90 PROSECUTIONS FOR LIBEL SIGNAL FAILURES. [1817. struggle he made against any display of his deep mortification at the issue of this prosecution. "Bishop Turner, who was present at the trial, and accompanied the Chief Justice home in his carriage, related that all the way he laughed at the tumultuous mob who followed him, remarking, 'that he was afraid of their saliva, not of their bite;' and that passing Charing Cross he pulled the check-string, and said, 'It just occurs to me that they sell the best red herrings at this shop of any in London; buy six.'"* Lord Campbell adds, "The popular opinion, however, was, that lord Ellenborough was killed by Hone's trial, and he certainly never held up his head in public after." There is a more conclusive evidence of his feelings than popular opinion. On Sunday, the 21st of December, the day after this last trial, lord Ellenborough wrote thus to lord Sidmouth: "The disgraceful events which have occurred at Guildhall within the last three or four days have led me, both on account of the public and myself, to consider very seriously my own sufficiency, particularly in point of bodily health and strength, to discharge the official duties of my station in the manner in which, at the present critical moment, it is peculiarly necessary they should be discharged. . . . I wish to carry my meditated purpose of resignation into effect, as soon as the convenience of Government, in regard to the due selection and appointment of my successor, may allow."+ The proceedings of the Government in the libel matters of 1817 were signal failures. A few miserable hawkers were held to bail, or sent to prison under lord Sidmouth's Circular; some ex-officio informations were filed, with only one conviction,-that of a printer in the country, who republished one of Hone's parodies, and was tried before Hone himself was tried. As to the three acquittals we have described, it is perfectly evident that three juries, consisting of respectable London merchants, would have assuredly convicted the defendant, had they not felt that the real sting of the alleged profaneness was the severity of the political satire. Although the indictment stated that these parodies were seditious as well as profane, the sedition was studiously kept in the background. Had they not been really prosecuted for their political doctrines, their unquestionable indecency and impropriety must have carried a verdict against them on the first trial. The second and third trials looked like persecution; and public opinion threw its shield over the offender. There was a feeling, moreover, that political passions were influencing the judgment-seat. The severity of the Lord Chief Justice to the reforming member for Westminster, lord Cochrane, was not forgotten. When we look back upon this unhappy period, we may honestly infer that the real danger was not so much that the people should be irritated and misled by mob-leaders and unscrupulous writers, as that a general feeling should grow up in the nation that Government was a power antagonistic to the governed-an oppressive and not a protective power-a power of separate interests from the interests of the people. This grew into a very widely-diffused feeling, and was found deeply rooted, long after the first sufferings that attended the transition state of peace had passed away-a * "Lives of the Chief Justices," vol. iii. p. 225. feeling that was far more dangerous to the national welfare than any insurrectionary outbreak of the masses of the working population. Deluded these masses unquestionably were-acted upon by demagogues-ready for riot and violence; capable of serious mischief, but incapable of resisting the law wisely administered. The eagerness of the Government to suspend the constitutional protections for the liberty of the subject; to call for new enactments to repress sedition; to fetter the expression of opinion by rendering the plain-speaking of the public journals very perilous; to employ the spy-system, with the certainty that it would excite the violence which it pretended to discover-these were the causes why the Government had no love from any class; very little respect; intense hate from many; slavish fear from more. A large number, indeed, of the upper and middle classes were alarmed into a prostrate adhesion to the menacing policy of the Government, and were ready with "lives and fortunes" to put down the revolutionary spirit which they were assured was working under the guise of Parliamentary Reform. From this year we may date the retrogression of public opinion on the question of an improved representation of the people. As long as the middle classes were afraid of its agitation, and naturally associated the idea of Reform with the rash movements of the operative classes, with their violent declamations and their tumultuous meetings, the differences of principle took the unhappy form of a contest between wealth and poverty, between capital and labour. The humbler classes had been taught by the demagogues that all the evils of civilization are political evils, and that democratic institutions would at once sweep away all social miseries. The upper and middle classes opposed all changes, in the belief that the preservation of existing institutions, however decayed and imperfect, was necessary for the maintenance of the security of property. There were, nevertheless, many of the wealthy and educated classes who, in 1817, thought, as Mr. Wilberforce then thought, when he wrote, "I continue friendly to the moderate, gradual, and almost insensibly operating Parliamentary Reform, which was last brought forward by Mr. Pitt;"* but who, nevertheless, were "adverse to the measure," on account of the character of its advocates and their followers. The reciprocal distrust of reformers and anti-reformers must have ended in a convulsion, had not alarm and violence gradually shrunk before a growing intelligence. The English mind had been trained by its historical experience to know that all the triumphs of liberty had been won quietly and legally. The time was not far distant when this forbearance would have its reward. Amidst the democratic agitations of 1817, which necessarily produced a corresponding violence in the tone of political parties, it is pleasant to turn to an "affecting, improving, and most memorable scene"+ in the House of Commons, on the 3rd of March. Francis Horner had closed his valuable and blameless life at Pisa on the 6th of February. Lord Morpeth, in moving a new writ for the borough of St. Mawes, in the room of Mr. Horner, delivered what Macintosh describes as "a speech so perfect, that it might have been well placed as a passage in the most elegant English writer." In * "Life of Wilberforce," vol. iv. p. 315. Sir James Macintosh-Diary, in his " Life," vol. ii. p. 339. 92 FRANCIS HORNER-TRIBUTE TO HIS MEMORY. [1817. the eulogies upon this statesman, so prematurely cut off from that career which opened the widest expectations of his future eminence, the leading men of all parties concurred, in a spirit which was calculated to inspire hope and confidence amidst the fears and doubts of that gloomy time. "Never was so much honour paid in any age or nation to intrinsic claims alone. A Howard introduced, and an English House of Commons adopted, the proposition of thus honouring the memory of a man of thirty-eight, the son of a shopkeeper, who never filled an office, or had the power of obliging a living creature, and whose grand title to this distinction was the belief of his virtue. How honourable to the age and to the House! A country where such sentiments prevail is not ripe for destruction."* Sir James Macintosh-Diary, in his "Life," vol. ii. p. 339. Death of the Princess Charlotte-Illness of the Regent-Causes of his gloom and irritationOpening of Parliament-Bill of Indemnity-The Petition of Ogden-Mr. Canning-Sir F. Burdett proposes a plan of Parliamentary Reform-Parliament dissolved-Death of Sir S. Romilly-Death of Queen Charlotte-Evacuation of France by the Allied troops-Meeting of the New Parliament-Duke of York the Custos of the King-Act for Resumption of Cash Payments-Sir James Macintosh's motion on the Criminal Laws-Last efforts of Mr. Grattan for Catholic Emancipation-Agitation for Reform-The Manchester Massacre, so called-The Six Acts-Death of the Duke of Kent-Death of George III. FORTY-FOUR years ago, "without the slightest warning, without the opportunity of a moment's immediate preparation, in the midst of the deepest tranquillity, at midnight a voice was heard in the palace, not of singing men and singing women, not of revelry and mirth, but the cry, Behold, the bridegroom cometh."* The death of the Presumptive Heiress of the British Crown, on the 6th of November, after the birth of a dead child, was the great event in the domestic history of 1817. Never was a whole nation plunged in such deep and universal grief. From the highest to the lowest, this death was felt as a calamity that demanded the intense sorrow of domestic misfortune. Around every fireside there were suppressed tears and bitter remembrances. The most solemn disclaimer was uttered, through this universal mourning, of the calumny against the people that they were desirous of a vital change Robert Hall's Funeral Sermon. 94 DEATH OF THE PRINCESS CHARLOTTE. [1817. in their laws and institutions. Whatever might be their complaints, they showed, on this occasion, that their attachment to a constitutional monarchy was undiminished by factious contests or real grievances; and that they looked with exulting hopes to the days when a patriot Queen should diffuse the sunlight of just government through every corner of a prosperous and happy land. The Princess Charlotte seemed born to build up for generations the succession to the British Crown, by calling around her own person the warmest devotion of a zealous but a reflecting people. The nation exulted in the maturity of her person and her mind. She stood, as was hoped amongst her future subjects, a beautiful, an accomplished, a noble-hearted woman. She had wisely asserted her own right to choose for herself in the most important action of her life. The nation hailed and reverenced her motives. The Prince of her choice brought neither extent of territory nor continental influence; but he brought an active, firm, inquiring mind, and an amiable temper. In the retirement of Claremont, they lived calmly and unobtrusively, in that enviable tranquillity which is so congenial to British feeling. The public sympathy with the husband of the Princess Charlotte upon his great bereavement is well characterized by Southey in a private letter: "The manner in which I have heard Prince Leopold spoken of on the occasion impressed me a good deal. He was called 'poor man' and 'poor fellow.' His affliction has brought him down to our level, and rank was forgotten in the sympathy of humanity."* Since the death of the Princess Charlotte, the Prince Regent had been seriously indisposed, and for a short time his life was considered in danger. He was not a hard-hearted though he was a selfish man, and the sudden calamity appears to have had a greater influence upon his health and spirits than might have been expected by those who judged that there had been no great affection between the father and daughter. In the "Autobiography of Miss Knight, Lady Companion to the Princess Charlotte," there are many curious details of unpleasant passages in the intercourse of the Regent and the Princess, some of which had acquired an awkward publicity at the period of their occurrence. In the unhappy position of the father and the mother of the Princess there. was a natural source of irritation; and the restrictions which were placed upon the intercourse of the daughter with the mother were in themselves galling to a young woman of strong affections and high spirit. In the enforcement of these restrictions the public sympathized with the two royal ladies; and manifested little respect for the support which the Prince Regent received when, in 1813, he placed before the Privy Council all the documents relative to the inquiry into the conduct of the Princess of Wales in 1806. He then obtained an opinion, that, with reference to the welfare of the Princess Charlotte and the most important interests of the State, the intercourse between the mother and the daughter should continue to be subject to regulation and restraint. The dissension became serious upon the refusal of the Princess Charlotte to marry the Prince of Orange. The impulsiveness of the Princess Charlotte's character was manifested when, in July, 1814, "Memoirs of Sir William Knighton," by Lady Knighton, vol. i. p. 131. |