the superintend-
ence of the police, the management of the jails, the paving
and lighting of the streets, and the supply of water, — they
thought only of the personal interests attached to office.
They grasped all patronage, lay and ecclesiastical, for their
relatives, friends, and political partisans ; and wasted the
corporate funds in greasy feasts and vulgar revelry.^ Many
were absolutely insolvent. Charities were despoiled, and
public trusts neglected and misapplied ; jobbery and corrup-
tion in every form were fostered.^ Townsmen viewed with
distrust the proceedings of councils, over whom they had
no control, whose constitution was oligarchical, and whose
political sentiments were often obnoxious to the majority.
In some towns the middle classes foiHid themselves ruled by
a close council alone : in others by the council and a rabble
of freemen, — its creatures, — drawn mainly from the lower
classes and having no title to represent the general interests
of the community. And important municipal powers were
therefore intrusted, under Local Acts, to independent com-
missioners, in whom the* inhabitants had confidence.' Even
the administration of justice was tainted by suspicions of
political partiality.* Borough magistrates were at once
incompetent and exclusively of one party ; and juries were
composed of freemen, of the same close connection. Thia
1 Rep. of Comm., p. 46. ' Ibid., 43.
2 Ibid., 31, 46, 47, 48. * Ibid., 26-29, 39.
VOL. II. 30
46G LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
favored class also enjoyed trading privileges, which pro-
voked jealousy and fettered commerce.*
But the worst abuse of these corrupt bodies was that
which too long secured their impunity. They
Monopoly , . , , ^ ,. ^ '' . ^
ofeiectorai were the strongliolds or parliamentary interest
and corruption. The electoral privileges which
they had usurped, or had acquired by charter, were conven-
ient instruments in the hands of both the political parties,
who were contending for power. In many of the corjwrato
towns the representation was as much at the disposal of
particular families, as that of nomination boroughs : in others
it was purchased by opulent partisans, whom both parties
welcomed to their ranks. In others, again, where freemen
enjoyed the franchise, it was secured by bribery, in which
the corporations too often became the most active agents, —=-
not scrupling even to apply their trust funds to the corrup-
tion of electors.^ The freemen were generally needy and
corrupt, and inferior, as well in numbers as in respectability,
to the other inhabitants:' but they often had an exclusive
right to the franchise ; and whenever a general election was
anticipated, large additions were made to their numbers.*
The freedom of a city was valued according to the length of
the candidate's purse. * Corporations were safe so long as
society was content to tolerate the notorious abuses of par-
liamentary representation. The municipal and parliamen-
tary organizations were inseparable : both were the instru-
ments by which the crown, the aristocracy, and political
parties had dispossessed the people of their constitutional
rights ; and they stood and fell together.
The Reform Act wrested from the corporations thei.
exclusive electoral privilesres, and restored them
TheMnnlcipal , , „„ . , „ ., .
Corporations to the people. 1 his tardy act ot retribution waa
' ■ followed by the appointment of a commission of
» Rep. of Coram., p. 40. a Vnd., 45. « /Wfi, 33.
* Ihid.^ 34, 35. (See table of freemen created.)
CORPORATIONS ACT, 1835. 467
inquiry, which roughly exposed the manifold abuses of irre-
sponsible power, wherever it had been suffered to prevail.
And in 1835, Parliament was called upon to overtlirow these
municipal oligarchies. The measure was fitly introduced by
Lord John Russell, who had been foremost in the cause
of parliamentary reform.* It proposed to vest the munici-
pal franchise in rated inhabitants, who had paid poor-rates
within the borough for three years. By them the governing
body, consisting of a mayor and common council, were to be
elected. The ancient order of aldermen was to be no longer
maintained. The pecuniary rights of existing freemen were
preserved, during their lives ; but their municipal franchise
was superseded ; and as no new freemen were to be created,
the class would be eventually extinguished. Exclusive
rights of trading were to be discontinued. To the councils,
constituted so as to secure public confidence, more extended
powers were intrusted, for the police and local government
of the town, and the administration of justice ; while pro-
vision was made for tlie publicity of their proceedings, the
proper administration of their funds, and the publication and
audit of their accounts.
No effective opposition could be offered to the general
principles of this measure. The propriety of re- Amended by
storing the rights of self-government to the *'^^ ^°"^-
people, and sweeping away the corruptions of ages, was
generally admitted ; but strenuous efforts were made to give
further protection to existing rights, and to modify the
popular character of the measure. These efforts, ineffectual
in the Commons, were successful in the Lords. Counsel
were heard, and witnesses examined, on behalf of several
of the corporations ; but the main principles of the bill were
not contested. Important amendments, however, were in-
serted. The pecuniary rights and parliamentary franchise
of freemen received more ample protection. With a view
to quality the democratic constitution of the councils, a
1 JuuB 5th, 1835. — Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, xxviii. 5-tl.
468 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
property qualification was required for town councillors ;
and aldermen were introduced into the council, to be elected
for life ; the first aldermen being chosen from the existing
body of aldermen.* These amendments were considered by
ministers and the Commons, in a spirit of concession and
compromise. The more zealous advocates of popular rights
urged their unconditional rejection, even at tlie sacrifice of
the bill ; but more temperate counsels prevailed, and the
amendments were accepted with modifications. A qualifi-
cation for councillors was agreed to, but in a less invidious
form : aldermen were to be elected for six years, instead of
for life ; and the exclusive eligibility of existing aldermen
was not insisted on.^ And thus was passed a popular meas-
ure, second in importance to the Reform Act alone.' The
municipal bodies which it created, if less popular than under
the original scheme, were yet founded upon a wide basis of
representation, which has since been further extended.*
Local self-government was effectually restored. Elected
rulers have since generally secured the confidence of their
constituents : municipal office has become an object of hon-
orable ambition to public-spirited townsmen ; and local ad-
ministration,— if not free from abuses,® — has been exer-
cised under responsibility and popular control. And further,
the enjoyment of municipal franchises has encouraged and
kept alive a spirit of political freedom in the inhabitants of
towns.
One ancient institution alone was omitted from this general
Corporation measure of reform, — the corporation of the City
of Loudon, ^j. Lq^Jqo^ J( yyjjg j^ municipal principality, — of
great antiquity, of wide jurisdiction, of ample property and
revenues, and of composite organization. Distinguished for
1 Hans. Deb., 3(1 Ser., xxx. 426, 480, 579, &c.
a Ibid., 1132, 1194, 13-35. .
« 6 & 6 Will. IV. c. 76.
* Municipal Corporations Act, 1859, 22 Vict. c. 35.
» See lieports of Lords' Committees on Rates and Municipal Franchise,
1859, and Elective Franchiflo. 1860.
CORPORATION OF LONDON. 469
its public spirit, its independent influence had often been the
bulwark of popular rights. Its magistrates had braved the
resentment of kings and parliaments : its citizens had been
foremost in the cause of civil and religious liberty. Its tra
ditions were associated with the history and glories of Eng-
land. Its civic potentates had entertained, with princely
splendor, kings, conquerors, ambassadors, and statesmen.
Its wealth and stateliness, its noble old Guildhall and antique
pageantry, were famous throughout Europe. It united, liko
an ancient monarchy, the memories of a past age with the
pride and power of a living institution.
Such a corporation as this could not be lightly touched.
The constitution of its governing body : its power- Efforts to
ful companies, or guilds : its courts of civil and "^form it.
criminal jurisdiction : its varied municipal functions : its
peculiar customs : its extended powers of local taxation ; —
all these demanded careful inquiry and consideration. It
was not until 1837 that the commissioners were able to pre-
pare their report ; and it was long before any scheme for the
reconstitution of the municipality was proposed. However
superior to the close corporations which Parliament had
recently condemned, many defects and abuses needed correc-
tion. Some of these the corporation itself proceeded to
correct; and others it sought to remedy, in 1852, by means
of a private bill. In 1853, another commission of eminent
men was appointed, whose able report formed the basis of a
government measure in 1856.^ This bill, however, was not
proceeded with ; nor have later measures, for the same pur-
pose, hitherto been accepted by Parliament.^ Yet it cannot
be doubted that this great institution will be eventually
brought into harmony with the recognized principles of free
municipal government.
The history of municipal corporations in Scotland re-
» Sir George Grey, April 1st, 1856. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxli. 314.
2 Sir George Grey, 1858. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cxlviii. 738; Sir George
Lewis, 1859 and 1860. Ibid., cliv. 946; clvi. 282.
470 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
sembles that of England, in its leading characteristics. Tha
Corporations Toyal burghs, being the property of the crown,
in ScoUand. y^y^j.^ the first to receive corporate privileges.
J urg s. ,pj^^ earlier burgesses were tenants of the crown,
with whom were afterwards associated the trades or crafts
of the place, which comprised the main body of inhabi-
tants. In the fourteenth century, the constitution of these
municipalities appears to have become popular ; and the
growing influence and activity of the commonalty excited
; the jealousy of more powerful interests.* The latter,
without waiting for the tedious expedient of usurpation,
obtained an Act of the Scottish Parliitrnent in 14G9, which
! deprived the burgesses of their electoral rijjJits, and estab-
lished a close principle of self-election. The old council
of every burgh was to choose the new council for the year ;
and the two councils together, with one person representing
each craft, were to elect the burgh officers.''
Municipal privileges were also granted to other burghs,
Otiier burghs, under the patronage of territorial nobles or
the church. The rights of burgesses varied in different
places ; but they were generally dependent upon their
patrons.
Neither of these two classes of municipalities had enjoyed
Close charac- for centuries the least pretence of a popular con-
inunioi-*** stitution. Their property and revenues, their
paiuiea. rights of local taxation, their patronage, their
judicature, and the election of representatives in Parlia-
ment, were all vested in small self-elected bodies. The
administration of these important trusts was characterized
by the same abuses as those of English corporations. The
property was coiTuptly alienated and despoiled : sold to
nobles and other favored persons, — sometimes even to the
provost himself, — at inadequate prices: leased at nominal
rents to members of the council ; and improvidently charged
1 Report of Commrs., 1835, p. 18.
2 Scots Acts, li69, c. 5.
MUNICIPAL REFORM IX SCOTLAND, 1833. 471
with debts.^ The revenues were wasted by extravagant
salaries, jobbing contracts, public works executed at an
exorbitant cost, and civic entertainments.^ By such malad-
ministration several burghs were reduced to insolvency*
Charitable funds were wasted and misapplied : * the patron-
age, distributed among the ruling families, was grossly
abused. Incompetent persons, and even boys, were ap-
pointed to offices of trust. At Forfar, an idiot performed
for twenty years the responsible duties of town clerk. Lu-
crative offices were sold by the councils.* Judicature was
exercised without fitness or responsibility. The representa-
tion formed part of the narrow parliamentary organization by
which Scotland, like her sister-kingdoms, was then governed.
Many of these abuses were notorious at an early*period ;
and the Scottish Parliament frequently interposed
- ,„ iL ^ L Municipal
to restram them.® lliey continued, however, to reform. Scot-
flourish ; and were exposed by parliamentary '
inquiries in 1793, and again in 1819, and the two follow-
ing years.' The latter Avere followed by an Act in 1822,
regulating the accounts and administration of the royal
burghs, checking the expenditure, and restraining abuses in
the sale and leasing of property and the contracting of
debts.* But it was reserved for the first reformed Parlia-
ment to deal with the greatest evil, and the first cause of
all other abuses, — the close constitution of these burghs.
The Scotch Reform Act had already swept away the elec-
toral monopoly which had placed the entire representation
of the country in the hands of the government and a few
individuals ; and in the following year, the ten-pound fran-
1 Rep., 1835, p. 30.
2 Rep., 1821, p. 14; Ibid., 1835, p. 34.
8 Rep., 1819, p. 15, 23; Jbid., 1835, p. 36.
* Rep., 1819, p. 23; JbiJ., 1835, p. 38.
6 Rep., 1820, p. 4; Jbid., 1835, p. 67.
6 Scots Acts, 1491, c. 19; 1503, c. 36, 37; 1535, c. 35; 1593, c. 39 1693,
c. 45; Rep. of 1835, p. 22-28.
7 Rep. of Comm. Committees, 1819, 1820, and 1821.
8 3 Geo. IV. c. 91.
472 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
cliise was introduced as the basis of new municipal constitu-
tions. The system of self-election was overthrown, and
popular government restored. The people of Scotland were
impatient for this remedial measure ; and, the abuses of the
old corporate bodies being notorious, Parliament did not
even wait for the reports of commissioners appointed to
inquire into them, but proceeded at once to provide a
remedy. The old fabric of municipal administration fell
without resistance, and almost in silence : its only defence
being found in the protest of a solitary peer.*
In the corporations of Ireland, popular rights had been
Oorpomtions, recognized, at least in form, — though the pe-
ireiand. culiar condition of that country had never been
favoraWe to their exercise. Even the charters of James I.,
designed to narrow the foundations of corporate authority,
usually incorporated the inhabitants, or commonalty of
boroughs.^ The ruling bodies, however, having the power
of admitting freemen, whether resident or not, readily
appropriated all the power and patronage of local adminis-
tration. In the greater number of boroughs, the council, or
other ruling body, was practically self-elected. The freemen
either had no rights, or were debarred, by usurpation, from
asserting them. In other boroughs, where the rights of
freemen were acknowledged, the council were able to over-
rule the inhabitants by the voices of nonresident freemen, —
their own nominees and creatures. Close self-election, and
irresponsible power, were the basis of nearly all the
corporations of Ireland.' In many boroughs, patrons filled
the council with their own dependents, and exercised
uncontrolled authority over the property, revenues, and
government of the municipality.
It were tedious to recount the more vulgar abuses of this
Their akusen. system. Corporate estates appropriated, or irreg*
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xx. 563-576; 3 & 4 WiU. IV. c. 76, 77.
2 Rep. of Commrs., 1835, p. 7.
» Jbid., p. 13-18.
CORPORATIONS IN ICELAND. 473
nlaily acquired, by patrons and others in authority : leases
corruptly granted': debts recklessly contracted : exclusive tolls
levied, to the injury of trade and the oppression of the poor :
exclusive trading privileges enjoyed by freemen, to the det-
riment of other inhabitants: tiie monopoly of patronage by a
few families : the sacrifice of the general welfare of the com
niunity to the particular interests of individuals ; — such were
the natural results of close government in Ireland, as else-
where.^ The proper duties of local government were neg-
lected of abused ; and the inhabitants of the principal towns
were obliged to seek more efficient powers for paving, light-
ing, and police, under separate boards constituted by local
Acts or by a general measure of 1828, enacted for that pur-
pose.'' But there were constitutional evils greater than these.
Corporate towns returned members to Parliament ; and the
patrons, usuiping the franchises of the people, reduced them to
nomination boroughs. But, above all, Catholics were every-
where excluded from the privileges of municipal Exclusion of
government. The remedial law of 1793, which CathoUcs.
restored their rights,^ was illusory. Not only were they
still denied a voice in the council, but even admission to
the freedom of their own birthplaces. A narrow and
exclusive interest prevailed, — in politics, in local admin-
istration, and in trade, — over Catholic communities,
however numerous and important.* Cathohcs could have
no confidence either in the management of municipal trusts
or in the administration of justice. Among their owu
townsmen their faith had made them outlaws.
The Reform Act established a new elective franchise on a
wider basis ; and the legislature soon afterwards
' addressed itself to the consideration of the evils
of municipal misgovernment. But the Irish
Irish Cor-
porations
Billa.
1 Rep. of Commrs. p. 17-38.
2 9 Geo. IV. c. 82; Rep. of Commrs., p. 21.
» 33 Geo. III. c. 21 (Irish). Supra, p. 331.
* Rep..of Commrs., p. 16.
474 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
corporations were not destined to fall, like the Scotch burghs,
without a struggle.
In 1835, Lord Melbourne's government introduced a bill
for the recon.^titution of the Irish corporations,
Corporations ... , , ,
Ireland) Biu, upoH the Same prmciples as those already ap-
plied to other parts of the United Kingdom. It
was passed by the Commons without much discussion ; but
was not proceeded with in the Lords, on account of the late
Renewed period of the session.^ In the following year it
In 1836. y.Q^ renewed, with some modifications ; ^ when
it encountered new obstacles. The Protestant party in Ire-
land were suffering under grave discouragements. Catholic
emancipation and parliamentary reform had overthrown
their dominion : their church was impoverished by the re-
fussil of tithes, and threatened with an appropriation of her
revenues ; and now their ancient citadels, the corporations,
were invested. Here they determined to take their stand.
Their leaders, however, unable openly to raise this isSue,
combated the measure on other grounds. Adverting to the
peculiar condition of Ireland, they claimed an exceptional
form of local government. Hitherto, it was said, all local
jurisdiction had been exercised by one exclusive party.
Popular election would place it in the hands of another
party, no lesc dominant. If the former system had caused
distrust in local government and in the administration of
justice, the proposed system would cause equal jealousy on
the other side. Catholic ascendency would now be the rule
of municipal government. Nor was there a middle class
in Ireland equal to the functions proposed to be intrusted to
them. The wealth and intelligence of Protestants would be
overborne and outnumbered by an inferior class of Catholic
townsmen. It was denied that boroughs had ever enjoyed a
popular franchise. The corporations prior to James I. had
been founded as outworks of English authority, among a
1 Hans. Deb., 3d Sen, xxx. 230, 614, &c.
a Jbid., xxxi. 496, 1019.
CORPORATIONS m IRELAND. 476
hostile people ; and after that period, as citadels of Protestant
ascendency. It was further urged that few of the Irish
boroughs required a municipal organization. On these
grounds Sir Robert Peel and the opposition proposed a
fundamental change in the ministerial scheme. They con-
sented to the abolition of the old corporations ; but declined
to establish new municipal bodies in their place. They
proposed to provide for the local administration of justice by
sheriifs and magistrates appointed by the crown : to vest all
corporate property in royal commissioners, for distribution
for municipal purposes ; and to intrust the police and local
government of towns to boards elected under the General
Lighting and Watching Act of 1828.^
The Commons would not listen to proposals for denying
municipal government to Ireland and vesting local authority
in officers appointed by the crown, but the Lords eagerly ac-
cepted them ; and the bill was lost.''
In the following year, a similar measure was again passed
by the Commons, but miscarried in tiie other House bhi of
by reason of delays and the king's death. In 1838, ''
the situation of parties and the determined resist- 1838-39.
ance of the Lords to the Irish policy of the government,
brought about concessions and compromise. Ministers, by
abandoning the principle of appropriation, in regard to
the Irish Church revenues, at length attained a settle-
ment of the tithe question ; and it was understood that
the Lords would accept a corporation bill. Yet in this and
the following years the two Houses disagreed upon the mu-
nicipal franchise and other provisions ; and again the minis-
terial measures were abandoned. In 1840, a sixth gj,, „j
bill was introduced, in which large concessions ^*^-
were made to the Lords.* Further amendments, however,
were introduced by their lordships, which ministers and the
1 Debates on second reading, Feb. 29th, and on Lord F. Egerton's i»
struction, March 7th. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser.,xxxi. 1050, 1308.
2 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxxiv. 963, &c.
« Ibid., li. 641; liu. 1160; Iv. 183, 1216.
476 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
M)tumon3 were constrained to accept. The tedious contro-
versy of six years was at length closed ; but the measure
virtually amounted to a scheme of municipal disfranchise-
ment.
Ten corporations only were reconstituted by the bill, with
_ . , a ten-pound franchise. Fift^'-eight wei-e abol-
The Irish . ; , .
CorporacioQB islied ; ^ but any borough with a population ex-
ceeding 3000 might obtain a charter of incorpora-
tion. The local afiairs and property of boroughs deprived
of corporations were to be under the management of com-
missioners elected according to the provisions of the General
Lighting and Watching Act, or of the poor-law guardians.'
The measure was a compromise ; and, however imperfect as
a general scheme of local government, it at least corrected
the evils of the old system, and closed an irritating contest
between two powerful parties.
The reconstitution of municipal corporations upon a popu-
Locai im- ^^r basis has widely extended the principle of local
an^'poUce self-govemment. The same principle has been ap-
^^**- plied, without reserve, to the management of other
local affairs. Most of the principal towns of the United
Eangdom have obtained local Acts, at different times, for im-
provements,— for lighting, paving, and police, — for water-
works,— for docks and harbors; and in these measures,
the principle of elected and responsible boards has been
accepted as the rule of local administration. The functions
exercised under these Acts are of vast importance, not only
to the localities immediately concerned, but to the general
welfare of the community. The local administration of Liv-
erpool resembles that of a maritime state. In the order and
wise government of large populations by local authority, rests
the general security of the realm. And this authority is
everywhere based upon representation and responsibility.
In other words, the people who dwell in towns have been
permitted to govern themselves.
1 Schedules B and C of Act.
a 3 & 4 Vict, c 108.
COURTS OF QUARTER SESSIONS. 477
Extensive powers of administration have also been in-
trusted to local boards constituted under general Local boards
statutes for the sanitary regulation, improvement, u*'nde1''"'**^
and police of towns and populous districts.^ Again, s^erai Acts
the same principle was adopted in the election of boards
of guardians for the administration of the new poor-laws,
throughout the United Kingdom. And lastly, in 1855,
(he local affairs of the metropolis were intrusted to the
Metropolitan Board of Worlds, — a free municipal assembly,
elected by a popular constituency, and exercising extended
powers of taxation and local management.*
The sole local administration, indeed, which has still been
left without i-epresentation, is that of counties ; „
*^ , . Courts of
•where rates are levied and expenditure sanctioned Quarter
by magistrates appointed by the crown. Selected
from the nobles and gentry of the county for their position,
influence, and character, the magistracy undoubtedly afford a^
virtual representation of its interests. The foremost men
assemble and discuss the affairs in which they have them-
selves the greatest concern ; but the principles of election
and responsibility are wanting. This peculiarity was noticed
in 1836 by the commission on county rates;' and efforts
have since been made, first by Mr. Hume,* and afterwards by
Mr. Milner Gibson,* to introduce responsibility into county
administration. It was proposed to establish financial boards,
constituted of members elected by boards of guardians, and
1 Public Health Act, 1848; Local Government Act, 1858; Toulmin
Smith's Local Government Act, 1858; Glen's Law of Public Health and
Local Government; Police (Scotland) Acts, 1850; Towns' Improvement
(Scotland) Act, 1860; Police and Improvement (Scotland) Act, 1862, con-
eolidating previous Acts.
2 Metropolis Local Management Acts, 1855, 1862. Toulmin Smith's
Metropolis Local Management Act.
8 The Commissioners said: — "No other tax of such magnitude is laid
upon the subject, except by his representatives." . . . . " The administra-
tion of this fund is the exercise of ah irresponsible power intrusted to a
fluctuating body."
* In 1837 and 1839. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., cvi. 125.
* In 1840, and subsequently. — ^J^d., cviii. 738.
478 LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
of magistrates chosen by themselves. To the representative
principle itself few objections were offered ; but no scheme
for carrying it into effect has yet found favor with the legis-
lature. .
Counties represent the aristocratic, — towns the democratic
DUtiDctire principles of our constitution. In counties, terri-
eou[!«es and toi'iiil power, ancestral honors, family connections,
towna. gpj loeal traditions have dominion. The lords of
the soil still enjoy influence and respect, little less than
feudal. Whatever forms of administration may be estab-
lished, their ascendency is secure. Their power is founded
upon the broad basis of English society ; not upon laws or
local institutions. In towns, power is founded upon numbers
and association. The middle classes, — descendants and rep-
resentatives of the stout burghers of olden times, — have
sway. The wealth, abilities, and public virtues of eminent
citizens may clothe them with influence; but they derive
authority from the free suffrages of their fellow-citizens>
among whom they dwell. The social differences of counties
and towns have naturally affected the conditions of their
local administration and political tendencies ; but both have
contributed, in different ways, to the good government of tl.e
Btate.
G0VER2?MENT OF IRELAND. 470
CHAPTER XVI.
Government of Ireland before the Union : — The Legislature and the Ex-
ecutive : — Protestant Ascendency : — Ireland a Dependency : — Commer-
cial Restrictions: — The Volunteers: — Legislative and Judicial Indepen-
dence granted 1782: — The United Irishmen and other Associations: —
The Rebellion of 1798: — The Union: — Its Benefits Deferred : — Free-
dom and Equality finally assured.
We have seen liberty steadily advancing, in every form,
and under every aspect, throughout our political p^.^^^^
and religious institutions. And nowhere has its ?f iii)«rty
° , , in Ireland.
advance been more conspicuous than in Ireland.
In that country, the English laws and constitution had been
established as if in mockery.^ For ages its people were
ruled, by a conquering and privileged race, as aliens and
outlaws.'- Their lands were wrested from them : their
rights trampled, under foot : their blood and their religion
proscribed.'
Before George III. commenced his reign, the dawn of
better days was brightening the horizon ; yet, Gtovemment
what was then the political condition of his Irish before toe
subjects ? They were governed by a Parliament, ^""0°
whence every Catholic was excluded. The House of Lords
was composed of prelates of the Protestant The Lords
church, and of nobles of the same faith, — owners of
boroughs, patrons of corporations, masters of the represen-
tation, and in close alliance with the castle.* The House
1 Leiand, Hist., i. 80, &c.; Plowden's Hist., i. 33.
2 Davis, 100, 109.
3 For the earlier historj* of Ireland see Plowden, i. 1-332; Leiand, Pre-
.im. Discourse; O'llalloran; Moore; and a succinct but comprehensive
outline by Uallain, Const. Hist., c. xviii.
* Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 102.
480 IRELAND.
of Commons assumed to represent the country ; but the elec
The Com- tivc franchise, — narrow and illusory in other re-
*°'""' spects, — was wholly denied to five sixths of the
people,^ on account of their religion.'^ Every vice of the Eng-
lish representative system was exaggerated in Ireland. Nomi-
nation boroughs had been more freely created by the crown : '
in towns, the members were returned by patrons or close
corporations : in counties, by great proprietors. In an as-
sembly of 300, twenty-five lords of the soil alone returned
no less than 116 members.* A comparatively small number
of patrons returned a majority; and, acting in concert, were
able to dictate their own terms to the government. So W(.'ll
were their influence and tactics recognized, that they were
known as the "parliamentary undertakers."* Theirs was
not an a.nbition to be satisfied with political power and
ascendency : they claimed more tangible rewards, — titles,
offices, pensions, — for themselves, their relatives and de-
pendents. Self-interest and corruption were all but
universal, in the entire scheme of parliamentary govern-
ment. Two thirds of the House of Commons, on whom
the government generally relied, were attached to its interest
by offices, pensions, or promises of preferment.^ Patrons
and nominees alike exacted favors ; and, in five-and-twenty
years, the Irish pension-list was trebled.'' Places and pen-
sions, the price of parliamentary services, were publicly
1 Primate Boulter admitted that there were five Catholics to one Prot-
estant in the reign of Geo. II. — Plowden'a Hist., i. 269, 271; Grattan's
Life, i. 64. .
2 2 Geo. I. c. 19 ; 1 Geo. II. c. 9, s. 7.
8 Leland, ii. 437; Plowden's Hist., i. 109; App., xv. xvi. ; Carte's Or-
mond, i. 18; Lord Mountmorres' Hist, of the Irish Parliament, i. 166, &c.:
l)esiderata Curiosa Hibemica, 308; Moore's Hist, iv. 164.
•* Massey's (on the authority of the Bolton MSS.) Hist., iii. 264. See
also Wakefield's Statistical and Political Account of Ireland, ii. 301.
6 Wilkinson's Survey of South of Ireland, 57; Adolphus" Hist., i. IGl.
• Plowden's Hist, i. 360, 375. See also analj-sis of the ministerial ma-
jority in 1784, in the Boltou MSS., Massey's Hist, iii. 265.
7 Plowden's Hist., i. 451; suprn, Vol. I. 212.
THE EXECUTIVE. 481
bought and sold in the market.* But these rewards, how-
ever lavishly bestowed, failed to satisfy the more needy and
prodigal, whose lidelity was purchased from time to time
with hard cash.^ Parliamentary corruption was a recog-
nized instrument of government : no one was ashamed of it.
Even the speaker, whose office should have raised him above
the low intrigues and sordid intex'ests of faction, was mainly
relied upon for the management of the House of Commons
And this corrupt and servile assembly, once in- parliament
trusted with power, might continue to abuse it on'deinise <rf
for an indefinite period. If not subservient to the "°*°'
crown, it was dissolved ; but, however neglectful of the
rights and interests of the people, it was firmly installed as
their master. The law made no provision for its expiration,
save on the demise of the crown itself.
Such being the legislature, to whom the rights of the
people were intrusted, the executive power was iheexecu-
necessarily in the hands of those who corruptly *'^®'
wielded its authority. The lord-lieutenant, selected from
English nobles of the highest rank, was generally superior
to the petty objects of local politicians ; but he was in the
hands of a cabinet consisting of men of the dominant fac-
tion, intent upon continuing their own power, and ministering
to the ambition and insatiable greed of their own families
and adherents. Surrounded by intrigues and troubles, he
escaped as much as possible from the intolerable thraldom
of a residence in Ireland ; and, in his absence, these men
governed the country absolutely, as lords justices. Contend-
ing among themselves for influence and patronage, they
agreed in maintaining the domination of a narrow oligarchy
and the settled policy of 'Protestant ascendency.^ As if to
1 Plow'en's Hist., i. 364, 378.
2 Ibid., 374; Irish Debates, i. 139; Grattan's Life, i. 97.
8 Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 83.
* Plowden's Hist., i. 370; Adolphus' Hist., 159-lGl; Grattan's lufe,
L 97.
VOL II. 31
482 • IRELAND.
mark the principles of such a rule, the primate bore th«
foremost place in the adminislration of affairs.*
The proscription of Catholics at once insured the power
MonoDoi ^"^ ministered to the cupidity of the ruling party,
of power Every judge, every magistrate, every officer, — ■
civil, military and corporate, — was a churchman.
No Catholic could practise the law,'' or serve upon a jury.
The administration of justice, as well as political power, was
monopolized by Piotestants. A small junto distributed
among their select band of followers all the honors and
pati-onage of the state. Every road to ambition was closed
against Catholics, — the bar, the bench, the army, the senate,
and the magistracy. And Protestant nonconformists, scarcely
inferior in numbers to churchmen, fared little better than
Catholics. They were, indeed, admitted to a place in the
legislature, but they were excluded, by a test Act, from every
civil office, from the army, and from corporations ; and, even
where the law failed to disqualify them, they might look in
vain for promotion to a clique who discerned merit in none
but churchmen. Such were the rights and liberties of the
Irish people ; and such the character and policy of their
rulers.
And while the internal polity of Ireland was exclusive,
„ ^ ,. illiberal, and corrupt ; the country, in its relations
Subordina- , ' •'
tionofire- to England, still bore the marks of a conquered
land to the .
English goT- province. The Parliament was not a free legisla-
ture, with ample jurisdiction in making laws and
voting taxes. By one of " Poyning's Acts," ' in the reign of
Henry VII., the Irish Parliament was not summoned until
the Acts it was called upon to pass had already been approved
and certified, under the great seal, in England. Such Acts it
might discuss and reject, but could not amend. This restric-
1 On the accession of Geo. III., the lords justices were the primate, Dr.
Stone, Lord Shannon, a former speaker, and Mr. Ponsoi-by, then lioldini;
the office of speaker.
» Plowden'8 Hist., i. 271.
• 10 Henry VIL c. 4 (Irish).
DEPENDENCE OF IRELAND. 483
lion, however, was afterwards relaxed ; and laws were cer-
tified, in the same manner, after the opening of Parliament.*
Parliament could say " aye " or '* no " to the edicts of the
crown ; but could originate nothing itself Even money
bills were transmitted to the Commons in the same imperial
form. Soon after the revolution, the Commons had vainly
contended for the privilege of originating grants to the crown,
like their English prototypes; but their presumption was re-
buked by the chief governor, and the claim pronounced un-
founded by the judges of both countries.* The rejection of
a money bill was also visited with rebuke and protest.'
The Irish Parliament, however, released itself from this
close thraldom by a procedure more consonant with English
usage, and less openly obnoxious to their independence.
Heads of bills were prepared by either House, and submit
ted to the Privy Council in Ireland, by whom they were
transmitted to the king, or withheld at their pleasure. If ap-
proved by His Majesty, with or without amendments, they
were returned to the House in which they had been proposed,
where they were read three times, but could not be amended.*
The crown, however, relinquished no part of its prerogative ;
and money bills continued to be transmitted from the Privy
Council, and were accepted by the Commons.®
These restrictions were marks of the dependence of the
legislature upon the crown : other laws and customs supremacy
proclaimed its subordination to the Parliament of j^'^^^^'^^^f
England. That imperial senate asserted and ex- England.
ercised the right of passing laws " to bind the people and
ingdom of Ireland ; " and in the sixth of George I. passed
n Act explicitly affirming this right, in derogation of the
1 3 & 4 Philip and llaiy, c. 4 (Irish); Lord Mountmorres' Hist, of Irish
Pari., i. 48-50; Blackstone's Comui. (Kerr), 1, 84.
2 Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 47; ii. 142, 184.
3 In 1692. — Comm. Joum. (Ireland), ii. 35; Lord Mountmorres' Hist^
L 54; Hard^-'s Life of Lord Charleniont, i. 246.
* Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 58, 63; Plowden's Hist., i. 395, n.
s lu 1760 a Bill was so transmitted and passed. — Grattan's Life i. 57
484 IRELAND.
legislative authority of the national council sitting in Dublin.*
Its judicature was equally overborne. The appellate juris
diction of the Irish House of Lords was first adjudged to be
subordinate to that of the highest court of appeal in England,
and then expressly superseded and annulled by a statute of
the English Parliament.* The legislature of Ireland was
that of a British dependency. AVhether such a Parliament
were free or not, may have little concerned the true interests
©f the people of Ireland, who owed it nothing but bondage ;
but the national pride was stung by a sense of inferiority and
dependence.
The subordination of Ireland was further testified in an-
Commerciai Other form, at once galling to her pride and inju-
lestrictions. j-jyus to her prosperity. To satisfy the jealous in-
stincts of English traders, her commerce had been crippled
with intolerable prohibitions and restraints. The export of
her produce and manufactures to England was nearly inter-
dicted : all direct trade with foreign countries and British
possessions prohibited. Every device of protective and pro-
hibitory duties had been i-esorted to, for insuring a monopoly
to English commerce and manufactures. Ireland was impov-
erished, that English traders should be enriched."
Such were the laws and government of Ireland when George
III. succeeded to its crown, and for many years
opened under afterwards. Already a " patriot " party had arisen
George III. , o , ■ , ,
to expose the wrongs ot their country, and advo-
cate her claims to equality ; but hitherto their efforts had
been vain. A new era, however, was now about to open ;
1 10 Henrj- VII. c. 22 (Irish); Carte's Life of Ormond, iii. 55; Lord
Mountmorres' Hist., i. 360; Comm. Joum. (England), June 27th and 30th,
1698; Pari. Hist., v. 1181; Plowden's Hist., i. 244; Statute 6 Geo. L c. 5.
2 6 Geo. I. c. 5.— Par). Hist., vii. 642; Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 333.
8 32 Charles II. c. 2, prohibited the export of cattle, sheep, and live
block; 10 & 11 Will. IIL c. 10, interdicted the export of wool, and other
statutes iuiposed similar restraints. See Pari. Hist., xix. HOG, et seq.f
Swifc's Tract on Irish Manufactures, 1720; Woras, vii. 15; Short View of
tlie SUte of Ireland, 1727. — Jbid., 324.
MONET BILLS. 485
and a century of remedial legislation to be commenced, for
repairing the evils of past misgovernment.
One of the first improvements in the administration of Ire-
land was a more constant residence of the lord- „ .,
Residence of
lieutenant. The miscliievous rule of the lords jus- lord-iieu-
1 t -1 -1 1 • rt /> ten*"' •
tices was thus abated, and even the miiuence or
the parliamentary undertakers impaired ; but the viceroy
was still fettered by his exclusive cabinet.^
Attempts were made so early as 1761 to obtain a septen
nial Act for Ireland, which resulted in the passing octenniai
of an octennial bill, in 1768.* Without popular •*^'''' ^'^
rights of election, this new law was no great security for free
dom, but it disturbed, early in the reign of a young king, the
indefinite lease of power, hitherto enjoyed by a corrupt con-
federacy ; while discussion and popular sentiments were be-
ginning to exercise greater influence over the legislature.
A new Parliament was called, after the passing of the Act,
In which the country-party gained ground. The conflict
government vainly attempted to supplant the un- ^*^^^^^^^
dertakers in the manasrement of the Commons, and ti»! co™
°, rt- • mons, 1769.
and were soon brought into conflict with that as-
sembly. The Commons rejected a money bill, " because it
did not take its rise in that House ; " and in order claim to
to prove that they had no desire to withhold sup- nionev**
plies from the crown, they made a more liberal ^^^^' ^'^^•
provision than had been demanded. The lord-lieutenant,
however, — Lord Townshend, — marked his displeasure at
this proceeding, by proroguing Parliament as soon as the sup-
plies were voted, and protesting against the vote and resolu-
tion of the Commons, as a violation of the law and an in-
vasion of the just rights of the crown.* So grave was this
1 Adolphus' Hist., i. 331.
2 This difterence between the law of the two countries was introduced to
prevent the confu.«ion of a general election, on both sides of the channel, at
the same time. — Walpole's Mem., iii. 155; Lord Chesterfield's Letters, iv.
468; Plowden"s Hist., i. 352, 387; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 248-
861.
8 Lords' Joum. (Ireland), iv. 638. The loid-lietiteaaat, not contented
486 IRELAND.
difference, that the lord-lieutenant suspended the further sit-
itcpeated ting of Parliament, by repeated prorogations, for
prorogations, fouj-fgen months,* — a proceeding which did not
escape severe animadversion in the Engli.-h Parliament.*
Parliament, when at length reassembled, proved not more
Bee. 21, tractable than before. In December, 1771, the
'* ' Commons rejected a money bill because it had been
altered in Enghuid;' and again in 1773, pursued the same
course, for tlie like.»reason, in regard to two other money
Oct. and bills.* In 1775, having consented to the with-
" ■ drawal of four thousand troops from (he Irish es-
tablishment, it refused to allow them to be replaced by Prot-
estant troops from England,* — a resolution whicii evinced
the growing spirit of national independence. And in the
game year, having agreed upon the heads of two money
bills,' which were returned by the British cabinet with
amendments, they resented this interference by rejecting the
bills and initialing others, not without public inconvenience
and loss to the revenue.' This first octennial Parliament ex-
hibited other signs of an intractable temper, and was dis-
solved in 1776.* Nor did government venture to meet the
new Parliament for nearly eighteen months."
■with this speech on the prorogation, further entered a separate protest ia
the Lords' Journal. — Commons' Journal (Ireland), viii. 323; Debates ot
I'arliament of Ireland, ix. 181; Plowden's Hist, of Ireland, i. 396; ii. 251
Grattan's Mem., i. 98-101; Lord Mountmorres' Hist., i. 54; Hardy's Lift
of Lord Charleraont, i. 290.
1 From Dec. 26th, 1769, till Feb. 26th, 1771; Conun. Journ. (Ireland),
viii. 354; Plowden's Hist., i. 401.
2 Mr. G. M. Walsingham, May 3d, 1770; Pari. Hist., v. 309.
* Comni. Journ. (Ireland), viii 467; Adolphus, ii. 14; Life of Grattan,
i. 174-185.
* Dec. 27th, 1773: Comin Journ. (Ireland), ix. 74.
* Comm. Jouni. (Ireland), ix. 223; Grattans Life, i. 268.
* Viz., a Hill for additional duties on beer, tobacco, &c. ; and another,
inipooing stamp-duties.
7 Dec. 2l8t, 1775; Comm. Journ. (Ireland), ix. 244; Plowden's Hist
L 435.
» Plowden's Hist., i. 441.
* The old Parliament was prorogued in June, 1776, and afterwards dit<
MONEY BILLS. 487
In the mean time, causes superior to the acts of a govern-
ment, tho efforts of psjtriots, and the combinations
of parties, were rapidly advancing the indepen- American
dence of Ireland. The American colonies had re-
sented restrictions, upon their trade, and the imposition of
taxes by the mother-country ; and were now in revolt again.-t
the rule of England. Who could fail to detect the parallel
between the cases of Ireland and America ? The patriots
accepted it as an encouragement, and their rulers as a warn-
ing. The painful condition of the people was also condition of
betraying the consequences of a selfish and illib- ***^ people,
eral policy. The population had increased with astonishing
fecundity. Their cheap and ready food, the potato, — and
their simple wants, below the standard of civilized life, — •
removed all restraints upon the multiplication of a vigorous
and hardy race. Wars, famine, and emigration had failed
to arrest their progress; but mi.sgovernment had deprived
them of the means of employment. Their country was
rich in all the gifts of God ; fertile, abounding with rivers
and harbors, and adapted alike for agriculture, manufactures,
and commerce. But her agriculture was ruined by absentee
landlords, negligent and unskilful tenants, half civilized
cottiers ; and by restraints upon the free export of her prod-
uce. Her manufactures and commerce, — the natural re-
sources of a growing population, — were crushed by the
jealousy of English rivals. To the ordinary resti'aints upon
her industry was added, in 1776, an embargo on the export
of provisions.^ And while the industry of the people was
repressed by bad laws, it was burdened by the profusion
and venality of a corrupt government. What could be
expected in such a country, but a wretched, ignorant, and
turbulent peasantry, and agrarian outrage ? These evils were
aggravated by the pressure of the American war, followed
solved: the new Parliament did not meet till October 1-tth, 1777. — Comm
Joum., ix. 289, &c.; Plow den's Hist., i. 441.
1 Grattan's Life, L 283.
488 IRELAND.
by hoslilities with France.* The English minisiters and Par-
liament were awakened, by the dangers which threatened
the state, to the condition of the sister-country ; and Eng-
land's peril became Ireland's opportunity.
Encouragement had already been given to the Irish fish-
Coiumerciai eries in 1775;'' and in 1778, Lord Nugent, sup-
remoTea'^ ported by Mr. Burke and favored by Lord North,
^"^' obtained from the Parliament of England a par-
tial relaxation of the restrictions upon Irish trade. The
legislature was prepared to make far more liberal conces-
sions ; but, overborne by the clamors of English traders,
withheld the most important, which statesmen of all parties
concurred in pronouncing to be just.' The Irish, confirmed
in the justice of their cause by these opinions, resented the
undue influence of their jealous rivals ; and believed that
commercial freedom was only to be won by national equality.
The distresses and failing revenue of Ireland again at-
Further re- tracted the attention of the British Parliament in
remoTed^ the ensuing session.* England undertook the pay-
■^^'*" ment of the troops in the Irish establishment serv-
ing abroad,^ and relieved some branches of her industry ; •
but still denied substantial freedom tp her commerce. Mean-
while, the Irish were inflamed by stirring oratory, by contin-
ued suffering, and by the successes of the Americans in a
like cause. Disappointed in their expectations of relief
from the British Parliament, they formed associations for the
exclusion of British commodities and the encouragement of
native manufactures.'
1 Grattan'8 Life, i. 283-289, 298, &c.; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont,
i. 368-.379.
2 15 Geo. IIL c. 31; Plowden's Hist, i. 430.
» Pari. Hist, xix. 1100-1126; Plowden's Hist., i. 459-466; 18 Geo. HL
c 45 (flax seed); c. 55 (Irish sliipping); Adolphns' Hist, ii. 551-554;
Grattan's Life, i. 330.
* Pari. Hist, xx. Ill, 136, 248, 635, 663.
6 King's Message, March 18th, 1779; Pari. Hist, xx. 327.
• £. g. hemp and tobacco. — 19 Geo. IIL c. 37, 83.
t Plowden's Hist, i. 485; Grattan's Life, i. 362-364; Hardj's Life of
Lwd Charlemont, i. 389.
THE VOLUNTEERS. 489
Another deci.sive movement precipitated the crisis of Irish
affairs. The French war had encouraged the xhe yoiun-
formation of several corps of vohmteers, for the *^"' *"*•
defence of the country. The most active promoters of this
array of military force were members of the country party ;
and their politiciil sentiments were speedily caught up by the
volunteers. At first the different corps were without concert,
or communication ;* but in the autumn of 1779, they received
a great accession of strength, and were brouglit into united
action. The country had been drained of its regular army,
for the American war ; and its coasts were threatened by the
enemy. The government, in its extremity, threw itself upon
the volunteers, distributed 16,000 stand of arms, and invited
the people to arm themselves, without any securities for their
obedience. The volunteers soon numbered 42,000 men,
chose their own officers, — chiefly from the country party, — •
made common cause with the people against the govern-
ment, shouted for free trade, and received the thanks of
Parliament for their patriotism.^ Power had been suffered
to pass from the executive and the legislature into the hands
of armed associations of men, holding no commissions from
the crown, and independent alike of civil and military au-
thority. The government was filled with alarm and per-
plexity; and the British Parliament resounded with remon-
strances against the conduct of ministers, and arguments for
the prompt redress of Irish grievances.' The Parliament
of Ireland showed its determination, by voting supplies for
six months only ; * and the British Parliament, setting itself
1 Plowden'8 Hist, i. 487; Grattan's Life, i. 343.
2 Plowden's Hist., i. 493 ; Lord SheflSeld's Observations on State of Ire-
land, 1785.
8 Debate on Lord Shelbume's motion in the Lords, Dec. 1st, 1779. —
Pari. Hist., xx. 1156; Debate on Lord Upper-Ossory's motion in the
Commons, Dec. 6th, 1779; Jtnd., 1197; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont,
'. 380-382; Grattan's Life, i. 368, 389, 397-400; Moore's Life of Lord K
Fitzgerald, i. 187.
* Nov., 1779; Plowden's Hist., i. 506.
400 IRELAND.
earnestly to work, passed some important measures for the
relief of Irish commerce.*
Meanwhile tlie volunteers, daily increasing in discipline
Tbevoian- ^'"^ military organization, were assuming, more
teern demand a„(j more, the character of an armed political
legislative «» i •
liidepen-^ association. The different coi-ps assembled for
' ' drill, and for discussion, agreed to resolutions, and
opened an extensive communication wiih one another. Early
in 1780, the volunteers demanded, with one voice, the legis-
lative independence of Ireland, and liberation from the sov-
ereignty of the British Parliament.* And Mr. Grattan, the
ablest and most temperate of the Irish patriots, gave eloquent
expression to these claims in tiie Irish House of Commons.'
In this critical conjuncture, the public mind was further
. , inflamed by another interference of the govern-
rhe Mutiny •' °
BiUniade ment, in England. Hitherto, Ireland had been
embraced in the annual Mutiny Act of the British
Pai'liament. In this year, however, the general sentiment
of magistrates and the people being adverse to the opera-
tion of such an Act without the sanction of the Irish legis-
lature, Ireland was omitted from the English mutiny bill ;
and the heads of a separate mutiny bill were transmitted
from Ireland. This bill was altered by the English cabinet
into a permanent act. Material amendments were also made
in a bill for opening the sugar trade to Ireland.'' !No con-
i^titutional security had been more cherished than that of an
annual mutiny bill, by which the crown is effectually pre-
vented from maintaining a standing ai"my without the
fonsent of Parliament. This security was now denied to
Ireland, just when she was most sensitive to her rights and
jealous of the sovereignty of England. The Irish Parlia-
1 Lord Nortti'8 Propositions, D^ 13th, 1779; ParL Hist, xx. 1272; 20
Geo. in. c. e, 10, 18.
3 Plouden's Hist., i. 513.
« April 19th, 1780; Grattan's Life, ii. 39-55.
* Pari. Hist., xxi. 1293; Plowden's Hist., i. 615, &c.; Grattan's Life
IL 60, 71, 85-100, et ttq.
THE VOLUNTEERS. 491
ment submitted to the will of its English rulers ; but the
volunteers assembled to denounce them. They declared that
their own Parliament had been bought with the wealth of
Ireland herself; and clamored more loudly than ever for
legislative independence.* Nor was such an innovation
without effect upon the constitutional rights of England, as
it sanctioned, for the first time, the maintenance of a military
force within the realm, without limitation as to numbers of
duration. Troops raised in England might be transferj-ed
to Ireland, and there maintained under military law, inde-
pendent of the Parliaments of either country. The anom-
aly of this measure was forcibly exposed by Mr. Fox and
the leaders of Opposition, in the British Parliament.-
The volunteers continued their reviews and political dem-
onstrations, under the Earl of Charlemont, with The roiun-
increased numbers and improved organization ; *^"' ' '
and again received the thanks of the Irish Parliament.*
But while they were acting in cordial union with the leaders
of the country party, in the House of Commons, the govern-
ment had secured, — by means too familiar at the Castle, —
a majority of that assembly, which steadily resisted further
concessions.* In these circumstances, delegates _.
' o The conven-
from all the volunteers in Ulster were invited to ''°° of
_ Dungannon.
assemble at Dungannon on the loth r ebruary,
1782, " to root out corruption and court influence from the
legislative body," and '' to deliberate on the present alarming
situation of public affairs." The meeting was held in the
church : its proceedings were conducted with the utmost pro*
1 Grattan's Life, ii. 127, d seq.
» Feb. 20th, 2-3(1, 1781 ; Pari. Hist., xxi. 1292.
» Plowdeii's Hist., i. 529; Grattan's Life, ii. 103.
•* Plowden's Hist., i. 5-35-555. Mr. Lden, wTiting to Lord North, Nov.
10th, 1781, infonns him that the Opposition had been gained over, and
adds: — " Indeed, I have had a fatiguing week of it in every respect. On
Thursday I was obliged to see fifty-three gentlemen separately in the
course of the morning, from eight till two o'clock." — Beresford Corr,,
i, 188 ; Correspondence of Lord Lieutenant, Grattan's Life, ii. 153-177.
492 IRELAND.
priety and moderation ; and it agreed, almost unanimously,
to resolutions declaring the right of Ireland to legislative
M o n ' ^^^ judicial independence, and free trade.'*- On
Motion^eb. (he 226, Mr. Grattan, in a noble speech, taoved
Mr Flood's ^" address of the Commons to His Majesty, as-
^o^on^Feb. gerting the same principles.* His motion was de-
feated, as well as another by Mr. Flood, declaring
the legislative independence of the Irish Parliament.'
In the midst of these contentions. Lord Rockingham's
liberal administration was formed, who recalled
Heasares of
the Hocking- Lord Carlisle, and appointed the Duke of Port-
try, AprU land as lord lieutenant. While the new ministers
' ■ were concerting measures for the government of
Ireland, Mr. Eden, secretary to Lord Carlisle, — who had
resisted all the demands of the patriots in the Irish Parlia-
ment, — hastened to England ; and startled the House of
Commons with a glowing statement of the dangers he had
left behind him, and a motion to secure the legislative inde-
pendence of Ireland. His motion was withdrawn, amidst
general indignation at the factious motives by which it had
been prompted.* On the following day, the king sent a mes-
sage to both houses, recommending the state of Ireland to
their serious consideration : to which a general answer was
returned, with a view to the cooperation of the Irish Parlia-
AprUieth, ment. In Dublin, the Duke of Portland coramu-
* nicated a similar message, which was responded to
by an address of singular temper and dignity, — justly called
the Irish Declaration of Rights.* The Irish Parliament
unanimously claimed for itself the sole authority to make
1 Plowden's Hist, i. 5G4-5G9; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, ii. 1,
el seq. ; Life of Grattan, ii. 203, el seq.
2 Irish Pari. Deb., i. 266.
« lind., 279.
* April 8th, 1782: Pari. Hist, xxii. 1241-1264; Wraxall's Mem., iii. 29,
92; Fox's Mem., i. 313; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 287-289; Grat-
tan'8 Life, ii. 208.
6 Plowden's Hist, L 595-599; Irish Debates, i. 332-346; Grattau'a Lift,
ii. 230, "i seq.
IRISH INDEPENDEXCE. 498
laws for Ireland, and the repeal of the permanent Mutiny
Act. These claims the British Parliament, ani- Legislative
mated by a spirit of wisdom and liberalitv, con- ?nJ Judicial
•' ' ■' iDilepenaenca
ceded without reluctance or hesitation.^ Tiie ?™'**^'
sixth Geo. I. was repealed ; and the legislative
and judicial authority of the British Parliament renounced.
The right of the Privy Council to alter bills transmitted from
Ireland was abandoned, and tlie perpetual Mutiny Act re-
pealed. The concession was gracefully and honorably made ;
and the statesmen who had consistently advocated the rights
of Ireland, while in opposition, could proudly disclaim the
influence of intimidation.'^ The magnanimity of the act was
acknowledged with gratitude and rejoicings, by the Parlia-
ment and people of Ireland.
But English statesmen, in granting Ireland her indepen
dence, were not insensible to the difficulties of her _,.„ ...
' Difficulties
future government; and endeavored to concert of irUi»»°-
° dependence.
some plan of union, by which the interests of the
two countries could be secured." No such plan, however,
could be devised ; and for nearly twenty years the British
ministers were left to solve the strange problem of govern-
ing a divided state, and bringing into harmony the councils
of two independent legislatures. Its solution was naturally
found in the continuance of corruption ; and the Parliament
of Ireland, having gained its freedom, sold it, without com-
punction, to the Castle.* Ireland was governed by her native
1 Debates in Lords and Commons, May 17th, 1782; Pari. Hist., xxiii.
16-48: Rockingham Mem., ii. 469-476.
2 Fox's Mem., i. 393, 403, 404, 418; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 290-
295; Grattan's Life, ii. 289, et seq.; Court and Cabinets of Geo. HI,, i. 65.
* Address of both Hou.«es to the king, May 17th, 1782; Correspondence
of Duke of Portland and Marquis of Rockingham; Plowden's Hist., i. 605.
The scheme of an union appears to have been discussed as early as 1757.
— Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, i. 107. And again in 1776; Com-
wallis's Corr., iii. 129.
* See a curious analysis of the ministerial majority, in 1784, on the
authority of the Bolton MSS. — Massey's Hist., iii. 264; and Speech of
Mr. Grattan on the Address, Jan. 19th, 1792; Irish Deb., xli. 6-8; and
494 IRELAND.
legislature, but was not the less under tlie dominion of a
close oligarchy, — factious, turbulent, exclusive, and corrupt.
And how could it be otherwise? The people, with arras in
their hands, liad achieved a triumph. "Magna Charta,"
said Grattan, *' was not attained in Parliament ; but by the
barons, armed in the field." * But what influence had the
people at elections? Disfranchised and incapacitated, they
could pretend to none ! The anomalous condition of the
Parliament and people of Ireland became the more conspicu-
ous, as they proceeded in their new functions of self-govern-
Thevoiun- ™*-*nt. The volunteers, not satisfied with the
•**",*•?; ,. achievement of national independence, now con-
mand Parli*- ^ ^
mentary fronted their native Parliament with demands for
reform.
Parliamentary reform.' That cause being dis-
cussed in the English Parliament, was eagerly caught up
in Ireland. Armed men organized a wide-spread political
agitation, sent delegates to a national convention,^ and seemed
prepared to enforce their arguments at the point of the bay-
onet. Their attitude was threatening; but their cause a hol-
low pretence. The enfranchisement of Catholics formed no
part of their scheme. In order to secure their assistance in
the recent struggle for independence, they had, indeed, recom-
mended a relaxation of the penal laws : a common cause had
softened the intolerance of Protestants,; and some of the
most oppressive disabilities of their Catholic brethren had
been removed : * but as yet the patriots and volunteers had
Speecli of Mr. Fox, March 23d, 1707. He stated that " a person of high
consideration was known to say that 500,000/. had been expended to quell
an opposition in Ireland, and that as much more must be expended in
order to bring the legislature of that country to a proper temper." — Pari.
Hist., xxxiii. 143: Speech of Mr. Spring Rice, April 23d, 1834; Hans.
Deb., 3d Ser., xxii. 1189; Plowden's Hist., ii. 346, 609.
1 Irish Debates, April 16th, 1782, i. 335.
a IMowden's Hist., ii. 28; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, ii, 93-134 j
Grattan's Life, iii. 102-146.
• Plowden, ii. 56.
* Viz. in 1778 (17 & 18 Geo. III. e. 49, Ireland), and in J782; Plowdea's
Bist, i. 555, 559, 564, 579; and supra, p. 330.
FAILURE OF CAUSE OF REFORM. 495
no inlention of extending to them the least share of civil or
political power.
Mr. Flood was the organ of the volunteers in the House of
Common?, — a patriot second only to Mr. Grattan Mr. Flood's
in influence and ability, and jealous of the pop- reform. Not.
ularity and preeminence of his great rival. In ^ath, I188.
November, 1783, he moved for leave to bring in a bill for
the more equal representation of the people. He was met
at once with the objection that his proposal originated with
an armed association, whose pretensions were incompatible
with freedom of debate ; and it was rejected by a large
majority.^
Mr. Flood renewed his efforts in the following year ; but
the country party were disunited ; the owners of
, , , . , 11- Renewed,
boroughs were determmed not to surrender their March 13th,
power ; the dictation of the volunteers gave '
just offence ; and the division of opinion on the admission
of Catholics to the franchise was becoming more ., .,
° Failure of
pronounced. Again his measure was rejected.^ the cause of
rr, • 1-1 reform.
The mob resented its rejection with violence and
fury ; but the great body of the people, whose rights werj
ignored by the patriots and agitators, regarded it with in-
difference. The armed agitation proceeded ; but the volun-
teers continued to be divided upon the claims of the
Catholics, to which their leader Lord Charlemont was
himself opposed.' An armed Protestant agitation, and a
packed council of borough proprietoi's, were unpromising
instruments lor refonning the representation of the peo-
ple.*
1 Ayes, 49; Noes, 158. Irish Debates, ii. 353; Fox's Mem., ii. 165, 186;
Grattan's Life, iii. 146, et seq.; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, ii. 135.
2 March 13th, •20th, 1784; Irish Deb., iii. 13; Plowden's Hist., ii. 80.
Ayes, 85; Noes, 159.
3 l'Io\vden"s Hist., ii. 105; Moore's Life of Lord E. Fitzgerald, i. 189,
198; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, ii. 129.
* For a list of the proprietors of Irish nomination borouglis, see Plow*
den's Hist., ii. App. No. 96.
49 G IRELAND.
A close and corrupt Parliament v\hs left in full posses-
Mr. Pitt'g sion of its power ; and Ireland, exulting in
n^^siTrMf' recent emancipation from British rule, was soon
•*^^- made sensible that neither was her commerce
free, nor her independence assured. The regulation of lier
commerce was beyond the power of the Irish legislature :
the restrictions under which it lal>ored concerned both coun-
tries, and needed the concert of the two Parliaments. Mr.
Pitt, wise and liberal in his policy concerning Ireland, re-
garded commercial freedom as essential to her prosperity
and contentment ; and in 1785, he prepared a comprehensive
scheme to attain that object. Ireland had recently acquired
the right of trading with Europe and the West Indies ; but
was nearly cut off from trade with England herself, and with
America and Africa. Mr. Pitt offered liberal concessions
on all these points, which were first submitted to the Par-
liament of Ireland, in the form of eleven resolutions.* They
were gratefully accepted and acknowledged ; but when tiie
minister introduced them to the British Parliament, he was
unable, in the plenitude of his power, to overcome the in-
terests and jealousy of traders, and the ignorance, prejudices,
and faction of his opponents in the House of Commons.
He was obliged to witlidraw many of the concessions he had
offered, — including the right of trading with India and the
foreign West Indies ; and he introduced a new proposition,
requiring the English navigation laws to be enacted by the
Parliament of Ireland. The measure, thus changed, was
received with chagrin and resentment by the Parliament and
people of Ireland, as at once a mark of English jealousy
and injustice, and a badge of Irish dependence." The reso
lutions of the Irish Parliament had been set aside, the in
terests of the country sacrificed to those of English traders,
and the legislature called upon to register the injurious edicts
1 Feb. 7th, 1785; Irish Deb., iv. 116; Plowden's Hist., ii. 113, n.
' Debates, Feb. 22d, and May 12th, in Commons ; Pari. Hist, xxv. 311,
575. In Ixtrds, June 7th; Ibid., 820.
LIBERAL MEASURES. 1792-3. 497
of the British Parliament. A measure, conceived in the
highest spirit of statesmanship, served but to aggravate
the ill-feelings which it had been designed to allay ; and
was abandoned in disappointment and disgust.^ Its failure,
however, illustrated the ditficulties of governing the realm
through the agency of two independent Parliaments, and
foreshadowed the necessity of a legislative union. Another
illustration of the danger of divided councils was afforded, a
few years later, by the proceedings of the Irish Parlianaent
on the regency.*
A few years later, at a time of peril and apprehension in
England, a policy of conciliation was again adopted uberai
in Ireland. The years 1792 and 1793 were ^^^J^^^
signalized by the admission of Catholics to the
elective franchise and to civil and military offices,^ the limi-
tation of the Irish pension list,* the settlement of a fixed
civil list upon the crown in lieu of its hereditary revenues,
the exclusion of some of the swarm of placemen and pen-
sioners from the House of Commons, and the adoption of
Mr. Fox's protective law of libel.^ Ireland, however, owed
these promising concessions to the wise policy of Mr. Pitt
and other English statesmen, rather than to her native Par-
liament. They were not yielded gracefully by the Irish
cabinet ; and they were accompanied by rigorous measures
of coercion.' Thi^ was the last hopeful period in the sep
1 Irisli Debates, v. 329, &c.; Plowden's Hist., ii. 120-136; Tomline'.s
Life of Pitt, ii. 69-92; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, i. 263-273; Beresford
Oorr., i. 265.
2 Supm, Vol. L 162; Hardy's Life of Lord Charlemont, ii. 168-188
Grattan's Life, iii. 341, et seq.
8 Sujn-a, p. 330 (1792-3); Plowden's Hist, ii. 407; Moore's Life of Lord
E. Fitzgerald, i. 205, 216, 217.
< Supra, Vol. I. 213; Plowden's Hist, ii. 146, 188, 279.
6 Svprn, p. 122.
6 Plowden's Hist., ii. 471. Tn 1805 Mr. Grattan stated that this policy
of conciliation originated with ministers in England; but being opposed
by the ministry in Ireland, its grace and popularity were lost. — Hans.
Deb., 1st Ser., iv. 926; Moore's Life of Lord E. Fitzgerald, i. 218; Hardy's
Life of Lord Charlemont, ii. 294-300; Grattan's Life, iv. 53-114.
vol.. II. 32
498 IRELAND.
arate history of Ireland, which was soon to close in tumults,
rebellion, and civil war. To the seething elements of dis-
cord, — social, religious, and political, — were now added
the perilous ingredients of revolutionary sentiments and
sympathies.
The volunteers had aimed at worthy objects ; yet their
association was founded upon revolutionary prin-
The United . , , • , ...
Irishmen, ciples, incompatible with constitutional government.
Clamor and complaint are lawful in a free state ;
but the agitation of armed men assumes the shape of rebel-
lion. Their example was followed, in 1791, by the United
Irishmen, wliose original design was no less worthy. This
association originated with the Protestants of Belfast ; and
sought " a complete reform of the legislature, founded on the
principles of civil, political, and religious liberty." * These
reasonable objects were pursue<^l for a time, earnestly and in
good faith ; and motions for reform, on the broad basis of
religious equality, were submitted to the legislature b}' Mr.
Ponsonby, where they received ample discussion.^ But tlie
association was soon to be compromised by republican lead-
ers ; and seduced into an alliance with French Jacobins, and
a treasonable correspondence with the enemies of their
country, in aid of Irish disaffection.^ Treason took the place
of patriotism. This unhappy land was also disturbed by
armed and hostile associations of peasants, known as "de-
fenders " and " peep-of-day boys." * Society was convulsed
with violence, agrarian outrage, and covert treason.
1 Plowd-n's Hist., ii 330-334, and App. No. 84: Report of Secret Com
mittee of I^ords; Lords' Journ., Ireland, vii. 580; Madden's United Irish-
men; Moore's Life of Lord E. Fitzgerald, i. 197.
-2 March 4th, 1794; May 15th, 1797. Plowden's Hist., ii. 452, &e.
* III 1795, the Irish Union Societies were formed out of the United Irish-
men. The correspondence appears to have commenced in 1795. — IMow-
den's Hist., ii. 567; Report of Secret Committee of Commons, 1797;
Irish Debates, xvii. 522; Grattan's Life, iv. 259, &c. ; Moore's Life of Lord
E. Fitzgerald, i. 164-166, 256-260, 273, et seq. ; ii. 9, et aeq. ; Life of Wolte
Tone, i. 132-136, ii. 14, et seq.; Report of Secret Committee of Comnions,
Ireland, 1797; Conim. Journ., Ireland, xvii. App. 829; Castlereagh Corr.,
i. 189, 296, .366, &c. ; Comwallis's Corr., ii. 338.
* Plowden's Hist, ii. 335; Moore's Life of Lord E. Fitzgerald, ii. 6.
RELIGIOUS FEUDS. 499
Meanwhile, religious animosities, which had been partially
allayed by the liberal policy of the government pends be-
and by the union of Protestants and Catholics in ^^"ts^d
the volunteer forces, were revived with increased Cathohcs.
intensity. In 1795, Lord Fitzwilliam's brief rule, — de-
signed for conciliation, — merely raised the hopes of Catho-
lics and the fears of Protestants.* The peasantry, by whom
the peace of the country was disturbed, generally professed
one faith ; the gentry, another. Traditional hatred of the
Romish faith was readily associated, in the minds of the
latter, with loyalty and the protection of life and property.
To them papist and "defender" were the same. Every
social disorder was ascribed to the hated religion. Papist
enemies of order, and conspii-ators against their country,
were banding together ; and loyal Protestants were invited
to associate in defence of life, property, and religion. With
this object, Orange societies were rapidly formed ; orango
which, animated by fear, zeal, and party spirit, «°*=*^''«*-
further inflamed the minds of Protestants against Catholics.
Nor was their hostility passive. In September, 1795, a
fierce conflict arose between the Orangemen and defenders,
— since known as the battle of the Diamond, — which in-
creased the inveteracy of the two parties. Orangemen en-
deavored, by the eviction of tenants, the dismissal of servants,
and worse forms of persecution, to drive every Catholic out
of the county of Armagh ; ^ and defenders retaliated with
murderous outrages.' In 1796, the disturbed state of the
country was met by further measures of repression, which
were executed by the magistrates and military with merciless
severity, too often unwarranted by law.* To other cjiuses
of discontent, was added resentment of oppression and injus-
1 Moore's Life of Lord E. Fitzgerald, i. 260; Grattan's Life, iv. 182;
CastlereaRh Corr., i. 10.
2 Speech of Mr. Grattan. Feb. 22d, 1796 ; Irish ParL Deb., xvi. 107.
8 Speech of Attorney-General, Feb. 20th, 1796; Ibid., xvi. 102.
< Plowden's Hist., ii. 544-567, 573, 582, 624; Lord Moira's Speech, Nor.
«2d, 1797; F«rl. Hist., xxxiii. 1058.
500 ffiELAND.
tice. The country was rent asunder by hatreds, strifes, and
disaffection, and threatened, from without, by hostile invasion
which Irish traitors had encouraged.^ At length these evil
passions, fomented by treason on one side and by cruelty or
the other, exploded in the rebellion of 1798. ;
The leaders of this rebellion were Protestants.^ The Cath-
The rcbeUjon **''*^ S^^^U ^"<^ priesthood Tccoilcd from any con
»f 1798. tf,gt ^vith French atheists and Jacobins : they
were without republican sympathies ; but could not fail
to deplore the sufferings and oppression of the wretciied
peasantry who professed their faith. The Protestant parly,
however, — frantic with fear, bigotry, and party spirit, — •
denounced the whole Catholic body as rebels and public en-
emies. The hideous scenes of this rebellion are only to be
paralleled by the enormities of the French Revolution.
The rebels were unloosed savages, — mad with hatred and
revenge, burning, destroying, and slaying; the loyalists and
military were ferocious and cruel beyond belief. Not only
were armed peasants hunted down like wild beasts ; but the
disturbed districts were abandoned to the license of a brutal
soldiery. The wretched " croppies " were scourged, pitch-
capped, picketed, half-hung, tortured, mutilated, and shot ;
their homes rifled and burned ; their wives and daughters
violated with revolting barbarity.' Before the outbreak of
the rebellion, the soldiers had been utterly demoralized by
license and cruelty, unchecked by the civil power.* Sir
Ealph Abercromby, in a general order, had declared " the
army to be in a state of licentiousness, which must render it
1 Report of Secret Committee of Lords, 1798; Lords' Joum., Ireland,
Tiii. 588.
2 Plowden'8 Hist., ii. 700.
' Plowden's Hist., ii 701, 705 and note, 712-714. It was a favorite sport
to fasten caps filled with hot pitch on to the heads of the pea.sants, or to
make them stand upon a sharp stake or picket. — Ibid., 713.
* The military had been enjoined by proclamation to act withont being
called upon by the civil magistrates. — Plowden's Hist, ii. 622, App. civ
er.; Lord Dunfermline's Memoir of Sir Ralph Abercromby, 69.
THE REBELLION. 501
formidable to eveiy one but the enemy." * la vain had that
humane and enlightened soldier attempted to restrain mil-
itary excesses. Thwarted by the weakness of Lord Camden,
and the bigotry and fierce party zeal of his cabinet, he re-
tired in disgust from the command of an army, which had
been degraded into bands of ruffians and bandits.^ The
troops, hounded on to renewed license, were fit instruments
of the infuriated vengeance of the ruling faction.
In the midst of these frightful scenes, Lord Cornwallis
assumed the civil and military government of
Ireland. Temperate, sensible, and humane, he waius lord-
was horrified not less by the atrocities of the
rebels, than by the revolting cruelty and lawlessness of the
troops, and the vindictive passions of all concerned in the
administration of affairs.' Moderation and humanity were
to be found in none but English regiments.* With native
ofiicers, rapine and murder were no crimes.^
1 Memoir of Sir Ralph Abercromby, 93. 2 /j^f., 89_i38.
8 Writing June 28th, 1798, he said: — " I am much afraid that auy man
m a brown coat, who is found within several miles of the field of action, is
butchered without discrimination." — " It shall be one of my first objects
to soften the ferocity of our troops, which I am afrtiid, in the Irish corps at
least, is not confined to the private soldiers." — Cornwallis Corr., ii. 355.
Of the militia he .said: — "They are ferocious and cruel in the extreme,
when any poor wretches, either with or without arms, come within their
power: in short, murder appears to be their favorite pastime." — IbicL, 358.
*' The principal persons of this country, and the members of both Houses
of Parliament, are, in general, averse to all acts of clemency . . . and
would pursue measures that could only terminate in the extirpation of the
greater number of the inhabitants, and in the utter destruction of the
countrj'." — [bid., 358. Again, he deplores " the numberless murders that
are hourly committed by our people without any process or examination
whatever." " The conversation of the principal persons of the country
tends to encourage this system of blood; and the conversation, even at my
table, where you may well suppose I do all I can to prevent it, always turns
on hanging, shooting, burning, &c., &c. ; and if a priest has been put to
death, the greatest joy is expressed by the whole company." — Jbid., 369.
■* In sending the 100th Regiment and "some troops that can be depended
upon,'" he wrote: — "The shocking barbarities of our national troops
would be more likely to provoke rebellion than to suppress it." — Jbid., 377.
See also his General Order, Aug. 31st, 1798. — /6iV7., 395.
5 £. (J. the murder of Dogherty. — Ibid., 420. See also Lord Holland's
Mem., i. 105-114.
502 IRELAND.
The rebellion was crushed ; but how was a country so
The Union convulsed with evil passions, to be governed ?
ruocerted. Lord Cornwallis found his council, or jinito, at
tlie castle by whom it had long been ruled, " blinded by their
passions and prejudices." Persuaded that the policy of this
party had aggravated the political evils of their wretched
country, he endeavoretl to save the Irish from themselves,
liy that scheme of union which a greater statesman than
himself had long since conceived.* Under the old sy,>«tem of
government, concessions, conciliation, and justice were im-
practicable.^ The only hope of toleration and equity was
to be found in the mild and impartial rule of British
statesmen, and an united Parliament. In this spirit was the
union sought by Mr. Pitt, who " resented and spurned the
bigoted fury of Irish Protestants; "' in this spirit was it
j)i-omoted by Lord Cornwallis.* Self-government had be-
come impossible. "If ever there was a country," said Lord
Hutchinson, *' unfit to govern itself, it is Ireland ; a corrupt
aristocracy, a ferocious commonalty, a distracted govern-
ment, a divided people." ® Imperial consideration*, no less
paramount, also pointed to the union. Not only had the
divisions of the Irish people rendered the difficulties of
internal administration insuperable, but they had proved a
source of weakness and danger from without. Ireland could
no longer be suffered to continue a separate realm, but
must be fused and welded into one state with Great Britain.
But the difficulties of this great scheme were not easily to
be overcome. However desirable and even ne-
IHfficUltics
In effecting cessary for the interests of Irehmd herself, an
the Uuiou. ... i i • i i
uivitation to surrender her independence, so
recently acquired, deeply affected her national sensibilities.
To be merged in the greater and more powerful kingdom,
was to lose her distinct nationality. And how could she bo
1 Cornwallis Corr., ii. 404, 405.
' Jbid., 414, 415, 416.
« NVilberlorce's Diary, July 16th, 1798.
* Cornwallis Corr., ii. 418, 419, &c. ; Castlereagh Corr., i. 443.
* Memoir of Sir Ralph Abercromby, 136.
THE UNION. e03
assured against neglect and oppression, when wholly at the
mercy of the Parliament of Great Britain, whose sovereignty
ehe had lately renounced ? The liberties she had won in
1782, were all to be forfeited and abandoned. At any other
time, these national feelings alone would have made an
union impossible. But the country, desolated by a war o!
classes and religions, had not yet recovered the united
sentiments of a nation.
But other difficulties, no less formidable, were to be
encountered. The Irish party were invited to„, . .
'^ •' Objections
yield up the power and patronage of the castle ; of the ruling
the peers to surrender their proud position as
hereditary councillors, in Parliament ; the great families to
abandon their boroughs. The compact confederacy of in-
terests and corruption was to be broken up.* But the gov-
ernment, convinced of the necessity of the union, was pre-
pared to overcome every obstacle.
The Parliament of Great Britain recognized the union as
a necessary measure of state policy; and the Means by
masterly arguments of Mr. Pitt ^ admitted of little l^^^ ^'^
resistance.' But the first proposal to the Irish accomplished.
Parliament miscarried ; an amendment in favor of main-
taining an independent legislature being lost by a single
1 " There are two classes of men in Parliament, whom the disasters and
sufferings of the country have but very imperfectly awakened to the neces-
sity of a change, viz., the borough proprietors, and the immediate agents
of government." — Ix>rd Coi-nioallis to Duke of Portland, Jan. 5th, 1799. ;
Corr., iii. 31. Again: — '' There certainly is a very strong disinclination to
the measure in many of the borougli proprietors, and a not less marked
repugnance in many of the official people, particularly in those who
have been longest in the habits of the current system." — Same to Sa7ne,
Jan. 11th, 1799; Ihid.,M. And much later in the struggle, his lordship
wrote: — " The nearer the great event approaches, the more are the needy
and interested s^enators alarmed at the efiects it may possibly have on their
interests, and the provision for their families; and I believe that half of our
majority would be at least as much delighted as any of our opponents, if
the measure could be defeated." — Ibid., 2'28.
2 Jan. 2.3d and 31st, 1799.
* In the Commons, his resolutions were carried by 149 votes against Sfl,
end in the Lords without a division.— Plowden's Hist., ii. 896.
504 IRELAND.
vote.i It was plain that corrupt interests could only be
overcome by corruption. Nomination boroughs must be
bought and their members indemnified, county interests
conciliated, officers and expectant lawyers compensated,
opponents brbed. Lord Castlereagh estimated the cost of
these expedients at a million and a hali ; and the price was
forthcoming.^ The purchase of boroughs was no new
scheme, having been proposed by Mr. Pitt himself, as tlie
basis of his measure of Parliamentary reform in 1785 ' ; and
now it was systematically carried out in Ireland. The
patrons of boroughs received 7,5001. for each seat ; and
eighty-four boroughs were disfranchised.* Lord Downshire
was paid 52,500/. for seven seats ; Lord Ely, 45,000/. foi
six.® The total compensation amounted to 1,260,000/.'
Peers were further compensated for the loss of their
privileges in the national council, by profuse promises of
English peerages, or promotion in the peerage of Ireland ;
commoners were conciliated by new honors,'' and by the
1 Jan. 22d, 1799. Ayes, 106; Noes, 105. — Com wall is Corr., iii. 40-51.
■•' Castlereagh Corr., ii. 151. His lordship divided the cost as follows: —
Boroughs, 756,000/. ; county interests, 224,000^.; hamsters, 200,000/.; pur-
chasers of seats. 75,000/.; Dublin, 200,000/.; total, 1,433,000/. — Cornwallis
Corr., iii. 81 ; Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iii. 180. Lord Cornwallis wpcte,
July 1st, 1799: — "There cannot be a stronger argument for the measure
than the overgrown Parliamentary power of five or six of our pauipered
borough-mongers, who are become most formidable to government, by
their long po.ssession of the entire patronage of the crown, in "their respec-
tive districts." — Curr., iii. 110.
8 Supra, Vol. L, p. 317.
* Of the thirty -four boroughs retained, nine only were open. — Cornwal-
lis Corr., iii. 234, 324. See list of boroughs disfranchised and sums piiid
to proprietors. — IbiiL, 321-324. The Ponsonbys exercised influence over
twenty-two seats; Lord Downshire and the Beresfords, respectively, over
nearly as many. Twenty-three of the thirty-four boroughs remained
close until tlie Keform Act of 1832. — Jbid., 324. Many of the counties
also continued in the hands of the great families. — Jbid.; and see supra,
Vol. L, 288.
6 Plowden's Hist., ii. 1018, 1067; Castlereagh Corr., iii. 56-67; Corn-
wallis Corr., iii. 324; Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iii. 227.
« Cornwallis Corr.^ iii. 323.
7 Castlereagh Corr., iii. 330; Cornwallis Corr., iii. 244, 252, 257, 262.
Twenty-nine Irish peerages were created, of which seven were tmconnectod
THE UNION. 605
largesses oi the British government. Places were given or
promised, pensions multiplied, secret-service money ex-
hausted.^ In vain Lord Cornwallis complained of the
"political jobbing" and ''dirty business" in which he was
" involved beyond all bearing," and " longed to kick those
whom his public duty obliged him to court." In vain he
" despised and hated himself," while " negotiating and job-
bing with the most corrupt people under heaven." ^ British
gold was sent for, and distributed ^ ; and, at length, — in
defiance of threats of armed resistance ,* in spite of insidious
pron»ises of relief to Catholics,^ and corrupt defection among
the supporters- of government,® — the cause was won. A
great end was compassed by means the most base and
shameless. Grattan, Lord Charlemont, Ponsonby, Plunket,
■with the Union ; twenty Irish Peers were promoted, and six English peer-
ages granted for Irish services. — Ibid., 318. See also Lord Stanhope's
Life of I'ilt, iii. 180.
1 Cornwallis Corr., iii. 278, 340: Grattan's Life, v. iii.
2 Cornwallis Corr., iii. 102. The luckless viceroy applied to himself the
appropriate lines of Swift: —
'* So to eftect his monarch's ends.
From hell a viceroy devil ascends: ^
His budget with corruption cramin'd —
The contributions of the damn'd —
Which with unsparing hand he strows
Through courts and senates, as he goes;
And then, at Beelzebub's black hall,
Complains his budget is too small."
» Comwallis's Corr., iii. 151, 156, 201, 202, 226, 309; Cotte's Hist, of the
Union.
< Mil, 167, 180.
• 6 Ibid., 51, 55, 63, 149 ; Castlereagh Corr/^ ii. 45, et supra, p. 335.
6 " Sir R. IJutler, Mahon, and Fetherstone were taken off by county
cahals during the recess, and Whaley absolutely bought bj- the Opposition
stock purse. He received, I understand, 2000/. down, and is to receive a»
much more alter the service is performed. We have undoubted proofs
though not such as we can disclose, that they are enabled to offer as higl
as 5000/. for an individual vote, and I lament to state that there are indi-
viduals remaining amongst us that are likely to yield to this temptation."
— l.oi-d C'islltrtagh to Duke of Portland, Feb. 7th, 1800; Cornwallis Corr.,
iii. 182. " The enemy, to my certain knowledge, offer 5000/. ready money
for a vote." — Lord Cornwallis to Bishop of Lichjieid; Ibid., 184.
506 IRELAND.
and a few patriots continued to protest against the sale of tlio
liberties and free constitution of Ireland. Their eloquence
and public virtue command the respect of posterity ; but
the wretched history of their country denies thera its sym-
pathy.*
The terms of the union were now speedily adjusted, and
Terms of ratified by the Parliaments of both countries.'
the uuon. Ireland was to be represented, in the Parliament
of the United Kingdom, by four spiritual lords, silting by
rotation of sessions ; by twenty-eight temporal peers, elected
for life by the Irish peerage ; and by a hundred members of
the House of Commons. Her commerce was at length ad-
mitted to a freedom which, under other conditions, could not
have been attained.'
Such was the incorporation of the two countries ; and
Results of henceforth the history of Ireland became the his-
the union. {^ry of England. Had Mr. Pitt's liberal and
enlightened policy been carried out, the Catholics of Ireland
would have been at once admitted to a participation in the
privileges of the constitution ; provision would have been
made fo^ their clergy ; and the grievances of the tithe system
would have been redressed.* But we have seen how his
statesmanship was overborne by the scruples of the king ; '
and how long and arduous was the struggle by which religious
liberty was won. The Irish were denied those rights which
English statesmen had designed for them. Nor was this the
worst evil which followed the fall of Mr. Pitt, and the reversal
of his policy. So long as narrow Tory principles prevailed
in the councils of England, the government of Ireland was
confided to tiie kindred party at the castle. Protestant as-
cendency was maintained as rigorously as ever : Catholics
1 Grattan'9 Life, v. 17, e( req., 75-180.
2 39 & 40 Geo. III. c. 67; 40 Geo. IIL c. 38. (Ireland.)
« 39 & 40 Geo. III. c. 67.
* Letter of Mr. Pitt, Nov. 17th, 1798; ComwaUls Corr., ii, 440; Lord
Stanhope's Life of Pitt, iii. 160.
* Vol. 1. 85; and supra, p. 336.
RESULTS OF THE UNION. 507
were governed bj Orangemen ; the close oligai-chj which
had ruled Ireland before the union was still absolute. Re-
pression and coercion continued to be the principles of its
harsh domination.* The representation of Ireland, in tliti
united Parliament, continued in the hands of the same part%
who supported Tory ministers, and encouraged them to re-
sist every concession wliich more liberal statesmen projwsed.
Political liberties and equality were withheld ; yet the SU'
j)erior moderation and enlightenment of British statesmen
secured a more equitable administration of the laws, and
moch remedial legishition, — designed for the improveraeni
of the social and material c6ndition of the people. These
men earnestly strove to govern Ireland well, within the range
of their narrow principles. The few restrictions wliich the
union had still left upon her commerce were removed;' her
laws were reviewed, and their administration amended ; her
taxation was lightened ; the education of her people en-
couraged; her prosperity stimulated by public works. De-
spite of insufficient capital and social disturbance, her
trade, shipping, and manufactures expanded with her free-
dom.'
1 Lord Comwallis had foreseen this evil. He wrote, May 1st, 1800:-
" It a successor were to be appointed who should, as almost all former
lords-lieutenants have done, throw himself into the hands of this party, no
advantage would be derived from the Union." — Corr., iii. 237. Apjain,
Dec. 1st, 1800: — " They assert that the Catholics of Ireland (seven tenths
of the population of the country) never can be good subjects to a Protes-
tant government. What then have we done»if this position be tme? We
have united ourselves to a people whom we ought, in policy, to have de-
stroyed." — Ibid., 307. Again, Feb. 15th, 1801 : — "No consideration could
induce me to take a res|)onsible part with any administration who can be
so blind to the interest, and indeed to the immediate security, of their
country, as to persevere in the old system of proscription and exclusion in
Ireland." — Jbid., 337.
- Com trade, 46 Geo. III. c. 97; Countervailing Duties, 4 Geo. IV. c
72; Butter trade, 8 Geo. IV. c. 61; 9 Geo. IV^ c. 88.
3 See debate on Repeal of the Union, April 1834, and especially Mr.
Spring Rice's able and elalwrate speech. — Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxii. 1092;
ei seq. Martin's Ireland before and after the Union, 3d ed., pref , and
chap. ii. iii., &c.
608 IRELAND.
At length, after thirty years, the people of Ireland were
Irish liixjrties admitted to the rights of citizen?. The Catholic
KpUe^Ac?' Relief Act was speedily foUowt-d by an amend-
and reform, noent of the representation; and from that time,
the spirit of freedom and equality has animated the ad-
ministration of Irish affairs. The party of Prote-iant as-
cendency was finally overthrown ; and rulers plwlged to a
more liberal policy, guided the councils of the siate. Jre-
hmd shared with England every extension of popular rights.
The full development of her liberties, however, was retarded
by the factious violence of parties, by the divisions of Orange
men and repealers, by old religious hatreds, by social feuds
and agrarian outrages, and by the wretchedness of a popu-
The Irish lation constantly in excess of the means of em-
^°'"'** ployment. The frightful visitation of famine in
1846, succeeded by an unparalleled emigration, swept from
the Irish soil more than a fourtli of its people.^ Their suf-
ferings were generously relieved by England ; and, grievous
as they were, the hand of God wrought greater blessings
for the survivors, than any legislation of man could have
accomplished.
In the midst of all discouragements, — in spite of clamors
Freedom ^^^ misrepresentation, in dehance of hostile fac-
and equality tions, — the executive and the legislature have
of Ireland. "
nobly striven to effect the political and social
regeneration of Ireland. The great English parties have
honorably vied with onp another in carrying out this policy.
Remedial legislation for Ireland, and the administration of
her affairs, have, at some periods, engrossed more attention
than the whole British empire. Ancient feuds have yet to
be extinguished, and religious divisions healed; but nothing
has been wanting that the wisdom and beneficence of
1 In the ten years, from 1841 to 1851, it had decreased from 8,175,124 to
6,552,385, or 19.85 per cent. The total loss, however, wns computed at
2,466,414. The decrease amounted to forty-nine persons to every square
mile. — Census Report, 1851.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT. 609
the state could devise for insuring freedom, equal justice,
and the privileges of the constitution, to every class of
the Irish people. Good laws have been well adminis-
tered ; franchises have been recognized as rights, — not ad-
mitted as pretences. Equality has been not a legal theory,
but an unquestioned fact. We have seen how Catholics
were excluded from all the rights of citizens. What is now
their position? In 1860, of the twelve judges on the Irish
bench, eight were Catholics.^ In the southern counties of
Ireland, Catholic gentlemen have been selected, in prefer-
ence to Protestants, to serve the office of sheriff, in order to
insure confidence in the administration of justice. England
has also freely opened to the sons of Ireland the glittering
ambition of arms, of statesmanship, of diplomacy, of forensic
honor. The names of Wellington, Castlereagh, and Palm-
erston attest that the highest places in the state may be
won by Irish genius.
The number of distinguished Irishmen who have been
added to the roll of British peers, proves with what welcome
the incorporation of the sister kingdom has been accepted.
Nor have other dignities been less freely dispensed to the
honorable ambition of their countrymen. One illustration
will suffice. In 1860, of the fifteen judges on the English
bench, no less than four were Irishmen.*^ Freedom, equal-
ity, and honor have been the fruits of the union ; and
Ireland has exchanged an enslaved nationality for a glorious
incorporation with the first empire of the world.
^ Sir Michael O'Loghlin was the first Catholic promoted to the bench, as
master of the rolls. — Grattan's Life, i. 66.
2 Viz., Mr. Justice Willes, Mr. Justice Keating, Mr. Justice Hill, and
Ba.-Ba Martin.
5K COLONIES.
CHAPTER XVII.
Free Constitutions of British Colonies: — Sovereigntj' of England :— Com
mercial Restrictions: — Taxation of the American Colonies: — Thei
Resistance and Separation: — Crown Colonies: — Canada: — Australia:
— Colonial Administration after the American War: — New Commercial
Policy affecting the Colonies: — Responsible Government: — Democratir
Colonial Constitutions: — India.
It has been the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race to
spread through every quarter of the globe their
Colonista ^ ,,,. . .,
have borne couragc and endurance, their vigorous industry
the laws of and love of freedom. "Wherever they have found-
^ ° ' ed colonies they have borne with thciu the laws
and institutions of England, as their birthright, so far as
they were applicable to an infant settlement.* In territories
acquired by conquest or cession, the existing laws and cus-
toms of the people were respected, until they were qualified
to share the franchises of Englishmen. Some of these, —
held only as garrisons, — others peopled with races hostile
to our rule or unfitted for freedom, were necessarily governed
upon ditferent principles. But in quitting the soil of Eng-
land to settle new colonies, Englishmen never renounced her
freedom. Such being the noble principle of English coloni-
zation, circumstances favored the early development of
colonial liberties. The Puritans, who founded the New
England colonies, having fled from tiie oppression of Charles
I., carrieil with them a stern love of civil liberty, and estab-
1 Blackstone's Comm., i. 107; Lord Mansfield's Judgment in Campbell
r. Hall; Howell's St. Tr., xx. 289; Clark's Colonial Law, 9, 139, 181, &c.;
Sir (i. Lewis on the Government of Dependencies, 189-203, 308; Mill*'
Colonial Constitutions, 18.
COLONIAL CONSTITUTIONS. 511
Iished republican institutions.* The persecuted Catholics
who settled Maryland, and the proscribed Quakers who took
refuge in Pennsylvania, were little less democratic."^ Other
colonies founded in America and the West Indies, in the
seventeenth century, merely for the purposes of trade and
cultivation, adopted institutions, less democratic indeed, but
founded on principles of freedom and self-government.'
Whether established as proprietary colonies, or under char-
ters held direct from the Crown, the colonists were equally
free.
The English constitution was generally the type of these
colonial governments. The governor was the Ordinary
viceroy of the Crown ; the legislative council, or nlaTconstttu-
upper chamber, appointed by the governor, as- ^'^°^'
sunied the place of the House of Lords ; and the represen-
tative assembly chosen by the people was the express image
of the House of Commons. This miniature Parliament,
complete in all its parts, made laws for the internal govern-
ment of the colony. The governor assembled, prorogued,
and dissolved it ; and signified his assent or dissent to every
act agreed to by the chambers ; the upper house mimicked
the dignity of the House of Peers;* and the lower house
insisted on the privileges of the Commons, especially that of
originating all taxes and grants of money for the public
1 In three of their colonies the council was elective; in Connecticut and
Bhode Island the colonists also chose their governor. — Adam Smith, book
IV. ch. 7. But the king's approval of the governor was reserved by 7 & 8
Will. Ill c. 22
- Bancroft's Hist, of the Coloni/iation of th^; United States, i. 264; iii.
94.
3 Meri vale's Colonization, ed. 1861, 95, 103.
* In 1858, a quiirrel arose between the two Houses in Newfoundland, in
consequence of the Upper House insisting upon receiving the Lower House
at a conference, sitting and covered, — an assumption of dignity which was
resp?ited by the latter. The governor liaving failed to accommodate the
dift'erence, prorogued the Parliament before the supplies were granted. la
tlie next se.*sion these disputes were amicably arranged. Message of
Council, April 2.3d, 1858, aud reply of House of Assembly; Private Cot-
tespondence of Sir A. Bannennan.
512 COLONIES.
service.* The elections were also conducted after the fashion
of the mother country.' Other laws and institutions were
imitated not less faithfully. Jamaica, for example, main-
tained a court of King's bench, a court of common pleas,
a court of exchequer, a court of chancery, a court of ad-
miralty, and a court of probate. It had grand and petty
juries, justices of the peace, courts of quarter sessions, ves-
tries, a coroner, and constables.*
Every colony was a little state, complete in its legislature,
its iudicature, and its executive administration.
The soTer- •' . . i i i ■•
eigoty of But, at the same time, it acknowledged tlie sov-
ereignty of the mother country, the prerogatives
of the Crown, and the legislative supremacy of Parliament.
The assent of the king, or his representative, was required
to give validity to acts of the colonial legislature ; his veto
annulled them ; * while the Imperial Parliament was able to
bind the colony by its acts, and to supersede all loo^\l legis-
lation. Every colonial judicature was also subject to an
appeal to the king in council, at Westminster. The depen-
dence of the colonies, however, was little felt in their internal
government. They were secured from interference by the
remoteness of the mother country,^ and the ignorance, in-
difference, and preoccupation of her rulers. In matters of
imperial concern, England imposed her own policy ; but
otherwise left them free. Asking no aid of her, they es-
caped her domination. All their expenditure, civil and mil-
itary, was defrayed by taxes raised by themselves. They
1 Stokes' British Colonies, 241; Edwards' Hist, of the West Indie%
ii. 419; Long's Hist, of Jamaica, i. 56.
2 Edwards, ii. 419; Haliburton's Nova Scotia, ii. 319.
' Long's Hist, of Jamaica, i. 9.
* In Connecticut and Rhode Island, neither the crown lor the governor
•were able to negative laws passed by the Assemblies.
6 "Three thousaird miles of ocean lie between you and them," said Mr.
Burke. " No contrivance can prevent the eftect of this distance in weak-
ening government." Adam Smith observed: — "Their situation has
placed them less in the view and less in the power of the mother country.*
— Book iv. ch. 7.
COMMERCIAL RESTRICTIONS. 513
provided for their own defence against the Indians and the
enenaies of England. During the seven years' war, the
American colonies maintained a force of 25,000 men, at a
cost of several millions. In the words of Franklin, '• they
were governed, at the expense to Great Britain, of only a
little pen, ink, and paper : they were led by a thread." *
But little as the mother country concerned herself in the
political government of her colonies, she evinced commercial
a jealous vigilance in regard to their commerce, "^-''^c^oo*-
Commercial monopoly, indeed, was the first principle in the
colonial policy of England, as well as of the other maritime
states of Europe. She suffered no other country but herseW
to supply their wants ; she appropriated many of their ex-
ports ; and, for the sake of her own manufacturers, insisted
that their produce should be sent to her in a raw, or unman-
ufactured state. By the Navigation Acts, their produce
could only be exported to England in English ships.^ This
policy was avowedly maintained for the benefit of the
mother country, — for the encouragement of her commerce,
her shipping, and manufactures, — to which the interests of
the colonies were sacrificed.' But, in compensation for this
monopoly, she gave a preference to the produce of her own
colonies, by protective and prohibitory duties upon foreign
commodities. In claiming a monopoly of their markets, she,
at the same time, gave them a reciprocal monopoly of her
own. In some cases she encouraged the production of their
staples by bounties. A commercial policy so artificial as
this, — the creatui'e of laws striving against nature, —
marked the dependence of the colonies, crippled their
industry, fomented discontents, and even provoked war with
foreign states.* But it was a policy common to every Euro-
pean government, until enlightened by economical science ;
1 Evidence before the Commons, 1766 ; Pari. Hist, xvi. 139-141.
2 The first Navigation Act was passed in 1651, during the Common-
wealth; Merivale, 75, 84, 89; Adam Smith, Book iv. ch. 7.
8 Jbid.
* Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, book iv. ch. 7.
VOL. II. 33
514 COLONIES.
and commercial advantages were, for upwards of a century,
nearly the sole benefit wluch England recognized in the
possession of her colonies.*
In all ages, taxes and tribute had been characteristic inci-
Taxes and dents of a dependency. The subject provinces of
tribute com- Asiatic monarchies, in ancient and modern times,
mon to de- '
pendencies. j,jid been despoiled by tlie rapacity of satraps and
pashas, and the greed of the central government. The
Greek colonies, which resembled those of England more
than any other dependencies of antiquity, were forced to send
contributions to the treasury of the parent state. Carthage
exacted tribute from her subject towns and territories. The
Roman provinces " paid tribute unto Caesar." In modern
times, Spain received tribute from her European dependen-
cies, and a revenue from the gold and silver mines of her
American colonies. It was also the policy of France, Hol-
land, and Portugal to derive a revenue from their settle-
ments.*^
But England, satisfied with the colonial trade, by which
her subjects at home were enriched, imposed upon
ouiesfree thcm alonc all the burdens of the state.* Her
periai tax- costly wars, the interest of her increasing debt, her
''"'°* naval and military establishments, — adequate i'ov
the defence of a widespread empire, — were all maintained
by the dominant country herself. James II. would have
levied taxes upon the colonists of Massachusetts ;
Arguments '
In fiiTor of but was assurcd by Sir William Jones that lie
taxation. , .
could no more "levy money without their consent
n an assembly, than they could discharge themselves from
heir allegiance."* Fifty years later, the shrewd instinct of
1 Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, book iv. ch. 7.
2 Sir G. Lewis on the Government of Dependencies, 99, ICl, 106, 112.
124, 139, 149, 211, el seq.; Adam Smith, book iv. ch. 7; Raynal, Livres i.
ii. vi.-ix. xii. xiii.
8 " The English Colonists have never yet contributed anything towards
the defence of the mother countrj', or towards the support of its civil gov-
ernment." — Adam Smith, book iv. ch. 7.
* Grabame'8 Hist of the United St
COLONIAL TAXATION. 515
Sir Robert "Walpole revolted against a similar attempt.* But
at length, in an evil hour, it was resolved by George III. ,
and his minister Mr. Grenville,'' that the American colonies
should be required to contribute to the general revenues of
the government. This new principle was apparently recom-
mended by many considerations of justice and expediency.
Much of the national debt had been incurred in defence of
the colonies, and in wars for the common cause of the whole
empire.^ Other states had been accustomed to enrich them-
selves by the taxation of their dependencies ; and why was
England alone to abstain fi'om so natural a source of rev-
enue ? If the colonies were to be exempt from the common
burdens of the empire, why sliould England care to defend
them in war, or incur charges for them in time of peace ?
The benefits of the connection were reciprocal ; why, then,
should the burdens be all on one side ? Nor, assuming the
equity of imperial taxation, did it seem beyond the compe-
tence of Parliament to establish it. The omnipotence of
Parliament was a favorite theory of lawyers ; and for a cen-
tury and a half, the force of British statutes had been ac-
knowledged without question, in every matter concerning the
government of the colonies.
No charters exempted colonists from the sovereignty of
the parent state, in matters of taxation ; nor were there
wanting precedents, in which they had submitted to imperial
imposts without remonstrance. In carrying out a restrictive
commercial policy. Parliament had passed numerous acts
providing for the levy of colonial import and export duties.
Such duties, from their very nature, were unproductive,—
imposing restraints upon trade, and offering encouragements
to smuggling. They were designed for commercial regula-
tion rather than revenue ; but were collected by the king's
1 Walpole's Mein., ii. 70. " I have Old England set against me," he
Baid, — by the excise scheme, — " do you think I will have New England
likewise? " — Coxe's Life, i. 123.
2 Wraxall's Mem., ii. Ill; Nichols' Recoil., i. 205; Bancroft's Amer.
Rev., iii. 307.'
* Adam Smith, book iv. ch. 7; Walpole's Mem., ii. 71.
516 COLONIES.
officers, and payable into the Exchequer. The state had
furtlier levied postage duties within the colonie.«.*
But these considerations were outweighed by reasons on-
the otlier side. Granting that the war expendi-
on the other ture of the mother country had been increased by
reason of her colonies, who was responsible for
European wars and costly armaments ? Not the colonies,
which had no voice in the government, but their f2nglish
rulers, who held in their hands the destinies of the empire.
And if the English treasury had suffered, in defence of the
colonies ; the colonists had taxed themselves heavily for pro-
tection against the foes of the mother country, witli whom
they had no quarrel.* But, apart from the equity of the
claim, was it properly within the jurisdiction of Parliament
to enforce it? The colonists might be Induced to grant a
contribution, but could Parliament constitutionally impose a
tax, without their consent ? True, that this imperial legisla-
ture could make laws for the government of the colonies ;
but taxation formed a marked exception to general legisla-
tion. According to the principles, traditions, and usage of
the constitution, taxes were granted by the people, through
their representatives. This privilege had been recognized
for centuries, in the parent state ; and the colonists had
cherished it with traditional veneration, in the country of
their adoption. They had taxed themselves, for local ob-
jects, through their own representatives ; they had respond-
ed to requisitions from the Crown for money ; but never, un-
til now, had it been sought to tax them directly, for imperial
purposes, by the authority of Parliament.
A statesman imbued with the free spirit of our constitu-
tion could not have failed to recognize these overruling prin-
1 Evidence of Dr. Franklin, 1766; Pari. Hist., xvi. 143; Stedman's
Hist, of the American War., j. 10, 44 ; Riphts of Great Britain Asserted,
102; Adolphus Hist, i. 145; Bancroft's Hist, of the American Revolu-
tion, ii. 200, el seq.; Dr. .Johnson's Taxation no Tyrannr, Works, xii. 177;
Speech of Lord Mansfield, .Tan. 1766; Pari. Hist., xvi. 160; Burke's Speech
on American Taxation, 1774, Work.?, ii. 380; Speech of Grovemor Pownall,
Nov. 10th, 1775; Pari. Hist., xviii. 984.
a Or Franklin's Ev., Pari. Hist., xvi. 139.
THE STAMP ACT, 1765. 517
'jiples. He would have seen, that if it were fit that the col-
onies should contribute to the imperial treasury, it was for
the Crown to demand their contribulions through the gov-
ernors; and for the colonial legislatures to grant them. But
neither the king nor his minister were alive to these princi-
ples. The one was too conscious of kingly power, to measure
nicely the rights of his subjects ; and the other was blinded
by a pedantic reverence for the authoiity of Parliament.^
In 1764, an act was passed, with little discussion, imposing
customs' duties upon several articles imported info .j^g stamp
the American colonies, — the produce of these **=''^'*^-
duties being reserved for the defence of the colonies them-
selves.^ At the same time, the Commons passed a resolu-
tion, that " it may be proper to charge certain stamp duties "
in America,* as the foundation of future legislation. The
colonists, accustomed to perpetual interference with their
trade, did not dispute the right of the mother country to tax
their imports ; but they resolved to evade the impost, as far
as possible, by the encouragement of native manufactures.
The threatened stamp act, however, they immediately de-
nounced as an invasion of the rights of Englishmen, who
could not be taxed otherwise than by their representatives.
But, deaf to their remonstrances, Mr. Grenville, in the next
session, persisted in his stamp bill. It attracted little notice
in this country ; the people could bear with complacency the
taxation of others ; and never was there a Parliament more
indifferent to constitutional principles and popular rights.
The colonists, however, and their agents in this country, re-
monstrated against the proposal.
1 Walpole's item., ii. 70, 220; Bancroft's Hist, of American Revolution
ii. 88.
2 4 Geo. III. c. 15. Mr. Bancroft regards a measure, introduced by Mr
Townshend in the previous session, for lowering some of the prohibitory
duties, and making them productive, as the commencement of the plan for
the taxation of America; but that measure merely dealt with existing
duties. It was not until 1764, that any new issue was raised with the
colonies. — Hist, of American Revolution, ii. 102.
' March 10th, 1764. Pari. Hist. xv. 1427; Grahame's Hist., ir. 179
fil8 COLONIES.
Their opinion had been invited by ministers; and, that
it might be expressed, a year's delay had been agreed upon.
Yet when they petitioned aganist the bill, the Commons re-
fused to entertain their petitions, under a rule, by no means
binding on their discretion, which excluded petitions against
a tax proposed for the service of the year.* An arbitrary
temper and narrow pedantry prevailed over justice and
sound policy. Unrepresented communities were to be taxed,
— even without a hearing. The bill was passed with little
opposition ; ^ but the colonists combined to resist its execu-
tion. Mr. Pitt had been ill in bed when the stamp act was
passed ; but no sooner were the discontents in America
brought into discussion than he condemned taxation with-
out representation, and counselled the immediate repeal of
the obnoxious act. '' When in this House," he said, " we
give and grant, we grant what is our own. But in an
American tax, what do we do ? We, Your Majesty's Com-
mons for Great Britain, give and grant to Your Majesty, —
what ? Our own property ? No ; we give and grant to
Your Majesty, the property of Your Majesty's Commons
of America." At the same time, he proposed to save the
honor of England by an act declaratory of the general
legislative authority of Parliament over the colonies.* Lord
Rockingham, who had succeeded Mr. Grenville, alarmed by
the unanimity and violence of the colonists, readily caught
Repeal of the ^^ ^^''' Pitt's Suggestion. The stamp act waa
stamp act. repealed, notwithstanding the obstinate resistance
of the king, and his friends, and of Mr. Grenville and the
supporters of the late ministry.* Mr. Pitt had desired ex-
1 This monstrous rule, or usage, which set at nought the right of peti-
fion on the most important matters of public concern, dates from the Kev
olution: and was not relinquished until 1842. — Hatsell, Prec, iii. 226;
ilay's Proceedings and Usage of Parliament, 486.
* Pari. Hist, xvii. 34. " We might as well have hindered the sun'»
Betting," wrote Franklin. — 5rtnc7-<)/i!, ii. 281.
8 Pari. Hist, xvi. 93; Life of Lord Chatham, i. 427.
4 Walpole'8 Mem., ii. 258, 285, &c.; Rockingham Mem., i. 291-295; ii
350, 294.
COLONIAL CUSTOMS DUTIES, 1767. 519
pressly to except from the declaratory act the right of
taxation without the consent of the colonists ; but the Crown
lawyers and Lord Mansfield denied the distinction between
legislation and the imposition of taxes which that great
constitutional statesman had forcibly pointed out ; and the
bill was introduced without that exception. In the House
of Lords, Lord Camden, the only great constitutional lawyer
of his age, supported with remarkable power the views of
Mr. Pitt ; but the bill was passed in its original shape, and
maintained the unqualified right of England to make laws
for the colonies.^ In the same session some of the import
duties imposed in 1764 were also repealed, and others
modified.* The colonists were appeased by these conces-
sions ; and little regarded the abstract terms of the declar-
atory act. They were, indeed, encouraged in a spirit of in-
dependence by their triumph over the English Parliament ;
but their loyalty was as yet unshaken.*
The error of Mr. Grenvilie had scarcely been repaired,
when an act of political fatuity caused an irrepa- Mr. Charles
rable breach between the mother country and her eo,onfa'i^°'^ '
colonies. Lord Chatham, by his timely inter- '*^«®' ^'''^''•
vention, had saved England her colonies ; and now his
ill-omened administration was destined to lose them. His
witty and accomplished, but volatile and incapable Chancellor
of the Excliequer, Mr. Charles Townshend, having lost half
a million of his ways and means by an adverse vote of the
Commons on the land tax,* ventured, with incredible levity,
to repeat the disastrous experiment of colonial taxation.
The Americans, to strengthen their own case against the
stamp act, had drawn a distinction between internal and
1 6 Geo. III. c. 11, 12; Pari. Hist., xvi. 163, 177, &c.; Walpole's Jlem.,
ii. 277-298,' 304-307, &c.; Rockingliam Mem., i. 282-293; Bancroft, u.
459-473; Chatliam Corr., ii. 375.
2 6 Geo. III. c. 52.
8 Stedman's Ili^'t., i. 48, et seq.; Bancroffs Hist, of the American Rev-
olution, ii. 523; Burke's Speech on American Taxation; see also Lord
Macaulay's Life of Lord Chatham, Essays; Lord Campbell's Lives of tba
Chief Justices (Lord Camden).
* Supra, Vol. I. 442
620 COLONIES.
external taxation, — a distinction plausible and ingenious, in
the hands of so dexterous a master of political fence as Dr.
Franklin,* but substantially without foundation. Both kinds
of taxes were equally paid by the colonists themselves ; and
if it was their birthright to be taxed by none but represen-
tatives of their own, this doctrine clearly comprehended
customs, no less than excise. But, misled by the supi)osed
distinction which the Americans themselves had raised, Mr.
Tovvnshend proposed a variety of small colonial customs*
duties, — on glass, on paper, on painters' colors, and lastly,
on tea. The estimated produce of these paltry taxes
amounted to no more than 40,000/. Lord Chatham would
have scornfully put aside a scheme, at once so contemptible
and impolitic, and so plainly in violation of the principles
for which he had himself recently contended ; but he lay
stricken and helpless, while his rash lieutenant was rushing
headlong into danger. Lord Camden would have arrested
the measure in the Cabinet ; but standing alone, in a dis-
organized ministry, he accepted under protest a scheme,
which none of his colleagues approved.^ However rash the
financier, however weak the compliance of ministers. Par-
liament fully shared the fatal responsibility of this measure.
It was passed with approbation, and nearly in silence.' Mr.
Townshend did not survive to see the mischief he had done ;
but his colleagues had soon to deplore their error. The
colonists resisted the import duties, as they had resisted the
stamp act ; and, a second time, ministers were forced to
recede from their false position. But their retreat was
All repealed ^^ff^^^ted awkwardly, and with a bad grace. They
duties^* *** yielded to the colonists, so far as to give up the
general scheme of import duties ; but persisted
in continuing the duties upon tea.*
1 Pari. Hist., xvi. 144.
2 See Lord Camden's Statement. — Pari. Hist, xviii. 1222.
« 7 Geo. IIL c. 46; Rockingham Mem , ii. 75; Bancroft's Hist, of tb»
American Revolution, iii. 83, et seq.
• 10 George III. 17; Pari.. Hist., xvi..853; Cavendish Deb., ii. 484.
TEA-DUTIES. 521
This miserable remnant of the import duties was not cal«
culated to afford a revenue exceedinst 12,000/; , . ^
° ' InsigoificaoM
and its actual proceeds were reduced to 300/. by of the tea
. duties.
smuggling and tiie determination of the colonists
not to consume an article to which the obnoxious impost was
attached. The insignificance of the tax, while it left ministers
without justification for continuing such a cause of irritation,
went far to secure the acquiescence of the colonists. But
their discontents, — met without temper or moderation, —
were suddenly inflamed by a new measure, which only indi-
rectly concerned them. To assist the half bank- _ , ^
■' , Drawbacks
rupt East India Company in the sale of their teas, granwdon
a drawback was given them, of the whole English
duty on shipments to the American plantations.^ By this
concession to the East India Company, the colonists^ ex-
empted from the English duty, in fact received their teas at
a lower rate than when there was no colonial tax. The
Company were also empowered to ship their teas direct
from their own warehouses. A sudden stimulus was thus
given to the export of the very article, which alone caused
irritation and dissension. The colonists saw, or affected to
see,- in this measure, an artful contrivance for encouraging
the consumption of 'taxed tea, and facilitating the further
extension of colonial taxation. It was met by a Attack upon
daring outrage. The first tea-ships which reached at BMton^'*^
Boston were boarded by men disguised as Mohawk ^''"'^
Indians, and their cargoes cast into the sea.'* This being
the crowning act of a series of provocations and insults, by
which the colonists, and especially the people of Boston, had
tystified their resentment against the stamp act, the import
duties, and other recent measures, ihe government at home
regarded it with just indignation. Every one agreed that
1 12 Geo. III. c. 60; 13 Geo. III. c. 44. The former of these Acts granted
a drawback of three fifths only.
2 Adams's Works, ii. 322 ; Bancroft's Hist, of the American Rev., iii.
514-541, &c.
522 COLONIES.
the rioters deserved punishment ; and that reparation was
due to the East India Company. But the punishment in-
flicted by Parliament, at the instance of Lord Nortli, was
such as to provoke revolt. Instead of demanding compen-
Bo8ton Port sation, and attacliing penalties to its refusal, the
Act, ii<4. flourishing port of Boston was summarily closed:
no ship could lade or unlade at its quays ; the trade and
industry of its inhabitants* was placed under an interdict.
The ruin of the city was decreed ; no penitence could avert
its doom ; but when the punishment had been suffered, and
the atonement made ; when Boston, humbled and contrite,
had kissed the rod ; and when reparation had been made to
the East India Company, the king in council might, as an
act of grace, remove the fatal ban.* It was a deed of ven-
geance, fitter for the rude arbitrament of an eastern prince,
than for the temperate equity of a free state.
Nor was this the only act of repression. The republican
Constitution Constitution of Massachusetts, cherished by the de-
Mtte'^u^^" scendants of the pilgrim fathers, was superseded,
eeded. Xhe council, hitherto elective, was to be nominated
by the Crown ; and the appointment of judges, magistrates,
and sheriflTs, was transferred from the council to tlie gov-
ernor." And so much was the administration of justice sus-
pected, that, by another act, accused persons might be sent
for trial to any other colony, or even to England.' Troops
were also despatched to overawe the turbulent people of
Massachusetts.
The colonists, however, far from being intimidated by the
„ , rigors of the mother country, associated to resist
Ri'sistaTice '^ -'
of the col- them. Nor was Massachusetts left alone in its
troubles. A •congress of delegates from twelve
of the colonies was assembled at Philadelphia, by whom the
1 Boston Port Act, 14 Geo. III. c. 19; Pari. Hist, xvii. 1159-1189;
Chatham Corr., iv. 342; Rockingham Mem., ii. 238-243; Bancroft's Hist.,
iii., 565, et seq.
2 14 Geo. III. c. 45; Pari. Hist., xvii. 1192, 1277, &c
» 14 Geo. III. c. 39; Pari. Hist, xvu. 1199, &c.
WAR OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE. 523
recent measures were condemned, as a violation of the rights
of Englishmen. It was further agreed to suspend all im-
ports from, and exports to, Great Britain and her depen-
dencies, unless the grievances of the colonies were redressed.
Other threatening measures were adopted, which proved too
plainly that the stubborn spirit of the colonists was not to be
overcome. In the words of Lord Chatham, '*the spirit
which now resisted taxation in America, was the same
spirit which formerly opposed loans, benevolences, and ship-
money in England." ^
In vain Lord Chatham, — reappearing after his long pros-
tration, — proffered a measure of conciliation, re- ^ , „,
' . . ' Lord Chat-
pealing the obnoxious acts, and explicitly renoun- ham's concU-
. . . , . , . . -, , iatory prop-
cmg imperial taxation, but requiring irom the osition, Feb.
colonies the grant of a revenue to the king. Such '
a measure might even yet have saved the colonies ; ^ but it
was contemptuously rejected by the Lords, on the first read-
ing."
Lord North himself soon afterwards framed a conciliatory
proposition, promising that, if the colonists should
make provision for their own defence and for the of Lord North
^ . and Mr.
civil government, no imperial tax should be levied. Burke.Feb.
His resolution was agreed to ; but, in the present '
temper of the colonists, its conditions were impracticable.*
Mr. Burke also proposed other resolutions, similar jjarch 22d
to the scheme of Lord Chatham, which were ^^^'
rejected by a large majority.^
The Americans were already ripe for rebellion, when an
unhappy collision occurred at Lexington between outbreak of
the royal troops and the colonial militia. Blood "^^ "V} ^'»
•' ' April 19th,
was shed ; and the people flew to arms. The war 1775.
1 Speech, Jan. 20th, 1777. — Pari. Hist., xviu. 154, n.
2 See Lord Mahon's Hist., vi. 43.
« Feb. 1st, 1775. — Pari. Hist., xviii. 198.
* Pari. Hist., xviii. 319; Chatham Corr., iy. 403; Gibbon's Posthumoiu
Works, i. 490.
« Pari. Hist., xviii. 478; Burke's Works, iii. 23.
524 COLONIES.
of independence was commenced. Its sad history and issue
are but too well known. In vain Congress ad-
Petition to . . ■ i . /> i i
the kiaj;, Sept. dressed a petition to the knig, for redress and con-
ciliation. It received no answer. In vain Lord
Chatham devoted the last energies of his wasting life^ to
effect a reconciliation, without renouncing the
Overtures ^ ^ . tT • • i
forpeace, sovereignty of England. In vain the British
Parliament, — humbling itself before its rebel-
lious subjects, — repealed the American tea duty, and re-
nounced its claims to imperial taxation.* In vain were
Parliamentary commissioners empowered to suspend the acts
of which the colonists complained, to concede every de-
mand but that of independence, and almost to sue for peace.'
It was too late to stay the civil war. Disasters and defeat
befell the British arms, on American soil ; and, at length, the
independence of the colonies was recognized.*
Such were the disastrous consequences of a misunderstand-
ing of the rights and pretensions of colonial communities,
who had carried with them the laws and franchises of Eng-
lishmen. And here closes the first period in the constitu-
tional history of the colonies.
We must now turn to another class of dependencies, not
Crown originally settled by Enghsh subjects, but acquired
Colonies. fj-om Other states by conquest or cession. To these
a different rule of public law was held to apply. They were
dominions of the crown ; and governed, according to the laws
1 Lord Chatham was completely secluded A-om political and social life,
from the spring of 1767 to the spring of 1769; and again, from the spring
of 1775 to the spring of 1777.
2 28 Geo. III. c. 12; Pari. Hist, xix. 762; Ann. Keg., 1778, 133.
« 28 Geo. III. c. 13.
* No part of English history has received more copious illustration than
the revolt of the American colonies. In addition to the general histories
of England, the following may be consulted: — Franklin's Works, Sparks's
Life of Washington, Marshall's Life of Washington, Randolph's Mem. of
JelTen^on, Chalmers' Political Annals, Dr. Gordon's History of the Amer-
ican Revolution, Grahame's History of the United States, Stedman's Hi**
toiy, Bancroft's History of the American Bevolutioo.
CANADtA. 525
prevailing at the time of their acquisition, by the king in
council.^ They were distinguished from other set- Freecon-
tlements as crown colonies. Some of them, how- to'irown
ever, hke Jamaica and Nova Scotia, had received <=''i°"»«*-
the free institutions of England, and were practically sell-
governed, like other English colonies. Canada, Canada,
the most important of this class, was conquered from the
French, in 1759, by General Wolfe, and ceded to England,
in 1763, by the treaty of Paris. In 1774, the administration
of its affairs was intrusted to a council appointed by the
crown ;^ but, in 1791, it was divided into two provinces, to
each of which representative institutions were granted.^ It
was no easy problem to provide for the government of such
a colony. It comprised a large and ignorant population of
French colonists, having sympathies with the country whence
they sprung, accustomed to absolute government and feudal
institutions, and under the influence of a Catholic priesthood.
It further comprised an active race of British settlers, speak-
ing another language, professing a different religion, and
craving the liberties of their own free land. The division of
the provinces was also a separation of races ; and freedom
was granted to both alike.* The immediate objects of this
measure were to secure the attachment of Canada, and to
exempt the British colonists from the French laws ; but it
marked the continued adhesion of Parliament to the prin-
ciples of self-government. In discussing its policy, Mr. Fox
laid down a principle, which was destined, after half a cen-.
tury, to become the rule of colonial administration. " I am
convinced," said he, " that the only means of retaining dis-
tant colonies with advantage, is to enable them to govern
themselves."* In 1785, representative institutions were giveo
1 Clark's Colonial Law, 4; Mills' Colonial Constitutions, 19, &c.
2 14 Geo. 111. c. 83.
8 31 Geo. 111. c. 31; Pari. Hist., xxviii. 1377.
* See Lord Durham's description of the two races. — Report, 1839, p. 8-
18.
6 March 6th, 1791; Pari. Hist., xxviii. 1379; Lord J. Russell's Life of
Fox, ii. 259; Lord Stanhope's Life of Pitt, ii. 89.
526 COLONIES.
to New Brunswick, and, so late as 1832, to Newfoundland ; and
thus, eventually, all the British American colonies were as
free, in their forms of government, as the colonies which had
gained their independence. But the mother country, in
granting these constitutions, exercised, in a niarkfd form, the
powers of a dominant state. She provided for the sale of
waste lands, tor the maintenance of the church establishment,
and for other matterS of internal polity.
England was soon compensated for the loss of her colonies
AuBtraiian in America, by vast possessions in another hemi
eoiouiea. sphere. But the circumstances under which Aus-
tralia was settled were unfavorable to free institutions. Trans-
portation to the American plantations, commenced in the
reign of Charles II., had long been an established punish-
ment for criminals.* The revolt of these colonies led to the
establishment of penal settlements in Australia. New South
Wales was founded in 1788,^ and Van Diemen's Land in
1825.' Penal settlements were necessarily without a consti-
tution, being little more than state prisons. These fair coun-
tries, instead of being the homes of free Englishmen, were
peopled by criminals sentenced to long terms of punishment
and servitude. Such an origin was not promising to the
moral or political destinies of Australia ; but the attractions
which it offered to free emigrants gave early tokens of its fu-
ture greatness. South Australia and New Zealand, whence
convicts were excluded, were afterwards founded, in the same
region, without free constitutions. The early political condi-
tion of the Australian colonies forms, indeed, a striking con-
trast to that of the older settlements, to which Englislimen
had taken their birthrights. But free emigration developed
their resources, and quickly reduced the criminal population
to a subordinate element in the society ; and, in 1828, local
1 4 Geo. I. c. 2: 6 (}eo. I. c. 23. Banisliment was made a punishment,
in 1597, by 39 Elizabeth, c. 4; and transportation, by orders in council, in
1614, 1615, and 1617. —Mills' Colonial Constitutions, 344.
2 24 Geo. in. c. 56; Orders in Coancil, Dec. 6th, 1786.
s Milht' Colonial Const, 325.
AUSTRALIA. 527
legislatures were granted to New South Wales and Van Die-
men's Land.*
While these colonies were without an adequate population,
transi)ortation was esteemed by tlie settlers, as the „
' ■' , ' Tmnspor-
means of affordini; a steady supply of labor; but ution du-
.. . . ° , 1 .1 • f continued.
as tree emigration advanced, the services or con-
victs became less essential to colonial prosperity ; and the
moral taint of the criminal class was felt more sensibly. la
1838, Sir William Moleswonh's committee exposed the enor-
mities of transportation as part of a scheme of colonization ;
and in 1840 the sending of convicts to New South Wales
was discontinued. In Van Diemen's Land, after various at-
tempts to improve the system of convict labor and discipline,
transportation was finally abolished in 1854. Meanwhile, an
attempt to send convicts to the Cape of Good Hope in 1848,
had been resisted by the colonists, and abandoned. In the
following year, a new penal settlement was founded in West-
ern Australia.
The discontinuance of transportation to the free colonies of
Australia, and a prodigious increase of emigration Freeconstuu-
and productive industry, were preparing them for traUan°coi^"
a further development of freedom at no distant •""**•
period.
From the period of the American war the home govern
ment, awakened to the importance of colonial ad- „ .
ministration, displayed greater activity, and a more administra-
ostensible disposition to interfere in the affairs of American
the colonies. Until the commencement of the dif-
ficulties with America, there had not even been a separate
department for the government of the colonies ; but the board
of trade exercised a supervision, little more than nominal,
over colonial affairs. In 1768, however, a third secretary of
state was appointed, to whose care the colonies were intrusted.
In 1782, the office was discontinued by Lord Rockingham,
after the loss of the American provinces ; but was revived
1 9 Geo. IV. c. 83.
528 COLONIES.
in 1794, and became an active and important department of
the state.* Its influence was felt throughout the British
colonies. However popular the form of their in.^titutions,
they were steadily governed by British ministers in Downing
Street.
In crown colonies, — acquired by conquest or cession, —
Colonies the dominion of the crown was absolute ; and the
wi^ug'" authority of the colonial-office was exercised di
street. rcctly, by instructions to the governors. In free
colonies it was exercised, for the most part, indirectly,
through the influence of the governors and their councils.
Self-government was there the theory ; but in practice, the
governors, aided by dominant interests in the several colonies,
contrived to govern according to the policy dictated from
Downing Street. Just as, at home, the crown, the nobles,
and an ascendant party were supreme in the national coun-
cils, — so in the colonies, the governors and their official
aristocracy were generally able to command the adhesion of
the local legislatures.
A more direct interference,' however, was often exercised.
Ministers had no hesitation in disallowing any colonial acts
of which they disapproved, even when they concerned the
internal affairs of the colony only. They dealt freely with
the public lands, as the property of the crown, often making
grants obnoxious to the colonists ; and peremptorily insisting
upon the conditions under which they should be sold and
settled. Their interference was also frequent regarding
church establishments and endowments, official salaries and
the colonial civil lists. Misunderstandings and disputes were
constant ; but the policy and will of the home government
usually prevailed.
Another incident of colonial administration was that of
Patronage, patronage. The colonies offered a wide field of
employment for the friends, connections, and political parti-
sans of the home government. The offices in England,
1 Mills' (Toloiiml Con.st., 2-13.
COLONIAL PATRONAGE. 529
available for securing parliamentary support, fell short of
the demand, and appointments were accordingl}- multiplied
abroad. Of these, many of the most lucrative were ex
ecuted by deputy. The favored friends of ministers, whc
were gratified by the emoluments of office, were little dis-
posed to suffer banishment in a distant dependency. Infants
in the cradle were endowed with colonial appointments, to be
executed through life by convenient deputies. Extravagant
fees or salaries were granted in Downing Street, and spent
in England ; but paid out of colonial revenues. Other offices
again, to which residence was attached, were too frequently
given to men wholly unfit for employment at home, but who
were supposed to be equal to colonial service, where indo-
lence, incapacity, or doubtful character might escape expos-
ure.* Such men as these, however, were more mischievous
in a colony, than at home. The higher officers were asso-
ciated with the governor in the administration of affiiirs ; the
subordinate officers were subject to less control and discipliuc.
In both, negligence and unfitness were injurious to the
colonies. As colonial societies expanded, these appointments
from home further excited the jealousy of colonists, many of
whom were better qualified for office, than the strangers who
came amongst them to enjoy power, wealth, and distinction,
which were denied to themselves.* This jealousy and the
natural ambition of the colonists, were among the principal
causes which led to demands for more complete self-govern-
ment. As this feeling was increasing in colonial society, the
home government were occupied with arrangements for in-
suring the permanent maintenance of the civil establish
1 " As to civil officers appointed for America, most of the places in th
gift of the crown have been filled with broken members of Parliament, of
bad, if any, principles, — valeis-de-chnmbre, electioneering scoundrels, and
even livery-servants. In one word, America has been, for many years,
made the hospital of England." — Letter of General Huske, in 1758; Phil-
Ijmore's Life of Lord Lyttelton, ii. 004, cited by Lord Mahon.
2 Long's Hist, of Jamaica, i. 27, 79; Edwards' Hist, of the West Indies,
ii. 390; Sir G. Lewis on Dependencies, 278-284; MS. Memorandum by the
Uight Hon. Edw. Ellice, M. P.
VOL. II. 34
530 COLONIES.
inents out of the colonial revenues. To continue to fill all
the offices with Englishmen, and at the same time to call
upon the jealous colonists to pay them, was not to be at-
tempted. And accordingly the home government surren-
dered to the governors all appointments under 200?. a year;
and to the greater number of other offices, appointed colonists
recommended by the governors.* A colonial grievance was
thus redressed, and increased influence given to tlie colonists ;
while one of the advantages of the connection was renounced
by the parent state.
While England was entering upon a new period of ex
New com- tended liberties, after the Reform Act, circura
X^^ngThe^ stances materially affected her relations with the
colonies. colonies ; and this may be termed the third and
last period of colonial history. First, the abolition of
slavery, in 1833, loosened the ties by which the sugar colonies
had been bound to the mother country. This was followed
by the gradual adoption of a new commercial policy, wl)ich
overthrew the long-established protections and monopolies of
colonial trade. The main purpose for which both parties
had cherished the connection was lost. Colonists found their
produce exposed to the competition of the world ; and, in
the sugar colonies, with restricted labor. The home con-
sumer independent of colonial supplies, was free to choose
his own market, wherever commodities were best and cheap-
est. The sugars of Jamaica competed with the slave-grown
sugars of Cuba ; the woods of Canada with the timber of
Norway and the Baltic.
These new conditions of colonial policy seriously affected
the political relations of the mother country with
Its effect
npon the her dependencies. Her interfei-ence in their inter-
relations of nal affairs having generally been connected with
commercial regulations, she had now less interest
1 Earl Grey'9 Colonial Policy, i. 37-41 ; Rules and Regulations for Her
Majesty's Colonial Service, ch. iii.; Milb' Colonial Constitutions, App.
378.
INSURRECTION IN CANADA. 531
in continuing it ; and they, having submitted to it for the sake
of benefitjs with which it was associated, were less disposed
to tolerate its exercise. Meanwhile the growing population;
wealth, and intelligence of many of the colonies, closer com-
munications with England, and the example of English lib-
erties, were developing the political aspirations of colonial
societies, and their capacity for self-government.
Early in this period of transition, England twice had
occasion to assert her paramount authority ; but contumacy
learned at the same time to estimate the force of repreS^i.
local opinion, and to seek in the further development of free
institutions the problem of colonial government. Jamaica,
discontented after the abolition of slavery, neglected to make
adequate provision for her prisons, which that measure had
rendered necessary. In 1838, the Imperial Parliament in-
terposed, and promptly supplied this defect in colonial legis-
lation.* The local assembly, resenting this act of authoi'ity,
was contumacious, stopped the supplies, and refused to ex-
ercise the proper functions of a legislature. Again Par-
liament asserted its supremacy. The sullen legislature was
commanded to resume its duties ; and submitted in time
to save the ancient constitution of Jamaica from suspen-
sion.''
At the same period, the perilous state of Canada called
forth all the authority of England. In 1837 and insurrection
1838, the discontents of Lower Canada exploded ^ ^'*"*^-
in insurrection. The constitution of that province was
inmediately suspended by the British Parliament ; and a
provisional government established, with large leg- Keunionof
1 lative and executive powers.* This necessary *'*® p"^"""*^-
act of authority was followed by the reunion of the prov-
inces of Upper and Lower Canada into a single colony,
nnder a governor-general.*
1 1 & 2 Vict. c. 67.
2 2 & 3 Vict. c. 26; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xlvi. 1243; xlvu. 459 &c
8 1 & 2 Vict. c. 9; 2 & 3 Vict. c. 53.
* 3 & 4 Vict. c. 35.
532 COLONIES.
But while these strong measures were resorted to, the
Right of British Government carefully defined the prin-
govJriiniwit" t'ip't'S upon which parliamentary interposition was
aauiitted. justified. " Parliamentary legislation," wrote Lorj]
Glenelg, the colonial minister, " on any subject of exclusivel*
internal concern to any British colony possessing a repre-
sentative assembly is, as a general rule, unconstitutional.
It is a right of which the exercise is reserved for extreme
cases, in which necessity at once creates and justifies tiie
exception." * Never before had the rights of colonial self-
government been so plainly acknowledged.
But another principle was about to be established in
. , Canada, which still further enlarged the powers of
Principle of , . , . * , '
responsible colonial assemblies, and diminished the influence
government. ... , nM • . • i . i
or the mother country. Ihis principle is known
as the doctrine of responsible government. Hitherto the
advisers of the governor in this, as in every other colony,
were the principal officers aj)pointed by the crown, and gen-
erally holding permanent offices. Whatever the fluctuations
of opinion in the legislature or in the colony, whatever the
unpopularity of the measures or persons of the executive
officers, — they continued to direct the councils of the colony.
For many years, they had contrived, by concessions, by man-
agement and influence, to avoid frequent collisions with the
assemblies ; but as the principles of representative govern-
ment were developed, irresponsible rulers were necessa-
rily brought into conflict with the popular assembly. The
advisers of the governor pursued one policy, the assembly
another. Measures prepared by the executive were re-
jected by the assembly ; measures passed by the assembly
were refused by the council, or vetoed by the governor.
And whenever such collisions arose, the constitutional means
were wanting, for restoring confidence between the contend-
ing powers.* Frequent dissolutions exasperated the popular
1 Pari. Paper, 1839, No. 118, p. 7.
a See Lord Durham's Report on Canada, 1839, pp. 27-W.
RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT. 533
party, and generally resulted in their ultimate triumph. The
hostility between the assembly and permanent and unpopular
officei's became chronic. They were constantly at issue ;
and representative institutions, in collision with irresponsible
power, were threatening anarchy. These difficulties were
not confined to Canada, but were common to all the North
American colonies ; and proved the incompatibility of two
antagonistic principles of government.^
After the reunion of the Canadian provinces, a remedy
was sought for disagreements between the exec- introduction
utive and the legislature, in that principle of ""^ '^■''P°"^''J'*
" ' r I government
ministerial responsibility, which had long been i"to tJ^^^ada,
accepted as the basis of constitutional government in
England. At first, ministers at home were apprehen-
sive lest the application of that principle to a depen-
dency should lead to a virtual renunciation of control by
the mother country.^ Nor had Canada yet sufficiently re-
covered from the passions of the recent rebellion, to favor
the experiment But arrangements were immediately made
for altering the tenure of the principal colonial offices ; and
in 1847, responsible government was fully established under
Lord Elgin.* From that time, the governor-generals elected
his advisers from that party which was able to command a
majority in the legislative assembly, and accepted the policy
recommended by them.* The same principle was and other
adopted, about the same time, in Nova Scotia ;® colonies,
and has since become the rule of administration in other
t'vefi colonies.'
1 Ibid.
2 Despatches of Lord J. Russell to Mr. Poulett Thomson, governor-gen
era! of Canada, Oct. 14tli and 16th, 1839; Pari. Papers, 1848, No. 621.
3 Earl Grey's Colonial Policy, i. 200-234, 269; Despatches of Lord
Elgin; Pari. Papers, 1848.
* See Resolutions of the Canadian Parliament, Sept. 3d, 1841; Pari.
Paper, 1848, No. 621.
6 Despatch of Earl Grey to Sir John Harvey, Nov. 3d, 1846; PaW.
Paper, 1848, No. 621, p. 8.
6 Mills' Colonial Constitutions, 201, 205, 209, &c.
534 coLONres.
By the adoption of this principle, a colonial constitution
Ita results, has become the very image and reflection of par-
liamentary government in England. The governor, like
the sovereign whom he represents, hoMs himself aloof from
and superior to parties ; and governs through constitutional
advisers, who have acquired an ascendency in the legislature.
He leaves contending parties to fight out their own battles ;
and by admitting the stronger party to his councils, brings
the executive authority into harmony with popular senti-
ments.^ And as the recognition of this doctrine, in Eng-
land, has practically transferred the supreme authority of
the state from the crown to Parliament and the people, —
80 in the colonies has it wrested from the governor and from
the parent state the direction of colonial affairs. And again,
as the crown has gained in ease and popularity what it has
lost in power, — so has the mother country, in accepting to
the full the principles of local self-government, establislied
the closest relations of amity and confidence between her-
self and her colonies.
There are circumstances, however, in which the parallel
Conflictiii)? is not maintained. The Crown and Parliament
Bnglaiidand havc a commou interest in the welfare of their
coioniea. country ; but England and her colonies may have
conflicting interests, or an irreconcilable policy. The crown
has, indeed, reserved its veto upon the acts of the colonial
legislatures ; but its practical exercise has been found
scarcely more compatilde with responsible government in
the colonies than in England. Hence colonies have been
able to adopt principles of legislation inconsistent with the
policy and interests of the mother country. For example,
after England had accepted free trade as ihe basis of her
commercial policy, Canada adhered to protection, and estab-
1 " The executive council is a removable body, in analoffj- to the ti.saf^e
prevailing in the British constitution " . . . " it being understood tlial
ccunciilorg wiio Imve lost the confidence of the local legislature will tcndei
their resignations to the governors." — Hules and Rtgulalwns for the Co
Imual Seivice, ch. ii.
AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTIONS. 535
lished a tariff injurious to English commerce.* Such laws
could not have been disallowed by the home government
without a revival of the conflicts and discontents of a former
period ; and in deference to the principles of self-govern-
ment, they were reluctantly confirmed.
But popular principles, in colonial government, have net
rested here. While enlarged powers have been in- Democratic
trusted to the local legislatures, those institutions constitutions,
again have been reconstituted upon a more democratic basis.
The constitution granted to Canada in 1840, on Franchise
the reunion of the provinces, was popular, but not ^^'''°^'^-
democratic.'^ It was composed of a legislative council, nom-
inated by the crown, and of a representative assembly, to
which freeholders or roturiers to the amount of 500/. were
eligible as members. The franchise comprised 40s. free-
holders, 51. house-owners, and 10/. occupiers ; but has since
been placed upon a more popular basis by provincial acts.'
Democrac}^has made more rapid progress in the Austra-
lian colonies. In 1842, a new constitution had Australian
been granted to New South Wales, which, depart- ««°«""«o°»-
ing from the accustomed model of colonial constitutions,
provided for the legislation of the colony by a single
chamber.
The constitution of an upper chamber in a colonial
society, without an aristocracy, and with few per-
sons of high attainments and adequate leisure, has single
ever been a difficult problem. Nominated by the
governor and consisting mainly of his executive officers, it
has failed to exercise a material influence over public
opinion ; and has been readily overborne by the more popular
1 Report on Colonial Military Expenditure, 1861. E\'. of Mr. Gladstone,
3785; MS. Paper by the Right Hon. Edw. Ellice, M. P.; and see a state-
ment of difficulties experienced by the home government in endeavoring
to restrain New Brunswick in the granting of bounties. — Earl Grey's
Colonial Policy, i. 279.
2 3 & 4 Vict. c. 35; Mills' Colonial Constitutions 184.
8 Canadian Acts, 16 Vict. c. 153 ; 22 Vict, c 82.
536 COLONIES.
assembl}'. The experiment was, therefore, tried of bringing
into a single chamber the aristocratic and democratic ele-
ments of colonial government. It was hoped that eminent
men would have more weight in the deliberations of tlie pop-
ular assembly, than sitting apart and exercising an impotent
veto. The experiment has found favor with experienced
statesmen ; yet it can scarcely be doubted that it is a con-
cession to democracy. Timely delays in legii^lation, a cau-
tious review of public measures, resistance to the tyranny
of a majority, and the violence of a faction, the means of
judicious compromise, are wanting in such a constitution.
The majority of a single chamber is absolute.*
In 1850, it became expedient to divide the vast territories
Constitutions of New South Wales into two, and the southern
of 1850. portion was erected into the new colony of Vic-
toria. This opportunity was taken of revising the constitu-
tions of these colonies, and of South Australia and Van
Diemen's Land.' The New South Wales model was adhered
to by Parliament ; and a single chamber was constituted in
each of these colonies, of which one third were nominated by
the crown, and two thirds elected under a franchise, restricted
to persons holding freehold property worth 100/., and 10/.
householders or leaseholders. A fixed charge was also im-
posed upon the colonial revenues for the civil and judicial
establishments and for religious worship. At the same time,
powers were conceded to the governor and legislative council
of each colony, with the assent of the queen in council, to
alter every part of the constitution so granted.^ There
could be little doubt that the tendency of such societies
1 The relative advantages of a single and double chamber are fully
argued by Earl Grey, Colonial Policy, ii. 96, and by Mr. Mills, Colonial
Constitutions, Introd., 57.
2 This constitution was postponed, as regards Wf-otem Australia, until
the colony should undertake to pay the charges of its civil government.
3 1.3 & 14 Vict. c. 59; Karl Grey's Colonial Policy, i. App. 422, ii. S8-
111; Mills' Colonial Const., 291; Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., (viii. 6?4; cix
1384, &c.
COLONIAL DEMOCRACY. 537
would be favorable to democracy ; and in a few years the
limited franchise was changed, in nearly all of these colonies,
for universal suffrage and vote by ballot.^ It was open to
the queen in council to disallow these laws, or for Parliament
itself to interpose and suspend them ; * but, in deference to
the principle of self-government, these critical changes were
allowed to come into operation.
In 1852, a representative constitution was introduced,
after some delay, into New Zealand,' and, about ^'ew Zealand
^ I. /-^ 1 rr A and Cape of
the same period, into the Cape of Grood Hope.* Good Hope.
To conclude this rapid summary of colonial liberties, —
it must be added that the colonies have further other eoio-
enjoyed municipal institutions,* a free press,* and '^^ liberties,
religious freedom and equality. No liberty or franchise
prized by Englishmen at home, has been withheld from their
fellow-countrymen in distan| lands.
Thus, by rapid strides, have the most considerable depen-
dencies of the British crown advanced, through colonial
successive stages of political liberty, until an an- democracy
cient monarchy has become the parent of democratic repub-
lics in all parts of the globe. The constitution of the United
States is scarcely so democratic as that of Canada, or the
Australian colonies. The president's fixed tenure of office
and large executive powers, the independent position and
1 Colonial Acts. Victoria, Xov. 24th, 1857, 21 Vict No. 33; South
Australia, Jan. 27(11, 1858, 21 Vict. No. 12; New South Wales, Nov. 24th,
1858, 22 Vict. No. 22.
2 Colonial Acts for such purpcses were required to be laid before Parlia-
ment, for thirty days, before her Majesty's pleasure should be sijjnified in
regard to them.
8 15 & 16 Vict. c. 72. A previous Act had been passed with this object
in 1846, but its operation was suspended in the following year. — Earl
Grey's Colonial Policy, ii. 153-158; Mills' Colonial Const., 335; Haas
Deb., 3d Sen, cxxi. 922.
* Earl Grey, ii. 226-234, App. C. and D.; Cape of Good Hope Papers,
presented by command, Feb. 5th, 1850; Mills' Colonial Const., 151.
5 Earl Grey's Colonial Policy, i. 32, 235, 437; ii. 327; Mills' Colonial
Const, 185, &c.; Merivale, Colonization, 1861, C51-65G
• Earl Grey's Colonial Policy, i. 29.
538 COLONIES.
autliority of the senate, and the control of the supreme court,
are checks upon the democracy of congress.* But in these
colonies the nominees of a majority of the democratic assem-
bly, for the time being, are absolute masters of the coh)nial
government. In Canada, the legislative council can offer no
effectual resistance ; and in Australia even that check, how-
ever inadequate, is wanting. A single chamber dictates its
conditions to the governor, and indirectly to the parent state.
This transition from a state of control and pupilage to that
of unrestrained freedom, seems to have been too precipilate.
Society, — particularly in Australia, — had scarcely had
time to prepare itself for the successful trial of so free a
representation. The settlers of a new country were suddenly
intrusted with uncontrolled power, before education, proper-
ty, traditions, and usage had given stability to public opinion.
Nor were they trained to freedo^, like their English breth-
ren, by many ennobling struggles and the patient exercise
of public virtues. But such a transition, more or less rai)id,
was the inevitable consequence of responsible government,
coupled with the power given to colonial assemblies, of
reforming their own constitutions. The principle of self-
government, once recognized, has been carried out without
reserve or hesitation. Hitherto there have been many fail-
ures and discouragements in the experiment of colonial
democracy ; yet the political future of these thriving com-
munities affords far more ground for hope than for despon-
dency.
England ventured to tax her colonies, and lost them ; she
Colonies have endeavored to rule them from Downing Street,
be<^me afflii- j^d piovoked disaffection and revolt. At last.
ated states. '^ _ '
she gave freedom, and found national sympathy
and contentment. But, in the mean time, her colonial de-
pendemcies have grown into affiliated states. The tie which
binds them to her, is one of sentiinent, rather than authority.
Commercial privileges, on either side, have been abandoned j
1 De Tocqueville, i. pp. 143, 151, 179.
MILITARY DEFENCE OF COLONIES. 539
transportation, — for which some of the coIoiiIl's were found-
ed,— has been given up; patronage has been surrendered,
the di<po-al of public lands waived by the Crown, and politi-
cal dominion virtually renounced. In sliort, their depen-
dence has become little more than nominal, except for puv
poses of military defence.
We have seen how, in the earlier history of the coloniet?,
they strove to defend themselves. But during the 5i5utj^„
prolonged hostilities of tiie French revolutionary defence of
' ^ _ ^ •' colonies.
war, assaults upon our colonies naturally formed
part of the tactics of the enemy, which were met, on our
part, by costly naval and military armaments. And after
the peace, England continued to garrison her colonies with
large military forces, — wholly paid by herself, — and to
construct fortifications, requiring still larger garrisons.
Wars were undertaken against the natives, as in the Cape
of Good Hope and New Zealand, — of which England bore
all the cost, and the colonies gained all the profit. English
soldiers have further performed the services of colonial
police. Instead of taxing her colonies, England has suffered
herself to be taxed heavily on their account. The annual
military expenditure, on account of the colonies, ultimately
reached £3,225,081, of which £1,715,246 was incurred for
free colonies, and £1,509,835 for military garrisons and
dependencies, maintained chiefly for imperial purposes.*
Many of the colonies have already contributed towards the
maintenance of Briti?h troops, and have fui'ther raised con-
siderable bodies of militia and volunteers ; but Parliament
has recently pronounced it to be just that the colonies which
enjoy self-government, should undertake the responsibility
and cost of their own military defence."^ To carry this policy
into effect must be the work of time. But whenever it may
be effected, the last material bond of connection with the
1 Report of Committee on Colonial Military Expenditure, 1861.
2 Jbicl., and Evidence ; Resolution of Commons, Mar. 4, 1862. — Hans.
Deb., 3d Ser, clxxv. 1032; Earl Grey's Colonial Policy, i. 265; Mr. Adder-
ley's Letter to Mr. Dkraeli on the Relations of England with the Colonies,
1861.
540 COLONIES.
colonies will have been severed ; and colonial states, ac-
knowledging the honorary sovereignty of P^ngland, and fully
armed for self-defence, — as well against herself as others,
— will Imve grown out of the dependencie.-i of the British
Empire. They will still look to her, in time of war, for at
least naval protection ; and, in peace, they will continue to
imitate her laws and institutions, and to glory in the proud
distinction of British citizenship. On her pfU't, P^ngland
may well be prouder of the vigorous freedom of her prosper-
»us sons, than of a hundred provinces subject to the iron rule
of British pro-consuls. And, should the sole remaining ties
«f kindred, affection, and honor be severed, she will reflect,
with just exultation, that her dominion ceased, not in oppres-
sion and bloodshed, but in the expansive energies of freedom,
and the hereditary capacity of her manly offspring for the
privileges of self-government.
Other parts of the British empire have — from the con-
Dependencies ditions of their occupation, the relations of the
wirgovem- state to the native population, and other circum-
ment. stances — been unable to participate in the free
institutions of the more favored colonies ; * but they have
largely shared in that spirit of enlightened liberality, which,
during the last twenty years, has distinguished the adminis-
tration of colonial affairs.
Of all the dependencies of the British crown, India is the
India. most considerable in territory, in population, in rev-
enue, and in military resources. It is itself a great empire.
Originally acquired and governed by a trading con){)any,
England was responsible for its administration no further
than was implied in the charters and Acts of Parliament, by
which British subjects were invested with sovereignty ovei
The East distant regions.'' Trade was the fii'st, dominion
Company. the Secondary object of the company. Early in
' Viz., India, Malta, Gibraltar, Ceylon, Hong Kong, St. Helena, Falk-
lands, Western Australia, Labuan, Sierra Leone, Gambia, Gold Coast
2 The first charter was granted in 1600; the first Act concerning the
East India Company wa.-< i)avsed in lf)J8, 9 i- lit U'il!. III. c. 4i.
INDIA. 541
the reign of George III. their territories had become so ex-
tended, that Lord Chatham conceived tlie scheme of claim-
ing them as dominions of the crown.^ This great scheme,
however, dwindled, in the hands of his colleagues, into
an agreement with the company to pay £400,000 a year,
as the price of their privileges.^ This tribute was not long
enjoyed, for the company, impoverished by perpetual wars,
and mal-administration, fell into financial difficulties ; and in
1773, were released from this obligation.* And in this year,
Parliament, for the first time, undertook to regulate the con-
stitution of the government of India.* The court of direc.
tors, consisting of twenty-four members, elected by the pro-
prietors pf India stock, and virtually independent of the
government, became the home authority, by whom the gov-
ernor-general was appointed, and to whom alone he was re-
sponsible. An Asiatic empire was still intrusted to a com-
pany, having an extensive civil and military organization,
making wars and conquests, negotiating treaties, and exer-
cising uncontrolled dominion. A trading company had grown
into a corporate emperor. The genius of Clive and War-
ren Hastings had acquired the empire of the Great Mogul.
But power exercised by irresponsible and despotic rulers
was naturally abused ; and in 1773, and again in Abuses of
1780, the directors were placed under the partial n^'fgVf^on,
control of a secretary of state.^ Soon afterwards li^si-^S-
some of the most glaring excesses of Indian misrule were
forced upon the notice of Parliament.* English statesmen
became sensible that the anomalies of a government, so con-
stituted, could no longer be endured. It was not fit that
1 Lord JIahon's Hist., v. 262; Chatham Corr., iv. 264.
2 7 Geo. III. c. 57; 9 Geo. III. c. 24; Pari. Ilist., xvi. 350; Walp. Mem.,
ii. 394,427,449; iii. 39-57.
8 13 Geo. III. c. 63.
4 Ibid., c. 64.
6 Burke's Speech, Works, iv. 115.
« See Debates, Feb. 1st and 12th, and May 8th, 1781; April 15th, 1782-
Pari. Hist, xxi. 1162, 1182; xxii. 200, 1275; Reports of Secret and Select
Committees, 1782 and 1783.
542 COLONIES.
England should suffer her subjects to practise the iniquities
of Asiatic rule, without effective responsibility and control.
On Mr. Fox and the coalition ministry first devolved the
task of providing against the continued oppression and mis-
rule, which recent inquiries had exposed. Tiiey
India Biu, grappled boldly with the evils which demanded a
remedy. Satisfied that the government of an
empire could not be confided with safety or honor to a com-
mercial company, they proposed at once to transfer it to an-
other body. But to whom could such a power be intrusted ?
Not to the crown, whose influence they had already de-
nounced as exorbitant ; not to any department of the exec-
utive government, which could become accessory. to Par-
liamentary corruption. The company had been, in great
measure, "independent of the crown and of the ministers of
the day ; and the power which had been abused, they now
proposed to vest in an independent board. This important
body was to consist of seven commissioners, appointed in the
first instance, by Parliament, for a term of four years, and
ultimately by the crown. The leading concerns of the com-
pany were to be managed by eight assistants, appointed first by
Parliament, and afterwards by the proprietors of East India
stock.^ It was a bold and hazardous measure, on which Mr.
Fox and his colleagues staked their power. Conceived in
a spirit of wisdom and humanity, it recognized the duty of
the state to redress the wrongs and secure the future welfare
of a distant empire ; yet was it open to objections which a
fierce party contest discolored with exaggeration. The main
objections urged against the bill were these : that it violated
the chartered rights of the company, that it increased the
influence of the crown, and that it invested the coalition
party, then having a Parliamentary majority, with a power
superior to the crown itself. As regards the first objection,
it was vain to contend that Parliament might not lawfully
dispossess the company of their dominion over millions of
1 Mr. Fox's Speech, N)v. 18th, 1783; Pari. Hist.jxxiii. 1187.
MR. FOX'S .NDIA BiLL. 543
men, *b.oh they had disgraced by fraud, rapine, oppression,
cruelty, and bloodshed. They had clearly forfeited the polit-
ical powers intrusted to them for the public good. A solemn
trust, having been flagrantly violated, might justly be re-
voked. But had they forfeited their commercial privileges ?
They were in difficulties and debt ; their affairs were in the
utmost confusion ; the grossest mismanagement was but too
certainly proved. But such evils in a commercial company,
however urgently needing correction, scarcely justified thf
forfeiture of established rights. The two latter objections
were plainly contradictory. The measure could not increase
the influence of the crown, and at the same time exalt a
party above it. The former was, in truth, wholly unten-
able, and was relinquished ; while the king, the opposition,
the friends of the company, and the country, made common
cause in maintaining the latter. And assuredly the weakest
point was chosen for attack. The bill nominated the com-
missioners, exclusively from the ministerial party ; and in-
trusted them with all the power and patronage of India, for
a term of four years. At a time when corrupt influence
was so potent in the councils of the state, it cannot be doubted
that the Commissioners would have been able to promote
the political interests of their own party. To add to their
weight, they were entitled to sit in Parliament. Already
the Parliamentary influence of the Company had aroused
jealousy ; and its concentration in a powerful and organized
party naturally excited alarm. However exaggerated by
party violence, it was unquestionably a well-founded objec-
tion, which ought to have been met and counteracted. It is
true that vacancies were to be filled up by the crown, and
that the appointment of the commissioners was during good
behavior; but, practically, they would have enjoyed an in*
dependent authority for four years. It was right to wrest
power from a body which should never have been permitted
to exercise it, and by whom it had been flagranti/ abused ;
but it was wrong to constitute the new government an in-
544 COLONIES.
strument of party, uncontrolled by the crown, and beyond
the immediate reach of that Parliamentary' responsibility
which our free constitution recognizes as necessary for the
proper exercise of authority. The error was fatal to the
measure itseJf, and to the party by whom it was com-
mitted.*
Mr. Fox's scheme having been overthrown, Mr. Pitt pro-
Mr Pitt's ceeded to frame a measure, in which he dexter-
1784*^"'' ously evaded all the difficulties under which his
rival had fallen. He left the Company in posses-
sion of their large powers ; but subjected them to a board of
control representing the crown.^ The Company was now
The double accountable to ministers, in their rule ; and miuis-
govemment ^gj-g^ jf jjjgy suffered wrong to be done, were re-
sponsible to Parliament. At the same time, however, power
and responsibiHty were divided ; and distracted councils, an
infirm executive, and a cumbrous and perplexed administra-
tion, were scarcely to be avoided in a double government.*
The administration of Indian affairs came frequently under
the review of Parliament ; * but this system of double or
divided government was continued, on each successive renewal
Later o^ '^'^ privileges of the Company. In 1833, the
measures. gj,gj great change was effected in the position of
the Company. Up to this time, they had enjoyed the ex-
clusive trade with China, and other commercial pi'ivileges.
This monopoly was now discontinued, and they ceased to be
a trading company ; but their dominion over India was con-
firmed for a further period of twenty years.^ The right of
Parliament, however, to legislate for India was then reserved.
1 Supra, Vol. I., 66 ; Pari. Hist, xxiii. 1224, 1255, &c. ; Burke's Works
V. 1; Adolphu.s's Hist., iv. 34-65; Massey's Hist., iii. 196-218; Fox Mem.
i. 212-221; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, ii. 24-48; Lord Stanhope's
[,ife of I'itt, i. 138.
2 24Geo. HLc. 2.5.
8 Mr. Fox's Speech, Pari. HisL, xxiv. 1122; Fox Mem., ii. 254; Debates
nil India Bill of 1858, passim.
* 28 Geo. Ill c. 8; 33 Geo. III. c. 52; 53 Geo. IIL c. 156.
• 3 & 4 Will. IV. c. 85.
INDIA. 545
It was the last periodical renewal of the powers of the Com-
pany. In 1853, significant changes were made ; india BUi,
their powers being merely continued until Parlia-
meat should otherwise provide, and their territories being
held in trust for the crown. The Court of Directors was
reconstituted, being henceforth composed of twelve elected
members and six nominees of the crown. At the same time,
the council of the Governor-General in India was enlarged,
and invested with a more legislative character. The gov-
ernment of India being thus drawn into closer connection
with ministers, they met objections to the increase of patron-
age, which had been fatal to Mr. Fox's scheme, by opening
the civil and medical services to competition.* This meas-
ure prepared the way for a more complete identity between
tlie executive administration of England and India. It had
a short and painful trial. The mutiny of the native army in
1857, disclosed the perils and responsibilities of England, and
the necessity of establishing a single and supreme authority.
The double government of Mr. Pitt was at length con-
demned ; the powers and territories of the Com- „
*■ Govenmieat
pany were transferred to the Queen ; and the of India
... . n T ^^ • 1 o transferred
administration ot India was intrusted to a oecre- to the crown,
tary of State, and Council. But this great change
could not be accomplished without a compromise ; and of
the fifteen members of the council, seven were elected by
the Board of Directors, and eight appointed by the crown.
And again, with a view to restrict the state patronage, cadet
ships in the engineers and artillery were thrown open to
competition.^
The transfer of India to the crown was followed by a vig-
orous administration of its vast dominions. Its
army was amalgamated with that of England ; * india^ad-
the constitution of the council in India was placed '"'°^''™''°°-
1 16 & 17 Vict. c. 95. 2 21 & 22 Vict. c. 106-
8 23 & 24 Vict. c. 100 (discontinuing a separate European force in India);
24 & 25 Vict. c. 74; and Pari. Papers, 1860, Nos. 471, 364, &c.
VOL. II. 35
546 COLONIES.
upon a wider basis ; * the courts of judicature were remod-
elled ; * the service enlarged ; ' and the exhausted revenues
of the country regenerated. To an empire of subjugated
states and Asiatic races, sell-governinent was plainly impossi-
ble. But it has already profited by European civilization
and statesmanship ; and while necessarily denied freedom,
its rulers are guided by the principles upon which free states
are governed ; and its interests are protected by a free
English Parliament, a vigilant press, and an enlightened
and humane people.
Beyond these narrow isles, England has won, indeed, a
Frecdom^f vast and glorious empire. In the history of the
empire. world, no Other state has known how to govern
territories so extended and remote, and races of men so
diverse ; giving to her own kindred colonies the widest lib-
erty and ruling, with enlightened equity, dependencies un-
qualified for freedom. To the Roman, Virgil proudly sang,
" Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento:
Has tibi eruut antes."
To the Englishman may it not be said with even juster
pride, " having won freedom for thyself, and used it wisely,
thou hast given it to thy children, who have peopled the
earth ; and thou hast exercised dominion with justice and
humanity ! "
1 84 & 25 Vict c 2 Ibid., c. 104. « Jbid., c 54.
IMPROVED SPIRIT OF LEGISLATION. 547
CHAPTER XVin.
Improved Spirit of Legislation coincident with Liberty: — Administration
of Justice: — Mitigation of the Criminal Code: — Capital and Secondary
Punishments: — Prisons: — Police: — The Poor Laws: — Lunatics: —
Provisions for the Social Welfare of the People: — Popular Education: —
Commercial and Financial Policy: — Activity of Parliament since the
Reform Act : — Conclusion.
We have now surveyed the progress of freedom and pop-
ular influence, in all the institutions of England, improved
Everywhere we have seen the rights and liberties modern^
of the people assured, and closer relations estab- legislation,
lished between the state and the community. The liberal
spirit of general legislation has kept pace with this remark-
able development of constitutional liberty. While the basis
of power was narrow, rulers had little sympathy with the
people. The spirit of their rule was hard and selfish ;
favoring the few at the expense of the many ; protecting
privileges and abuses by which the governing classes prof-
ited, but careless of the welfare of the governed. Respon-
sibility and popular control gradually forced upon them
larger views of the public interests ; and more consideration
for the claims of all classes to participate in the benefits of
enlightened government. With freedom there grew a stronger
sense of duty in rulers ; more enlightenment and humanity
among the people ; wiser laws, and a milder policy. The
asperities of power were tempered ; and the state was gov
erned in the spirit which society approved.
This improved spirit has displayed itself throughout the
wide range of modern legislation ; bat, in passing beyond
the strict limits of constitutional history, we must content
518 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
ourselves with a rapid glance at some of its more remarkable
illustrations.
No example more aptly illustrates the altered relations of
Eraoium»nu I'u'ers to the people, than the revision of official
of office. emoluments. Ministers once grew rich upon the
gains of office ; and provided for their relatives by monstrous
sinecures, and appointments egregiously overpaid. To grasp a
great estate out of the public service, was too often their first
thought. Families were founded, titles endowed, and brokei*
fortunes repaired, at the public expense. It was asked what
an office was worth ; not what services were to be rendered.
This selfish and dishonest system perished under exposure ;
but it proved a tedious and unthankful labor to bring its
abuses to the light of day. Inquiries were commenced early
in the present century ; but were followed by few practical
results. At that time, " all abuses were freeholds," ^ which
the government did not venture to invade. Mr. Joseph
Hume, foremost among the guardians of pubhc interests,
afterwards applied his patient industry and fearless public
spirit to this work ; and, unruffled by discouragements and
ridicule, he lived to see its accomplishment. Soon after the
Reform Act, ministers of state accepted salaries scarcely
equal to the charges of office ; ^ sinecures and reversions
were abolished ; offices discontinued or consolidated ; and the
scale of official emoluments revised, and apportioned to the
duties performed, throughout the public service. The change
attested a higlier sense of duty in ministers, and increased
responsibility to public opinion.
The abuses in the administration of justice, which had
been suffered to grow and flourish without a cheeky
Adminis- .„ , . ° , . . „ ,
tritiou of illustrate the inert and stagnant spirit or the
eighteenth century. The noble principles of
1 Thuj happy phrase is assigned to Richard Bentley, son of Dr. Bentlcy
— Walpole's Mem., ii. 391.
« Roports on Sinecure Offices, 1807, 1810-12, and 1834; Debates on Oflicefl
fa Reversion Bill, 1807, 1808; Hans. Deb. 1st Ser., ix. 178, 1073, &c.; x.
LAW RFFORMS. 549
English law had been expounded by eminent judges an6
applied to the varying circumstances of society, until they
had expanded into a comprehensive system of jurisprudence,
entitled to respect and veneration. But however admirable
its principles, its practice had departed from the simplicity of
former times, and, by manifold defects, went far to defeat the
ends of justice. Lawyers, ever following precedents, were
blind to principles. Legal fictions, technicalities, obsolete
forms, intricate rules of procedure, accumulated. Fine in-
tellects were wasted on the narrow subtleties of special plead-
ing; and clients won or lost causes, — like a game of chess, —
not by the force of truth and right, but by the skill and cun-
ning of the players. Heart-breaking delays and ruinous costs
were the lot of suitors. Justice was dilatory, expensive, un-
certain and remote. To the rich it was a costly lottery ; to
the poor a denial of right, or certain ruin. The class who
profited most by its dark mysteries, were the lawyers them-
selves. A suitor might be reduced to beggary or madness ;
but his advisers revelled in the chicane and artifices of a life-
long suit, and grew rich. Out of a multiplicity of forms and
processes arose numberless fees and well-paid offices. Many
subordinate functionaries, holding sinecure or superfluous ap-
pointments, enjoyed greater emoluments than the judges of
the court; and upon the luckless suitors, again, fell the charge
of these egregious establishments. If complaints were made,
they were repelled as the promptings of ignorance ; if amend-
ments of the law were proposed, they were resisted as inno-
vations. To question the perfection of English jurisprudence
was to doubt the wisdom of our ancestors, — a political heresj,
which could expect no toleration.
The delays of the Court of Chancery, in the time of Lord
Eldon, were a frequent cause of complaint ; and Delays in the
formed the subject of Parliamentary inquiry in chancery.
194, 870, &c.; Romilly's Life, ii. 219, 302; iii. 9; Twiss's Life of Lord
Eldon, ii. 116, 225; Reports of Commons on offices held by members,
1830-31, No. 322; 1833, Xo. 671; Report on Miscellaneous Expenditurei
1847-48, No. 543; and on PubUc Offices, 1856, No. 368.
650 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
both Houses.^ In 1818, a vice-chancellor was appointed,
to expedite the business of the court ; but its complex
and dilatory procedure remained without improvement.
Complaints continued to be made, by Mr. Micliael Angelo
Taylor, Mr. Williams, and othei's, until, in 1825, a commis-
sion was appointed to inquire into the administration of jus-
tice in that court.'^
In 1828, Mr, Brougham exposed the complicated abuses
« - . ,.^ of the courts of common law, and the law of real
Defect* of the '
Common Law j^roperty. His masterly speech, of six hours, dis-
played the combined powers of the philosophic
jurist, the practised lawyer, the statesman, and the orator.'
Suggesting most of the law reforms which have since been
carried into effect, and some not yet accomplished, it stands a
motmment to his fame as a lawgiver.* Commissions of in-
quiry were immediately appointed ; and, when their investi-
Lawre- gations were completed, a new era of reform and
forms. renovation was commenced. Thenceforth, the
amendment of the law was pursued in a spirit of earnestness"
and vigor. Judges and law officers no longer discountenanced
it ; but were themselves foremost in the cause of law reform.
Lord Brougham, on the woolsack, was able to give effect to
some of his own cherished schemes ; and never afterwards
faltered in the work. Succeeding chancellors followed in his
footsteps ; and Lord Denman, Lord Campbell, Sir Richard
Bethell, and other eminent jurists, labored successfully in the
same honorable field of legislation. The work was slow and
toilsome, — beset with many difficulties, — and generally un-
thankful ; but it was accomplished. The procedure of the
1 Romilly'8 Life, ii. 368, 386, 392; iii. 13, &c.; Twiss's Life of Lord
Eldon, ii. 167, 199.
S Ibid., ii. 474, 48G, 567; iii. 321, et geq.
8 Feb. 7th, 1828, Hans. Deb., 2d Ser., xviii. 127; Lord Brougham's
Speeches, ii. 311.
* Acts and Bills of Lord Brougham, by Sir Eardley Wilniot, Intr. xv.
et $eq.; Ivi., el seq.; Ixxx. ; Speech of Lord Brougham on Law ReforiUj
May 12th, 1848, Hans. Deb. 3d Ser.. xcviii. 877.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. 551
court of Cliancery was simplified ; its judicial establjshmenl
enlarged and remodelled ; its offices regulated. Its delajf*
were in great measure averted ; and its costs diminished.
The courts of common law underwent a like revision. The
effete Welsh judicature was abolished ; the bench of English
judges enlarged from twelve to fifteen ; the equitable juris-
diction of the court of Exchequer superseded ; the procedure
of the courts freed from fiction and artifice ; the false system
of pleading swept away ; the law of evidence amended ; and
justice restoied to its natural simplicity. The law of bank-
ruptcy and insolvency was reviewed ; and a court established
for its administration, with wide general and local jurisdiction.
Justice was brought home to every man's door, by the consti-
tution of county courts. Divorce, which the law had re-
served as the peculiar privilege of the rich, was made the
equal right of all. The ecclesiastical courts were reconstitu-
ted ; and their procedure and jurisdiction reviewed. A new
court of appeal, — of eminent learning and authority, — was
found in a judicial committee of the Privy Council ; — which,
as the court of last resort from India and the colonies, from
the ecclesiastical courts and the court of Admiralty, is second
only to the House of Lords in the amplitude of its juris-
diction. The antiquated law of real property was • re-cast ;
and provision made for simplifying titles and facilitating the
transfer of land. Much was done, and more attempted, for
the consolidation of the statutes. Nor have these remarkable
amendments of the law been confined to England. Scotland
and Ireland, and especially the latter, have shared largely in
the work of reformation. Of all the law reforms of this
period, indeed, none was so signal as the constitution of the
Irish encumbered estates court.
Such have been the more conspicuous improvements of
the law, during the last thirty years. Before they had yet
been commenced. Lord Brougham eloquently foreshadowed
the boast of that sovereign who should have it to say " that
he found law dear, and left it cheap ; found it a sealed book,
00-2 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
left it a living letter; found it the patrimony of the rich, left
it the inheritance of the poor ; found it the two-edged sword
of craft and oppression, left it the staff of honesty and the
shield of innocence." The whole scheme of renovation is
not yet complete ; but alrea<ly may this proud boast be justly
uttered by Queen Victoria.
In reviewing the administration of justice, the spirit and
SDiritand temper of the judges themselves, at different pe-
temperof riods, must not be overlooked. One of the first
thejuiJges.
acts of George III. was to complete the indepen-
dence of the judges by providing that their commissions
should not expire with the demise of the crown. It was a
necessary measure, in consummation of the policy of the
Revolution ; and, — if unworthy of the courtly adulations
with which it was then received, — it was, at least, entitled
to approval and respect.^ The tenure of the judges was
now assured ; and their salaries were charged permanently
on the civil list.
The law had secured their independence of the crown ;
but the spirit of the times leagued them closely with its au-
thority. No reign was more graced by the learning and ac-
complishments of its judges. They were superior to every
corrupt influence ; but all their sympatlvjes and predilections
were with power. The enemies of Lord Mansfield asserted
'• that he was better calculated to fill the office of praetor under
Justinian, than to preside as chief criminal judge of this
kingdom in the reign of George III." ^ Neither Lord Mans-
field himself nor any other judge deserved so grave a cen-
Bure ; but, with the illustrious exception of Lord Camden,
he most eminent magistrates of that reign were unfriendly
o liberty. Who so allied to the court, so stanch to arbitrary
principles of government, so hostile to popular rights and
1 King's Message, March 3d, 1761; 1 Geo. TIL c. 23; Walpole Mem., i.
41; Cook's Hist, of Party, ii. 400. In 1767 the same law was extended to
Ireland, on the recommendation of Lord Townshend, the lord-lieutenant
Walpole Mem., iii. 109.
« Wraxall Mem., ii. 307.
THE CRIMINAL CODE. 553
remedial iaws, as Lord Mansfield, Lord Thurlow, Lord
Loughborough, Lord Eldon, and Lord EUenborough ? The
first and last of these so little regai'ded their independence,
in the exercise of the chief criminal judicature of the realm,
that they entered the cabinet as ministers of tlie crown, and
identified themselves with the executive government of the
day. What further illustration is needed of the close rela-
tions of the judgment-seat with power ? But no sooner
had principles of freedom and responsible government gained
ascendency, than judges were animated by independence and
liberality. Henceforward they administered justice in the
spirit of Lord Camden ; and promoted the amendment of the
laws, with the enlightenment of statesmen.
The deepest stain upon the policy of irresponsible govern-
ment is to be found in the history of the criminal
.,.1.1 Thecmninal
law. The lives of men were sacrificed with a code,
reckless barbarity, worthier of an Eastern despot. Capital
\ t* j^ punishments
or African chief, than of a Christian state. The
common law was guiltless of this severity ; but as the coun-
try advanced in wealth, lawgivers grew merciless to crimi-
nals. Life was held cheap, compared with property.* To
hang men was the ready expedient of thoughtless power.
From the Restoration to the death of George IIL, — a
period of 160 years, — no less than 187 capital offences
were added to the criminal code. The legislature was able,
every year, to discover more than one heinous crime deserv-
ing of death. In the reign of George II., thirty-three Acts
were passed creating capital offences : ^ in the first fifty
years of George III., no less than sixty-three.* In such a
1 " Penal laws, which are in the hands of the rich, are laid upon the
poor; and all our paltriest possessions are hung round with gibbets. —
Goldsmith's Vicni- of Waktjield.
2 Speech of Sir W. Meredith, 1777; Pari. Hist., xix. 237.
8 Lord Grenville's Speech, April 2d, 1813, on Sir S. Romilly's Shop-
lifting Bill ; Hans. Deb , Ist Ser., xxv. 525.. This excellent speech, how-
ever, is scarcely reported in Hansard, but was printed separately by th«
Capital Punishments Society.
554 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
multiplication of offences all principle, was ignored ; offences
wlioUy different in character and degree were confounded
in the indiscriniinating penalty of death. Whenever an
offence wa^ found to be increasing, some busy senator called
for new rigor,* until murder became in the ey6 of the law
no greater crime than picking a pocket, purloining a ribbon
from a shop, or pilfering a pewter-pot. Such law-makers
were as ignorant as they were cruel. Obstinately blind to
the failure of their blood-stained laws, they persisted ia
maintaining them long after they had been condemned by
philosophers, by jurists, and by the common sense and hu-
manity of the people. Dr. Johnson, — no squeamish moral-
ist,— exposed them ; '■^ Sir W. Blackstone, in whom admira-
tion of our jurisprudence was almost a foible, denounced
them.' Beccaria, Montesquieu, and Bentham * demonstra-
ted that certainty of punishment was more effectual in the
repression of crime, than severity ; but lawgivers were
still inexorable. Nor within the walls of Parliament it-
self, were there wanting humane and enlightened men to
protest against the barbarity of our laws. In 1752, the
Commons passed a bill to commute the punishment of feloay,
in certain cases, to hard labor in the dockyards ; but it was
1 Mr. Burke sarcastically observed that if a country gentleman could
obtain no other favor from the government, he was sure to be accommo-
dated with a new felony, without benefit of clergy. Paley justified the
same severity to unequal degrees of guilt, on the ground of" the necessity
of preventing tlie repetition of the offence." — Moral and Political Philoso-
phy. Book vi. ch. ix.
2 " Whatever may be urged by casuists or politicians, the greater part
of mankind, as they can never think that to pick a pocket and to pierc
the heart are equally criminal, will scarcely believe that two malefactors, s
different in guilt, can be justly doomed to the same punishment." -
Rambler, i. 114; Works, iii. 275. In this admirable essay, published in
1751, the restriction of death to cases of murder was advocated.
• " It is a kind of quackerj' in government, and argues a want of solid
skill, to apply the same universal remedy, the uldmiun supplicium, to eveiy
case of difficulty." — Comment, iv. 15.
* Bentham's work, " Tb^orie des Peines et des Recompenses," appeared
in 1811.
THE CRIMINAL CODE. 655
not agreed to by the Lords.* In 1772, Sir Charles Bun-
bury passed a bill through the Commons, to repeal some of
the least defensible of the criminal statutes ; but the Lords
refused to entertain it, as an innovation.^ In 1777, Sir W.
Meredith, in resisting one of the numerous bills of exter-
mination, made a memorable speech which still stands out
in judgment against his contemporaries. Having touehingly
described the execution of a young woman for shoplifting,
who had been reduced to want by her husband's impress-
ment, he proceeded : " I do not believe that a fouler murder
was ever committed against law, than the murder of this
woman by law ; " and again : " the true hangman is the
member of Parliament ; he who I'raraes the bloody law is
answerable for the blood that is shed under it." ' But such
words fell unheeded on the callous ears of men intent on
offering new victims to the hangman.*
Warnings more significant than these were equally neg-
lected. The terrors of the law, far from prevent-
, . . «,.,.. . , Uncertainty
ing crime, mteriered with its just punishment, ofpunish-
Society revolted against barbarities which the law
prescribed. Men wronged by crimes, shrank from the
shedding of blood, and forebore to prosecute ; juries forgot
their oaths and acquitted prisoners against evidence ; judges
recommended the guilty to mercy.* Not one in twenty of
the sentences was carried into execution. Hence arose un-
certainty,— one of the worst defects in criminal jurispru-
dence. Punishment lost at once its terrors and its example.
Criminals were not deterred from crime, when its conse-
1 Conim. Journ., xxvi. 345; Lords' Joum., xxvii, 661.
2 Pari. Hist., xvii. 448; Comm. Joum., xxxiii. 695, &c.; Sjieech of Sir
W. Meredith, 1777.
8 Pari. Hist., xix. 2-37.
* Sir William Meredith said: — " When a member of Parliament brings
in a new hanging Bill, he begins -with mentioning some injurj' that may
be done to private projierty, for which a man is not yet liable to be hanged:
and then proposes the gallows as the specific and infallible means of cur«
and prevention."
6 Blackstone Comm., iv. 15.
656 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
qutnces were a lottery : society could not profit by the suffer-
ings of guilt, when none could comprehend why one man
was hung and another saved from the gallows. The law
was in the breast of the judge; the lives of men were at the
mercy of his temper or caprice.* At one assize town, a
" hanging judge " left a score of victims for execution ; at
another, a milder magistrate reprieved the wretches whom
the law condemned. Crime was not checked ; but, in the
words of Horace Walpole, the country became " one gi'eat
shambles;" and the people were brutalized by the hideous
spectacle of public executions.
Such was the state of the criminal law, when Sir Samuel
Sir Sanmei Romilly commenced his generous labors. He en-
bli^,'"8<»- t^''^'^ "PO" ^'i^™ cautiously. In 1808, he obtained
1818. the remission of capital punishment for picking
pockets. In 1810, he vainly sought to extend the same
clemency to other trifling thefts. In the following year, he
succeeded in passing four bills through the Commons. One
only — concerning thefts in bleaching grounds — obtained
the concurrence of the Lords. He ventured to deal with
no crimes, but those in which the sentence was rarely car-
ried into execution ; but his innovations on the sacred code
•were sternly resisted by Lord Eldon, Lord EUenborough,
and the first lawyers of his time. Year after year, until
his untimely death, he struggled to overcome the obduracy
of men in power. The Commons were on his side ; Lord
Grenville, Lord Lansdowne, Lord Grey, Lord Holland, and
other enlightened peei's supported him ; but the Lords, un-
der the guidance of their judicial leaders, were not to be
convinced. He did much to stir the public sentiment in his
cause ; but little, indeed, for the amendment of the law.'
1 Lord Camden said: — "The discretion of the judge is the law of
tyrants. It is always unknown; it is different in different men: it is
casual, and depends upon constitution, temper, and passion. In the best,
It is oftentimes caprice; in the worst, it is every vice, folly, and passion to
which human nature is liable." — St. Tr., viii. 58.
2 Romilly's Life, ii 30-3, 315, 325, 333, 383; iii. 95, 233, 331, 337; Twiss'i
Life X)f Lord Eldon, ii. 119.
THE CRIMINAL CODE. 557
His labors were continued, under equal discouragementi
by Sir James Mackintosh.^ In 1819, he obtained „. ,
•' — -^ ' Sir James
a^Committee, in opposition to the Governnaent ; Mackintosh,
1819-1 *>23
and in the following year, succeeded in passing
three out of six measures which tliey recommended. This
was all that his continued efforts could accomplish. But his
philosophy and earnest reasoning were not lost upon the more
enlightened of contemporary statesmen. He lived to see
many of his own measures carried out ; and to mark so
great a change of opinion " that he could almost think that
be had lived in two different countiies, and conversed with
people who spoke two different languages." ^
Sir Kobert Peel was the first minister of the crown who
ventured upon a revision of the criminal code, gj^j^^jept
He brought together, within the narrow compass ^^''.Vj
of a few statutes, the accumulated penalties ofiawbuis,
,, , . , 1824-1830.
centuries. He swept away several capital pun-
isfiments that were practically obsolete ; but left the effective
severity of the law with little mitigation. Under his revised
code upwards of forty kinds of forgery alone were punish-
aule with death.' But public sentiment was beginning to
prevail over the tardy deliberations of lawyers and states-
men. A thousand bankers, in all ptirts of the country, pe-
titioned against the extreme penalty of death in cases of
ibrgery ; * the Commons struck it out of the Government
bill ; but the Lords i-estored it.^
With the reform period commenced a new tra in criminal
legislation. Ministers and law ofiicers now vied BeTfcion
with philanthropists, in undoing the unhallowed code^saa-
work of many generations. In 1832, Lord Auck- ^^*^"
land, Master of the Mint, secured the abolition of capital
1 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxix. 7S4, &c.
2 Mackintosh's Lite, ii. 387-396.
8 11 Geo. IV. and 1 Will. IV. c. 66.
* Presented by Mr. Brougham, May 24tb, 1830; Hans. Deb., 2d Ser.
Kxiv. 1014.
• Ibid., XXV 838.
558 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
punishment for offences connected with coinage ; Mr. At-
torney-general Den man exempted forgery from the same
penalty, — in all but two cases, to which ihe Lords would
not assent; and Mr. Evvart obtained the like remission for
sheep-stealing, and other similar offences. In 1833, the
Criminal Law Commission was appointed, to revise the en-
tire code. While it^ labors were yet in progress, Mr. Ewart,
— ever foremost in this work of mercy, — and Mr. Lennai-d,
carried several important amendments of the law.^ The
commissioners recommended numerous other remissions,
wliich were promptly carried into effect by Lord Jolin Rus-
sell in 1837. Even these remissions, however, fell short
of public opinion, which found expression in an amendment
of Mr. Ewart, for limiting the punishment of death to the
single crime of murder. This proposal was then lost by a
majority of one ; * but has since, by successive measures,
been accepted by the legislature ; — murder alone, and the
exceptional crime of treason, having been reserved for the
last penalty of the law.* Great indeed, and rapid, was this
reformation of the criminal code. It was computed that,
from 1810 to 1845, upwards of 1,400 persons had suffered
death for crimes, which had since ceased to be capital.'
While these amendments were proceeding, other wise
provisions were introduced into the criminal law. In 1834,
the barbarous custom of hanging in chains was abolished.
In 1836, Mr. Ewart, after a contention of many years, se-
cured to prisoners, on trial for felony, the just privilege of
being heard by counsel, which the cold cruelty of our
criminal jurisprudence had hitherto denied them.® In the
1 In 1833, 1834, and 1835.
» Second Report, p. 33.
8 Hans. Deb., 3d Ser., xxxviii. 908-922.
* 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100.
* Report of Capital Punishments Society, 1845.
* ThLs measure had first been proposed in 1824 by Mr. George Lamb.
See Sydney Smith's admirable articles upon this subject. — Works, ii. 259,
lii. 1.
PRISONS. 559
Bame year, Mr. Aglioiiby broke down the rigorous usage
which had allowed but forty-eight hours to criminals under
sentence of death, for repentance or pioof of innocence.
Nor did the efforts of philanthropists rest here. From 1840,
Mr. Ewart, supported by many followers, pressed upon the
Commons, again and again, the total abolition of capital
punishment. This last movement failed, indeed; and the
law still demands life for life. But such has been the sen
sitive — not to say morbid — tenderness of society, that
many heinous crimes have since escaped this extreme pen-
alty ; while uncertainty has been suffered to impair the
moral influence of justice. — n
While lives were spared, secondary punishments were no /
less tempered by humanity and Christian feeling, g^^^j i
In 1816, the degrading and unequal punishment ?"'"«*»"!««'»• <
of the pillory was confined to perjury ; and was, at length, \
wholly condemned in 1837.^
In 1838, serious evils were disclosed in the system of
transportation : the penal colonies protested against iranspor-
its continuance : and it was afterwards, in great *^^°'^
measure, abandoned. Whatever the objections to its prin-
ciple, however grave the fiults of its administration, — it
•was, at least in two particulars, the most effective secondary
punishment hitherto discovered. It cleansed our society of
criminals ; and afforded them the best opportunity of future
employment and reformation. For such a punishment no
equivalent could readily be found.* Imprisonment became
nearly the sole resource of the state ; and how to punish and
reform criminals, by prison discipline, was one of the most
critical problems of the time.
The condition of the prisons, in the last century, was a
reproach to the state and to society. They were Prisons.
1 56 Geo. III. c. 138; 1 Vict. c. 23. In 1815 the Lords rejected a Bill
for its total abolition. — Romilly's Life, iii. 144, 166, 189.
2 Reports of Sir W. Molesworth's Committee, 1837, Xo. 518; 1838, No.
669. Bentliam's '' Th^orie des Peines," &c.; Dr. Whately's Letters to
Earl Grey; Reply of Colonel Arthur; Innes on Home and Colonial Con-
vict Management, 1842.
5 GO PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
damp, dark, and noisome : prisoners were lialf-starved on
bread and water, clad in foul rags, and suffered to perisli of
want, wretchedness, and jail-fever. Their sufferings were
aggravated by tiie brutality of tyraiuious jailers and turn-
keys,— absolute masters of their fate. Such punishment
was scarcely less awful than the gallows, and was inflicted in
the same merciless spirit. Vengeance and cruelty were its
only principles : charity and retbrmation formed no part of
its scheme. Prisons without separation of sexes, without
classification of age or character, were schools of crime and
iniquity. The convicted felon corrupted the untried and
perhaps innocent prisoner ; and confirmed the penitent novice
in crime. The unfortunate, who entered prison capable of
uaoral improvement, went forth impure, hardened, and irre-
claimable.
Such were the prisons which Howard visited; and such
the evils he exposed. However inert the legislature, it was
not indifferent to these disclosures ; and attempts were im-
mediately made to improve the regulation and discipline of
prisons.^ The cruelty and worst evils of prison life were
gradually abated. Philanthropists penetrated the abodes of
guilt ; and prisons came to be governed in the spirit of
Howard and Mrs. Fry._ But, after the lapse of half a cen-
tury, it was shown that no enlarged system had yet been
devised to unite condign puni^hment with reformation : ad-
equate classification, judicious employment, and instruction
were still wanting.'^ The legislature, at length, applied
itself to the systematic improvement of prisons. In 1835,
inspectors were appointed to correct abuses, and insure
uniformity of management.' Science and humanity labored
ogether to devise a punishment, calculated at once to deter
1 Two bills were passed in 1774, aud others at later periods; and see
Reports of Conimous' Committees ou Jails, 1819, 1822; Sydney Smiths
Works, ii. 196, 244.
3 Five Reports of Lords' Committee, 1835 (Duke of Richmond), on
Jails and Houses of Correction.
« 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 38.
POLICE. 561
from crime, and to reform criminals. The magistracy,
throughout the country, devoted themselves to this great
social experiment. Vast model prisons were erected by the
titate : costly jails by counties, — light, airy, spacious and
healtliful. Physical suffering formed no part of the scheme.
Prisoners were comfortably lodged, well fed and clothed, and
carefully tended. But a strict classification was enforced :
every system of confinement — solitary, separate, and
silent — was tried : every variety of employment devised.
While reformation was sought in restraints and discipline, in
industrial training, in education and spiritual instruction, —
good conduct was encouraged by hopes of release from
confinement, under tickets-of-leave, before the expiration of
the sentence. In some cases penal servitude was followed
by transportation ; in others it formed the only punishment.
Meanwhile, punishment was passing from one extreme to
another. It was becoming too mild and gentle to deter from
crime; while hopes of reformation were too generally disap-
pointed. Furtiier experiments may be more complete ; but
crime is an intractable ill, which has baffled the wisdom of all
ages. Men born of the felon type, and bred to crime, will
ever defy rigor and frustrate mercy. If the present gen-
eration have erred, its errors have been due to humanity
and Christian hopefulness of good. May we not contrast
them proudly with the wilful errors of past tirafes, — neglect,
moral indifference, and cruelty ?
Nor did the state rest satisfied with the improvement of
prisons ; but, alive to the peculiar needs and Reform-
dangers of juvenile delinquents, and the classes *'°™8-
whence they sprung, it provided for the establishment ot
reformatory and industrial schools, in which the young might
be spared the contamination and infamy of a jail, and
trained, if possible, to virtue.^
Our ancestors, trusting to the severity of their punish-
ments, for the protection of life and property, took Poljc«
» 17 & 18 Vict. c. 86, &c.
VOL. u. 36
562 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
little pains in the prevention of crime. The metropolis was
left to the care of drunken and decrepit watchmen, and
scoundrel thief-takers, — companions and confederates of
thieves.^ Tiie abuses of such a poUce had long been
notorious, and a constant theme of obloquy and ridicule.
They had frequently been exposed by Parliamentary Com-
mittees ; but it was not uDtil 1829, that Mr. Peel had the
courage to propose his new metropolitan ])olice. This ef-
fective and admirable force has since done more for the
order and safety of the metropolis, tlian a hundred execu-
tions every year, at the Old Bailey. A similar force was
afterwards organized in the city of London ; and every
considerable town throughout the realm was prompt to
follow a successful example. The rural districts, however,
and smaller boroughs, were still without protection. Already,
in 1836, a constabulary of rare efficiency had been organized
in Ireland; but it was not until 1839 that provision was
made for the voluntary establishment of a police in English
counties and boroughs. A rural police was rendered the
more necessary by the efficient watching of large towns :
and at length, in 1856, the support of an adequate constabu-
lary force was required of every county and borough.
And further, criminals have been brought more readily
Summary *o justice, by enlargements of the summary juris-
jun«diction. (]iction of magistrates. A piinciple of crimi-
nal jurisprudence which excludes trial by jury is to be
accepted with caution ; but its practical administration has
been unquestionably beneficiah Justice has been adminis-
tered well and speedily ; while offenders have been spared a
long confinement prior to trial, and the innocent have had .-i
prompt acquittal. The like re:^ults have also been attained
by an increase of stipendiary magistrates, in the metropolis
and elsewhere, by tiie institution of the Central Criminal
Court, and by more frequent assizes.
1 Wraxairs Mem., i. 329; Reports of Commons' Comm., 1812, 1816,
1817, 1822, and 1828.
THE POOR-LAWS. 563
The stern and unfeeling temper which had dictated tlie
penal code, directed the discipline of fleets and
armies. Life was sacrificed with the same cruel the"S.vy and
levity; and the lash was made an instrument of*'^'"^'
torture. This barbarous rigor was also gradually relaxed,
under the combined influence of humanity and freedom.
Equally wise and humane were numerous measures lor
raising the moral and social condition of the The poor-
people. And first in importance was an im- ^*^"
proved administration of relief to the poor. Since the reiga
of Elizabeth, the law had provided for the relief of the
destitute poor of England. This wise and simple provision,
however, had been so pervei-ted by ignorant administration
that, in relieving tiie poor, the industrial population of the
whole country was being rapidly reduced to pauperism,
while property was threatened with no distant ruin. The
system which was working this mischief assumed to be
founded upon benevolence ; but no evil genius could have
designed a scheme of greater malignity, for the corruption of
the human race. The fund intended for the relief of want
and sickness, of age and impotence, was recklessly distributed
to all who begged a share, pjvery one was taugiit to look
to the parish, and not to his own honest industry, for sup-
port. The idle clown, without work, fared as well as the
industrious laborer who toiled from morn till night. Ti»e
shameless slut, with half a dozen children, — the progeny of
many fathers, — was provided for as liberally as the destitute
widow and her orphans. But worse than this, — indepen-
flent laborers were tempted and seduced into the degraded
ranks of pauperism, by payments freely made in aid of
wages. Cottage rents were paid, and allowances given
according to the number of a family. Hence thrift, self-
denial, and honest independence were discouraged. The
manly farm laborer, who scorned to ask for alms, found his
own wages artificially lowered, while improvidi^nce was
cherished and rewarded by the parish. He could barely
564 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
live without incumbrance ; but boys and girls were hasten-
ing to church, — without a thought of the morrow, — and
rearing new broods of paupers, to be maintained by tiie
overseer. Who can wonder tiiat laborers were rajjidly
sinking into pauperism, without pride or self-respect? Bii:
the evil did not even rest here. Paupers were actually
driving other laborers out of employment, — that labor
being preferred which was partly paid out of rales, to
wliich employers were forced to contribute. As the cost of
pauperism, thus encouraged, was increasing, the poorer
ratepayers were themselves reduced to poverty. The soil
was ill-cultivated by pauper labor, and its rental consumed
by parish rates. In a period of fifty years, the poor-rates
were quadrupled ; and had reached, in 1833, the enormous
amount of 8,600,000/. In many parishes they were ap-
proaching the annual value of the land itself.
Such evils as these demanded a bold and tliorougli
remedy; and the recommendations of a masterly
The new •' J
poor-law, commission of inquiry were accepted by the first
refoi-med Parliament in 1834, as the basis of iv
new poor law. The principle was that of the Act of
Elizabeth, — to confine I'elief to destitution ; and its object,
to distinguish between want and imposture. This test was
to be found in the workhouse. Hitherto pauperism had
been generally relieved at home, — the parish workhouse
being the refuge for the aged, for orphans, and others, whom
it suited better than out-door relief. Now out-door relief
was to be withdrawn altogether from the able-bodied, whose
wants were to be tested by their willingness to enter the
workhouse. This experiment had already been successfully
tried in a few well-ordered parishes, and was now generally
adopted. But instead of continuing ill-regulated parisii
workhouses, several parishes were united, and union work-
houses 'established, common to them all. The local ad-
ministration of the pot)r was placed under elected bourds
of guaixlians ; and its general superintendence under a
THE POOR-LAWS. 565
central bo.nrd of commissioners in London. A change so
sudden in all the habits of the laboring classes, could not be
introduced without discontents and misconception. Some of
the provisions of the new law were afterwards partially
relaxed ; but its main principles were carried into successful
operation. . Within three years the annual expenditure for
the relief of the poor was reduced to the extent of three
millions. The plague of pauperism was stayed ; and the
English peasantry rescued from irretrievable corruption.
The full benefits of the new |K)or law have not yet been
realized ; but a generation of laborers has already grown
up in independence and self-respect ; and the education
and industrial training of children in the workhouses have
elevated a helpless class, formerly neglected and demoral-
ized.^
While England had been threatened with ruin, from a
reckless encouragement of pauperism, the law of poor-iawa
Scotland had made no adequate provision for the °''^°"*°^-
support of the destitute poor. This error, scarcely more
defensible, was corrected in 1845. But worst of Of Ireland,
all was the case of Ireland, whei-e there was absolutely no
It'gal provision for the destitute.'' The wants of the peasantry
■were appalling : two millions and a half were subsisting, for
a part of every year, on charity. The poor man shared
his meal with his poorer neighbor ; and everywhere the
vagrant found a home. To approach so vast a mass of
destitution, and so peculiar a condition of society, was a
hazardous experiment. Could property bear the burden of
y)roviding for such multitudes ? Could the ordinary ma-
cliiiiery of poor-law administration safely deal with them ?
The experiment was tried in 1838, — not without serious
misgivings, — and it succeeded. The burden, indeed, was
1 Extracts of information crtllected, 1833; Report of Commissioners of
Inquiry. 1834; Debates in Lords and Couunons, April 17th and July 21st,
1834; Xicholis' Hist, of the Poor Law, &c.
2 3d Report of Commissioners on the Poorer Classes in Ireland, 1836
p. 25, &c.
566 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
often ruinous to the land, and the workhouse was peculiar-
ly repugnant to the Irish peasantry ; but Uie operation of
the new law was faciHtated by tiie fearful famine of 1846,
and has since contributed, with other causes, to the advan-
cing prosperity of Ireland. Tiie poor-law legislation of this
period was conceived in a spirit of enlightened charity : it
saved England from pauperism, and the poor of Scoiland
and Ireland from destitution.
The same beneficence has marked recent legislation for the
Lunatics. care of lunatics. Witiiin the wide range of hu-
man suffering, no affliction so much claims pity and protection
as insanity. Rich and poor are stricken alike ; and both are
equally defenceless. Treated with care and tenderness, it is
sad enough ; aggravated by neglect and cruelty, it is unspeak-
ably awful. To watch over such, affliction, to guard it from
wrong and oppression, to mitigate its sufferings, and, if pos-
sible, to heal it, — is the sacred office of the state. But,
until a period comparatively recent, tiiis office was grievously
neglected. Rich patients were left in charge of" keepers,
in their own homes, or in private asylums, without control or
supervision ; the poor were trusted to the rude charge of
their own families, or received into the workhouse with otiier
paupers. Neglect, and too often barbarity were the natural
results. The strong may not be safely trusted with unre-
strained power over the weak. The well-paid keeper, tlie
pauper family, the workhouse matron, could all tyrannize
over helpless beings bereft of reason. Sad tales were heard
of cruelty committed within walls, to which no watchful
guardian was admitted ; and idiots were suffered to roam at
large, the sport of idle jests or worse brutality.
A few charitable asylums had been founded, by private
or local munificence, for the treatment of the insane ; ^
but it was not until the present century that county and
borough lunatic asjluras began to be established ; nor until
\ E.g. Bethlem Hospital, in 1547; St. Peter's Hospital, Bristol, iu 1697
Bethel Hospital, Nonvich, in 1713; St Luke's Hospital, in 1751.
LABOR IN FACTORIES. 567
after the operation of the new poor law, that their erection
was rendered compulsory.* At the same time, provision
was made for the inspection of asylums ; and securities were
taken against the wrongful detention or mismanagement of
lunatics. Private a-ylums are licensed ; every house ten-
anted by the insane is subjected to visitation ; and the care
of all hinatics is intrusted to commissioners.'^ The like pro-
vision has also been made for the care of lunatics in Scotland
and Ireland.* Two principles were here carried out, — the
guardianship of the state, and the obligation of property
to bear the burden of a liberal treatment of the lunatic poor.
Both are no less generous than just ; and the resources of
medical science and private charity have more than kept
pace with the watchfulness of the state, in alleviating the
suflFerings of the insane.
In other cases, the state has also extended its generous
protection to the weak, — even where its duty
was not so clear, lo protect wCmen and chil- factories,
, ,. . • 1 1 1 1 • 1 mioes, &c.
dren from excessive or_ unsuitable labor, it has
ventured to interfere with husband and wife, parent and
child, laborer and employer, — with free labor and wages,
production and profits. The first Sir Robert Peel had in-
duced the legislature to interfere for the preservation of the
health and morals of factory children.* But to the earnest
philanthrophy of Mr. Sadler and Lord Ashley, is due their
first protection from excessive labor. It was found that chil-
dren were doomed to immoderate toil in factories, by the
cupidity of parents ; and young persons and females accus-
tomed to hours of labor, injurious to health and character.
The state stretched forth its arm to succor them. The em-
ployment of children of tender years in factories was prohib-
ited ; the labor of the young, of both sexes under eighteen,
1 la 1845; 8 & 9 Vict. c. 126.
3 8 & 9 Vict. c. 100, &c.
« 9 & 10 Vict. c. 115, &c.: 20 & 21 Vict. c. 71.
* In 1802 and 1819; Act« 42 Geo. III. c. 73; 59 Geo. III. c. 6G, &c.
568 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
and of all women was subjected to regulation ; an inspection
of factories was instituted ; and provision made for the
education of factory children.* Tiie like parental care
was extended to other departments of labor, — to mities,^
and bleaching works,* and even to the sweeping of chim-
neys.*
The state has further endeavored to improve the social
^ condition of the working classes, by providing for
the improve- the establishment of savings' banks and i)rovident
ment of the . . ^ ^ .
working- Societies, of schools of design, of baths and wash-
houses, of parks and places of recreation ; by
encouraging the construction of more suitable dwellings, by
the supervision of common lodging-houses, — and by meas-
ures of sanitary improvement ; the benefits of which, though
common to all classes, more immediately affect the health and
welfare of the laboring multitudes. In this field, however,
the state can do comparatively little ; it is from society, —
from private benevolence and local activity, that effectual
aid must be sought for the regeneration of the poorer classes.
And this great social duty has fallen upon a generation
already awakened to its urgency.
Among the measures most conducive to the moral and
Popular social improvement of the people, has been the
eUucaUon. promotion of popular education. That our ances-
tors were not insensible to the value of extended education,
is attested by the grammar-schools and free or charity-sciiools
in England, and by the parochial schools of Scotland. The
state, however, inert and indifferent, permitted endowments
for the good of society to be wasted and misapplied. From
the latter end of last century much was done by private zeal
and liberality for the education of the poor, but the state
stirroi not.* It was reserved for Mr. Brougham, in 1816;
» 3 &, 4 Will. IV. c. 103; 7 Vict. c. 15, &c. .
2 5 & 6 Vict 3. C9.
8 23 & 24 V:c'. c. 73.
* 4 & 5 Will. IV. c. 35, &c.
» See Porter's P-oyress of the Nation, 690-699.
POPULAR EDCCATIOJT. 569
to awaken Parliament to the ignorance of the poor ; and to
his vigilance was it due, that many educjUional endowments
were restored to the uses for which they were designed.
Again, in 1820, he proposed a scheme for tlie systematic
education of the poor.^ To the general education of tiie
people, however, there was not only indifference, but repug-
nance. The elevation of the lower grades of society was
dreaded, as dangerous to the state. Such instruction as im-
pressed them with the duty of contentment and obedience
might be well ; but education which should raise their intel-
ligence and encourage freedom of thought, would promote
democracy, if not revolution. It was right that the children
of the poor should be taught the church catechism : it was
wrong that they should leani to read newspapers.* So long
as this feeling prevailed, it was vain to hope for any sys-
tematic extension of secular education ; but the church and
other religious bodies were exerting themselves earnestly, in
their proper sphere of instruction. In their schools religious
teaching was the primary object; but great advances were
also made in the general education of the poor. Meanwhile,
the increasing prosperity of the country was rapidly devel-
oping the independent education of the children of other
classes, who needed no encouragement or assistance. As
society advanced, it became more alive to the evils of igno-
rance ; and in a reformed Parliament, the jealousy of popular
education was speedily overcome.
In Ireland, as we have seen, a broad scheme of national
education was introduced, in 1831, on the princi- obstacles to
le of " a combined literary, and a separate re- "" naTionar
igious education." ' In Great Britain, however, e^iucation.
there were obstacles to any such system of national educa-
tion. In the schools of the church, and of dissenters, re-
1 Ha:is. Deb., 2d Ser., ii. 49; Harwbod's Mem. of Lord Brougham, 124,
161.
2 See Lord Cockburn's Life of Jefirey, i. 68 ; Porter's Progress, 694
8 Supra, p. 455.
570 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
ligious teaching was the basis of education. The patrons of
both were jealous of one another, resentful of interference,
and unwilling to cooperate in any combined scheme of na-
tional education. Tlie church claimed the exclusive right of
educating the people ; dissenters asserted an equal title to
direct the education of the children of their own sects. Both
parties were equally opposed to any scheme of secular edu-
cation, distinct from their own religious teaching. Hence
the government was obliged to proceed with the utmost
PariUmen- cautiou. Its Connection with education was com-
i!i'aid?f"'* menced in 1834, by a small parliamentary grant,
eUucation. in aid of the building of school-houses. The ad-
ministration of this fund was confided to the Treasury, by
whom it was to be distributed, through the National School
Society, representing the church, — and the British and
Foreign School Society, to whose schools children of all
religious denominations were admitted. This arrangement
was continued until 1839 ; when Lord Mflbourne's govern-
ment vested the management of the education funds in a
Committee of Privy Council. This change was effected,
in contemplation of a more comprehensive scheme, by which
aid should be given diiectly to schools connected with
the church and other religious bodies. The church was
alarmed, lest her own privileges should be disturbed ; many
of the conservative party were still adverse, on political
grounds, to the extension of education ; and the government
scheme was nearly overthrown. The annual grant met with
strenuous resistance; and was voted in the Commons by a
bare majority of two.* The Lords, coming to the aid of the
church and their own party, hastened to condemn the new
scheme, in an address to tiie Crown.''^ Their lordships, how
ever, received a courteous rebuke from the throne ;^ and tlie
scheme was vigorously carried out- Despite of jealousies
and distrust, the operations of the Committee of Privy Coup-
1 Uans. Deb., 3d Ser., xlviii. 229, et aeq. 2 jbid., 1332.
« Ibid., xlix. 128; Ann. Reg., 1839, 171.
COMMERCIAL POLICY. 571
cil were speedily extended. Society was awakened to the
duty of educating the people ; local liberality abounded ; the
rivalry of the church and dissenters prompted thcni to in-
creased exertions ; and every year larger demands were
made upon the public fund, until, in 1860, the annual grant
amounted to nearly 700,000/.
However such a system may fall short of a complete
scheme of national education, embracing the poorest and
most neglected classes, it has given an extraordinary im-
pulse to popular education ; and bears ample testimony to
the earnestness of the state in promoting the social improve-
ment of the people.
Let us now turn to the material interests of the country ;
its commerce, its industry, its productive energies, commercial
How were these treated by a close and irresponsible ^"^■''y-
government? and how by a government based upon public
opinion, and striving to promote the general welfare and hap-
piness of the people ? Our former commercial policy was
founded on monopolies, and artiticial protections and encourage-
ments, — maintained for the benefit of the few, at the expense
of the many. The trade of the Eiist was monopolized by the
East India Company ; the trade of the Mediterranean by the
Levant Company ; ^ the trade of a large portion of North
America by the Hudson's Bay Company.'^ The trade of
Ireland and the colonies was shackled for the sake of
English producers and manufacturers. Every produce and
manufacture of England was protected, by high duties or
prohibitions, against the competition of imported commodi-
ties of the like nature. Many exports were encouraged by
bounties and drawbacks. Every one sought protection or
encouragement for himself, — utterly regardless of the wel-
fare of others. The protected interests were lavored by
the state, while the whole community suffered from prices
artificially raised and industry unnaturally disturbed. This
^ This Company was wound up in 1826. — 6 Geo IV. c. 33.
* The charter of this Company expired in 1859.
572 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
selfish and illiberal policy found support in erroneous doc*
trines of political economy ; but its foundation was narrow
self-interest. First one monopoly was established, and then
another, until protected interests dominated over a Par-
liament in which the whole coninuinity were unrepre-
sented. Lord North and Mr. Pitt, generally commanding
obedient majorities, were unable to do justice to the industry
of Ireland, in opposition to English traders.^ No jwwer
piiort of rebellion could have arrested the monstrous corn
bill of 1815, which landowners, with one voice, demanded.
But political science and liberty advanced together : the one
pointing out the true interests of the people, the other
insuring their just consideration.
It was not until fifty years after Adam Smith had exposed
Free trade, what he termed " the mean and malignant expe-
dients of the mercantile system," that this narrow policy was
disturbed. Mr. Huskisson was the first minister after Mr.
Pitt, who ventured to touch protected interests. A close
representation still governed ; but public opinion had already
begun to exercise a powerful influence over Parliament ;
and he was able to remove some protections from the silk
and woollen trades, to restore the right of free emigration to
artisans, and to break ii\ upon the close monopoly of the
navigation laws. These were the beginnings of free trade ;
but a further development of political liberty was essential to
the triumph of that generous and fruitful policy. A wider
representation wrested exclusive power from the hands oi
the favored classes ; and monopolies fell, one after another,
in quick succession. The trade of the East was thrown
open to the free enterprise of our merchants ; the pro-
ductions of the world were admitted, for the consumption
and comfort of our teeming multitudes ; exclusive interests
in shipping, in the colonies, in commerce and manufactures,
were made to yield to the public good. But above all, the
most baneful of monopolies, and the most powerful of pro-
1 Supi-a, p. 496.
FINANCIAL POLICY. 573
tected interests, were overborne. The lords of the soil, oncft
dominant in Parliament, had secured to themselves a mo-
nopoly in the food of the people. To insure high rents,
it had been decreed that multitudes should hunger. Such a
monopoly was not to be endured ; and so soon as public
opinion had fully accepted the conclusions of science, it fell
before enligijtened statesmen and a popular Parliament.
The fruits of free trade are to be seen in the marvellous
development of British industry. England will ever hold
in grateful remembrance the names of the foremost promo-
ters of this new policy, — of Huskisson, Poulett, Thomson,
Hume, Villiers, and Labouchere, — of Cobden and Bright, —
of Peel and Gladstone ; but let her not forget that their
fruitful statesmanship was quickened by the life of freedom.
The financial policy of this period was conceived in the
same spirit of enlightened liberality, and regarded Financial
no less the general weKare and happiness of the p*'^''^-
people. Industry, while groaning under protection, had fur-
ther been burdened by oppressive taxes, imposed simply for
purposes of revenue. It has been the policy of modern
finance to dispense with duties on raw materials, on which
the skill and labor of our industrious artisans is exercised.
Free scope has been given to productive industry. The
employment and comfort of the people have been further
encouraged by tlie removal or reduction of duties on manu-
factured articles of universal use, — on glass, on bricks and
tiles, on soap and paper, and hundreds of other articles.
The luxuries of the many, as well as their food, have also
been relieved from the pressure of taxation. Tea, sugar,
coffee, cocoa, — nay, nearly all articles which contribute to
the comfort and enjoyment of daily hfe, — have been placed
within reach of the poorest.^ And among financial changes
conceived in the interest of the whole community, the re-
markal)le penny postage of Sir Rowland Hill deserves an
1 In 1842, the customs' tariff embraced 1163 articles; in 1860, it com-
priaed less than fifty, of which fifteeb contributed nearly the whole revenue.
574 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
honorable place. Notwithstanding extraordinary reductiona
of taxation, the productive energies of tlie country, encour-
aged by so liberal a policy, have more than made good the
amount of these remission?;. Tax after tax has been re-
moved ; yet the revenue — ever buoyant and elastic — has
been maintained by the increased productiveness of the
remaining duties. This policy — the conception of Sir
Henry Parnell — was commenced by Lord Althorp, boldly
extended by Sir Robert Peel, and consummated by Mr
Gladstone.
To insure the safe trial of this financial experiment, Sir
Robert Peel proposed a property tax, in time of peace, to
fall exclusively on the higher and middle classes. It was
accepted ; and marks, no less than other examples, the solici-
tude of Parliament for the welfare of the many, and the
generous spirit of those classes who have most influence
over its deliberations. The succession duty, imposed some
years later, affords another example of the self-denying
principles of a popular Parliament. In 1796, the Com-
mons— ever ready to mulct the people at the bidding c
the minister, yet unwilling to bear their own proper burden —
refused to grant Mr. Pitt such a tax upon their landed prop-
erty. In 1853, the reformed Parliament, intent upon spar-
ing industry, accepted this heavy charge from Mr. Gladstone.
The only unsatisfactory feature of modern finance has
been the formidable and continuous increase of
of expend!- expenditure. The demands upon the Exchequer —
apart from the fixed charge of the public debt —
were nearly doubled during the last ten years of this period.*
Much of this serious increase was due to the Russian,
Chinese, and Persian wars, to the vast armaments and unaet-
1 In 1850, the estimated expenditure was 50,763,583/.; in 1860, it
amounted to 7'J,534,000/. The latter amount, however, comprised 4,700,000/.
for the collection (.' the revenue, which had not been brought into the ac-
count until 18.56. in the former year the charge of the public debt was
28,105,000/. ; in the latter, 26,200.000/. Hence an expenditure of 22,653,583i
at one period, is to be compared with 42,634,000/. at the other.
INCREASE OF EXPENDITURE. r»7.j
tied policy of foreign states, to the proved deficiencies of our
military organization, to the reconstruction of the navy, and
to the greater costHness of all the equipments of modern
warfare. Much, however, was caused by the liberal and
humane spirit of modern administration. While the utmost
efficiency was sought in fleets and armies, the comforts and
moral welfare of our seamen and soldiers were promoted, at
great cost to the state. So, again, large permanent additions
were made to the civil expenditure, by an improved adminis-
tration of justice, a more effective police, extended postal
communications, the public education of the people, and the
growing needs of civiHzation throughout .a powerful and
wide-spread empire. This augmented expenditure, however,
deprived the people of the full benefits of a judicious scheme
of taxation. The property-tax, intended only as a temporary
expedient, was continued ; and however light and equal the
general incidence of other taxes, — enormous contributions
to tlie state were necessarily a heavy burden upon the indus-
try, the resources, and the comforts of the people.
Such have been the legislative fruits of extended liberty : —
wise laws, justly administered ; a beneficent care These
for the moial and social welfare of the people ; carefully
freedom of trade and industry ; lighter and more '^'^'^^■
equitiible taxation. Nor were these great changes in our
laws and policy effected in the spirit of democracy. They
weie made slowly, temperately, and with caution. They
were preceded by laborious inquiries, by discussion, experi-
ments, and public conviction. Delays and opposition were
borne patiently, until truth steadily prevailed ; and when a
sound policy was at length recognized, it was adopted and
carried out, even by former opponents.*
1 M. Guizot, who never conceals his distrust of democracy, says: — " In
the legislation of the country, the progress is immense: justice, disinter-
ested good sense, respect for all rights, consideration for all interests, the
conscientious and searching study of social facts and wants, exercise a far
greater s ivay thau they formerly did, in the government of England : in ita
676 PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION.
Freedom and good government, a generous policy and the
Good govern- devotioii of rulers to the welfare of the people,
mo^con- have been met with general confidence, loyalty,
tent and ^nd Contentment. The great ends of freedom
disconnges _ _ ° _
democracy, have been attained, in an enlightened and respon-
sible rule, approved by the judgment of the governed.
The constitution, having worked out the aims and promoted
the just interests of society, has gained upon democracy;
while growing wealth and prosperity have been powerful
auxiliaries of constitutional government.
To achieve these great objects, ministers and Parliaments
Pressure of have labored, since the Reform Act, witii unceas-
Itfci'^he" *"o energy and toil. In less than thirty years,
KeforinAct. jjig legislation of a century was accomplished.
The inertness and errors of past ages had bequeathed a long
arrear to lawgivers. Parliament had long been wanting in
its duty of "devising remedies as fast as time breedetli mis-
chief." ^ There were old abuses to correct, new principles
to establish, powerful interests and confirmed prejudices to
overcome, the ignorance, neglect, and mistaken policy of cen-
turies to review. Every department of legislation, — civil,
ecclesiastical, legal, commercial, and financial, — demanded
revision. And this prodigious work, when shaped and fash-
ioned in council, had to pass through the fiery ordeal of a
popular assembly ; to encounter opposition and unrestrained
freedom of debate, the conflict of parties, popular agitation,
the turmoil of elections, and lastly, the delays and reluctance
of the House of Lords, which still cherished the spirit and
sympathies of the past. And further, this work had to be
slowly wrought out in a Parliament of wide remedial juris-
diction, — the Grand Inquest of the nation. Ours is not a
council of sages for framing laws, and planning amendments
of the constitution ; but a free and vigorous Parliament,
domestic matters, and as regards its dflily affairs, England is assuredly
governed much more equitably and wisely." — Life of Sir R. Peel, p. 373
1 Lord Bacon. I'aciiication of the Church.
FOREIGN RELATIONS. 577
which watches over the destinies of an empire. It arraigns
ministers ; directs their policy, and controls the administra-
tion of affairs ; it listens to every grievance ; and inquires,
complains, and censures. Such are its obligations to free-
dom ; and such its paramount trust and duty. Its first care
is that the state be well governed ; its second that the laws
be amended. These functions of a Grand Inquest received
a strong impulse from Parliamentary Reform, and were
exercised with a vigor characteristic of a more popular
representation. Again, there was the necessary business of
every session, — provision for the public service, the scrutiny
of the national expenditure, and multifarious topics of inci-
dental discussion, ever arising in a free Parliament. Yet,
notwithstanding all these obstacles, legislation marched on
ward. The strain and pressure were great, but they were
borne ; ^ and the results may be recounted with pride. Not
only was a great arrear overtaken ; but the labors of another
generation were, in some measure, anticipated. An exhaust-
ing harvest was gathered ; but there is yet ample work for
the gleaners, and a soil that claims incessant cultivation. "A
free government," says Machiavel, " in order to maintain
itself free, hath need, every day, of some new provisions in
favor of liberty." Parliament must be watchful and earnest,
lest its labors be undone. Nor will its popular constitution
again suffer it to cherish the perverted optimism of the last
century, which discovered pei'fection in everything as it was,
and danger in every innovation.
Even the foreign relations of England were affected by
lier domestic liberty. "When kings and nobles Foreign
governed, their sympathies were with crowned ^^'J°2b
he^ds ; when the people were admitted to a share freedom,
in the government, England favored constitutional freedom
in other states, and became the idol of every nation which
cherished the same aspirations as herself.
1 The extent of the,«e labors is shown in the reports of Committees on
Public Business in 1848, 1855, asid 1S61; in a pamphlet, by the author, oc
tliat subject, 1849; and in the Edinburgh Review, Jan. 1854, art. vii.
vol.. II. 37
678 CONCLUSION.
This history is now completed. However unworthy of
Conclusion, its great theme, it may yet serve to illustrate a
remarkable periofl of progress and renovation in the laws and
liberties of England. Tracing the later development of the
constitution, it concerns our own time and present franchises.
It shows how the encroachments of power were repelled, and
popular rights acquired, without revolution ; how constitu-
tional liberty was won, and democracy reconciled with time-
honored institutions. It teaches how freedom and enlighten-
ment, inspiiing the national councils with wisdom, promoted
the good government of the State and the welfare and con-
tentment of society. Such political examples as these claim
the study of the historian and philosopher, the reflection of
the statesman, and the gratulations of every free people.
POWER OF THE PliESS. 579
SUPPLEMENTARY CHAPTER.
1861—1871.
Review of Political Progress since 1860: — Tranquillity under Lord Palmer-
ston: — His Death: — Earl Russell's Reform Bill, 1866: — Reform Acts
of Earl of Derby and Mr. Disraeli, 1867-18G8 : — Disestablishment of the
Irish Church: — Irish Land Act; — Settlement of Church-Rate Question:
— Universit}' Tests: — Repeal of Ecclesiastical Titles Act: — Education:
— The Ballot.
The century comprised in this history was a period of
remarkable constitutional progress. The politi-
^ '^ ^ Constitutional
cal abuses of many ao^es were corrected ; and chauges, i760-
, . . . .,..,. , I860.
our laws and institutions judiciously improved
and developed. While other states were convulsed by
revolutions, English liberties were steadilv advancinor with-
out violence or tumult. The influence of the crown was
constantly diminished, and ministerial responsibility in-
creased. The political ascendency of the House of Peers
was reduced. The House of Commons, purged of corrup-
tion, and casting oflf its dependence upon patrons, received
a vast increase of power from a wider representation of
the people, while it became more responsible to the country,
and more sensitive to public opinion.
Meanwhile, the press attained a power which had never
been conceived in any constitutional system. Irresponsible
itself, but at once forming and expressing the sentiments
of the people, it swayed the councils of responsible rulers.
In alliance with the press, political agitation exercised a
potent influence over the executive government and the
legislature.
580 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
No less remarkable was the change in the relations of the
church to the state, and to the community. The suprem-
acy of the state church had been maintained by a penal
code for the repression and discouragement of Roman
Catholics and nonconformists. Within this period every
restraint upon freedom of conscience, and every civil dis-
ability, was swept away. Religious freedom and equality
had become the settled policy of the state.
Such were the changes in the laws and liberties of Eng-
land, which distinguished this period of our history. Let
us now approach the consideration of our political progress
since 1860.
Tlie five first years of this period were marked by un-
political tran- usual political tranquillity. The discussions upon
Lord Palme/-' Parliamentary reform, in 1860, had failed to
*'*"'• awaken any excitement, or even interest, in favor
of further electoral changes. After thirty years of agitation,
and legislative activity, the minds of men appeared to be at
rest. The Crimean war, and the Indian mutiny, had served
to divert public attention from domestic politics; and the
great civil conflict in the United States engrossed the thoughts
of all classes of Englishmen.
Such being the sentiments and temper of the country,
the venerable statesman who directed its policy, as first min-
ister, was little inclined to disturb them by startling experi-
ments in legislation. No ruler was ever more impressed
with the practical wisdom of the maxim, " quieta non movete"
than Lord Palmerston, in the last years of his long political
life. Originally an enlightened member of that party which
had been opposed to change, he had developed into a mem-
ber of the liberal administration, which had carried the
Reform Act of 1832. Henceforward he frankly accepted
the policy, and shared the fortunes, of the liberal party, until
he became their popular leader. He had outlived some
generations of his countrymen : he had borne a part in the
LORD PALMERSTON PREMIER. 581
political strifes of more than half a century : he had observed
revolutions abroad, and organic changes at home : and in
these, his latter days, he was disposed, as well by conviction
as by temperament, to favor political tranquillity. Of rare
sagacity, and ripe judgment, it had long been his habit to
regard public affairs from a practical rather than a theoretical
point of view ; and the natural inertness of age could not
fail to discourage an experimental policy.
The miscarriage of the Reform Bill of 1860 had demon-
strated the composure of the public mind ; and Lord Pal-
merston perceived that in a policy of inaction he could best
satisfy the present judgment of the country, and his owa
matured opinions.
Such an attitude, if it alienated the more advanced sec-
tion of his supporters, was congenial to the great body of
the Whig.s, and disarmed the opposition, who were convinced
that his rule would insure the maintenance of a Conservative
policy.
Hence, during his life, the condition of the country may
be described as one of political repose. There was no great
agitation or popular movement : no pressure from without :
while within the walls of Parliament this adroit and popular
minister contrived at once to attach his friends, and to con-
ciliate his opponents.
The question of parliamentary reform, now dropped by
the Government, was occasionally pressed for- Attempts to
ward by other members. In 1851, Mr. Locke ^nch^s^*
King sought to lower the county franchise to °^ ^^^'
10/., and Mr. Baines to reduce the borough franchise to 6/.;
but neither of these proposals found favor with the House
of Commons.
Again, in 1864, these proposals were repeated, without
success, though supported by strong minorities. Meanwhile,
reformers were perplexed by the utterances of statesmen.
The veteran reformer, Earl Russell, had lately counselled
582 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE I860.
the people of Scotland to "rest and be thankful ;" while Mr.
Gladstone earnestly advocated the clainas of working men
to the suffrage, and contended that " every man who is not
presumably incapacitated by some personal unfitness, or
political danger, is morally entitled to come within the pale
of the constitution."
In 1865, Mr. Baines' bill revived the discussion of par-
liamentary reform. Though supported by Government, it
was defeated by a considerable majority. The debate was
signalized by a protest against democracy by Mr. Lowe,
which foreshadowed his relations to his own party, and to
the cause of reform, at no distant period.
After this session. Parliament, which had exceeded the
usual span of Parliamentary life,^ whs dissolved.
Dissoladon of ' . .' '
Pariiameut, The elections were not marked by the excite-
1866. . *^
ments of a severe party conflict: no distinct issue
was referred to the constituencies ; and general confidence in
Lord Palmerston was relied upon by candidates rather than
any special policy: but the Liberal party gained a considerable
accession of strength.
There was, however, one memorable election. Mr. Glad-
Mr. Giadstooe stone, who had represented the University of
thi*UntTereity Oxford for eighteen years, lost his seat, and was
ofOxforu. returned for South Lancashire. As member for
the University, his career was always restrained and tram-
melled: as member for a great manufacturing and commer-
cial county, he was free to become the leader of the Liberal
party.
At length in October, 1865, the aged premier died, at the
Death of Lord summit of his powcr and popularity ; and at once
Paimerston. ^ change Came over the national councils. He
Earl RusseU was Succeeded by Earl Russell, the acknowledged
leader of the Whigs, and the statesman most
associated with Parliaoventary reform. He had felt deeply
1 Upwards of six years.
EARL RUSSELL PREMIER. 583
the loss of his own measure in 1860, and the subsequent
relations of Lord Palmerston's government to its policy.
They had fought their way into office as the champions of
reform, and at the first check, had abandoned it. For five
years tliey had been content to rule and prosper, without
doing further homage to that cause; and now Earl Russell,
Mr. Gladstone, and other members of the cabinet, would
no longer submit to the reproach of insincerity. Nor was
a change of policy, at this time, dictated merely by a sense
of honor and consistency. It rested upon a continued con-
viction of the necessity of such a measure, in the interests
of the state, and in fulfilment of obligations which Parliament,
no less than ministers, had assumed. And further it was
deemed politic, with a view to satisfy the long-deferred hopes
of the more advanced members of the Liberal party. Ac-
cordingly, in the autumn. Earl Russell announced ReriTai of Par-
that the consideration of reform would be re- Reform. '^
newed in the approaching session.
There were, however, some considerations, not sufficiently
veeighed at the time, which had a disastrous influ-
^ . , CoDRicleraUona
ence over the fate of ministers, and of the meas- advei-se to iu
I'll 1 1 T-. !• settlement.
ure to which they stood committed. Parliament
had recently been dissolved, while Lord Palmerston was still
minister, and reform had been treated, upon the hustings,
with little more earnestness than in the House of Commons.
Hence the cause was without the impulse of a popular de-
mand. Again, a large proportion of the members, returned
at the general election, sharing the sentiments of Lord Pal-
merston and the late Parliament, had no inclination to dis-
turb the political calm of the past few years. But above all,
in this, the first session of a new Parliament, members w'ere
invited to recast the constitution of the House of Commons,
many of them to foifeit their seats, and all to return speedily
to their constituents. The political situation, indeed, may be
compared to a feast offered to guests who had lately dined.
584 POLITICAL PnOGKESS SINCE 1860.
At the first meeting of the Cabinet, after Lord Palmer-
Karl Russell's ston's funeral, ministers had taken means to col
Keforin Bill. j^^^ .,mple electoral statistics : ^ and early in the
session of 1866 were prepared to submit their proposals to
Parliament. "Warned by the obstacles which a com[)rehen-
sive measure had encountered in 1860, they confined their
scheme to a revision of the franchise, reserving for another
session the embarrassing problem of a redistribution of seats.
It was proposed to reduce tlie occupation franchise in coun-
ties to 14/. annual value, and in boroughs to 11. The addi-
tion to the voters was estimated at 400,000, of which one-half
would be working men. This measure, however moderate
and cautious, was at once beset with difficulties. Though
falling short of the views of Mr. Bright and the radicals, it
was supported by them as an "honest measure." But it
was denounced by the Conservatives, and even by several
Whigs, as democratic and revolutionary ; and an alarming
"TheCaTe." defection soon disclosed itself in the ministerial
ranks. Comprising about forty members, it numbered among
its leaders Mr. Lowe, Mr. Horsman, Mr. Laing, Lord Elcho,
Earl Grosvenor, and Lord Dunkellin. This party was
htiraorously compared by Mr. Bright with those who had
gathered in the " cave of AduUara," by which name it was
henceforth familiarly known.
The first weak point in the scheme which was assailed,
was the omission of a redistribution of seats.
Earl GrosTe-
nor's amend- This was brought to au issue by an amendment
of Earl Grosvenor, on the second reading of the
bill, when ministers, after a spirited debate of eight nights,
and in a very full house, escaped defeat by five votes only.^
Deferring to the opinion of so large a minority, ministers
promised a bill for the redistribution of seats, and reform
1 Mr. Gladstone's speech, on introducing the English Beform Bill, 2Iarclr
12th, 18C6.
a Ayes, 318; Noes, 313.
RESIGXATIOX OF MINISTERS. 585
bills for Scotland and Ireland, before they proceeded with
the original measure. On the 7th May, these Biiisforthe
bills were introduced. By the redistribution [^i^'^tribudon
of seats bill, thirty boroughs having a population °^^^^ uoited.
under 8,000 lost one member, and nineteen other seats were
obtained by the grouping of smaller boroughs, — forty-nine
seats being available for larger places. Though sharply
criticised, this bill was read a second time without a division :
but ministers were obliged to agree to a proposal of Mr.
Bouverie to refer it and the franchise bi)l to the same com-
mittee, with a view to their consolidation. Nor was this
all : the measure was already too large to be fully discussed,
when Sir R. Knightley carried an instrliction to the com
mittee, by a majority of ten, to provide for the better pre-
vention of bribery and corruption at elections.
In committee Lord Stanley moved, without notice, the
postponement of the franchise clauses ; but was
. , -»«• Continued op-
defeated by a majority of twenty-seven. Mr. position to tha
Walpole moved that the occupation franchise
in counties should be raised to 20/., and his amendment was
lost by fourteen votes only. Mr. Hunt proposed that the
county franchise should be based on rating instead of rental,
and was resisted by a majority of seven ; and lastly. Lord
Dunkellin moved a similar amendment in regard to bor-
oughs, which was carried against the government, by a ma-
jority of eleven.
Ministers now perceived that the game v^as lost. They
had declared their resolution to stand or fall by Resignation of
their bill ; and its fate was beyond hope of re- ™5°»*'«"-
covery. They submitted their resignation to the Queen,
•who hesitated to accept it; and a vote of confidence was
about to be moved with a view to re-establish them, when
they finally determined to resign.^ Their defeat, indeed,
1 Mr. Crawfonl, member for the City of London, was on the point of
rising to give notice of » vote of confidence, when he received a letter from
Earl Russell announcing his resignation.
586 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE I860.
had been susUiined upou a questiou of secondary importance,
and might have been repaired at a later stage of the bill :
but they had been sorely pressed on other occasions: tlieir
party was disorganized and broken up : it was plainly im-
possible to pass the bill, and they could not abandon it with-
out discredit.
Such was the issue of this infelicitous measure. A strong
Earl of Derby ministry was ruined; a triumphant party over-
remier, 1866. jiji-own ; and the minority again placed in power,
under the Earl of Derby. But events of higher importance
Popniuagita. resulted from the miscarriage of this measure.
*'**°" For some years, reformers had been indifferent
and inert : when P^arl Russell promised reform, they trusted
him, and were calm and hopeful : but now that he had been
driven from power, and supplanted by the opponents of
reform, they became restless and turbulent. The spirit of
democracy was again awakened, and the new government
were soon brought into collision with it. A
Hyde Park . . ®
riots, July meeting in Hyde Park had been announced by
the Reform League for July 23d, as a demon-
stration in favor of an extension of the suffrage. Ministers
being advised that the crown had power to prevent such a
meeting in a Royal Park,* and fearful of a disturbance to
the public j)eaoe, instructed the police to close the gates of
the park, and prevent the enti'ance of the multitudes expected
to assemble there. The gates were accordingly barred ; and
the leaders of the League, on being refused admittance, pro-
ceeded, according to previous arrangement, to Trafalgar
Square to hold their meeting. Meanwhile, the park gates
were securely held, and a considerable police force was col-
lected inside. But the vast enclosure was without protec-
tion, and the mob, pulling down the railings, rushed through
every breach, and took forcible possession of the park.
1 This right had been affirmed in 1S55 by an opinion of the Law Officers
of the Crown, Sir A. Cockbum and Sir £. Bethell, ^d of Mr. Willes.
EARL OF DERBY'S REFORM BILL. 087
Democracy had overcome the government; and the main-
tenance of order was afterwards due, as much to the exertions
of Mr. Beales and tlie Reform League, as to the police.
These events increased the public excitement, and encour-
aged the activity of the reformers. Several impulse given
important meetnigs and popular demonstrations 'o'**"'™-
were held, whicli stirred the public mind : while political
uneasiness and discontents were aggravated by commercial
distress and an indifferent harvest.
Public opinion iiad, at length, been aroused in favor of
reform : but the House of Commons had lately position of
shown its disinclination to deal with that ques- re^rd^"|^
tion ; and the party of whom the new ministry '°™''
was composed, aided by a strong body of ^Vhigs, had defeated
Earl Russell's moderate measure, as revolutionary. Would
ministers resist reform, and count upon the support of their
new allies : or venture upon another reform bill, and trust
for success to adroit management, and the divisions in the
Liberal party ?
These questions were set at rest, at the opening of the
session, by the announcement of a reform bill in
. Introdnction
the Queens speech, rxo position could be more of the question,
embarrassing for a government. In a minority
of seventy ic the House of Commons : representing a party
opposed tc tl.e principles of reform : brought into power by
resisting such a measure when offered by the late govern-
ment : confronted by a strong party in the House pledged to
reform, and by popular agitation : in what manner could
they venture to approach this perilous question ? At first
they invited the House no longer to treat reform as a party
question, but to concert a satisfactory measure in friendly
consultation ; and for this purpose they offered to submit
resolutions as the basis of a bill. Such a course Mr. Disraeli's
was naturally objected to, as being designed to '*^'"'^°°*-
evade ministerial responsibility ; and when the resolutions
588 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
appeared, they proved too vague and ambiguous for effec-
tive discussion. In explaining them, indeed, Mr. Disraeli
sketched the outline of the ministerial scheme : but they were
eventually withdrawn ; and ministers were forced to commit
themselves to more definite proposals. And here the diffi-
culties of their position were disclosed by the resignation of
three members of the Cabinet, — the Earl of Carnarvon,
Lord Cranborne, and General Peel. Their reluctance had
already induced the government to sketch out a less bold
scheme than their colleagues had been prepai-ed to propose ;
and their retirement, otherwise a source of weakness, now
enabled the Cabinc^t to agree upon a more extended measure.
At length, on the 18th March, the bill, which had caused
so much expectation, was introduced. Tiie fran-
Earl of Der- ' /
by 8 Reform chisc was granted in boroughs to every house-
holder paying rates, who had resided for two
years : in counties to every occupier rated at 15/. ; and there
were added various franchises, based upon education and
the payment of taxes. As a counterpoise to the extended
occupation suffrage, a scheme of dual voting was proposed
for voters of a higher qualification. There was to be a
redistribution of thirty seats.
The scheme was founded throughout upon the principle
of securities and compensations, the conception
and compenssu of which was duc to the pccuHar relations of the
tions.
Government to different parties. Household
suffrage in boroughs, the distinctive principle of Mr. Bright
and the radicals, had also found favor with Mr. Henley, Mr.
Walpole, Sir Roundel Palmer, and a certain section of the
Conservatives; and could not be opposed by the Whigs,
without an open breach with advanced reformers. On the
other hand, it was qualified by a two years' residence, by
the pereonal payment of rates, by voting papers, by edu-
cation and tax-paying franchises, and by dual voting.
These securities, as they were called, against a democratio
EARL OF DERBY'S REFORM BILL, 1867. 589
franchise, commended the measure to the Conservative
party ; but their futility had been apparent to the seceding
ministers, and was soon to be proved by their successive
rejection or abandonment. The measure embraced pro-
posals calculated to please all parties; and ministers were
prepared to assent to any amenthnents by which its ultimate
character should be determined by the majority. The re-
sults may be briefly told. Household suffrage in ng ultimate
boroughs was maintained, with one year's resi- ''°'^™"
dence instead of two ; the county franchise was reduced to
12/. ; a lodger franchise was added ; the higher class fran-
chises, the dual votes, and voting papers disappeared from
the bill ; and the disqualification of large numbfers of com-
pound householders was averted.
The scheme for the redistribution of seats was also
enlarged. Every provision which had reconciled Conser-
vatives to the measure was struck out : every amendment
urged by the liberal party was grafted upon the bill. And
thus the House of Commons found itself assenting, inch by
inch, to an extended scheme of reform, which neither Con-
servatives nor Whigs wholly approved. Parties had been
played off against one another, until a measure which grati-
fied none but advanced reformers, — probably not more
than a sixth of the House of Commons, — was accepted,
as a necessity, by all.
While the bill was under discussion in the House of
Commons, the public excitement gave an impulse
f . . - Meedngin
to the Liberal party, in passmg every amend- HyiJe Park,
ment favorable to extended franchises. And
one remarkable episode illustrated at once the strength of
popular sentiment, and the impotence of the executive Gov-
ernment to resist it. A great demonstration in favor of
reform was announced to take place on the 6th May, in
Hyde Park, when Mr. Walpole, the Home Secretary, not
profiting by his sore experience of the previous year, issued
590 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
a proclamation, stating that the use of the park for the hold
ing of such meeting was not permitted, and warning and
admonishing all persons to refrain from attending it. But,
in spite of this proclamation, the meeting was held, and
large assemblages of people occupied the park, without
disorder or disturbance.
The right of the Government to prohibit the meeting
was contested not only by Mr. Beales and the Reform
League, but by Mr. Bright and many other members of
the Liberal party. On the other hand, the conduct of the
Government in first prohibiting the meeting, and then al-
lowing it to take place, in defiance of their authority, was
censured as bringing the executive into contempt. In defer-
ence to the strong opinions expressed upon this subject,
Mr. Walpole resigned the seals of the Home Department,
but retained his seat in the Cabinet.
Meanwhile, the state of the law in reference to the use
of the parks for public meetings was so uusatis-
Unsatisfsctory r r o
state of the factory, that the Government had brought in a
bill to prohibit, under the penalties of a misde-
meanor, the holding of any meeting in the royal parks,
without the consent of the crown. This bill being violently
opposed, was overtaken by the close of the session, and
abandoned; and the law has still been left uncertain, and
incapable of enforcement. It cannot be questioned that the
meetings of 1866, and 1867, should either have been allowed,
or effectually prevented. The latter course could only be
taken at the risk of bloody collisions with the people ; and
accordingly such meetings have since been permitted, and
have signally failed as popular demonstrations.^
In the House of Lords, several amendments were made
Proceedings to the RefQrm Bill ; but the only one of impor-
uUn*ti^'^'^ tance agreed to by the Commons was a clause
K«fomi Bill. q£ Lord Cairns, providing, with a view to the
1 Such meetings were regulated by Act in 1872.
REFORM ACTS, 1867-1868. 691
representation of minorities, that in places returning three
members, no elector should vote for more than two candidates.
The scheme of enfranchisement, however, was not yet
complete. The settlement of the boundaries
' , Boundaries of
of boroughs and the divisions of counties was boroughs and
, , . . , , . , . counties.
referred to a commission, and the consideration
of the reform bills for Scotland and Ireland was postponed
until the next session.
Before these measures were introduced, in 1868, the
Earl of Deiby was obliged by ill-health to re- ReMgnation
tire, and was succeeded as Premier by Mr. Derby.
Disraeli, to whose extraordinary tact, judgment, ^j^ DisraeU
and address the passing of the English Reform Premier.
Act was acknowledged to be due. Many difficult questions
remained to be settled, which needed the exercise
The Scotch
of all his abilities. The Scotch Reform Bill, Reform Act,
1868.
founded generally upon the same principles as
the English bill, proposed an increase of seven members to
represent Scotland. This provision contemplated an addi-
tion to the number of the House of Commons, which was
resisted; and justice to the claims of Scotland was event-
ually met by the disfranchisement of seven English bor-
oughs having less than 5,000 inhabitants ; and in this form
the bill for the representation of Scotland was passed.
The Reform Bill for Ireland left the county franchise
unaltered, reduced the boroush franchise, and
. ... . The Irish
proposed a partial redistribution of seats, which Reform Act,
was shortly abandoned. The measure, avowedly
incomplete, and unequal to the English and Scotch schemes,
was nevertheless assented to, as at least a present settle-
ment of a question beset with exceptional difficulties.
The boundaries of the English boroughs and the new
divisions of counties were still to be settled ; and,
Boundaries of
after an inquiry by a select committee, the bound- boroughs and
J ™ , , , . . counties.
aries, as denned by the commissioners, were,
with several modifications, agreed to.
592 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
The series of measures affecting the electoral system was
BiecHon Peti- DOt even yet concluded. A measure was, after
roptPmcti^ 'o"S discussions, agreed to, for transferring the
Act, ii;68. cherished jurisdiction of the Commons, in mat-
ters of election, to judges of the superior courts, and for
amending the laws in restraint of corrupt practices. And,
lastly, a bill was passed to facilitate the registration of the
year, so as to insure the election of a Parliament during
the autumn, by the new electors.
These measures for extending the representation of the
people were little less important than the great
Constitutional . , .
importance of Reform Acts of 1832. The new franchises
these measures. ,
embraced large numbers of the working classes,
and greatly enlarged the basis of electoral power. At the
same time, a certain counterpoise to household suffrage was
found in the addition of twenty-five members to the English
counties, which their population fully justified, and the with-
drawal of thirty-three members from English boroughs.
Considering how this great constitutional change had been
accomplished, — not by the deliberate judgment of statesmen,
but by the force of circumstances, — its results were, not
unnaturally, viewed with grave misgivings. The Earl of
Derby himself had said, " No doubt we are making a great
experiment, and taking a leap in the dark;"^ and many
thoughtful men believed the state to be approaching the very
verge of democracy. Nor can there be any reasonable doubt
that the popular element of the constitution acquired a de-
cided preponderance. Even with a limited franchise, popular
influences had prevailed ; and an extended representation
necessarily invested them with greater force, and clothed
them with more authority. Yet the sound principles of
these measures have since been generally acknowledged.
If the settlement of 1832 was to be disturbed, — and no
one contended for its perpetuity, — household suffrage was
1 August Cth, 1867; upon the question "that this bill do pass."
IRISH CHURCH QUESTION, 1868. 593
an ancient franchise known to the constitution : it had been
advocated in 1797 by Mr. Fox and Mr. Grey: it found
favor with men of widely different political sentiments ; and
its basis was broad and rational. The redistribution of seats
was unquestionably judicious and moderate.
It may be too soon yet to estimate the results of the new
constitution. Rank, property, and employment of labor,
and other social influences, have apparently retained their
ascendency ; but however the popular will may be pro-
noanced, no constitutional means are left for resisting it.
At once to lead, to satisfy, and to control this vast power,
and to hold it in harmony with other authorities, will de-
mand the highest statesmanship. A Government resting
upon the confidence of an enfranchised people will indeed
be strong : but its policy must be that of the community,
which is the source of power.
Whatever may be our institutions, public opinion has
become the ultimate ruler of our political destinies. How-
ever formed, — whether by statesmen or demagogues, —
whether by society at large or by the press, — or by all of
them combined, — it dominates over ministers and parlia-
ments. Under a more restricted representation, it dictated
the policy of the state ; and under our present constitution,
it will exercise its influence more promptly and decisively.
In public opinion, therefore, rests at once our safety and our
danger. If rational and well ordered, like the society of
this great country, whose judgment it should express, we
may rely upor. it with confidence. If it should become
perverted and degenerate, who shall save us from our-
selves ?
While the discussions upon the later measures of Parlia-
mentary reform were still proceeding, the condi- wgh church
tion of Ireland, its discontents, and disaffection, Q"**"""' i^ea.
the outrages of the Fenians, and the continued suspension
of the Habeas Corpus Act, demanded the attention of Par-
voL. n. 38
594 POLITICAL TROGRESS SINCE 18C0.
liameut ; and the policy of the Government in relation to
16th March, that Country was explained. Ministers prom-
ised an inquiry into the relations of landlord
and tenant, proposed to create a new Catholic university
by royal charter, and intimated that when the Commission
already inquiring inio the condition of the Irish Church
should report, they might review that establishment. Hints
were also given of promoting religious equality, by an in-
crease of the regium domim, and by the endowment of the
Catholic clergy, — a policy, as it was described by Lord
Mayo, of levelling upwards, and not downwards. On the
other side, Mr. Gladstone declared the policy by which he
was prepared to redress the grievances of Ireland, and to
bring peace and contentment to that country.
In 1865, and again in 1867,* Mr. Gladstone had disclosed
Irish Church, a growing conviction that a review of the church
establishment in Ireland would soon be necessary ; and he
now announced that, in his opinion, the time had conie when
the Protestant Church, "as a state church, must cease to
exist." It was in this form that he would secure religious
equality in Ireland. He also urged the necessity of an early
settlement of the land question.
The disestablishment of the Irish Church henceforth be-
Mr. Gladstone's came the primary question of the time, and
resolutions, ^^^^ accepted by the entire Liberal party, as its
watchword. Parliamentary reform was being settled by the
united action of all parties : but this was a question by
which Conservatives and Liberals were again divided into
hostile ranks. Mr. Gladstone soon carried resolutions, in
opposition to the Government, by which it was sought to
prevent the creation of uew public interests in the church,
until Parliament had settled the future position of that
establishment. Ministers, defeated upon so momentous a
policy, tendered their resignation, but obtained from the
1 March 28th, 1865 ; May 7th, 1867.
THE DISSOLUTION OF 1868. 595
Queen a power of. dissolving Parliamfent, whenever the state
of public business would permit it. A dissolution at that
time would have involved an appeal to the Mar, 1868.
old constituencies, instead of to the new electoral bodies,
which were to be called into being by the measures still
pending in Parliament ; and eventually ministers His suspensory
allowed the Suspensory Bill, founded upon Mr.
Gladstone's resolutions, to be passed through the House ol
Commons, while the reform bills were being completed in
view of a dissolution in the autumn. The exceptional po-
sition of ministers during this interval could not fail to
elicit criticism. They had suffered a grave defeat upon a
vital question of state policy: a measure whicii they de-
nounced was being carried through the House of Commons,
in defiance of them : they had advised Her Majesty not to
withhold her consent fi"om the Suspensory Bill, which other-
wise could not have been passed by the Commons : they had
received authority to appeal from the Commons to the
country, and yet deferred the exercise of that authority,
and continued to hold office, and to pass important measures,
in presence of a hostile majority. Yet it cannot be denied
that the peculiar circumstances of the occasion naturally
led to such a position, on the part of ministers. They could
not be expected to resign without an appeal to the people ;
and a sudden dissolution, while the great measures of en-
franchisement were still incomplete, would have been an
idle and mischievous disturbance of the country, involving
a second dissolution a few months later. The Irish Church
question had come athwart Parliamentary reform, and was
left to await its further progress. The Suspensory Bill was
rejected by the House of Lords : the supplementary meas-
ures of reform were completed ; and at length The dissolution
an appeal was made to the people. The main *'^^^^-
issue was the policy of disestablishing the Irish Church ; the
second was the confidence to be reposed, by the majority of
596 POUTICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
the electors, in one or other of the great political parties,
whose policy, character, and conduct had recently been dis-
played in the contentions of the three hist eventful years.
The result of the elections was decisive of these issues.
Its decisive -^Jl the conditions of success were on the side
"*""*• of the Liberal party. The policy of disestab-
lishing the Irish Church united English Dissenters, Scottish
Presbyterians, and Irish Roman Catholics with Liberal
politicians of every shade, who had long regarded that in-
stitution as theoretically indefensible. The wide extension
of the suffrage had also increased their power. Many Con-
servatives had persuaded themselves that the lower class of
electors would be on their side ; but generally it was found
that the sympathies of the new constituencies were with the
Liberal party.^ There were, indeed, some remarkable ex-
ceptions. Mr. Gladstone himself was defeated in South-
West Lancashire, — a new division of that county which
came within the Conservative influence of Liverpool. Other
parts of that great manufacturing county, and its boroughs,
also showed a strong preference for Conservative candidates.
On the whole, however, the Liberal party, throughout the
country, sent to Parliament a majority of about 120, pledged
to support Mr. Gladstone, and to vote for the disestablish-
ment of the Irish Church. So decided and incontestable
Resignation of ^as the national verdict, that Mr. Disraeli, with-
D^!!'i^!^ out waiting for the meeting of Parliament,
Mr Gladstone P^^ce^ i" Her Majesty's hands the resignation
Premier. ^f ministers ; and Mr. Gladstone (who had been
returned for Greenwich) was at once charged with the for-
mation of a new administration. It united Peelites, Whigs,
and advanced Liberals : it embraced Mr. Bright and Mr.
Lowe.
1 In the United Kingdom 1,408,239 electors voted for Liberal candidates,
and 883,530 for Conservative candidates, thus showing a majority of 524,709
in favor of the former.
IRISH CHURCH ACT, 1869. 597
And now was witnessed the extraordinary power of a
Government representinjj the popular will, under
-, -, n , ' aT The Irish
an extended franchise. Mr. Gladstone had com- church BUi,
1869
mitted himself to the boldest measure of modern
times. Thirty years before, the House of Lords and the
Conservative party had successfully resisted the theoretical
assertion of the right of the state to appropriate the surplus
revenues of the Irish Church ; and now it was proposed to
disestablish and disendow that church, and, after the satisfac-
tion of existing interests, to apply the bulk of its revenues
to secular purposes. Founded upon the principle of religious
equality, it was a masterly measure, — thorough in its appli-
cation of that principle, — and complete in all its details.
Given the principle, — which public opinion had now fully
accepted, — its legislative workmanship was consummate.
The church was severed from the state, and its bishops
deprived of their seats in Parliament. At the same time,
the annual grants to Presbyterian ministers, in the form of
regium donum, and to the Roman Catholic college of May-
nooth, were commuted.
This great ecclesiastical measure — by far the greatest
since the Reformation — was supported by arguments of rare
ability, and by overwhelming majorities. The Lords secured
somewhat better terms for the church, but all their amend-
ments which otherwise affected the principle, or main con-
ditions of the bill were disagreed to ; and the bill, unchanged
in every essential point, was passed in a single session.
When the disestablishment of the Church in Ireland had
been accomplished, Mr. Gladstone immediately irUhLand
undertook to redress another Irish grievance. For *''^ '
nearly forty years the relations between landlords and ten-
ants in Ireland had been discussed in Parliament, and espe-
cially the system of evictions, and the rights of tenants to
compensation for unexhausted improvements. This difficult
question, so nearly affecting the rights of property, was grap-
598 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
pled with by Mr. Gladstone in 1870, and carried to a success-
ful conclusion, like the Irish Church bill, in the same session.
This period also witnessed the settlement of another ira-
Churoh rates portaiit question affecting the Churcli, which had
i86e-68. \)een under the consideration of Parliament for
thirty-five years. In 1866, a compromise in regard to church
rates, first suggested by Mr. Waldegrave- Leslie, had been
viewed favorably by Mr. Gladstone. It was to abolish com-
pulsory church rates, and to facilitate the raising of voluntary
church rates. In 1867, Mi\ Hardcastle succeeded in passing
a bill through the Commons to give effect to this arrange-
ment : but it was rejected by the Lords, upon the second
reading.
And, at length, in 1868, Mr. Gladstone introduced a bill
founded upon the same principle. It commended itself to
dissenters as giving up the principle of compulsion ; and to
churchmen as affording a legal recognition of voluntary
Church rates church rates, and providing machinery for their
^^^' assessment and collection. The church had
already been practically reduced to a voluntary system of
church rates ; and this bill, if it surrendered her theoretical
claims, at least saved her from further litigation and obloquy.
It was approved by the Commons, and was even accepted
by the Lords, after consideration by a select committee, and
the addition of several amendments. And thus, at length,
this long-standing controversy between churchmen and dis-
senters was brought to a close. If the church failed in se-
curing all her legal rights, the present settlement was founded
upon the practical result of a long contention in the courts
and in Parliament, and was a compromise which all parties
were contented to accept.
Other questions affecting the interests of churchmen, dis-
University sentcrs, and Roman Catholics were also pressing
Tesu. £>^j. ^ settlement, at this time. Foremost of
these was that of religious testa at the universities, by which
UNIVERSITY TESTS. 599
dissenters were denied their share in the privileges and
endowments of those national seats of learning, for which
churchmen alone were qualified.
The injustice of this exclusion had been repeatedly dis-
cussed : but it was not until 1866 that the entire Liberal
party were determined to redress it. In that year a bill,
introduced by Mr. Coleridge, was passed by the Commons,
and rejected by the Lords. Again, in 1868. the second
reading of a bill with the same objects, introduced by Mr.
Coleridge, was agreed to after full discussion, and by a large
majority : ^ but was prevented, by the pressure of other
measures, from being further proceeded with in that session.
In 1869, a similar bill was passed by the Commons and
again rejected by the Lords. Again, in 1870, p^j^gj^jt
the University Tests Bill was passed by the Tests Bin, 1869.
Commons ; and referred by the Lords to a uniyersity
select committee, whose deliberations deferred ^e*** ^"1. 1870.
the bill to another session. But, at length, in Uniyersity
io-r, 1 1 -1, 1 • -1 Tests Act, 1871.
1871, the same bill, having again been sent up
to the Lords, was ultimately agreed to.
This Act, stating that the benefits of these universities
" shall be freely accessible to the nation," enacted that per-
sons taking lay academical degrees, or holding lay academical
or collegiate offices in the universities of Oxford, Cambrido-e,
or Durham, shall not be required to subscribe any religious
test or formulary. But as it did not open to dissenters the
headships of colleges, or professorships of divinity, or offices
required to be held by persons in holy orders or by church-
men, some dissatisfaction was still expressed at this settlement.
Otherwise another controversy was, at length, closed; and
one of the last grievances of dissenters redressed.
Another religious controversy was also settled by Par-
liament. The celebrated Ecclesiastical Titles Ecclesiastical
Act was an offence to Roman Catholics, while it Titles Act, 1871,
1 By 198 against 140.
600 POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860
was wholly inoperative as a protectiou against the Church
of Rome. After an inquiry into its operation by a com-
mittee of the House of Lords, in 1868, and discussions in
both Houses concerning the form in which the law should
be expressed, rather than its policy, the Act was eventually
repealed in 1871, with the general acquiescence of all par-
ties. The law and the Queen's prerogative in regard to
ecclesiastical titles and jurisdiction were again asserted by
Parliament, but the original Act with its penalties, which
had never been enforced, was removed from the statute
book.
Of all social questions none can be compared in impor-
Education. tance with that of the education of the people.
Not only is it essential to their moral, intellectual, and ma-
terial welfare, but at a time when large masses of the com-
munity had recently been invested with political power, it
was obviously the duty of the state to apply itself earnestly
to the task of popular enlightenment ; and this task was
undertaken immediately after the new scheme of represen-
tation had been completed.
In 1869, an important measure was passed in the interests
of education, for the reform and regulation of endowed
schools.
In the same year a comprehensive scheme for the im-
provement of education in Scotland was passed by the
Lords ; but was unfortunately lost, partly by reason of amend-
ments made to the bill by the Commons, and partly in con-
sequence of the late period at which these amendments were
communicated to the Lords.
In England great advances had been made, since 1834, in
popular education, aided by the state. But as
Elementary .
Educadon Act, the systcm was entirely founded upon local and
voluntary efforts, it too often happened that the
places which most needed the civilizing agency of the school-
master were left destitute. All parties admitted the neces-
ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ACT, 1870. 601
sity of providing more effectual means for the general
education of the people ; but the old " religious difficulty "
caused the widest divergence of opinions concerning the prin-
ciples upon which education should be conducted. Tlie
church party naturally desired to retain the teaching of the
church catechism, with a liberal conscience clause for the
satisfaction of dissenters. Another party, known as Secu-
larists, advocated secular education only in the schools, leav-
ing religious instruction to be sought elsewhere. Another
party, again, insisted upon religious instruction in the schools,
while they objected to the church catechism and formularies.
In 1870, Mr. Gladstone's government were prepared with
a scheme for the settlement of this great social question.
The country was divided into school districts under the gov-
ernment of elected school boards, and provision was made
for the support of schools out of local rates. The voluntary
system, which had already accomplished so much good, was
retained : but a more complete organization and extended
means were provided. This wise and statesmanlike measure
— which was carried through the House of Commons, with
great ability, by Mr. Forster — was nearly lost by the in-
tractable differences of the several parties, upon the religious
question. It was at length settled, however, upon the prin-
ciple of a conscience clause exempting every child from
any religious instruction or observance to which his parents
should object, and of excluding from schools, provided by a
school-board, every denominational catechism or formulary.
' No measure in which religious jealousies are concerned,
can be settled to the satisfaction of all parties ; and this
scheme, accepted by the church and by a very large propor-
tion of nonconformists, was naturally obnoxious to the sec-
ular party. But already its general acceptance by all religious
denominations in the country, and the earnest spirit in which
it is being carried into effect, promise well for its practical
Buccess.
602 ' POLITICAL PROGRESS SINCE 1860.
The last question of constitutional policy which need be
The Ballot. referred to, is that of the ballot. This question
had long divided the Liberal party. It had been the
distinctive principle of advanced Liberals : but had been
opposed by Lord Palmerstou, and by most of his Whig fol-
lowers. In 1869, however, the recent extension of the rep-
resentative system, disclosures at the late general election,
and the altered relations of the leaders of the Liberal party
to that section of their followers who favored secret voting,
brought about a change of policy in regard to that question.
Ministers accordingly proposed an inquiry into the mode of
conducting Parliamentary and municipal elections, with a
view to limit expense, and to restrain bribery and intimida-
tion ; and it was generally understood that this inquiry was
designed to prepare the way for the general adhesion of
ministers and the Liberal party to the principle of secret
voting. '
This committee continued its investigations throughout
the session ; and being reappointed, in 1870, presented a
report, recommending several changes in the mode of con-
Baiiot Biu ducting elections, and the adoption of secret vot-
^^'^' ing. The government introduced a bill founded
upon this report : but the education bill and" other important
measures interfered with its further progress. Ministers,
however, and the Liberal party now stood committed to
the principle of the ballot; and this most important con-
stitutional question, which for nearly forty years had been
discussed rather as a political theory than as a practical
measure, was accepted by a powerful Government, and a
large majority of the House of Commons, as the policy of
the state.
In 1871, another bill was brought in and passed, after
Ballot Bill, protracted discussions, by the Commons : but it
1871. ^gg received by the Lords at so late a period of
the session that they declined to consider it ; and this com-
CONCLUSION. 603
pliment to an extended franchise still awaits the final judg-
ment of Parliament.^
Such have been the constitutional measures of the last ten
years. In all, we recognize the development of Conclusion.
those liberal principles which had characterized the policy
of a previous generation. In politics, more power has
been given to the people: in religion, more freedom and
equality.
1 The ballot was, at len/^h, adopted in 1872.
INDEX.
INDEX TO VOL. H.
Abbot, Mr. Speaker, opposes Catholic
relief, 354, 355; his speech at the
Bar of the Lord", 355, «.
Jlbercromby, Sir R , his opinion of the
Irish soldiery, 500; retires from
command, 501.
Aberdeen, Earl of, his ministry, 86;
its fall, 87; his efforts to reconcile
differences in the Chiu'ch of Scot-
land, 436, 443.
Addingtou, Jlr. See Sidmouth, Vis-
count.
Additional Curates Society, sums ex-
pended by, 415, n.
Advertisement duty, first imposed,
108 ; increased, 172 ; abolished, 214.
Affirniiitiims. See Quakers.
Agitation, political. See Opinion,
Liberty of; Political Associations;
Public Meetings.
Aliens, protection of, 283-283 ; Alien
Acts, -284, 285; Traitorous Corre-
spondence Act, 285; Napoleon's de-
mands retused, 286; the Conspi-
racy to Murder Bill, 289; Extradi-
tion Treaties, 290.
Almoii, bookseller, proceeded against,
113.
Althorp, I^ord, brings forward cases
of imprisonment for debt, 266; his
Church rates measure, 1834, 404;
plans tor tithe commutation, 416;
commenced the modern tinanciai
policy, 574.
American colonies, the war with, a
test of party principles, 29, 32; first
proposals to tax them, 515; Mr.
Greiivillc's Stamp Act. 517; repeal-
ed, 518; Mr. Townshend's schemes,
619; repealed, except the tea duties,
520 ; attack on the tea-ships, 521 ; the
port of Boston closed, 522 ; the con-
stitution of Massachusetts snpei-
seded, id. ; attempts at conciliation,
523; the tea duty repealed, 524;
independence of colonies recog-
nized, ib. ; its effects on Ireland, 487.
Anne, Queen, the press in the reign
of, 106 : her bountv to poor clergy,
414.
Anti-Corn Law League, the, 239-242.
Anti-Slavery Association, the, 133,
232.
Appropriation question, the, of Irish
Church revenue, 448-454, 475.
Army, the interference of military
in absence of a magistrate, 132;
Orange lodges m, 230; impress-
ment for, 260; freedom of worship
in 344, 349 ; the defence of colonies,
539 ; flogging in, abated, 563.
Army and Navy Service Bill, the, 342.
Arrest, on mesne process, 267 ; abol-
ished, 268.
Articles, the Thirty-nine, subscription
to, by clergv. and on admission to
the universities, 305, 316, 400; by
dissenting schoolmasters abolished,
317, 318."
Associations. See Political Associa-
tions.
Auchierarder Cases, the, 434, 436.
Australian colonies, the settlement and
constitutions of, 526, 535.
Ballot, vote by, one of the points of
the Charter, 235; in the Colonies,
536.
Baptists, the number and places of
worship of, 419, 420, n.
Beaufoy, Mr., his efforts for the relief
of dissenters, 322-324.
Bedford, Duke of, attack by the sitt-
weavers, 125.
608
INDEX TO VOL. H.
Birminghain, public meetings at, 191,
218 ; election of a legislatorial attor-
ney, 1U2; political uuiuu of, 216,
218.
Births, bills for registration of, 3G2,
395.
Boards. See Local Goverament.
Bobton, Lord, assaulted, 130.
Boston, the p^irt of, closed by Act, 522.
Bourne, Mr. S., his Vestry Act, itjl.
Braiiitree Ca.<es, the, -105.
Brandreth, execution of, 186.
Briellat, i., tried lor sedition, 142.
Bristol, refonn riots at, 219.
Brougham, Lord, defends Leigh Hunt,
179; describes the license of the
press, 180, n ; promotes popular ed-
ucation, 211, 612 ; bis law reforms,
550.
Brownists, the, 297.
Bunbury, Sir C, attempts amendment
of the criminal code, 555.
Burdett, Sir F., his Catholic Relief
Bills, 305, 370.
Burghs (Scotland), reformed, 470.
Burial, the, of dissenters with Church
of England rites, 392, 395; bills to
enable dissenters to bury in church-
yards, 396; permitted iu Ireland,
397.
Burke, Mr., separates from the Whigs,
42; his alarm ac the French Revo-
lution, ib., 140; among the first to
advocate Catholic relief, 318; his
opposition to relief of dissenters, 326,
329.
Bute, Earl of, driven from office, 110,
125.
Ca.m BRIDGE University, admission of
dissenters to degrees at, 316, 400;
the petition for admission of dis-
senters, 1834, 398; state of feeling
at, on Catholic relief, in 1812, 351.
Cauiden, Lord, supports the right of
juries in libel ca-ses, 117, 121, 122;
his decisions condemning the pnic-
tice of general warrants, 246, 250;
protects a Catholic lady by a pri-
vate Act of Parliament, 319; op-
poses taxation of the American
colonies, 519, 520; a friend to lib-
erty, 552.
Campbell, Lord, his Act to protect
publishers in libel cases, 114.
Canada, a crown colony, 525; free
constitution granted, ib.; the insur-
rection, and reunion of the prov-
inces, 531 ; responsible government
in, 632; establishes a protective ta-
riti", 535; popular franchise in, ib.
Canning, Mr., his influence on parties,
52 ; in otKce, 63 ; secession ol Tories
from, ib.; supported by the Whigs,
64; advocates Catholic relief, 63,
834, 351, 353, 358; brought in the
Catholic Peers' Bill, 359; his death,
65, 360.
Capital punishmeiits, multiplication
of, since the Revolution, 553; since
restricted to murder and treason,
558.
Caricatures, influence of, 123.
Caroline, Queen, efl'ect of proceedings
against, upon pirties, 61.
Catholic Association, the, proceedings
of, 204-209, 372, 374.
Catholic Emancipation. See Roman
Catholics.
Castle, the government spy, 276.
Cato Street Conspiracy, the, 200; dis-
covered by spies, 278.
Censorship of the press, 103, 106.
Chalmers, Dr., heads the Free Kirk
movement, 433; moved deposition
of the Strathbogie presbytery, 4-38.
Chancery, Court of, reformed, 549.
551.
Charlemont, Earl of, heads Irish vol-
unteers, 491 ; opposes claims of Cath-
olics to the franchise, 495.
Chartists, the torch-light meetings,
234; the national petition, i6.; meet-
ings and riots, 235; proposed elec-
tion of popular representatives by,
236; the meeting and petition of
1848, 237-239.
Chatham, Earl of, effect of his leav-
ing office on parties, 26; his protest
against colonial ta.xation, 518; that
measure adopted by his ministry
during his illness, 519; his concil-
iatory propositions, 523; proposed
to claim India for the Crown, 541.
Church of England, the, relations of
the Church to political history, 2Jl;
the Church before the refonnaiion,
ib.; the Refonnation, 292; under
Queen Elizabeth, 293; relations of
the Reformed Church with the State,
297 ; Church policy from James I.
to Charles 11., 300, 302; attempts
at comprehension, 304, 306; the
Church at the Revolution, 305; un-
der William III., 306; state of, at
accession of George III., 308; Wes-
INDEX TO VOL. U.
609
ley and Whitefield, 310; motion for
relief from subscription to the Arti-
cles, 316; surrender by the Church
of" the lees ou dissenters' marriages,
&c..3i^5; the Church-rate question,
402; state of Church to end of last
century, 409; hold of the Church
over society, 410; church building
and extension. 413: Queen Anne's
bounty, 414; ecclesiastical revenues,
ib.; sums expended by charitable
societies. 415, n. ; tithe commuta-
tion, 416; activity of the clergy,
417; Church statistics, 420; rela-
tions of the Church to dissent, ib. ;
to Failiament, 421.
Church in Ireland, the establishment
of, 299, 300; state of, at accession
of Geo. III., 312; at the Union,
44-]; the tithes question, 445,455;
advances to the clergy, 446 ; Church
refjnn, 447 ; The Temporalities Act,
443; the appropriation question, ib.;
the Irish Church commission, 450;
the report, 454 ; power monopolized
by churchmen, 482.
Church of Scotland, the presbyterian
form of, 298; legislative origin of,
ib.; Church policy from James I.
to George HI., 302, 305, 307, 312;
motion tor relief from the Test Act,
328; the patronage question, 430-
438; earlier schisms, 432; the Free
Kirk secession, 441.
Church rates, the law of, 402; the
question tirst raised, 403; the Brain-
tree cases, 405; number of parishes
refusing the rate, 407 ; bills for ab-
olition of, ib.
Civil Disabilities. See Dissenters;
Jews; Quakers; Roman Catholics.
Coalitiun ministries, favored bv Geo.
III., 26, 37, 38; the Coalition, 1783,
34-36 ; attempted coalitions between
Pitt and Fox, 44, 54; coalition of
the Whigs and Lord Sidmouth's
party, 54; Lord Aberdeen's minis-
try, 86.
Cobbett, \V., trials of, for libel, 178;
withdraws from Kugland, 189; pro-
secuted by Whig government, 212.
Colliers and salters, in Scotland, sla-
very of, 274; emancipated, 275.
Colonies, British, colonists retain the
freedom of British subjects, 510;
colonial constitutions, 511, 525, 527,
532; democratic form of, 535, 636;
the sovereignty of England, 512;
VOL- II. 39
colonial expenditure, 512, 531;
and commercial policy, 513, 530,
534; taxes common to de|}enden-
cies, 514; arguments touching im-
perial taxation, ib. ; taxation of
American colonies, 517-523; the
crown colonies, 524; colonial ad-
ministration, 527; first appointment
of Secretary of State for, ib. ; pat-
ronage surrendered to the colonies,
529; responsible government, 532;
conflictiug interests of England and
colonies, 534; dependencies unfit-
ted for self-government, 540 ; India,
ib.
Commerce, restrictions on Irish, 484;
removed, 488, 490, 506 ; Pitt's prop-
ositions, 496 ; restrictions on colo-
nial commerce, 513; the protective
system abandoned, 530, 571; the
Canadian tariA', 535.
Common Law, Courts of, reformed,
551.
Commons, House of, England, oath of
supremacy imposed on the Com-
mons, 293; O'Connell refiised his
seat for Clare, 380; number of Ca-
tholic members in, 381; Quakers
and others admitted on afBrraation,
382; a resolution of the House not
in force after a prorogation, 390, n;
refusal to receive the petitions of
the American colonists, 518. See
also Parliament.
Commons, House of, Ireland, the com-
position of, 480; conflicts with the
executive, 485; claim to originate
monev bills, ib.; bought over by
the government, 491, 493, 504.
Conservative Party, the. See Parties..
Constitutional Information Society,
137 ; Pitt and other leading states-
men, members of, ib. ; reported on
by secret committee, 152; trial of
members of, for high treason, 156.
Constitutional Association, the, 203.
Contempt of court, imprisonment for
265.
Conventicle Act, the, 303.
Convention, National, of France, cor
respondence with, of English socio
ties, 137, 173.
Conventions. See Delegates, Politi
cal Associations.
Copenhagen House, meetings at, 163
170.
Corn Bill (1815), the, 183, 572.
Corn laws, repeal of. SI, 239, 573.
610
INDEX TO VOL. U.
Corawallis, Marquess, his policy as
Lord-Lieutenant ot Ireland regard-
ing Catholic relief, 335, 501; con-
certs the Union, 5U2.
Corporations, the passing of the Cor-
poration and Test Acts, 303, 304;
extortion practised on dissenters
under the Corpuration Act, 315;
motions tor repeal of Corporation
and Test Acts, 3-22-326, 328; their
repeal, 66, 367 ; the consent of the
bishops, 368; the bill amended in
the Lords, 370; admission of Catho-
lics to, 376, 482, 497 ; and Jews, 3b6.
(England), the ancient system
of Corporations, 462; loss of popu-
lar rights, 463; corporations from
the Revolution to George IIL, 464;
corporate abuses, ib. ; monopoly of
electoral rights, 403, 466 ; corporate
reform, 466; the bill amended by
the Lords, 467; self-government
restored, 468; the corporation of
London excepted from the bill, ib.
(Ireland), apparent recognition
of popular rights in, 318; exclu-
sion of Catholics, 472, 473; the
first municipal Reform Bill, 474;
opposition of the Lords, 475; the
municipal reform Act, ib, (Scot-
land), close system in, 470; munici-
pal abuses, H>. ; reform, 471.
Corresponding societies, proceedings
of, 127, 137, 144, 173; trials of mem-
bers of, 145, 156; bill to repress,
173.
Courier, newspaper, trial of, for libel,
175.
Criminal Code, improvement of, 553,
656; counsel allowed in cases ot
felony, 558; summary jurisdiction
of magistrates, 562; the transpor-
tation Question, 559.
Grown colonies, the. See Colonies.
Crown debtors, position of, 264.
Cumberland, Duke of, grand master
of the Orange Society, 229; dis-
solves it, 231.
Daviot Case, the, 436.
Deaths, Act for registration of, 395.
Debt, imprisonment for, 268; debtors'
prisons, 269; exertions of the
Thatched House Society, 270; in-
solvent debtors, 271; later measures
of relief, ib.
Delegates of political associations, the
practice of, adopted, 127, 173, 219,
229, 235 ; assembled at Edinborgh,
144; law against, 185; in Ireland,
205.
Democracy to promote associations in
1792, 134, 136; alarm excited by,
138; proclamation against, 141; in
Scotland, 144; in the colonies, 635;
discouraged by good government,
576. (See also Party.
Derby, Earl of, his ministries, 85, 89,
95 ; persuades the Lords to agree to
Jewish relief, 390.
Derbyshire insurrection, the, 186.
Diplomatic relations with the Papa]
Court Bill, 425, n.
Dissenters, origin of dissent, 295-297;
the penal code of Elizabeth, 293,
295; dissent from James I. to Chas.
II., 300-304; attempts at compre-
hension, 304, 306 ; Corporation and
Test Acts, 303, 304; conduct of
dissenters at the Revolution, 305;
the Toleration Act, ib.; di.ssenters
in reigns of Anne and Geo. 1. and
II., 307 ; the Occasional Conformity
Act, 308; annual Acts of Indem-
nity, ib., n. ; their numbers at acces-
sion of Geo. III., 309, n. ; impulse
given by Wesley and Whitetield,
310 ; relaxation of penal code com-
menced, 313; general character of
the penal code, 314 ; extortion prac-
tised on dissenters by the City of
London under the Corporation Act,
315; debate on subscription to the
Articles by dissenters, 316; and ad-
mission to universities, ib., 400;
subscription by dissenting school-
masters abolished, 317; offices in
Ireland thrown open, 318; first mo-
tions for repeal of the Corporation
and Test Acts, 322-326; motions
for relief of Unitarians, 329 ; and of
Quakers, 331 ; Lord Sidmouth's
Dissenting Ministers' Bill, 349 ; re-
lief from requirements of the Tole-
ration Act, 350; the army thrown
open, 356; bills for relief of dis-
senters in respect of births, mar-
riages, and burials, 362, 363, 392-
396; repeal of the Corporation and
Test Acts, 66, 867; dissenters ad-
mitted to the Commons on making
an affirmation, 382 ; admitted to
universities and endowed school.>t,
397-401; the London University,
400; the Dissenters' Chapels Bill,
»6.; final repeal of penal cod<*, 402;
INDEX TO VOL. n.
611
tiie church-rate question, tS.; prog-
ress of dissent, 41 1, 418 ; numbers
of different sects, &c ,419; in Scot-
land, 444, n. ; in Ireland, 454; rela-
tions of the Church and dissent,
420 ; Hud of dissent to political
liberty, 422.
Donoughmore, Lord, his motions for
Catholic relief, 346, 350, 352.
Douglas, Neil, trial of, for sedition,
191.
Downie, D., trial of, for high treason,
154.
Drakard, J., trial of, for libel, 179.
Dundas, Mr. leader of the Tories in
Scotland, 50.
Dundas, Mr. K., hjs influence in Scot-
land, 56.
Dun^annon, conventioii of volunteers
at, 491.
Dver, cudgelled by Lord Mohan, for
a libel, 107.
Earl Marshal's Office Act, the, 364.
East India, the Company, allowed a
drawback on tea shipped to Amer-
ica, 521 ; first parliamentary recog-
nition and regulation of, 541; Mr.
Fox's India Bill, 542; Mr. Pitt's,
544; the Bill of 1853, 545; India
transferred to the crovm, ib. ; subse-
quent administration, ib.
Eaton, D. I., trial of, for sedition, 151.
Ek:clesiastical Commission, the, 414.
Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, the, 426.
Edinburgh Review, the influence of, 57.
Education, proposals for a national
system in England, 568; in Ireland,
455, 569 ; address of the House of
Lords on the subject, 570; the sys-
tem continued, ib.
Edwards, the government spy, 278.
Eldon, Lord, retired from office on
promotion of Canning, 63 ; opposes
the repeal of the Corporation and
Test Acts, 60, 369; and Catholic
relief, 378; assisted f)oor suitors to
put in answers, 265; favors au-
thority, 553; resists amendment of
the penal code, 556.
Elective franchise, Ireland, the regula-
tion of, 366, 379, 50S; admission of
Catholics to, 376, 508.
Elizabeth, Queen, her church policy,
293.
EUlenborough, Lord, his conduct on
the trials of Hone, 190, and n.;
• cabinet minister, 553 ; resists
amendment of the criminal code,
556.
Entinck, Mr., his papers seized under
a general warrant, 249 ; brings an
action, 250.
Erskine, Lord, a leading memlier of
the Whig party, 40; supports the
rights of juries in libel cases, 118;
case of Dean of St. Asaph, tb. ; of
Stockdale, 119; promotes the Libel
Act, 120, 122; defends Paine, 1-35:
and Hardy and Home Tooke, 158.
Erskine, E., seceded from the Church
of Scotland, 432.
Erskine, Mr. H., the leader of the
Whigs in Scotland, 50.
Ewart, Mr., his efforts to reform the
criminal code, 55S.
Excise Bill, its withdrawal in defer-
ence to popular clamor, 124.
Ex-officio informations, filed by gov-
ernment for libels, 111, 179, 212;
bills to restrain, 112, 116.
Expenditure, national, vast increase
in, since 1850, 574.
Extradition treaties, 290.
Factokies, labor of children, &c.,
regulated in, 567.
Financial policy, the present system
of, 573 ; origmated by Sir H. Par-
nell, 574.
Fitzgerald, Mr. V., defeated in the
Clare election, 371.
Fitzwilliam, Earl, dismissed from his
lord -Lieutenancy for heading a pnb-
lic meeting, 195 ; his conduct as
Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, 333,
499 ; his motion on the state of Ire-
land, 350.
Five Mile Act, the, 303.
Flogging, articles on military flog-
ging punished as libels, 178 ; m
army and navy abated. 563.
Flood, Mr., his efforts for indepen-
dence of Ireland, 492; for reform,
495.
Foreigners. See Aliens.
Fox, Mr. C. J. , opposes the repress*-
ive policv of 1792, 44, 141; and of
1794-6, 31, 167-172, 254; his ad-
vice to the Whigs to take office re-
jected, 32; refuses office under Lord
Shelbume, 33; in office with Lord
North, 34 ; his policy contrasted
with .Mr. Pitt's, to., n., 35; sympa-
thizes with the French Revolution
42; attempted coalitions with Pitt
612
INDEX TO VOL. II.
44, 53 ; deserted by his party, 45 ;
secedes from Pailiament, 51; in of-
fice with Lord Sidinouth, 54, 341;
efFi^ct of his dnath on p;irtifs, 55;
his remark on the rijjhts of juries in
libel cases, 116; his libel bills, 120;
takes the chair at a reform meeting,
1779, 127; advocates the relief of
Catholics 318, 339; and of Dissent-
ers and Unitarians, 325, 329 ; his
India bill, 542.
Fox Mnule, Mr., presents petition of
the General Assembly, 440.
Free Church of Scotland, the, 442.
Freedom of Opinioa. See Opinion,
Freedom of.
Free trade, the policy of, adopted, 80,
241, 572; effect of, on colonial poli-
cy, 530.
French Revolution, effect of, on par-
ties, 42; sympathy with, of English
democrats, 134, 136, 138; alarm ex-
cited by, 138, 198, 201.
Friends of the People, the Society of,
leading Whig members of, 43; dis-
countenances democracy, 138.
Frost, J., tried for sedition, 142.
Genekal Assembly, the (Chnrch of
Scotland), petitions for relief from
the Test Act, 328; passes the Veto
Act, 433; rejects Lord Aberdeen's
compromise, 436; adlresses Her
Majesty, 439; admits the quoad sa-
cra ministers. 440; petitions Par-
liament,/6; the secession, 441 ; the
Veto Act rescinded, 442.
tJeneral warrants, issued in the case
of the " North Briton," 246 ; against
Mr. Entick, 249; actions brought in
consequence, 247; condemned in
Parliament, 252.
George III., his party tactics on ac-
cession, 25; influence of his friends,
27; overcomes the Coalition, 36;
influenced by Lord Thiirl iw, 40;
his repugnance to the Whigs, 41,
55; to Fox, 53; directs the suppres-
sion of the Gordon Riots, 132; his
speech and message respecting se-
ditious practices, 1792 and 1794,
141, 152; attacked by the mob, 164;
opposes Catholic relief, 335, 336;
and the Army and Navy Service
Bill, 344; his message to Parlia-
ment touching aflTairs in Ireland,
492 ; seeks to tax the American col-
onies, 515, 516.
George FV., his conduct on the pass-
ing of the Catholic Relief Bill, 376,
378.
German Legion, the, Cobbett's libel
on, 178.
Gerrald, J., tried for sedition, 150.
Gibson, Mr. Milner, heads movement
against taxes on knowledge, 215;
his pr()()osal to establish county
flnancial boards. 477.
Gillray, his eaiicaturt's, 124.
Gladstone, Mr., separates from Lord
Palmerston's ministry, 87 ; his finan-
cial pohcy, 573,
Goderich, Lord, his administration, 65.
Goldsmith's Hall Association, the, 145,
150.
Good Hope, Cape of, a constitution
granted to, 537.
Gordon, Lord G., heads the Protes-
tant Association, 129,321; presents
their petition, 130; committed to
Newgate, 133.
Gower, Lord F. L., his resolution for
the state endowment of Irish priests,
366.
Graham, Sir J., separates from Lord
Palmerston's ministry, 87 ; case of
opening letters by, 281 ; his answer
to the claim, &c., of the Church of
Scotland, 439.
Grant, Mr. K., his motions for Jewish
relief, 383, 385.
Grattan, Mr., advocates Catholic re-
lief, 340,346, 350-354; the indepen-
dence of Ireland, 490, 492, 505; liis
death, 357.
Grenville, Lord, the tactics of his par-
tv, 53, 61; in office, 53, 341; intro-
duces the Treasonable Practices
Bill, 164; advocates Catholic re-
lief, 338; his Army and Navy Ser-
vice Bill, 342; fall of his ministry,
344.
Grenville, Mr., attacked by Wilkes,
1 10 ; his .schemes for taxation of
American colonies, 517.
Grey, Earl, the separation of his party
from the Radicals, 58, 71; carries
Parliamentary Reform, 69; his min-
istry, 70-75 ; his Army and Navy
Service Bill, 343; advocates Catho-
lic claims, 346; and relief from dec-
laration against transubstantiation,
357.
Habeas Corpus Suspension Acts, the,
of 1794, 153, 161, 253 ; of 1817, 185,
INDEX TO VOL. H.
$18
257 ; cases of, between the Revolu-
tion and 1794, 253; the Acts of In-
demnity, 253-259; in Ireland,
359.
Halifax, Elarl of, issue of general war-
rants by, 24fi, 249 ; action brought
against him by Wilkes, 249.
Hardwicke, Lord, changes caused by
his Marri.ige Act, 362
Hardy, J., tried for treason, 156.
Hawkesbury, Lord, his refusal of Na-
poleon's demands against the press
and foreigners, 176, 287.
Hewlev, Lady, the case of her chari-
ties," 401.
Hobhouse, Sir J. his Vestry Act, 461.
Uoghton, SirH., his Dissenters' Relief
Bills. 317. *
Hone, W., trials of, for libel, 189.
Horsley, JMshop, his opinion on the
rights of the people, 165; amends
the Protesting Catholic Dissenters'
Bill, 327.
Bowick, Lord. See Grey, Earl.
Hudson, Dr., tried for sedition, 143.
Hudson's Bav Company, the, expired,
571.
Hume, Mr., his motion against Orange
lodges in the annv, 230 ; his scheme
for voluntary enlistment, 263; his
projwsed reform of county adminis-
tration, 477 ; his exertions in revision
of official salaries, 548.
Hunt, Leigh, tried for libel, 179.
Hunt, Mr. headed the Manchester
meeting, 193; tried for sedition,
200.
Huskisson, Mr., his commercial policy,
62, 572.
Impressment for the army, 260 ; for
the navy, 261.
Imiirisonment, for debts to the Crown,
SJ64; contempt of court, 265; on
me«ue process, 267; for debt, 268.
See also Prisons,
lidemnity Acts, the, on expiration of
the Habeas Corpus Suspension Acts,
256, 257; Annual, the first
passed, 308, n.
Independents, the. their tenets, 296;
their toleration, 302; numbers, &c.,
419, 420, n.
India- Ste East India.
Informers. See Spies.
Insolvent debtors, laws for the relief
of, 271.
\reland, the Reformation in, 299 ; dan-
herons state of, 1823-25, 365; and
in 1828, 371 ; burial-grounds in,
open to all persuasions, 397; the
tithe question, 445, 451-454; nar
tional education, 455, 569; May-
nooth and Queen's Colleges, 456;
Government of Ireland prior to the
Union, 479; the Parliament, i6.; the
executive, 481 ; power monopolized
by churchmen, 482 ; supremacy
of English Government, 483; com-
mercial restrictions, 483, 484; par-
tially removed, 488, 490; residence
of lord-lieutenant enforced, 481,
485; conflicts between the Commonj*
and the Executive, ib.; state of Ire-
land, 1776, 487; the volunteers.
489 ; they agitate for independence
and parliamentary reform, 490-492,
494; the convention at Dungannon,
491; independence granted, 49"
admission of Catholics to the elec-
tive franchise, 330, 497 ; the United
Irishmen, 173, 498; feuds between
Protestants and Catholics, 499 ; the
rebellion of 1798, 600; Union with
England concerted, 502 ; opposi-
tion bought oflT, 503 ; the Lnion
effected, 506 ; its results, ib. ; effect
of Catholic relief and reform in the
representation, 879, 508; present po-
sition of Ireland, ib.\ and of its
Catholic inhabitants, 509; the num-
ber of Irishmen on the English
bench, ib., n. ; corporate re-
form, 472 ; new poor-law introduced
into, 565.
Jamaica, colonial institutions in, 512,
525 ; contumacy of assembly re-
pressed, 531.
James II. expelled by union of church
and dissenters, 305; his proposal to
tax colony of Massachusetts, 514.
Jews, the Naturalization Act of, 1754,
repealed, 125; tolerated by Crom-
well. 302 ; excepted from Lord
Hardwicke's Marriage Act, 362;
the first motions for their relief. 383;
Mr. Grant's motions, ib., 385; Jews
admitted to corporatidns, 386; re-
turns of Baron Koths«hil(l iind Mr.
Salomons, 387, 388; attempt to ad-
mit Jews under declaration, 389:
the Relief Acts, 390 ; number of,
returned, 391.
Judges, their conduct in libel cases,
188, 189; number of Irishmen on
614
INDEX TO VOL. II.
the English bench, 509, n. ; flpirit
and temper of the judges, 552; their
tenure of office assured, to.
Junius, the letter of, to the king, 113.
Juries, rights of, in libel cases, 114-
122.
Kenninoton Common, Chartist
meeting at, 237.
Kersal Moor, Chartist meeting at, 235;
election of popular representative at,
236.
" King's Friends, the," a section of
the Tory partj', 27; estranged from
Pitt, 53; coalesce with the Whigs,
ib.; estranged from them, 53.
Knight's (a negro) ca^, 273.
Lansdowne, Marquess, his motions
respecting the marriages of Catho-
lics and Dissenters, 363; for relief of
English Catholics, ib.
Law, the improvement in the spirit
and administration of, 550; legal
sinecures abolished, 551.
Legislatorial attorneys, election of, at
public meetings, 190, 191; practice
of, imitated by the Chartists, 235.
Letters, opened" at the Post-othce by
government, 279; the former prac-
tice, 280, and n. ; case of in 1844,
281.
Libel, the Act, 120-122; Lord Sid-
mouth's circular to the lord-lieuten-
ants respecting seditious libels, 186;
conduct of judges in libel cases, 188,
189. See also Sedition, &c.
Liberal Part^, the. See Party.
Liberty of opinion. See Opinion, Lib-
erty of.
Liberty of the subject. See Subject,
Liberty of.
Licensing Act, the, 105 ; not renewed,
106.
Liverpool, Earl of, his administration,
58,62; disunion of the Tories on his
death, 63; his ministry and the
Crttholic question, 353.
Local government, the basis of consti-
tutional freedom, 460; vestries, open
and select, 461; Vestry Acts, ib.,
462; municipal corporations before
and after reform, 462-476; local
boards, 477; courts of quarter ses-
sions, ib.
i^gan, the Rev., his defence of War-
ren Hasting?, 119.
ixmdon, corporation of, extortion
practised by, on dissenters, 315, ad-
dress of the Common Council on the
Manchester massacre, 195 ; schemes
for its reform, 469.
London Corresponding Society, the,
137, 138; reported on by a secret
committee, 153 ; trial of members of,
for high treason, 156 ; inflames public
discontent, 162; calls a meeting at
Copenhagen House, 163 ; address on
an attack on Geo. III., 170; in-
creased activity of, 172; suppressed
by Act. 173.
London University, founded, 400.
Lord-lieutenant of Ireland, the resi-
dence of, enforced, 485.
Lords, House of, the Catholic peers
take their seats, 380.
Lords, House of (Ireland), composi-
tion of, 479.
Loughborough, Lord, joins the Tories,
45; prompts the repressive policy of
the government, 140.
Luddites, the, outrages of, 182.
Lunatics, a state provision for, 566.
Lyndhurst, Lord, brought in the Dis-
senters' Chapels Bill, 401.
Mackintosh, Sir J., his defence of
Peltier, 177; his eflforts to reform
the criminal code, 557.
M'Laren and Baird, trial of, for sedi-
tion, 190.
Magistrates, military interference io
absence of, 1-32; tlie summary juris-
diction of, 562.
Manchester, public meeting at, 192,
the massacre, 193; debates thereon
in Pariiament, 194-196.
Manstield, Lord, his decisions touch-
ing the rights of juries in libel cases,
114, 118; produced the judgment in
Woodfall's case to the House of
Lords, 116 ; his house burnt by the
Protestant rioters, 132; his opinion
on military interference in absence
of a magistrate, ib.; his decision in
the negro case, 273; and recogniz-
ing toleration, 315; his tolerant ac-
quittal of a priest, 319; a cabinet
minister, 553.
Manufacturing districts, state of the,
191, 410.
JIargarot M., trial of, for sedition, 150.
Marriages, laws afTec-ting the, of Dis-
senters and Catholics, 362-;364, 392-
395; effect of Lord llardwicke's
Act, 362.
INDEX TO VOL. II.
615
llassachnsetts, proposal of James II.
to tax, 514 ; constitution of, super-
seded, 522.
Maynooth College, founded, 456;
l^eel's endowment of, 457; popular
opposition to, ib.
Mazzini, J., his letters opened by gov-
ernment, 281.
Meetings. See Public Meetings.
Melbourne, Vi.«count, his ministries,
76, 77; receives a deputation of
workingmen, 220; reception of
delegates from trades' unions, 233
framed the Tithe Commutation Act
417 ; and the first Irish Corporations
Bill, 473.
Melville, Lord, impeachment of, a blow
to the Scotch Tories, 56.
Meredith, Sir W., his speech against
capital punishments, 555.
Middle classes, the, strength given to
Whigs by adhesion of, Gl, 69, 202;
a combination of the working and
middle classes necessary to success-
ful agitation, 216, 236.
Middlesex, electors of, cause of, sup-
ported by public meetings, 126.
Militar\' and Xaval Officers' Oaths
Bill, "the, 356.
Militia, the, Catholics in, 333.
Miller, tried for publication of a libel,
115.
Mines, labor of children, &c. regulated
in, 567.
Ministers of the Crown, increasing in-
fluence of public opinion over, 28,
61, 123, 201; the principles of coali-
tion between, 38,86; responsibility
of ministers to their supporters, 66,
83; the premiership rarely held by
the head of a great family, 95; re-
vision of salanes of, 548.
Mohun, Lord, cudgelled Dyer for a
libeL 107.
Moravians. See Quakers.
Muir, T., trial of, at Edinburgh for
sedition, 145; comments thereon in
Parliament, 150.
Municipal Corporations. See Corpo-
rations.
Mutiny Act (Ireland), made perma-
nent, 490 ; repealed, 493.
Napoleo?!, First Consul of France,
demands the suppression of the
press, 176 ; the dismissal of refugees,
286; trial of Peltier for libel on, 177.
Naturalization Act, passing of, 286.
Navy, impressment for, 261 ; flogging
in, abated, 563.
Negroes freed by landing in England,
272; in Scotland, 273; the slave-
trade and slaverv abolished, 133,
232, 275.
New Brunswick, the constitution of,
526.
Newfoundland, the constitution of,
626.
Newport, the Chartist attack on, 236
New South Wales, a legislature
granted to, 527; transportation to,
abolished, ib.; democratic constitu-
tion of, 535.
Newspapers, the first, 104, 106, 107;
stamp and advertisement duties
first imposed, 108; increased, 172;
removed, 214, 215; improvement in
newspapers, 123, 180; commence-
ment of "the Times" and other
papers, 123, n. ; measures of repres-
sion, 174, 196.
New Zealand, constitution granted to,
537.
Nonconformists. See Dissenters.
Norfolk, Duke of, his eldest son ab-
jured the Catholic faith, 1780, 322,
n.; his Catholic Officers' Relief Bill,
356 ; enabled by Act to serve as Earl
Marshal, 365.
" North Briton," the, proceedings
against. 111, 112. 246.
North, Lord, in office, 26,28; driven
from office, 32; the Coalition, 34;
his measure to conciliate the Ameri-
can colonies, 523.
Nottingham Castle, burnt by mob,
219.
Nova Scotia, responsible government
in, 533.
Nugent, Lord, his bill for Catholic
relief, 362; obtained relaxation to
Irish commerce, 488.
Occasional Cosfokmity Act, the,
308.
O'Connell. Mr., leads the Irish party,
73 ; heads the Catholic Association,
204 ; agitates lor repeal of the Union,
223 ; trials of, 224, 227 ; released on
writ of error, 228; returned for
Clare, 371; his reelection required,
380 ; his motions on Irish tithes and
Church, 448-453.
O'Connor, F., presents the Chartist
petition, 238.
Octennial Act, the, (Ireland,) 485.
616
INDEX TO VOL. II.
Official salaries, revision of, since the
Reform Act, 548.
Oliver, the government spy, 276.
Opinion, liberty of, the last liberty' to
be acquired, 102; the press, trom
James I. till the accession of* Geo.
III., 104; the " North Briton " pros-
ecutions, 110; the law of libel, 114;
political agitation by public meet-
ings, 124; bv associations, 127;
democratic associations, 134 ; repres-
sive measures, 1792-99, 139; Napo-
leon and the Lnglish press, 176; the
press, before the Regency, 179; re-
pressive measures under the Regen-
cy, 182; the contest between au-
thority and public opinion reviewed,
800; the Catholic Association, 204;
the press under Geo. IV., 210; its
freedom established, 213 ; the Reform
agitation, 216; for repeal of the
Union, 223; Orange lodges, 229;
trades' unions^ 232; the Chartists,
234; the Anti-Corn Law League,
239; political agitation reviewed,
242. See Press; Political Associa-
tions; Public Meetings.
Orange societies, suppressed bv Act,
206; revived, 208; organization of,
229, 499; in the army, 230; dis-
solved, 231; peculiar working of
Orange societies, ib.
Orsini conspiracy, the, plotted in Eng-
land, 289.
Oxford Universit}-, state of feeling at,
on Catholic relief. 351; admission
of dissenters to degrees at, 400.
Paine, T., tried for seditious writings,
135.
Palmer, the Rev. T. F., trial of, for
sedition, 148 ; comments thereon in
Parliament, 150.
Palmerston, Viscount, adhered to Mr.
Canning, 64; in the Uuke of Well-
ington's ministry, 65; in office, 85;
secession of the Peelites, 87; his
overthrow in 1857 and 1858, 88, 290;
his second ministry, 90.
Papal aggression, 1850, the, 422;
Court, diplomatic relations with.
Bill, 42.5, n.
Paper-duty, the, abolished. 216.
Parish, the, local affairs of, adminis-
tered by vestries, 461.
Parliament, secessions of the Whigs
from, 30, 51, 168; repression of the
press by Parliament, 107 ; attempted
intimidation of, by the silk-weavwrs
125; by the Protestant Associations,
129; relations of the Church and
Parliament, 421 ; supremacy of, over
the Irish Parliament, 483; Parlia-
ment since the Reform Act, 576;
vast amount of public business, ib.
Parliament (Ireland), state of before
the Union, 479; exclusion of Catho-
lics, ib. 482; expired only on demise
of the crown, 481; Poyning's Act,
482; supremacy of "the English
Parliament, 483; agitation for in-
dependence, 490, 492; submit* to
the permanent Mutiny Bill, 490; in-
dependence grantetl, 493; corrupt
influence of the government, ib.;
motions for Parliamentary Reform,
495; the Union carried, 503.
Parnell, Sir H., the originator of the
present tinancial policy, 574.
Party, influence of, in party govern-
ment, 17; origin of piirties, 18; par-
ties under the Stuarts, and after the
Revolution. 19, 20; Whigs and To-
ries, 20; their distinctive principles,
22, 28, 90; parties on the accession
of George III., 24, 27; the Ameri-
can war a test of party principles,
29; secessions of the Whigs from
Parliament, 30, 51, 168; overtures
to the Whigs, 32; commencement
of a democratic party, ib. ; crisis on
death of Lord Rockingham, 33; the
Coalition, 34-36 ; ruin of the Whigs,
37; principles of coalition, 38; the
Tories under Mr. Pitt, 38, 47; the
Whigs and the Prince of Wales, 40,
54, 58 ; ettect of the French Revolu-
tion upon parties, 42, 45; position
of the Whigs, 43, 46, 49; the To-
ries in Scotland, 49 ; schism among
the Tories, 52; parties on Pitt's re-
tirement from olHce, ib. ; the Whigs
in oftice, 1806, 53-55, 341; coalesce
with Lord Sid mouth's party, 83;
the Tories reinstated, 55; position
of the Whigs, 56; the strength they
derived from the adhesion of the
middle classes, 57, 202; the Tories
under Lord Liverpool, 58-63; un-
der Canning, 63; influence of na-
tional distress, and of proceedings
against Queen Caroline, upon par-
ties, 60, 61; increase of liberal feel-
ing, 61: ettect of the Catholic que:--
tion upon parties, 63, 66, 344, 353,
376; party divisions aftci Mr Can-
INDEX TO VOL. U.
617
ning's death, 65 ; -he Duke of Well-
ington's ministry, t6.; secession of
liberal members from his cabinet,
66; the Whifcs restored to office,
68; supported by the democratic
party, 69; Whig ascendency after
the Reform Acts, 70 ; state of parties,
ib. ; the Radicals, 71 ; the Irish par-
ty, 73; the Tories become "Con-
servatives," 75; increase in power,
ib.; break up of Earl Grey's min-
istry, ib.; dismissal of Lord Mel-
bourne's ministry, 76; Liberals re-
united against Sir R. Peel, ib. ; his
liberal policy alarms the Tories, t6. ;
parties under Lord Melbourne, 77 ;
a conservative reaction, 78; effect
of Peel's free-trade policy upon the
Conservatives. 80, 82; the obliga-
tions of a party leader, 83; the
Whigs in office, 84; Lord Derby's
first ministry, 85; coalition of Whigs
and Peelites under Lord Aberdeen,
86; fall of his ministry-, 87; the
Peelites retire from Lord Palmer-
Bton's first administration, ib.; his
overthrows, in 1857 and 1858, 88;
Lord Derby's second ministry, 89;
Cssed the" Jewish Relief Act", 390;
ird Patmerston's second admin-
istration, 90; fusion of parties, ib.;
essential difference between Con-
servatives and Liberals, ib. ; party
sections, 91; changes in the char-
acter, &c., of parties, 92; politics
formerly a profession, 93 ; effects of
Parliarnentary Reform on parties,
96; the conservatism of age, 97;
statesmen under old and new sys-
tems, ib. ; patronage, an instrument
of party, 98; review of the merits
and evils of party, 100; the press
an instrument of party, 107, 123,
124; opposition of the Whigs to a
repressive policy, 141, 195; to the
Six Acts, 196 : the Habeas Corpus
Suspension Bills, 100, 253-259 ; the
Treasonable Practices, &c., Bills,
165-169; the Irish Church appro-
priation question adopted by the
Whigs, 453; abandoned bv them,
45 L
Patronage, an instrument of party,
98; the effect of competition, 100;
abuses of colonial patronage, 528;
surrendered to the colonies, 530.
Patronage Act (Scotland), 443. See
also Church of Scotland.
Peel, Mr. See Peel, Sir R.
Peel, Sir R., the first, his Factory
Children Act, 567.
Peel, Sir R., hi? commercial policy,
62, 573 ; seceded from Canning on
the Catholic question, 63; opposes
that measure, 354, 360; brings in
the Relief Act, 66, 376; his first
ministrj', 76; his policy, and fall,
ib; 454; his relation to the Con-
servatives, 79, 82; his second min-
istry, 79; his free-trade policy, 80;
repeal of corn-laws, 81, 239, 572;
his obligations as a party leader,
83; obtains the bishops' consent tc
the repeal of the Corporation ana
Test Acts. 368: proposes to retire
from the Wellington ministry', 374;
loses his seat at Oxfiird, 375; the
Irish Franchise Act, 379; his Dis-
senters Marriage Bills, 394; plan
for commutation of Irish tithes,
452; resists the appropriation ques-
tion, 453; proposes endowment to
Maynooth and the Queen's Col-
leges, 456; his scheme for Irish
corporate reform, 475 ; the first min-
ister to revise the criminal code,
557.
Peers, the Catholic, restored to thei
privilege of advising the Crown,
328, 360; exempted from the oath
of supremacv, 359: the Catholic
Peers Bill, lb.; take seats in the
House of Lords, 380; creation of,
to carry the Union with Ireland,
504.
Peltier, J., trial of, for libel, 177.
Perceval, Mr., in office, 55, 58, 345.
Peto, Sir M., his Dissenters Burial
Bills, 396.
Phillimore, Dr., his Catholic Marriages
Bill, 363.
Pillor\', punishment of, abolished, 559.
Pitt, Mr. W., Tory principles never
completely adopted by, 29, 34, n.,
39; entered Parliament as a Whig,
33, 36; the leader of the Tories, 39;
his first ministry a coalition, 37;
his policy contrasted with Mr.
Fox's, 3-i, n., 39; his feelings to
wards the French Revolution, 42,
140; attempted coalition with Fox,
44, 53; joined by portion of the
Whigs, 45; the consolidation of his
power, 47, 140; dangerous to liber-
ty, 50; h's liberal views on Catho-
Lc question, 52, 334-340, 506; hb
618
INDEX TO VOL. II.
retirement from office, 52; his re-
turn, 53; the Torj' party after his
death, 55; member of the Consti-
tutional Information Society, 128,
•137 ; commences a repressive policy,
139 ; brings in the Seditious Mee't-
ings Bill, 166; opposes relief to dis-
senters, 324-326, 330; his proposal
for commutation of Irish tithes,
445; his Irish commercial proposi-
tions, 496; carried the Union with
Ireland, 503; his India Bill, 544.
I'ius IX., his brief appointing bishops
in England, 423; and against the
Queen's Colleges, 458.
Plunket, iMr., his advocacy of Catho-
lic relief, 358, 361
Police, modern system of, 561.
Political associations, commencement
of, 124, 126, 128; for Parliamentary
Reform, 127,216; Protestant asso-
ciations, 129-132, 320; anti-slave-
trade, 133, 232; democratic, 134,
136, 163, 169, 172; proceeded
iigainst, 145, 154; suppressed, 173,
185, 197 ; associations for suppress-
ing sedition, 143,203; for Catholic
relief, 204; finally suppressed, 209;
for repeal of the Union with Ire-
land, 223; Orange lodges, 229;
trades' unions, 232; the Chartists,
234; the Anti-Corn Law League,
239.
Ponsonby, Mr., chosen leader of the
Whigs, 57.
Poor-laws, the old and new systems,
563; in Scotland and Ireland, 565.
Population, great increase of, in the
manufacturing districts, 192; \t»
effect on the position of the
Church, 419.
Post-Office. See Letters, Opening at.
Poyning's Act, the, 482.
Pratt, Lord Chief Justice. See Cam-
den, Lord.
Presbyterians, in England, 296; in
Scotland, 298,302; in Ireland, 299,
454. See Church of Scotland.
Press, the, under censorship. 103;
from the Stuarts to acci-.-i-.ion of
George III., 104-109; the attacks
on Lord Bute, 110; general war-
rants, 111; the prosecutions of,
1763-1770, 112; publishers liable
for acts of servants, 114; the rights
of juries in libel cases, 114-122;
the progress of free discussion,
123, 180, 201, 2IU, 215; caricatures,
123; laws for repression of the
press, 165, 172, 174, 188, 196; the
press and foreign powers, 176; the
press not purified by rigor, 203;
complete freedom of the press, 213;
tiscal laws affecting, to.; public
jealousies of, 215.
Prisons, debtors', 269; improved
state of, 559.
Protection, &c., against Republicans'
Society, the, 144.
Protestant associations, the, 129, 320;
the petition, and riots, 130, 320.
S«e also Orange Societies.
Protestant Dissenters Ministers Bills,
349.
Protesting Catholic Dissenters, bill
for relief of, 327.
Public meetings, commencement of
political agitation by, 124, 126;
riotous meetings of the silk-weavers,
125; meetings to support the Mid-
dlesex electors, 126; for Parliamen-
tary Reform, 1779, ib.; in 1795,
163"; in 1831, 218; of the Protestant
Association, 1.30, 320; to oppose the
Sedition and Treason Acts, 170; in
the manufacturing districts, 1819,
190; for Catholic relief, 208; for re-
peal (Ireland), 224; of the trades'
unions, 233 ; the Chartists, 2-34, 237 ;
the Anti-Corn-Law League, 240;
laws to restrain public meetings,
166, 185, 196.
Public Opinion. See Opinion, Lib-
erty of; Press, the; Political Asso-
ciations; Public .Meetings.
Publishers, criminally liaijle for acts
of servants, 114.
Puritans, the, under Queen Elizabeth,
295; under James I. and Charles II.,
300, 302; numbers imprisoned, 304.
See also Dissenters.
Quakers, number of, imprisoned,
temp. Charles II., 304; motions f«r
relief of, 331; excepted from Lord
Hardwicke's Marriage Act, 362 ; ad-
mitted to the Commons on making
an affirmation, 382. See also D.s-
senters.
Quarter Sessions, courts of, county
rates administered by, 477; efforts
to introduce the representative ."sys-
tem into, ib.
Queen's Colleges, Ireland, founded,
458; opposition from Catholic der
gy, 459.
INDEX TO VOL. H.
iid
anoad Sacra ministers, the, in the
Church of Scotland, 440.
Radical Partt. See Party.
Reeves, Mr., his pamphlet condemned,
170.
Reform in Parliament, carried by the
Whigs, as leaders of the people, 69 ;
influence of, on parties, 96; on offi-
cial emoluments, 548; on law re-
form, and amendment of the crim-
inal code, 549, 553 ; on the spirit and
temper of the judges, 552; on the
condition of the people, 562; on com-
mercial and financial policy, 571;
on Parliament, 576; the first reform
meetings, 126; and in Ireland, 494;
reform discouraged from the exam-
ple of the French Revolution, 138,
198, 201; repressed as seditious,
145-149, 162, 190; cause of, pro-
moted by political agitation and
unions, 216; review of reform agi-
tation, 223.
Reformation, the, effect of, upon Eng-
land, 292 ; doctrinal moderation of,
294; in Scotland, 298; in Ireland,
299.
Reformatories, instituted, 561.
Refugees. See Aliens.
Regent, the Prince. See Wales, Prince
of.
Registration of births, marriages, and
deaths. Act for, 395.
Religious liberty, from the Reforma-
tion to Geo. ill., 291-308; com-
mencement of relaxation of the pe-
nal code, 313 ; Corporation and Test
Acts repealed, 367 ; Catholic eman-
cipation carried, 376; admission to
the Commons by affirmation, 382;
Jewish disabilicies, 390; registra-
tion of births, marriages, and deaths,
395; the Dissenters' Marriage Bill,
ib. ; admission of dissenters to the
universities, 397 ; dissenters" chap-
els, 400; church-rates. 402. See
also Church of England; Church in
Ireland; Church of Scotland; Dis-
senters; Jews; Quakers; Ronlan
Catholics.
Revenue laws, restraints of, on per-
sonal liberty, 263; offices
thro^vn open to dissenters and Cath-
olics, 331, 367, 376.
Revolution, the etfect on the press,
106; the Church policy after, 304.
Revolution Society, the, 136.
Rockingham, Marquess, Whigs re-
stored to power under, 33, 95 j h'u
death, 33; his administration con-
sent to the independence of Ireland,
492.
Roman Catholics, the first Relief Act,
1778, 129, 319; the riots in Scotland
and London, 129, 320; the Scotch
Catholics withdraw their claims for
relief, 129, 321; the penal code of
Elizabeth, 293; Catholics under
James I., Chas. I., and Cromwell,
300-302; the passing of the Test
Act, 304; repressive measures, Wm.
III.-Geo. I., 306-308; the Catho-
lics, at accession of Geo. IIL, 308,
314, 318; their numbers, 309, n.;
later instances of the enforcement
of tlie penal laws, 319 ; bill to re-
strain education of Protestants by
Catholics, 321; the case of the Pro-
testing Catholic Dissenters, 327;
another measure of relief to English
Catholics, 1791, ib.; first measures
of relief to Catholics in Ireland and
Scotland, 330, 331, 497; the Catho-
lics and the militia, 333 ; effect of
union with Ireland on Catholic re-
lief, 51, 333 ; Catholic claims, 1801-
1810, 336-347 ; the Armv and Narj
Sen-ice Bill, 342 ; the Regency not
favorable to Catholic claims, 348;
freedom of worship to Catholic sol-
diers, 349; the Catholic Question.
1811-1823, 350-361 ; treated as aii
open question, 353, 361 ; Acts for re-
lief of Naval and Military Officers,
356; the Catholic Peers' Bill. 359;
the Catholic Question in 1823, 361 ;
efforts for relief of English Catholics,
ib. ; the laws aflfecting Catholic mar-
riages, 362, 363; Office of Earl Mar-
shal Bill, 364; Sir F. Burdett's mo-
tion, 365; State provision for Cath-
olic clergy carried in the Commons,
366; the Duke of Wellington's min-
istry, 65, 366 ; repeal of the Corpora-
tion and Test Acts, 367; Catholic
relief in 1828, 370; the Act, 66-68,
376, 508; the Catholic peers take
their seats, 380; Catholic emancipa-
tion too long deferred, 381; number
of Catholic members in House of
Commons, ib.; Bills for relief in re-
spect of Catholic births, marriages,
and deaths, 392-396; final repeal of
penalties against Roman Catholic?,
402; numbers, &c. of, in F^glanc,
620
INDEX TO VOL. H.
419, 420: in Ireland, 454; the papal
aggression, 422; the Maynooth and
Queen's Colleges, 456; exclusion of
Irish Catholics from the corpora-
tions, 474; from the Parliament, 479,
482; number on Irish bench, 509.
See also Corporations.
Roman CalhoKc Officers' Relief Bill,
the, 356.
RomilU-, Sir S., his efforts to reform
the penal code, 556.
ttothschild, Baron L. N. de, returned
for London, 387 ; claims to be sworn,
ib.
Russell, Lord John, attempts to form
a free-trade ministry, 81; in office,
84; retires from Lord Palmerston's
ministry, 87; carries the repeal of
Corporation and Test Acts, 367 ; his
efforts to obtain the admission of
Jews to the Commons by declara-
tion, 389 ; his Dissenters' Marriage
Bills, 393, 395; his Registration Act,
394 ; his letter on the papal aggres-
sion, 425; overthrows the Peel min-
istry upon.the Appropriation Ques-
tion, 453, 454; carries Municipal
Reform, 467; and amendments of
the criminal code, 558.
St. Asaph, Dean of, the case of, 118.
Salomons, Mr., returned for Green-
wich, 388; claims to be sworn, ib.
Salters (Scotland). See Colliers.
Savile, Sir G., among the first to ad-
vocate CMtholic Relief, 319; his bill
to restrain Catholics from teaching
ProfestanU, 321.
Schism Act, the, 308.
Scotland, the Tory partj' in, 49, 56;
literary influence of the Scotch
Whigs, 57 ; alarm of democracy in,
144; trials for sedition and high
treason, 145, 154, 190; the slavery
of colliers and salters abolished, 274 ;
the reformation in, 298; intimida-
tion of I'arliament by the mob, 129,
321; motion for rei^eal of the Test
Act ( Scotland ), 328 ; relief to Scotch
Episcopalians, 329; to Scotch Cath-
olics, 331; religious disunion in,
444; statistics of places of worship
in, i6 , n. ; municipal reibrin in,
470 ; new poor-laws introduced into,
565.
Secretary of State, the powers given
to, in repression of libel, ] 11, 188,
246, 250; of opening letters, 279;
for the colonies, date of forma-
tion of office, 527.
Sedition and seditious libels, trials for,
Wilkes, and his publishers. 111 ; the
publishers of Junius's Letters, IW;
the Dean of St. Asaph. 118; ot'Stock-
dale, 119; Paine, 135; Frost, Win-
terbotham, BrieiJat, and Hudson,
142; Muir and Palmer, 145, 148;
Skirving, Margaret, and Gerrald,
149; Eaton, 151; Yorke, 161; .Mr.
Reeves, 170; Gilbert Wakefield and
tlie "Courier," 175; ofCobbett, 178
212; J. and L. Hunt and Drakard,
179; Hunt and Wolseley, 200;
O'Connell and others, 224, 227;
measures for suppression of sedi-
tion in 1792, 139; 1794, 152; 1795,
164; 1799, 173; 1817, 184; 1819, 196;
societies for the repression of, 143,
203. iS'ee also I'reason, High, Trials
for.
Seditious Meetings Bills, the, 166, 198;
Libels Bill, 198.
Session Court of (Scotland), proceed-
ings of, in the patronage cases, 434-
438.
Shelbume, Earl of, in office, 33, 95;
his concessions to America, 35.
Sheridan, Mr., one of the Whig asso-
ciates of the Prince of Wales, 40;
adhered to Fox, 46; liis inoiiou on
the state of the nation, 1793, 141;
brought Palmer's case before the
Commons, 150; urged repeal of the
Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, 160,
161; ills opposition to the Seditious
Meetings Bill, 168.
Sidinouth, Viscount, as premier, 53 i
in otKce with the Whigs, 54; his re-
pressive ptilicy, 182, 259; his circu-
lar to the lord-lieuteiiaiKs, 186; his
emploj-inent of spies, 276; his Dis-
senting Ministers' Bill, 349.
Silk-weavers, riots by, 125; bill pas.<!ed
for protection of their trade, ib.
Sinecures, official and legal, abolished
548, 551.
Six Acts, the, passed, 196.
Skirving, W., trial of, (or sedition, 149
Slave-trade Association, the, 133,275.
Smith, h\r. W., his Unitarian .Mar-
riages Bills, 362, 364.
Smith O'Brien, abortive insurrection
by, 228.
Sommersett's (the negro) case, 278
Spa Fields, meeting at, 186.
Spies, employment of, by govern-
INDEX TO VOL. U.
621
ment, 275; under Lord Sidmouth,
877; their employment considered,
ib.; the Cato Street conspiracy dis-
covered by, 278.
pring Kice, Mr., his scheme for set-
tling church-rates, 40-t; his speech
on the srate of Ireland. 507, n.
Stamp Act, the .\merican, 517.
Stamp duty. See Newspapers.
State trials. {See Trea.son, High,
Trials for.
Stockdale, the case of, 119.
Strath bogie cases, the, 436.
Subject, liberty of, the earliest of poli-
tical privileges, 245; general war-
rants, ib. ; suspension of the Habeas
Corpus Act, 252 ; impressment, 260 ;
the restraints caused by the revenue
laws, 263; imprisonment for debt,
ib., 268; for contempt of court, 265;
arrest on mesne process, 267 ; debt-
ors' prisons, 269 ; insolvent debtors,
271; negroes in Great Britain, 272;
colliers and salters in Scotland, 274;
spies and informers, 275; opening
letters, 27U ; protection of aliens, 283 ;
extradition treaties, 2J0.
Supremacy, oath of, imposed bv Queen
Elizabeth, 293; on tlie House of
Commons, ib. ; Catholic peers ex-
empted from, 328, 359 ; altered by
tiie Catholic Relief Act, 375, 376.
Thatched House Society, the, 270.
Tbelwall, J., tried for high treason,
156.
Thistlewood, A., tried for high trea-
son, 186 ; for the Cato Street plot,200.
Thurles, Synod of, opposition of, to
the Queen's Colleges, 458.
Thurlow, Lord, the character of, 40,
553.
I'ieniey, Mr., joins the Whigs, 46;
their leader, 51, 61.
'i'indal. Chief Justice, his opinion re-
specting the law of church-rates,
405.
Tithes, the commutation of, 416; in
Ireland, 445, 455; associated with
the question of appropriation, 451.
Toleration Act, the, 305; dissenters
relieved from its requirements, 317.
350.
Tooke, Home, trial of, for high trea-
son, 156.
Tory Party, the. See Party.
Townshend, Mr. C, his scheme for
colonial taxation, 519 *
Trades' anions, 2-32; procession of,
through London, 233; reception of
their petition by Lord Melbourne,
234.
Traitorous Correspondence Act, pass-
ing of, 285.
Transportation, commencement of the
punishment, 52G; establishment of
the Australian penal settlements,
ib.; discontinued, 527, 559.
Transubstantiation, Lord Grey's mo-
tion for relief from declaration
against, 357.
Trciisonable Practices Bill, the pasj-
ing of the, 164.
Treason, high, trials for, of Walker,
152; of Watt and Downie, 154; of
Hardy and others, 156 ; of Watson,
Thistlewood, and others, 186.
Tutchin, beaten to death for a libel,
107.
Uniformitt, Act of, of Queen Eliza-
beth, 293; of Charles 11., 303.
Union, the, of England and Ireland,
agitation for repeal of, 223 ; effect of,
on Catholic relief, 333; the means
by which it was accomplished, 503.
Unions, political, e.stablished, 216,
their proceedings. 217 ; organize del-
egates, 219; proclamation against,
220; threatening attitude of, 221
Unitarians, the, toleration withheld
from, 305; further penalties against,
306; tirst motion for relief of, 329;
relief granted, 350; laws affecting
their marriages, 362-364.
United Englishmen, Irishmen, and
Scotsmen, the proceedings of, 173,
498, 499 ; suppressed by Act, 173.
United Presbyterian Church, the, 429,
n., 432.
Universal suflrage, agitation for, 138,
163, 191, 235; in the colonies, 536.
Universities, the, of Oxford and Cam-
bridge, admission of dissenters to,
316; of London, 400.
Van Diemen's Land, a legislature
granted to, 527, 536 ; transportation
to, discontinued, 527.
Vestries, the common law relating to,
461; Mr. S. Bourne's and Sir J
Hobhoase's Vestrj' Acts, ib.
Veto Act, the, 433; rescinded, 442.
Volunteers, the (Ireland), 489; de
mand independence of Ireland, 490,
^1 ; and Parllamenury Reform, 494
622
INDEX TO VOL. H.
Wakefield, Mr. 6., tried for libel,
175.
Wales, Prince of (Geo. IV.), a mem-
ber of the Whig party, 40 ; deserts
them, 46, 58; alleged effect of Mr.
Fox"8 death upon his conduct, 54;
attack on, when Regent, 183; unfa-
vorable to Catholic claims, 348.
Wales, progress of dissent in, 412.
Walker, T., tried for high treason, 152.
Walpole, Sir K., his indifference to
newspaper attacks, 109; withdrew
the Excise Bill, 124; his refusal to
levy taxes on our colonies, 515.
Warrants. See General Warrants.
Watson, J., tried for high treason, 186.
Watt, R., tried for high treason, 154.
Wellesley, Marquess, his ministry and
the Catholic claims, 353; his mo-
tion, ib.
Wellington, Duke of, seceded from
Canning on the Catholic question,
63; in office, 65, 69; secession of
Liberal members from his cabinet,
66; beaten on repeal of the Test,
&c Acts, ib., 367 ; his ministry and
Catholic claims, 66, 36G, 373 ; prose-
cutes the Tory press, 211.
Wesley, the Kev. J., effect of his la-
bors, 310; number, &c. of Wesley-
ans, 419, 420.
Westminster Hall, public meetings
prohibited within one mile of, 185.
Weymouth, Lord, proposal that the
Whigs should take onice under him,
32.
I^hig Club, the, meeting of, to oppose
the Treason and Sedition Bills, 169.
Whig Party, the. See Party.
W^hit bread, Mr., his party estrunged
from Earl (jrey's, 58.
White Conduit House, threatened
meeting at, 220.
VVilberforce, Mr., promoter of the ab-
olition of slavery, 133; endeavors
to obtain admission of Catholics to
the militia, 333.
Wilkes, Mr., attacks Lord Bute and
Mr. Grenvilie in the " North Bri^
on," 110; proceeded against, 111,
125, 247 ; brings actions against Mr.
Wood and Lord Halifax, 247,248;
dogged by spies, 276.
William III., his church policy,
305, 306; towards the Church of
Scotland, 307; towards Catholics,
ib.
William IV., his declaration agamst
the Appropriation question, 450.
Williams, a printer, sentenced to the
pillory, 112.
Winterbotham, Mr., tried for sedition,
142.
Wolseley. Sir C., elected popular rep-
resentative of Birmingham, 191;
tried for sedition, 200.
Wood, Mr. G., his Universities Bill,
399.
Woodfall, his trial for publishing Ju-
nius's Letter, 114; the judgment
laid before the Lords, 116.
Working-classes, measures for the im-
provement of the, 668. See also
Middle Classes.
YoRKE, H. P., tried for sedition, 16L
THB END.
^s^-g
r ^
> ' 4- ' *
"'-'-'.
':^.y.:i
I"'- •■■-5 :,
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11