CHAPTER IX. Meeting of Parliament on the demise of George III.-Prorogation and dissolution-The Catostreet Conspiracy-Debate on the subject of Queen Caroline-Differences between the King and the Cabinet regarding the Queen-The ministerial propositions finally agreed toOpening of the new Parliament-Preparations for the Coronation--The Queen expectedHer arrival-Green bag containing papers laid before Parliament-Adjournment-Conferences for averting a public proceeding-Failure of the negotiation-The Bill of Pains and Penalties-Scenes in the streets-Scenes in the House of Lords-The third reading of the Bill carried by a small majority-The Bill finally abandoned-Joy of the country-Discussions on the subject of the Queen in the next Session-The Coronation of the King-The Queen vainly endeavours to be present-Her death and funeral. UPON the Accession of George the Fourth there were the same Ministers in the Cabinet as those which formed the Administration of the Earl of Liverpool at the close of the war; with the exception of Mr. Canning, who in 1816 succeeded the earl of Buckinghamshire as President of the Board of Control.* The Statutes of William and of Anne provided that the demise of the Crown should not interfere with the regular course of Constitutional government. Under these Statutes the Parliament, although adjourned to the 15th of February, assembled on Sunday morning the 30th of January; adjourned till the next day; and then proceeded to the swearing in of members. On the 17th of February, the Houses having again assembled, a Message was delivered from the King, recommending that such measures should be adopted by the House of Commons as were necessary to provide for the exigencies of the public service, during the short period that must elapse between the termination of the present Session and the opening of a new Parliament, which it was his Majesty's intention to call without delay. The Houses sat till the 28th of February. During a few days after the death of his father, the King had been seriously ill, not without some apprehension that this would be the shortest reign in English history. When the Parliament was prorogued, with a view to its immediate dissolution, the Speech of the Royal Commissioners alluded to "the flagrant and sanguinary conspiracy which has lately been detected." "The Cato-street Conspiracy," atrocious as were the objects which it See volume vii. p. 576. The List in the opposite page of the King's Ministers, of the Great Officers of State, of the Law Officers, and of the Irish Administration, is of the date of June, 1820. 160 THE CATO-STREET CONSPIRACY. [1820. proposed to accomplish, base and brutal as were the wretched persons engaged in it, fearful as might have been the national terror had it been successful, was certainly not calculated, as affirmed in the Royal Speech, "to vindicate to the whole world the justice and expediency of those measures " [the Six Acts] to which the Parliament had resorted "in defence of the laws and Constitution of the kingdom." The detection and prevention of what was something more formidable than "a little plot in a hay-loft," though not in any degree a symptom of a revolutionary spirit in the country, were certainly not advanced by the enactment of an unconstitutional code. The proceedings of a knot of sanguinary madmen had for some time been well-known at the Home Office. "The principal informant was a modeller and itinerant vendor of images, named Edwards, who first opened himself at Windsor, as early as the month of November, to Sir Herbert Taylor, then occupying an important official situation in the establishment of George III."+ Arthur Thistlewood, the leader of the gang who desired to assert their patriotism by the murder of all the King's ministers, had been a subaltern officer in the militia, and afterwards in a regiment of the line. He had sojourned in France in the early stages of the French Revolution, and was amongst the number of those who held that violence and insurrection were the proper modes of redressing the evils of what they considered bad government. He was one of the persons engaged in the Spafields riot; and, in company with Dr. Watson, was tried for high treason. Upon his acquittal his rashness displayed itself in sending a challenge to Lord Sidmouth, for which folly he was convicted of a misdemeanor, and underwent a [year's imprisonment. This term of confinement expired about the period of the affray at Manchester. Upon his trial he declared that his indignation at this occurrence prompted him to take his resolution of murderous vengeance: "I resolved that the lives of the instigators should be the requiem to the souls of the murdered innocents." He adds, "In this mood I met with George Edwards." He had decided that "insurrection became a public duty" before he met with George Edwards, "the contriver, the instigator, the entrapper," as he terms him. ‡ A noble writer, whose facts are in most cases of far higher value than his opinions, says, "the history of the Thistlewood Conspiracy, as related in the criminal annals of the period, illustrates in a remarkable manner the diseased state of political feeling then existing in England." § Lord Sidmouth has himself testified to the general healthfulness of public opinion: "Party feelings appeared to be absorbed in those of indignation, which the lower orders had also evinced very strikingly upon the occasion." It was not in the nature of Englishmen to entertain any other feeling than indignation at * Sydney Smith's "Memoirs," vol. ii. p. 195. "Life of Lord Sidmouth," vol. iii. p. 316. The Author of the "Popular History" well recollects this man, who had a small shop in the High-street of Eton, where the most profitable exercise of his art was in the production and sale of a little model of Dr. Keate, the head master of Eton, in his cocked hat, the consumption of which image was considerable, from its rapid destruction by the junior boys as a mark to be pelted at. Sir Herbert Taylor, whose honour was unimpeachable, was utterly incapable of suggesting to the spy that he should incite these wretched men to the pursuance of their frantic designs. Yet in this, as in most similar cases, the functions of the tempter and the betrayer are very closely united. "State Trials." See also "Annual Register," 1820, p. 946. § Duke of Buckingham, "Court of George IV.," vol. i. p. 9. "Life of Lord Sidmouth," vol. iii. p. 320. 1820.] THE CATO-STREET CONSPIRACY. 161 the scheme of assassination which was intended to be carried into effect on the 23rd of February. On Tuesday the 22nd, the Earl of Harrowby, President of the Council, was riding in the Park without a servant, when he was addressed by a person who said he had a letter directed to Lord Castlereagh. On the 23rd Lord Harrowby was to have had a Cabinet dinner at his house in Grosvenor-square, to which, as is usual, none but members of the Cabinet were invited. The person who accosted Lord Harrowby met him the next morning in the Ring at Hyde Park by appointment. That person was Thomas Hidon, a cow-keeper, formerly a member of a Shoemakers' Club, where he knew one of the conspirators, Wilson. By this man Hidon was invited to come forward and be one of a party to destroy his Majesty's ministers, when they were assembled at dinner, by hand grenades thrown under the table, and by the sword if any escaped the explosion. The paper which Lord Harrowby received from Hidon was described as a note containing the whole plot." The plans of Thistlewood had been also communicated to an Irishman named Dwyer, who revealed at the Home Office what he had heard. The evidence of Hidon and Dwyer sufficiently agreed to make the Cabinet take their resolution. They determined not to dine at Lord Harrowby's house, but that the preparations for dinner should go on as if no alarm had disarranged them. Mr. Birnie, the police magistrate, was to proceed to Cato-street, with a strong party of police-officers, at seven o'clock, the appointed dinner hour. In Cato-street, which runs parallel with the Edgeware-road, a loft had been engaged by the parties to the plot, and during the afternoon of the 23rd they had been observed conveying sacks into their place of rendezvous. A detachment of the foot-guards had been ordered to turn out for the purpose of accompanying the police, but through some mistake the civil officers had to enter the loft to execute their warrant without the military support. As Smithers, the police officer, first confronted the twenty-four whom he found assembled, having gone up into the loft by a ladder, he was stabbed through the heart by Thistlewood, whilst three others. of his comrades were stabbed or shot. The lights were put out, and in the confusion Thistlewood, with about fourteen, escaped. The leader, however, was arrested the next morning, the government having offered a reward of a thousand pounds for his apprehension. When the soldiers arrived they captured nine of the party, with arms and ammunition. Thistlewood and four of his principal accomplices were tried for high treason in April. Chief Justice Abbott, in passing sentence of death upon the prisoners, expressed what was the universal public sentiment-" That Englishmen, laying aside the national character, should assemble to destroy in cold blood the lives of fifteen persons unknown to them, except from their having filled the highest offices in the State, is without example in the history of this country, and I hope will remain unparalleled for atrocity in all future times." These five were executed on the 1st of May. A motion of Alderman Wood on the day after the execution, the object of which was to blame the conduct of the government in the employment of Edwards, did not call forth the same animadversion as in the former case of Oliver at Derby. Lord Campbell says,-and few will disagree with him in his opinion-"I do not * "Annual Register," 1820, p. 932. VOL. VIII. M 162 DEBATE ON THE SUBJECT OF QUEEN CAROLINE. [1820. think that Ministers deserved any censure for the manner in which they conducted themselves in this affair." * In such cases there is always the difficulty of interfering too soon or too late. Some members of the Cabinet proposed that the dinner should take place; that guards should be stationed near lord Harrowby's house, and that the conspirators should be arrested at the moment of their attempt. Others contended that ministers, being in possession of evidence to satisfy reasonable men, ought to stop the progress of the crime before it went on to the last step. "Lord Castlereagh was for going to the dinner in the face of it all at the hour invited, and letting each gentleman arm himself if he thought proper; whilst the duke of Wellington counselled to the course that was taken."t The Cato-street Conspiracy for a while absorbed every other topic of popular interest. If this extraordinary event had not occurred, the public journals would probably have attached more importance to a short debate in the House of Commons, on the subject of Queen Caroline. On the 21st of February, in a Committee of Supply, Mr. Hume, the Member for the Montrose Burghs,-who, since his return in 1818, had begun to take an active part in the discussion of financial questions-pressed to know whether any distinct provision was to be made for the Queen, inasmuch as the Act which granted to the Princess of Wales the sum of 35,000l. a year, expired on the demise of his late Majesty. He complained, also, that the Queen was slighted, and asked why her name was not inserted in the Liturgy. Mr. Tierney took the same course, with an important variation: "While the noble lord (Castlereagh) called her merely that 'high personage' instead of recognising her as the Queen-while all Italy, nay, all Europe, was filled with rumours of her guilt, and of official inquiries about it-while her name was omitted in the Liturgy-while she was not acknowledged, he could not agree to vote her the means of maintaining herself, until the reasons for such extraordinary circumstances as he had recited should be satisfactorily explained." Mr. Brougham, who was the chief legal adviser of the Queen, maintained that her title did not depend upon any words in the Liturgy, or upon any Act of Council, or upon any expression of a Minister of the Crown. The provision for the maintenance of her dignity was, it appeared, to be made out of the general sum for which the Minister was about to move, and that arrangement was at present to his mind quite satisfactory. He totally disregarded the rumours which were imagined to cast a cloud of suspicion upon the Queen's character. Till some specific charge should be submitted to that House, his lips should be sealed upon the subject. If any charge should be preferred, he must beg it to be recollected, that this illustrious personage was not remarkable for any slowness to meet accusation, nor for any difficulty to prove her innocence. He trusted no appeal upon this matter would ever be made to any turbulent passions out of doors. Lord Castlereagh rose to thank the honourable and learned gentleman for a speech which did equal honour to his head and his heart. The perfect agreement between Mr. Brougham and lord Castlereagh must have excited some surprise. But the Queen's legal adviser was no * "Lives of the Chancellors," vol. x. p. 3. + Rush, "Residence at the Court of London," second series, vol i. p. 289. 1820.] DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE KING AND THE CABINET. 163 doubt fully cognizant of an arrangement by which the Cabinet had on the 21st of February tided over a difficulty which only four days before threatened their removal from office. On the 13th lord Sidmouth had written to earl Talbot, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, a brief note, in which he apologizes for not having answered a letter received on the 12th. "If you knew how the day was passed you would not be surprised at the omission. The Government is in a very strange and I must acknowledge in a precarious state."* The King had for his confidential private adviser Vice-Chancellor Leach, who, in 1818, had arranged the Milan Commission, for the purpose of making inquiries into those rumours of the conduct of the Princess of Wales, which appeared to have determined the King to press the conduct of some very hazardous enterprise upon his Ministers. Six months before the death of George III., the Cabinet had a full sense of the difficulty and danger that would arise if Caroline of Brunswick should return to England as Queen Consort. But they steadily refused to meet the difficulty by acceding to the Prince Regent's passionate desire for a divorce. With Mr. Brougham, as the Princess of Wales's law-adviser, they then communicated "in order to bring about some arrangement which should hold good in the event of her Royal Highness becoming Queen."+ In August, "the lady in question," as Mr. Brougham terms his client, wrote to him to express her resolve to come over herself, saying she had written to Lord Liverpool to tell him so. The Princess of Wales's law-adviser expresses himself with some vivacity upon the public danger, and the private discomfort to himself, that would result from this rash determination. "I am confident from her letter of to-day that she now intends to come, and I am still more clear that her coming would be pregnant with every sort of mischief." Mr. Stapleton, who was private Secretary to Mr. Canning, gives the date of this letter, August 5th, 1819, but does not state to whom it was addressed. It is evidently addressed to some official personage, as Mr. Brougham says, "You had better communicate this. I rely on the honour of the party principally concerned to have justice done to my motives, in the event of the other setting the mob against me, which she is quite capable of doing." + In a minute of the Cabinet on the 10th of February, the Ministers communicated to the King their opinion, individually as well as collectively, that a proceeding for high-treason against the Queen was out of the question, and that a measure of divorce might seriously prejudice the interests of the King and of the Monarchy. They honestly stated that any private individual, circumstanced as the King had been with respect to the Princess, could not expect to obtain a divorce according to the established usage of Parliament. They were of opinion, therefore, that the notoriety of what had been and still were the situation and conduct of the Princess of Wales upon the Continent, would induce Parliament to give a ready consent to any measure which, while it afforded to the King security against the invasion of his dignity and comfort by the return of the Princess to England, would be calculated, at the same time, to avoid discussions and disclosures offensive to public |