Secret History of the Court of England Volume II Part 8

"The little knot of dependants, who were willing to make common stock and carry themselves to market with you, have become ashamed of the trifling, oscillating buffoon, whom they mistook for the head of a party, and who accepted the first and lowest vacancy that could replace him in the precincts of power. Even the miserable chuck-farthing, Ward, who has learnt from you how to run riot on his apostacy, owns, that he hesitates between the disgrace of 'serving without wages, and of being dismissed without a character.'

"Go on, sir, I pray you; proceed with your pleasantries; light up the dungeon with the flashes of your merriment,--make us familiar, make us pleased, with the anguish of the captive; teach us how to look upon torture and tyranny as agreeable trifles; let whips and manacles become the play-things of parliament; let patriotism and principle be preserved only as vain names, the materials of a jest; and, as you have disturbed the bed of sickness with your unhallowed mirth, hasten, with appropriate mockery, the long foretold approaching _Euthanasia_ of the expiring const.i.tution. But confine your efforts to that a.s.sembly where they have been so favourably, so thankfully received. You will find no other hearers. You are nothing but on that stage. The clerks, the candles, the heated atmosphere, the mummeries and decorations, the trained, packed paper audience, confused, belated, and jaded into an appet.i.te for the grossest stimulants; these are the preparations indispensable to your exhibition. Thank heaven, however, the House of Commons is not the only tribunal; and it is possible, that, in spite of your extraordinary progress and probable success, there may still be, in this country, a body of men, now _dispersed_, but whom their common interest will ONE DAY COLLECT AND UNITE, FOR THE DEFENCE OF THEIR RIGHTS AND THE PUNISHMENT OF THEIR OPPRESSORS[187:A].

"Believe me, sir, not an echo of those shouts of laughter which hailed your jests upon rebellious old age and traitorous disease, not an echo has been lost in the wide circ.u.mference of the British islands. Those shouts still ring in our ears; they will never die away as long as the day of retribution is deferred; they will never die away until we are finally extirpated by your triumph, or you are annihilated by our indignation. Do not flatter yourself that, by securing the connivance of parliament, you are safe from all national censure. _Parliament does not represent the feelings of the British nation._ It would be an a.s.sault upon the character of this great, this glorious people, to suppose that their representatives were sent to the House of Commons to encourage the playful ferocity of a hardened politician. The n.o.bler portion of the nation are certainly not members of either house: the better educated, the more enlightened, and the more wealthy, at least the more independent, are to be found _without the walls of parliament_. You are (and what ministerial man is not?) an enemy to reform. But you shall be told, sir, that the necessity of reform, and of choosing our representatives from some other cla.s.ses of society, was never so decidedly shewn as in the reception of your speech. If Mr. Canning was, on a former occasion[188:A], applauded for saying, that the const.i.tution of that a.s.sembly could not be bad, which '_worked so well in practice_'

as to admit of the selection of such men as Mr. Windham and Mr. Horner, I am sure it is to be allowed me to say, that the a.s.sembly can have no feelings or opinions, in common with the rest of their countrymen, which would receive, with shouts of approving laughter, such a speech as this of Mr. Canning.

"You cannot be far from the close of your career; for, either we shall be so lost that all your farther efforts will be superfluous, or you will be so resisted as to disable you for ever from all noxious exertion. This, then, may be the time for summing up the evidence, furnished by the unbia.s.sed, uncontradictory witnesses of your life; and for enabling your countrymen to pa.s.s the verdict.

"Let him speak who ever knew you in possession of any respectable reputation. The rag you stole from Mr. Sheridan's mantle was always too scanty to cover your nakedness: like all mimics, you caught only the meaner characteristics of your archetype; oratorical, not orator; poetaster, not poet; witling, not wit. You were never the first or best in any one line of action. You might not have been altogether inept or slow in playing second parts, but on no one occasion have you ever evinced that sincerity, either of principle or capacity, which the lowest amongst us are accustomed to require from the pretenders to excellence. Your spirit was rebuked in presence of those accomplished persons whom the followers of all parties recognized as beings of a higher order, and were willing to yield even more deference than their unambitious merit required. The chances of survivorship have left you a great man in these days of little men; but you keep true to the epic rule; you end as you began; power has conferred upon you no dignity,--elevation has not made your posture more erect. The decency of your character consists in its entire conformity to the original conception formed of you in early life. It has borrowed nothing from station, nothing from experience. IT BECOMES YOU, BUT WOULD DISGRACE ANY OTHER MAN."

[187:A] How well has part of this prediction been fulfilled by the people of 1832! May the rest be speedily accomplished!

[188:A] See motion for a new writ for the Borough of St.

Mawes, in the room of Francis Horner, esq., deceased.

To a person of Mr. Canning's warmth of temper, such a production was felt most acutely; for he could not, with all his ready eloquence and talent, deny the truth of the writer's charges, or the justness of his severe censure. When men find themselves exposed, without the possibility of making out a good defence by argument, however speciously employed, it is no uncommon thing for them to abuse their accusers, by stigmatizing them with the epithets of "SLANDERER," "LIAR," "COWARD,"

"DOLT," "IDIOT," and similar opprobrious names, which, however, generally fall harmless on the person to whom they are applied, while they recoil, with ten-fold vigour, on the head of him who disgraces himself and his cause by their adoption. Such was precisely the case with Mr. Canning, as the following letters will testify:

MR. CANNING'S LETTER.

"_Gloucester Lodge, April 10, 1818._

"SIR,--I received early in the last week the copy of your pamphlet, which you (I take for granted) had the attention to send to me.

"Soon after I was informed, on the authority of your publisher, that you had withdrawn the whole impression from him, with a view (as was supposed) of suppressing the publication.

"I since learn, however, that the pamphlet, though not sold, is circulated under blank covers.

"I learn this from (among others) the gentleman to whom the pamphlet has been industriously attributed, but who has voluntarily and absolutely denied to me that he has any knowledge of it or its author.

"To you, sir, whoever you may be, I address myself thus directly, for the purpose of expressing to you my opinion, that,

"You are a liar and a slanderer, and want courage only to be an a.s.sa.s.sin.

"I have only to add, that no man knows of my writing to you; that I shall maintain the same reserve so long as I have an expectation of hearing from you in your own name; and that I shall not give up that expectation till to-morrow (Sat.u.r.day) night.

"The same address which brought me your pamphlet will bring any letter safe to my hands.

"I am, sir, your humble servant, (Signed) "GEO. CANNING."

"N.B. Mr. Ridgway is requested to forward this letter to its destination."

THE AUTHOR'S REPLY,

_Addressed to the Editor of the Examiner._

"SIR,--You are requested to insert in your paper the reply of the Right Hon. George Canning to my public remonstrance with that gentleman on the insult he lately dared to offer to the people of England.

"I am agreeably disappointed. After ten days' deliberation, he acknowledges the tribunal, and has determined to plead.

"Whilst his judges are deciding on the merits of his defence, it shall be my care to provide the gentleman with another opportunity of displaying his taste and talents in the protection of his character.

"In the mean time, whilst Mr. Lambton is a 'dolt and an idiot,' I am content to be a 'liar and a slanderer, and an a.s.sa.s.sin,' according to the same inimitable master of the vulgar tongue.

"I am, sir, your obedient servant, "THE AUTHOR OF THE LETTER TO THE RIGHT HON. G. CANNING."

It was hard indeed for Liberty to have so ready and so ruthless an antagonist as Mr. Canning. This minister was not satisfied with those legitimate and cla.s.sical weapons he was so well skilled to wield, forgot the days of the "Anti-jacobin," and vociferated against and challenged every one whose pen or voice was raised in opposition to him. Thus, whether squibbing "the Doctor," as Lord Sidmouth was called, fighting my Lord Castlereagh, cutting heartless jokes on poor Mr. Ogden, flatly contradicting Mr. Brougham, swaggering over the Holy Alliance, or quarrelling with the Duke of Wellington, he was in perpetual personal sc.r.a.pes,--one of the reasons which created for him so much personal interest during the whole of his parliamentary career. No imaginative artist, fresh from reading that career, would sit down to paint him with the broad and deep forehead, the stern, compressed lip, the deeply thoughtful and concentrated air of Napoleon. As little would the idea of his eloquence or ambition call to our recollection the swarth and iron features, the bold and haughty dignity, of Strafford. We cannot fancy in his eye the volumed depth of Richelieu's, the volcanic flash of Mirabeau's, or the offended majesty of Chatham's. We should sketch him from our imagination as we see him identically before us, with a countenance rather marked by intelligence, sentiment, and satire, than meditation, pa.s.sion, or sternness,--with more of the petulant than the proud, more of the playful than the profound, more of the quick irritability of a lively temperament in its expression, than of the fixed or fiery aspect which belongs to the rarer race of men, whose characters are wrought from the most inflexible and violent materials of human nature. We do not wish to deny that Mr. Canning was an orator, a wit, and a poet. Such talents and accomplishments, however, are not of pre-eminent importance to the situation which he occupied at his death.

A premier ought to be the bold opposer of corruption, the solid friend of his sovereign, and the uncompromising champion of the people's rights. He should always remember that the security of the throne arises from the interest which the sovereign possesses in the hearts of his subjects, and that all attempts to stifle their voice, under a sense of grievances, must tend to alienate their affections, and inevitably lead to similar calamities which, in other countries, have been produced by arbitrary and corrupt measures. Whether Mr. Canning was such a statesman, we need only refer to his general vacillating conduct to his superiors in office, and to the return made in 1820, that this gentleman had received from the country, during his public a.s.sociation with government, _two hundred thousand pounds_! Upon the demise of Mr.

Canning, a pension was granted, by act of parliament, to the trustees of the family, of three thousand pounds per annum, and his widow, shortly after, created a peeress!

The ensuing motley ministry, headed by Lord G.o.derich, (late Mr.

Robinson) soon exhibited symptoms of its inefficiency to stand against the powerful phalanx of Toryism, then in array to oppose every thing like liberty. The philosopher, however, deeply deploring the many vicissitudes, the varying process, through which Opinion has to pa.s.s in order to be refined to Truth, but calmly aware that the sense of a people never ultimately retrogrades, might have observed through the clouds which, at this period, dimmed the political horizon, the sun of Liberty darting forth its smiling beams, and exhibiting signs of a speedy victory over the murky enemies of mankind,--the brighter period, when a more enlarged intelligence would necessarily triumph,--when warlike Tory despotism, founded on a feverish desire to keep the people down by the bayonet, would wear out its own hara.s.sed existence, and a system of freedom, sanctioned and confirmed by a long previous disposition of thought, would be realized, and the spirit and letter of that solemn compact, made and ratified between the crown and the people in 1688, be finally restored to the country.

No Englishman, who cherishes in his heart a love of freedom, and who is at all conversant with the history of his country from its earliest era down to the period of the revolution, can be insensible of the acquisitions procured at that eventful period,--of the acc.u.mulation of strength gained by the popular branch of the const.i.tution, the limitation to the power of the crown, and the extension of the admitted and declared rights of the people. Before the revolution, we were the slaves of kingly despotism, and the House of Commons itself was as much subservient to the tyranny of the throne as the personal liberty of the subject. We have heard much talk about Magna Charta, and the triumph over John at Runnymede, by the people,--who, by the way, had nothing to do with the struggle, for it was the struggle of the barons and the king, the former of whom in their several domains were as despotic to those beneath them as they felt the tyranny of the king they sought to humble. It was the invasion of their own power and possessions by John that fired their resentment and animated their public spirit, and hence ensued Magna Charta. But, with the exception of the single clause that forbids arbitrary and vexatious imprisonment, it scarcely adds, either in spirit or letter, any thing to the liberties of the people. Not so, however, with the compact as settled at the revolution,--not so with the Bill of Rights and the Act of Settlement. The prerogative of the crown was by these measures curtailed, and the liberty of the people greatly extended and more clearly defined; the purity of the elective right was provided for, as also the short duration of parliaments, the discretionary power of the crown was prohibited, and standing armies in time of peace declared to be illegal! The pretended right of _suspending_ or of carrying into execution the laws, at the pleasure of the crown, was done away with; the levying of money for the use of the crown, by pretence of _prerogative_, without the consent of parliament, was forbidden; the right of the subject to pet.i.tion the king was established; all elections of members of parliament were declared ought to be free; excessive bail and excessive fines were declared should neither be required nor enforced, nor cruel punishments inflicted; and for amending, strengthening, and preserving the laws, it was declared that parliaments ought to be held frequently. The further wise provisions and legislative enactments of that period are proofs that the liberties and happiness of the nation were the chief objects contemplated by our ancestors.

But as all the wise limitations imposed by the friends of liberty on the power of the crown would be rendered ineffectual and useless, without a pure and freely-elected House of Commons, it had long been the chief design of the Tories to destroy this sacred palladium by bribery and corruption. How fatally they succeeded is well known. Thus all the hazards which our forefathers had incurred, all the treasures which they had expended, and all the blood that was shed to establish the freedom of themselves and their posterity, were rendered useless by Mr. Pitt, the Earl of Liverpool, Lord Castlereagh, Mr. Canning, and their mercenary adherents. When this lamentable state of the power of the Tories is considered, and which had been produced by fifty bitter years of misrule, the difficulty of any other ministry being kept together will be apparent. The cabinet of Lord G.o.derich was a confused mixture of Whigs and Tories, and as the latter possessed a corrupted House of Commons, it were easy to prophesy which party would gain the ascendency, at least for a time; though it were equally observable, that

"The PEOPLE, by and by, would be the stronger!"

In the month of September, the House of Commons lost one of its worthiest members in the Right Hon. Lord Archibald Hamilton, who died in the fifty-eighth year of his age, after a long and painful illness. His lordship was more than twenty years the representative of the county of Lanark, and one of his const.i.tuents publicly declared, that "the n.o.ble lord had conducted himself, throughout that long period, so much to the satisfaction of the county and honour to himself, that he was justly considered the pride of Clydesdale and the glory of Scotland." The name of his lordship was always to be found among those who supported the people's rights. His virtues and his talents placed him at the head of civil and religious liberty; he advocated every measure, both in and out of parliament, which had for its object the welfare of man,--of the meanest peasant as well as of the greatest lord. His affability and kindness of heart secured to him a numerous circle of friends, and his unwearied opposition in parliament to corruption and grants to pamper royal libertines gained for him the proud and inestimable t.i.tle of PATRIOT.

In November, the unfortunate creditors of the late Duke of York were informed that the a.s.sets of his royal highness would not furnish means to pay more than _one shilling_ in the pound! We know that the duke, in his dying hours, declared himself solvent. Whether he went out of the world with a falsehood in his heart and on his tongue, whether he was kept in ignorance of his affairs by those around him, or whether his estate had been foully dealt with by his family or others, are points which ought to have been better elucidated. We cordially pity the creditors, many of whom have been more grossly defrauded than in any case which has been punished in the Insolvent Court. The conduct of the royal family and the executors of the Duke of York must have appeared to the public in a very unamiable light; for why was not a thoroughly clear account of every thing laid before the creditors? Nothing, however, was said about the duke's jewels and the valuable diamond necklace belonging to his d.u.c.h.ess!!! We impute nothing to the executors, Sir Herbert Taylor and Sir Benjamin Stephenson, both, doubtless, honourable men,--good Tory placemen; but if people will not make executorship accounts clear and public to all concerned in them, they are liable to be complained of.

The wills and affairs of dead princes are always smuggled over and hushed up; but the creditors surely have a right to demand, because they have an interest in demanding, that the wills and executorship accounts of the royal family should be made as public as those of other individuals.

During the session of parliament this year, Mr. Hume made a motion to repeal one of the odious "Six Acts" against the liberty of the press, which subjected to a stamp-duty those cheap periodical tracts that formed the most powerful instruments against the oppression of Toryism.

The treatment which Mr. Hume received on this occasion will ever reflect the greatest disgrace on the _pretended_ Whig government and their friends. All those members who had opposed the pa.s.sing of this act now either purposely absented themselves or advocated its _utility_, and the honourable member for Aberdeen had the mortification to see his good intentions frustrated at a time when he calculated upon certain success.

Independently of the vexatious trouble which this act of Lord Castlereagh's framing caused the booksellers, it was found materially to injure the spreading of knowledge. But it was for this very purpose that it became the law of the land. Lord Castlereagh was aware of the truism, that

"MEN, ONCE IGNORANT, ARE SLAVES!"

and consequently, to further his own unconst.i.tutional views, he used every exertion to fetter the press and clap a padlock on the mouth of political knowledge. Wiser and better men, however, knowing that the free education of the people is the surest safeguard to the permanent happiness of the community, have lifted up their voices and given their votes against the subjugation of the Press,--the Leviathan protector of all that is worth living for. "The great ma.s.s of British subjects," said the venerable and patriotic Lord ERSKINE, "have no surer means of being informed of what pa.s.ses in parliament and in the courts of justice, or of the general transactions of the world, than through cheap publications within their means of purchase; and I desire to express my dissent from that principle and opinion, that the safety of the state, and the happiness of the mult.i.tude in the laborious condition of life, may be _best secured by their being kept in ignorance of political controversies and opinions_. I hold, on the contrary, that the government of this country can only continue to be secure while it conducts itself with fidelity and justice, and as all its acts shall, as heretofore, be thoroughly known and understood by all cla.s.ses of the people." Lord Erskine, however, is not singular in his view of this subject; for every philanthropist cannot but subscribe to the justice and equity of such doctrines. The prohibitory duty, therefore, on political periodicals must be considered as a scheme, emanating from a bad heart and weak head, to favour despotism. That law which requires publishers and printers of newspapers to enter into heavy securities, to answer to the consequences of the remote contingency of a LIBEL,--that is, publishing any thing having a _tendency_ to bring either house of parliament or his majesty's ministers _into contempt_,--must ever operate perniciously to the cause of freedom. For is it not one of the most sacred duties which a rational being owes to society, to his family, and to himself, to endeavour to "bring into contempt" a government, if it really be contemptible? To what did we owe the wreck of our liberties, at this period, except to the _contempt_ into which the preceding cabinets had been brought among the people? Is there an Englishman, possessing a particle of manhood, or breathing the inspirations of his ancestors, who would not blush at the human form, could he witness a being so debased as not to perpetuate the contempt into which public virtue had happily brought the names of Liverpool, Castlereagh, Eldon, Sidmouth, and the whole tribe of Tory locusts that so long fastened upon the vitals of his country? In America, the idea of indicting a man for endeavouring "to bring the government into contempt," would appear ludicrous. The language of the public authorities in America would be, "If the government is not contemptible, it will only gain strength from attacks; if it be contemptible, the citizens have a right to prove it so, and to demand a change: it is their duty to discuss the point, and to settle it by reason, and not to suppress it by indictment." Our readers will acknowledge, that we do not here advocate a doctrine we dare not practice; for we despise the unjustness of the "Six Acts," and will never allow their _unconst.i.tutional_ powers to intimidate us in the discharge of our public duty.

On the 29th of January,

1828,

parliament was opened by commission, when the ministry, headed by Lord G.o.derich, was dissolved. The Duke of Wellington and Mr. Peel succeeded the former premier and secretary of state,--a change that could not possibly afford any satisfaction to the public. Mr. Brougham, in an address to the House of Commons on this subject, said, "Though I entertain the highest opinion of the duke's military genius, still I do not like to see him at the head of the finances of the country, enjoying, as he does, the full and perfect confidence of his sovereign,--enjoying all the patronage of the crown,--enjoying the patronage of the army,--enjoying the patronage of the church,--and, in fact, enjoying almost all the patronage of the state. The n.o.ble duke is likewise entrusted with the delicate functions of conveying constant and delicate advice to the ears of his royal master. As a const.i.tutional man, this state of things strikes me as being most _unconst.i.tutional_."

Mr. Brougham further added, "I have no fear of slavery being introduced into this country by the power of the sword. The n.o.ble duke (of Wellington) may take the army,--he may take the navy,--he may take the mitre, he may take the great seal,--I will make the n.o.ble duke a present of them all. Let him come on with his whole force, sword in hand, against the const.i.tution, and the energies of the people of this country would not only beat him, but laugh at his efforts." These were the excellent sentiments of Mr. Brougham, and we wish the n.o.ble Lord Chancellor may long continue the undeviating advocate of the people's rights and liberties.

We have now to record the death of the Earl of Liverpool, which took place at his residence, Coome Wood, on the 4th of December, in the fifty-ninth year of his age, regretted by none but those who had feasted on the wealth of our country, under his long unfortunate sway over national affairs.

Could we write as severe as the ministerial qualities of Lord Liverpool were injurious to the British people, what a hideous draught of distortion, both in principle and conduct, should we exhibit! Looking at the insignificant origin of his lordship, and the crooked crags of his political progress, we trace the wily ascent of an intriguing speculator, clinging to his towry height by principles hostile to the const.i.tution of England. His career is marked by a glazy ichor, which, though repulsive to the chaste eye of public virtue, and offensive to the independent feelings of public spirit, will be as memorable as odious. Long after the praises of his lordship's minions shall be buried in oblivion, the iniquity of his deeds will pain the recollection of all good men, while he will be regarded as the favourite model of those who aspire to the ruin of their country. The character of this weak and daring man would not deserve the attention of history, if it were not so fatally united with the misfortunes of our country, which are mainly to be attributed to him and his notoriously wicked and over-bearing junta.