A.D. 1834.] REACTION IN FAVOUR OF THE CONSERVATIVES. 247 "The tories," he said, "have again come in, and their first orderly manner. In many places the closeness of the poll act has been to appoint an Englishman. And what!-is was remarkable. It was a neck and neck race between the bar so degraded that it will not call a bar-meeting; the rival candidates., In the metropolitan boroughs the that it will not remonstrate; that it will not protest against ministerialists were everywhere defeated. Not one of the degradation of Irish talent?" sixteen seats in this vast centre of influence could the government, with all its lavish expenditure, obtain. In some of the provincial towns, however-Bristol, Exeter, Newcastle, Hull, York, Leeds, Halifax, and Warringtona tory supplanted a whig. At Liverpool the contest was intensely exciting. During the last hour of polling were seen in every direction vans, gigs, and flies in rapid motion, and the price of a vote rose from £15 to £25. On the accession of Sir Robert Peel to power, the Conservative Association of Ireland was dissolved at the suggestion of its leader, the Rev. Dr. Boyton, a fellow of Trinity College. He was at that time the great champion of political protestantism, and having a strong apprehension of papal ascendancy in Ireland, his logical and vehement eloquence had a great effect on the public mind. But the ultra-protestant or Orange party were by no The result was the return of lord Sandon, a moderate tory; means disposed to lay down their arms. The care bestowed on the registries told strongly in favour of the conservatives at the English elections. The exertions they made to secure a majority were immense. It was believed at the time that the Carlton Club had expended nearly a million sterling in securing the success of their candidates in every possible way in which money could be made available. In the counties and boroughs, the whigs and radicals lost about 100 seats, but after all, the conservatives could muster only 302 members, against 356. The contests were unusually numerous and severe, but the reform act machinery worked so well, that the elections were for the most part conducted in a very Sir Howard Douglas, the other conservative candidate, being defeated by Mr. Ewart. In Lancashire and Hampshire both the liberal candidates were defeated. Manchester, Birmingham, Bolton, Sheffield, Preston, and most of the manufacturing towns, returned liberals. On the whole, the government had a small majority of the 500 English members, which was justly regarded as an astonishing fact, "considering how lately the country had been shaken to its foundations by the reform tempest, and eminently instructive," says Sir A. Alison, "as to the strength of the religious, loyal, and orderly feelings which characterised a large portion of the English people." Eminently instructive, also, he might have added, as to the folly of the alarms that were excited during the reform agitation, that the monarchy and the aristocracy would be swept away, and that England would fall under the power of an unmitigated communism and rampant democracy. In Scotland, however, the Reform Act had wrought a complete revolution, and the mass of the electors so long excluded from political power used the privileges they had obtained with great zeal in favour of the party to which they were indebted for their enfranchisement. The whole of the burghs, twenty in number, returned liberal members. Five of the counties were gained by the tories and three by the whigs, where respectively they had formerly failed. Glasgow, whose voice had been neutralised by returning one representative of each party, now returned two liberals. Serious disturbances took place at Jedburgh when lord John Scott, the tory candidate, made his appearance. At Hawick, in the same county, the rioting was still worse. The persons who came to vote for him were spit upon, pelted with stones, and severely struck. In some cases they were thrown into the stream that runs through the town, and subjected to the most shocking indignities, which the judges who afterwards tried the cases declared to be 66 worse than death itself." But the new government met its Nemesis in Ireland. O'Connell and the priests were resolved that, so far as in them lay, protestant ascendancy should not be re-established in that country. The Anti-Tory Association was but one of many names and forms which the Protean agitation had assumed, and all were brought to bear with concentrated power upon every point to secure the defeat of the ministerial candidates. Minor differences were sunk for the occasion, and all forces were combined against the government. The consequence was that amongst the large constituencies the cause of reform was almost everywhere successful. In Kerry, in Meath, in Youghal, and Tralee, the candidates returned were the sons and nephew of O'Connell. He himself stood a severe contest for Dublin, and was returned with Mr. Ruthven, but was unseated on petition. It was during this contest that he recommended that a "death's head and cross-bones" should be painted on the door of every elector who would support the "nefarious and blood-stained" tithe system. It was the tremendous exertions of Mr. O'Connell and his followers that secured the triumph of the liberal party in this memorable struggle. The first trial of strength was on the election of a speaker. Parliament met on the 19th of February, and lord Francis Egerton, one of the members for Lancashire, moved that Sir C. Manners Sutton, who for eighteen years had filled the chair with the unanimous approbation of all parties in the house, should be re-elected. Mr. Denison, one of the members for Surrey, proposed Mr. Abercrombie, a gentleman of high position at the bar, and member for the city of Edinburgh. The division, it was felt on both sides, would be decisive as to the fate of the government, by showing whether or not it was supported by a majority of the new parliament which was the response given to the prime minister's appeal to the country. The house was the fullest on record, there being 626 members present. Mr. Abercrombie was elected by a majority of ten, the numbers being 316 to 306. Sir Charles Sutton was supported by a majority of the English members-23, but his opponent had a majority of ten of the Scotch. Still, had the decision been in the hands of the British representatives, government would have had a majority of 13; but of the Irish members only 41 voted for Sutton, while 61 voted for Abercrombie. From this memorable division, two things were evident to the tories, in which the future of England for the next half century was to them dissinctly foreshadowed; the first was, that the ministry was entirely, on party questions, at the mercy of the Irish catholic members: the second, that the county members of the whole empire were out-voted by the borough members in the proportion of 35 to 20, and that a large majority of the former had declared for the conservative side. It was stated that this result was accomplished by what was called the Lichfield House compact, which made a great noise at the time. By this compact it was alleged that a formal coalition had been effected between the whigs and the Irish catholics; but they denied that there was anything formal about the arrangement. There was a meeting, it is true, at Lichfield House, when lord John Russell stated his intentions, and described what would be These met the concurrence of his parliamentary tactics. O'Connell and his friends, and to that extent alone, even by implication, did any compact exist. Mr. O'Connell was accustomed to explain his reason for supporting the whigs by a comparison which was not the most complimentary to them; he said they were like an old hat thrust into a broken pane to keep out the cold. CHAPTER XXVI. The Royal Speech-Lord Morpeth moves an Amendment to the Address— Carried by a Majority of Seven-The King's Answer-Motion of Lord Chandos on the Malt Duties-The Appointment of Lord Londonderry as Ambassador to St. Petersburg cancelled in Deference to Public Opinion-Dissenters' Marriages-Ministerial Bill on Irish TithesLord John Russell's Motion on Irish Church Temporalities-The Right of the State to Dispose of Church Property-Defeat of the Ministry on this Question-Second Defeat on their Irish Tithe Bill-Sir Robert Peel's Resignation-His Parting Statement The Irish Church Question. SIR ROBERT PEEL hoped that by earnestly promoting practical reforms, and improving the institutions of the country in the spirit of his manifesto, he would gradually conciliate a number of members of independent position and moderate views, so that he might be able to secure a working majority. He therefore did not resign when defeated in the first trial of strength on the election of a speaker; and the same consideration induced him to hold his ground when he was defeated on the amendment to the address. The house of commons met for the dispatch of business on the 24th of February. The speech from the throne, after lamenting the destruction of the houses of parliament, congratulated the country on the prevalent commercial prosperity, which, however, was accompanied by a general depression of the agricultural interest. king, therefore, recommended to the consideration of parliament whether it might not be in their power, after providing for the exigencies of the public service, and con *Alison, vol. vi., p. 133. The A.D. 1835.] MOTION FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE MALT TAX REJECTED. 249 property should be reserved for ecclesiastical purposes. He declared they would be prepared to remedy all real abuses, when the report of the commissioners appointed for their investigation was received. sistently with the steadfast maintenance of the public credit, to devise a method for mitigating the pressure of those local charges which bore heavily on the owners and occupiers of land, and for distributing the burden of them more equally over other descriptions of property. When On the 26th of March the marquis of Chandos made an the address was moved, an amendment was proposed by lord Morpeth, which was designed to strike at the very existence of the new ministry. It was not a direct censure upon their policy, or a formal declaration of want of confidence; but it affirmed a policy materially differing from that which had been announced by Sir Robert Peel. It expressed a hope that municipal corporations would be placed under vigilant popular control; that the undoubted grievances of the dissenters would be considered; that abuses in the church of England and Ireland would be removed; and it lamented the dissolution of parliament as an unnecessary measure, by which the progress of these and other reforms had been interrupted and endangered. This hostile motion gave rise to a debate of intense earnestness, which lasted four nights. It was not easy to predict, during the course of the conflict, which side would be victorious. Even the whippers-in must have been doubtful of the issue; but the contest ended in the triumph of the liberals, who had a majority of seven, the numbers being 309 to 302. Of the English members, the government had a majority of 32; and of the English and Scotch together, of 16; but in Ireland, Sir Robert Peel's supporters were only 36, while the liberals mustered 59. When the amended address was presented to the king, he wisely recollected his position as a constitutional sovereign, which had been, to some extent, compromised by the dismissal of an administration in which the country had shown no want of confidence, and by the uncalled-for dissolution of the reformed parliament after so brief an existence. His majesty, therefore, replied as follows:-"I learn with regret that you do not concur with me in the policy of the appeal which I have recently made to the sense of my people. I never have exercised, and will never exercise, any of the prerogatives which I hold, except for the single purpose of promoting the great end for which they are entrusted to me-the public good; and I confidently trust that no measure conducive to the general interests will be endangered or interrupted in its progress by the opportunity I have afforded to my faithful and loyal subjects of expressing their opinions through the choice of their representatives in parliament." As ministers did not resign on being placed in a minority the second time, rumours were industriously circulated by their opponents that they meant to rule the country despotically; that they were about to dissolve parliament the second time, and had resolved to maintain the army on their own responsibility, without the Mutiny Act. On the 2nd of March lord John Russell, referring to these rumours, gave notice that he intended to bring forward the Irish appropriation question, and the question of municipal reform. It was for a test of this kind that Sir Robert Peel waited. In the meantime he denied that he had any such intentions as those ascribed to him. He promised that government would bring in a bill on the Irish church; but it would adhere strictly to the principle that ecclesiastical attempt to obtain some relief for the agricultural interest, The premier was at this time subjected to a great mortification, in being compelled by the house of commons, and public opinion out of doors, to cancel the appointment of the marquis of Londonderry as ambassa dor to St. Petersburgh. A deep sympathy pervaded the and sympathy, especially since its partition between public mind in the United Kingdom with the oppressed Russia, Austria, and Prussia—the foulest crime ever perPoles, and an abhorrence of the unrelenting despotism of petrated against freedom by a combination of despotic Russia. The marquis of Londonderry had distinguished powers. Feeling this, we recall to our readers' rehimself by sympathies of an opposite kind-by manifesting distrust of the people, and by favouring a policy at home and abroad which aimed at keeping down the democracy. It was generally felt that England could not be fairly represented at the court of St. Petersburgh by a man of such well-known sentiments. The press was loud in its condemnation of the appointment, and Mr. Sheil brought the subject before the house of commons by moving that an address be presented to his majesty for a copy of the appointment. As lord Stanley declared emphatically against the selection of the noble marquis for such a mission, it was evident that if government had gone to a division they would have been defeated. Sir Robert Peel therefore gave way with a good grace, stating that the appointment had not been formally made out; and though the house seemed to be interfering unduly with the royal prerogative, he would not advise his majesty to persist in it. The motion was then withdrawn, and when lord Londonderry read the report of the debate in the papers next day, he immediately sent in his resignation. In announcing this in the house of peers, he said: "Having but one object, and that to serve the king honestly, and to the best of my ability, were I to depart from this country, after what has passed in the house of commons, I should feel myself, as a representative of his majesty, placed in a new, false, and improper position. My efficiency would be impaired, and it would be impossible for me to fill the office to which I have been called with proper dignity or effect. Upon these grounds, I have now to announce that no consideration will induce me to accept the office which his majesty has been graciously pleased to confer on me." The spirit in which the liberal organs of public opinion regarded the appointment may be inferred from a sentence in the Times: "We notice, merely to discountenance an absurd report, that lord Londonderry has been, or is to be, named ambassador to St. Petersburgh. The rumour is a sorry joke." Some of the noble lord's antecedents were now remembered against him. It appeared that he had been soliciting a pension from lord Liverpool as a reward for diplomatic services already too liberally paid for, and that his lordship had written on the back of the application, "This is too bad." It was now felt to be too bad that a nobleman who had derided the claims of the Poles as rebellious subjects, and who had evinced a warm sympathy with such brutal despots as Don Carlos and Don Miguel, should have received one of the most important diplomatic appointments at the disposal of the sovereign. There is no doubt that the transaction had a damaging effect upon the government. This cannot surprise any one who knows the intensity of the feeling which the perfidy and barbarity of Russia towards the Poles had produced in the public mind throughout the United Kingdom. Indeed, the condition of Poland has always been a subject of deep interest collection some points in her sad history which have already been recorded. The interest was kept up during the period of the French war by the bravery with which the Polish legions fought in other lands, and the ingratitude with which they were treated by France. To them “the tent was their home, the battle-field their country," until the hour should come when they would be enabled to re-conquer their freedom, and strike down the oppressors of their country-a hope which never died in Polish hearts, whether groaning under their heavy chains at home or following the fortunes of Napoleon abroad. Freely and recklessly did they shed their blood in the cause of freedom in other countries, in the hope that some day they should receive foreign aid, to realise their patriotic aspirations. But their blood flowed in vain. In every treaty which their valour had been instrumental in winning, their services were overlooked, and their country was forgotten. In the year 1806, however, the advance of the French army into Poland excited their hopes to the utmost, and promised a restoration of their country to the position of an independent kingdom. The enthusiasm of the Poles was excited to the utmost. Polish regiments were organised with marvellous rapidity, and the army of Napoleon was increased by thousands. But Napoleon cruelly disappointed their too sanguine hopes, and dissipated their illusions. Instead of restoring the kingdom of Poland, he merely formed a small portion of his conquests into the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, which he united with Saxony. Still, though deluded and disappointed by the emperor, they were ever ready to fight against their oppressors, and credulously accepted the promises which had so often deceived them, though the more reflecting portion of the people said, "We are flattered when our services are required. Is Poland always to be fed on hope alone?" Yet, when the French invaded Russia, in 1812, the more ardent of the Poles were fascinated by the arts of Napoleon. They flocked to his standard, and were full of enthusiasm, until they learned at Wilna that he had guaranteed to the emperor Francis the integrity of the Austrian possessions in Poland. In connection with the treaty of 1814, however, the restoration of Poland became a subject of anxious consideration. The justice, policy, and humanity of this measure were powerfully advocated by France and England, and a satisfactory adjustment would probably have been effected, but for the escape of Napoleon from Elba, which produced a general feeling of alarm throughout Europe, in presence of common danger, and led the other powers to acquiesce in a hasty concession by Russia, with the object of preventing the Poles from swelling the ranks of the invader. It was decided that the Grand Duchy of Warsaw should be attached to the empire under the name of the " kingdom of Poland," and that it should be governed by separate institutions. In the words of the treaty of Vienna-"The Duchy of Warsaw, with the ex ception of those provinces and districts which are other |