educated at Eton and Cambridge, and in 1786 was returned to Parliament for Northumberland. He joined the Whig party under Mr. Fox, and immediately made a position for himself. As early as the year 1797 he brought forward a scheme embodying his views upon the subject of Parliamentary Reform. This scheme, which included, amongst other things, triennial Parliaments, was lost by 149 votes. On the death of Mr. Pitt, in 1806, Mr. Fox was called to the administration of public affairs, and Mr. Grey (who had then become Lord Howick by the elevation of his father to the peerage), was appointed First Lord of the Admiralty, with a seat in the Cabinet. In the following year he became leader of the House of Commons, and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. Ministers, however, were dismissed, on account of their desire to remove some of the disabilities of the Roman Catholics. Parliament having been dissolved, Lord Howick was returned to the new House by the borough of Appleby. On the death of his father, Lord Grey took his seat in the Upper House. He was now in comparative retirement for a long period; and it was not until 1830 that he again assumed the reins of Government. During his four years of office he carried two of the greatest measures of modern times, for we owe to him the great Reform Bill and the abolition of slavery. No statesman could wish to connect his name with nobler measures. Earl Grey retired from public life in 1834, and died on the 17th of July, 1845. The inscription written by

Sydney Smith, the celebrated essayist and wit, for the statue of Earl Grey erected at Newcastle, well describes the great statesman's character:— 'Charles, Earl Grey, K.G., of Berwick, in Northumberland. This monument, in a spirit of solemn respect and deep gratitude, is erected by many of his fellow-citizens. They have seen him through a long life devoting his fine talents to promote the best interests of mankind; and in evil days, with high moral courage, defending the almost extinguished liberties of England. They owe to him that memorable Reform which, blending freedom with loyalty and order, has infused fresh life and energy into all our institutions; Reform which he planned in his youth, and brought to triumphant perfection in his advanced age. Remembering these things, they have deemed it an act of sacred justice to record, by a public monument, their admiration of this great statesman; not without hope that the young, seeing what those qualities are which command the gratitude of mankind, may strive to be as good and pure as he whose image is placed before their eyes.'

The third Earl Spencer, better known as Viscount Althorp, and by his intimate friends as 'honest Jack Althorp,' was born in 1782, and educated at Harrow and Cambridge. Entering Parliament at an early age, he held office as a Junior Lord of the Treasury in the Fox and Grenville Administration. During the long Tory reign he was a leader of the Opposition in the Commons, where he sat for a quarter of a

a

cultural pursuits.

The name of Lord Brougham shines with equal lustre as advocate, political orator, Lord Chancellor, and social and educational reformer. He was born in Edinburgh in the year 1778, and was educated at the High School and University in that city. Called to the Scot

his long and earnest campaign against the slave trade. Defeated at Liverpool by Canning, in 1816, he was returned for Winchelsea. His splendid and versatile talents soon gave him a position. In 1817 began his labours in the cause of education, and in 1820 the country rang with his fame as the leader of the

defence in the trial of Queen Caroline. In 1823 he was jointly concerned in the establishment of the London Mechanics' Institution, which was speedily followed by the founding of similar institutions in other towns. He strenuously supported the Catholic Relief Bill, and other measures then considered very advanced. In 1830 he was appointed Lord Chancellor, and remained on the woolsack throughout the agitation of the Reform Bill. He was the chief hero of its success, and one dramatic incident in connection with his advocacy of the measure is well known. His subsequent years were mainly devoted to literature, his works and pamphlets being varied and numerous. His lordship died at Cannes on the 7th of May, 1868. To these three men, as we have said, the Reform Act of 1832 was almost entirely due; and, in consequence, it was these same men who were charged with the impending ruin of the country.

But the measure having passed, the friends of Reform now looked forward to a realisation of the fruits of victory; and men of all shades of opinion forecast with speculative wonder-mingled in not a few instances with apprehension the composition of the first reformed House of Commons. The result was a surprise to the extreme politicians of both parties. The Reformers did not carry everything before them, as they anticipated, neither were the Tories the enormous losers which they expected to be. Ministers preserved their power, and were victorious in England, and still more so in Scot

land. In Ireland, however, they sustained very serious defeats. Special constituencies, also, in England proved treacherous, and many popular men, and earnest friends of Reform, went to the wall. In addition to many counties, Bristol, Norwich, Stamford, Hertford, Newark, and other boroughs, pronounced against the Ministry. The Duke of Newcastle, who had propounded the memorable political maxim, 'Have I not a right to do what I like with my own?' once more regained his ducal influence, which had been rudely curtailed in 1831. During this time of revolution the Continent was greatly disturbed, and the internal condition of England was likewise one to be deeply deplored. There was little trade, and an unfavourable revenue; riots occurred in the provinces and in Ireland; the working classes were discontented; labour was diminishing, pauperism was increasing, and the cholera was claiming its victims everywhere. The poor looked to the operation of the Reform Bill as the first Act of their redemption, while the landed gentry saw in it the first sign of the declension of our national greatness. Both classes were disappointed; the former had to look elsewhere for a revival of commercial prosperity, and the latter discovered that the ox in the stall, and the soil which they owned and tilled, were just as safe and inviolate as they were before the passing of the terrible Act.

Mr. Gladstone having received an invitation from the Duke of Newcastle (with whose son, the Earl of Lincoln, he was on terms of intimate friendship)

to contest the representation of Newark, hurried back from the Continent for that purpose. Before the close of September, 1832, he was actively engaged in canvassing the borough. He immediately became very popular in the town, and one of the local journals remarked that if candour and ability had any influence upon the electors, there would soon be a change in the representation. A week later came accounts of glorious' meetings, with the assurance that Gladstone's return might be fully calculated upon. The other candidates were Mr. W. F. Handley and Mr. Serjeant Wilde. The last-named gentleman was an advanced Liberal, who had unsuccessfully contested the borough in 1829 and 1830. After the latter contest a piece of plate had been presented to him 'by his ardent friends, the Blue electors of the borough-who, by their exertions and sufferings in the cause of independence, largely conduced to awaken the attention of the nation to the necessity of a Reform in Parliament.' The inscription further went on to state, Upon this humble token of respect (contributed in the hour of defeat) the Blue electors of Newark inscribe their sense of the splendid ability, unwearied perseverance, and disinterested public spirit displayed by Serjeant Wilde in maintaining the two contests of 1829 and 1830, in order to emancipate the borough from political thraldom, and restore to its inhabitants the free exercise of their long-lost rights.' In the following year, 1831, when the Reform fever had gained its

height, Serjeant Wilde was successful in defeating the Duke of Newcastle's nominee, and became member for the borough. The election which now succeeded upon the passing of the Reform Bill was consequently looked forward to with unusual interest, and it was early perceived that the struggle would be of a close and determined character.

The career of Mr. Gladstone's first political antagonist was one of remarkable note, and justifies some allusion to it in this place. Thomas Wilde (whose father was an attorney) was born on the 7th of July, 1782, in Warwick Square. He was educated at St. Paul's School, and himself admitted as an attorney in 1805. 1805. He continued to practise for twelve years, but in 1817, when he was in his thirty-fifth year, he was called to the bar. Though suffering from an impediment in his speech, by great courage and persistency he overcame it, and so great was the progress he made in three years at the bar, that he was appointed assistant-counsel in the defence of Queen Caroline. Most men at nearly forty have generally fallen into the groove they are destined to occupy, but it was not so with Mr. Wilde. In 1827 he was made a King's Serjeant, and so largely had his business increased that in the Court of Common Pleas he was almost always engaged on one side or the other. Lord Tenterden said that he industry enough to succeed without talent, and talent enough to succeed without industry.' Entering Parliament, he sat first for Newark and afterwards for Worcester.

had

He