1818.] GLOOM OF THE PRINCE REGENT. 95 she fled from Warwick House, her own residence, to the house of the Princess of Wales, in the belief that she was about to be subjected to more coercion and to a stricter surveillance than she had yet endured. Miss Knight says, "It is possible that when Princess Charlotte was a child, her temper might have been violent and headstrong, and the world held that opinion when she was grown up. I never saw anything of this violence or obstinacy. Much agitation, nervous uneasiness, and sometimes nervous impatience, all this I observed, and sometimes to such a degree as to injure her health. As a proof of this, it may be remarked, that she was so much afraid of her father, that when she had seen him, or expected him, she stuttered exceedingly, which she never did at times when there was nothing particular to agitate her."* Placed under happier circumstances by her union with a man of extraordinary good sense and prudence, the nation hoped that, although one cause of previous unhappiness still existed in full force, there would be no manifestation of those dissensions which, in former days, had rendered the position of the sovereign and of the heir-apparent one of mutual misery and of public scandal. The national expression of feeling upon the death of the Princess Charlotte was termed by lord Dudley "exaggerated lamentation;" and he thought that it "could not but be, from its obvious purport, offensive to the other branches of the Royal family." It certainly might have been offensive to the Regent; for the strong national expression of hope in a future reign presented a forcible contrast to the small measure of enthusiasm towards him who was in the actual exercise of the sovereign power. But beyond this, there was a more direct cause of the Prince Regent's depression of spirits the scandals that had reached him respecting the Princess of Wales. The only remedy for his gloom and irritation "was beset with so many difficulties, that his Ministers shrunk from the responsibility of advising it, though he grew daily more urgent for them to attempt it at any risk." On the 1st of January the Prince Regent wrote to the Lord Chancellor," You cannot be surprised (much difficulty in point of delicacy being now set aside in my mind by the late melancholy event which has taken place in my family), if I turn my whole thoughts to the endeavouring to extricate myself from the cruellest, as well as the most unjust, predicament, that ever even the lowest individual, much more a Prince, ever was placed in, by unshackling myself from a woman who," &c. &c.§ Mr. Fremantle, the gossiping correspondent of the marquess of Buckingham, assigns as a reason for the Regent not opening the Parliament in person, on the 27th of January, "that allusion must be made in the Speech to the death of the Princess Charlotte, which he cannot bear."|| Lord Dudley considered that, in the Speech composed for the Prince Regent, he could distinguish somewhat of that feeling which "the exaggerated lamentation" for the Princess was calculated to excite: "The mention of her is rather dry-sulky rather than sad." * "Autobiography of Miss Cornelia Knight," vol. ii. pp. 88, 1861. +"Letters," p. 195. Duke of Buckingham-"Court of England during the Regency," vol. ii. p. 202. §"Life of Lord Eldon," vol. ii. p. 305. "Court of England during the Regency," vol. ii. p. 202. 96 BILL OF INDEMNITY-MR. CANNING. [1818. The general tone of the Royal Speech was hopeful and confiding. Improvement in every branch of domestic industry, and the state of public credit, were proofs that the difficulties under which the country had been labouring were to be ascribed to temporary causes. So important a change could not fail to withdraw from the disaffected the principal means of fomenting a spirit of discontent. The peace and tranquillity of the country had been restored. The confidence thus expressed by the Government was supported by the announcement of their intention of bringing in a bill for the immediate repeal of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act. The chief business of the Opposition was therefore to contend against the mode in which the Ministers had exercised their extraordinary powers, and to argue that no necessity had ever arisen for granting those powers. The discussion on these topics was initiated in both Houses by the Ministers themselves. Papers relative to the recent state of the country were presented on the 2nd of February. Committees were appointed to report upon them, and the Reports of the Lords and Commons were presented towards the end of the month. The Reports went to completely justify the necessity for extraordinary measures, and to prove the discretion and moderation of the Government in the execution of the powers vested in it by the two Acts of the last Session. It was somewhat contrary to the general tenor of these Reports, that they expressed a decided opinion that the great body of the people had remained unseduced by the designs of the disaffected, even in the most disturbed districts, and at the periods of the greatest distress. The Reports produced little debate, but the discussions were repeated and vehement upon "A Bill for Indemnifying Persons who, since the 26th of January, 1817, have acted in apprehending, imprisoning, or detaining in custody, persons suspected of high treason, or treasonable practices, and in the suppression of tumultuous and unlawful assemblies." On the motion for going into Committee on this Bill, Mr. Canning uttered five words, which long had the effect of inducing a belief that he regarded the sufferings of the humble with cold-blooded indifference, and made a jest of their misfortunes. One of three petitioners, who complained of severities which they endured whilst under confinement, was described by Canning as "the revered and ruptured Ogden." In Hansard's Parliamentary Debates the words are given as "the ever to be revered and unhappy Ogden." There appears to be little doubt, that the words which his enemies ascribed to Canning were the words which he used. But in the same sentence in which he employed the unfortunate alliteration, he exposed the shameful mendacity of the petition which had been got up for Ogden, which affirmed that hernia had been caused by the weight of his irons, when he had suffered from the affliction during eight years, and was cured whilst in confinement, having written to his relatives and friends to express the delight he felt in being made a new man again. Amongst the most virulent of the attacks upon Mr. Canning for his somewhat imprudent expression, was an anonymous pamphlet, "which he considered as suggestive of his assassination," and of which he was always fully persuaded that Mr. Hobhouse was the author."+ A fashion, now happily * * Hansard, vol. xxxvii. col. 1026. + Stapleton- George Canning and his Times," p. 246. 3 1818.] PARLIAMENTARY REFORM-ROYAL MARRIAGES. 26 97 past with regard to all classes, was at that time, for men filling the highest offices in the State, to settle attacks upon their personal honour by the arbitrement of a duel. To provoke a duel, Canning wrote to the anonymous author of the pamphlet, "you are a liar and a slanderer, and want courage only to be an assassin." The writer of the pamphlet acknowledged the letter, but declined to remove the mask. The question of Parliamentary Reform, which had slept for ten years, as far as Parliament was concerned, was revived in the House of Commons by sir Francis Burdett. In 1809 he had proposed that every county should be divided into electoral districts, each returning one member; and that the franchise should be vested in the taxed male population. Fifteen members then supported this motion. In 1818 sir Francis Burdett, in accordance with the views of the Hampden Club, of which he was the chairman, brought forward resolutions for universal male suffrage, equal electoral districts, vote by ballot, and annual parliaments. Sir Francis restricted his proposal to male suffrage, although many of the Reform Associations were composed of women as well as of men. In the session of 1818 the seconder of the resolutions, lord Cochrane, was their only supporter on the division, in addition to the mover. The advocates of Reform out of doors were damaging a cause which had once had the support of Pitt and Fox, of Grey and Erskine. Moderate men had begun to wish that the cause was in better hands than the violent advocates of the same principle that Burdett had announced. Sydney Smith, in 1819, wrote to Francis Jeffrey, "I am doubtful whether it is not your duty and my duty to become moderate Reformers, to keep off worse."* In this session messages from the Regent were delivered to both Houses, announcing that treaties of marriage were in negotiation between the duke of Clarence and the Princess Adelaide Louisa Theresa Caroline Amelia of Saxe Meiningen; also between the duke of Cambridge and the Princess Augusta Wilhelmina Louisa of Hesse; also announcing that the Prince Regent had given his consent to a marriage between the duke of Kent and her Serene Highness Mary Louisa Victoria, daughter of the duke of Saxe Cobourg Saalfeld, widow of Enrich Charles Prince of Leiningen, and sister of Prince Leopold. There were long debates as to the sums to be voted by Parliament in consequence of these projected alliances. The marriage of the duke of Cambridge was solemnized on the 1st of June; those of the duke of Clarence and the duke of Kent on the 13th of July. The daughter of the fourth son of George III., by his marriage with the sister of Prince Leopold, was born on the 24th of May, 1819. It is a remarkable example of the vanity of human fears, that the people who wept, as a people without hope, for the decease of Charlotte Augusta, should have realized through her premature death precisely such a female reign, of just and mild government, of domestic virtues, of generous sympathy with popular rights, of bold and liberal encouragement of sound improvement, as they had associated with her probable career, a reign more congenial to the spontaneous love of the people than they could have thought, in that season of disquiet, was a possible blessing to be reached in a few coming years. "Memoir of Sydney Smith," vol. ii. p. 181. VOL. VIII. H 98 PARLIAMENT DISSOLVED-DEATH OF QUEEN CHARLOTTE. [1818. On the 10th of June the Prince Regent announced from the throne his intention forthwith to dissolve the Parliament. The word prorogation was not mentioned. At the close of the royal speech the Lord Chancellor in formal terms notified the will and pleasure of his Royal Highness "that this Parliament be now dissolved, and this Parliament is dissolved accordingly." When the Commons returned to their House, Mr. Manners Sutton, the late Speaker, offered to read the speech at the table, as is usual after a prorogation. Mr. Tierney objected to any such proceeding, as implying some approbation of this mode of dissolution, which he considered as an insult to Parliament. Mr. Manners Sutton said that this was a case in which there was no precedent, there having been no such dissolution since that of the Oxford Parliament in the reign of Charles II. The motive for this extraordinary proceeding was, apparently, that no delay should arise in summoning a new Parliament. It had been a stormy session; and it was not desirable in the view of the ministry, that the same Parliament should re-assemble in consequence of the demise of the Crown, which then appeared to be an event very likely speedily to happen. The Proclamation for calling a new Parliament was issued the same day as that on which the dissolution took place. The writs for the new Parliament were made returnable on the 4th of August. The elections were all over by the middle of July. Sydney Smith wrote to Earl Grey, "I congratulate you on the general turn of the elections, and the serious accession of strength to the Whigs." There probably never was a general election in which there was a more revolting display of the violence which too often attended protracted contests. In Westminster, the government candidate, sir Murray Maxwell, a distinguished naval officer, was nearly killed by the brutality of the mob, who were outrageous that he stood before Burdett on the poll. In this stronghold of popular opinions, it was creditable to the good sense of the middle classes that Romilly was returned with Burdett, and that Hunt, who continued the contest to the end of the fifteen days allowed by law, had only eighty-four votes. Romilly's high character secured him a triumphant return at the head of the poll, though he had not spent a shilling, nor solicited a vote, nor made his appearance on the hustings. He never took that place in Parliament which the reverence of his fellow citizens had awarded him. On the 29th of October he lost his wife, to whom he was most tenderly attached. In a paroxysm of insanity he died by his own hand on the 2nd of November. On the 17th of November took place the death of Queen Charlotte, at the age of seventy-five. For fifty-seven years she had shared the political anxieties, and watched over the mental aberrations of the King, who had since 1811 ceased to be conscious of the sympathy of wife or child. Under the Regency Bill she was appointed the Custos of the king's person. During the Regency she had presided over the Court ceremonies with the same decorum which she had always maintained, and which did something to preserve the appearance of virtue, however the reality might be sacrificed in royal retreats which her scrupulous eye might not care to explore. Richard Rush, the plenipotentiary from the United States, who was presented to her Majesty in the February preceding her decease, describes her deportment with a strong feeling of respect: "During the whole interview there was a benignity in her 1818.] EVACUATION OF FRANCE BY ALLIED TROOPS. 99 manner, which, in union with her age and rank, was both attractive and touching." At the Congress of the Allied Sovereigns and of the ministers of the several powers, at Aix-la-Chapelle, the duke of Wellington, associated with Lord Castlereagh, represented Great Britain. The only object of the Congress was to determine with regard to the continued occupation of the French territory by the troops of the Allies, of which Wellington was generalissimo. On the 2nd of October, the evacuation was unanimously agreed upon. By the Treaty of Paris, the possible occupation had been fixed at five years. The fears of the more timid of the French Royalists inclined the representatives of the continental powers, with the exception of Russia, to prolong the occupation for the whole term. Louis XVIII. and his ministry had more confidence in the security which had been established, during the three years which had sufficed to restrain any attempt to shake the government by popular violence. The duke of Wellington was satisfied with the state of things which he had witnessed during that period. A French historian says that sufficient justice had not been done to the duke, "for the liberal and faithful manner in which he protected the interests of France throughout all the negotiations with foreign powers . . . . . He was of opinion that this measure of precaution ought to cease, seeing that France had not only duly discharged her stipulated payments, but that her government appeared to present the character of order and duration." + your The members of the new Parliament having assembled on the 14th of January, and Mr. Manners Sutton having been re-elected Speaker, the Prince Regent's speech was delivered by commission on the 21st. The most important passage in that speech was in connection with the announcement of the death of the Queen :-"His Royal Highness has commanded us to direct attention to the consideration of such measures as this melancholy event has rendered necessary and expedient with respect to the care of his Majesty's sacred person." This was the preliminary to a Bill appointing the duke of York as a successor to the Queen in the office of the King's Custos. In a committee on the Civil List it was proposed that the sum of 10,000l., which her Majesty had received on account of this office, should be continued to the duke of York. The Windsor establishment was proposed to be reduced from 100,000l. to 50,000l. The motion of Mr. Tierney, that these charges should be defrayed out of the privy purse, was negatived by a majority of 95. The proposed allowance to the duke of York was the subject of continued and animated debate. The repugnance to this measure was not confined to the ordinary parliamentary Opposition. Lord Grenville thought that there was "something very revolting in paying a sum of 10,000l. per annum to superintend the condition of his father, that father being the sovereign of the country." He was apprehensive that this would be a very general feeling. Sydney Smith did not probably express himself too strongly, after the House, on the 22nd of March, had divided upon the question, that the clause granting 10,000l. a year to the duke of York should stand as part of the Royal "Residence at the Court of London," p. 134. + Capefigue-" Histoire de la Restauration," tome i. p. 478. |