UNDER the word BRITAIN, in the Encyclopædia, the history of our affairs, as well as of the more interesting events on the Continent, is brought down to the renewal of hostilities with France, in 1803. We now resume our narrative from that period, dividing it under the following heads:
War with France and her allies, until the general pacification of 1814.
War with the United States, from 1812 to the beginning of 1815.
Return and second overthrow of Bonaparte.
Parliamentary and domestic history from 1803 to 1820; followed by a short notice of the affairs of Ireland.
I.—War with France and her Allies from 1803 to 1814.
On the Continent of Europe, the only great operation was the invasion, or rather occupancy, of Hanover. War was declared by us on the 18th May, and the French troops had advanced from Holland, and entered the electoral capital by the 5th June. To attempt resistance would have been folly; but in a season when soldiers were so much wanted in England, and so great an expence was incurred in training them, it was matter of regret that the Hanoverian troops, in number about 15,000, should not have been marched down to the coast, and embarked in a body, instead of being disbanded and obliged to pledge themselves not to serve against France until exchanged.
On the side of France the aspect of war was displayed in a great encampment at Boulogne, and in the dispatch, from all the ports along the coast, of flotillas of boats to join the armament preparing in that central rendezvous. These petty convoys seemed to have instructions to tempt our cruisers to attack them, and to draw them, at fit occasions, under the fire of land-batteries. The main object of Bonaparte was to excite alarm; a course, which, however politic toward some countries, was certainly ill-judged in regard to one where the executive power, in its inability to coerce, often seeks support in the apprehensions of the public. The general impression of dread facilitated the measures of defence, and led to an unparalleled extent of the Volunteer System. Never did a country exhibit so many of the middle and higher classes under arms as England and Scotland in 1803; and never did individuals, in these stations, make more personal sacrifices for the object of national defence. The result was effectual to as great a degree as the situation of the individuals permitted. The volunteers made as
near an approach to regularity of discipline as was practicable in the case of men full of ardour, and submitting for a season to the restraint of military service, but necessarily devoid of experience in the field. The error lay in carrying volunteering too far; for the system ought never to have been allowed to extend to a length that absorbed no inconsiderable part of the time and money of men whose lives were too valuable to be indiscriminately exposed, and whose proper aid to the public cause was the tribute of their industry. The volunteer system was of real use only in as far as it promoted cordiality in the common cause, and by assuring the maintenance of tranquillity at home, enabled government to dispose of the regulars in the field.
The plan of collecting flotillas of boats, from East to West, in the central depot of Boulogne, was continued by Bonaparte, during two years, from the middle of 1803 to that of 1805. A great parade was made of the number of troops ready to embark, and of the determination to encounter all hazards; but there was no efficient support by ships of war, until, in the spring of 1805, the sailing of squadrons for the West Indies took place, first from Rochefort, and afterwards from Cadiz. These, it was calculated, might excite alarm for our colonies, and induce government to send thither a part of the men of war hitherto reserved for home defence; after which the hazardous attempt of a descent might have entered seriously into the calculations of the French ruler. That it did so at this time was positively affirmed by him in conversations held in 1814 with English gentlemen in the Island of Elba; but these conversations, to minutes of which we have had access, were marked by Bonaparte's usual misrepresentations, for he attributed the non-execution of the attempt entirely to the threatened coalition on the Continent, and would not acknowledge that it was impracticable, — a matter of nautical calculation, when our Government kept our Channel fleet at home, instead of sending it, as he had anticipated, to the West Indies.
Such was the aspect of the war during two years, Naval Operations in which our naval superiority led to an easy conquest of several of the Dutch and French West India colonies. St Lucie surrendered on 22d June 1803; Tobago, on 1st July; Demerara and Berbice, on 23d September; Cape Town, the last spot in the French half of St Domingo, occupied by French troops, was made to capitulate to the Blacks, on 30th November. Next year was taken the small Island of Gorée on the coast of Africa, and soon after the important Dutch colony of Surinam. On the other hand, we were not successful in our attempts on the French flotillas on their own shores. One of these was directed against a convoy on the coast between — 10. 1814.
* See the references from the word BRITAIN, Vol. II. p. 523, and from the article ENGLAND, p. 108 of this volume.
War with France and her Allies. c. 2, 1804. Flushing and Ostend; another, on a larger scale, and very different plan, was pointed at the Boulogne armament, which it was proposed to blow up by cata-marans, an attempt no less unsuited to open and generous warfare than the torpedoes of the Americans. Fortune was more favourable to us in encounters with the enemy in the open Ocean, where, in the early part of 1804, a striking proof of the effects of intrepidity was given in the case of a fleet of merchantmen from China, which beat off, or at least deterred from action, a French squadron under Admiral Linois, consisting of a ship of 80 guns and three frigates.
war. The war hitherto had been with France and Holland only; but a new power was now to be added to the list of our antagonists. Spain had been allowed by Bonaparte to avoid participating in the contest, on condition of paying a large annual contribution; a condition, so contrary, as was alleged, to real neutrality, that, for some time past, our Government had kept a vigilant eye on the expected arrival of her treasure ships from America. A small squadron of four frigates, sent out to intercept these valuable supplies, met, on 5th October 1804, a Spanish squadron of a similar number proceeding towards Cadiz. The Spanish commodore refusing to surrender, an engagement ensued, attended with the capture of three of the Spanish frigates, and the explosion of the fourth with the loss of many lives. This decisive act, approved at home by the advocates of vigorous measures, was productive of the worst impressions in regard to our national honour both in Spain and her colonies, and led, soon after, to a declaration of war. Bonaparte was now provided with additional means of threatening our distant possessions. A squadron of five sail of the line escaping from Rochefort, landed a body of nearly 4000 men on the Island of Dominica, and burned the chief town; the Island of St Kitt's escaped with paying a contribution and the loss of some merchantmen. But this was only a prelude to the arrival of a much more formidable fleet, which, to the number of eighteen sail of the line, French and Spanish, reached the West Indies in the end of May, and spread alarm throughout the Islands,—an alarm not dispelled till the arrival of a force inferior by one-third, but commanded by Lord Nelson. The hostile fleet soon after set out on its homeward voyage. Intelligence to that effect was opportunely received by Lord Barham, then at the head of the Admiralty, and a fleet, detached to cruise on their supposed track, had the good fortune to fall in with them on 22d July. An action took place; two sail of the line (Spanish) were captured; night closed the conflict, and though it might have been renewed on the succeeding days, an unfortunate indecision on the part of our admiral, Sir Robert Calder, allowed the enemy to escape. They repaired to Ferrol, whence they soon after sailed with augmented force, and reached Cadiz. To watch them there, or to engage them on their coming out, was an object of the highest moment, and it was to Lord Nelson that the important trust was committed. Joining our fleet off Cadiz, he avoided keeping in sight, and even dispensed with the aid of six sail of the line, which he sent to a distance along the coast; judging that the enemy, when
apprised of their absence, would be induced to come out. Accordingly, the combined fleet left Cadiz on the 19th October to the number of 33 sail of the line (18 French and 15 Spanish), commanded by Admiral Villeneuve, and early on the 21st came in sight of the British fleet consisting of 27 sail of the line. The scene of conflict was off Cape Trafalgar, Battle of nearly half way between Cadiz and Gibraltar. The Trafalgar. enemy, convinced that their former defeats at sea had been owing to the want of concentration and mutual support, now formed a double line, so that any of our ships, attempting to penetrate, should be exposed to the fire of two or of three antagonists. Nelson, while yet distant, perceived their arrangement, and understood its object. It was new, but he was satisfied that no concentration in the open sea could prevent our vessels from coming to close action with their opponents, in which case the result could not long be doubtful. He made, consequently, no alteration in his previous plan, but directed his fleet to advance to the attack in two divisions, one of which, under Admiral Collingwood, intersected that part of the enemy's line, which gave it a nearly equal number of ships to encounter, while Nelson with the other division, acted on a similar plan. Such was the only general manoeuvre in this great action; by our superior seamanship, and our ships keeping near each other, we had, in some cases, a local superiority, but the general character of the fight was a conflict of ship to ship, and its decision, in our favour, was owing to that skill in working the guns, to that dexterity in an occasional change of position, and that confidence of success which characterizes a naval force in high discipline—advantages which we had displayed with such success against the Dutch at Camperdown, and the French at Aboukir, and in which we met with no equal opponents till we encountered the Americans. Our loss, amounting to 1600 men, was in part caused by the riflemen in the enemy's rigging,—an ungenerous mode of warfare, which may deprive an opposing force of officers, but can have little effect on the general issue of a conflict. The fighting began at noon, became general in less than half an hour, and lasted from two to three hours; in the case of a few ships it was longer, but all firing was over by half past four o'clock. Nineteen sail of the line struck; but unfortunately gales of wind, after the action, wrecked part of our prizes, and necessitated the destruction of others; four sail, however, were preserved, and four more, which had escaped, were met on their northward course, on 2d November, and captured off Cape Ortegal by a squadron under Sir Richard Strachan.
But on the Continent of Europe the course of Continental public events was very different. The year had been Affairs in 1805. ushered in by a letter of Bonaparte to our Sovereign, containing pacific professions expressed in general terms. An answer was given, not by the King, but, according to diplomatic usage, by our Minister for Foreign Affairs to the French Minister in the same station; expressing a similar wish for peace; but adding, that it was incumbent on us to consult our allies, particularly the Emperor of Russia. The French ridiculed the assertion of our being on
confidential terms with that court; but Russia had, in fact, begun to listen to the proposal of forming against France a coalition on an extensive scale. The basis of this compact was a treaty signed at St Petersburg in April. Russia, Austria, Sweden, Naples, all acceded to it, and hopes were entertained of the co-operation of Prussia. Bonaparte, apprized of this, affected to be absorbed in arrangements for immediately invading England, but secretly prepared to march his troops from Boulogne to the Rhine. After throwing on the Austrians the odium of aggression, by allowing them to attack Bavaria before he acted, he proceeded to execute a plan singularly adapted to the overweening confidence of his opponent, General Mack, who, by this time, had traversed Bavaria, and advanced to Ulm. By making forced marches, and by violating part of the neutral territory of Prussia, Bonaparte reached first the flank, and soon after the rear of the enemy, who clung, with blind pertinacity, to the position of Ulm. The result to the Austrians was a series of checks in the field, and, eventually, the surrender, by capitulation, of more than 30,000 men. The road to Vienna was thus opened to Bonaparte. He marched thither, crossed the Danube, proceeded northward, and at Austerlitz, on 2d December, displayed his military combinations in all their lustre, gaining, with forces not superior, a victory, which compelled Austria to immediate peace; and thus, by one blow, broke up the coalition.
Such was the alternation of fortune by sea and land, that the next year had hardly commenced, when fresh successes were obtained over the French navy. A division of the Brest squadron, after landing troops in the Spanish part of St Domingo, were overtaken by a superior force, and three sail of the line captured, and two burned. Admiral Linois, returning from India, was captured in the Marengo of 80 guns; and, at a subsequent date, of a squadron of frigates detached from Rochefort for the West Indies, four fell into our hands.
It was under these circumstances, that a negotiation for peace was for some months carried on at Paris. It began in consequence of an overture from Talleyrand, eagerly embraced by Mr Fox; and Lord Yarmouth, who happened to be under detention in France, was made the first medium of communication and conference. In its more advanced stage, the negotiation was entrusted to Lord Lauderdale; and, at one period (in September), the conciliatory tone of the French inspired a hope of peace;—a hope soon disappointed, when it was found that the offers of Bonaparte were followed by the demand of Sicily; and that, while professing an ardent wish for peace, he was extending his usurpations in Germany, and secretly preparing to subvert the power of Prussia.
The humiliation of Austria left Bonaparte at liberty to direct his manœuvres, both diplomatic and military, against her northern rival. Affecting great indignation at the friendly disposition shown by Prussia the preceding autumn towards the coalition, he demanded the cession of a portion of her territory in the south-west, and, in return, transferred to her
Hanover, in the hope of kindling the flame of discord between her and England. The Prussians accordingly entered Hanover; the local government making no resistance, and our Cabinet taking no retaliatory measure, except the detention of vessels bearing the Prussian flag; a measure adopted not in the spirit of hostility, but to satisfy popular clamour in England. The discussions between France and Prussia continued during the summer of 1806, and, from the blind confidence of one party, and the art of the other, assumed at last a serious aspect. The battle of Jena (see the article FRANCE, towards the close) deprived Prussia of her army, her capital, her fortresses; and her court was fugitive in the north of Poland, ere there had been time to send, or even to concert the sending of succours from England. The Grenville ministry, less eager than their predecessors to embark in Continental war, confined themselves to sending a general officer (Lord Hutchinson) to the Russian head-quarters, and to the grant of a limited subsidy. For some time, the difficulties of the country, and the firm resistance of the Russians, particularly at Eylau, encouraged the hope of arresting the progress of Bonaparte; but this hope was disappointed by the battle of Friedland, and still more by June 14, the approximation of the court of Russia to that of 1807. France.
The treaty of Tilsit excited alarm, less from its July 1. specific provisions, than from the probable consequences of the co-operation of the contracting powers. Among these, some persons reckoned, or pretended to reckon, the equipping against us of the Danish navy, a force of sixteen sail of the line, not manned or ready for sea, but capable of being fitted out without a great sacrifice. The ministry of 1807 founded their claim to public favour on a system of vigour, on a course altogether opposite to the cautious calculations of their predecessors. No sooner were they apprized of the treaty of Tilsit, than, without waiting for its effect on the Danish government, they determined on the as yet unexampled measure, of taking forcible possession of a neutral fleet. A powerful armament of 20,000 troops, and twenty-seven sail of the line, prepared ostensibly against Flushing and Antwerp, was directed to proceed to the Sound, there to await the result of a negotiation at Copenhagen. This negotiation was entrusted to a special envoy, who represented the danger to Denmark from France and Russia, and demanded the delivery of the Danish fleet to England, under a solemn stipulation of its being restored on the termination of our war with France. The Danes, justly offended at this proposal, and aware that their agreeing to it would expose them to the loss of the continental part of their territory, refused; our envoy returned on board our fleet; our army was landed, and Copenhagen invested by sea and land, while a part of our fleet cut off all communication between the Continent and the island on which it stands. After a fortnight passed in preparations, a heavy fire was opened on the city, and continued during two days with great effect. A capitulation now took place; the citadel, dock-yards, and batteries were put into our hands, and no time was lost in fitting the Danish men of war for sea. All stores,
War with France and her Allies.
timber, and other articles of naval equipment, belonging to government, were taken out of the arsenals, embarked and conveyed to England.
The expedition to Copenhagen excited much discussion and difference of opinion in England, * particularly when it was avowed that ministers had no evidence of an intention in Russia to coerce Denmark, and still less of a disposition in Denmark to give way to such coercion. The only tenable ground was, to acknowledge at once that the Danes had given no provocation; that their conduct had been strictly neutral; but that they would evidently have been unable to defend themselves, had Russia and France united against them. Still it was extremely questionable, whether we, to ward off a contingent annoyance, should commit a present aggression. The success of our attempt, considering our naval superiority, the insulated position of Copenhagen, and its unprepared state, admitted of little or no doubt. But this was not all. There remained farther and more important considerations;—the odium that would be thus excited against us in the Danish nation, and that closer approximation of Russia to France, which could hardly fail to follow so open an affront to a power professing to take a lead in the political arrangements of the Baltic.
The Cape of Good Hope surrendered to an armament from England in January 1806. After this, Sir Home Popham, who commanded the naval part of the expedition, ventured to make, without the sanction, or even knowledge of government, an attempt on Buenos Ayres. Our troops, though under 2000 in number, effected a landing, and occupied the town. Intelligence to this effect having reached England, the popular notion, that Buenos Ayres would prove a great market for our manufactures, induced government to take measures for completing the new conquest. And, though the inhabitants soon rose, and drove out the feeble detachment under Sir Home Popham, an armament, which arrived in January 1807, under the command of Sir Samuel Auchmuty, attacked the fortified town of Monte Video, and carried it in an assault, conducted with great skill and gallantry. But a very different fate awaited our next enterprise,—an assault on Buenos Ayres, planned by General Whitelocke, an officer wholly unfit for such a service. Our troops, 8000 in number, were successful in some parts; but failing in others, the result was a negotiation, and a convention that we should withdraw altogether from the country, on condition of our prisoners being restored.
But, in another part of the world, and against an enemy in general far more formidable, our arms had been attended with success. Naples had been engaged in the coalition of 1805, with a view to assail the French on the side of Lombardy; but an Anglo-Russian army, landed for that purpose, had been prevented from marching northward by the disastrous intelligence from Germany. They were subsequently re-embarked, the British withdrawing to Sicily, and Palermo becoming once more the refuge of the
Neapolitan court. That court, eager to excite insurrection against the French in Calabria, prevailed on General Sir John Stuart, in the beginning of July 1806, to lead thither a detachment of our troops. They landed, and soon after received intelligence, that at Maida, distant only ten miles from our encampment, was a French corps, already nearly equal to our own, and hourly expecting reinforcements. Our troops marched to attack them on the morning of 4th July, and at nine o'clock drew near to their position, which had a river in front. General Reynier, who commanded the French, having received his reinforcements the preceding evening, and seeing that our small army was unprovided with cavalry, made his men march out of their camp, and advance to charge us on the plain. Our force, including a regiment landed that morning, was nearly 6000; that of the enemy above 7000. The French, who knew our troops only by report, marched towards them with confidence, and hardly expected them to stand the charge. Our line formed, faced the enemy, and advanced. The firing commenced at the distance of about 100 yards; but it had not long continued, when the extreme of each line, as if by mutual consent, suspended it, and advanced towards the other with fixed bayonets. The advancing division on each side was composed of choice troops. On our side, of light companies; on that of the French, of grenadiers. They crossed bayonets, and were about to begin a conflict hand to hand, when the firm aspect of our men daunted their opponents. The French gave way, and were pursued with great slaughter. The rest of the enemy's left now drew back, but at first in good order; for they stopped occasionally, fired, and retreated only as our troops drew near; at last they fell into great confusion. Their right flank being in like manner repelled in an attack on our left, the field of battle remained entirely in our possession. The French loss in killed and wounded was nearly 2000; ours only between 300 and 400. This brilliant exploit produced the evacuation of part of Calabria by the French, but had no other result; our small force returning soon after to Sicily.
Our next operation in the Mediterranean was an unsuccessful menace of the Turkish capital. That court refusing to enter into our plans of hostility to France, our ambassador withdrew, and re-entered the Straits of the Dardanelles, with a squadron of seven sail of the line, exclusive of frigates and bombs. They suffered considerably in passing the narrow part of the straits, between the ancient Sestos and Abydos, now called the castles of Romania and Natolia. Anchoring at a distance of eight miles from Constantinople, our Admiral, Sir J. Duckworth, threatened to burn the Seraglio and the city, but in vain. The Turks continued adverse to our demands, and employed the interval assiduously in strengthening the formidable batteries of the Dardanelles. It soon became indispensable to withdraw, and to repass the straits; but this was not accomplished without a loss of 25 men in killed and wounded, the cannon at the castles being of
* See the Parliamentary Debates on this expedition.
great size, and discharging granite balls. A descent made soon after in Egypt was equally unfortunate. A detachment of troops landing at Alexandria, occupied that town, but suffered a severe loss at Rosetta, and eventually withdrew, on the Turks consenting to give up the prisoners they had taken. Peace was soon after concluded with the Turks, and our operations in the Levant confined to the capture of the Ionian Islands from the French. Zante, Cephalonia, Ithaca, and Cerigo, were taken by a small expedition in 1809, and Santa Maura the succeeding year.
On the side of Sicily, our commanders, though pressed by the court of Palermo, refused to make descents on Calabria, which could lead to nothing but partial insurrections, followed, on the return of a superior force, by the death of the most zealous of our partisans. We took, however, in June 1809, the small islands of Ischia and Procida, near the coast of Naples; and, in the autumn of 1810, repelled an attempt of Murat to invade Sicily. A body of nearly 4000 Italians, who had landed on this occasion, were driven back with loss—a failure which, joined to our decided naval superiority, put an end to all attempts of the kind.
The hostility of Russia consequent on her connection with France, produced a menaced invasion of Sweden, now our only ally in the north. To aid in repelling it, Sir John Moore was sent to Gottingen with a body of 10,000 men. This force did not land; but the general, repairing to Stockholm, entered into communications with the king, and had the mortification of finding that prince wholly incapable of rational conduct, and bent on projects which would necessarily involve the sacrifice of the British troops. On this he lost no time in returning to Gottingen, and soon after brought back the armament to England, to be employed on a more promising service.
The influence possessed by Bonaparte over Spain had long inspired him with the hope of overawing Portugal, and of obliging that country to dissolve her alliance with England. To this hope the humiliation of Germany, and his new alliance with Russia, gave double strength; and, in the latter part of 1807, the most peremptory demands were made on the court of Lisbon. To part of these, implying the exclusion of British merchantmen from the harbours of Portugal, compliance was promised; but the demand of confiscating English property, or detaining the English resident in Portugal, was met with a decided refusal. A French army now marched towards Lisbon, and threatened openly to overthrow the house of Braganza; but the latter, after some momentary indications of indecision, took the determination of abandoning their European dominions, and proceeding to Brazil. This spirited, and by many unexpected measure, was carried into effect in the end of November, and Lisbon was forthwith occupied by French troops. A few months after the transactions at Bayonne occurred, and the general
declaration of hostility by the Spaniards to Bonaparte. Our cabinet now determined to postpone all other projects to that of a vigorous effort on Spain and Portugal. With that view, an armament of 10,000 men collected at Cork, and said to be intended for Spanish America, sailed in July to the Peninsula, and offered its co-operation to the Spaniards in Galicia. They, however, thought it best that we should confine our aid to Spain to arms and money, directing our military force against the French army in Portugal. Accordingly, our troops, after passing an interval at Oporto, were landed to the southward, in Mondego Bay, where, after receiving the co-operation of a farther division of British, and of a few Portuguese, they proceeded on their southward march to Lisbon. The first actions took place with French detachments at the small town of Obidos, and at Roleia. Neither were of importance: the French, inferior in number, retreated; but their commander at Lisbon was Junot, an officer trained in the school of revolutionary enterprise, and disposed, like most of his brethren at that time, to make light of British land forces. He determined forthwith on offensive operations, advanced from Lisbon, and, reaching the British army on 21st August, attacked it in its position at the small town of Vimiera. The force on either side* was about 14,000 men. The French marched to the onset in columns, with their wonted confidence, but they had to encounter an enemy equally firm as Germans or Russians, and far superior in arms, equipment, and activity. A part of the opposing lines advanced to the charge, and not only crossed bayonets, but, what very rarely happens, maintained that desperate conflict for several minutes, when the French gave way. Equal success attended our efforts in other parts of the line, and the loss of the enemy was 3000 men, and 13 pieces of cannon. The object now ought to have been to follow up our success, before the French should recover themselves, and fortify the almost impenetrable mountains on the road to Lisbon. In vain did Sir A. Wellesley † urge this, first on Sir H. Burrard, who had now taken the command, and next day on Sir H. Dalrymple, who arrived and replaced him. Reinforcements were daily expected; and, till their arrival, neither of these officers could be persuaded to incur hazards for the attainment of an advantage which, from their unacquaintance with localities, they were not competent to appreciate. A precious interval was thus lost. The French occupied the passes, opened their negotiation in a tone of confidence, and obtained, by the treaty called the Convention of Cintra, a free return to France on board of British shipping. The Convention of Cintra.
* Report of the Board of Inquiry into the Convention of Cintra.
† See the Evidence before the Board of Inquiry.
ministers felt the necessity of acceding; the three generals were ordered home from Portugal; and, after a long investigation, and divided opinions, the chief error was found to lie in the loss of the twenty-four hours which followed the battle of Vimiera.
The public disappointment at the Convention of Cintra was soon counterbalanced by gratifying intelligence from the Baltic. Bonaparte, whose plan was to subjugate all Europe, by making one nation instrumental in overawing another, had sent the Spanish regiments in his service into Denmark; but he could not prevent their receiving intelligence of the rising spirit of their countrymen, and the vicinity of a British fleet happily facilitated their evasion. Ten thousand Spaniards were thus brought off, and carried, with their arms, stores, and artillery, to join the standard of their country.
Meantime the command of our troops in Portugal was vested in Sir John Moore, and arrangements were made for moving them forward into Spain. From the badness of the roads, it was necessary to advance in two divisions, one marching due east, and another north-east, while a farther force, arrived from England at Corunna, was instructed to hold a south-east course. Each of the lateral divisions received, in their progress, orders to adapt the direction of their march to existing circumstances; but the result was, that both converged towards the central division, led on by Sir John Moore in person.
In their march, our officers had an ample opportunity of witnessing the fallacious and exaggerated impressions entertained in England with regard to the ardour of the Spaniards. They saw a country wretchedly cultivated and thinly peopled; a nation hostily disposed, indeed, to the French, but unaccustomed to exertion, and incapable of combination; instead of recruits, supplies of provisions, or offers of voluntary service, all was inactivity and stagnation; and, amidst the general poverty, our Commissariat had great difficulty in obtaining provisions. Another great source of perplexity was the want of information. The natives, whether in the civil or military service, were too ignorant and credulous to be capable of detecting exaggeration, or of distinguishing truth from falsehood; and our officers were obliged to judge for themselves under the most contradictory rumours.
Sir John Moore reached Salamanca on 13th of November, aware that the Spaniards had been defeated at Burgos, and soon after apprised that a French corps was advancing to Valladolid, within 60 miles of his front. In this situation, he received from Madrid the most urgent solicitations to send thither his army, in whole or in part. He knew the ardour of his country for the cause of Spain, and directed his movements in the plan of complying, as far as should be at all advisable, with the representations pressed on him; but, day after day, the intelligence became more discouraging. At last, the fall of Madrid, ascertained by an intercepted letter of General Berthier, removed every doubt, and left him no other plan but that of uniting his three divisions, and determining on a retreat; but, as his army was now augmented to 25,000 men, he determined to strike, if possible, a blow against the detached
French army under Soult, stationed at some distance to the north-east. With this view, our troops advanced from the small town of Sahagun towards the enemy, and a partial action, which took place between the opposite vanguard, was to our advantage; but intelligence arriving that Bonaparte was directing a superior force on our rear, it became indispensable to make a prompt and uninterrupted retreat. Bonaparte, pressing forward with his vanguard, reached our rear at Benavente, saw, for the first time, British soldiers, and witnessed a cavalry action, in which several squadrons of his guard were very roughly handled, and their commanding officer, Lefevre Desnouettes, made prisoner. Meanwhile, Soult, marching by a different road, hoped to cross our line of retreat at Astorga; and the Spaniards having abandoned the position which covered the access to that town, it required both prompt and skilful exertion to enable our army to occupy it before the enemy. Here, pressed as we were, it became necessary to destroy a great part of our camp equipage. Our army was a-head of the enemy, but had before it a long and difficult march over the mountains of Galicia. The weather was severe, provisions scanty, the inhabitants cold and unfriendly: so many privations and disappointments relaxed the discipline of our soldiers, who called loudly to be led to action, as the close of their distress. Retreat, however, was unavoidable; and, in this state of suffering and insubordination, the army performed a march of more than 200 miles, our general keeping in the rear to check the French, who followed with their usual audacity. At Lugo, about 60 miles from Corunna, circumstances seemed to justify our awaiting the enemy, and fighting a general battle. Our soldiers repaired with alacrity to their ranks, but Soult did not accept the challenge, and our retreat was continued. It closed on the 12th January, having been attended with the capture of many men, from disorder, and the sacrifice of many horses, from want of forage, but without losing a standard, or sustaining a single check in action. On the 13th, 14th, and 15th, the sick and artillery were embarked on board our men of war; the troops remained on shore, to await the enemy, and to cover the reproach of retreat by some shining exploit. This led to the battle of Corunna: Jan. 16. on that day our position was good on the left, but very much otherwise on the right; thither, accordingly, the French pointed their strongest column, and thither Sir John Moore repaired in person. He directed the necessary movements first to obstruct, and afterwards to charge, the advancing enemy. These orders were gallantly executed, and the attack of the French repelled; but our lamented general received a wound from a cannon ball, which soon after proved mortal. Subsequent attacks, first on our centre, and next on our left, were equally foiled; and, in the evening, we occupied an advanced position along our whole line. Enough having now been done for the honour of our arms, the embarkation was continued on the 17th, and completed on the 18th, after which the whole set sail for England.
Our failure in this campaign was far from discouraging our government from new efforts. Austria was preparing to attack the allies of Bonaparte
in Germany, and the Spaniards, though repeatedly beaten in close action, continued a destructive warfare in the shape of insular insurrections. Sir Arthur Wellesley was accordingly sent with a fresh army to Lisbon, and General Beresford with a commission to discipline the Portuguese forces. They found the French threatening Lisbon in two directions; from the east, with a powerful force under Victor; from the north, with a less numerous body under Soult. Sir Arthur Wellesley advanced against the latter, drew near his rear guard on the banks of the Douro, drove it over that river, and crossing immediately after, forced Soult to a precipitate retreat from Oporto. Returning to the southward, our commander obliged the force under Victor to draw back; and having, some time after, effected a junction with a Spanish army, took the bold determination of moving forward in the direction of Madrid. The French now sent reinforcements to the army of Victor, and the opposing forces met at Talavera de la Reyna, a town to the north of the Tagus, near the small river Alberche. The British force was 19,000; that of the Spaniards above 30,000; the French army amounted to 47,000.* Lord Wellington was too distrustful of the discipline of his allies to venture an attack on the French, but he saw no imprudence in trying, as at Vimiera, the chance of a defensive action. Stationing the Spaniards on strong ground on the right, he occupied with the British a less strong, but yet favourable position, on the left. Against the army thus posted, the French advanced in the afternoon of 27th July, driving in our van, and attacking an eminence on our left. This eminence, the key of the position, would have been assailed from the beginning, by Bonaparte, with a formidable column, but the rifle corps and single battalion sent against it by Victor were soon driven back by our troops. A second attack, made in the evening by three regiments of infantry, was at first successful, but it was soon repelled by a fresh division of British. The main body of the French, surprised at this failure, waited impatiently for morning to renew the attack; they advanced, marched through a destructive fire to the top of the rising ground, approached our cannon, and were on the point of seizing them, when our line rushed forward with the bayonet, and drove them down with great loss. Their commanders now determined to suspend all attacks on the Spaniards, and to bring a mass of force against the front and flank of the British. A general attack took place at four in the afternoon, and the troops directed against the height, now consisted of three divisions of infantry, or about 18,000 men. Crossing the ravine in their front, the first division scaled the height amidst volleys of grape-shot; but its general fell, a number of officers shared his fate, and retreat became unavoidable. No attempt was now made to carry the eminence in front; attacks were made on its left and right, but all were ineffectual. Our greatest loss was sustained in an unsuccessful attack by our cavalry on two squares of French infantry in
the plain; the 23d light dragoons were here almost annihilated. The loss of the Spaniards was only 1200; that of the British above 5000; that of the French (De Rocca's Memoirs) nearly 10,000.
Notwithstanding this signal success, it became necessary for the allied army to retire; the French divisions, in the north-west of Spain, having united and begun to march in a direction which would soon have brought them on our rear. Our army crossed the Tagus, and held a south-west course till reaching Badajos, where it remained during the rest of the year, in a position which covered that fortress, and showed the Spaniards that we had not abandoned their cause, however dissatisfied with their co-operation, and convinced of the impracticability of combining offensive operations with such allies.
While, by land, the fortune of war was thus chequered, at sea the French experienced nothing but disasters. Eight ships of the line in Brest, eluding our blockade, sailed southward to Basque Roads near Rochefort, where they were joined by four sail of the line from that port. Our fleet blockaded them in their new station, and preparations having been made to attempt their destruction by fire-ships, Lord Cochrane sailed in with these dreadful engines on the evening of the 11th April 1809. Our seamen broke the boom in front of the French line, disregarded the fire from the forts, and, after bringing the fire-ships as near to the enemy as possible, set fire to the fusées and withdrew in their boats. The French, surprised and alarmed, cut their cables and run on shore. Four sail of the line that had accompanied Lord Cochrane attacked them, and though the main body of our fleet was prevented by the wind and tide from coming up, the result of our attack, and of the effect of the fire-ships, was the loss of four sail of the line, and one frigate burned or destroyed. At a later period of the year, a French convoy of three sail of the line and eleven transports, proceeding from Toulon to Barcelona, was attacked and destroyed by a division from Lord Collingwood's fleet.
Doubtful as was the aspect of the great contest in Spain, it employed a large portion of Bonaparte's military establishment, and revived the hope of independence in Germany. Prussia was too recently humbled, and too closely connected with Russia, at that time the ally of France, to take up arms; but Austria was unrestrained, and thought the season favourable for a renewal of the contest. Her troops took the field in April, and invaded Bavaria, under the Archduke Charles, but were worsted at Eckmühl, and Vienna was a second time entered by Bonaparte. His impatience to attack the Austrian army on the north side of the Danube, led to his failure in the sanguinary battle of Aspern; and necessitated the advance of almost all his regular troops into the heart of Germany, at a distance of several hundred miles from the coast.
Of the naval stations thus exposed, by far the most important was Antwerp, situated on a part
* See Mémoires sur la Guerre des Français en Espagne. Par M. De Rocca, Chevalier de l'Ordre de la Légion d'Honneur. 8vo. 1815.
of the Scheldt, of as great depth, and as accessible to ships of the line as the Thames at Woolwich. From Antwerp to the mouth of the Scheldt is a distance of about 50 miles. The first fortified town, on coming in from the sea, is Flushing, the batteries of which, though formidable, are not capable of preventing the passage of ships of war through a strait of three miles in width. Our armament, consisting of nearly forty sail of the line and 38,000 military, was the most powerful that ever left our shores. It crossed the narrow sea with a fair wind, and, in the morning of 30th July, the inhabitants of the tranquil coast of Zealand were astonished by an unparalleled display of men of war and transports. Our troops landed and occupied forthwith Walcheren and the islands to the north. No resistance was offered except at Flushing; and our commander, the Earl of Chatham, showed himself wholly incapable of discriminating the causes of success or failure, when he stopped to besiege that place; it ought only to have been watched, while the main body of the troops should have landed in Dutch Flanders, on the south of the Scheldt, and marched straight to Antwerp, which, even with artillery, might have been reached in a few days. The French, never doubting the adoption of this plan, and conscious of their weakness, had moved their men of war up the river, beyond the town, previous to setting them on fire. But a delay of a fortnight took place before Flushing, and time was thus given to the enemy to strengthen the forts on the river, and to collect whatever force the country afforded. Still, as an attack by water was not indispensable to success, there yet remained a chance; ten days more, however, were lost; the relinquishment of the main object of the expedition became unavoidable, and the only farther measure was to leave a body of 15,000 men in the island of Walcheren. There, they remained during several months, suffering greatly from an unhealthy atmosphere, and doing nothing except destroying, on their departure, the dockyards of Flushing. Never was a gallant force more grossly misdirected; the choice of our general was as unaccountable as the choice of Muck in 1805; and the historian, were he to reason from the inferior numbers of the enemy, might pronounce this expedition as inglorious to our arms as the battles of Poitiers and Agincourt to our enemies of a former age.
We turn, with impatience, from the banks of the Scheldt to a scene more honourable to our arms. Our troops, under (Sir A. Wellesley) Lord Wellington, had passed the winter in the interior of Portugal, moving northward as spring advanced, but delaying active operations: offensive war was unsuited to our situation, and the French awaited reinforcements from the north. Bonaparte's determination now was to make Massena penetrate into Portugal, and to expel those auxiliaries who were the main spring of the obstinate resistance experienced by him in Spain. The first enterprise of the French army was the siege of the frontier fortress of Ciudad Rodrigo, which surrendered on 10th July. The next object of attack was the Portuguese fortress of Almeida, which was invested in the end of July, and taken unfortunately too soon, in consequence of the explo-
sion of the magazine. Soon after, the French army, now a formidable body, advanced into Portugal, Lord Wellington retiring before them, but determined to embrace the first opportunity of fighting on favourable ground. This occurred when occupying the highest ridge of the mountain of Busaco, directly in face of the enemy. The French, always impetuous, and not yet aware of the firmness of our men, marched up the mountain; one division reached the top of the ridge, where they were immediately attacked by a corps of British and Portuguese, and driven from the ground. In other parts the same result took place before the French reached the top. The loss on our side was 1000 men; that of the enemy between 2000 and 3000. Massena desisted from farther attacks, but, turning the flank of our position, Lord Wellington necessarily retreated in the direction of Lisbon, till he reached the ground where he had determined to defend that capital.
The tract of country to the north of Lisbon is not above twelve miles in breadth, having the sea on the west and the Tagus on the east; the ground is extremely mountainous, and accessible only by passes, which were occupied by our troops and batteries. Massena felt all the strength of this position, and the repulse at Busaco made him beware of a second encounter on disadvantageous ground. It was now for the first time that the impetuous bands of Bonaparte stopped short in their career; the armies remained opposite to each other above four months, during which the French were greatly straitened for provisions and forage, being obliged to get convoys of biscuit under escort from France, while the command of the sea procured abundance to the British. Still Massena persisted in keeping his position, hoping to combine his operations with the army of Soult, advancing from the south-east of Spain,—an army which was but too fortunate, having attacked and taken by surprise a Spanish camp on the banks of the Guadiana. A number of boats had been constructed by Massena to cross the Tagus and co-operate with Soult, but in the beginning of March, intelligence arrived that a convoy of biscuit long expected from France had been intercepted by the Guerillas. There was now an end to all offensive projects, and there remained only the alternative of retreat; it began on 5th March; the British followed, and the movements of either army, during a very long march, afforded an admirable exemplification of the rules of war. Our advance was so prompt, that the French were often obliged to move hastily from one position to another; but they kept their best troops in the rear, collected in solid bodies, and affording no opening to our vanguard. The retreat lasted a month, and closed near Almeida on the frontier of Spain. The French, however, were soon again in a condition to act, and advanced to relieve Almeida, of which we had now begun the siege: the chief fighting took place on 3d and 5th May, near a village called Fuentes d'Honoré, but all their efforts were ineffectual, and Almeida was left to its fate: the chief part of the garrison, however, found means to escape by a nocturnal march.
Meanwhile the south, or rather the south-west of Spain, was the scene of very active operations. A body of Spaniards and British, marching northward from Gibraltar, approached the south-west extremity of the line occupied by the French troops engaged in the blockade of Cadiz. General Graham commanded the British, and on 5th March, at noon, was drawing near to the close of a long march, when he received intelligence of the advance of a French force. Knowing the height of Barrosa, which he had just left, to be the key of the position, he immediately countermanded his corps, and had proceeded but a short way, when he found himself unexpectedly near to the enemy, whose left division was seen ascending the hill of Barrosa, while their right stood on the plain within cannon shot. To retreat was wholly unadvisable; an immediate attack was determined on, though unsupported by the Spaniards, and inferior to the enemy. A battery opened against the right division of the French, caused them considerable loss, but they continued to advance, until a charge with the bayonet drove them back with great slaughter. With the other division on the ascent of the hill, there took place a similar conflict with a similar issue; both sides fought with courage, and both sustained a heavy loss; that of the British was above 1200; that of the enemy nearly double. The action lasted an hour and a half: our success was owing partly to the effect of our guns, but more to the firmness of the troops, who showed themselves determined rather to fall than yield.
About the same time, but at a distance of 200 miles to the north of Cadiz, the important fortress of Badajoz fell into the hands of the French. This painful intelligence reached Lord Wellington when following up the retreat of Massena; and no time was lost in detaching a body of troops to the south of Portugal to enable Marshal Beresford to advance and form the siege of Badajoz. This called from the south the army of Soult, 20,000 strong; on their approach, Marshal Beresford raised the siege of Badajoz, and marched to meet the French near the river Albuhera, or Albuera, with a force numerically superior, but among which there was only 8000 British. Our army awaited the attack in a position as good as a country, in general level, afforded; but our general, in an evil hour, entrusted to the Spaniards a rising ground which formed the key of that position. The French columns succeeded in driving them from it, and were about to rake with their field-pieces all the allied line. A British division marching to attack the enemy with the bayonet, were unfortunately turned by a body of lancers, who, amidst the smoke from the firing, had approached unperceived. Our loss was very great here, and there remained only one fresh division, which advancing gallantly to the charge, and, being supported by the other corps, drove the French with great slaughter from the field. The battle lasted five hours, and so great was the loss, that of the British force engaged, nearly one half were killed or wounded: the French had fought with equal bravery, and their loss also was very great. Lord Wellington reached the army some time after, and determined to renew the siege of Badajoz; breaches
were made in the walls, and two attempts at assault were hazarded (6th and 9th June), but in vain; the advance of the French army from the north, in concert with that of the south, necessitated the raising of the siege. Here ended the active operations of the year; our army remained some time encamped in the central part of Portugal, after which Lord Wellington marched northward and threatened Ciudad Rodrigo, but retreated before a superior force collected by the French.
The campaign of 1812 commenced very early, Campaign of 1812.
Lord Wellington investing Ciudad Rodrigo on 8th January. The siege was pressed with activity, and a breach being made, the town was carried by storm on 19th January, though with a great loss, particularly in officers, among whom was General Mackinnon. So prompt had been our operations, that the French army approaching to the relief of the place, would not at first believe its capture. Soon after, Lord Wellington turned his forces to the south and invested Badajoz, already the scene of such obstinate contests. Here, also, the operations were pressed with great rapidity, that they might be brought to an issue before the arrival of the French army from Cadiz. On the night of 6th April, Badajoz was attacked on several points by escalade; but we were repulsed in every direction except at the castle, which was fortunately carried, and, commanding all the works, the consequence was the surrender of the town next day, after a siege which, short as it had been, cost us very nearly 5000 men. Secure on the south, Lord Wellington now marched towards the north, and detached Sir Rowland Hill to make a sudden attack on the French station at Almaraz, where the bridge over the Tagus served as the chief military communication between the northern and southern army. The expedition was successful, the entrenchments being stormed and destroyed. Lord Wellington now May 19.
marched against the French army in the north, commanded by Marmont, and reached Salamanca on 16th June. The forts in that town being taken after some sharp fighting, the French retreated to the Douro, but being soon reinforced, resumed the offensive, and obliged our army to retreat in turn. These movements continued several weeks, Lord Wellington being obliged to yield ground to his opponent, but ready to attack him on the commission of any material fault. Such an opportunity at last occurred on 22d July, near Salamanca, when the French, rendered confident by our continued retreat, extended their left, and presented an opening, which was instantly seized by their vigilant adversary. Columns were sent forward against the enemy's left and centre; the former succeeded completely, the latter met with much opposition. Great gallantry was shown, and heavy loss sustained, on both sides; at last the French centre and right were both driven from the field. The darkness prevented our making prisoners, but a body of cavalry joining in the night, the hostile rear-guard was attacked next morning, and obliged to surrender. Our loss was about 3000 British and 2000 Portuguese, that of the enemy in killed and wounded was at least equal, and we took between 6000
War with France and her Allies.
and 7000 prisoners. The British force in the field was 22,000.
August 25.
The consequences of the victory of Salamanca were the pursuit of the French army; the occupation of Madrid on 12th August by the allies; the abandonment by the French of the works constructed with vast expence against Cadiz; the evacuation of Andalusia, Granada, and all the south of Spain. But as this loss of territory was not attended by a loss of troops, it became incumbent on Lord Wellington to prepare against a vigorous attack from forces that were rapidly concentrating. He made repeated attempts to take the castle of Burgos and the military stores collected there, but this fort, defended by a strong garrison and a vigilant commander (General Dubreton), baffled all our efforts, and proved the cause of a considerable sacrifice of lives. Meantime, the approach of Soult from the south, and of the army that had fought at Salamanca from the east, obliged Lord Wellington to adopt the alternative of retreat. He began on 20th October, and proceeded westward, in a line nearly parallel to the Douro, taking above three weeks to recross the country to the scene of his victory at Salamanca. There, united with General Hill, and at the head of 50,000 men, he remained on ground lately so propitious; hoping that an opportunity might offer to attack the enemy, though now increased, by the junction of their two armies, to the number of 70,000. But Soult's positions were found too strong for attack, and the interval afforded him by Lord Wellington was diligently employed in pushing forward detachments to cut off our communications with Portugal. Retreat now became indispensable; and here, amidst hasty marches, and a scarcity of five days, there occurred scenes of insubordination which recalled all the disorders of our march to Corunna, and drew from Lord Wellington a most severe censure in general orders. Fortunately, similar privations on the side of the French prevented them from making many prisoners, and, on 20th November, on the frontier of Portugal, was closed this eventful campaign.
Operations in the East of Spain.
June 3.
The campaign of 1813 opened in the east of Spain, by an attack on the allied army under Sir John Murray, stationed not far from Alicant; the ground it occupied was strong, but the length of the position, two miles and a half, made Suchet, who commanded the French, conceive the hope of penetrating it at one or other point. In this, however, he was foiled with a loss of from 2000 to 3000 men; the only check of importance received by that commander in all his campaigns in Spain. Soon after this success, our army was engaged in the bold plan of proceeding by sea to Catalonia and besieging Tarragona. The wind proved favourable; the main body was landed near Tarragona, and a detachment succeeded, by great exertion, in taking fort St Philip on the mountain called the Colde Balaguer, which blocked the nearest road for the arrival of the French from the south. Suchet, however, lost no time in marching northwards; and our general, Sir John Murray, considered his force (which was chiefly Spanish) unable to withstand the French; he therefore embarked and returned to
Alicant, a measure which incurred censure, but appears fully justified by circumstances, and still more by the conduct of his successors in the command.
Suchet, though successful on this occasion, soon found himself unable to retain his extensive line of occupation. The battle of Vittoria brought a new enemy on his rear, and obliged him to withdraw first from Valencia, and subsequently as far as Barcelona. Our army now advanced by land, and resumed the siege of Tarragona, with the power of retreating, not as before by sea, but on the country behind; an alternative to which a second advance by Suchet soon compelled our new commander, Lord William Bentinck. The French, however, unable to occupy an extended position, blew up the works of Tarragona and retired. Our army advanced anew, but was again checked and obliged to draw back, exhibiting a striking proof of the impracticability of opposing an active enemy with a mixed force, of which the Spaniards formed a large proportion.
We now turn to the western part of the peninsula, the field of the commander-in-chief, and of the far larger portion of our force. Lord Wellington, averse to open the campaign till every part of his troops was ready to co-operate with efficiency, did not move from quarters till after the middle of May. He knew that he would have much ground to traverse, retreat being evidently the policy of the French, weakened as they were by the recall of 25,000 veterans, who had been feebly replaced by a body of conscripts. Lord Wellington was now, for the first time, at the head of a superior force, which he wielded with consummate skill. The strength of the enemy lay in the line of the Douro, which they expected to defend with advantage, so far at least as to make us purchase dearly its acquisition; but all this was prevented by Lord Wellington making his left division cross the river on the Portuguese territory, and advance along its northern bank; while he and Sir Rowland Hill, at the head of separate corps, marched, after several feints, in a diagonal direction, so as to support this movement, and effect a junction in an advanced position. The French, threatened with being taken in the rear, evacuated one town after another, and, even at Burgos, declined to fight on ground where late recollections would have been so animating; they continued to retreat, increasing from time to time their numbers by the garrisons of the evacuated towns, until, at last, they took a position at Vittoria, a town in Biscay, near the north-east frontier of Spain.
The position of the French extended from north to south, and was of great length. Their left rested on heights; part of their centre was also on heights, and their right was near the town of Vittoria. The Zadora, a stream of considerable size, but crossed by several bridges, ran nearly parallel to their front. Both armies were numerous, particularly that of the allies. It was the first time that nearly 40,000 British had fought together in Spain. Lord Wellington acted on the offensive throughout, and began the operations by taking possession of the heights near the extreme left of the enemy. This was easily
effected; but their importance being soon perceived by the French, an attack was made to recover them. An obstinate contest took place, but the British on the heights repelled every assault. Under cover of these heights our right wing advanced, and took a village (Sabijana) in front of the enemy's centre. It was in vain the French attempted to retake this village. The centre of the allies crossed the river near it, and the centre of the French withdrew from their position, retreating to the town of Vittoria. At first this retreat took place in good order, but an alarming account was soon received from the French right. That part of their position had been defended by the river and two têtes de pont, but the troops of our left wing had taken, first the heights commanding these forts, and soon after the forts themselves, baffling every effort of the enemy to retake them. The great road leading to the north was thus in possession of the allies; hence a general alarm and confusion throughout the French army. Their reserve was hastily withdrawn from its position, and pressed, with the whole army, along the only remaining road to the eastward; abandoning all their artillery, their ammunition, and their baggage. The loss of the battle was imputed by the French to Jourdan, whom Bonaparte, in a luckless hour, had allowed his brother to substitute to Soult; and who here, as at Talavera, was too late in discovering the importance of commanding positions. The loss in men was not particularly severe; that of the allies in killed and wounded was under 4000, and that of the French probably not much greater. The temptation afforded by the plunder of the baggage prevented our troops from making many prisoners; but the spirit of the enemy was shaken, and the loss of their artillery and stores obliged them to retreat across the Pyrenees.
The next operation of consequence was the siege of San Sebastian, a frontier fortress of great importance, which the French made the most vigorous efforts to relieve. Their army, provided anew with ammunition and cannon, advanced under command of Soult, and drove back, after some sharp actions, the British corps posted in the passes of the Pyrenees. Our troops retreated to the vicinity of Pamplona, where, on the 27th, and still more on the 28th, they sustained a succession of impetuous attacks from the enemy. On the 29th Lord Wellington resumed the offensive, drove the French from their position, strong as it was, and obliged them to retrace their steps through the Pyrenees. Our loss in these actions was about 6000 men in killed and wounded; that of the enemy was still greater, exclusive of 4000 prisoners.
At San Sebastian we had been repulsed in an assault on 25th July; the siege was continued, and a final assault on 31st August led to the capture of the place, though with the loss of 2500 men. The further operations were the entrance of our army on the French territory on 7th October; the capitulation of Pamplona on the 26th, and a general attack on the position of the French near St Jean de Luz on 10th November, after which they retreated across the Nivelle. But this mountainous country afforded a number of positions, and our next task was to
drive the enemy from behind the Nive, a large river flowing northward from the Pyrenees. This was partly accomplished on 9th December; but on several succeeding days the French, commanded by Soult, made impetuous attacks on the allied army, all anticipated by Lord Wellington, and all repulsed with heavy loss. Still the rains of the season, and the size of the mountain streams, retarded our operations. In January (1814) our army made some farther progress, and, on 25th February, attacked the French in a position near Othes, behind the Gave de Pau, another large river flowing from the Pyrenees. This attack was successful; and the retreat of the French was followed by the desertion of a number of their new levies. Soult's army now drew back, not in a northerly but easterly direction, to join detachments from the army of Suchet in Catalonia. At Tarbes, on 20th March, the fighting was of short duration, but a sanguinary battle took place at Toulouse, on 10th April;—a battle attended with a loss to the allies of nearly 5000 men, which, as well as a great sacrifice of lives on the part of the French, might have been prevented, had earlier intelligence arrived of the overthrow of Bonaparte, and the change of government at Paris.
The causes of this great change have been already explained in the concluding Section of our article FRANCE. They are but partly to be found in the operations described above; for though the Spanish war had proved extremely injurious both to the finances and military establishment of Bonaparte, his power was so great, that nothing could have shaken it but a vast and sudden catastrophe. From the moment that he lost his armies in Russia, there existed substantial grounds for hope; and after the accession of Austria to the coalition, there was little reason to doubt his overthrow. The resources of France continued indeed unreservedly at his disposal; and the dread of a counter-revolution gave him the support of the majority of a nation long disgusted with his domineering spirit and never-ending wars; but the preponderance of military means was irresistible; in vain did he struggle against it in Saxony in 1813, and in Champagne in 1814. His partial successes served only to excite a temporary illusion; and the occupation of Paris by the allies proved, like its possession by successive parties in the Revolution, decisive of the fate of France.
We are now arrived at the period when, after a contest which, as far as regards England and France, may be termed a war of twenty years, Europe was restored to a condition which promises long continued peace. The principal provisions of the treaty of Paris in 1814, and the Congress of Vienna in 1815, were as follows:
France was circumscribed within her former territory, with the addition of part of Savoy, which, however, was relinquished in 1815 to the King of Sardinia.
Austria recovered Lombardy, and added to it Venice with its adjacent territory; possessing thus a population (29 millions) equal, or very nearly equal, to that of France, and considerably greater than she had had in 1792.
Germany was declared a great federal body as be-
ore the French Revolution; with the distinction that a number of petty districts and principalities were incorporated into the larger, such as Bavaria, Württemberg, Hesse Cassel, Hesse Darmstadt; and with the farther distinction, that there is now no imperial head, but an understood division of influence between the two great powers; Austria being the protectrix of the south, Prussia of the north. These are progressive advances towards consolidation, and to them are to be added the formation of a Diet, still devoid of unity and slow in deliberation, but not altogether so tardy or disunited as its predecessors at Ratisbon.
Russia has, during the present age, suffered no reduction of her territory, but has proceeded in a regular course of acquisition. Her power, though less colossal than is vulgarly supposed, has received a substantial addition by the acquisition of Finland and of the chief part of Poland. Two-thirds of what once was Prussian Poland, and a part of Galicia, were formed in 1815 into a kingdom, the crown of which is worn by the Czar.
Prussia, on the other hand, has exhibited a striking example of the mutability of political greatness. Raised by the talents of Frederick II. to a rank above her real strength, but making, after his death, successive additions to her territory by the dread of her arms, and by diplomatic combinations, she saw the whole overturned by Bonaparte in one fatal campaign. From 1807 to 1813 her dominions continued circumscribed, and her population hardly exceeded six millions. But the arrangements of 1814 restored to her a third of Russian Poland, and a valuable tract of country on the Lower Rhine; and her population is now, as in 1806, above ten millions.
Of her colonial conquests from France, England retained Tobago, St Lucie, and the Isle of France. The peace confirmed also our possession of Malta and the Cape. Of the other Dutch settlements, Surinam and Java were restored; but Demerara, Berbice, and Essequibo, containing a number of British settlers, were retained; the merchants of Holland, however, enjoying certain privileges of trade with these colonies. On the Continent of Europe, we effected an important and long desired measure, the union of the seven Dutch and ten Belgic provinces into one kingdom. The latter, in their detached state, presented too tempting an object for France, and would have proved the cause of repeated wars, in which England, from her interest in the independence of Holland, and her dread of invasion, could hardly fail to participate.
The losses of Denmark rank among the most painful consequences of the wars of the French Revolution. To strip that pacific and inoffensive kingdom, first of its navy and next of a kindred country, governed by the same sovereign during 400 years, were acts that called for the regret and condemnation of every unprejudiced observer. The transfer of Norway was opposed by the inhabitants, and, we add with regret, that our navy was ordered to take part against them by blockading their ports. At last all was terminated by a convention pronouncing the union of Sweden and Norway under the same sovereign, the latter retaining her separate constitu-
tion. Pomerania was transferred from Sweden to Prussia, and Denmark received a small territory to the south of Holstein.
Sweden had enjoyed during many years the advantage of neutrality, and, like Denmark, increased gradually her shipping and trade. Deviating from this in 1805, and becoming a party to the coalition against France, she was saved from hostilities by the rapid overthrow of Austria; and Pomerania was not attacked until 1807, when Gustavus IV. chose to refuse peace at the time when he had not the support of a single continental ally. This and other acts of madness led to his deposition in 1809; and the year after Europe saw with surprise the nomination of Bernadotte as the efficient head of the Swedish government. This choice, attributed at first to the interference of Bonaparte, was due (Memoirs of Madame de Stael, Vol. III. Chap. iv.) to the personal exertions of Bernadotte himself. The acquisition of Norway, and the introduction into Sweden of various improvements by an active minded foreigner, are advantages of magnitude, and calculated to form some counterpoise to the loss of Finland, and the increased danger from Russia.
Spain and Portugal preserved their territory unaltered; both had received rude shocks from the invader, but in both the reign of superstition and indolence seemed so firmly fixed as to bid defiance to political change, whether introduced by mild or harsh means. The events of 1820, however, have shown, that in Spain there exists that sense of the abusive nature of their institutions, and that desire of reform which in France produced the Revolution; while in Portugal, results, eventually favourable, may be expected from the continued absence of a bigoted court.
Switzerland, without being made a province of France, had been obliged to furnish a military contingent in the wars of Bonaparte. The arrangements of 1814 maintained her as a federal state, but with 19 cantons instead of 13; an increase derived, not from extended territory, but from the independent form acquired by certain districts (such as the Pays de Vaud) incorporated formerly with the original cantons.
The King of Sardinia was restored to Piedmont, and his other continental possessions, with the addition of the territory of Genoa.
Italy was the country of all Europe the most likely to profit by the occupancy of the French. The substitution of an efficient government for the feeble administration of Naples and Rome; the diminution of superstition, the increase of industry, the extirpation of robbery on the high ways, the new modelling of the military establishment, were all objects of the highest importance. To these was added a hope of blending all the states of the Peninsula into a common union,—a union most ardently desired by the Italian nation, and calculated, above all things, to preserve their country from war and the intrusion of foreigners. The selfish policy of Bonaparte, whose object was merely to extract from every country the utmost possible supply of revenue and recruits, prevented the adoption of this grand measure, until the reassumed sway of foreigners, in particular of the
Austrians, removed it to an indefinite distance, and reinstated the territorial divisions of Italy on the footing of 1792, with the exception of the republics of Venice and Genoa.
The royal family of Naples remained in Sicily during 1814, but Murat was not recognised by the Bourbons, and dreaded, with reason, that the allies would deem their task incomplete, if they did not restore the crown of Naples to the ancient family. He armed in self-defence, and no sooner did he hear of Bonaparte's entrance into Lyons, than he advanced against Lombardy, and called on all Italians to unite in the assertion of their national independence. But his troops were unable to cope with the Austrians; after some partial successes they were obliged to retreat; and finding, in some sharp actions on their own territory, the continued superiority of their opponents, the eventual result was the dispersion of the Neapolitan army, and the surrender of their capital on 22d May. The royal family now returned from Palermo to Naples, and resumed their sovereignty. Murat escaped to Toulon; but, after the second return of the Bourbons, he proceeded to Corsica, and conceived the wild project of landing in the Neapolitan territory, at the head of a feeble detachment, in the hope of being joined, like Bonaparte, on returning from Elba, by thousands of his ancient followers. He disembarked in Calabria, but was forthwith attacked by the inhabitants, taken and shot by order of the royal family, who were thus left in undisturbed possession of the crown.
Turkey was no party to the treaty of 1814, but remained on the footing on which the treaty of 1812 with Russia had placed her. Stationary in an age of change, and inflexible in her adherence to traditional usages, she saw the French Revolution pass without hurt; or rather was indebted to it for a relaxation in the shocks to which the European part of her empire is exposed from Austria and Russia. The peace of 1790 had been preserved uninterrupted by Austria; that of 1791 was infringed by Russia by only one war, viz. from 1807 to 1812. The temporary occupancy of Egypt by the French, and the more permanent establishment of England in the Ionian Islands, have had no effect on the interior of the Turkish empire.
II.—War with the United States of America.
We are now obliged to record military operations conducted in a very different quarter, and involving considerations very distinct from those which animated the contest on the continent of Europe. The United States of America continued on friendly terms with us during several years after the beginning of the war of 1803. There existed discussions, and of rather a serious nature, between the two countries, particularly in regard to the practice of our naval officers of impressing American seamen on suspicion, or pretended suspicion, of their being British subjects; but these contests were happily confined to diplomats. Meantime, the navigation of the Americans was in a course of rapid extension; for their neutral flag enabled them to act as carriers to the con-
tinental belligerents, and, in particular, to convey to Europe the produce of the French and Spanish West Indies. The depression of our West India trade in 1805, though the unavoidable result of too great a growth of produce for a system of monopoly, was attributed to the successful rivalry of the Americans in the continental markets. Mr Pitt was assailed by our ship-owners, and prevailed on to take measures which obliged the Americans to forbear the direct passage across the Atlantic, and to give such cargoes a neutral character by carrying them in the first instance, to their own ports. The Grenville ministry maintained what Mr Pitt had done, and went no farther; but they were succeeded by men actuated by different views. A parliamentary committee, appointed in June 1807 to inquire into the distress of our West India colonies, received evidence calculated to strengthen an impression already very general, that a total stop ought to be put to the conveyance of French or Spanish colonial produce in neutral bottoms. No sooner did the successful termination of the Copenhagen expedition give popularity to the "system of vigour," than we issued the Orders in Council of November 1807; the object of which, however disguised, was to put a stop to neutral traffic, except when carried on by licence from our government, thus assuming the power of restricting or extending that traffic as we should find beneficial to our interests; or rather, as we should imagine, to be beneficial, since, in questions of commerce, the real is frequently far different from the anticipated result.
In this explanation of these ill-understood Orders, we exclude from the motives of ministers all participation in that jealousy of America that actuated so many of our countrymen. We consider them as acting from conviction, as seeking in this measure only a source of benefit to our commerce, and of annoyance to our enemies in Europe; yet, even with these qualifications, the Orders in Council have contributed more than any other measure in the present age to the distress that now afflicts our country. Their first practical result was a suspension of the navigation of the Americans, by a general embargo imposed by their own government: this preliminary measure was, in a few months, succeeded by a non-intercourse act, which continued in operation above a year, during which our exports to America were greatly reduced, and our manufacturers distressed to a degree that ought to have served as a warning of the consequences of a farther contest with our best customers. In 1809, in consequence of a temporary arrangement, the intercourse was resumed, and exports from England to America took place to a great amount. But the offensive part of our system was soon after revived; the Americans were prevented from trading with France, Italy, or Holland, and the only conciliatory answer given by our government, was a promise to recall our orders whenever the Americans should obtain from Bonaparte the repeal of his Berlin and Milan decrees. This repeal was in some measure obtained in 1810, but nothing could wean our ministry from their predilection for what they account-
ed a grand political measure; and those who inspect the official communications of the two governments,* will see with surprise the expedients devised, and the promises held out to gain time, and to delude the Americans, while, in fact, there never was an intention of recalling the obnoxious decrees. The Americans offered explicitly (Letter from Mr Monroe to Mr Foster, 26th July 1811) to recall all hostile edicts "if we revoked our orders;" but this not being complied with, their ports were definitively shut against us, and our manufacturers reduced to great distress,—a distress portrayed in colours unfortunately too impressive in the parliamentary papers on the Orders in Council, printed in the early part of 1812. But no change could be effected in our measures till the accession of Lord Liverpool to the first ministerial station, when a repeal took place, but unhappily too late, the Americans having declared war before this intelligence could reach them. From this time forward the impartial narrator finds it his duty to transfer the charge of aggression from England to America. We had now a minister aware of the evil tendency of our Orders in Council, and prepared to make reasonable concessions to the Americans, while they, heated by the contest, and attributing the change to the dread of losing Canada, refused our offers of accommodation.
The naval conflicts in the first year of the war were of a nature greatly to surprise the public, accustomed as it was to our almost uninterrupted triumphs at sea. The Guerriere frigate was captured on 19th August (1812) by the Constitution, American frigate, and the Macedonian on 25th October by another American frigate, called the United States. If these losses could, in any degree, be attributed to the fault of our officers, no such charge could be brought in the case of Captain Lambert of the Java, a most intelligent seaman, who, after a dreadful conflict, was obliged, on 29th December, to strike to the Constitution. In this, as in the preceding actions, the real cause of failure lay in the disproportion of strength, the Guerriere having only 263 men, her antagonist 476; the Macedonian only 300, the United States 478. Even the Java, though a large frigate, had only 367 men, her opponent 480. The inequality in weight of metal was still greater, each of these American frigates having been originally intended for a ship of the line. No sooner did the two nations meet on an equal footing in the case of the Chesapeake and Shannon (June 1st 1813), than the superiority was found to rest with us.
The operations by land were offensive on the part of the Americans, and directed to the conquest of Canada, of which the frontier adjoins their northern states, extending in a long line from south-west to north-east. The boundary consists in a great measure of water, being formed partly by the great lakes Erie and Ontario, partly by the course of the
St Lawrence. On the south-west part of this frontier, a body of 2300 Americans, regulars and militia, advanced in July 1812 from the small fort of Detroit. Their operations, at first successful, were soon checked by a British detachment; retreat became unavoidable, and our troops assuming the offensive in their turn, the result was the surrender (16th August) of the whole body of Americans and of the fort of Detroit. Not discouraged by this failure, another detachment of Americans assembled near Niagara, but, after a sharp action (13th October), were obliged, like their countrymen, to surrender. A farther attempt, on the part of the Americans, to force the Niagara frontier, on 28th November, was likewise unsuccessful; while, in a different quarter, at a distance of nearly 300 miles to the north-east, the advance of their main body to Champlain proved ineffectual, the preparations on our side necessitating their retreat. Lastly, a detachment advancing, in January 1813, in the hope of retaking Fort Detroit, were themselves attacked by a British division and obliged to surrender.
These repeated failures were the result, not of a Campaign of deficient activity or courage, but of impatience and insubordination; the restraint of discipline being ill-suited to a nation that acknowledges no master. But, in the next campaign, the Americans took the field with augmented forces, and an improved plan of action. A strong division crossing Lake Ontario, landed on 27th April, at York, the chief town of Upper Canada, and took it, with its stores, and part of the garrison. A check was, indeed, given to them April 25. in a very different quarter, on the Miami, a river May 27. falling into Lake Erie; but, next month, a strong body of Americans penetrated the Niagara frontier, May 26. and an attempt made by the British on Sackett's harbour, a port in Lake Ontario, was not successful. Still the progress of the American main body into Canada from the Niagara was obstructed, and checks experienced by them in a way that clearly demonstrated the inexperience of their troops. They forbore, therefore, to advance by land, and directed their efforts to a naval superiority. On Lake Erie, the more remote of the two from our Canada settlements, this superiority was acquired in September, after the capture of our petty squadron, under Captain Barclay, and the consequence was our abandoning the more distant posts in Upper Canada. On Lake Ontario, the naval contest was long maintained; and an attempt made, in November, by a strong division of Americans, to descend the St Lawrence in small craft, and to threaten Montreal, was rendered abortive by the activity of our troops. The campaign was then closed by our opponents without making any serious impression on Canada, though their force exceeded 20,000 men. On our part, the campaign terminated by taking Fort Niagara by surprise, and by repulsing, near the small town of Buffalo, a corps of 2000 men, brought forward to check our advance. The town was burned, in re-
* See the American State Papers, printed in 1811 at Philadelphia, and reprinted in London.
liation for a similar excess committed by the Americans.
The inclemency of an American winter suspended hostile operations for some months. The first exploit of consequence, in next campaign, took place on Lake Ontario, and was an attack by a British division and squadron on Fort Oswego, which, with its stores, fell into our hands. In the beginning of July, an American division, 5000 strong, crossed the Niagara, already so often traversed, and obliged the opposing force to retreat. But the opportune arrival, from Bourdeaux, of some regiments which had served in France, soon enabled our troops to make a stand; and, on 25th July, there took place an action more obstinate, and better sustained on the part of the Americans, than any in the present war. They were finally repulsed, but the loss was heavy on both sides. Some time after, a sally made by the garrison of Fort Erie against a detachment of British entrenched in the vicinity, though at first successful, was eventually repulsed. But a very different result attended an offensive enterprise, on a large scale, attempted by us on the side of Lake Champlain. For this purpose, our Commander, Sir G. Prevost, assembled all his disposable force, amounting, with the reinforcements from Europe, to nearly 15,000 men, crossed the American frontier, and marched southward to attack Plattsburgh, a fortified town on Lake Champlain. The attack on the land side was combined with that of a flotilla, consisting of a frigate and several small vessels, which, coming within sight on 11th September, engaged an American flotilla of nearly equal force. Unfortunately, our commanding officer was killed, and our flotilla captured,—a check which, though in itself of no great moment, induced our general to make a sudden retreat. This retreat, in the face of so inferior an enemy, was altogether inexplicable, and excited general surprise and disappointment. With it closed the operations on the side of Canada, each party having entirely relinquished the idea of offensive war.
So long as there remained a hope of treating with the Americans, our government had avoided offensive operations, and kept the command of our fleet in that station in the hands of Sir John Borlase Warren, an officer who joined diplomatic to nautical habits. At last, however, it became necessary to replace him by one whose spirit of enterprise was more conformable to the impatient ardour of our navy. Admiral Cochrane arrived, and lost no time in concerting an attempt on the American capital, by sailing up the Patuxent, destroying a flotilla in that river, and landing a military force under Major-General Ross, which attacked the American division posted to defend Washington, drove them from their ground, and entered the capital in the evening. Here private property was respected, but of the public buildings there were destroyed not only the arsenal, the dock-yard, the war-office, but the houses of the senate and representative body, the residence of the president, and the bridge across the Potowmack. Our troops, being few in number, retreated soon after, and, embarking anew, proceeded against Baltimore, where they landed, drove the defending force of the Americans from their position, and ap-
proached the town. But the entrance to the harbour being closed by a barrier of sunk vessels, co-operation on the part of the navy was impracticable, and our troops were re-embarked without any loss of consequence, except that of their commander General Ross. A better result had been obtained in an expedition against Alexandria, a trading town on the Potowmack, whence a quantity of stores and shipping was brought away. Success also attended an expedition in a very different quarter;—in the river Penobscot, at the northern extremity of the United States, adjoining the British province of New Brunswick. Far different was the result of an expedition on a larger scale, directed against New Orleans. Our troops disembarked from the Mississippi, repelled an assault from the Americans, moved forward, and came within six miles of the town, where they found the enemy posted behind a canal, with a breastwork in front, and their right flanked by the Mississippi. After a fortnight passed in mutual preparations, a night attack was at last determined on; but, unexpected difficulties retarding it till day-light, the fire of the Americans from behind their breastwork was pointed with unerring aim, and proved extremely destructive. In the short space of twenty minutes, our three principal officers, and nearly 2000 privates, were killed or wounded; and though, on the opposite side of the river, our attack had been successful, it was determined to relinquish the expedition, and re-embark the troops. This distressing failure was poorly compensated by the capture of Fort Mole, the last land operation of the war. At sea, our final exploit was the capture of the American frigate President, of 54 guns, and 490 men.
The peace was signed at Ghent, on 24th December 1814, and its terms afforded a curious exemplification of the futility of warlike struggles. The territorial possessions of both countries were, with a very trifling exception, left on the same footing as before the war; and not the slightest notice was taken of the questions which had most strongly excited the spirit of hostility on both sides;—neither of the impressment of seamen, a point so important to the Americans, nor of the limitation of the rights of neutral traffic, a topic so often urged among us.
The United States, in no respect a manufacturing country, purchased from us merchandise to an extent annually increasing, and which, in 1807, had reached the amount (see our article ENGLAND, p. 134) of £12,000,000 Sterling. Every addition to their capital, every year that they passed in peace and prosperity, increased their value to us in a commercial sense, while every blow given to their productive funds necessarily operated in diminution of their purchases and payments. But, far from acting on these impressions, the ministry of 1807 eagerly seized the opening given them by the violence of Bonaparte, to assail the trade of America; and issued (in November) those Orders which "prohibited all direct intercourse from a neutral port to France, or her tributary states, unless the neutral vessels, intended for such voyages, touched first at a port in the British dominions, and paid a duty." This singular measure was vindicated, not as legal in itself, but as a trespass on neutral rights justified by the
Return of Bonaparte. previous trespasses of the French government. It would, it was argued, distress the part of the Continent subject to Bonaparte, and excite discontent against his government; but the real motive was to cramp and control the trade of neutrals. That the Americans would not submit to such humiliating conditions, our Government was well aware; but it knew also that they had neither army nor navy, and would not, at least for several years, resort to the alternative of war. So far our calculation was correct, but the question of national advantage we entirely misconceived. For what was the practical operation of these restrictive edicts? The trade of the Americans with the Continent was suspended, and the remittances formerly made to us from the sale of their goods, — remittances not overrated (Baring on the Orders in Council) at four or five millions a year, were made no more. Our bank paper fell, more from that than from any other cause, into a discredit which occasioned a loss of 20, 30, and eventually nearly 40 per cent. on all subsidies and other government expenditure on the Continent. The mercantile insolvencies in America, which followed the Orders in Council, recoiled, in a great degree, on England, whose exporting merchants were the chief creditors of the bankrupts. Next came the burdens and the havoc of war; and of every million of American capital thus diverted from productive industry, the half at least was lost to the British manufacturer. But this was not all; the suspended intercourse, and the appeal to arms, induced the Americans to attempt to manufacture for themselves. This, for several years, excluded our goods, and when, on the return of peace, British merchandise was poured into the United States at prices so low as to defy competition, the consequence, particularly in the year 1819, was a scene of general insolvency in the States, which once more recoiled with the most distressing effects on the British creditor. All this was the result of a policy, bad in every point of view, and which neither had nor could have any decisive influence on the grand contest in Europe.
III.—Return of Bonaparte, and Events of 1815.
The ratification of the peace with America had not been received from the other shore of the Atlantic, when the return of Bonaparte from Elba raised in Europe a fresh alarm of war. He ventured to land with a force barely sufficient to secure his personal safety in a march, and to supply emissaries for mixing with the opposite ranks. The French soldiers are fond of glory; and their attachment revived at the sight of their leader. They first refused to oppose, and soon after pressed forward to join him; and he proceeded in a rapid and unresisted march to the capital. Ought England to participate in the coalition formed to expel this intruder, and to reinstate the Bourbons? On this question there existed, either in parliament or the public, very little difference of opinion, so great was the enmity inspired by Bonaparte, and such the dread of incessant war under his sway. Our ministry soon took their determination; our Continental allies were unanimous in the cause, and
not a day was lost in preparing for the invasion of France. The Netherlands, it was evident, would be the first scene of operations; thither the Prussians pressed with all the ardour inspired by recent wrongs; thither were conveyed from England, troops, ammunition, and stores, with all the dispatch afforded by the undisputed command of the sea. By the end of May or beginning of June, the Prussian and British force in the Netherlands was superior to any that could be mustered by Bonaparte. It was not till the second week of June that his disposable force, to the number of 115,000 men, was collected in front of the allied line. This was effected with great secrecy and dispatch. He joined the camp on the 14th, and made his troops march early on the 15th, driving insuccessively the Prussian outposts at Charleroi and Fleurus. From the beginning of his march to Ligny, the Prussian head-quarters, the distance was thirty miles; to Brussels, the head-quarters of Lord Wellington, was nearly twice as far; and all Bonaparte's hope rested on fighting his opponents separate and unsupported. Intelligence of the first movements of the French reached Lord Wellington in the afternoon of the 15th, and made him forthwith prepare for the march, which, however, he delayed until the arrival of a second courier from the Prussians, and of advices from his own outposts, which should show whether there was any serious attack on other points. In the evening arrived accounts, which left no doubt that the mass of the French army was directed against the Prussians; and orders to march were issued that night in all directions, so as to reach even remote stations between three and four in the morning. Our troops began their march from almost every point at day-light, all pointing to Quatre Bras, a spot where four roads meet, and distant seven miles from Ligny. After marching between six and seven hours, several of the divisions stopped to take rest and refreshment; but they were hurried from their unfinished meal by dragoons dispatched to quicken their advance, for Lord Wellington had received by the way intelligence of the rapid approach of the French. Proceeding promptly with his escort, he had time to reach the head-quarters of the Prussians, and to learn from their impatient commander, that, without knowing the numbers of the French, or their plan of attack, he was determined to accept battle on that day, and on the ground he then occupied. Lord Wellington had no controlling power. All he could do was to lessen the pressure on his allies, by pushing, as much as possible, such part of the French as might be opposed to the British. This interview took place between one and two o'clock; and his lordship, returning forthwith to Quatre Bras, found the French trailleurs already in possession of the wood, which skirted and commanded the road. Immediate orders were given to drive them out, a task which devolved on the Highlanders arriving from Brussels, and the Guards from Enghien, each after a march of twenty-five miles. They succeeded in expelling the French; but the want of artillery and cavalry (neither of which came up till late at night) prevented them from pushing forward with effect. Fresh bodies of the French were now seen advancing; and, on the other hand, regiments of British succes-
sively reached the ground. The conflict spread, and was maintained with great gallantry on both sides, but with hardly any other plan than that of fighting straight forward. At first the French possessed considerable advantages, and their cavalry, charging rapidly through fields of rye, which grows in Flanders to a great height, came unexpectedly on some of our battalions; the latter suffered greatly, but fairly repelled their antagonists. As our reinforcements came up, the superiority was progressively acquired by us. The French were driven back, and Ney, who commanded, sent to order up a body of 20,000 men, which had arrived within three miles of Quatre Bras; but the answer was, that they had marched to Ligny by order of Bonaparte. They were soon after ordered back, but were unable to join Ney, until nine at night, when the fighting was over, and the field of action in possession of the British. The force engaged on either side did not exceed 25,000 men. Our loss amounted to 5000; that of the French (see Soult's Report) appears to have been considerably greater. Both sides fully expected a new battle the next morning. The British, by the arrival of all their divisions, formed a large army. The French, still strangers to the firmness of our troops, attributed their failure to accidental causes, and declared that their cavalry had been repulsed, parce qu'ils n'avait pas franchement abordé l'ennemi.
Meanwhile, there had been fought at Ligny a battle on a larger scale, and with greater preparation. On the slope of a rising ground, which, however, was much exposed, a Prussian army, of no less than 80,000 men, awaited the attack of Bonaparte. The fighting began between two and three o'clock, by the French gaining possession of the village of St Amand on the Prussian right. To re-occupy this village, Blücher made repeated efforts; and it was during one of the most furious of these, that Bonaparte is understood to have ordered round the corps, the absence of which was so bitterly regretted by Ney. The battle now raged along the whole line. The masses of Prussian infantry, drawn up on the slope, were much thinned by the French artillery; but in the village of Ligny, which was repeatedly taken and retaken, the slaughter was mutually great. Such was the course of the engagement till the evening at half past eight o'clock, when the French reserve, marching forward in columns, obliged the Prussians to leave the long-contested field. Their loss on this dreadful day was not short of 20,000; that of the French 10,000.
Next day Bonaparte adopted the plan of detaching, under Grouchy, a body of 34,000 men to follow the retiring Prussians, while, with the mass of his force (71,000), he turned against the British, in the hope of fighting a battle at the head of superior numbers. Lord Wellington knew not till morning the retreat of his allies; a similar measure, on his part, then became indispensable; but as his army was in the best state, and as the Prussians had just received a reinforcement, retreat was necessary only until reaching a position favourable for fighting, and for awaiting the co-operation of his allies. Waterloo, he well knew, presented these advantages; his march thither met with no annoyance from the
French, and the only fighting that took place on the 17th was at Genappe, in a cavalry action begun by our rear-guard. Bonaparte, following with his van, reached the ground opposite to our position, and, in the evening, ordered a partial cannonade, to ascertain if we occupied the latter with an intention to remain. He concluded in the affirmative, and began arrangements for a battle; next morning, he continued under a similar impression, although in his army there was (see Drouet's Account of the Battle) a general belief that we would not venture to assail their onset. At ten o'clock, he perceived, by his glass, a corps in march at a great distance, which he immediately concluded to be Prussians; this necessitated his posting a body of above 8000 men on his right to receive them,—a disposition which deprived him of his numerical superiority, and made the battle of Waterloo be fought between equal, or nearly equal forces. It began, towards noon, by an attack on the post of Hougomont, a chateau, or country seat, in front of our right, surrounded by an orchard: the possession of this point would have favoured the approach of the French to our right wing, but though they drove us from the orchard, all their efforts proved ineffectual against our troops (a detachment of guards) stationed in the building and within the court wall. This attack, though very obstinate and sanguinary, was, in the eye of either commander, only a prelude to the great onset in the centre. That began towards two o'clock, planned by Bonaparte, and conducted by Ney, whose station, during the action, was in the high road leading straight to our centre. Our army made little show, the battalions being formed in squares, and partly hid from view by the sinuities of the ground: between each square were openings sufficient to enable the battalions to deploy into line, as well as to afford our cavalry space to advance and charge. The squares were farther placed en echiquier (like a chess-board), so that the enemy's cavalry, in venturing through an opening, exposed itself to a fire in front from the opposite square, and to a flank fire from that which it had passed. Yet this firm array did not appal the French Cuirassiers, who, confiding in past success and in the protection of their armour, repeatedly tried the deadly experiment of attack. Never was the impetuosity of the French more conspicuous, and never was it more effectually opposed, whether we consider the firmness of our troops, the judgment of our general, or the efficiency of our artillery. The only ground gained by the French, was the central point of La Haye Sainte, and the space immediately in front of our line,—the whole attended, said Ney, "by a carnage the most dreadful I had ever seen." Meanwhile Bonaparte watched anxiously the moment when a partial breach, or disorder, in our line should afford him a favourable opportunity of attacking with his reserve. Ney repeatedly intimated an expectation of great success, but could report no positive advantage, even after the double charge made by the Imperial Horse Guards at five in the afternoon. It became, however, indispensable to act, and Bonaparte could hardly doubt that the long continued conflict must, by this time, have greatly weakened our line. Accord-
ingly, between six and seven o'clock, the Imperial Foot Guards, to the number of nearly 13,000, were drawn from behind the ridge which had hitherto covered them from our fire; directed to advance along the high road leading to our centre; and harangued by Bonaparte, whom they answered with reiterated cries of Vive l'Empereur. We are now come to the decisive part of the battle, that part in which till now, whether at Marengo, at Austerlitz, or at Ligny, success had uniformly attended the charge of a fresh and numerous corps. By what means did it fail at Waterloo? The answer is, that our line, though thinned, was nowhere disordered; our battalions, though reduced, were firm in their position. Besides, the Duke, apprised of the approach of his allies, moved round an additional force from his left to his centre, and directed our battalions to deploy from their squares into line;—a line not of two ranks, but of four. Its formidable aspect, and the knowledge of the approach of the Prussians, prevented Ney from attempting the last alternative, a bayonet charge by the Guards. Their ranks, however, were rapidly thinned, for the fire from our line was much more extensive and destructive than that of the columns of the enemy. It was now that the Duke saw the approach of the Prussian main body, and ordered a general movement forward; the French retired, at first slowly and in good order; but seeing that behind them all was falling into confusion, the artillerymen and waggon train, cutting the traces of their horses, and pressing to gain the high road to which the Prussians were fast advancing, the retreat became a rout. Our troops advanced over the field of battle, crossed the hollow beyond it, and, towards nine at night, reached the ridge occupied by the French Staff during the day. Their task was now fulfilled, and the Prussians were left to follow the flying enemy. The loss on our side was 13,000 men; that of the French opposed to us, exclusive of the loss caused by the Prussians, was about 20,000.
This great battle displayed no manoeuvring; the plan once formed, the whole was a succession of impetuous attacks and obstinate repulses; but the talents of either commander were not the less displayed, the one in making no fruitless application of his force; the other in never permitting the ardour of his troops to lead them from their ground or to deviate from a defensive plan. Bonaparte committed only one error,—that of ordering the advance of his guards, who, though they might penetrate our line at a particular point, had no chance of gaining a victory, and were besides likely to be soon wanted as a rear-guard to their own army. In the battle, Lord Wellington appears to have committed no error; on the preceding days, his fault lay in supposing Blücher likely to act with discretion, and in remaining personally at Brussels, instead of keeping near to his impatient coadjutor. Had the latter avoided fighting on the 16th, and retreated only twelve or fifteen miles, the allied forces would have been completely in co-operation, and their numbers (160,000) would have deprived Bonaparte of every chance.
From Waterloo to Paris, the advance of the allies was an almost uninterrupted march; marked on our part by the capture, by escalade, of two towns,
Cambray and Peronne; on that of the Prussians by an unremitting pursuit of the enemy. On one occasion (2d July, near Versailles), a corps of French cavalry reasserted their claim to fame, and taught the Prussians the hazard of a precipitate advance; but the success was partial, the evacuation of Paris unavoidable, and resistance hopeless; now that almost all Europe was pouring her armies into the French territory. Hence the second treaty of Paris (see the Article FRANCE), concluded after many vain appeals to the generosity of the allies, and which burdened France with contributions to the amount of nearly L.30,000,000 Sterling, exclusive of the support of an allied army on her frontier. This army, amounting at first to 150,000 men, was reduced in 1817 to 120,000, and withdrawn in the end of 1818; since which all has borne the aspect of tranquillity on the Continent.
The time is not yet arrived for viewing, with the calm impartiality of history, our war against Bonaparte; but the more reflecting part of our countrymen can hardly fail to regret our participating in the war of 1792. Those who know the inoffensive state of the French nation at that time, their general wish for peace, and the reduced condition of their army, can have no doubt that the efforts which subsequently poured forth such a host of combatants, owed their existence to the threats of the allied powers; without these the Jacobins would not have triumphed, nor would a military adventurer, like Bonaparte, have had the means of acquiring an ascendancy. Louis XVI. might have been brought to the scaffold, and republican visions have prevailed for a season, but the eyes of the people would have been opened to the blessings of a constitutional monarchy much earlier than when threatened with invasion, and obliged, in self-defence, to throw undue power into the hands of their new rulers. The first great error,—the coalition of 1792,—was the act of Austria and Prussia; but of the continuance of the Continental war, after 1795, we were almost the sole cause. Belgium and Holland had, it is true, fallen into the hands of France, and to recover them was an object of the highest interest; but in attempting this, our ministers made no adequate allowance for the jealousies, the prejudices, we may add, the incapacity of the governments whose aid was indispensable to success. In 1803, circumstances had become extremely embarrassing; France was confirmed in the possession of the Netherlands and Italy, and at the disposal of an ambitious despot, who studied in peace only the means of farther encroachment. What course was our Government to follow? Were they to continue in peace, and to trust for our eventual safety to the progressive extension of our resources and the improvement of our army; or were they to resort to immediate war, and present, by our declared hostility, a rallying point to other powers? An experienced government would have preferred the former; the ministry of 1803 adopted the latter; not from views of ambition, but from yielding to that popular impulse, which it would not, however, have been impracticable to guide and control. As to the course of the war,
Parliamentary Proceedings. it was, during the two first years, a contest without decided success on either side. In its third year, an ill conducted coalition gave to France that superiority which was to be expected in the case of a great military power directed by a single head. Such, in a farther degree, was the result of the continental operations of 1806 and 1807. In 1808, Spain gave an unexpected change to the calculations of politicians, and showed, in an encouraging light, the power of popular resistance; still its effects, aided even by our military means, produced little decisive of the grand objects of the war. We were proceeding with great zeal and gallantry, but without any definite hope or object, when, a catastrophe, as little expected by ourselves as by the French, entirely changed the aspect of affairs, and made it incumbent on us to omit no exertion, financial or military, to redeem the independence of Europe. The success was complete; but it was not till the close of the struggle that we became aware of the amount of the sacrifices incurred in its prosecution.
IV.—Parliamentary Proceedings since 1803.
The parliamentary proceedings in the summer session of 1803 were remarkable as indicating the existence of three or four distinct parties, amidst an almost general concurrence in support of the war. These parties were, first, that of the Ministry and their usual followers; next, that of the Grenvilles and Mr Windham, who had all along blamed the peace of Amiens, and predicted that it would prove a mere truce; thirdly, that of Mr Pitt and Lord Melville, who, after approving that peace, had, on the continued aggressions of Bonaparte, become ardent supporters of war; and, fourthly, that of Mr Fox, with a part of the old Opposition, who were of opinion that the war might have been avoided. So far were the last from being numerous, that a motion, made on 23d May, to express the concurrence of Parliament in the war, found a minority of only ten in the Peers and sixty-seven in the Commons. A subsequent measure, in the same spirit, an act for arming a large part of the population, was carried in July by a great majority; and similar ardour was evinced in submitting anew to war taxes, particularly to a 5 per cent. Income-tax. After the adoption of several other measures of the kind, and a most interesting session of nine months, Parliament was prorogued on 12th August.
The next session opened on 22d November, and discovered the same alacrity for the prosecution of the war, mixed, however, with a growing opposition to ministers. Mr Pitt had, from the beginning of the war, foreborne to commend them, and, since the failure of a negotiation to bring him into office, had assumed a language occasionally hostile. He continued to support their propositions for the public defence, and frequently improved them in their progress through Parliament; but he disclaimed all personal connection with ministers, and at last treated them as incapable of originating any measure of vigour or utility. This disposition could hardly fail to be turned to account by those busy inter-
mediaries, who find means to combine the efforts even of opposite parties for the purpose of getting into power. On 15th March Mr Pitt, aware of the side on which the public was most alive to alarm, brought forward a motion for an "Inquiry into the management of the Navy." On this occasion, severe as was his language in regard to Lord St Vincent, then at the head of the Admiralty, he received the support of the Opposition, and had on his side 130 votes against 201. From this time forward the strength of Ministers was visibly shaken. On 23d April Mr Fox brought forward an eagerly expected motion on the defence of the country, in which Mr Pitt joined, with great animosity against the Ministers. The division was 204 against, and 256 in favour of Government; a majority of 52, which, in a second debate, on 25th April, was reduced to 37. Soon after this ministers resigned, and Mr Pitt, called to the royal presence, was desired to form an administration, with the exclusion, however, of Mr Fox. This peremptory order, and Mr Pitt's too ready acquiescence in it, proved the source of the greatest difficulties. The Grenvilles had recently so connected themselves with Mr Fox and his friends, that a separation would have been altogether dishonourable; and their united strength, joined to the occasional support of Mr Addington's adherents, was the cause, during the remainder of the session, of very strong divisions against the new ministers, particularly in the Commons. Their chief measure, entitled the Additional Force Bill, was carried by only 265 to 223. The session soon after closed, but not without passing a corn bill, evidently intended to dispose the landed interest to submit to the new taxes, and which prohibited the importation of foreign wheat whenever our own should be at or below 63s. the quarter.
Before the opening of next session, an overture, suggested, it is said, by the Sovereign personally, was made to Mr Addington. After some discussion it was accepted, Mr Addington receiving the Presidency of the Council for himself, and corresponding situations for his friends. With this support ministers met Parliament; and, in one of the first great questions, the approval of the war with Spain, obtained the concurrence of 313 votes against 106. In subsequent divisions, the majorities, though less decisive, were considerable, until 6th April, when Mr Whitbread brought forward a most interesting discussion on the Tenth Report of the Commissioners of Naval Inquiry, which implicated Lord Melville. This question, debated in a full house, produced a division of 216 against 216, when, after an anxious pause, the resolutions moved by Mr Whitbread were carried by the casting vote of the Speaker. This led immediately to the resignation, by Lord Melville, of his office of first Lord of the Admiralty, and was followed by his erasure from the list of privy councillors. Some time after, his Lordship was, at his own desire, heard before the House of Commons, and, while he acknowledged that temporary irregularities in the appropriation of the public money had taken place when he was Treasurer of the Navy, he disclaimed, on his honour, the alleged participation in the profits of Mr Trotter, who had acted
Parliamentary Proceedings. as his paymaster. But the expectations of the public were raised, and a prosecution, in some shape or other, was indispensable. A motion for an impeachment before the Lords, made by Mr Whitbread, was lost by 272 to 195; but the Addington party joining Opposition in a motion for a criminal prosecution, the latter was carried by 298 against 229. Lord Melville and his friends, dreading this more than an impeachment, found means, by a sudden division of the House, to rescind the vote to that effect, and to decide on an impeachment before the Lords.
June 11.
June 25.
Among the remaining acts of the session was one of very doubtful equity—the grant of an annuity of £3000 to the Duke of Athol, for his long relinquished claims on the Isle of Man. Parliament was pro-rogued after giving ministers a vote of credit to the extent of three millions, to be applied, if necessary, in subsidies to Continental powers.
June 2.
The proceedings against Lord Melville made a deep impression on Mr Pitt, and deprived him of his only efficient coadjutor, at a time when, from the magnitude of his public cares, he was more than ever in want of support. The consequent fatigue and anxiety made severe inroads on a constitution naturally not strong. His indisposition became apparent in the early part of winter; and, on the meeting of Parliament, was understood to have reached a dangerous height. His death took place on 23d January 1806. A motion, brought forward a few days after, to grant a public funeral, and to erect a monument to “the late excellent minister,” excited much discussion. Mr Fox paid a high tribute to the financial merits of his great rival, but could not join in ascribing the epithet of “excellent” to measures which he had so often opposed. Mr Windham also opposed the vote; and the Grenvilles chose to be absent. Still the motion was carried, by 258 against 169. To a subsequent proposition, for a grant of £40,000 for the payment of Mr Pitt’s debts, no opposition was made.
Death of Mr Pitt.
Feb. 3.
The public attention was now fixed on the approaching change of ministry. The king (in concurrence, it is said, with the death-bed recommendation of Mr Pitt) sent for Lord Grenville, desired him to form a ministry, and made no opposition to the admission of Mr Fox into the cabinet; but is said to have expressed a desire that the Duke of York should retain the office of Commander-in-chief. The new administration was formed on a broad basis, comprising the friends of Lord Grenville, those of Mr Fox, and those of Lord Sidmouth. But, hardly had they entered on office, when circumstances occurred which placed, in a striking light, the different conduct of men when in and out of power. Lord Grenville thought fit to hold the incompatible offices of First Lord and Auditor of the Treasury; and the Chief-Justice was admitted to a seat in the Cabinet; while Mr Fox consented to come forward as the vindicator of both.
Jan. 26.
The New Ministry.
Act for a Limited Term of Military Service.
Bill, and a plan for improving the regular army, by substituting a limited for an unlimited term of service, and by granting a small increase of pay after the expiration of the prescribed term. These propositions, brought forward in the end of April, and beginning of May, were warmly opposed; they passed, however, by a great majority in both Houses; and would, doubtless, have conduced materially to the improvement of our army, had they received a fair trial; but the succeeding ministries sought, during the whole war, to procure enlistments for life. In France, since 1817, the rule is, to be scrupulous about the character of recruits; to give little or no bounty, but to limit the time of service, and to increase the pay after the expiration of the specified term. The same principle, differently modified, prevails in Prussia and Austria.
Of the budget, the most remarkable feature was an increase of the property-tax, from 6½ to 10 per cent., the odium of which ministers sought to lessen by the appointment of a Board of Auditors, to examine the long-standing arrears in public accounts. In regard to trade, the principles of this ministry, though little understood, and even disliked by the great majority of merchants, were entitled to much attention. They attempted to introduce into our practical policy some of the doctrines of Dr Smith; doctrines which Mr Pitt had studied in his early years, but to which circumstances had not allowed him to give an extensive application. The letter of our navigation laws forbids all intercourse between our colonies and other countries; but our West India colonies are, in time of war, so dependent on the United States for provisions, that it had been customary with the island governors to take on themselves the responsibility of infringing these acts, and to obtain regularly a bill of indemnity from Parliament. Mr Fox now brought in a bill termed “the American Intercourse Act,” the purport of which was, to authorize the governors of our colonies to do, during the remainder of the war, that which they had hitherto done from year to year, and to dispense with any application for indemnity. This bill, moderate and politic as it in fact was, met with keen opposition in Parliament, and with still keener out of doors, from the shipping and commercial interests. It passed into a law; but it was denounced as a glaring infraction of our navigation code, and contributed, more than any other measure, to shake the popularity of ministers.
The trial of Lord Melville before the House of Peers began on 29th April 1806. The charges against him, little understood by the public at large, related to an infraction of his official duty, not as a member of the cabinet, but in his early and inferior station of Treasurer of the Navy. These charges may be comprised under the following heads: That he had allowed Mr Trotter, his paymaster, to take the temporary use and profit of sums of money lodged in the Bank for the naval expenditure; that he had himself participated in such profits; and, finally, that he had applied certain sums of public money to his private use. All participation in the speculations or profit of his paymaster his lordship positively denied, but he acknowledged a temporary appropriation of the sum
Parliamentary Proceedings.
Parliamentary Proceedings.
Trial of Lord Melville.
Parliamentary Proceedings. of £10,000 in a way which "private honour and public duty forbade him to reveal." The trial closed on 12th June; the articles of impeachment had been extended to the number of ten, and on all of them there was a majority of Peers for his acquittal; but while in regard to the charge of conniving at stock speculations by Trotter, or converting the public money to his private use, the majorities were triumphant, the case was otherwise in regard to his Lordship's permitting an unauthorized appropriation of the public money by Trotter, and receiving from him temporary loans, the records of which were afterwards destroyed.
New Parliament. Though the present Parliament had completed only four sessions, ministers determined on a dissolution, doubtless from a wish to have the benefit of the government influence in the new elections. They knew their weakness at Court, and flattered themselves that a decided ascendancy in Parliament would enable them to press, with greater confidence, measures for which they could not boast the cordial concurrence of their royal master. For the time of the new election, they chose the moment of national excitement, caused by the recall of our ambassador from the French capital. The first debate in the new House of Commons related to the abortive negotiation for peace, and although the publication of the official papers excited some surprise, and showed that Bonaparte had at one time carried his offers of concession considerably farther than the public had supposed, there prevailed so general a distrust towards him, that Mr Whitbread stood almost alone in the opinion that the negotiation ought to have been continued. After some renewed discussions on Mr Windham's military measures, Lord Henry Petty, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, brought forward a plan of finance, which, assuming the expense of the current year as equal to that of subsequent years of war, professed to provide, without new taxes, for a contest of fourteen years or more. This plan contained an anticipated calculation of the loans necessary for several years to come, and supposed that a sum equal to 10 per cent. on each loan should be appropriated from the war taxes, of which 5 per cent. should serve to pay the interest of the loan, and the other 5 per cent. form a sinking fund, which, by the operation of compound interest, would redeem the capital in fourteen years; leaving the whole 10 per cent. again applicable to the same purpose, should the war continue. That this plan possessed, no more than those of Pitt or Vansittart, the merit of increasing the productive power of our revenue, has been already shown by Dr Hamilton in his well known Treatise on the National Debt. Its merit, had it been tried, would have been found to consist, as that of such plans generally does, in a support, perhaps a temporary increase, of public credit. It may even be questioned, whether the same ministry, had they continued in office, would have restricted themselves to a limited expenditure in 1808, when the Spanish struggle called forth such a burst of our national enthusiasm. There can, however, be no doubt, that they would have avoided the Orders in Council, which, by depriving us of the unseen but powerful aid of neutral
traffic, gave the first great blow to our Bank paper, and consequently to our public funds. Parliamentary Proceedings.
The bill for the abolition of the slave trade was now brought forward with all the weight of government support, and carried by triumphant majorities; the Slave in the Lords by 100 to 36, in the Commons by 283 to 16. This prompt termination of a struggle of twenty years showed how easily the measure might have been carried had not Mr Pitt declined to give it ministerial support; a course, suggested to him, probably by a dread of offending the West India planters, but founded, in a great measure, on misapprehension, since the most respectable part of that body (the proprietors of long settled estates) were far from adverse to the abolition, calculated as it was to prevent that superabundance of produce which to them is the most serious of evils. This proved the last important bill of the Grenville ministry, whose removal from office took place very unexpectedly in consequence of a difference with the sovereign about the Irish Catholics.
The bill which produced this sudden change was introduced by Lord Howick on 5th March, and entitled, "A bill to enable his Majesty to avail himself of the services of all his liege subjects in his naval and military forces, in the manner therein mentioned;" that is, by their taking an oath contained in the bill, after which they should be left to the free exercise of their religion. Here, as in the case of the American intercourse with the West Indies, the intention was less to introduce a new practice, than to permit by law what was already permitted by connivance. The draught of the bill had been previously submitted to the King, and returned by him without objection; but the royal attention was more closely drawn to it on its introduction into parliament, and on a vehement opposition from Mr Perceval, who described it as part of a system of dangerous innovation, and as a precursor of the abolition of all religious tests. The king now intimated his disapprobation of the bill to ministers, who endeavoured to modify it, but still without succeeding in rendering it acceptable to their sovereign. They then felt the necessity of withdrawing the bill, but inserted in the cabinet minutes a declaration, reserving to themselves two points—the liberty of delivering their opinion in Parliament in favour of the proposed measure, and of bringing it forward at a future period. This minute was unfortunately couched in terms too positive, if not disrespectful to the King, who, always tenacious on the Catholic question, and never personally cordial with Lords Grenville and Howick, insisted that they should pledge themselves in writing never to press him again on the subject. Ministers declining to comply, the King consulted with Lord Eldon about forming a new ministry, and receiving a ready assurance of the practicability of such a measure, refused to listen to a modified acquiescence with his late order, offered rather tardily by Lord Grenville. Ministers gave up the seals of office on 25th March; and, next day, the change and the causes that led to it were fully discussed in Parliament. A short adjournment now took place, after which there occurred some remarkable trials of strength between the two parties. An independent
member (Mr Brand), with reference to the conditions on which the ministry had come into office, made a motion that it was contrary to the duty of members of the cabinet to restrain themselves by a pledge from advising the King on any subject. This motion produced a very long debate, but was lost by 258 against 226; while a corresponding motion in the Lords was lost by 171 to 90. A subsequent proposition, to express the regret of the House at the removal from office of so firm and stable an administration, was lost by 244 against 198; and it became apparent that in Parliament, as at Court, the fall of the Grenville ministry was decided.
It remains to make a few observations on their conduct when in office; and here an impartial inquirer will not be long in discovering that both their merits and demerits have been greatly exaggerated. Their war measures proved unimportant, particularly in the point which, in the then ardent state of the public mind, superseded all others—the annoyance of France; and the result was, an unconsciousness in the greater part of the people of what was really valuable in their views and conduct. Yet Mr Fox brought to the department of foreign affairs an intimate knowledge of continental politics, and an exemption from national prejudices, far, however, from being accompanied, as the vulgar supposed, by an indifference to our national interests. Lord Grenville, if naturally less conciliating, and less fitted for grand views, possessed a practical knowledge of business, and had become aware in retirement of the various errors arising from a too early introduction into office. They had a liberal feeling towards Ireland and the United States; and though by no means lukewarm in their resistance to Bonaparte, they all held the impracticability of making any impression on his power by force of arms, until the occurrence of some combination of circumstances which should justify a grand and united effort. In what manner they would have acted had they been in power when the general insurrection in Spain burst forth, the public have no means of judging; so different is the language and even the feeling of politicians when in and out of office. Several of their measures, such as the introduction of the Lord Chief Justice to a seat in the cabinet, and the assent to the appointment of such a commander as Whitelocke, were singularly ill-judged. To place Lord Grey, and after him Mr T. Grenville, at the head of the Admiralty, was to declare to the public that professional knowledge was unnecessary in that high station, as if its effects had not been most beneficially displayed in the administration, short as it was, of Lord Barham. Finally, their intemperate declaration in the Cabinet minute of 12th March, evinced a strange miscalculation of their strength when put in opposition to the personal will of the sovereign and the existing prejudices of the public. The result was, that their fall caused no regret to the majority of the nation, and that the errors of their successors excited no wish for their recall.
Of the new ministry the efficient members were Mr Perceval, Chancellor of the Exchequer; Mr Canning, Minister for Foreign Affairs; Lord Castlereagh for the War, and Lord Liverpool for the
Home Department. One of their first measures was a prorogation of Parliament, followed by a dissolution, which gave them, in the elections, the advantage so lately enjoyed by their predecessors, with the farther advantage of an alarm strangely excited in the public mind on the ground of Popery. The new Parliament met on 22d June, and, after passing the bills requisite for the army, navy, and other current business, was prorogued on 14th August.
The Session of 1808 was opened on 31st January by a speech of uncommon length, which enlarged on the Copenhagen expedition; our relations with Russia, Austria, and Sweden; the departure of the royal family of Portugal to Brazil, and our Orders in Council respecting Neutrals. The chief debates of the session related to these subjects. The Copenhagen expedition was much canvassed, as unprovoked by Denmark, and incompatible with the honour of England. Still that measure received the support of a great majority, Mr Ponsonby's motion for the production of papers relating to it being negatived by 252 to 108, and a similar motion in the House of Lords by 105 to 48. Even a motion for preserving the Danish fleet, to be restored, after the war, to Denmark, was negatived in both Houses.
The volunteer system had, since 1804, been greatly relaxed, and the country evidently stood in need of a more constant and efficient force. The Grenville ministry, adverse to the Volunteer System, had determined to let it fall into disuse, and to replace it by a levy of 200,000 men, to be trained to act not in battalions but separately, and as irregulars, on the principle that local knowledge was the chief recommendation, and a continuance of previous habits the proper exercise of such a force. The new ministry, however, pursued a different course, and passed an act for a local militia; a body which, with the exception of the officers, was composed of the lower orders, pledged to regular training during one month in the year, and subjected to all the strictness of military discipline. Such of the volunteers as chose were to remain embodied; the total of the local militia was about 200,000, and the mode of levy was by a ballot of all persons, not specially exempted, between the age of 18 and 31.
The Orders in Council were frequently discussed during this session, but they were as yet imperfectly understood either in their immediate operation or in their consequences. Unfortunately for the advocates of moderation, Bonaparte now lost all regard to justice, and committed the most lawless of all his acts—the seizure of the Spanish crown. Indignation at this atrocity, and a firm determination to support the Spanish cause, were manifested by men of all parties, among whom were remarkable, as habitual members of Opposition, the Duke of Norfolk and Mr Sheridan; the latter making, on this occasion, one of the most brilliant speeches of his latter years.
The Session of 1809 was opened on 13th January by a speech declaring a decided determination to adhere to the cause of the Spaniards, notwithstanding the failure of the campaign, and the retreat of our army, under Sir John Moore. The intelligence that arrived soon after the death of that commander, drew from the house a unanimous eulogy of his character,
Parliamentary Proceedings. and regret for his fall. There still prevailed, both in Parliament and the public, a strong attachment to the Spanish cause; and, in the various motions made by the Opposition to censure ministers for mismanaging our armaments, or ill-planning our operations, the minority seldom exceeded a third of the members present.
The Duke of York. But the attention of Parliament and the public was withdrawn even from this interesting question, and absorbed by the charges against the Duke of York, brought forward by Colonel Wardle, on evidence given or procured by Mrs Mary Anne Clarke, a forsaken mistress of the Duke. Ministers, unaware of the extent of the proofs, brought the inquiry before the House, instead of referring it to a committee, and a succession of singular disclosures were thus made to Parliament and the public. Of these the most remarkable were produced by the friends of the Duke persisting in examinations begun under an impression of his entire innocence. It is hardly possible to describe how much this subject engaged the public attention during the months of February and March. Of the influence of Mrs Clarke in obtaining commissions from the Duke, and of her disposing of them for money, there could be no doubt. The question was, whether the Duke was apprised of this traffic; and though he might not be aware of its extent, there seems hardly room to doubt that, in certain cases, he suspected its existence. The debate on the collective evidence was uncommonly long, being adjourned from night to night, and exhibiting a great difference of opinion on the part of the speakers. Several resolutions, varying in their degree of reprehension, were proposed; and though those finally adopted condemned only the immorality of the connection formed by the Duke, without asserting his knowledge of the pecuniary abuses, the result was his resignation of the office of Commander-in-Chief.
March 19. The success of this investigation prompted an inquiry into other abuses, particularly the sale of East India appointments, and disclosed a negotiation of Lord Castlereagh to barter a nomination to a Bengal writership, for the return of a member to Parliament. The house declined to proceed to any resolution against his Lordship, or to entertain a motion relative to the interference of the executive government in elections. A Bill for Parliamentary reform, brought in by Mr Curwen, was not directly opposed, but so materially altered in its progress as to be nugatory when it passed into a law.
May 5. The farther business of the session consisted in the annual votes for the public service, and in motions by Sir S. Romilly, on a subject which has been but lately followed up with effect—the amendment of our criminal law, by lessening the severity, but insuring the application of punishments.
May 4. The failure, in autumn, of the expedition to the Scheldt, and the resignation of the Duke of Portland, when on the verge of the grave, led to the disclosure of a remarkable secret in Cabinet history—the attempts made, during several months, by Mr Canning, to obtain, from the Duke of Portland, the removal of Lord Castlereagh from the war department, on the ground of incompetency to the station. On making this mortifying discovery, the complaint of Lord Castlereagh was, not that his brother minister should think with slight of his abilities, but that, during all the time that he laboured against him, he should have maintained towards him the outward manner of a friend. This led to a duel, followed, not by serious personal injury, but by the resignation of both—causing, in the ministry, a blank which, to all appearance, could be filled only by bringing in the leaders of Opposition. An overture to this effect, whether sincere or ostensible, was made by Mr Perceval. Lord Grenville, on receiving it, came to London; Lord Grey, more indifferent about office, answered it from his seat in Northumberland; but both declared a determination to decline taking part in the administration so long as the existing system should be persisted in. Marquis Wellesley, who had gone as ambassador to the Spanish Junta, now returned, and was invested with the Secretaryship for Foreign Affairs. Mr Perceval was appointed premier; and the new ministry, feeble as they were in talent, received the support of a decided majority in Parliament, so general was the hatred of Bonaparte, and the conviction that our safety lay in a vigorous prosecution of the war.
Session of 1810—Walcheren Inquiry. Jan. 26. The Session of 1810 opened on 28th January, and the leading subject of debate was our unfortunate expedition to Walcheren and the Scheldt. A motion leading to inquiry was carried after a close division—195 to 186. And the investigation was conducted chiefly at the bar of the House of Commons, a secret committee being appointed for the inspection of confidential papers. The Earl of Chatham, and other officers concerned in planning or conducting the expedition, were examined. The inquiry lasted several weeks, and disclosed, clearly enough, the imbecility of our commander; but the speeches of the Opposition were pointed, not against the management of the expedition, but against its expediency as an enterprise; not against the general, but the cabinet. In this they were not seconded by the majority of the house. On the policy or impolicy of the expedition being put to the vote, the former was supported by 272, in opposition to 232; and even the less tenable ground of keeping our soldiers in an unhealthy island for three months after relinquishing all idea of an attempt on Antwerp, was vindicated by 253 votes against 232—a decision too remarkable to be forgotten; and which has since stamped this with the name of the Walcheren Parliament. The only ministerial change consequent on the inquiry was the removal of Lord Chatham from his seat in the cabinet, and from the Master-generalship of the Ordnance; but this was in consequence of privately delivering a statement to the King—a statement professing to vindicate himself at the expence of Sir Richard Strachan and the navy. The resolution adopted on this occasion was, "That the House saw with regret that any such communication as the narrative of Lord Chatham should have been made to his Majesty, without any knowledge of the other ministers; that such conduct is highly reprehensible, and deserves the censure of the House."
The exclusion of strangers from the gallery of the House during the Walcheren inquiry gave rise to a Committal of Sir F. Butt.
Parliamentary Proceedings. discussion, which, though at first unimportant, soon engaged much of the public attention. John Gale Jones, well known among the demagogues of the age, and at that time president of a debating club, animated on the House of Commons in a handbill, in a style which induced the House to order his commitment to Newgate. A few weeks after, Sir Francis Burdett brought in a motion for his liberation, on the broad ground that the House had no right to inflict the punishment of imprisonment in such a case. Baffled in this by a great majority, Sir Francis wrote and printed a letter to his constituents, denying this power, and applying contemptuous epithets to the Houses. This imprudent step provoked a debate, which ended in a resolution to commit Sir Francis to the Tower. The Speaker issued his warrant; the Serjeant at Arms carried it to the house of Sir Francis, but withdrew on a refusal of Sir Francis to obey. Next day the Serjeant repeated his demand, accompanied by messengers; but the populace had by this time assembled in crowds near the baronet's house, and prevented his removal, until an early hour on the 9th, when the civil officers burst into his house, put Sir Francis into a carriage, and conveyed him to the Tower in the midst of several regiments of horse. Sir Francis brought actions against the Speaker and other officers; but they fell to the ground by non-suits, and he continued in confinement during the remainder of the session.
Irish Regency and Legislature. Among the farther acts of this session were two which regarded Scotland; one for the increase of the smaller church livings, of which none in this part of the kingdom are now under £150; the other relative to judicial proceedings, and reducing the heavy expences caused by the compulsory extract of office papers. The Court of Session had been previously divided into chambers by an act passed in 1808; and the trial, by jury, in civil causes, was introduced into Scotland by an act of 1815.
Regency of 10-11. The Session opened in November, more early than was intended, in consequence of the mental indisposition of the King. Repeated adjournments, however, took place in the vain hope of a recovery, and it was not till 20th December that resolutions for a regency were moved in both Houses. They formed the chief subject of discussion during the ensuing month. Their principal characteristics consisted in the restrictions imposed on the Prince for the succeeding year, during which he was not permitted to confer the rank of Peer, to grant an office in reversion, or even a place or pension, except during the King's pleasure; while the management of the royal household was vested in the Queen. Resolutions so obnoxious to the Prince called forth a strong opposition, and a motion that the royal power should be conferred on him without restriction, was supported by 200 against 224. But the divisions in favour of ministers became stronger after the question of the regency was settled, and great part of the Session passed without any contest between Government and the Opposition; the latter considering the present arrangement as temporary;
an opinion in which they were confirmed by the language of the Regent, who entered on his functions, by declaring, that he continued ministers in office solely from a feeling of filial respect. Among the successive topics of discussion were the county meetings of the Catholics in Ireland, and the steps taken by Government to repress them;—an act to authorize Government to send English militia into Ireland, and Irish militia into England; and, finally, the reappointment of the Duke of York to his office of Commander-in-chief—a step which excited some surprise, but received the decided support of Parliament; a motion made to censure it being negatived June 6. by 249 to 47. But the most anxious topics of parliamentary and public attention were the distress of trade and the state of our paper currency. Towards the relief of the former, an issue of exchequer bills April. was authorized under certain limitations; and to support the credit of the latter, a law was passed, July. which, when joined to former enactments, had nearly the effect of making bank notes a legal tender.
The Session opened on 7th January, and the early discussions related to arrangements for the royal household, and to a motion by Mr Brougham to exclude the droits of Admiralty from the Civil List. In this he was unsuccessful, and a similar fate attended a motion by Lord Morpeth, for an inquiry into the state of Ireland, with a view to admitting the Catholics to political rights. The next measures of general interest were two acts against frame-breaking,—a practice which the Nottingham workmen, pressed by the loss of the American market, and the consequent fall of wages, had carried to an alarming length. The public attention was soon after engaged by ministerial changes. Marquis Wellesley finding himself unable to lead the Cabinet, or to prevail on his colleagues to extend the scale of our operations in Spain, resigned in February the secretaryship of foreign affairs, and was succeeded by Lord Castlereagh. The restrictions on the power of the Regent now drawing to a close, consistency required an overture for the admission into office of the leaders of the Opposition, intimate as they had been in former years with his Royal Highness. This prompted the well known letter of 13th February from the Prince to the Duke of York, professing a wish to unite with the present ministers "some of those persons with whom the early habits of his public life had been formed." The answer of Lords Grey and Grenville explained their reasons for declining a union with an administration differing so much from them in the most important points of national policy,—the claims of the Irish Catholics; the Orders in Council; and the over issue of bank paper. With this explanation the correspondence closed, and the ministry proceeded unchanged until the assassination of Mr Perceval; when Lord Liverpool succeeded to the first station, and was directed by the Prince to make an overture to Marquis Wellesley and Mr Canning. This led to nothing; and a motion made in the House of Commons to address the Regent, "praying him to appoint an efficient administration," was carried by 174 against 170. This unexpected vote necessitated a
Parliamentary Proceedings. second overture to the Opposition, the management of which was committed first to the Marquis of Wellesley, afterwards to Lord Moira. It now seemed highly probable that the Opposition would come in; yet the negotiation entirely failed, in consequence partly of existing animosities, partly of the stiffness of Lord Grey, partly, perhaps, of a secret reluctance in the court to admit the Opposition. Lords Liverpool and Castlereagh remained in office with all the benefit of a declared readiness, and of an apparent unreasonableness in the demands of Opposition.
Orders in Council. The most urgent question now before Parliament was the continuation or repeal of the Orders in Council. The distress of the manufacturers had become general, and had led, among the lower orders, to commotion and riot, among the higher, to petitions to Parliament complaining of our pertinacious adherence to these Orders as the cause of the loss of the great market of the United States. An inquiry was instituted on the motion of Mr Brougham. It was conducted by him, with astonishing knowledge and talent, during several weeks, and every step in its progress gave the evidence a more serious aspect. Still there was a prevailing disposition to cling to those measures, when the accession of Lord Liverpool to the leading station in the Cabinet produced their repeal, though unfortunately too late to prevent the American war.
June. Session of 1812-13. Though Parliament had sat during five years only, the victory of Salamanca and our other successes in Spain afforded ministry a favourable opportunity for appealing to the people. A dissolution was proclaimed on 29th September, and on 30th November the new Parliament was opened by the Regent in person, who spoke for the first time from the throne. Our partial reverses in the close of the campaign in Spain, and the murmurs of Marquis Wellesley and Mr Canning at the inadequacy of our financial contributions to the Peninsular contest, were silenced by the cheering intelligence from Russia, whence Bonaparte was now retreating with great loss. In the progress of the session, the attention of the House and the public was strongly excited by an appeal from the Princess of Wales to Parliament, demanding an investigation of her conduct. This led to a motion for a copy of the Report delivered by the noblemen charged with the inquiry of 1806; and this motion being negatived, the result was the publication, in the newspapers, of a succession of papers relating the whole transaction. These papers, however indicative of want of discretion on the part of her Royal Highness, produced, on the whole, an impression in her favour, as unjustly attacked in her honour. The most interesting debates of the session related to the Catholic question, and the renewal, with important changes, of the Charter of the East India Company. The new Charter, granted for twenty years from 1814, reserved to the Company the exclusive trade to China, but laid open to the public, with slight qualifications, the trade to all other parts of the east. Among the minor proceedings of the session were an act for lessening the endless delays of Chancery by appointing a Vice Chancellor; and an act, which, if it did not enforce Clerical residence, held out a strong in-
ducement to it, by obliging incumbents to increase the stipends of their curates. After granting ministers a liberal vote of credit, Parliament was prorogued on 22d July, amidst a general hope of favourable intelligence from the Continent; Spain being nearly delivered from the invaders, and the Germans having risen with ardour to assert their independence.
Session of 1813-14. These cheering expectations were happily realized in the course of the autumn, and Parliament reassembled on 4th November with the knowledge that the victories at Leipzig had secured the independence of Germany, and enabled our allies to shake the throne of the usurper. There was but one opinion, that at such a juncture every exertion, whether financial or military, should be made to complete the deliverance of the Continent. All the propositions of ministers were adopted, and on 17th November Parliament adjourned to 1st March; evidently in the hope that, before that period, the advance of the allied arms into France would lead to a general pacification. This result, justified by sound calculation, was delayed by the precipitancy of the Prussians, and the consequent checks received by them and their allies; so that Parliament, on meeting on 1st March, adjourned to the 21st, and, on their assembling at that date, Lord Castlereagh being still absent on the Continent, the business transacted during several weeks was of inferior interest. Next came the discussions on the corn trade; the budget of the year, and an additional measure for the preservation of tranquillity in Ireland. A general pacification had by this time taken place, and the arrangements of ministers afforded little opening for animadversion, except as to the compulsory transfer of Norway from Denmark to Sweden. That question was warmly debated in both Houses, and a motion relative to it, made in the House of Lords by Earl Grey, in a speech of uncommon eloquence, received the support of 81 votes against 115. The farther proceedings of the session were an address, praying the Regent to interest himself with foreign powers for a prompt and general abolition of the slave-trade; a vote of L. 400,000 in addition to the L. 100,000 of the preceding year to the Duke of Wellington; and grants, but on a far smaller scale, to Generals Graham, Hill, and Beresford, now raised to the peerage. On the Princess of Wales a settlement of L. 35,000 was definitively made.
Session of 1814-15. Parliament assembled on 18th November, and, after the transaction of some business relative chiefly to keeping the English militia embodied, and preserving the peace of Ireland, adjourned on 2d December. They met again on 9th February, and were soon after called on to discuss a most important department of home policy,—the Corn Laws. The prospect of the return of peace and of large imports of corn from the Continent, had early excited the attention of the landed interest; and a committee, appointed in the spring of 1813, had made a report to Parliament recommending the prohibition of foreign corn, except when wheat at home should be at or above the very high price of 105s. the quarter. No proceedings on the subject took place that session, and next year the sense of
the public was so unequivocally declared against this extravagant proposition, that a great reduction was indispensable; and, on bringing forward the resolutions connected with the subject, it was proposed to allow the import of foreign wheat whenever our own should be at or above 87s. Still this limit appeared too high; the debates were warm, the petitions against the bill numerous; and, ministers suspending their support, the main part of the question was adjourned to next year. In the summer and autumn corn underwent a great fall, and the farmers experienced much distress; the consequence of which, and of the evidence given before the Parliamentary committees, was, that Government determined to support a corn bill on a reduced scale, foreign wheat being admissible when our own should be at or below 80s. Resolutions to that effect were moved (see our article on the CORN LAWS) on 17th February, and a bill founded on them was soon after brought in. It still experienced opposition, particularly from Mr Baring and others, who argued that the limitation price ought not to be permanent, but subject to a graduated abatement during a series of years, till at last the corn trade should arrive at that unrestrained state so essential to commerce at large. But notwithstanding these arguments, and a tumultuous opposition without doors, the bill was carried by large majorities in both Houses.
But from discussions of internal policy, the attention of Parliament was suddenly directed to a more urgent topic,—the return of Bonaparte from Elba, and a notice of an immediate augmentation of our forces. An address to the Regent, in support of this augmentation, was carried by great majorities; and a subsequent motion, by Mr Whitbread, to prevent our interference for the reinstatement of the Bourbons, was lost by 273 against 72. Finally, the addresses in approbation of the treaties with the Continental powers were supported by Lord Grenville, Mr Grattan, and other oppositionists; the numbers in the Lords being 156 against 44; in the Commons, 331 against 92. Next month brought intelligence of the battle of Waterloo, which was followed, in a moment of exultation, by a grant of L.200,000 to the Duke of Wellington, making the sum total voted to his grace L.700,000. The farther proceedings were an approval of the treaty of peace with America, and of the very questionable transfer of Genoa to the King of Sardinia: the session was concluded by a repeal of the law for fixing the price of bread in London by Assize.
Parliament met on 1st February, and, after some business of minor importance, proceeded, in March, to discuss the interesting question of our military peace establishment. The navy had been reduced with sufficient promptitude, but there seemed, on the part of Government, a disposition to keep the army on a scale neither required by the general tranquillity of Europe, nor justified by our financial means, which exhibited several symptoms of decline. Yet a motion for so moderate a reduction as 10,000 from the proposed number of land forces, was negatived by 202 to 130; and, in long debates that ensued relative to the army estimates, ministers carried every point, and were likely to keep up the whole on an
expensive scale; when, on 18th March, after a long and animated discussion, the question of continuing the property-tax, modified to 5 per cent., was decided against them by a majority of 37; there being 238 against 201. This signal and unexpected defeat necessitated a relinquishment of the war malt duty, and a general reduction of expenditure, which we should have in vain expected from the reason or reflection of our rulers.
Another measure of importance was the regulation, after a long investigation, of the civil list, on a footing which was adopted as a standard on the beginning of the present reign. This was followed by acts for the consolidation of the English and Irish Exchequers; for the exemption of the bank from cash payments during two years; and, finally, by an act for striking off a new silver coinage. Among the minor proceedings of the session was a grant of L.60,000 a year to the Princess Charlotte and her husband, with a provision, unfortunately too soon required, of L.50,000 to the latter in the event of her demise.
A general want of work and reduction of wages continued during the year, subjecting the lower orders to great distress, and exposing them to the arts of designing demagogues. Large assemblages, particularly in Spafields, took place previous to the meeting of Parliament; and, on the day of its opening (28th January) the Regent was insulted on his way to the House. A secret committee of each House was soon after appointed to examine papers in the possession of Government, bearing evidence of serious projects of insurrection, and each made a speedy report, declaring the existence of very dangerous societies. There was, in these reports, a strain of confident allegation, unaccompanied by specific proof or temperate reasoning, which brought to recollection the declamatory state papers of the French Revolution, and gave the reports the appearance of documents framed to disseminate alarms, and justify extreme measures. They engaged, however, the serious attention of the House, and the result was a bill for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus act during the current session of Parliament,—a measure carried in the Lords by 150 to 35; in the Commons by 265 to 103. Towards the close of the session, a second report from the secret committees produced an act for continuing the suspension of the Habeas Corpus to 1st March 1818.
The continued want of work, and distress of the lower orders, led to an act for authorizing the issue of Exchequer Bills to persons finding employment for the poor. The same causes inducing the public to call loudly for retrenchment; the Opposition took, on 25th February, the sense of the House of Commons on a motion to reduce the number of the Lords of the Admiralty, and mustered 152 votes against 208. As an offering on the part of Government to the prevailing call, an act was passed for abolishing the two sinecure offices of Justice in Eyre.
Mr Abbot, who had filled the office of Speaker of the House since 1802, finding himself incapable, from continued indisposition, of performing its ar-
duous duties, sent in his resignation, and was succeeded by the Right Honourable Charles Manners Sutton. Mr Abbott was forthwith raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Colchester, and, on 6th June, a vote passed the Commons for settling on him a life annuity of L. 4000.
Parliament was opened on 27th January, under circumstances which indicated that the want of work and distress of trade, though still considerable, were less serious than in the preceding year. A secret committee, appointed anew by each House, reported to that effect; and, on their recommendation, was brought in a bill to indemnify persons (chiefly magistrates) who had acted in apprehending and detaining individuals suspected of treasonable practices: this bill was not carried without considerable opposition.
The death of the Princess Charlotte having caused a blank in the succession to the Crown, the marriage of the Royal Dukes became a subject of consideration; but the provision for any increase of expenditure was exposed to difficulty, as well from the distress of the public, as from the near approach of the time when the members were to meet their constituents. A motion, made by ministers, to grant L. 10,000 additional to the Duke of Clarence, was not successful; an amendment for reducing it to L. 6000 having been carried by 193 to 184. Votes, equally restricted, were passed in the case of the Dukes of Kent and Cambridge; and an attempt to obtain a similar grant to the Duke of Cumberland (who had been several years married) was negatived by 143 to 146; but a provision of L. 6000 a year was made for the Duchess in case she should survive him.
Among the other transactions of this year was a grant of L. 400,000 to Spain, as a compensation for losses attendant on an early abolition of the slave-trade by that power. Certain acts were also passed for the humane treatment of negroes in our sugar colonies. The bank exemption act being about to expire, Mr Vansittart brought in a bill for continuing it another year, on the ground that the loans now contracting in England for France and Prussia carried capital out of the country, and prevented the bank, for a time at least, from diminishing its paper circulation.
Mr Brougham having, early in the session, brought in a bill for investigating the abuses of Public Charities, it was referred to a committee, and, after some discussion in the Commons, passed to the Lords. There it encountered opposition from Lords Eldon and Redesdale, and was returned to the Commons with material alterations; the commissioners charged with the inquiry being limited in their powers, and restricted to charities connected with education. The act, however, passed in this state, and the labours of the commissioners, like those of the committee on the education of the poor, have been productive of much public advantage. The session was closed on 10th June by a speech from the Regent, containing a notice, not only of the prorogation, but of the dissolution of Parliament,—a measure which for many years had been announced by proclamation.
The new Parliament met on 14th January 1819, and on 21st proceeded to business. The demise of the queen having taken place during the recess (17th November), one of the first measures was to vest the custody of the King's person in the Duke of York, who, very imprudently, under the circumstances of the country, demanded and received from Parliament an annual allowance of L. 10,000 for discharging an act of filial duty. This formed a striking contrast to the conduct of the Marquis of Camden, who, possessed of the lucrative sinecure of Teller of the Exchequer, relinquished L. 9000 a year of it to the public,—a sacrifice noticed in honourable terms in a vote passed in Parliament on the occasion.
Such was the addition given to Opposition, by an election under circumstances of general distress, that several measures were carried in this session against ministers; in particular, a motion on 2d March, by Sir James Mackintosh, for a revision of the criminal code, where the numbers were 147 against 128; and a motion for a committee on the state of the Scottish Burghs, carried by 149 to 144. In the division on the grant of L. 10,000 to the Duke of York, the Opposition mustered 186 votes against 281. But the impression excited by these successes was greatly enfeebled by a motion, which arrayed on one side all the strength of Government, and that of the neutral party. We allude to Mr Tierney's motion for an "inquiry into the state of the nation," which was negatived by 357 to 178—a division, evincing that, though disposed to co-operate with Opposition occasionally and for specific objects, the neutral party had no wish for a change of Ministry. Encouraged by this success, Mr Vansittart came forward with the bold proposition of new taxes, to the extent of L. 3,000,000, on the ground of a sum of that amount being absolutely necessary to give efficiency to the Sinking Fund. Of this sum the chief part was expected from an increase of the duties on malt, spirits, and tobacco; but part also was to be derived from a tax on foreign wool (6d. per lb.); a most singular impost in a country where the export of manufactured wool forms a main branch of the national industry. Ministers were conscious of its injurious tendency, but were obliged to bring it forward as an equivalent to the landed interest, for the fresh burden exacted from them in the malt-duty.
The farther debates of the session related to the Catholic question, and the resumption of cash payments. In the contest pending at this time between Spain and her American colonies, Ministers took part with the mother country, so far at least as to discourage, by act of Parliament, the enlistment of our officers and soldiers on the side of the insurgents. In the preceding session, L. 1,000,000 had been voted for building additional churches and chapels for the established worship in England; and this year, L. 100,000 was appropriated for a similar purpose to the established church of Scotland. The last act of the session was a grant made in July of the limited sum of L. 50,000, to be shared by government among persons settling, on particular conditions, at the Cape of Good Hope. This was the first pecuniary aid given by government towards emigration, which is accounted by
Parliamentary Proceedings. some the only remedy for our present overstock of labourers and manufacturers.
The revival of commercial activity, in 1818, proved unfortunately of short duration. Distress returned towards the end of that year, and assumed an aggravated aspect in the course of 1819. This produced popular assemblages, and led, on 16th August, to an unfortunate scene at Manchester, in which the interference of the Yeomanry Cavalry, to disperse a very numerous meeting of the people, was productive of loss of life to several persons, and of bodily injury to many. The irritation excited among the lower orders by this proceeding, and by the continued pressure of poverty, led to the dissemination of a spirit of discontent and insurrection, which necessitated the assembling of Parliament on 23d November. The speech of the Regent, as well as the discussions of both Houses, were directed to this painful subject; and the alarm excited among the aristocracy, joined to other considerations, having finally detached the Grenville party from the Opposition, the latter now mustered in less formidable array. On the division for an amendment upon the address to the Regent, the numbers were 150 against 380.
Several bills were afterwards introduced by Ministers for the prevention of disturbances. These consisted in imposing a tax on the petty publications circulated among the lower orders; impeding the circulation of libels; authorizing the seizure of arms; and forbidding military training, or seditious meetings. These bills produced long and animated debates; but the most considerable division on the side of Opposition (for limiting the act against seditious measures to three years, instead of five) consisted of only 150 votes against 328. A motion of a more comprehensive nature, for a committee on the state of the country, was negatived in the Lords, by 178 to 47; in the Commons, by 395 to 150.
After transacting this and other business of an urgent nature, Parliament adjourned; but was soon after brought together by an event, which, however conformable to the course of nature, was not at that time expected—the death of George III. The day after the demise, agreeably to established usage, both Houses met, and took the oath of allegiance to the new Sovereign. On the 2d February, they adjourned till the 17th, the day after the interment of his Majesty. On that day, both Houses voted an address of condolence to the present King, after which they proceeded to transact such business as was pressing, and might, according to law, have continued to sit during six months; but Ministers judged fit to resort to a dissolution. Another election now took place under circumstances of general distress. The new Parliament met on the 21st April, and was opened on the 27th by George IV., in a speech, declaring his anxiety for strict economy; but regretting, that the state of the country was such as to admit of no reduction of the military force.
The peace of Amiens at first gave hopes of the improvement of Ireland by the introduction of British industry and capital; but these hopes were soon clouded by the renewed contest of 1803. In that contest, the public in England and Scotland joined with almost unexampled zeal; Ireland
was less cordial; but it would be altogether erroneous to connect with any political party, whether Catholic or Protestant, the miserable insurrection of 23d July 1803. A plot to seize Dublin, almost as extravagant as that of the late Cato Street conspiracy in London, was framed by a few infatuated individuals; and in the tumult, which burst forth with great violence, but feeble means, Lord Kilwarden, the Chief Justice, unhappily lost his life. A party of military soon dispersed the rabble, and of their leaders, most of whom were afterwards apprehended and executed, the only one entitled to notice was Emmett, a young man, whose education and talents ought to have placed him above such desperate attempts. The alarm thus excited, engaged, some time after, the attention of Parliament, and led to the enactment of two bills, one for a renewed suspension of the Habeas Corpus act in Ireland, the other for trying rebels by martial law.
The encouragement so generally given to the volunteer system in England and Scotland was not extended to Ireland, from a dread of embodying, indiscriminately, a people of whom so great a proportion were disaffected. The yeomanry, however, or select volunteers of Ireland, were very numerous (about 80,000); and had been highly instrumental in putting down the unfortunate insurrection of 1798. In addition to these, Ireland required a large body (50,000) of our regulars and militia, as a defence against invasion, a guarantee of public tranquillity, and a check on illicit distillation and smuggling. The return yielded by Ireland in the shape of revenue was small, but her supply of recruits to our army and navy was very considerable.
The suspension of the Habeas Corpus continued in 1805, a year remarkable as the first in which the Catholic question was submitted to Parliament. It was brought forward in the Commons by Mr Fox, in the Peers by Lord Grenville, and curiosity was strongly excited in regard to Mr Pitt, who had lately accepted office without carrying his professed object—the grant of political privileges to the Catholics. He, however, extricated himself with address; declaring, that if his vote could give the Catholics what they desired, they should not long want it, but that at present the prevailing sentiment was against their claims; as was, in fact, sufficiently shown by the division that ensued, and which exhibited 336 votes against them, and only 124 in their favour. Next year, the appointment to office of Lord Grenville and Mr Fox raised high the hopes of the Catholics; but the known repugnance of the Sovereign to their claims induced these ministers to dissuade a direct discussion of the question in Parliament; under an assurance, that they would do whatever should be otherwise practicable for obtaining the removal of disabilities. Hence the bill of February 1807, which caused the dismissal of the Grenville ministry, and excited such a ferment in England against the Catholics, as to render it wholly unadvisable to bring forward the question for several years.
In 1809, the Catholic Committee in Dublin held public meetings, but confined themselves to preparing a new petition to Parliament. Next year they went much farther, and sought to assume an imposing attitude; proposing that ten persons should be
Ireland. deputed by each county to Dublin, and there form an assembly, charged not only with the petition to Parliament, but with measures for the redress of the general grievances of the Catholic body. The secretary for Ireland (Mr Wellesley Pole), alarmed at this design, addressed circular letters to the sheriffs of counties, requiring them to prevent the election of the proposed delegates, and even to arrest all persons taking part in such elections. This order appeared too peremptory to the Opposition, and a debate took place, in which Mr Wellesley Pole explained, that, so long as the Catholics confined their proceedings to petitioning, they had received no interruption, but that the delegates proposed to go much farther, and that a body, under the name of a Committee of Grievances, had assembled weekly in Dublin with all the forms of Parliament. The House supported the measure adopted by Mr Wellesley Pole, and disapproved the proceedings of the Catholics. Still the latter deemed this session not unfavourable to the discussion of their political claims, on account of the laurels lately won by our armies in Spain and Portugal,—armies which counted many Catholics in their ranks. The question was brought forward by Mr Grattan, but lost by a large majority in both Houses.
March 3, 1811. The same fate attended its discussion next spring. Another year elapsed; and in the session of 1813, it was brought forward with more combination and better prospects. Mr Grattan, supported by a part of the Cabinet, obtained the assent of the House to several preliminary resolutions; first, "That the Catholic disabilities ought to be removed;" next, That the "Catholic clergy should bind themselves on oath to hold no correspondence with Rome except on ecclesiastical business;" and, thirdly, "That two commissioners should be appointed for examining into the loyalty of persons recommended as deans or bishops among the Catholics." The time occupied in these discussions was considerable, and gave occasion to the Catholic clergy in Ireland to testify their dissent from several of the provisions; particularly from that which restricted their correspondence with Rome. The knowledge of this dissatisfaction made a deep impression on Parliament, and gave a turn to the question, which induced the supporters of the bill to withdraw it for that session.
April 1812. The ensuing year unfortunately gave farther evidence of the want of temper and union among the Catholics. The court of Rome recommended their acquiescence with the propositions of Mr Grattan; but meetings of the Catholic Board at Dublin disclaimed indignantly all foreign interference; and the clergy passed resolutions against the appointment of any Catholic bishop by the British government. The intemperate proceedings of the Catholic Board now led government to dissolve that body, and declare its meetings contrary to law.
June 3, 1814. These dissensions prevented the question from being submitted to Parliament in 1814. Next year it was brought forward by Sir H. Parnell, not by Mr Grattan, who declared that an unconditional grant of the demands of the Catholics was not to be expected, and that, without cultivating a spirit of conciliation, they never would succeed. The motion was lost by a great majority. In 1816, it was again brought before Parliament, but in two distinct petitions, of which the more temperate, introduced by Mr Grattan, received the support of 141 votes against 172.
Feb. 25. Next year (1817) the question was proposed by Mr Grattan, with the same views as in 1813, and supported by 221 votes against 245. The disappointment of failure was soothed not only by the large minority, but by a very substantial concession obtained soon after, on the proposition of ministers, viz. an act to enable Catholic officers in the army and navy to attain rank nearly on the plan proposed by the Grenville ministry in 1807. In 1818 the Catholic question was not agitated; but in 1819 the tone of that body being more conciliating, Mr Grattan's motion for taking it into consideration was supported by 241 votes against 243.
TABLE showing the Times and Results of the Parliamentary Discussion of the Catholic Question, since 1805.
| House of Lords. | House of Commons. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| For. | Against. | Majority. | For. | Against. | Majority. | |
| 1805. Motion for taking into consideration the Petition of the Irish Roman Catholics, | 49 | 178 | 129 | 124 | 336 | 212 |
| 1806. Not brought forward in consequence of Mr Fox's advice. | ||||||
| 1807-8-9. Not brought forward. | ||||||
| 1810. Motion for a Committee of the whole House, | 68 | 154 | 86 | 109 | 213 | 104 |
| 1811. The same, | 62 | 121 | 59 | 83 | 146 | 63 |
| 1812. April 21. The same, | 102 | 174 | 72 | 215 | 300 | 85 |
| July 1. For taking it into consideration next year, | 125 | 126 | 1 | 235 | 106 | 129 |
| 1813. Feb. 25. For a Committee of the whole House, | 264 | 224 | 40 | |||
| March 9. For leave to bring in a Bill for removing disqualifications, &c. | 186 | 119 | 67 | |||
| May 11. For a Select Committee, | 189 | 235 | 48 | |||
| — 13. A Motion against the Bill negatived, | 245 | 203 | 42 | |||
| — 24. A Motion (by the Speaker) for omitting the words in the bill, "To sit and vote in either House of Parliament," | 251 | 247 | 4 | |||
| (Not debated in the Lords this year.) | ||||||
| 1814. Not brought forward. | ||||||
| 1815. For a Committee of the whole House, | 60 | 86 | 26 | 147 | 228 | 81 |
| 1816. For consideration next year, | 69 | 73 | 4 | 141 | 172 | 31 |
| 1817. For a Committee of the whole House, | 90 | 142 | 52 | 221 | 245 | 24 |
| 1818. Not brought forward. | ||||||
| 1819. For a Committee of the whole House, | 106 | 147 | 41 | 241 | 243 | 2 |