SOLD BY ALL THE BOOKSELLERS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM.
PRINTED BY WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS, EDINBURGH.
BLACKWOOD’S
EDINBURGH MAGAZINE.
No. CCCCXV. MAY, 1850. Vol. LXVII.
FREE-TRADE FINANCE.
513
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
has brought forward the Budget,
and the Financial Measures of Government
are before the public. It
contains matter worthy of the most
serious consideration. It is hard to
say whether the admission it contains,
or the measures it proposes, are
most condemnatory of the system of
Class Government which the Reform
Bill has imposed on the country.
The statement of the Chancellor of
the Exchequer, in a few words, is
this:—“Last year, I calculated upon
a small surplus of L.104,000 for the
year ending 5th April 1850, but that
surplus has swelled to L.2,250,000,
by rise in the produce of the taxes,
and reductions of the expenditure. Of
this sum L.1,500,000 is to be regarded
as the real surplus to be
relied upon for the measures of this
year.” Assuming this as the surplus
to be dealt with, he proposes to apply
L.750,000 in reduction of the last
contracted part of the debt, and
L.750,000 in reduction of taxation;
L.400,000 a-year being applied to the
reduction of the duty on bricks, and
L.350,000 to that of stamps on conveyances.
It is thus that he proposes to alleviate
the agricultural distress which,
he admits, prevails in the country.
Three things are especially worthy
of observation in this statement.
In the first place, it affords another
illustration, if another was needed, of
the present deplorable subjection of
Government to the pressure from
without, which has so often and painfully
been exhibited since the new
system of government began. It is
well known that, during the three
disastrous years that preceded the
present one, debt to a large amount
was contracted. To mention two
items only: eight millions were borrowed
in 1847 to relieve the Irish
famine; L.2,000,000 in the succeeding
year, to carry on the current expenses
of the year; and in 1841 the deficiency
had been such, that no less
than L.5,000,000 was borrowed to
meet the ordinary expenses of the
year. One would suppose, that when
a surplus arose in the year 1849, the
natural course would have been to
have applied it, in the first instance,
to extinguish, so far as it would go,
the additional debt so recently contracted.
Has this been done? Not
at all. Only L.750,000 out of a real
surplus said to amount to L.1,500,000,
is to be applied in this way; and
L.750,000 is to be devoted to reduction
of taxes. L.10,000,000 is borrowed
during two years of distress;
L.750,000 only has been devoted to
its reduction, in a year, we are told,
of unparalleled commercial prosperity.
In the next place, to what object is
the L.750,000 a-year of surplus available
to reduced taxation, discovered
for the first time after three years of
deficit, to be applied? Is it to be
devoted to remission of taxes pressing
upon the agricultural interest, whom
the measures pursued for behoof of
towns have reduced to such a state of
depression? Not at all. It is to be
applied to reduction of the duty on
$1. The first may be
admitted to be desirable, because, as so
large part of the landed property in
the kingdom will soon, to all appearance,
change hands, it is an object to
render the transfer as little costly as
possible. But of what use is the
reduction of the duty on bricks to the
suffering cultivators? That it is a
boon to the master-builders in towns,
may be conceded; though it may well
be doubted whether it will ever cause
a reduction of price to the purchasers
from them. But what the better will
the farmers and ploughmen, the landlords
and yeomen, be of the change?
Additional houses are not wanted $1; on the contrary, there
will in all probability not be inmates
for those that already are there, from
the certain and experienced effect of
Free-trade in diminishing the demand
for rural labour. It is in the towns
and villages that the building is going
on; because Free-trade policy is
daily more and more forcing the rural
inhabitants into the towns in quest of
employment or relief. In London,
200 miles of new streets, and 66,000
houses, are said to have been constructed,
or to be in course of construction,
during the last two years.
Is there any increase of houses in the
rural districts? Herein, then, lies
the injustice of the present measures
of Government, that, though prefaced
with professions of a desire to relieve
all parties, they in reality benefit one
class only; and that, introduced at a
time when it is admitted the agriculturists
are in a state of extreme
depression, and the manufacturers are
asserted to be in a state of unexampled
prosperity, they are mainly calculated
to add to the prosperity of the
latter, and take nothing from the sufferings
of the former. It is not difficult
to see where the Reform Bill has
practically lodged the power of
Government in the British Empire.
In the third place, and what is
most material of all, the speech of
the Chancellor of the Exchequer contains
an admission in regard to the
present state and past direction of
our finances, since we have fallen under
Liberal direction, of such moment, that
we regard it as the most important
statement that has ever yet been given
in regard to the effect of the new measures
on the national fortunes. It must
be given in his own words, as reported
in the Times of March 16:—
“If honourable gentlemen will refer to
what has taken place during the last
twenty years—the sums which have been
borrowed on the one hand, and the
amounts which have been applied to the
reduction of the debt on the other—I
think they will see that there is good reason
for not being indifferent on this subject.
In 1835 and 1836, a sum of L.20,000,000
was borrowed for the emancipation of the
West Indian slave population; to defray
the deficiency, in the year 1841,
L.5,000,000 were borrowed; I was
obliged to borrow L.8,000,000 to meet
the necessities of the sister country in
1847; and when the House refused to
increase the income-tax in 1848, I was
obliged to borrow a further sum of
L.2,000,000, to meet the extraordinary
expenditure. Since the period I have
mentioned, then, a sum of L.35,000,000
has been added to the national debt.
When I turn to the other side of the
account, I find that all the money which
has been applied from surplus income to
the reduction of debt, in the course of the
last twenty years, amounts to only
L.8,000,000; so that, $1. (Hear,
hear.) When, in 1848, the House refused
to accede to the proposal I made
for an increased tax upon income, I certainly
did hope that, when a turn took
place in our financial affairs, they would
not, the moment there was a surplus of
income, instantly press that the whole of
that surplus should be devoted to the reduction
of taxation. What should we
think of a private individual who acted
in such a manner (hear, hear)—a man
who, whenever he found his income fall
short of his expenditure, borrowed the
money necessary to meet his liabilities,
but who never thought of paying off that
debt when, by a fortunate turn of affairs,
he happened to be in receipt of an excess
of income? (Hear, hear.) I must say
that it will be hopeless for us to maintain
that character as a nation which we
think indispensable in an individual, if,
in a time of profound peace, instead of
reducing our public debt, we go on adding
to it from year to year.”
Here it is admitted, by the Whig
Chancellor of the Exchequer, that
after twenty years of profound peace
and unbroken Liberal government,
(Sir Robert Peel was essentially Liberal,)
not only has there been no reduction
of the public debt, but AN
INCREASE OF IT TO THE EXTENT OF
TWENTY-SEVEN MILLIONS. It has
been repeatedly demonstrated that, if
the noble sinking-fund of L.15,000,000
a-year, which Mr Pitt’s policy left to the
Administration at the close of the war
in 1815, had been preserved unimpaired
by keeping up the indirect
taxes from which it arose, the whole
national debt would have been extinguished
in 1845. When the ruinous
monetary act of 1819, and the increasing
concession of successive Administrations
to urban clamour had rendered
that impossible, the semi-Liberal
semi-Tory Governments from 1815
to 1830 still contrived to pay off
L.82,000,000 of the public debt in
fifteen years; and when the Duke of
Wellington resigned in November
1830, he left, by the admission of all
parties, a real sinking-fund, arising
from an excess of income above
expenditure, of L.2,900,000 a-year to
his successors. But since that time,
under his Liberal successors, not only
has that surplus on an average of
years disappeared, but during twenty
years of profound peace L.27,000,000
has been $1 to the total amount
of the debt. Well may Sir Charles
Wood say, “What should we
think of a private individual who
acted in such a manner?” Such is
the rule of the urban constituencies,
to humour whose fancies, and appease
whose clamour, the whole efforts of
Government for the last twenty years
have been directed.
The important thing in the statement
of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
is, that it gives us the result of
Whig government and Free-trade
finance during so long a period.
Every successive quarter, during these
twenty years, we have been told by
the Liberal press that the finances
were in the most flourishing condition;
that any deficiency that appeared was
more apparent than real; and at any
rate, in the most unfavourable view,
it was sufficiently explained by temporary
causes, and afforded no ground
whatever for despondency in the future.
Every successive Session, the Ministers
came down to Parliament with
the most flourishing accounts of the
state of the country and of the public
finances, and demonstrated to the
satisfaction of every reasonable man
in the nation that both never were in
more hopeful and prosperous circumstances.
Even when a deficiency of
one or two millions stared the Chancellor
of the Exchequer in the face,
which was not unfrequently the case,
there was always some temporary or
transient cause to which it was to be
referred. The China tribute had ceased,
or some reduction of duties had come
into operation, or revolutions in
Europe had diminished our exports to
the adjoining states. The Irish potato-rot
was a perfect godsend to the
Liberal financiers. It constituted their
stock in trade for the next three years.
The ruin of L.15,000,000 worth of
agricultural produce in Ireland, out of
at least L.260,000,000 worth in the two
islands, explained the whole distress
of the country and the exchequer for
the next three years; and, strange to
say, the very men who paraded so
ostentatiously the ruinous effects of
this comparatively trifling deficiency
in a single year, made a boast soon
after of their having destroyed
L.90,000,000 of agricultural remuneration
by the importations they induced
of foreign grain.
But nothing is more certain than
that error and delusion cannot, by any
human effort, be prolonged for a very
long period. With the advent of the
time when the interest to deceive has
ceased, or a new generation of deceivers
has succeeded, the whole fabric
falls to pieces. As certainly and mercilessly
as the vices or follies of preceding
monarchs are portrayed by
those who have succeeded to the inheritance
of their results, are the ruinous
consequences of former delusions in
democratic Governments exposed by
succeeding Administrations who find
themselves hampered by their effects.
Many a popular Nero is cast down
from his pedestal, almost before the
vital warmth has left his body; many
a republican Necker is exposed by a
republican Bailly, when he finds the
public finances rendered desperate by
the measures which had been pursued
with the cordial approbation of the
whole Liberal party in the state. It
is the same with our present Chancellor
of the Exchequer. He finds the
public finances, in the midst of boasted
commercial and manufacturing prosperity,
in so deplorable a condition,
that he is fain to lay the whole blame
upon his predecessors; and, after deploring
the extraordinary fact, that
during twenty years of profound peace,
Liberal government, and retrenching
Administrations, we have not only
made no reduction whatever in the
public debt, but added twenty-seven
millions to its amount, he very naturally
and justly observes, “What
should we say to a private individual
who should conduct his affairs in this
manner?”
We have been so accustomed, during
twenty years of Liberal and popular
rule, to see every successive Administration
live only from hand to
mouth, and to be content if they can
get over present difficulties, without
bestowing a thought on the future,
that the nation has almost forgotten
what it was to have a prudent and
foreseeing Government at the head of
affairs: or rather, nearly the whole
generations who have risen to manhood
have come to think that such a
system of government is impossible,
and is to be ranked with the El
Dorado of Sir Walter Raleigh, or the
Utopia of Sir Thomas More. To
enlighten their minds on this subject,
we subjoin two Tables, showing what
was done by the corrupt old Tory
Governments—even during the anxieties
and expenditure of a most protracted
and costly war, or when the
national finances were slowly recovering
from its effects—to put the finances
on a good footing, and lay, in present
fortitude and sacrifice, a solid foundation
for future relief and prosperity.
Table I., showing the growth of the Money applied to the reduction of the Debt, and the Sums paid off from 1792 to 1815, being twenty-three years of war.
1792,
£1,558,504
1793,
1,634,972
1794,
1,872,957
1795,
2,143,697
1796,
2,639,956
1797,
3,393,210
1798,
4,093,164
1799,
4,528,568
1800,
4,908,379
1801,
5,528,315
1802,
6,114,033
1803,
6,494,694
1804,
6,436,929
1805,
9,406,865
1806,
9,602,658
1807,
10,125,419
1808,
10,681,579
1809,
11,359,691
1810,
12,095,977
1811,
13,073,577
1812,
14,098,842
1813,
16,064,057
1814,
14,830,957
1815,
14,241,397
£186,928,399
—Porter’s Parl. Tables, i. 1.
It is a total mistake to allege, as is
often done, that this immense and
growing sinking-fund was obtained
entirely by borrowing with the one
hand what was paid off with another.
The $1 thus applied to the reduction
of debt were obtained from the
$1 taxes set apart on the contraction
of each loan, in amount adequate
not only to defray its annual
interest, but also to extinguish, within
forty-five years after it was contracted,
the principal of the loan
itself. That part of the loan was
applied in each year, especially during
the latter years of the war, to
keep up the sinking-fund, is true, but
is immaterial. That was only because
the taxes set apart for its support were
absorbed, in great part, by the necessities
of the contest; and when $1, these taxes
were amply sufficient to keep up the
sinking-fund without any extraneous
aid. This appears from the following
Table, also taken from Mr Porter,
exhibiting what was actually paid off
of the public debt during the next
fifteen years of Tory peace-government:—
Table showing the Money applied to the reduction of Debt, Funded and Unfunded, from 1815 to 1832.
1816,
£13,945,117
1817,
14,514,457
1818,
15,339,483
1819,
16,305,590
1820,
17,499,773
1821,
17,219,957
1822,
18,889,319
1823,
7,482,325
1824,
10,625,059
1825,
6,093,475
1826,
5,621,231
1827,
5,704,766
1828,
4,667,965
1829,
2,559,485
1830,
4,545,465
1831,
1,663,093
1832,
5,696
£162,682,256
—Porter’s Parl. Tables, i. 1.
But the Reform Bill, passed in
1832, has entirely put an end to the
reduction of the debt. Since that
time, as Sir Charles Wood tells us,
the debt, so far from having diminished,
has increased £27,000,000.
That there was a substantial reduction
of debt going on during the period
included in the above table, and not a
mere juggle, by transferring debt from
one denomination to another, though
not to the amount which these figures
would indicate, is decisively proved by
the following Table, showing the general
result of the financial operations
from 1816 to 1832, when the Whigs
introduced the Reform Bill:—
Funded Debt on 5th Jan. 1816,
£816,311,940
Unfunded do.,
48,510,501
Total,
£860,822,441
Total Debt on 5th Jan. 1832—
Funded,
£754,100,549
Unfunded,
27,752,650
781,853,199
Paid off in sixteen years,
£82,969,242
—Porter’s Parl. Tables, ii. 6.
In the next eighteen years, since
the Reform Bill changed the Constitution,
it has been seen the debt was
increased by £27,000,000.
So prodigious and fatal a change
in our financial system would be
wholly inexplicable, considering the
many able and patriotic men who,
since that period, have been intrusted
with its direction, if we did not recollect
the vital change made since that
time in the constitution of the country,
and the new class which was brought
up in overwhelming numbers to return
representatives to the House of Commons.
That class is the borough and
shopkeeping interest, with whom the
main object is to buy cheap and sell
dear. Not only has this principle,
since that time, formed the sole regulator
of Government measures in
general or commercial policy, but it
has operated decisively on our finances,
and is the main cause to which their
present hopeless condition is to be
ascribed. To cheapen everything became
the great object; and this was to
be done, it was thought, most effectually
by taking taxes off articles of
consumption. Under the influence of
this principle, indirect taxes to the
following enormous amount have been
repealed since the peace, the magnitude
of which renders it noways surprising
that the sinking-fund has
disappeared:—
Table showing the Taxes, Direct and Indirect, Repealed and Imposed from 1816 to 1847, both inclusive.
Repealed.
Imposed.
Year.
Direct.
Indirect.
Direct.
Indirect.
Year.
1816,
£15,000,000
£2,547,000
£320,058
1816
1817,
36,495
7,991
1817
1818,
9,564
1,336
1818
1819,
705,846
3,094,902
1819
1820,
4,000
119,602
1820
1821,
471,309
43,642
1821
1822,
2,139,101
1822
1823,
1,860,000
2,190,050
18,596
1823
1824,
1,704,724
45,605
1824
1825,
3,639,551
43,000
1825
1826,
1,973,812
188,000
1826
1827,
4,038
21,402
1827
1828,
51,998
1,966
1828
1829,
126,406
1829
1830,
4,093,955
696,004
1830
1831,
1,598,536
627,586
1831
1832,
747,264
44,526
1832
1833,
1,526,914
1833
1834,
1,200,000
891,516
198,394
1834
1835,
165,817
75
1835
1836,
989,786
1836
1837,
234
3,991
1837
1838,
289
100
1838
1839,
66,258
1,783
1839
1840,
18,959
2,155,673
1840
1841,
27,176
1841
1842,
1,596,366
£5,529,989
1842
1843,
1843
1844,
1844
1845,
4,535,561
23,720
1845
1846,
1846
1847,
1847
£18,060,000
£33,523,623
£5,529,989
£7,743,962
Imposed,
5,529,989
7,743,962
Taxation reduced,
£12,431,011
£25,779,661
Thus the balance of indirect taxation,
reduced since the Peace, has been
above £25,000,000—of direct, above
£12,000,000 annually; and till 1842,
it was £15,000,000 yearly. Had the
sinking-fund been kept up at its
amount as it was in 1815—that is,
at £15,000,000 sterling out of the
indirect taxes, there might have
been repealed £15,000,000 of direct,
and £14,000,000 of indirect taxes, and
still $1.
Why has this most desirable, most
vital object for the national safety in
future times, not been gained? Simply
because the mania of cheapening
everything has ruled the State. Successive
Administrations, which have
succeeded to the helm of affairs, have
endeavoured to gain a fleeting popularity,
by bidding against each other
in the race for popularity, by the sacrifice
of the best interests of their
country; and because Parliament—composed,
so far as its majority goes
since 1832, of the members for
boroughs—have shut their eyes entirely
to the ultimate consequences of
their actions, and looked only to the
gratifying their buying and selling
constituents by the incessant reduction
of the indirect taxes, and lowering
the remuneration of industry of
every kind throughout the country.
In truth, the chasm made in the
finances of the country by this incessant,
uncalled for, and ruinous reduction
of the indirect taxes, in pursuance
of the mania to cheapen everything,
under which the nation has been labouring
during the last thirty years, has
been far greater and more disastrous
than the preceding figures, formidable
as they are, would lead us to suppose.
The taxes repealed are of course set
down at the amount they were $1. But that is very
far from what they would have produced
if they had been kept up; because,
in that case, of course they
would have shared in the vast increase
of wealth and population which has
since taken place. At the time when
a large part of these taxes were
repealed, the British isles did not
contain above from 20,000,000 to
24,000,000 of inhabitants—now they
contain 29,000,000. Our exports
and imports have more than doubled
in amount since the income-tax was
taken off in 1816. Beyond all doubt,
at its original rate of ten per cent, it
would now have produced, at the
very least, £20,000,000 a-year. The
duty on spirits, so fatally lowered
in 1826, would now have produced,
not £2,000,000, but £3,000,000 or
£3,500,000 annually. There cannot
be a shadow of doubt that the taxes,
which in 1815 produced £72,000,000
a-year, would, if continued at the same
rates, have been now producing 50
per cent more, or £110,000,000.
There is no man in his senses who
would think that the nation either
could have borne, or ought to have
borne, such a load of taxation. Relief,
on the return of peace, was indispensable.
But it is one thing to give
relief in a reasonable and prudent degree;
it is another, and a very different
thing, to throw away the public
revenue with a reckless prodigality,
without either principle or foresight,
and for no other reason but to win a
temporary popularity for wasteful
Administrations.
Indeed, the inevitable effect of the
cheapening system, and especially of
the repeal of the Corn Laws, in rendering
the taxes unproductive, and payment
of the interest even of the public
debt ere long impossible, was distinctly
foreseen and foretold not only by ourselves
in this Magazine, but by the
most decided apostles of the opposite
set of opinions. Hear Mr Cobbett
on the subject, in Vol. LI. of his Register,
No. 2, July 10, 1824—a quotation
for which we are indebted to
that able and consistent journal, the
Standard.
“‘The commercial world’ will, I believe,
find it rather difficult to persuade
the landlords to ‘modify and alter the
Corn-laws,’ much less to ‘do away’
with those laws: but what now is to become
of all the pretty doctrine about the
inseparable interests of manufacture and
agriculture? I trust we shall hear no
more of that soft nonsense....
“Now mind, I do not say that the manufacturers
ought not to be permitted to
get food from abroad; but I say—and
what man in his senses does not say, that
in whatever degree this cotton body is
supplied with food from abroad, it must
and will dispense with food from our own
lands....
“I would fain then see the two-legged
animal who is quadruped enough still to
contend that the interests of the landlords
and those of the cotton-lords are
inseparable. They are directly opposed
to each other; and opposed to each other
they must be as long as this debt shall last.
“It will be curious enough to observe
how ‘the manufacturing mind’ will work
upon ‘the agricultural mind.’ These
two minds will now come into direct
contact with each other. It will be the
business of the cotton mind to convince
the landlords that bringing in foreign
corn will not make their English corn
sell cheaper; or, failing in this, to convince
them that wheat at 4s. a bushel
will, ‘in the long run,’ be better for the
landlords than wheat at 8s. a bushel. A
very long run, I believe, indeed! In
short, it is a question of rents or no rents.
With the present debt and taxes, and
with wheat at 4s. a bushel, there can be
no rents; so that, when the cotton mind
comes forward to get a repeal of the
Corn Bill, it comes in fact to pray that
there shall no longer be rents in England.
“The cotton-lords, and indeed all the
lords of the loom and anvil, are bestirring
themselves, and collecting all their forces
for a desperate assault upon the jolterheads
(the landlords) who cry aloud for
national faith. I wish them success.
I will not absolutely join them; but I
wish them success; because that success
would destroy the $1 (the system
of paper-money, national debt, and
oppressive taxation) root and branch.
The Corn Bill, the Small-Note Bill, the
laying out of public money in Ireland, the
lending of money occasionally to manufacturers
and merchants, the Bank advancing
money upon big estates—all
these shifts and tricks just keep the thing
agoing; but come a war, or repeal the
Corn Bill, and you will soon see what is
to become of the system. Everything
seems strained to its utmost: and when
that is the case, something must soon give
way.”
The alleged advantage which the
Free-trade party oppose to the obviously
calamitous effects of this incessant
surrender of the public revenue, and
the now admitted abandonment of all
attempts to pay off the public debt, is,
that commodities have been cheapened
thereby, and the weight which
oppressed them taken off the springs
of industry. We utterly deny this
advantage. What is the good of this
constant cheapening, when confessedly
you cannot cheapen our debts and
obligations? Is it anything else but
diminishing the funds from which the
interest of these debts and obligations
is to be discharged, and running the
nation into the most imminent hazard
of incurring a general bankruptcy,
public and private? Do not salaries
and incomes fall, from the highest to
the lowest, in consequence; and if so,
what good does the fall of prices do,
even to the individuals who apparently
profit by it? Suppose we gained
our object, and rendered everything
as cheap here as it is in Poland or
Norway—what should we gain by it,
but that we should speedily become
$1, and that the realised
wealth of this nation, now for the
most part invested in situations where
its interest is paid by the industry of
the people, would be lost by that
industry having ceased to receive a
sufficient remuneration? And is that
an object for which the national security
should be endangered, and the
means of maintaining our independence
destroyed?
In truth,—with the exception of
some manufactured articles, such as
cotton and calicoes, in which the fall
of prices has been prodigious, owing
to the successive improvement of the
machinery employed in their formation,—we
are at a loss to see that this
immense remission of indirect taxes,
which has evidently been fatal to the
national finances, has been attended
with the slightest benefit to the country
generally. We say the country
generally—because there can be no
doubt that it has been a very great
advantage to the $1, who have, in most cases, contrived
to put the whole tax lost to the
public into their own pockets. That
is the real secret of the remission.
Individual selfishness, the thirst for
gain, was in most cases the moving
spring. The parties interested besieged
the Chancellor of the Exchequer
with memorials, setting forth
the hardships they sustained from the
tax affecting their branch of industry,
and the immense benefit the $1
would derive from its abolition; but
the public was the very last thing
they were really thinking of. It was
their own profits to which they were
looking; and but for that, they never
would have stirred in the matter.
The immense fortunes made in many
branches of manufactures, during the
last quarter of a century, have been
in great part owing to the tax remitted
having been wholly gained to the
master-manufacturers engaged in
them. We pay the same now for our
shoes and beer as we did thirty years
ago, though, since its termination, the
whole tax on leather and the war tax
on malt have been repealed.
There is no doubt that prices have
declined in most articles of consumption
to a great degree during the last
twenty-five years, and in some to a
most extraordinary extent. But
where the decline has been great—as,
for example, in cottons or calicoes,
which are now selling for a fifth of
what they cost during the war—it is
not owing to the remission of taxation,
so much as to the extraordinary
perfection to which machinery and the
division of labour have been brought.
The proof of this is decisive. The fall
of price has been fully as great in
branches of manufactures in regard to
which no remission has taken place,
or in a very slight degree, as in those
in which it has been most considerable.
And in regard to all commodities,
the effect of the monetary bills
of 1819, 1826, and 1844, must be
taken into consideration. Those bills,
by contracting the currency to $1 of what it previously had been in
proportion to the industry and population
of the country, have effected a
revolution of prices so great, that
nearly the whole reduction of the cost
of articles prior to the last year is to
be ascribed to it. The great organ
of the money interest, the Times,
boasts that recent legislation has
doubled the value of the sovereign.
Unquestionably it has; and of course
it has also doubled the whole debt of
the country, public and private. It
has turned the national debt of
£800,000,000 into £1,600,000,000;
it has made the annual taxation of
£52,000,000 as burdensome as
£100,000,000 would have been during
the war. Prices have generally fallen;
but it is the contraction of the currency
which has done that. As to the remission
of taxation, with the exception of
a few articles, such as salt and spirits,
in which the remission, being very
large, was immediately felt by the
consumer, the reduction of prices has
not been greater than necessarily
flowed from the artificial scarcity of
money, and would have been the same
though no reduction of public duties
had taken place. Generally speaking,
the tax, lost to the public, has been
entirely gained by the master-manufacturer.
Had the system of cheapening, carried
into effect by the contraction of
the currency on the one hand, and the
extensive remission of duties on the
other, been attended by beneficial consequences
to the people, and resulted
in general happiness and prosperity,
there would at least have been some
set-off against the ruin of our financial
prospects which it has occasioned;
and we might have consoled ourselves
for the evident imposition of the public
debt as a hopeless burden upon
the nation, by the reflection that at
least temporary wellbeing had resulted
from the change. Has this been the
case? Alas! the fact is just the reverse;
and among the many mournful
reflections which the present hopeless
condition of our finances awakens, it is
perhaps the most mournful, that the
price paid for it has been, not public
happiness, but general and unprecedented
misery. In the long and varied
annals of English history, there is
beyond all question no period which
has been marked by such repeated and
widespread suffering as the thirty
years which have elapsed since the
cheapening system was begun, by the
contraction of the currency in 1819,
and the present time, when it has been
carried into full effect by Sir R. Peel’s
Free-trade policy in 1846. The three
dreadful monetary crises of 1825,
1839, and 1847, followed, as each of
them was, by several years of devastation
and ruin to the trading classes;
the repeated recurrence of agricultural
distress, especially from 1832 to 1836,
and in 1849; the unheard-of agonies
of the Irish famine of 1846, perpetuated
by the fall of prices, which
rendered agriculture unremunerative
over great part of that country,—are
some of the leading features of an
epoch which will ever be regarded as
at once the most momentous and the
most disastrous which the British Empire
has ever known.
It has left its traces deeply furrowed
and for ever marked in English
annals. It has produced consequences
which will never be forgotten, and to
which the historians of future times
will point as the turning-point of
British story, an eternal warning to
future ages. It has produced the Revolution
of 1832; disfranchised our
whole Colonies; displaced the government
of property, talent, and intelligence
in the ruling island, and installed
that of buying and selling in
its stead. It has severed the public
policy from the protection of the Land
and Native Industry, the real inheritance
and only sure patrimony of the
nation, and anchored it instead on the
shifting quicksands of Commercial
Prosperity. It has destroyed the
West Indies beyond the possibility of
redemption, and spread discontent so
widely through our other Colonies, that
it is universally known they are all
only waiting for some serious disaster
to the parent state, or the advent of
a protracted and hazardous war, to
declare themselves independent. It
has rendered every seventh man in
Great Britain and Ireland, taken together,
a pauper. It has driven from
250,000 to 300,000 industrious citizens,
for the last three years, annually
into exile from their native land. It
has raised the poor-rate in both
islands to an unprecedented height,
and, when measured by its true standard,
the price of subsistence to double
what it ever was before. It has implanted
the seeds of ruin in our Mercantile
Navy, by the rapid growth of
foreign shipping as compared with
British in carrying on our own trade.
It has rendered our shores defenceless
as they were in the days of the Saxon
Heptarchy; and made one of our
first admirals, Sir Charles Napier,
thankful when the winter frosts closed
the Baltic harbours, and secured our
capital from the insulting visits of the
successors of the sea-kings of the
north. It has rendered our means of
raising a revenue so hopeless, that the
“greatest bill-broker in the world,”
Mr Gurney, has declared that we
must end in national bankruptcy; and
the leader of the Free-traders himself,
Mr Cobden, has publicly said that
there is no resource but to disband
our troops, sell our ships of war, and
trust the national security to the justice
and moderation of our enemies,
and the total absence of envy in our
rivals. Such, and not public and
passing felicity, is the price which the
nation has paid for the ruin of its
finances, the abandonment of the sinking-fund,
and the imposing of the
public debt $1, as a burden,
hopeless of redemption, on the country.
The destruction of property which
has taken place in the British Empire
during the thirty years that this
cheapening process was going on,
exceeds probably anything recorded
during a similar period in the annals
of mankind. It has much exceeded
all that was produced by the confiscations
of the Convention, or the
devastation of the wars of Napoleon.
Each of the three great monetary
crises of 1825, 1839, and 1847, occasioned
the destruction at once of
two or three hundred millions worth
of mercantile property, and halved the
fortunes of persons to double that
extent. The intervals between them
were, with the exception of a few
brief gleams of perilous prosperity,
periods of anxiety, gloom, and depression,
during which all persons engaged
in business, with the exception of the
great capitalists, who were daily
getting richer, found their property
melting away under the ceaseless
and progressive fall of prices. It
was exactly the obverse of the vast
impulse given to industry over the
whole world by the discovery of the
mines of Mexico and Peru, and the
consequent rise of prices which everywhere
ensued. One class, and one
only, flourished amidst the general
distress; but, unfortunately, in that
class the government of the nation
for the time was vested, viz., the
$1. So immensely had
this interest grown under the protective
policy of the preceding hundred
and fifty years, that it was able to set
all other interests in the State at defiance,
and to pursue the system of
making the sovereign worth two
sovereigns, despite the evident ruin
which that system was bringing on
all the industrious classes in the state.
Future ages will ask what were the
devastating wars, the stunning calamities,
the loss of provinces, the
severance of colonies, which inflicted
such deep and irremediable wounds
on the British nation during these
memorable periods? and they will be
answered, it was thirty years of unbroken
peace at home, a series of
brilliant colonial conquests abroad,
and ONE SYSTEM.
But that one system was amply
sufficient to break down the most
wisely-conceived system of finance,
to ruin the most flourishing revenue,
to render beggarly the richest nation,
to destroy the greatest empire. It
is the system, originating with the
Roman empire, as a necessary and just
consequence of its universal conquest,
of universal free-trade—a system
which ruined the empire. It is the more
dangerous that it recommends itself to
the people in the first instance by the
alluring prospect of cheapening everything,
of making money daily go farther,
rendering every one apparently richer
and more comfortable than he was
before. It is readily adopted by the
shopkeeping and trading class, because
it enables them, in the first
instance, to purchase the goods at a
less cost; forgetting that if they buy
cheap they must also sell cheap, and
that their customers’ means of payment
are melting away from the effects
of that very cheapness. It is long,
however, before this truth, how obvious
soever, is generally understood. It is
by slow degrees, and after much
suffering only, that it is discovered
that this system of general cheapening
does not stop short with people’s $1;
that it speedily comes to
affect their $1 also, and that in
a still greater degree; that, if shopkeepers
buy cheap, they must sell
little or sell cheap also; that wages
must fall with the decline in the price
of commodities; and that the last condition
of the people is worse than the first.
But while this great and eternal truth
is in the course of being brought home
to the nation by suffering, the national
pre-eminence is lost, the national
security is endangered, the national
spirit is weakened. Multitudes become
desperate in regard to their own
and their country’s fortunes, from the
scenes of suffering and distress which
they perpetually see around them;
the selfish feelings acquire a fatal preponderance,
from the general experienced
impossibility of indulging in
the generous. Meanwhile the national
income melts away under the effects
of the general cheapening of the remuneration
of industry—all steady or
foreseeing system of finance is abandoned,
and every successive Government,
like a needy spendthrift, deems
itself happy if it can get through the
year without a financial crisis, never
bestowing a thought on the future,
either as regards the national security,
its finances, or its means of defence.
One memorable instance of the way
in which, under the cheapening system,
the public revenue has been recklessly
and needlessly thrown away, is
to be found in the Penny Postage. It
is well known that, prior to the change,
the Post-office income, after paying
$1,
yielded a clear surplus revenue to the
nation of £1,500,000 or £1,600,000
a-year. The postage of letters, however,
was decidedly too high; a reduction
was loudly called for by the
public; and, if cautiously and judiciously
applied, the increase of letters
might have compensated the reduction
of rates of postage, and a boon have
been conceded to the community, without
any detriment to the public service.
A uniform 2d. or 3d., or even 4d., postage
would have been hailed with
unmixed satisfaction by the people,
who had been paying 10d. or 1s. for
their letters, and no material diminution
of that important branch of the
revenue experienced. Instead of this,
what did the Government, urged on
by the cheapening party, actually do?
Why, they reduced the postage at once
to a penny for all letters, from all distances
within the two islands. We
were told, that not only would there
be no loss, but a certain gain, after a
few years had elapsed, from the vast
and certain increase in the number of
letters that would be transmitted.
How have these expectations been
realised? The revenue set down as
coming from the Post-office, immediately
after the change, was only
£500,000 or £600,000 a-year; and,
after having been nine years in operation,
it has only risen, in the year
ending 5th April 1850, to £803,000;
much less than half of what it would
have been under the former system,
when the increased population and
transactions of the country are taken
into consideration, if either the old
rates had been continued, or a reasonable
reduction to 2d. or 3d. had taken
place. It is to the embarrassment
produced by this great defalcation that
we are mainly indebted for the renewal
of the income-tax.
But this defalcation, great and serious
as it thus appears on the face of
the public accounts, was little more
than $1 of what really occurred
in consequence of the change.
To conceal the effects of this great
innovation, the Free-trading party,
who had now got entire possession of
the Government, had the address both
to get the expense of the Packet Service,
$1, and to keep
that important change a secret among
the Government officials. In this way
a double object was gained. The
disastrous effect of the reduction was
kept out of view, and the increased
charges of the Navy afforded a
plausible ground for demagogues to
assail the Government for alleged extravagance
in that department. But
that which one demagogue had done,
another demagogue brought to light.
Mr Cobden made so violent a clamour
about the increase of expenditure in
the Navy since 1835, when it had
been reduced, under the pressure of
the Reform mania, to its lowest point,
that the Admiralty, in their own defence,
let out the important fact, that,
since the penny-postage system began,
they had been saddled with the
whole cost of the Packet Service,
which they never had been before;
and, in the debate on the Estimates,
Lord John Russell stated that this
cost now amounted to £737,000
a-year. Thus the real Post-office
accounts stand thus:—
Apparent surplus for year ending 5th April 1850,
£803,000
Deduct cost of Packet Service, thrown on Navy,
737,000
Real Post-office revenue,
£66,000
And it has been raised to this level
only during a year of extraordinary
manufacturing activity, when our
exports turned £60,000,000. On the
whole, since the postage was reduced
in 1841, the Post-office has not yielded
a farthing to the country, but, on the
contrary, has occasioned a loss of some
hundred thousand pounds.
We have heard enough from the
Free-traders of the disasters which
accumulated on the year 1848, and
commencement of 1849, when a monetary
crisis, the Irish famine, the
European revolution, the Irish rebellion,
and the Chartist sedition, combined
to reduce the revenue to an unprecedented
degree. We have heard
enough, also, of the unexampled
prosperity of the year 1849, when
these extraneous disasters had ceased,
and the blessings of Free-trade and
the cheapening system were still in
undiminished lustre. Be it so. Let
us compare the public revenue of this
year of unprecedented disaster with
that obtained in the next year of unexampled
prosperity, as appearing
from the finance accounts of April 5,
1850:—
Year ending
Year ending
5th April 1849.
5th April 1850.
Ordinary revenue,
£48,490,002
£48,643,042
China money,
84,284
Imprest and other monies,
665,293
656,855
Repayment of advances,
427,761
553,349
£49,667,430
£49,853,246
49,853,246
Increase in 1849,
£185,816
—Times, April 1850.
So that the increase in a year of
extraordinary and unprecedented prosperity,
as we are told, over one of
unexampled and overwhelming suffering,
is $1 £185,000, for £128,000
of which we are indebted to an excess
in the repayment of advances in 1849
over 1848. We care not to what this
extraordinary fact is to be ascribed,
whether reduction of duties, the continuance
of distress, or any other
cause. We rest on the fact that Free-trade
finance and the cheapening
system have brought the revenue of
the country, $1. History
cannot, and will not, overlook
these facts. The leaders of the Free-traders
say they live for posthumous
fame. Let them not be afraid. Posterity
will do them full justice.
The financial problem of the Free-traders
is—“Given a cheapened nation,
to extract an adequate revenue
out of their unremunerated industry.”
We recommend this problem to the
study of the Free-trading Chancellor
of the Exchequer. If he solve it,
we shall assign him a place superior
to Archimedes in physical—to Bacon
in political science.
What a contrast to this mournful
decay of the national resources, and
ruin of the national strength, from the
effects of a theory acted upon by the
Legislature under the influence of a
class majority in Parliament, would a
truly catholic and national policy, protective
alike to all interests, have
afforded! An adequate but not redundant
currency, cautiously administered,
and relieved from the fatal
liability to abstraction from a great
increase of imports in any particular
year, would at once have afforded free
scope to national industry, and
avoided the frightful vicissitudes in
the demand for labour, which the
opposite system of making the currency
entirely dependent on the most
evanescent of earthly things—gold—of
necessity occasioned. The terrible
monetary crises of 1825, 1839, and
1847, would have been unfelt. They
would have been surmounted, as that
of 1810 had been, by an extended
issue of paper when the gold was for a
time abstracted, without their existence
being known to the nation. Industry,
protected in every department
by adequate but not oppressive fiscal
duties, would have generally and
steadily flourished. Periods of extravagant
speculation and exorbitant
wages, followed by commercial depression
and general suffering, would have
been unknown. The national revenues,
sustained by an adequate currency
and unbroken industry, would
have afforded an ample surplus to
Government, both for the public service
and the promotion of objects of
general utility, after providing for the
maintenance of the sinking-fund.
Emigration, supported, so far as the
destitute are concerned, by the Government
resources, and conducted in
Government vessels, would have
poured a ceaseless and prolific stream
into the Colonies, at once vivifying
their industry, and converting the
paupers of England and Ireland into
consumers of our manufactures, at the
rate of six or seven pounds a-head
per annum. Pauperism at home,
relieved in the classes where it originates
by this wise and paternal
policy, would have been arrested.
Crime itself would have been made
to minister to the general good: the
jails of Great Britain would have
been converted into industrial academies
for behoof of the Colonies. The
industry of the Colonies, encouraged
by the protective policy of the mother
country, and supported by the ceaseless
streams of its emigration, would
have advanced with rapid strides,
and afforded a rising and inexhaustible
mart for domestic manufactures.
The ocean would have become a
British lake: the navy of England,
the floating bridge which at once
united and protected its distant dependencies.
Colonial discontent would have
been unknown. The West Indies,
Canada, and Australia, would have
been the most loyal and contented,
because the most flourishing and justly
governed parts of the Empire. The
foreign trade of the world would have
been to the British Empire what
Adam Smith justly called the most
profitable of all trades, a home trade.
We should have raised the raw material
for all our staple branches of industry
within ourselves; wool from
Australia, cotton from the East and
West Indies, grain from the British
isles and Canada. Agriculture at
home and abroad would have advanced
abreast of manufactures;
commerce and shipping would have
risen with the increase of their productions;
the Navy, fed by an ample
and protected commercial marine, and
sustained at an adequate amount by
a well-filled treasury, would have
secured our independence, and enabled
us to attend to the interests and anticipate
the wants of our remotest
dependencies. We should have been
alike independent of foreign nations
for the materials of pacific industry,
and superior to them in warlike resources.
Great Britain, though grey in
years of renown, would have retained
for centuries the vigour of youth,
because she would have been continually
renovated by the energy of her
descendants. The paternal hall would
have been constantly cheerful and
happy, because it would have been
always filled with children and grandchildren,
or enlivened by their exploits.
Amidst general prosperity
and unceasing progress, the National
Debt—constantly encroached on
by a sustained sinking-fund—would
have disappeared. Before this time
it would have been all extinguished;
and the taxation of the Empire, reduced
to £30,000,000 or £35,000,000
a-year, would have enabled us for ever
to maintain the national armaments on
such a scale as would have qualified us
to bid defiance alike to the covert encroachments
of our rivals, or the open
hostility of our enemies. Under the
opposite or cheapening system, the
public debt has, on the admission of
its ablest supporters, been virtually
doubled; the sinking-fund has, amidst
general and almost constant distress,
disappeared; Colonial discontent
threatens the Empire with dismemberment;
agricultural distress
will speedily render it dependent for
its daily bread on its enemies; and
the maintenance of the national independence,
if the present system is persisted
in, has been rendered, for any
length of time, impossible.
GREECE AGAIN.
526
“If, Cassandra-like, amidst the din
Of conflict none will hear, or, hearing, heed
This voice from out the wilderness, the sin
Be theirs, and my own feelings be my meed.”
Prophecy of Dante.
Greece is a most unfortunate country.
She has only escaped the Turks
to be plundered by her rulers and
ruined by her protectors. Seventeen
years ago, Lord Palmerston placed
King Otho on his throne; he has since
been occupied in making that throne
an uneasy seat. King Otho refuses
to answer Lord Palmerston’s letters;
in revenge, Great Britain ruins a
number of Greek shipowners, and
leaves the Greek ministers unpunished.
The Duke of Wellington has said that
he never bombarded a town, and never
saw the necessity for committing such
an act of cruelty; and the saying does
him even more honour than his long
career of victory. We had hoped that
no Englishman would ever have forgotten
this saying; yet Lord Palmerston
bombards the merchants of Greece
for the faults of King Otho’s ministers.
We are irresistibly reminded, by this
last display of our Foreign Secretary’s
warlike propensities, of Mr Winkle’s
fight with the small boy.
Though much has been written on
the subject of this quarrel, both at
home and on the Continent, no clear
statement of the exact relations between
England and Greece has been
published; nor can it be gathered
even from the papers recently laid before
Parliament.[1] We believe, therefore,
that our readers will thank us
for devoting a few pages to a serious
examination of the political relations
between the two countries, which will
tend to place the recent coercive measures
in their true light. This is the
more necessary, because Ministers,
both in debates and Parliamentary
papers, have it in their power to conceal
everything relating to the past;
and the Opposition must hunt long
before they can spring a single truth
in the thickets of official deception.
A view of the subject, under the guidance
of truth and common sense, free
both from party views and national
prejudices, has been rendered necessary
by the speech of Mr Piscatory,
the late French Minister in Greece.
The spoken pamphlet of Mr Piscatory
was prepared with considerable skill;
but it communicates hardly a single
fact that has not been perverted by
being removed from its true context,
or by having only half its concomitant
circumstances narrated. Indeed, Mr
Piscatory having been bellows-blower
in the disputes between Sir E. Lyons,
the English envoy at Athens, and
King Otho’s ministers, for four years,
is not a famous witness; he has his
own secrets to conceal. His oratorical
display did not impose on the good
sense of General Cavaignac, who parodied
Sylla’s speech to a wordy Athenian
ambassador, by hinting to the
French ex-minister plenipotentiary,
“that it seemed France had sent him
to Athens to study rhetoric, not to
collect information.”
The papers laid before Parliament
prove the worthlessness of Mr Piscatory’s
diplomacy; but the conduct of
Lord Palmerston cannot be correctly
appreciated, unless we trace the connexion
of England and Greece since
the convention of 1832, appointing
Prince Otho of Bavaria King of
Greece, under the protection and guarantee
of England, France, and Russia.
That treaty, it must be recollected,
was the work of Lord Palmerston.
King Otho was selected by
Lord Palmerston; he was conveyed
to Greece by Lord Palmerston’s
favourite diplomatist, Sir E. Lyons;
and it was under Lord Palmerston’s
special protection that the Anglo-Bavarian
Regency was furnished with
£2,400,000, and allowed to destroy
the institutions of the Greek nation.
These facts embrace the history of
British connexion with Greece from
1832 to 1837. Great Britain, or, to
speak more correctly, our Foreign
Secretary, is morally responsible for
the government of the Greek kingdom
by Count Armansperg, who ruled far
more absolutely than King Otho has
ever done, for the simple reason that
he had a better filled purse. Sir E.
Lyons supported him with vigour
alike against Russian and French
opposition, Greek patriotism, and constitutional
principles, as may be seen
by a reference to the papers laid before
Parliament in July 1836.
In 1837, Armansperg was dismissed
from office; but Greece is still suffering
from the loss of the institutions he
destroyed, and the political corruption
he introduced. Coletti, it is true,
imitated his political system in the
internal government with singular
aptitude, but with diminished funds
and resources for corruption. Where
Armansperg could appoint an amnestied
brigand a captain of infantry,
Coletti could only make some old
friend a policeman, or peradventure a
consul.
In 1837 the Government of Greece
broke off its intimate connexion with
England, and the English Minister at
Athens became involved in a succession
of quarrels with the court. It is
not necessary for us to prove that the
Bavarian Administration from 1837
to 1843 was bad. All parties agree
that it was intolerable; and the
Greeks were universally applauded
when they expelled the whole tribe of
Bavarian officials. King Otho had
fallen into an error that might have been
expected from a Whig-created king;
he had neglected all the real duties of
royalty, and transacted the business
of his under-secretaries of state.
The circumstances that have determined
the position of our relations
with Greece, since the Constitution of
1844, occurred in the preceding period.
Lord Palmerston’s first quarrel
with the Greek court dates from 1837,
and originated in the dissatisfaction
then felt, because the British Minister
at Athens did not possess as much
influence with King Otho’s Government
as he had possessed with Count
Armansperg’s. The avowed object of
British diplomacy, at that period, was
to force the adherents of the English
party into office; and King Otho incurred
the enmity of England for preferring
the counsels of France and
Russia. The first pitched battle between
Greece and England was fought
about the waistcoat of the British
Minister’s groom. The question was,
whether the waistcoat worn by Sir E.
Lyons’ groom in his stable dress, and
in which he had been carried off to
prison for squirting water on a policeman,
was or was not a livery waistcoat.
After several weeks’ deliberation,
the Greek court decided, that,
although they did not consider the
waistcoat in question to be a livery
waistcoat, yet, in consideration of the
fact that the British Minister called it
his livery, the Government of Greece
was ready to make every concession
that could be required to heal the
wounded honour of Great Britain.
Parliament had a narrow escape of
seeing the waistcoat laid before both
Houses. Now this is very silly. Yet
there is no doubt that the arrest of the
groom was an intentional insult.
This affair was enacted to lower the
English minister in the eyes of the
populace, and compel the English
Government to change him. Everybody
in Greece knew that the groom
was sent to prison; few Greeks believed
that the Government had apologised
for the insult; indeed, nothing
but the sight of a policeman chained
before the British legation for
twenty-four hours could have reintegrated
the name of England at
Athens, so stoutly did all Government
officials declare that no apology
was ever made. Another scene was
exhibited for the satisfaction of the
court and the corps diplomatique. At
a private theatrical representation in
King Otho’s palace, the British minister
was left without a chair in the
circle, and remained standing during
a long comedy. Some ambassadors
would have been sorely distressed
by this species of physical torture;
but the ambassador in question is
said to have consoled himself, during
this public exhibition of the feelings
of protected Greece to protecting
England, by the reflection that his
turn came next.
A blow was shortly after inflicted
on the royalty of Greece, from which
it can never recover; but Lord
Palmerston is accused of tolerating
the use of forbidden weapons by some
of his adherents, in his eagerness to
make the Greek monarch sensible of
the impolicy of the conduct of the
Hellenic court. Attacks on the person
of King Otho, more bold and
unsparing than the most malignant
vituperation of Junius, appeared in
a London morning paper, then supposed
to be allowed to imbibe some of
its inspiration from Downing Street.
These communications pretended to
come from an anonymous correspondent
in Athens, but it was evident
the unknown writer was aware of
many things that could hardly be
known beyond the Bavarian court and
the sanctuaries of Downing Street.
At least, King Otho drew this conclusion,
and apparently on good
grounds. This correspondent informed
the world, that his Hellenic
Majesty, who had been selected by
Lord Palmerston, and supported with
a loan of £2,400,000, was nevertheless
unfit to govern his kingdom;
and that a certificate to this effect
had been signed by several officers,
civil, military, and medical, who were
then at Athens in the service of King
Otho, and that this certificate had
been placed in the hands of King
Louis of Bavaria. This strange communication
would have passed unnoticed
in Greece, had it not been
made the subject of conversation by
all the English officials, and the attention
of Greek statesmen called to it
by the British legation and consulates.
At last, it was publicly
noticed by the Greek press, and an
outcry produced. Three of the Bavarians
named as having signed the
certificate, published a declaration
contradicting the statement, in a
document bearing date the 11th-23d
June 1839, which was printed in the
Greek newspapers. The medical
and military officers who signed this
counter-certificate were dismissed
from all their places, and immediately
quitted Greece. Very little
has been said on this subject since.
All parties seem heartily ashamed of
their share in the transaction, and
the public never discovered the key
of the mystery. It is certain, however,
that King Otho has given Lord
Palmerston and Sir E. Lyons good
proof of the falsity of the certificate,
if they were ever led into the belief
that such a document really existed;
for, during ten years, he baffled them
both in every diplomatic move, and
made their vaunted constitutional
policy tend more to the injury of
their own reputation than to the
diminution of his power.
This episode of the certificate,
whether its existence be a fact or a
fable, placed an impassable barrier between
Lord Palmerston and King Otho.
Right or wrong, his Hellenic Majesty
held the English foreign secretary
responsible for the publication, for he
believed that the English Government
possessed the power of dragging the
calumniator to light, and that it
would have used the power had the
anonymous correspondent not been
protected by a powerful patron. Besides,
the King of Greece might well
ask, who in England could have acquired
the knowledge which enabled
this correspondent to attack the person
of a monarch under the special
protection of Great Britain, without
fear of investigation or reply, unless
the information came directly from
some high diplomatic authority. We
need not wonder, therefore, when we
find that, from June 1839, hatred to
England was the prominent feeling
displayed by the Greek court in all
its relations with the British cabinet.
Lord Palmerston, finding all hope of
acquiring influence in the Greek court
vain, changed his policy, and became
the advocate of constitutional government.
The revolution in 1843 afforded the
British cabinet an opportunity of
putting our relations with Greece on
a proper footing; but the opportunity
was lost. Instead of English influence
being employed to restore the national
institutions destroyed by the Bavarians,
it supported the establishment
of what is called the constitutional
form of government. One of those
compilations of political commonplace
which the lawgivers of our age
are ready, at a week’s notice, to prepare
either for Greenland or China,
was translated from French pamphlets,
and entitled the Constitution of
Greece. Lord Aberdeen, who was
then foreign secretary, committed as
great a blunder in engaging Great
Britain to stand godfather to this
constitution, as Lord Palmerston had
done in making Old England guardian
to King Otho. The following are
the words in which the British
Government thought fit to record its
approbation of this inane waste of
time and paper,—“Her Majesty’s
Government have viewed with no
less satisfaction the admirable temper
which appears to have generally prevailed
in the Constituent Assembly,
throughout the whole of her deliberations
on the deeply interesting and
important act on which they have
been engaged. Such self-command
in a popular Assembly, convoked
under very exciting and critical circumstances,
is highly creditable to
the Greek nation. Nor is the result
of their labours, as a whole, less
entitled to credit for the general
soundness of the constitutional principles
therein established.”
This, being the deliberate opinion
of a British statesman of high character,
not supposed to be infatuated
by a blind love of revolutionary doctrines,
demands serious examination.
Let us see, therefore, what are the
principles which received the sanction
of the British Government on
this occasion. In our opinion, they
are precisely those principles that
lead with certainty to political
anarchy and national demoralisation.
This vaunted constitution revived no
local habits of business, re-established
no parochial usages, improved no
provincial institutions, corrected no
political immoralities, restored no
religious authority, and insured no
education to the clergy. It proclaimed
universal suffrage to an armed people,
and vote by ballot to a mob that cannot
write; and these are the principles
held up to public approbation
for their $1! While,
as to the proofs of admirable temper
and self-command displayed by this
assembly, these feelings were surely
not expressed in the decree by which
this good-tempered assembly excluded
all their countrymen, who had
immigrated to the Greek territory
since the year 1828, from official
employments. There are, perhaps,
some who may feel inclined to observe
to us, as Rob Roy did to his
kinsman, Bailie Nicol Jarvie, when
they met in the Tolbooth of Glasgow,
“Hout, tout! man, let that flee stick
in the wa’; when the dirt’s dry it will
rub out.” Be it so; but there are
political blunders that leave a stain,
which neither time nor repentance
can efface.
We believe that the source of Lord
Aberdeen’s error arose from his wish
to treat Greece as an independent
state. But Greece under the protection
of the three powers, and loaded
with debt, could not be an independent
power. False appearances
always produce evil consequences.
Lord Palmerston had been in too
great a hurry to make the bantling
monarchy of the treaty of 1832 walk
without a baby-jumper, and his
rivalry with Warwick the king-maker
was not more glorious than his emulation
of Mr Winkle. He ought to
have perceived that sundry Klephtopiratic
excrescences, like the protuberances
on the body of a young
bear, required to be carefully licked
into shape. Our Foreign Secretary
delayed the operation too long; and,
when he perceived the dangers that
had resulted from his negligence, he
erroneously fancied that a licking
of a different kind, applied by Admiral
Parker to King Otho’s Government,
would set all right.
When the Greek monarchy was
founded in 1832, it was the duty of
Lord Palmerston to have laid before
Parliament detailed answers to the
following questions, as a justification
of the course he had pursued in
engaging Great Britain to protect
the new state, and furnish it with a
loan of £2,400,000. The questions, in
perfect ignorance of which the character
of England was compromised, and
the money wasted, were:—
1. What were the actual means of
government in the country, and the
nature of the parochial, communal,
borough, provincial and central administrative
institutions, which had
enabled the Greeks to maintain a
war against Sultaun Mahmoud and
Mahommed Ali for seven years?
Enthusiasm and patriotism are good
words in a debate, and may explain
the events of a single campaign; but
common sense tells every one that a
people must possess some administrative
institutions, in order to persist in
a desperate struggle for many successive
years. If Greece had no
institutions in 1832, she was clearly
unfit to receive a king; and the duty
of the Three Protecting Powers was
to frame a system of administration,
not to choose a monarch. But on
the other hand, if the foundations of
political government already existed,
it was especially the duty of Great
Britain to see that these foundations
or local institutions were improved,
and not destroyed, by the new Government.
2. What were the land and sea
forces necessary to maintain order on
shore, and guard the Grecian seas
from piracy; and how could these
forces be immediately subjected to
the system of discipline, which the
protecting powers might consider indispensable?
3. What measures were requisite,
in order to enable the mass of the
population to turn their attention to
profitable branches of industry without
loss of time?
And 4. What were the financial
resources of the country? What was
the amount of the debts contracted
by the Government during the revolutionary
war? What sum would be
required to supply the deficit in the
annual expenditure for the first year
of the new monarch’s reign; and what
sum would be required to be set
apart annually for paying the interest
of the debts of the Greek state,
now converted into a European kingdom?
Strange as it may seem, there is
not the slightest information on these
important questions in the papers laid
before Parliament in 1832; and we
believe that, had Lord Palmerston
taken the trouble to collect even the
limited information we have specified,
before he involved Great Britain in a
guarantee of King Otho’s throne, he
would have perceived that it was not
necessary to burden Greece either
with a new debt or the presence of a
foreign army. Great Britain would
then have prevented the regency
from destroying the existing institutions,
and saved the country from the
administrative corruption that ruined
the despotic royalty of King Otho,
and promises very soon to annihilate
his constitutional monarchy.
One advantage might have been
obtained for Greece by the constitution
of 1844, if either the Greeks or
their sovereign had known how to
profit by it. The direct influence of
the protecting powers in the internal
affairs of the country was greatly diminished.
Unfortunately, Mr Coletti
did not avail himself of this circumstance
to lead the Greeks to make one
single improvement in the interior.
Not a road was made, or a packet
established. Coletti was, nevertheless,
a favourite minister with King
Otho, for he fomented the King’s aversion
to England, and carried on an
active warfare with Sir E. Lyons.
When Mr Wyse arrived at Athens
last year, as British minister, he found
the train laid to the mine Lord Palmerston
was about to spring. He tried
in vain to persuade the Greek ministers
to make such concessions as would
prevent an open rupture. His conciliatory
conduct misled the Greek court
into a belief that Lord Palmerston
was afraid to come to blows, and, in
an evil hour, it deemed itself secure of
victory. The only alternative left to
Great Britain, in King Otho’s opinion,
was to withdraw the English minister
from Athens. But, even if Lord
Palmerston’s disposition had made
him inclined to take this course, King
Otho ought to have remembered that
the convention of 1832, which created
the Greek kingdom, bound England to
watch over it. So infatuated was the
court of Athens at this time, that the
modifications which it would be possible
to make in the Greek constitution,
after the departure of the English
minister, became a subject of conversation.
Yet when the hour arrived,
and Lord Palmerston’s demands were
communicated, the Greek ministers
felt the folly of resistance; and they
would have capitulated, had the minister
of the French Republic not
availed himself of the conjuncture to
flatter King Otho’s private prejudices,
and assumed the direction of affairs.
The Greek minister of foreign affairs,
Mr Londos, was a man utterly unfit
for the place. His communications to
the Chambers, on the subject of the
quarrel, are a tissue of erroneous
statements. M. Thouvenel persuaded
this unlucky minister to brave Lord
Palmerston, and trust to the protection
of France and the European
press. The French minister knew
that he would gain for himself the
star and the broad blue ribbon of King
Otho’s Order of the Redeemer, and he
knew equally well that he would inflict
a serious injury on the commerce
and revenues of Greece, and that he
would cause the ruin of many Greek
merchants. There can be no doubt,
that ambassadors ought never to be
allowed to receive Orders from the
sovereigns to whose court they are
accredited. The interests of nations
are often sacrificed by honourable men
for stars and ribbons. In finally coming
to an open rupture with Greece,
Lord Palmerston probably only did
what any other minister who had
placed himself in a similar position
must have done. But though we believe
that it was King Otho who made the
cup run over, we have shown our
readers that Lord Palmerston had
already filled it pretty full; and we
are far from approving of the measures
he adopted for the coercion of
the Greek Government. In our opinion,
it was cruel to punish the Greek
people for the faults of their rulers,
since those rulers were selected and
protected by the Three Powers, of
which England is one. The coercion
ought to have been confined to measures
that would have directly affected
the King and the Government.
We have now laid before our readers
the history of all the causes, supposed
and real, of Lord Palmerston’s war
with Greece. It was neither the livery
waistcoat of Sir E. Lyon’s groom, the
missing chair at the royal comedy, Mr
Pacifico’s furniture, Mr Finlay’s garden,
no, nor the constitutional policy
of the English Government, that
brought our fleet to Salamis. It was
the anonymous correspondent of the
Morning Chronicle in 1839, be that
individual who he may. Lord Palmerston’s
conduct to Greece since that
period, it is true, has been generally
unwise, and often unjust; but that correspondence
having been once placed
to the account of the British Cabinet
by the King of Greece, he consequently
acted in such a spirit towards
England, that we acknowledge a
collision became unavoidable, without
a sacrifice of the dignity of the British
Crown. The papers laid before Parliament
show, that the communications
of the English Government were
left unanswered for years.
We are bound also to observe, that
the conduct of King Otho has so completely
disorganised the finances of
Greece, that his throne is in imminent
danger, and a great change in the
government of Greece must take place
in the present year. In the year 1848,
a serious rebellion took place in Greece.
The diplomacy of England was accused
of encouraging the insurgents, and, for
some days, the flight of King Otho
from Athens was an event hourly expected.
When the full extent of the
evil, and the anarchy which threatened
the country in consequence of the
insane conduct of the Greek Opposition,
was known in England, Lord
Palmerston frankly changed his policy,
and sent our ablest and best English
diplomatist, Sir Stratford Canning, to
save King Otho’s throne. If a throne
be of any value, the King of Greece
owed some thanks to England for the
great services of Sir Stratford Canning,
who had to encounter a virulent and
unfair opposition from the English
officials at Athens during his exertions
to save Greece from anarchy.
We have no time to point out the
connexion of the events we have noticed
with the general movement of
European diplomacy since 1833. Our
space compels us to confine our observations
to Greece; and we must now
hastily examine the state of society
in the country, in order to enable our
readers to judge of the manner in
which the civilisation of the people
affects the administration of public
affairs. The Greeks themselves think
that their great political want is a good
systematic central administration. We
believe, on the contrary, that their
great political deficiency is the want
of municipal institutions, that would
admit of their making some exertions
to improve their own condition. Every
one who has travelled much in Greece
must have seen, that every little town
and island contains two or three individuals
capable of fulfilling the duties
of a local magistracy with honour to
their country; while everybody who
has had anything to do with the ministers
of King Otho, or with the
members of his council of state, knows
that there is not a statesman in Greece
capable of filling a ministerial post, in
a period of political difficulty, without
disgracing his country. It would be
invidious to name respectable men as
instances of incapacity; but every
one, who has followed the political
history of Greece, is aware that every
Greek statesman has had opportunities
of disgracing it, and repeating the
same blunders several times. The
despotic government of King Otho
failed from the utter incapacity of his
ministers; the constitutional monarchy
is hastening to ruin from the same
cause. In the present state of Greece,
it is not possible to find men capable
of conducting the King’s Government
with the necessary ability. The people
are greatly in advance of their rulers.
The conclusion of the revolutionary
war left the nation divided into several
classes of society, as different in
their ideas and habits of life as if they
had formed parts of different nations.
These classes were, first, the peasantry—for
so the cultivators of the
soil are generally called, though a
large portion of them are landed proprietors,
and often the only persons of
substance in the provinces. Second,
the primates, or proprietors, who did
not cultivate their own lands. These
men managed public business, and
acted as collectors of the revenue
under the Turks: they frequent coffee-houses,
and form political societies
under the centralised constitutional
system of government. This
class, however, possesses some education,
but its moral character is vitiated
by a firm conviction that it is
entitled to be maintained in a state
of idleness at the public expense. It
has gained considerable political influence
by means of the election law
of 1844. Coletti, by intimidating the
weak, bribing the active, and creating
innumerable places, purchased this
class wholesale, and rendered himself
master of nearly all the electoral districts
in Greece. The third class is
composed of that numerous body of
Greeks who have emigrated to the
Hellenic territory from different provinces
of Turkey. This class includes
the greater part of the ablest and
best educated men in the country;
but the abject principles of the Phanariotes,
or Greeks educated for the
public service in Turkey, and the base
avidity displayed by this class in
place-hunting, which is their principal
means of life, rendered them very
unpopular, and enabled their rivals,
the primates, to exclude them from
official employments by a decree of
the national assembly of 1844. The
fourth class is the military. This
class is very numerous, as its ranks
are swelled by crowds of individuals
who never served in a military capacity,
but who have received military
rank as a payment for political services.
King Otho makes generals of
secretaries, and colonels of commissaries;
while farmers of the revenue,
muleteers, and officers’ servants, form
about one half of the unattached officers
of an army which counts an
officer for every two privates and a
quarter, if we can trust the Greek
Budget and the Greek newspapers.
There is also a remarkable difference
between the social condition of
the inhabitants of the country and of
the towns; and this difference must
be taken into consideration in estimating
the political state of Greece.
The principal towns contain as many
persons of education, and as high a
degree of mental cultivation, as can be
found in any towns of a similar size
in other countries; but in the rural
districts, on the contrary, there is a
want of material civilisation, a degree
of rudeness in every process of industry,
which places the agricultural
population far below the people of
every other European country, even
including the Greek population in
Turkey. The Hellenic peasant
cultivates his $1, or yoke of land,
in a manner that only enables him to
live, to rear a family to replace his
own, and to pay his taxes. No improvements
take place on his farm—nor,
indeed, can any take place under
the system of taxation and administration
actually in force. Fruit trees
are annually destroyed, and forests
are burnt down, but none are ever
planted. The depopulation caused by
the war of the revolution may still
admit of the location of some additional
families on uncultivated land;
but no improvement has yet been
commenced in agricultural industry or
transport, that will give one family
the means or the time to cultivate
more land than its predecessors have
cultivated, or that will make the same
extent of land to yield any additional
produce.
Here, then, we find precisely the
state of things which produced the
stationary condition of European society
during the middle ages, and
which still keeps the greater part of
the East in its immutable condition.
The land under the windows of King
Otho’s palace, and the fields around
the university of Athens, are more
rudely cultivated than any other portion
of the soil of Europe; yet neither
king, senators, deputies, nor professors,
appear to have perceived that
the turning point of national civilisation
is not marked by the splendour
of court balls, the regularity of the
payment of official salaries, or the
number and quality of scholastic lectures,
but by the creation of a state of
things in which capital is advantageously
employed in augmenting the
produce of the soil. When this is
not the case, generations of agriculturists
succeed one another for ages,
treading in the footsteps of their predecessors
in the same numbers, and
in the same state of barbarism.
Coexistent with this rude peasantry,
there is an educated class
whose numbers are also limited by
the fixed amount of rent and taxes,
on which they depend for their support,
and by means of which they
perpetuate themselves by the side of
the rude agriculturists, giving the
towns all the appearance of civilisation.
This unfortunate state of society
is not new in the history of the
Greek nation: it has now existed for
more than 1000 years, and it forms
the prominent feature in the internal
organisation of the Byzantine empire.
Judging from the records of that
government, it is a state of society
that presents greater obstacles to
change than any social combinations
which the history of the human race
reveals to the west of China. The
cultivators of the soil cannot improve
their condition or increase in number;
the educated classes are interested in
opposing change, and have influence
enough to prevent it: poverty in the
country, and meanness in the towns,
render the universal moral degradation
an element of stability in the political
condition of a nation whose social
state is such as we have described.
There remains an important class
of society in Greece, which we have
not yet mentioned, because it has been
excluded from all political influence
since the formation of the Hellenic
monarchy. This is the mercantile
class. Before the revolutionary war,
and during the contest with the
Turks, it was the Greek merchants
and shipowners who formed the
aristocracy of the nation; but this
class is now almost null in the movement
of political affairs at Athens.
The greater part of the able, respectable,
and wealthy merchants have
quitted the country, and are to be
found at Odessa, Trieste, Marseilles,
London, and Manchester, not in King
Otho’s dominions. A small fraction
of shipowners remain, but the small
schooners that now compose the
mercantile navy of Greece cannot be
compared with the fine ships that
Hydra, Spetzia, and Psara formerly
sent out to engage the Turkish fleet;
and the comparative increase of the
tonnage of the trading vessels of large
size in Greece and Turkey, since 1840,
shows that the trade of the Levant is
extending more rapidly under the
Turkish than under the Greek flag.
We have now described the state of
society with sufficient accuracy to
enable us to examine the value of the
measures adopted for founding a monarchy
in Greece. From what we
have said, it must be evident that
constitutional government, as the
Continental liberals and English political
lecturers understand the term,
could not be an object of much interest
to those classes that were called upon
to exercise universal suffrage. It probably
never engaged their attention
more seriously than the laws of gravitation
or the number of the fixed
stars. They felt that they wanted
permanent and systematic administration,
in place of the inconstant and
arbitrary measures from which they
suffered; they demanded security of
property, liquidation of the public
debt, and employment for labour, but
they knew not how to arrive at the
consummation of their wishes. Instead
of attending to these commonplace
matters, the British Government
and its allies gave the Greeks a king,
a court, a regency less united than
their own Capitani, civil wars, additional
debts, and an order of knighthood
to corrupt foreign diplomatists;
but not a road, a bridge, or a ferry-boat,
was introduced into a country
full of mountains and dangerous torrent-beds,
and consisting, in great
part, of peninsulas and islands. King
Otho, who has spent £3,000,000 sterling
on civil wars, and £1,000,000 on
palaces, does not possess fifty miles
of road practicable for a donkey-cart,
in his whole dominions. There is not
a carriage-road from Athens to Corinth,
nor a ferry-boat to the islands
of the Archipelago. Need we wonder,
then, if the Greeks despise their own
Government, and suspect the intentions
of the three protecting powers
that support it in its evil conduct?
The consequence is, that fifteen thousand
military and police officials fail
to preserve order in a population of
nine hundred and twenty thousand
souls. The result of this political
experiment, in the foundation of monarchies,
certainly reflects little credit
on the statesmen of England, France,
and Russia.
We must examine the error that
was committed, in giving the countenance
of Great Britain, as a protecting
power, to the absurd constitution
established in 1844; and while we
blame what was then badly done, we
shall point out what common sense,
when not warped by party interests,
dictated ought to have been done.
Of course, we can only offer the suggestions
urged by a wise minority at
Athens. The nation, in making the
revolution in 1843, did not want a
constitution, for they possessed institutions
which a written constitution is
only valuable as a means of attaining.
The Greeks, as we have said before,
sought to reform the system of administration.
The method of carrying
on the executive government, under
the hourly control of an elective
chamber, called constitutional government,
was forced upon them by accident,
as France lately became a
republic. Without the assistance of
this pons asinorum of French politicians,
the Greeks had saved the
liberty of the press from the attacks
of Count Armansperg, and established
trial by jury in spite of Austria and
Russia.
The constitutional system of government,
as it has laid hold of the
public mind on the Continent, is a
very imperfect political contrivance:
practically, it has proved a delusion—a
mere form, figured in empty space
by a mass of thick clouds, impelled
hither and thither by unseen currents
of wind, the precursor of an approaching
storm, not the source of beneficial
showers. When examined in detail,
with its tribunes; its orators, pamphlet
in hand; its galleries, and its
ministers playing at see-saw between
social democracy and court corruption,
what hope does it hold out of
establishing a sense of moral responsibility
and firmness of purpose in
individual statesmen, or the deep
conviction that creates patriotic feeling,
and the power of self-sacrifice, in
a whole people? What collection of
men, chosen by a mob which can
never hear the names of the wisest
and best in their immediate vicinity,
can, in the actual state of education,
morality, and religion, either possess
the qualifications necessary to make
laws, or the experience required to
control and direct the executive government?
English institutions, or
what we call, in conversation, the
English constitution, is even now
something totally different from this
spawn of modern political quackery.
Yet even among men of education, at
home as well as among demagogues
and itinerant orators, we now find
some who pretend that our political
system would be improved by allowing
Gregory the poacher, and Herman the
tinker, to take an active share in
legislation, by the adoption of universal
suffrage, annual Parliaments, and
the vote by ballot. We doubt whether
a British Codex Gregorianus or Hermogenianus,
so framed, would do our
country much honour. Things are
bad enough as they are. We already
make laws faster than lawyers can
read them; and the electors care
very little about the legislative labours
of the elected. They seem contented
to know that the work has been done
in such a hurry, that half of it must
be done over again next year. The
people of England, like the Continental
constitutionalists, are beginning
to fancy that the proper function
of our legislators is to make themselves
the real executive. A true
constitutional chamber, according to
the modern theory of government,
ought to use the king’s ministers as
its own head-clerks. The evil is
manifest. Ministers know that their
masters, the chambers, have no administrative
plans, and a very defective
memory, so they themselves remain
without any settled policy. This
state of things is a vice of our age.
It is as apparent in the embryo constitutionalism
of Greece, as in the
premature decrepitude of Liberalism
in France.
Constitutional government, where
no educated and independent class
exists in the provinces, must always
turn out, as it has done in Greece, to
be injurious to the cause of liberty,
unless it be neutralised by powerful
municipal institutions, and an able
and disinterested monarch. The prominent
vices of the Greek constitution
are, universal suffrage, vote by ballot,
and a servile, ignorant, and useless
Senate, as a satire on a House of Peers.
Without entering into any general
examination of the value of similar
measures in other countries, we shall
show that they are unsuited to the
actual state of society in Greece.
Universal suffrage evidently supposes
that the people intrusted with it is
entitled to self-government; yet the
constitution of Greece, which gives
the people universal suffrage, does
not allow them any practical influence
even in the affairs of their smallest
towns and rural districts. Every
person in Greece is supposed to be
capable of choosing legislators, but
not mayors, aldermen, and provincial
councillors. The Greeks possessed
great power in the local administration
under the Turks. This power contributed
in a high degree to the preservation
of their national existence, but it
alarmed the weak-minded Bavarians;
and, under the shield of the three
protecting powers, the Greeks were
robbed of their municipal institutions
by the Regency. A system of local
oligarchies was introduced, which
prevails at present.
The election of the mayor and
aldermen is vested in an electoral
college, one half of which is composed
of the persons who pay the greatest
amount of taxes. Here is an element
of respectability; but in order to
dilute it with one of servility, a certain
number of individuals, decorated with
crosses, is admitted. Even this respectably
servile body is not allowed
to elect the mayor; it is only empowered
to name three candidates,
from which the King chooses the
individual who is to direct the interests
of the little community. The
mayor so chosen enjoys his office for
three years, and receives a good
salary from the municipal funds. Let
us now examine how this system is
worked, in conformity with constitutional
principles, in the capital of the
Hellenic kingdom. Attica, it must
be observed, sends four deputies to the
Legislative Chamber; and as these
deputies receive two hundred and
fifty drachmas a-month, and have
succeeded in making the sittings of
the Greek Chambers perpetual, the
place of deputy is worth as much as
the best estates in Greece. Now, as
these interminable sitters are chosen
by universal suffrage, but are required
to support the minister, it became
absolutely necessary to job the elections,
by means of the oligarchy holding
office in the municipalities. This
was not very difficult, for the number
of persons who can read and write
among the Albanian population of
Attica, which outnumbers the Greek,
is very small. Even among the Greek
population of the city of Athens, the
proportion of government officials and
street porters, who pay no taxes,
exceeds the number of the independent
citizens. The middle classes, and
the friends of order, are excluded from
all local influence, by being excluded
from any share in the municipal government.
A town-council party is formed,
and this party is allowed to employ
the whole local revenues of Attica,
amounting to between three and four
hundred thousand drachmas annually,
in jobbing, on condition that they
support the ministerial candidates at
the elections.
The constitutional system of political
corruption, to make universal suffrage
profitable to the court, runs
thus: The mayors are selected from
men without character or local influence.
This is brought about by
naming the third candidate mayor, he
being generally some insignificant
person, whom both the leading parties
agree to admit on the list. This individual,
when appointed, is nothing
more than a creature of the prefect or
of the court, which alone possesses the
power of protecting him in office, and
in the receipt of a good salary for
three years. The duty of the mayor
is to bribe the aldermen, by allowing
them to arrange with the municipal
councillors how to divert the revenues
of the city into their own pockets, or
that of their relations, by the creation
of places. The extent to which the
court have brought jobbing, is testified
by the shifts and tergiversation
employed to prevent the publication
of any regular accounts of the receipts
and expenditure of the municipalities;
and the municipal revenues exceed the
sum of two millions of drachmas.
Athens, with a revenue of three hundred
thousand drachmas a-year,
would be the filthiest town in Europe,
were nature not kinder to it than its
magistrates.
A single instance of how matters
are carried on in the provinces, is sufficient
to describe the whole system.
A rural commune, placed on an important
line of communication, wished
to make a good mule road over a
mountain pass. It voted the sum of
six hundred drachmas in its budget,
hoping, by its example, to produce
similar votes in the neighbouring
communes. The central government
was then invited to send an engineer,
to trace the best line of road. The
deputy of the province was a creature
of the court; he and the minister of
the interior put their heads together,
and sent down an inspector of the
road, before it was surveyed or commenced,
with an order on the commune
which had put six hundred
drachmas in its budget, to pay him a
salary of fifty drachmas monthly for
a year. This ministerial exploit put
an end to all projects of road-making
on the part of the municipalities.
The vote by ballot is converted into
a constitutional method of counteracting
any evil effects that might otherwise
arise to ministerial candidates
from the use of universal suffrage; for
man is fallible, and the Greeks felt
inclined, in some places, to oppose the
system of Coletti. We recommend
the plan adopted to the attention of
an eminent historian of ancient Greece,
who has more faith in the wood of the
ballot-box than in the moral responsibility
of the elector. When the
number of electors in a district was
about five thousand, and it was feared
that three thousand might vote against
the government candidates, and only
two thousand in their favour, the
ballot-boxes were doctored beforehand,
by having one thousand votes
placed in them before the process of
the public ballot commenced. Intimidation
was resorted to, to prevent
at least one thousand of the real
voters from attending, and it was
generally successful with the middle
classes; but, in one unlucky district,
which contained only about four thousand
voters, six thousand tickets were
found in the ballot-box. At times,
the success of the opposition was so
great, that nothing could be done at
the time of voting. The persons
charged to convey the ballot-box to
the place appointed for the scrutiny,
were, in such cases, waylaid by armed
bands, and the ballot-boxes were destroyed.
These scenes were enacted
even in Attica. We believe that, in
order to secure free institutions to any
people, it is more necessary to create
a feeling of moral responsibility, than
to protect the electors from the effects
of intimidation and fraud merely when
they exercise the franchise. National
liberty cannot be protected by a
wooden box; it must be fought for
boldly before the face of all mankind.
The vote by ballot injures the nation
more than it protects the individual;
and it can only cease to do harm in a
state of society where perfect equality
reigns among the electors themselves,
and between the electors and the
elected.
With regard to the Greek Senate,
we have little to say. In a country
where not one single element of an
aristocracy exists, and where it was
impossible to secure superior education
in the members of a chamber
appointed for life, it was evident that
one chamber would afford a better
guarantee against bribery and corruption
than two. No nobles, no independent
gentlemen, no dignified clergy,
no learned lawyers, can enter the
Greek Senate. The qualification of a
senator is a certain period of service
in official appointments, which have
been generally held by men who can
neither read nor write. The consequence
is, that the Senate is utterly
useless as a legislative body, from the
ignorance of its members; while the
nature of the materials from which it
is composed, render it a more servile
instrument, in the hands of every minister,
than the elective chamber. It
was yesterday a tool in the hands of
Coletti—to-morrow it may become
one in those of Mavrocordatos. It
would be an object of contempt, were
it not an expensive instrument of
oppression.
We have now shown what the constitution
has effected; let us turn to consider
what measures Great Britain ought
to have recommended to the attention
of the national assembly, when it was
occupied in framing this constitution.
The first great national question was
municipal reform. Unless the people
could be intrusted with the direction
of the affairs of their own districts, it
was unwise to entrust them with a
direct control over the national legislation
and expenditure. Men take a
more lively interest in the trifling details
of their own households, and in
affairs that pass under their own eyes,
and with which they are perfectly
cognisant, than they do about more
distant though more important matters.
Had the people in Greece been
allowed to administer their local affairs,
they would have drawn much
of their attention from party struggles
about which they knew very little, to
devote it to business they perfectly
understood. No guarantee for the
permanent existence of Greece, as an
independent and free state, can exist,
until the present oligarchical constitution
of the municipalities throughout
the country is destroyed. The mayors
must be annually elected by the
people, and not removable by the
minister of the interior. The accounts
of the municipal expenditure must be
published quarterly.
The next step towards giving
Greece some practical liberty is to
abolish universal suffrage. In a country
where the election of provincial
councillors is regulated by a census,
surely the same guarantee ought to be
required in the election of legislators.
In Greece, everybody is expected to
know how to read and write except
the national legislators and the King’s
ministers. Oligarchy prevails in the
municipal institutions, aristocracy in
the provincial, democracy in the legislative,
and ignorance in the executive;
and British statesmen, under
whose protection matters have arrived
at this condition, express surprise at
the anarchy they have themselves
nourished, instead of blushing at their
own negligence or political incapacity.
The vote by ballot had better
be abolished, and the senate replaced
by a deliberative council of state,
composed of men of education capable
of preparing laws. The actual representative
chamber must only be allowed
to sit for two months annually,
in order to put an end to the jobbing
in which its members have acquired
an alarming degree of experience.
The question arises, How are the
changes necessary to save Greece to
be effected? We believe that there
is not moral force in the country to
produce the necessary reforms. Greece
is now very much in the situation in
which England was during the reign
of Charles II.; she is exhausted with
civil war and party struggles. Besides,
she does not possess a body of
statesmen, or any statesman, of superior
abilities or commanding character.
In the present state of things, any
ministry that attempted to clean the
Augean stable of the administration,
would create a degree of opposition, on
the part of the court and of the officials
in Athens, that would drive him or
them from office in less than six months.
If Lord Palmerston desire to save
Greece, and secure her a place among
independent states, he must lose no
time in convoking a conference of
England, France, and Russia; and
this conference must decide on a practical
scheme of administration for the
Greek government, and impose a
budget on the ministers. The army
must be reduced; a navy of packets
must be created; roads must be
made; the taxes in kind must be
gradually commuted; and a field must
be opened for the improvement of
agriculture. If this is not done, the
first great convulsion in the East will
put an end to the monarchy created
by Lord Palmerston in 1832, and
Greece will separate into a number of
small cantons, like ancient Hellas and
modern Switzerland, or fall under the
domination, direct or indirect, of some
foreign power. The reputation of
Great Britain for political wisdom is,
throughout the East, connected with
the growth and prosperity of the
monarchy she founded: hitherto she has
gained very little honour by the share
she has taken in the affairs of Greece.
We cannot conclude without making
a few observations on Lord Palmerston’s
attempt to conquer the
islets of Cervi and Sapienza for the
Ionian republic. We never knew
Lord Palmerston undertake a worse
case, nor conduct one in a worse
manner. Whether the islands in
question belong to King Otho or Sir
H. Ward, is a matter about which
neither can feel very positive, as it
turns on the interpretation of obscure
treaties that make no mention of the
thing in dispute; and these treaties
were in part framed before either of
the states now appearing as claimants
had an existence.
The facts are, Greece is in possession
of two islands. The Ionian republic
advances a claim to them.
Greece takes no notice of this claim,
even when backed by the powerful
intervention of England. Lord Palmerston,
considering the British Government
is not treated with proper
courtesy by King Otho, gives orders
to seize the islands and deliver them
to Sir H. Ward; but, before these
orders are executed, he receives an
answer from the Greek Government,
and recalls his orders. Still he boldly
tells the world that he had given these
orders, as may be seen in the last
despatch printed in the Parliamentary
papers. Now this announcement was
quite uncalled for, and has very naturally
given great offence to the Russian
Government, for it was a gratuitous
violation of the diplomatic
courtesy due to our allies, the joint
protectors of Greece. When England
found that Greece was withholding
property supposed to belong to
the Ionian republic, it was clearly her
duty, as protector of the Ionian republic,
to lay the case before Russia,
France, and England, the three protectors
of Greece. No want of courtesy
on the part of Greece, in leaving
the communications of England unanswered,
could ever warrant England
forgetting what was due to Russia
and France, and even to herself.
England alone could not pretend to
decide whether Cervi and Sapienza
belong to Greece or to the Ionian
republic. Russia, from her earlier
connexion with the Ionian islands, and
her more intimate knowledge of Greek
and Turkish affairs, was the power
best qualified to decide the question;
and both Russia and France had a
right to take part in deciding it. Had
the imprudent order of Lord Palmerston
been unfortunately carried into
execution, it might have seriously
troubled our relations with Russia;
even as it is, the unnecessary publicity
given to the fact that such an order
had been issued, has been viewed as
an intentional slight.
These two islands, it must be remembered,
have been in the possession
of the Greek Government ever
since its formation. King Otho found
them a part of the Greek territory
when it was delivered over to him by
the protecting powers in 1833; and as
they are within cannon-shot of the
shores of Greece, he could hardly doubt
that he was their lawful sovereign.
But, at all events, we cannot understand
what object could be gained by
Great Britain taking forcible possession
of these paltry little islands, when
it was evident that the final decision
concerning their property could only
be given by Russia and France.
We hope Lord Palmerston has some
better argument to plead before these
two powers than he has communicated
to Greece in his despatch of the 9th
February last, as given in the correspondence
presented to Parliament.
If not, his case is lost. The geography
and the logic of this document are
equally defective. As a proof that
these islands belong to the Ionian state,
he cites an act of the Ionian legislature
dated in the year 1804, in which they
are enumerated as portions of the territory
of the republic. This act, however,
does not even prove that they
were ever occupied by the Ionian
government. The legislature of Great
Britain, when Lord Palmerston was a
young man, was in the habit of enumerating
France as an appendage of
the crown of England; the King of
France used to boast of himself as
King of Navarre, without Europe attaching
much importance to the enumeration
of territory in the possession
of others. The Sultan does not
trouble his head about the pretensions
of the Kings of Sardinia and Naples to
the kingdom of Jerusalem; so that
King Otho may be excused for not
paying more attention to the Ionian
claim to Cervi and Sapienza, than he
does to the Spanish claim to the
Duchy of Athens and New Patras.
Nor does Lord Palmerston strengthen
his argument when he declares, that
no island belongs to Greece except
those expressly enumerated in the
protocol of the 3d of February 1830.
If this dictum of his lordship be correct,
neither Hydra, Spetzia, Poros,
Ægina, nor Salamis, would belong to
Greece, which is manifestly absurd;
unless, indeed, Lord Palmerston supposes
these islands are included under
the name of Cyclades, which would be
still more absurd, for it is wiser to quarrel
with King Otho than with Strabo.
This imprudent attack on Greece
lays the despatch open to reply; for
though Lord Palmerston is proved to
be wrong when he says that no island,
except those expressly enumerated in
the protocol of 3d February 1830, can
belong to Greece, he is right in maintaining
that the legislative act of the
Ionian republic in 1804 cannot advance
a claim to any island not enumerated
in it. Now only one island of Cervi
is mentioned in that act, and that
island will be found laid down on the
west side of Cerigo, with the Greek
name of Elaphonisi, which is identical
with the Italian name Cervi, in
the map of Greece published by Arrowsmith,
which we believe was the
one used at the conference on the
3d February 1830. It corresponds
in size, form, and value, with the
island of Dragonera, situated on the
east side of Cerigo, which is enumerated
immediately before it in the
legislative act of 1804. The island of
Cervi on the coast of Greece does not,
therefore, belong to the Ionian republic.
THE MODERN ARGONAUTS.
539
I.
You have heard the ancient story,
How the gallant sons of Greece,
Long ago, with Jason ventured
For the fated Golden Fleece;
How they traversed distant regions,
How they trod on hostile shores;
How they vexed the hoary Ocean
With the smiting of their oars;—
Listen, then, and you shall hear another wondrous tale,
Of a second Argo steering before a prosperous gale!
II.
From the southward came a rumour,
Over sea and over land;
From the blue Ionian islands,
And the old Hellenic strand;
That the sons of Agamemnon,
To their faith no longer true,
Had confiscated the carpets
Of a black and bearded Jew!
Helen’s rape, compared to this, was but an idle toy,
Deeper guilt was that of Athens than the crime of haughty Troy.
III.
And the rumour, winged by Ate,
To the lofty chamber ran,
Where great Palmerston was sitting
In the midst of his Divan:
Like Saturnius triumphant,
In his high Olympian hall,
Unregarded by the mighty,
But detested by the small;
Overturning constitutions—setting nations by the ears,
With divers sapient plenipos, like Minto and his peers.
IV.
With his fist the proud dictator
Smote the table that it rang—
From the crystal vase before him
The blood-red wine upsprang!
“Is my sword a wreath of rushes,
Or an idle plume my pen,
That they dare to lay a finger
On the meanest of my men?
No amount of circumcision can annul the Briton’s right—
Are they mad, these lords of Athens, for I know they cannot fight?
V.
“Had the wrong been done by others,
By the cold and haughty Czar,
I had trembled ere I opened
All the thunders of my war.
But I care not for the yelping
Of these fangless curs of Greece—
Soon and sorely will I tax them
For the merchant’s plundered Fleece.
From the earth his furniture for wrath and vengeance cries—
Ho, Eddisbury! take thy pen, and straightway write to Wyse!”
VI.
Joyfully the bells are ringing
In the old Athenian town,
Gaily to Piræus harbour
Stream the merry people down;
For they see the fleet of Britain
Proudly steering to their shore,
Underneath the Christian banner
That they knew so well of yore,
When the guns at Navarino thundered o’er the sea,
And the Angel of the North proclaimed that Greece again was free.
VII.
Hark!—a signal gun—another!
On the deck a man appears
Stately as the Ocean-shaker—
“Ye Athenians, lend your ears!
Thomas Wyse am I, a herald
Come to parley with the Greek;
Palmerston hath sent me hither,
In his awful name I speak—
Ye have done a deed of folly—one that ye shall sorely rue!
Wherefore did ye lay a finger on the carpets of the Jew?
VIII.
“Don Pacifico of Malta!
Dull, indeed, were Britain’s ear,
If the wrongs of such a hero
Tamely she could choose to hear!
Don Pacifico of Malta!
Knight-commander of the Fleece—
For his sake I hurl defiance
At the haughty towns of Greece.
Look to it—For by my head! since Xerxes crossed the strait,
Ye never saw an enemy so vengeful at your gate.
IX.
“Therefore now, restore the carpets,
With a forfeit twenty-fold;
And a goodly tribute offer
Of your treasure and your gold:
Sapienza, and the islet
Cervi, ye shall likewise cede;
So the mighty gods have spoken,
Thus hath Palmerston decreed!
Ere the sunset, let an answer issue from your monarch’s lips;
In the meantime, I have orders to arrest your merchant ships.”
X.
Thus he spake, and snatched a trumpet
Swiftly from a soldier’s hand,
And therein he blew so shrilly,
That along the rocky strand
Rang the war-note, till the echoes
From the distant hills replied;
Hundred trumpets wildly wailing,
Poured their blast on every side;
And the loud and hearty shout of Britain rent the skies,
“Three cheers for noble Palmerston!—another cheer for Wyse!”
XI.
Gentles! I am very sorry
That I cannot yet relate,
Of this gallant expedition,
What has been the final fate.
Whether Athens was bombarded
For her Jew-coercing crimes,
Hath not been as yet reported
In the columns of the Times.
But the last accounts assure us of some valuable spoil:
Various coasting vessels, laden with tobacco, fruit, and oil.
XII.
Ancient chiefs! that sailed with Jason
O’er the wild and stormy waves—
Let not sounds of later triumphs
Stir you in your quiet graves!
Other Argonauts have ventured
To your old Hellenic shore,
But they will not live in story,
Like the valiant men of yore.
O! ’tis more than shame and sorrow thus to jest upon a theme
That, for Britain’s fame and glory, all would wish to be a dream!
MY PENINSULAR MEDAL. BY AN OLD PENINSULAR. — PART VI.—CHAPTER XV. — CHAPTER XVI.
542
Early in the morning I was surprised
by a visit from Mr Chesterfield.
He had received information, which
he wished to communicate. From
other British officers, then in the
town, he had learned that the state
of the country through which we had
to pass was far from satisfactory;
and one or two had even told him that,
in the course of this day’s march,
we should certainly be attacked.
Mr Chesterfield added that he had
attempted, under the circumstances,
to obtain an addition to our escort,
but without success; there were but
few troops in the place, and none
could be spared. He wished, therefore,
to know what course I thought
preferable; whether to wait till fresh
parties bound to headquarters came
up, or to proceed at once.
I was quite for proceeding. Begged
to ask, Did he know what was the
character of the road we should have
to travel?
Mr Chesterfield had inquired. It
was for the most part through an open
country. “Any villages?”—If there
were, no doubt parties of troops were
stationed in them, and their presence
would be a check on the population.
These replies confirmed my previous
views; and, as my orders were to
conform to the written route, not only
with regard to places, but with regard
to time, I gave my voice decidedly
in favour of going on. If plans against
us were in process of concoction,
delay on our part would both give
encouragement, and afford time for
the mischief to come to a head. With
a convoy like ours, holding out so
many temptations to irregular enterprise,
it seemed far better to pass
quickly on, ere reports could spread,
and an attack be organised. Admitting
that there was danger if we proceeded,
there was also danger if we
remained stationary. If we incurred
any disaster by remaining, we incurred
it by a breach of orders; if by proceeding,
we met it in the path of
duty.
Fully concurring in these views,
and agreeing that we should proceed,
Mr Chesterfield then suggested—might
it not be proper to adopt some
precautions? He thought, as soon as
we were out of the town, the men
should load.
This I fully concurred in, not only
as a defence, but as likely to keep the
men steadier, by letting them see that
we were preparing for business in
earnest. Here were two inexperienced
youths, the one raw from college, the
other from school, thrown on their
own resources, and laying their heads
together to meet an emergency, by
the most prudent measures their
united stock of wisdom could suggest.
Suffice it to say, we both spoke with
oracular gravity; and gave dignified
evidence of our perfect self-possession,
by blowing copious puffs of fragrant
smoke.
The conference between our two
high mightinesses, though, was suddenly
interrupted. Enter Corporal
Fraser, evidently in a little bit of a
flurry. The sight of Mr Chesterfield
brought him at once to a halt. He
saluted, and seemed to check himself
in something that he was going to say.
In short, he looked flushed and
anxious—not altogether himself—breathed
hard between his clenched
teeth—stood silent. The visit being
to me, Mr Chesterfield gave me a
look; so I asked the corporal what
he wanted.
“I am sorry, sir,” said he, “to be
the bearer of disagreeable intelligence.”
“Well, corporal, out with it.”
“The men, sir, I regret to say,
are in a state of beastly intoxication.”
The corporal, it was clear, wishing
to shield the men, had come to my
billet, intending the information for
my ears only. But finding Mr Chesterfield
with me, and not being at the
time in the absolute possession of his
faculties, (for, though quite unconscious
of the fact, he was himself partially
under the influence of liquor,)
he had no resource but to tell out all,
though not by any means one of those
petty officers “as likes to get poor
fellers into trouble.”
Beastly intoxication? What! at
this early hour of the day? It was a
strange circumstance, and excited
ugly apprehensions. How could they
have become so? Who made them
drunk? Under other circumstances,
I should have applied to the corporal
for an explanation forthwith;
but I saw indications, in the corporal’s
eye, that it would not be kind to
question him at the moment before an
officer—so proposed, instead, that we
should go and look for ourselves. We
went. The case was much as Fraser
had stated it. We reached a large
old house with a porte cochère, within
which was a court. On entering this
court we found the men—happily the
infantry only, for the cavalry had
quarters just by—all, with one exception,
more or less in a state of intoxication.
Some were laughing; others
were wrangling; one or two were
crying—maudlin drunk. Some were
making a show of cleaning arms and
accoutrements, with profound bows
and sagacious nods. All tried, on our
arrival, to look as sober as they could.
On any morning this would have been
a serious state of things, at the hour
of mustering to start; but now, when
we expected hostility, it was worse
than ever. Neither did I like the
look of the inhabitants. There was
no exact throng, indeed; but parties
were standing near in groups, evidently
cognisant of our present fix,
watching, and making their remarks
among themselves. In that old house,
guarded by those drunken soldiers,
were sixty mule-loads of silver and
gold! Things looked still worse,
though, when we entered the quarters.
Three or four men, who were most
overcome, had deliberately laid themselves
down again for a snooze. There
they were, wrapped up in their blankets,
stretched and snoring on the
floor; while Corporal Fraser, himself
a little “disguised,” flushed in the
face, and in a high state of indignation
and excitement, was storming
and kicking them up; and a fellow,
who found it easier to lean against
the wainscot than to stand upright,
was expostulating—“You haven’t no
business to kick a poor soger in that
’ere way.”
To this general boskiness, I have
said, there was one exception. It was
Jones. In fact, with all his faults, I
never, on any one occasion, saw Jones
overcome with liquor; which was the
more remarkable, because he got more
than any other soldier of the detachment.
His own ration—all that he
could appropriate of mine—occasional
contributions from Coosey—all he
could get from every quarter, (and he
never missed an opportunity,) all went
down his throat without visible effect.
In short, he seemed brandy-proof.
I never saw him affected, nor had he
the appearance of a hard drinker.
Observing that he looked much as
usual, while all around were looking
so different, I applied to him for an
explanation. “Why, Jones, what’s
the cause of this disgraceful scene?
How did the men get it?”
“Please, sir, the fellers is very
sorry for it, sir. Hadn’t no intentions
to get drunk $1, sir.”
“Well, but how did it happen,
man?”
“Please, sir, the jeddleham stood
treat, sir; treated ’em all, sir.”
“What gentleman?”
“Please, sir, the same as treated
me the night before last, sir: give me
a tumbler of hot punch what was all
a-fire, sir; brought it out into the
inn-yard all of a blaze, sir. Told me
the French soldiers got that twice a day,
sir. Said, if the Hinglish soldiers
had their rights, they’d get the
same, sir.”
“The night before last? What
gentleman treated you the night before
last?”
“Please, sir, it was the same jeddleham
as aast to speak to you, sir;
the jeddleham what you went into the
house to speak to him, sir.”
“Oh, that fellow! Why, you
might have seen him again yesterday.
Didn’t you notice him among the
people at the ferry?”
“Please, sir, when we come to the
ferry, I was in the rear, sir; halted
there, and remained till we turned the
hinnimy over the ford, sir. Didn’t
git a sight on him, sir. Only wish I
had, sir.”
“Well, but how comes it some of
the other men didn’t know him again?
They must have seen him yesterday,
if you didn’t.”
“Please, sir, I s’pose it’s ’cause
this morning he was dressed different,
sir. Had a large hat pulled over his
eyes, sir; and muffled up in a long
cloak, sir. Shouldn’t not have knowed
him myself, sir, only if it hadn’t not
a-been for his nose, sir.”
“Stood treat, though? How?—did
he treat the whole party?”
“Please, sir, I won’t tell you no lie,
sir. Jest after the fellers turned out
in the morning, sir—jest as I was a-washing
my face in this ’ere horse
trough, sir—there come along a man
with a couple of barrils, sir; which
the barrils was slung on a-top of a
donkey, sir. So he took and stopped
the donkey close to that ’ere gateway,
sir, which some of the fellers was
standing at it, sir. So they knowed
at once it was wine, sir—in course
they did, by the look on it, sir—so
they got a-bargaining with him for a
drink, sir. So, jest as they was a-bargaining
come along that ’ere Nosey,
sir; which, as soon as he see the
fellers a-talking to the man what belonged
to the donkey, sir, he looked
very pleasant, and stopped and spoke
to him, sir. Then he spoke to the
fellers, sir, and told ’em they might
drink as much as they pleased, sir;
might drink it all, if they liked, sir;
and he’d stand it, sir.”
“Did he speak English, then?”
“Yes, he did, sir; sitch Hinglish as
they speaks here, sir; not sitch as you
and I speaks, sir. I won’t tell you no
lie, sir.”
The case was too clear. Hookey
was still on our traces. Disappointed
in his two previous attempts to turn
us from our route, he meant to keep
near us, watch his opportunity, and
act accordingly. Making the men
drunk just when we were about to
start on a dangerous part of the road,
was as unquestionably part of some
more extensive plot as it was palpably
Hookey’s doing. I briefly
stated the matter to Mr Chesterfield,
adding, “We shall see that fellow
again to-day.”
“If he comes once more within the
range of a firelock,” said Mr Chesterfield,
“we must not let him get off so
easily.”
Meanwhile, the immediate question
was a practical one: What course was
best, under existing circumstances?
In spite of the state of the men, I was
still for proceeding.
“Very well,” said Mr Chesterfield;
“then let the packing commence. We
will take all the infantry who are fit
to march when the mules are loaded,
and go on with them and the cavalry.
Such as are too bad must remain behind,
and come up afterwards with
other parties, as they can.”
Mr Chesterfield then went to see
after his own men; the mules arrived,
and the muleteers began loading.
Jones stepped up to me: he had
apparently overheard our conversation.
“Please, sir, none of the fellers
won’t not stay behind, sir.”
“How do you know?”
“’Cause, sir, when the mules is
ready, they’ll be ready, sir.”
“Ready? How ready, if they ’re
beastly drunk?”
“Please, sir, they won’t be beastly
by that time, sir.”
“How can you tell that?”
“Please, sir, ’cause I knows they
won’t, sir; ’cause it’s only that ’ere
wine, sir. Please, sir, that ’ere hasn’t
not got no varchy in it, like the sperrits
has, sir. ’Cause, please, sir, when a
feller gets drunk on sperrits, sir, they
makes him rale drunk, sir; but that
’ere wine only jest makes him drunkish-like,
sir; ’cause it’s only jest for a
time, sir, and then it goes off again,
sir; ’cause there’s no good in it, sir,
if you drink a butt of it, sir. Hope no
offence, sir.”
“Common country wine, was it?”
“Please, sir, it was new wine,
sweetish-like, sir. That’s what did
it, sir. Sitch new wine gits into a
feller’s headpiece at once, sir; makes
him silly drunk directly instant, sir;
but then he soon gits sober agin,
sir. Consickvent, I considers the fellers
will all be sober agin in an hour
or two, sir; and then they’ll be able
to fall in, sir. ’Cause I knowed it
was new, sir; ’cause it sparkled like
cider do when it’s drawed frish from
the barril, sir.”
Jones’s prognosis, though not very
clearly expressed, was verified by the
result. Ere the loading was completed,
all the men had become either
sober or nearly so. Even those who
had been most affected fell in, and
mustered with the rest; and though
our rank and file displayed some set
and gummy eyes, only two or three
of the worst betrayed the disaster by
their gait. Hookey had thus outwitted
himself. By dosing the men
with new wine, (which, as all persons
acquainted with the wine countries are
well aware, flies at once to the head,
even if taken moderately,) he had,
indeed, succeeded in making them
drunk at once; but not in making
them drunk for a continuance. “Let
alone it’s new,” said Jones, “it
isn’t no wine, sitch as the fellers gits,
as would make ’em rale drunk;
nayther Spanish wine, nor yit Frinch
wine, except it’s the jinny-wine.”
The men having somehow discovered
that they were likely to be put
on their mettle during the day’s
march, were all, in appearance, truly
sorry for what had occurred. They
became aware, through Jones, of
Hookey’s real character; saw through
his contrivance to make them all
drunk; and, feeling that they had
been in a measure his dupes, were
savage at the artifice, and burned for
an opportunity to retrieve their character
in the course of the day. Mr
Chesterfield now returned: he glanced
at the men, and afterwards took an
opportunity of speaking to me.
“That fellow with the nose,” said
he, “according to your account of
him, must be a dangerous character.
Should not steps be taken for his
apprehension?”
“If you like, I will go to the Mairie,
and make inquiries about him.”
“I fear,” said he, “you will not be
very cordially seconded in that quarter,
judging, at least, from my own
last night’s experience, when I applied
for billets. However, it can do no
harm.”
“Well, then, the sooner I go the better.
I will take with me the Spanish
Capataz. As soon as we have gone in,
be so kind as to keep an eye on the entrance.
If Señor Roque puts his head
out, send me three or four dismounted
dragoons. We must see if we can’t
teach those fellows good manners.”
I took with me Señor Roque, and
explained to him, by the way, what I
wished him to do. If, after we entered
the bureau of the Mairie, I gave him a
look, he was to go down to the door,
and bring up the dragoons.
We entered; and, as at a previous
interview the night before, found three
gentlemen busily employed in writing,
each at his desk. The interval had
wrought no improvement in their
manners. When I saluted them,
neither of the three took the least
notice—all went on writing. I addressed
the head man of the party.
“I have the honour of waiting on
you, Monsieur, for the purpose of soliciting
your co-operation.”—Still he
writes. Wait awhile. Try again.
“I must soon be leaving this place,
Monsieur, and have duties which will
occupy me in the interval. May I
claim a moment’s attention?”—Scribble,
scribble, scribble.
One or two similar attempts were
similarly met. I then gave friend
Roque the concerted look; and he,
nothing loath, went off to fetch the
dragoons. Meanwhile, no seat having
been offered me, I took one, and remained
quiet. The three official gentlemen,
though so dreadfully busy,
just before, that they could not notice
my application, now began jabbering
amongst themselves upon some indifferent
topic, as if no one else had been
in the room. When a Frenchman
really wishes to treat you with insolence,
I must say he has a neat, quiet
way of doing it, which no other people
on earth can equal. An Englishman,
I admit, can beat him in vulgarity;
but for $1 of execution, there is
no intentional rudeness like the rudeness
of a Frenchman.
Presently was heard on the stairs
a stumping—ha!—a hoof-like tread!—the
tramp of heavy feet! With it
ascended the clatter of accoutrements!
Four scabbards were mounting the
stairs, each scabbard marking each
step by a bang! The three officials
started—exchanged looks—wrote on
in silence with redoubled energy,
while their faces twitched.
The door opened! Four big fellows
entered the bureau, with clattering
accoutrements and resounding steps.
Señor Roque, his face burnished with
exultation—for he hated the French—followed,
and closed the door. The
bold dragoons ranged themselves in
line, with their backs to the wall.
Nay, more: their four right hands,
probably by a hint from the Capataz,
moved simultaneously towards their
left sides; four enormous swords
leaped from their scabbards, flashed
in the air, and slumbered on the
bearers’ shoulders. The writing was
now intense.
The display of arms in such a place,
though, might compromise us with
our own authorities. I made a sign,
and the swords were sheathed.
Having so often spoken in vain, I
was determined that the civic dignities
should speak first. I therefore quietly
took out a cigar. Quick as lightning,
my friend the Capataz whipped out
his smoking gear, and went to work
with flint, steel, and junk. At the
first click, my three polite entertainers
almost jumped from their stools.
The twinkle of the jolly old Spaniard’s
eye, as he handed me a light, was
worth a dollar any day. The four
dragoons, much to their credit, maintained
the most perfect gravity
throughout. I lit, and blew a cloud.
The panic of the three writers increased.
They were evidently telegraphing.
At length the chief turned
round on his seat, and, with alarm
and courtesy comically mingled in his
visage, begged to be informed in what
way he could be of service to me.
“I interrupt you, Monsieur. Pray,
finish the business you have in hand.”
“Monsieur, I have no business so
cherished as to expedite yours.”
I then told my object—that there
had been in the place a suspicious
sujet, whom I described. Should he
again make his appearance, he must
be apprehended tout-de-suite, and kept
in safe custody, till he was surrendered
to the normal authorities. “Messieurs,
has he presented himself here?”
Three voices answered simultaneously—“Yes”—“No”—“Yes.”
“Do you know anything of him?”
“He is an Englishman—a courier
from Madrid.”—“He bears despatches
to the British headquarters.”—“Nothing
whatever.”
“He is neither an Englishman nor
a courier; consequently, he must be
provided with a passport. Has he
presented it HERE?”
“Viewing him as attached to the
British service, we did not consider it
our affair.”
“Where is he now?”
“He is not here.”—“He didn’t
state his intended route.”—“He has
left this place.”
“By what route?”
“We don’t know.”—“He went,
within the last hour, towards St
Sever.”
“Is that an ascertained fact?”
“Yes, Monsieur, yes,” they all answered;
“he is gone in the direction
of St Sever.”
“If, Messieurs, what you have now
stated should prove correct, and if I
find that you have told me all you
know, I trust I shall not feel it necessary
to report the matter to our commander-in-chief.”
These gentlemen, I felt, could have
told me more, had they chosen; and
I, with time at my command, could
have extracted more. But in our case
it was touch and go. We could not,
with such a charge, stop to pursue
investigations. So I took my leave,
deeming it, at any rate, something to
have ascertained that friend Hookey,
in accordance with my anticipations,
though not in accordance with his own
statements, had preceded us by the
route which we were so soon to
follow.
The civic trio were as courteous at
my departure as they were rude at my
entry. First stumped out the cavalry—who
had really done the business;
then followed the old unctuous Capataz;
and I, with a horizontal tripartite
bow, closed up the rear. Ere I
had fairly quitted the room, the three
were all at work again, intently scribbling.
The “dressing” of a $1,
with formal and full details of
the whole transaction, was probably
their occupation for the rest of the
morning. I was sorry that we had
compromised ourselves by the exhibition
of cold steel. But, under all
the circumstances, I felt little apprehension,
to borrow an expression from
Jones, of their “telling that ’ere to
my Lord Valentine.”
The mules were loaded, the men
fell in; and, though some of them
were still a little the worse for the
disaster of the morning, we were quite
in a condition to lick any Frenchmen
that might come across us, and made
a very respectable march of it to the
outskirts of the town. There we were
again joined by Pledget and Gingham;
and shortly after, Fraser, by Mr
Chesterfield’s direction, made the infantry
load, and saw that each had a
supply of cartridges—a process which
caused the muleteers to look a little
queer. We then proceeded on our
march.
Passing through an open country,
Mr Pledget and Mr Chesterfield rode
on side by side in conversation, at the
head of the line; while Gingham and
I followed close, in similar guise.
Suddenly was heard, in the rear, the
crack of a musket! A ball whistled
close over our heads, and struck the
road, a few yards before us. Mr
Chesterfield immediately called a halt
of the whole party; and he and I proceeded
to the rear. As we were
riding back, Corporal Fraser came
running forward to meet us, and soon
explained. Our Yorkshire lad, it appeared,
had been larking with another
soldier, one of those whose early sobriety
the wine had most disturbed,
and had got him into a scrape. The
result was, that the musket of the
half-tipsy soldier had gone off, and
had so nearly done execution amongst
us in front. It was evident our infantry
were not yet in a state to be
trusted with loaded arms; it wouldn’t
do. Mr Chesterfield gave directions
at once, that they should all draw
their charges. And as our route for
some distance appeared perfectly level
and open, so as to afford no cover for
a sudden attack, (it was that sort of
country so common in France, cultivated
to the road-side, but totally
bare of hedges, copse, or trees,) it
was settled that they should not load
again till circumstances rendered it
necessary. The man whose musket
had caused the alarm looked stupid
and bewildered—could give no explanation,
but that “it went off.” I
observed, however, that Mr Chesterfield
quietly spoke a few words to the
Yorkshireman. What they were, I
did not hear; but they certainly had
the effect of making that worthy a
better-behaved, though not a merrier
man, during the rest of our march.
Finding no foe to fight withal, we
began to suspect that Mr Chesterfield,
as a new-comer, had been hoaxed, in
our last halting-place, by some military
wag; and Gingham and I fell
into a long conversation, which he
commenced by reminding me of our
arrangement to campaign together,
entered into a year before, at Falmouth.
All obstacles, he said, were
removed; he hoped, therefore, the
plan would now be carried out. To
this I readily consented; the advantages,
indeed, were all on my side.
Gingham then, in his own way, introduced
a discussion respecting his plans
and mine. Be it however premised,
we had dined together the night before;
and I had shown him some
methods—more expeditious than those
in common use, which were the only
ones he knew—of reducing one denomination
of coin to another: $1,
dollars to pounds sterling, pounds
sterling to francs, &c. He expressed,
as before, his high gratification; and
begged my MS. calculations “in the
strictest confidence,” depositing them
in the recesses of his writing-desk.
He now, as we were riding along,
commenced an important, and, on his
part, highly diplomatic conference,
by a friendly examination as to the
nature of my official duties at Lisbon.
I described them, as I have described
them to the reader a few chapters
back.
“Then, in fact,” said Gingham,
“your last year has been employed
to as good purpose as it could have
been in any London counting-house.”
(That was Gingham’s standard.)
“You have had the keeping of a distinct
account, and that in all its parts,
from the items to the account current.
Of course, it occupied your whole
time.”
“Not the whole,” said I. “There
was some to spare, for which I had
other employment.”
“Indeed!” said Gingham, with interest.
“Will you, Mr Y—, as a particular
favour, permit me—confidentially
of course—to make an inquiry?”
“Make any inquiry you like: I
shall feel pleasure in answering it.”
“Would you, then,” said Gingham,
“have the kindness to inform me—that
is, unless you feel it a violation
of official confidence—what were your
other duties?”
“No violation whatever. I kept
the letter-books; managed the correspondence:
not the whole correspondence
of the department, but that of
the branch I belonged to—the account
office.”
“Your duty, then,” said he, “was
to arrange and enter all letters received,
and to keep copies of all letters
sent?”
“Sometimes to copy, sometimes to
make the draughts. A man soon gets
into the way, you know.”
“One entire account,” said Gingham,
speaking to himself, “and one
whole branch of correspondence!
What an excellent introduction!”
Not understanding in what sense he
used the word “introduction,” I made
no reply.
“Of course,” he proceeded, “the
correspondence was in English?”
“Almost exclusively. I should
scarcely feel equal to any other, except
perhaps Portuguese.”
“Might I not,” said Gingham, “add
Spanish and French?”
“Well, if I get a little polishing,
perhaps you might. Italian I hope to
be able to add ere long; and, in due
time, German.”
Gingham now turned half round in
his saddle, and addressed me with
great gravity. “Mr Y—, my dear
sir, I venture, as a friend, to offer one
suggestion. If a person, not older
than yourself, applied for an engagement
in the corresponding line, I
would say to him—that is, in the
strictest confidence, speaking as a
friend—‘Say only three languages;
wouldn’t advise you to say more.’
The principal, however unjustly, might
suspect—excuse me, I speak candidly—might
suspect a little romancing.
In short, if a person under eight-and-twenty
or thirty said five languages,
it might prevent an engagement.”
Gingham, I should observe, talked
just as he always did. There was
still the touch of mannerism, the quiet
earnestness blended with courtesy. I
never viewed any man with more unfeigned
respect and esteem; and yet
there were moments, in the course of
our present conversation, when I could
scarcely refrain from laughing in his
face. True, I was one year farther
removed from boyhood than when our
acquaintance commenced; and more
than one incident had taught me, in
the interval, the necessity of respecting
“time, place, and circumstances.”
But the trial was great; a gravity
that even Liston could not shake,
would have been shaken by Gingham.
Still there was his comical solemnity.
Still there was his politeness, touched
off with formality. Still there were
his green barnacles, and his two little
winky-pinky eyes. Still, still there
was his irresistible nose. Stand everything
else, I would defy you to stand
that. Great, please to observe, was
the difference between Gingham’s nose
and Hookey’s, though both arrested
the beholder. When Hookey and
Gingham met on board the packet,
each observed of the other that he
had a very odd nose. The first meeting
of the two noses, and the look
exchanged by the two wearers, beat
anything in Molière—so much more
comical is nature than fancy. Hookey’s,
unquestionably the most marked feature
of a very marked countenance,
did nevertheless so far maintain the
unities, that it perfectly harmonised
with the rest of his physiognomy. It
was an eagle’s beak, and his whole
face was aquiline. Gingham’s, on the
contrary, was conspicuous by contrast.
It had no appearance of belonging to
his face. You might fancy him one
of the triumphs of Talicotius—a man
(on which subject see Lavater) with
a false nose. Neither broad nor massive,
yet prominent and conspicuous,
it was slightly crooked, flattened on
one side; as if, when a baby, he had
slept too much on his right cheek, and
his nose, from its thinness, had got
bent towards his left. This nose, I
say, from its peculiar expression, or
rather want of expression, appeared
no part or parcel of the face in which it
stood. And, what was unfortunate,
its extraneous appearance was most
marked when Gingham was most in
earnest; so that it provoked you to
laugh just at the time when a man is
least disposed to be laughed at.
Well, Gingham having thus accomplished
his first object, by ascertaining
all that he wished to ascertain
concerning myself, now went on, in
the second place, to develop his own
plans.
“You are, I believe,” said he, “to
a certain extent aware of the scheme
which brought me out from England.
By the public prints, and still more by
my private correspondence, I am now
led to conclude that Napoleon’s day
is near its close, and that the war will
soon be terminated. In that event,
my plan falls to the ground. But
should we carry on the war here
another twelvemonth, I shall have
time to try it; and, if we go on permanently,
I mean to carry it out.”
“I have some general idea of your
plan, and that is all. You wish to
meet the monetary difficulties connected
with the operations of our
army, by a method which you have
concocted; and which you intend to
start, for self and friends, as a private
speculation. Don’t see how you can
make a beginning: where’s the opening?”
“An opening is afforded by the
necessity of the case,” replied he;
“which necessity my plan will
meet.”
“Don’t see how. Look here; the
difficulty is just this: Here are certain
headquarters transactions, which
require ready money; and that ready
money must be current coin. Credit
will not do; bank notes will not
answer the purpose; no, nor yet bills,
nor any kind of available security.
It must be specie, minted gold and
silver, hard cash. For example, the
troops have hitherto been usually
paid in dollars. When we have got
dollars in the military chest, the
troops can be paid; when our dollars
are gone, they must wait till we get
more. And though we had power to
draw at will on the British treasury,
for three months’ pay to the whole
army, not a stiver can the army
receive till we have more dollars.”
“That’s just it,” said Gingham;
“and I beg to ask, is such a state
of things desirable? The efficiency of
our army depends, not on the solvency
of our Government, but upon the
activity of money-dealers in raking
up specie in the four quarters of
the globe. That is the state of
things which my plan proposes to
remedy.”
“Do that, and you will effect a
great object. The mode, though, is
quite beyond me.”
“I mean to do it, sir,” said Gingham,
almost sternly, (for the little man,
as he sat on his splendid horse,
swelled with the grandeur of his conceptions)—“I
mean to do it, sir, by a
twofold method: not by two independent
methods, operating simultaneously;
but by the united operation
of two systems combined in one.”
His eyes looked full in mine; but his
nose pointed at Pledget, who was
riding before. I didn’t laugh—in
face at least I didn’t—though suddenly
seized with a dreadful twitching
of the intercostal muscles. “I
shall effect my object, sir, partly by
paper, partly by hard cash. I shall issue
notes payable at sight; and I shall
get all the dollars I can into my own
keeping. You, when you want dollars
to pay the troops, come to me. I, on
receiving what I deem an equivalent,
let you have them. What will be the
result? Instead of requiring a fresh
supply of dollars from the coast every
time you give the soldiers their pay,
you will pay them with the same dollars
twice over, nay, over and over
again.”
“Why, that’s a bank! You will be
banker to the British army!”
“Exactly,” said Gingham, subsiding
all at once into his ordinary style
of speech: “I mean to establish a
headquarters bank. Suggest a title.”
“Suppose,” said I, “as of course
you will move with the army, you
borrow a suggestion from the military
hospitals of the French, and call it
“The Ambulatory Bank.” No, that
title doesn’t go well. Let me see. A
good title requires time and consideration.”
“To be candid, sir,” said Gingham,
“you need not trouble yourself: the
title is already decided. I won’t tell
it, I’ll show it you. Have the kindness
to draw up by the road-side.”
We halted, the convoy passed, the
cart came on in the rear, and was
stopped by Gingham. He then dismounted,
gave the bridle to Coosey,
stepped up into the cart, opened the
tarpaulin at its back, raised a lid, and
exhibited a green baize frame fitting
into the top of a box, which frame
contained a large and splendid brass
plate.
“It wouldn’t exactly do,” said
Gingham, “to borrow this title at
home. Here, though, I mean to
make free with it.”
In bold, broad letters, excavated
in the burnished brass, I read
“THE BANK OF ENGLAND.”
Really the largeness of Gingham’s
plans was too much for my limited
capacities. We rode forward again to
the head of the column; and I, for a
while, rode on in silence, digesting.
At length, one idea leading to another,
I ventured to say something about
“authority—concurrence.”
Gingham, big with his scheme, was
now like a gladiator prepared for
every thrust. “At home,” said he,
“I have all the concurrence, all the
authority I need, with many good
wishes to boot; and, as to pecuniary
support, I can have whatever amount
is required. All that I settled before
I left Falmouth, or have since
arranged by correspondence. Here
I ask for countenance only so far as
my plan is found, on trial, to aid the
public service. Let that once become
manifest, and I doubt not we shall
find all the favour we want.”
“Only sorry your plan was not
thought of before. It might have
spared our Commander much anxiety,
and our soldiers many privations.”
Swelling with the plenitude of his
anticipations, Gingham began to dogmatise.
“In London,” said he,
“credit is equivalent to cash. Here,
at headquarters, the case is different.
In London, so long as my
banker will honour my cheques, I have
cash at command. Here, I may
possess unlimited power to draw
bills, yet not be able to raise a rap.
What makes the difference?”
“Here, your resource is at a distance;
there, your banker is close at
hand.” I was more disposed, though,
to chew upon Gingham’s ideas than
to discuss them, and we again rode
on in silence. At length I bolted
out a difficulty.
“Well, we make an issue in cash—say
a hundred thousand dollars, for
the pay of the troops. These dollars
are distributed, and spent; the whole
sum evaporates. How do you get
them together again, for a second
payment?”
“I don’t expect to get them all,”
said Gingham, scornfully. “But
suppose I can get a part of them, say
half. That, I think, I shall manage;
for, observe, ten dollars are quite as
many as you can carry about your
person without annoyance. Undoubtedly,
then, many individuals,
receiving a payment in dollars, will
be glad enough to lodge them in a
bank, when there’s a bank at hand.
And when I have issued my paper,
payable at demand, many, I make no
question, will much rather take it,
than burden themselves with a load
of specie.”
The reasonableness of Gingham’s
expectations was fully borne out, by
scenes which I afterwards witnessed,
when accompanying the military
chest, as it moved from place to place
with the headquarters of the British
army. A gentleman, say a Frenchman
or a Spaniard, has a claim for
payment, on account of provisions,
forage, or other necessaries, supplied
for the service of the troops—the
amount, suppose, ten thousand dollars.
After long following headquarters
from place to place, till he is
far distant from his own home, he has
at length established his claim: it’s all
right, he has got a written order for
payment, and enters our office elated,
bearing it between his finger and
thumb, eager to receive the cash.
The cashier takes the bill, points to
five deal boxes, each containing two
thousand dollars, and tells him,
“There’s the money.” I have seen a
man, under such circumstances,
knocked down in a moment, perfectly
dumfounded. He has not brought a
horse and cart, and every available
conveyance has been impressed by the
troops. One of the five boxes is as
much as a man can carry; two are a
load for a mule. If he has a lodging
in the place, he possesses no means
even of taken them there; but probably
he has none—the whole town
is full of soldiers. But to-morrow it
will be worse: the army will have
swept on; headquarters will be three
or four leagues in advance; and the
troops will be succeeded by stragglers,
camp-followers, marauders, and all
the lawless tribe that close up the rear
of an advancing host. Poor man!
what an alteration in his looks! He
sees, in an instant, the full amount
of his difficulties. Two minutes ago,
he was dying to realise; now, he
has got the cash, and doesn’t know
what to do with it. I remember an
instance when an acquaintance of
mine, a Frenchman, came to receive
five thousand dollars, which, with the
aid of an attendant, he removed from
the office. Presently he reappeared
at the door, caught my eye, intimated
by bows and simpers his request
for a private interview. It was
easy to guess the subject of his communication,
but I followed him out.
He had got his five bags in a cowhouse.
His home was distant a two
days’ journey. How was he to get
them there? Could he have gold
instead of silver? Would gladly
make any sacrifice in the way of $1.
Couldn’t I $1 it?—How he
managed at last, I never learned—whether
he got his dollars to a place
of safety, or was robbed and murdered
on the road. Sometimes the
claimants would come eagerly demanding
their money, and, the next
moment, would most earnestly entreat
permission to leave it in our
keeping. If a man so circumstanced,
instead of hard dollars, could have
had paper securing him cash at demand,
at a time more convenient for
receiving it—in short, Gingham’s
plan just meets a case like this. And
Gingham, who knew headquarters
well, especially in respect to financial
details and the attendant difficulties,
had devised his scheme as a practical
remedy. The claimant gives his bill
to Gingham, and takes Gingham’s
bank notes, or, if he prefers it, part
notes and part specie. Gingham, at
his own convenience, gets the official
dollars on the bill. Then comes the
other advantage. So much hard
cash as has not been paid away to
the claimant remains at headquarters,
available, by monetary arrangements
with the authorities, for the payment
of the troops, or for any other headquarters
purposes. What an improvement
from the state of things when
cash was so low, that, the commander-in-chief
wishing to communicate with
a distant point, it was necessary to
raise a private loan for the expenses
of the courier!
In short, twenty practical difficulties
occurred to my mind, all which Gingham
took off, as fast as I started them.
“After all,” said he, “the only real
difficulty will be this: that whereas
now, at headquarters, there sometimes
is not a dollar disposable for
public purposes, we shall then, especially
if the army is on the move, have
more dollars than we know what to
do with.” His plan, indeed, contemplated
a large concern, for the cash
transactions of headquarters were
immense; but it was clear he had
viewed the scheme in every light,
and was prepared to carry it out.
No question, Gingham would have
made a good thing of it, both for
himself and for his backers in London.
Yet it was a concern which Government
could not undertake; and which,
if Government had undertaken it,
would have infallibly broken down.
Private enterprise alone could prosperously
conduct the scheme.
Gingham had laid out our conference
in three parts, and two were now
disposed of. First, he had ascertained
the progress of my financial education
in the past year; secondly, he had
developed his own plans; but there
yet remained the third topic of discussion,
into which he now led with
all his usual elegance, straightforwardness,
and good feeling. The
long and the short of it was this,—he
had two gentlemen in London,
ready to come out to Bordeaux
whenever he commenced operations;
they would arrive, like a letter, by
return of post; but there was a question
respecting myself. Did I feel so
far interested in his plan that I might
be willing, on due reflection, to relinquish
my actual appointment, and
work with him? He asked it “in the
strictest confidence,” and begged me
to consider all that now passed “as
merely conversation.”
“Have the kindness to excuse me
for a few moments. I’ll presently
tell you just exactly my own prospects
and plans, and then we’ll talk the
matter over. In the mean time, accept
my best thanks for this proof of
confidence.”
While listening with the profoundest
attention to Gingham, I had,
it must be confessed, been taking a
look, from time to time, at the country
round. Hitherto our route had been
across an open level, and we had
always seen the road before us. Now,
first, we reached a spot were we could
not discern what was in front. The
table-land, over which we had been
marching, terminated in a brow or
declivity. The road dipped, and disappeared;
where it led us there was
no perceiving. The road itself also
became hollow—that is, it descended
between two high banks, and these
were covered with underwood. This
was the part of our way on which we
were now about to enter.
Just at this moment, while I was
debating with myself whether we
ought to go on without a little exploration,
Jones stepped up to me
rather hastily. “Please, sir,” said
he, “I’m a-thinking Nanny siz something
as we doesn’t see.” I should
mention that, in the course of our
march, when we approached any
eminence that afforded a view of the
road and country in front, Nanny
would trot off from the party, run to
the summit, and make her observations—in
short, see all that was to be
seen. Goats, if you observe, never,
unless compelled, venture on new
ground, till they have first halted, and
taken a view of it. Even sheep, if
not over-driven, will not turn down a
lane, till they have stopped and turned
their heads, for the purpose of
taking a look with $1 eyes. Cows,
on the contrary, look and advance at
the same time; and your nag, contenting
himself with a $1 view,
appears to advance without looking
at all. Your dog, who has more
sense than all the others put together,
when you come to a place where the
road forks—dear old Burruff!—$1. Well, Nanny, in the
present instance, had done as she
always did. The ground rose to our
left, and the elevation $1 the
valley in front. On that elevation
Nanny was now standing, and Jones’s
observation was evidently correct. She
saw something, or somebody, unseen
by us. There she stood—not, though,
as on previous occasions, quietly taking
a survey of the road before us:
her tail, the “upward curl” of which
was more than perpendicular—$1—from
time to time vibrated
rapidly. She uttered, at intervals,
a sharp, anxious bleat, and ever and
anon stamped with a movement so
quick, the eye could scarce discern it.
“What d’ye think, then, she sees
down there?” said I to Jones—“other
goats?”
“Please, sir,” said Jones, “I’m
a-thinking it’s not goats, sir; ’cause
then she wouldn’t stop up there, sir.
Please, sir, she’d come back at once,
and keep close, sir; ’cause she knows
as how I’d protect her varchy, sir;
’cause for fear the Billies should make
too free, sir; ’cause, when the Nannies
is in milk, sir, they doesn’t not
pemit hinnersint libbities, sir.”
Nanny now adopted a new style of
attitude—rearing, as when at play,
with arched neck and combative front,
still, at times, subsiding into the quadruped;
now bleating, now stamping,
now wagging her tail with intense
vivacity; then walking back, stamping
again, advancing; gazing all the while
on the low ground in front. “If
Nanny takes a view, why shouldn’t
Sancho?” I cantered up, and speedily
cantered down again. “Mr Chesterfield,
I think, sir, we had better
halt.”
Indeed there was reason. In front
was the enemy, drawn up to receive
us, in military array. The road, I
must explain, led down to a lower
level. Just at the bottom, another
road crossed it; and, where the two
roads cut, they spread out round a
large pond. About this pond, but
principally in advance of it, appeared
a large concourse of the rural population.
“Tout Français est soldat.”
I never felt the force of the phrase as
I did at that moment. They were
armed, and stood in line; their number
formidable, their aspect decidedly
pugnacious. Oh, you plucky villains!
won’t we be down upon you presently?
I stated to Mr Chesterfield what
I had seen, and he immediately halted
our whole party. “If you will ride
up with me,” said I, “you may see
the whole lot of them.”
I returned to Nanny’s look-out
post, but Mr Chesterfield did not follow.
Had I known what he was
about to do, I should certainly have
remonstrated. He chose to take a
nearer look at the enemy, and for that
purpose rode forward alone. On the
eminence on which I stood, I heard
the rattle of his horse’s hoofs in the
hollow way; and presently I saw him
emerge below, at its further extremity.
He then reined in his horse,
and sat viewing the foe, who greeted
his appearance with shouts and yells.
Having quietly made his observations,
he turned, and began to come back at
a walk. As he withdrew, three or
four shots were fired after him from
below, but without effect. After he
again disappeared in the hollow road,
though, on his way to rejoin us, I
heard, with great uneasiness, other
shots fired—the report much nearer.
They were evidently from rascals
ambushed in the underwood of the
two banks, between which he was
passing. I rejoined the convoy just
as he rode up. His look was perfectly
calm and self-possessed, but
pale as ashes. He held the bridle in
his right hand, while his left hung
helpless at his side. Pledget at once
tumbled off his mule, stepped up, and
addressed him with a tone and aspect
of unfeigned concern—“Not serious,
sir, I hope?”
“Oh, nothing,” said he, his manner
a little hurried; “a mere graze—nothing.
Corporal Fraser, the infantry
must load immediately. Let them
fix bayonets, though. We must begin
by clearing those two banks.”
Scarcely were the words out of his
lips, when his face became ghastly
like death, his eyes half closed, his
mouth half opened. His head drooped;
and speechless, almost fainting,
he sank down gradually from his
saddle into Fraser’s arms. The corporal
carried him to the road-side—why,
he was but a boy—and seated, or
rather laid him upon the bank. Pledget
was promptly in attendance, got
off the patient’s coat, and examined
the wounded arm, amidst the clatter
of fixing bayonets and ramming down
cartridges. “Oh, ain’t we going at
it in yarnest, though?” said Jones.
“The system,” said Pledget, with
all his usual deliberation—“the system
has received a severe shock; that
is the cause of these alarming symptoms—they
will not last. So it often
happens with gunshot wounds. The
wound itself is not dangerous. The
ball has gone clean through the arm,
and at short distance too, but without
fracturing the bone or injuring any
important vessel.”
Oh, had you seen that lad languishing
on the sod, with the black blood
trickling from two holes at once, and
joining in a sluggish stream which
went rippling down his arm, and
dripped into the grass! I don’t know
what he thought of; I thought of his
mother. Enough: the foe is in
front.
But affairs now assumed a new
phase. While I was anxiously surveying
our wounded commander, Corporal
Eraser stepped up to me, saluting
in due form, à la militaire! He
stood waiting and looking at me, as if
he expected to receive directions.
The nature of the position in which
I was so unexpectedly placed, broke
upon me in a moment. I’ll tell you
just everything, exactly as it occurred.
Mr Chesterfield was $1.
Pledget, in discharge of his professional
duty, was wholly occupied in
attending upon him. The corporal,
and, it was clear, the men also, looked
to me for direction in our present fix.
Gingham, when the corporal approached
me, backed his horse. From
many persons such an action might
have gone for nothing. But Gingham
had a reason for all he did; and, from
him, it seemed to say, “Now, Mr
Y—, take the management of this
little business, and go through with it.
Don’t you see, my dear sir? It has
devolved upon you.”
“The men are ready, sir,” said
Corporal Fraser; “shall we now
proceed to clear the banks?”
It was evident I must direct, or
nothing could be done. “Wait a
minute, Fraser.”
I beckoned to the cavalry sergeant,
and desired him to place a few of his
men, with swords drawn, in the rear
of the convoy, giving them strict directions
to suffer no one to fall behind,
mule or muleteer. He was then to
divide the rest of our mounted force
into two equal parties, under his two
corporals, who, when the infantry advanced,
were to descend along the top
of the banks, and halt at its extremity.
I then gave the word to Corporal
Fraser to move forward at once
with the infantry, and clear the underwood,
but to halt where the cavalry
halted, and by no means to go beyond.
“Then, to prevent that,” said the
corporal, “I will go first myself, sir.”
He dashed forward, and the infantry
followed, with a shout. Thus we
moved down to the extremity of the
hollow road. The infantry led the way,
gallantly headed by General Fraser,
and dislodged some ten or a dozen
fellows from the banks, who bolted
successively, and cut away, making
good their retreat to their own party
below. This movement was not
effected without some firing on both
sides, but nobody was hurt on either.
The cavalry, supporting the infantry,
walked quietly down the two edges of
the cutting: and I put the convoy in
motion to follow. Mr Chesterfield
now rallied for a few moments, and
was eager to remount. But the faintness
returned; it was evident he
could neither ride nor walk; so he
was brought down in Gingham’s cart,
with every attention both from Gingham
and Pledget.
While we were thus moving down
through the hollow, I heard, close behind,
an angry shout from our dragoons
on the banks above. Then followed
three shots in quick succession, one from
the underwood, on the side, two from
the summit. A bullet whizzed by my
head, and spat into the opposite bank.
A rustling was then distinguishable
among the bushes, and presently a
peasant, in a blue gabardine, slid down
stiff into the road, and there doubled
up. Eluding Fraser and the foot
soldiers, he had remained in ambush
till we came along, when he had
selected me for a passing compliment,
as the head of the party, intending
no doubt to climb up the bank, if
pursued, and escape above. Just as
he was taking aim, though, he was
seen by the dragoons, who, unheard
by him, were quietly moving down at
a walk over the ploughed ground.
Two of them fired their carbines, and
one or both of their shots taking effect,
prevented the effect of his.
Too green to know that it was unmilitary,
I returned a few paces to
take a view of the dying foe. A
Frenchman to the last, he must needs
find something to say, though life was
now ebbing apace. Slowly, and with
apparent difficulty, he raised his eyes
till they were fixed full on mine; and
then, with quivering features, and a
strange snapping of the jaw, began to
speak. “Ah, Monsieur —— j’ai
pensé—vous.”——He was dead!
We now gained the extremity of
the hollow way, and stood looking
down on the enemy ranged in order of
battle at the pond. Fraser had drawn
up the infantry across the road, and
the cavalry, with the exception of the
rearguard, formed on our two flanks.
Our first movement was thus effected.
All our men were perfectly steady,
but burning to fall to, and savage on
account of Mr Chesterfield’s casualty.
Gingham now suggested, as the
enemy were so numerous—two hundred
and fifty at least, if not three hundred—that
it might be prudent to wait a
while, in the hope that other parties,
bound to headquarters, might come
up. But I happened to know that
none were coming that day; and
Gingham, on hearing this, withdrew
his motion. What, then, was our
course? How were we to deal with
these Mounseers? No doubt we could
lick them; and, had fighting been our
object, nothing would have given our
men greater satisfaction. But we had
dollars in charge, and our first care
must be to get safe through, and
deliver them safe at headquarters.
My decision, then, was taken. We
must advance—we must continue our
march—and we mustn’t let those fellows
hinder us; but we must, if possible,
effect our purpose, without coming
to close quarters. A mêlée we
must shun; for, though the issue would
be glorious—no doubt of that—yet, if
once mixed up with our convoy, the
enemy, when they took to flight,
might persuade some of our mules to
go with them. Our object, then, reduced
itself to this: we must disperse
the foe, without coming to close quarters
with them. Gingham quite
adopted this view of the subject, and
now prepared for further operations by
drawing his pistols from the holsters,
and examining their priming. He
next called to Coosey to get him his
sword out of the cart, girded it on, and
drew it forth from the scabbard—a
formidable Andrea Ferrara, equally
available for cut and thrust. He bore
it bolt upright, with great gravity,
and with an air half military, half
civic, which, on his showy Spanish
horse, would have rendered him a
highly ornamental addition to a Lord
Mayor’s procession.
We were now immediately in front
of the enemy; and I rode a few yards
forward, to take a full view of their
position, previous to our advance.
They favoured me with a great deal
of noise, and, on my turning, with a
few shots, which I acknowledged by
taking off my hat. Many of them returned
the compliment; while others
expressed their civility by a courteous
gesture, vernacular in most civilised
countries.
The enemy, it was clear, had no idea
that we marched with a Nanny-goat in
company, and had intended that we
should walk into them unawares. In
that case, we should probably have
come off second best. As matters
stood, our position was far more
favourable: and theirs, less advantageous
in the same degree. The worst
of it was, though, that to the left of the
main road—that is, on the enemy’s
right—a wood came down to within
two hundred yards of them; which
same wood, further on, extended close
up to the road we were to proceed by,
and seemed to skirt it for some distance.
The danger was that, when
we attacked the enemy, and drove
them before us, some of them, perhaps
the greater number, might escape into
this wood; in which case we might
afterwards find it difficult to get rid of
their agreeable company. These considerations,
then, indicated the plan
of our attack. I desired the sergeant
of cavalry to select seven or eight of
his steadiest men, and gain at once
the skirts of the wood, at the point
nearest the enemy. He was to advance
at first as if intending to attack
their right; but, when he got nearer,
was to quicken his pace, and make at
once for the wood. Immediately after,
when he saw the general attack commence,
his party, also, were to advance
and fire; but not to advance so
far that fugitives, escaping from the
enemy’s rear, might be able to enter
the wood. The infantry were to advance,
firing, down the road; and the
remainder of the cavalry was to spread
out on our flanks, and act in concert
with us: our whole party pressing
more on the enemy’s right than left,
in order that their retreat might be
from the wood, not to it. These
matters I explained distinctly. One
other point remained.
“Corporal Fraser, step this way.
Your duty is the most responsible of
any.” I knew it would be a bitter
pill for the corporal, so endeavoured
to gild it.
“I am ready for any duty you may
assign me, sir,” said the corporal,
whose blood was up.
“You must take two or three of
the infantry to the rear—we shall
want all the cavalry—and see that no
muleteer loiters behind, or falls out—bring
all up.”
“As you please, sir,” said Fraser;
“but in action, the rear is not the
place to which I have been most accustomed.”
The poor fellow looked so
dismally blank, I really felt for him.
“Never mind that, corporal. Remember
you have had your turn already,
and have done well. Depend upon
this,” I added, with a consolatory wink,
“should there be any real business in
front, though I don’t expect it, you, if
possible, shall have your share.” The
clouds were now dispelled from the
corporal’s face, and he retired to his
station in the rear.
Our preparations being thus completed,
I forthwith sent forward the
cavalry sergeant with his party, to
gain the wood. The movement was
well executed. They advanced steadily
down upon the enemy’s right, without
answering his fire; then turned suddenly
to the left, and trotted off to the
trees. Having reached the point assigned
them, they pulled up, faced
round, and formed in line. Immediately
upon this commenced our general
movement in advance, Fraser following
the train of mules and muleteers,
and “keeping them up behind.” Infantry
and cavalry marched down to
the attack; while both the contending
armies maintained a brisk fusillade.
As far as I then discovered, none of
the enemy’s shots took effect, while
some of ours appeared to tell. The
foe stood his ground manfully at first;
but, as we got closer, some of them
began to run from the rear, and all
soon joined in the flight. The retreat
was as rapid as it was general; and
we, as the convoy could not be left,
abstained from pursuit. The cavalry
advancing from the wood, though, got
a little too forward. The consequence
was that a few of the fugitives, running
down the main road, attempted
to escape into the wood. But a few
carbine shots soon turned them back
on the main body; and the whole
mass then made their escape down the
road to our right, which was just what
I wanted. Long after we had ceased
to fire, they continued to run, without
stopping to look behind, alarmed probably
by the apprehension of a cavalry
pursuit. Half a mile off, in remarkably
short time for the distance, I
saw some of them, like a scattered
flock of sheep, scampering up a hill,
and disappearing over its summit.
What execution was done by our fire,
did not immediately appear. Some
decamped slower than others; one or
two were carried. Some made their
escape through the pond; and of
these, some fell over in the water, as
if they had been hit. One fell, the
men said, and didn’t get up again. A
few of the enemy halted awhile to
take a look, in their run down the
cross-road, as if they would like to
make an attempt on the extremity of
our convoy, which probably appeared
to them unprotected. But, receiving
the fire of our rearguard, they again
took to flight. We assembled at the
pond, and there halted in a body, convoy
and escort.
Mr Chesterfield had not yet recovered
from the first shock of his
wound; and was obliged to remain in
the cart, unable to sit up. Gingham
administered some brandy, with good
effect. We had, however, one other
wounded man. I noticed several of
our fellows, horse and foot, assembled
in a group, from which proceeded
loud jeers, and shouts of laughter.
There was something in the midst of
them, the occasion of their mirth,
which I could not see. Presently,
however, I caught a sight of poor
Jones, the picture of woe. He was
standing in a posture very far from upright,
and leaning with his elbows on
the back of a spare mule—his aspect
cadaverous. Advancing, I heard the
talk.
“Why, Taffy, old feller, how come
ye to get hit there?” A roar of
laughter drowned Jones’s indignant
reply.
“Taffy, my lad, why, I didn’t think
you vos the chap as vould turn tail.”
“It’s a lie,” roared Jones, in a voice
of extreme agony and exasperation.
“I didn’t turn tail; nor I haven’t not
never turned tail. Only jest turned
round to load, and felt all at wance
jest as if somebody had bin and give
me a kick——” A universal roar
drowned the conclusion of the sentence.
“Mr Pledget,” said I, “there seems
to be here another case, soliciting your
attention.”
The men made way. Pledget advanced
with great seriousness; and
the laughter, though less vociferous,
became tenfold in intensity, at the
rich idea of Pledget’s investigating
and doctoring Jones’s wound. Jones,
at the sight of the doctor, in his alarm
and anguish set up a regular hullabaloo,
almost running into a cry. The
doctor, regardless of Jones’s fears and
lacerated feelings, began gravely to
question him—made serious attempts
and approaches to ascertain particulars.
Two or three of the fellows,
positively overcome with the scene,
threw themselves down by the road-side
in an agony. One, I really thought,
would have laughed himself into a fit.
He turned red, crimson, purple, almost
black in the face; still, in his
bursts, casting his eyes, from time to
time, towards Jones and the doctor.
Jones, leaning on the mule’s back,
screwing and twisting first this way
then that, evaded and defeated all
the doctor’s approaches; while the
men, taking a little extra freedom
after our glorious victory, renewed
their vociferous merriment. Pledget,
at length, began to lose his patience.
“Come, my good fellow,” said he;
“this won’t do, you know.”
He then looked round at the soldiers,
and made a sign. Four of them
stepped forward, seized Jones by the
arms and legs, and bore him off to the
road-side—struggling, fighting, kicking,
roaring, screeching, his agony increasing
as he saw the moment at
hand when he must be doctored.
Pledget humanely pointed to some
bushes close by, and the men carried
Jones behind them. There the bullet
was extracted at once. But how
Pledget proceeded, or what was the
precise character of the wound, of
course we, who remained in the road,
had no opportunity of perceiving. The
progress of the operation, however,
was marked by occasional shouts and
yells from Jones; and in five minutes
he hobbled forth with a rueful aspect,
but looking “as well as could be expected.”
Pledget almost immediately
followed, and handed the bullet to
Jones. “There, my man,” said he;
“put that in your pocket.”
There still was something, though,
upon Jones’s mind. He limped down
to the edge of the pond with an eager,
anxious look; and began prowling
about, examining among the reeds and
bushes, right and left.
“Jones, hadn’t you better keep
yourself quiet? Sit down, man.”
“Please, sir, if you’ve no objections,
sir, I’m noways inclined to sit down
jest at present, sir, ’cause it would be
rayther ill-colvelielt, sir; rayther be
excused, sir. Hope no offence, sir.”
He continued on the prowl.
“What are you looking for, Jones?
Lost any part of your kit?”
“Please, sir, I’m a-looking for that
’ere Nosey, sir.”
“What! the man that stood treat
this morning? You don’t expect to
find him here.”
“Please, sir, I see him here, sir; and
I marked him too, sir. See him drop
somewhere hereabouts, sir.”
This intelligence was “important,
if true;” and I also began to look.
There was nothing, however, on
this part of the field of combat, to
indicate that a wounded man had
fallen. Jones, though, was positive.
“Sure you were not mistaken,
Jones?”
“No, sir; it wasn’t no mistake,
I’m sartain, sir. I’m sartain as I see
him, and I’m sartain as I marked him,
sir. Knowed him by his——Oh,
there he is, sir.”
Jones pointed to something in the
pond that looked like a package or
bundle, half immersed in the water, at
the edge of the reeds, a little out from
the side.
A soldier stepped in, and examined
more closely. “It’s a dead man, sir.”
“Dead! Get him out, that’s a good
fellow. Perhaps he’s only wounded,
and not past recovery.”
“He’s past that, sir,” said the soldier,
as he turned him, face upwards,
on the bank.
The face had a mask of mud. The
soldier knelt down, felt in the dead
man’s pockets, brought out a white
handkerchief of French cambric—wiped
away the mud. Yes, it was
Hookey! The features retained their
general expression—harsh by temperament,
but composed to blandness.
Oh, what a look was that! Hookey
shot through the neck! The brow
was slightly knit; the lips were parted;
the teeth clenched. His perpetual
smile had set his face, at last, in a
fixed, unmeaning smirk—the dead
man’s simper! The two corners of
his semicircular mouth, drawn up high
on the cheeks, were flanked by two
furrows, rigid and profound! It was
the sort of look which, seen but for a
moment, stamps on the memory an
impression that we can recall at will,
and that sometimes comes unbidden!
“Just hold up that handkerchief,
my man. Spread it out, will you?
Oh, there’s the mark—$1.”
“Any papers?” said I to Jones,
who was rummaging in the dead man’s
pockets.
“Only this here, sir,” said Jones,
holding up an envelope, which had
been emptied of its contents. It was
the cover of my letter, which Hookey
had undertaken to deliver at headquarters.
The letter itself he had probably
sent in a different direction.
Jones, meanwhile, had found a
leathern purse, which, without any
remarks, he was quietly secreting about
his own person. The soldier, though,
who had landed the dead man, detected
this act of conveyance, and
demanded “snacks.” A discussion
arose, and a squabble seemed inevitable.
“Corporal Fraser,” said I,
“just see all fair here.” I then turned
Sancho’s head, and withdrew from
the scene. Sancho had more than
once brought down his nose, slowly
and cautiously, into close proximity
with the object that lay stretched out
before him. He now, ere he obeyed
the bridle, pawed, tossed his head,
and snorted; as though fain to get rid
of the very air that he had just been
inhaling, and to blow out of his nostrils
the smell of blood!
Mr Chesterfield, now considerably
recovered, stood by the cart, with his
arm slung in a silk handkerchief. He
thought he was able to sit his horse—at
any rate, wished to try. Pledget
objected—wanted him to come on in
the cart. A discussion arose; and it
was settled at last, that Pledget should
mount the horse, while Mr Chesterfield
rode Pledget’s mule. Gingham
then gave directions to Coosey and
Joaquim, who helped Jones into the
cart. Coosey had already been won
upon by Jones. But now, when Jones
came out fresh from the field, with a
memorial of the combat that would
follow him to the day of his death,
Coosey’s admiration knew no bounds.
I saw him pass something to Joaquim,
who took an early opportunity of passing
it to Jones. “You don’t think,”
said I to Gingham, “Coosey will give
him more than will do him good?”—“No,
no,” said Gingham; “you may
depend on Coosey’s discretion.”
It was time to be getting on again.
First, however, Mr Chesterfield deemed
it advisable to see all right respecting
the wood. For this purpose, he sent
forward Corporal Fraser with part of
the infantry. After they entered the
wood, we heard a single shot. In
about ten minutes the whole party
returned, the Corporal riding a clumsy
French cart-horse, with a rope bridle.
They had found a horse and cart.
The shot was fired to bring up the
driver, who had, however, got off.
The object of the horse and cart was
pretty evident. It no doubt had occurred
to Hookey that, in case of his
making a successful foray, and securing
part of our dollars, such a conveyance
might do good service in carrying
off the “swag.” There was no
convenient way of getting the cart to
us out of the wood; it appeared to
have been brought from another direction;
so Fraser had taken out the
horse, which he considered his own
lawful prize. All being now arranged,
we proceeded on our march.
Jones rode on in the cart. He lay
along at full length; not on his back,
though, but in the opposite position,
which he preferred under existing circumstances.
I observed him—like a
recumbent bull-terrier, with muzzle
protruding from his kennel—keenly
watching as we proceeded—now forwards,
now right, now left, looking
out for the $1, and eager to have
another slap at a Frenchman.
With regard to the enemy’s position,
it will probably occur to the military
reader, that they might have
chosen a better. A more skilful opponent,
probably, would have concealed
himself in the forest, and
attacked us in flank; and a bolder
one might have ventured to occupy
the hollow way with all his forces—a
plan which, if detected, would have
been attended with greater risk to
himself, but, if successful, with greater
damage to us. As it was, the ambuscade
was too far in front of the
main body, and we were able to deal
with it before we were further engaged.
Still, I think, it must be
admitted, on the whole, the arrangements
of the enemy were not badly
made. Had we not kept a good look-out—or
rather, had not our four-legged
attendant providentially put us on
our guard—we might not have discovered
our opponents till it was too
late to avoid a conflict at close quarters,
the probable consequence of
which would have been the loss of
some of our mules; while the crossroads
afforded facilities for driving
them off, with the choice of four directions.
And, some of their party being
concealed in the two banks between
which we had to pass, we might have
discovered an enemy at hand only by
finding ourselves under fire. On the
whole, we had reason to be thankful
that our loss was so small.
With regard to our fallen opponent,
Hookey or Christophe, in lately turning
over Colonel Gurwood’s volumes,
I met with something which appears,
curiously enough, to identify him.
In a letter from our Commander-in-Chief,
bearing date 2d January 1814,
that is, two or three months before
our rencontre, I find that a person,
calling himself Christophe, had been
arrested and sent to General Freyre,
to be forwarded to Madrid; that, in
the November previous, this Christophe
was at Bilbao; that he had letters
from King Ferdinand; that he
showed a draft or order on the Biscayan
Provinces to pay him seventy
thousand dollars; that he was advised
to present himself to the Government;
and that, as the opinion entertained of
him was not very favourable, and he
remained at St Jean de Luz, he was
at length arrested, and sent off.
Now, I am not prepared to assert
that this was the same individual
with my Christophe or Hookey; but,
supposing it so, we may give some
such sketch of his services as the following.
In the early part of 1813,
the period of my voyage from Falmouth
to Lisbon, the French authorities
in Spain, civil and military, were
not a little perplexed as to our Commander’s
plans for the ensuing campaign.
This mystery he solved ere
long, by breaking forth from the
north of Portugal, advancing on the
line of the Douro, marching across the
north of Spain, winning the battle of
Vittoria, investing San Sebastian and
Pampeluna, liberating the Peninsula,
crowning the Pyrenees, completing
the great circle that was closing round
Napoleon, and menacing the south of
France. Precisely when we may
suppose the curiosity of the Gallic
leaders to have been most intense,
that is, in the early spring of 1813,
just previous to Lord Wellington’s
advance, Hookey—Christophe, said
his cambric handkerchief—came off
to us in the Oporto boat, and, under
the assumed character of a courier,
obtained a passage by the Falmouth
packet from Oporto to Lisbon—in
other words, from the left to the right
of the position then occupied by the
British troops. Subsequently, a
Christophe makes his appearance at
Bilbao, in the November of the same
year; and, on account of his suspicious
conduct there, and afterwards at
headquarters, is arrested, and delivered
over to the Spaniards, for transmission
to Madrid. The Spaniards,
of course, let him escape; and he then
returns to his old trade. He cannot,
however, appear again at headquarters,
therefore hangs about the line
of march on the look-out for a job;
falls in with a greenhorn in charge of
treasure; gets out of him all the information
he can; tries to divert him
from his route; tampers with his personal
attendant; opposes his passage
of a river; makes his escort drunk;
and musters a rural force, with the
aid of which he hopes to realise more
by ready cash, than he did by his
cheque on the “Biscayan provinces.”
Thus he went on, prying, plotting,
and meddling, till he found his
end.
We proceeded quietly on our march,
Gingham and I riding side by side,
while Pledget and Mr Chesterfield
preceded us.
“Yes,” said Gingham, resuming
the thread of our conversation where
our rencontre with the enemy had
broken it off; “I know that you have
formed schemes connected with military
service; and those, I presume,
are the plans you allude to.”
I really did not understand, at the
moment, what Gingham meant; and,
fancying he referred to our recent
operations in the presence of the foe,
answered wide of the mark.
“No, no,” said he; “I was not
speaking, sir, with regard to the little
affair which has just come off; though,
give me leave to say, Mr Y—, you
acquitted yourself in a way that does
you credit. I allude to what fell from
you within the last hour, when you
mentioned some plans that you had
formed, and which, you were kind
enough to say, you would communicate
for my information.”
We now resumed the conversation,
which the “little affair” had interrupted.
I stated my plans, hopes,
difficulties, without reserve; and
Gingham, in reply, from his own
knowledge and observations, drew,
with equal force and feeling, a not
very agreeable picture of the discouragements,
disappointments, toils,
hardships, sufferings, privations,
wrongs, and snubbings, incidental
to the life of a marching officer on
actual service. He was still eloquently
descanting on these topics,
when we reached the termination of
our day’s journey.
GERMAN POPULAR PROPHECIES.
560
LETTER FROM PROFESSOR GREGORY TO THE EDITOR.
Dear Sir,—The following notice of certain popular prophetic traditions,
widely current in the country to which they refer, may perhaps prove interesting
to your numerous readers.
All widely-spread opinions, however apparently absurd, have, or have had
at some time, a foundation in nature or in historical fact; and it cannot be
uninteresting, with a view to the history of popular traditions, to place on
record those which I have here collected, even although we cannot at present
trace them satisfactorily to their origin. The whole subject of trances, and
the various phenomena connected with them, including the second sight, is
one hitherto very imperfectly studied, and for that reason I have not entered
into detail on that part of the question; but I may possibly do so at a future
period.—Believe me, very truly yours,
William Gregory.
Edinburgh, $1.
It is well known that in all ages,
and in most countries, prophetic traditions
have been said to exist; and
although it may often have happened
that such traditions have arisen from
spurious prophecies, written after the
event, and falsely said to have existed
before it, yet it would also appear
that genuine prophecies have from
time to time appeared, and become
traditions before the events took
place. Of course, we do not here
allude to the Scriptural prophecies,
but to such as have no pretensions to
a divine origin. There can be little
doubt that the Sybilline Books contained
prophecies of the future fate of
Rome; and although we cannot now
ascertain, even if this were the case,
whether they were accurate predictions,
or merely sagacious guesses,
nor whether the event confirmed them,
yet the tradition of their existence is
in itself curious. We cannot here
enter into an enumeration of the various
prophecies which are said to have
existed, in ancient or modern times,
before the events occurred, but on
some future occasion we may return
to that subject: in the mean time
we may allude, as a modern example
of popular prophecy in our own
country, to the prediction of the extinction
of the male line of the house
of Seaforth, in the person of a deaf
Caberfae—a prediction which Mr
Morritt of Rokeby, the friend of Scott,
heard quoted in Ross-shire at a time
when the last Lord Seaforth, who became
quite deaf, had several sons in
perfect health. We have no doubt
our Highland readers are acquainted
with many analogous cases.
Our present object is to direct attention
to the fact, that in Germany,
more especially on the Rhine and in
Westphalia, there exist many remarkable
popular prophecies concerning
public events, of various dates, and
originating in various quarters, but
exhibiting a remarkable coincidence
in many of the chief points. Many of
these have been printed at various
times; others exist as traditions
among the peasantry; others, again,
are said upon good evidence to
have been in modern times taken
down from the lips of the prophets
themselves, all or most of whom are
now dead. Yet they generally predict,
and often with strange minuteness
of detail, events which were to
occur about this time,—viz. in 1848,
1849, and 1850. Political and religious
convulsions, wars, and finally
peace and prosperity, form the burden
of them; and we shall see that the
events of 1848 and 1849 supply apparently
strong confirmation of their
truth, their previous existence being
admitted.
Having spent some months in
Rhenish Prussia during the summer
of 1849, we made many inquiries on
the subject, and found everywhere,
and among all classes, a firm conviction
of the $1 of many of the
popular prophecies; while it was admitted
that they had long been known
and believed by the people. As the
matter, considered under any point of
view, is a curious and interesting one,
we procured the latest work on the
subject, which in fact appeared while
we were in Germany. It is entitled,
“Prophetic Voices, with Explanations.
A collection as perfect as possible,
of all Prophecies, of Ancient
and Modern date, concerning the
Present and Future Times, with an
explanation of the obscure parts,” by
Th. Beykirch, licentiate in Theology,
and (R.C.) curate in Dortmund. The
worthy Curate is often too brief in his
accounts of the prophecies themselves,
and very diffuse in his explanations,
which, for the most part, tend to extract
from the predictions the comfortable
assurance of the complete reestablishment
of the Roman Catholic
religion, and the utter discomfiture of
Protestantism. He even treats his
readers to a disquisition, altogether
out of place, on Scriptural prophecies,
and an interpretation, by Holzhaüser,
of the Apocalypse, in which he applies
to Protestantism the same passages
which Protestants apply to the
Papacy, and does so, apparently, very
much to his own satisfaction. We
shall not touch on these parts of his
work, but use it as a storehouse, from
which we may draw the predictions
themselves, without regarding them
through the theological medium of
the reverend author.
The first we shall mention is of an
ancient date. It is the vaticination
of Brother Herrmann, a monk of the
monastery of Lehnin, who flourished
circa A.D. 1270, and died in the odour
of sanctity. It is written in a hundred
leonine hexameters, rhyming in the
middle and end of each verse, and was
printed in 1723 by Professor Lilienthal,
from what was said to be an old
MS. His prophecies chiefly concerned
the future fate of his own monastery
of Lehnin in Brandenburg, and
of the monastery of Chorin in the
Uckermark, a part of Brandenburg.
But as that fate depended on public
events, more especially on the history
of the princes of that country, his
vaticination assumes the form of a
brief prophetic history of the house of
Hohenzollern, that is, the now royal
house of Prussia. Our readers will
probably readily dispense with the
whole of the original hexameters of the
good monk, but we shall give a few
specimens: he begins—
1. “Nunc tibi, cum cura, Lehnin!
cano fata futura,
2. Quæ mihi monstravit Dominus, qui
cuncta creavit,” &c.
“Now, oh Lehnin! I sing with sorrow
to thee thy future fates,
Which the Lord, the creator of all, has
shown to me.”
He proceeds to describe the prosperity
of Lehnin under the race of
Otto I., and its decay after the extinction
of this family, which took
place in the person of Henry III.,
1320. These princes were from
Anhalt, of the race called the Askanier
in German history.
At verses 14 $1, he describes
Brandenburg as becoming a den of
lions, while the true heir is excluded.
After Margrave Henry III., the
Dukes of Pomerania, Mecklenburg,
Brunswick, Anhalt, Electoral Saxony,
and Bohemia attacked the Mark,
(Brandenburg,) and committed horrible
devastations. The Emperor
Louis of Bavaria seized it for himself,
excluding the princes of Saxony, the
nearest heirs to the former princes.
After various details concerning
the fate of Brandenburg, plundered by
robber knights and barons, who were
to be put down by a strong emperor,
as happened under Charles IV. who
died in 1378,—he comes to the accession
of the Hohenzollerns, and describes
the first prince of that family
as rising to distinction by holding two
castles or Burgen. The Emperor
Sigismund sold Brandenburg to
Frederick, Burggraf of Nuremberg, of
the house of Hohenzollern. He belonged
to the lower nobility, but now
became more important by the possession
of two castles—those of
Nuremberg and Brandenburg. These
examples are sufficient to give an idea
of that part of Brother Herrmann’s
prophecy, concerning events which
preceded the printing of it in 1723,
and in which he describes $1,
without giving the names, and very
briefly, but in striking language, the
fate and character of the successive
Margraves, Electors, and Kings, till
he comes to Frederick William I.,
who died in 1740, seventeen years
after the prophecy was printed, and
whose character and death he describes.
Then follows Frederick the
Great, whose career, with its vicissitudes,
is indicated with tolerable
clearness. One line is curious,
84. “Flantibus hinc Austris, vitam
vult credere claustris.”
“When the south wind blows, he trusts
his life to the cloisters.”
In fact, Frederick, when hard
pressed by the Austrians, was once
compelled to conceal himself in a
monastery.
$1 signifies south wind, but is
probably here used for Austria.
After his successor, Frederick William
II., whom the good monk truly
describes as vicious, sensual, and oppressive,
but not warlike, comes this
line—
89. “Natus florebit; quod non sperasset
habebit.”
“The son shall flourish; he shall possess
what he did not hope for.”
The application of this to the late
king, Frederick William III., is obvious.
Under him, Prussia, after
having been reduced to the lowest
ebb by Napoleon, became, unexpectedly,
far more powerful than it had
ever been.
90. “Sed populus tristis flebit temporibus
istis.
92. “Et princeps nescit quod nova
potentia crescit.”
“But the sad people shall mourn in
these times;
“And the King knows not that a new
power is arising.”
These lines also apply well to
Frederick William III.
93. “Tandem sceptra gerit, qui ultimus
stemmatis erit.”
“At length he bears the sceptres, who
shall be the last of his race.”
Now this is very remarkable. In
line 49, he had said—
49. “Hoc ad undenum durabit stemma
venenum.”
“This poison[2] shall last to the eleventh
generation.”
The present king, Frederick William
IV., is the eleventh from Joachim
III., the first Protestant prince of
Brandenburg, in reference to whom
the above line is written. But why
did the writer (even supposing the
prophecy not to have existed earlier
than 1723, when it was printed) stop
at this point? We shall see that
other prophecies coincide with this
one in predicting that the present
will be the last King of Prussia.
Then comes the remarkable line—
95. “Et pastor gregem recipit, Germania
regem.”
“And the shepherd receives his flock,
Germany a king.”
The worthy curate of Dortmund
explains this as pointing out the submission
of Europe to the Pope, and of
Germany to one sovereign. Brother
Herrmann goes on to predict peaceful
times, and the restoration of Chorin
and Lehnin to their pristine splendour.
We have omitted many curious
lines, but the reader will probably
feel satisfied that the brief and obscure
vaticinations of Brother Herrmann
are worthy of notice, especially that
part of them relating to the last
hundred and twenty years, bearing in
mind that they were printed in 1723.
The next prophet mentioned by our
author is Joseph von Görres, who
died in January 1848—that is, before
the last revolution in France, which
shook the thrones of Europe. On
his deathbed he lamented the misfortunes
about to come on Poland, described
Hungary as appearing to him
one huge field of carnage, and wept
over the approaching downfall of the
European monarchies. The events
of February and March 1848, the insurrection
in Posen, the devastations
committed by the Prussians in suppressing
it, and the war in Hungary,
would appear to be the events to
which he referred. But he was a
man deeply read in history, and there
are some of those prophetic hints
which may possibly have occurred to
him as reflections on probable events,
and have assumed a certain degree of
vividness in his mind.
We now come to a peasant prophet,
namely Jaspers, a Westphalian shepherd,
of Deininghausen, near the
ancestral seat of the Lord of Bodelschwing.
He was a simple-minded
pious man. In 1830, soon after which
time he died, he publicly predicted as
follows:—
“A great road (said he) will be carried
through our country, from west to east,
which will pass through the forests of
Bodelschwing. On this road, carriages
will run $1, and cause a
dreadful noise. At the commencement
of this work, a great scarcity will here
prevail; pigs will become very dear, and
a new religion will arise, in which wickedness
will be regarded as prudence and
politeness. Before this road is quite completed,
a frightful war will break out.”
These words, to the astonishment
of the natives, have nearly all been
fulfilled. The railway from Cologne
to Minden has, since his death, been
carried through the very district he
mentioned in 1830, before the first
English railway had been opened,
and when the primitive shepherds of
Westphalia were little likely to know
anything about railways. The scarcity
took place at the time specified;
and his remark as to a new religion
is supposed to apply to a deterioration
of manners among the simple
natives, consequent on the opening
up of their district. A personal
friend of Jaspers collected the following
sayings, which the author, after
minute inquiry on the spot, considers
as genuine.
1. “Before the great road is $1, a dreadful war will break out.”
The railway has for a year or two
been in operation; but, up to the
end of 1849, as we saw by advertisements,
the second line of rails was
not laid down. It is probably still
only in progress. Now in 1848 and
1849, we have seen war in Schleswig-Holstein,
Hungary, Italy, Posen, and
Baden.
2. “A small northern power will be
conqueror.”
Probably the Danish war, and the
success of Denmark, is here meant.
3. “After this another war will break out—not
a religious war among Christians,
but between those who believe in Christ
and those who do not believe.”
Here we must remember that the
simple and ignorant peasants of Westphalia
have strong religious feelings
and prejudices, and are apt, like some
nearer home, to apply the term Infidel
somewhat rashly. Possibly
Russia and the Greek church may be
here alluded to.
4. “This war comes from the East. I
dread the East.
5. “This war will break out very suddenly.
In the evening they will cry
‘Peace, peace!’ and yet peace is not;
and in the morning the enemy will be at
the door. Yet it shall soon pass, and he
who knows of a good hiding-place, for a
a few days only, is secure.”
The probability of a war, in which
Russia shall take an active share, cannot
escape any observer of the signs
of the times; and, with the aid of
railways, which were not known at
the date of Jaspers’ death, the sudden
outbreak is quite possible, even in
Westphalia.
6. “The defeated enemy will have to
fly in extreme haste. Let the people
cast cart and wheels into the water,
otherwise the flying foe will take all
carriages with them.
7. “Before this war, a general faithlessness
will prevail. Men will give out
vice for virtue and honour, deceit for
politeness.
8. “In the year in which the great
war shall break out, there shall be so fine
a spring, that in April the cows will be
feeding in the meadows on luxuriant
grass. In the same year, wheat may be
harvested, (in his district,) but not oats.”
(This appears to be likely to apply to
1850.—W. G.)
He seems here to hint that the harvest
of oats will be interrupted by the
war; if so, the war occurs in autumn.
9. “The great battle will be fought $1, between Unna, Hamm, and
Werl. The people of half the world will
there be opposed to each other. God will
terrify the enemy by a dreadful storm.
Of the $1, but few shall return
home to tell of their defeat. Jaspers
described this battle as terrific.”
We shall by and by hear more of
this birch-tree.
10. “The war will be over in 1850, and
in 1852 all will be again in order.
11. “The Poles are at first put down;
but they will, along with other nations,
fight against their oppressors, and at
last obtain a king of their own.
12. “France will be divided internally
into three parts.”
It is curious to notice, that at present,
although the state of matters in
1830 was very different, there are
three parties in France, all of them
powerful: namely, the Buonapartists,
(with at least a part of the Orleanists,)
and the moderate as well as the pro
tempore Republicans, headed by Louis
Napoleon; the party of the old Bourbons
and the priests, led by Falloux
and the old nobility, such as Larochejaquelein
and Montalembert; and
lastly the Red Republicans, Socialists,
and Communists. These three parties
hold each other in check, and no one
of them can at this moment do much.
13. “Spain will not join in the war.
But the Spaniards shall come after it is
over, and take possession of the churches.
14. “Austria will be fortunate, provided
she do not wait too long.
15. “The papal chair will be vacant
for a time.
16. “The nobility is much depressed,
but in 1852 again rises to some extent.
17. “When asked as to the future of
Prussia, he maintained an obstinate
silence, saying only that King Frederick William
IV. would be the last.”
This agrees with Brother Herrmann,
as formerly stated. A man named
Pottgiesser, in Dortmund, long since
dead, drew up a genealogical tree of
the royal house, in which he says of
the present king—to whom he gives
no successor—“He disappears.”
18. “There will be one religion. On
the Rhine stands a church which all
people shall aid in building. From
thence, after the war, shall proceed the
rule of faith. All sects shall be united;
only the Jews shall retain their old obstinacy.”
The dome at Cologne is obviously
alluded to. We shall see, hereafter,
that Cologne is expected to become
the seat of ecclesiastical rule by other
prophets.
19. “In our district priests shall become
so rare, that, after the war, people
will have to walk seven leagues in order
to attend divine service.
20. “Our country will be so much depopulated,
that women will have to cultivate
the soil; and seven girls shall
fight for a pair of inexpressibles.
21. “The house of Ikern shall be set
on fire by shells.
22. “The soldiers shall march to battle
(or to war) first, then return, decked
with the cherry blossoms. And only after
that shall the great war break out.”
In spring 1848, troops marched to
Baden, at the time of the first insurrection
there, in which war General
von Gagern was killed; and they
returned home decked with cherry
blossoms.
23. “Germany shall have one king,
and then shall come happy times.
24. “He spoke also of an approaching
religious change, and warned his children,
when that time should come, to go to
Mengede.”
When jeered on his prophetic
powers, Jaspers often said—
“When I have long been in the grave,
you will then often remember what I
have said.”
There is a prophet in Dortmund,
who, among other curious things, said,
in 1840, “When the Prussian soldiers
shall be dressed like those who
crucified our Lord, then war shall
break out with great violence.” It is
worthy of notice that, since that time,
the whole Prussian army, with the
exception of the Hussars, have been
armed with helmets of Roman form.
Their new Waffenrock, or military
coat, is also a short plain surtout,
buttoned to the throat, and probably
not unlike a Roman tunic.
The predictions of Jaspers are curious—first,
on account of their minuteness;
secondly, because they specify
dates yet future. We shall see that
they coincide, in many of the chief
points, with other popular prophecies.
The next prophet is Spielbähn,
a Rhenish peasant. “Spielbähn” signifies,
in the dialect of his countrymen,
“the fiddler;” and this name was given
to him on account of his skill as a rustic
performer on the violin. He was employed
as messenger and servant in
the convents of Siegburg and Heisterbach.
His predictions have been published
by Schrattenholz, and widely
circulated; but, as we could not
procure this work, we can only
give such extracts as our author has
selected.
Spielbähn died in 1783 in Cologne.
He is said to have been rather addicted
to the wine-flask, and to have
occasionally indulged in predictions of
doubtful authenticity, possibly from
interested motives. But he is thought,
in the main, to have uttered what he
really believed to be true predictions,
and he gave them out as visions. He
predicted the imprisonment of the
Archbishop of Cologne, which took
place a few years ago, with many less
interesting local occurrences, which
our author passes over. Speaking of
the present time, (1848–50,) and of
what should follow, he said—
1. “In that time it will be hardly possible
to distinguish the peasant from the
noble.”
In Rhenish Prussia, where the Code
Napoleon prevails, there is hardly a
trace of the splendour of the old aristocracy
to be found. The nobles of
old family who remain have lost all
exclusive privileges, and are poor.
2. “Courtly manners and worldly vanity
will reach to a height hitherto unequalled.
Yea, things will go so far, that
men will no longer thank God for their
daily bread.
3. “Human intellect will do wonders,
(or miracles,) and on this account men
will more and more forget God. They
will mock at God, thinking themselves
omnipotent, because of the carriages,
which shall run through the whole world,
(or everywhere,) without being drawn by
animals.
4. “And because courtly vices, sensuality,
and sumptuousness of apparel, are
then so great, God will punish the world.
A poison shall fall on the fields, and a
great famine shall afflict the country.”
In Nos. 3 and 4, railways and the
potato blight seem meant.
5. “When a bridge shall be thrown
across the Rhine at Mondorf, then it will
be advisable to cross, as soon as possible,
to the opposite shore. But it will only be
necessary to remain there so long as a
man will take to consume a 7 lb. loaf of
bread; after which (that is, in less than a
week,) it will be time to return.”
This coincides with Jaspers’ prediction
of the shortness of the last
great struggle.
6. “Thousands shall conceal themselves
in a meadow among the seven mountains,
(opposite Bonn.)
7. “I see the destruction of the heretics,
with dreadful punishments; of those
who dared to think their puny minds
could penetrate the councils of God. But
the long-suffering of God is at an end,
and a limit is put to their wickedness.”
The worthy curate dwells with peculiar
satisfaction on this prediction.
8. “Observe well, thou land of Berg!
Thy reigning family, which proceeds from
a Margraviate, shall suddenly fall from
its high station, and become less than the
smallest Margraviate.”
The grand-duchy of Berg, on the
Lower Rhine, of which Düsseldorf is
the chief town, was given by Napoleon
to Murat, and was afterwards
part of the kingdom of Westphalia,
but, since the peace, has formed part
of Prussia, the royal family of which,
as we have seen, descends from the
Margraves of Brandenburg; but in
1783 all this was as yet in the womb
of time. See also Jaspers, No. 17,
and Brother Herrmann, verse 93.
9. “The false prophets (heretic clergy?)
shall be killed with wife and child.
10. “The holy city of Cologne shall
then see a fearful battle. Many, of foreign
nations, shall here be killed, and men and
women shall fight for their faith. And
it will be impossible to avert from Cologne,
up to that time spared by war, all
the cruel extremities of war. Men will
then wade in blood to the ankles.
11. “But at last a foreign king shall
arise, and gain the victory for the good
cause. The survivors of the defeated
enemy fly to the $1; and here shall
the last battle be fought for the good
cause.”
See Nos. 9 and 33 of Jaspers’ sayings,
as to the birch-tree and the German
king; also verse 95 of Brother
Herrmann.
12. “The foreign armies have brought
the ‘black death’ into the land. What
the sword spares the pestilence shall devour.
Berg shall be depopulated, and
the fields without owners; so that one
may plough from the river Sieg up to the
hills without being (Scoticè) challenged.
Those who have hid themselves among
the hills shall again cultivate the land.”
See No. 20 of Jaspers’ predictions.
13. “About this time France will be
divided internally.”
See Jaspers, No. 12.
14. “The German Empire shall choose
a peasant for Emperor. He shall govern
Germany a year and a day.”
The Archduke John, late regent of the
empire, had long lived, banished from
court, as a Styrian peasant, adopting
the costume and manners of the peasantry.
He also married a peasant
girl. His regency lasted little more
than a year, and, indeed, after the
year had expired, he only returned to
Frankfort in order to resign his power
to the present commission.
15. “But he who after him shall wear
the imperial crown, he will be the man
for whom the world has long looked with
hope. He shall be called Roman Emperor,
and shall give peace to the world.
He shall restore Siegburg and Heisterbach,
(two convents, above mentioned.)
16. “Then shall there be no more Jews
in Germany, and the heretics shall beat
their own breasts.
17. “And after that shall be a good
happy time. The praise of God shall
dwell on earth; and there shall be no
war, except beyond the seas. Then shall
the fugitive brethren return, and dwell in
their homes in peace for ever and ever.
“Men should heed well what I have said,
for much evil may be averted by prayer;
and although people jeer me, saying I
am a simple fiddler, yet the time will
come when they shall find my words
true.”
See Jaspers’ predictions, Nos. 18
and 23. Brother Herrman, also, in
verses 96–100, prophesies happy times,
and the restoration of the convents of
Chorin and Lehnin.
The next seer is Anton (Anthony),
called the Youth of Elsen, a village
near Paderborn, in Westphalia. He
had the gift of the “second sight”—that
is, he saw visions—and has a
great reputation in that country as
a true seer. His predictions were first
collected by Dr Kutscheit, from whose
work the author extracts as follows.
The date is not given by our curate.
1. “When the convent of Abdinghof is
occupied by soldiers, armed with long
poles, to which little flags are attached,
and when these troops leave the convent,
then is the time near.”
At this time (1849) Prussian lancers
occupy the convent, which has been
converted into a barrack. This was
not the case when the prediction was
made.
2. “From Neuhaus, houses may be
seen on the Bock, (Buck,) and a village is
founded between Paderborn and Elsen.
Then is the time near.”
The Bock is a wooded eminence
near Paderborn, where an inn was
built. To obtain a fine view from the
inn, the wood was lately cut through,
and thus the buildings have become
visible from Neuhaus. The village
or $1 is a newly-founded country
house, or rather farm-house, with its
appurtenances—$1, a town.
3. “When people see, in the Roman
field, houses with large windows; when
a broad road is made through that field,
which shall not be finished till the good
times come, then shall come heavy
times.”
In the Roman field, on the high road
to Erwitte, the Thuringian Railway
was begun in 1847, and a terminus,
the buildings of which have very large
windows, has been laid down on the
spot. The works have been, from the
necessity of the times, suspended for
the present. See Jaspers, No. 1, and
Spielbähn, No. 3.
4. “When barley is sown on the Bock,
then is the time close at hand. Then
shall the enemy be in the land, and kill
and devastate everything. Men will
have to go seven leagues to find an acquaintance.
The town of Paderborn
shall have eight heavy days, during which
the enemy lies there. On the last day,
the enemy shall give up the town to plunder.
But let every man carry his most
valuable property from the ground floor
to the garret; for the enemy will not have
time, even to untie his shoestrings, so near
will succour be.”
In the summer of 1848, the first
attempt was made to grow barley on
the Bock, a cold, high-lying district.
5. “The enemy will try to bombard
the town from the Liboriberg, (a hill
close to Paderborn); but only one ball
(or shell) shall hit, and set on fire a house
in the Kampe. The fire, however, shall
soon be extinguished.
6. “The French shall come as friends.
French cavalry with shining breastplates
(cuirassiers) shall ride in at the Westergate,
and tie their horses to the trees in
the Cathedral close. At the Giersthor,
(another gate) soldiers with gray uniforms,
faced with light blue, shall come
in. But they will only look into the
town, and then immediately withdraw.
On the Bock stands a great army, with
double insignia, (or marks—possibly the
two cockades, Imperial German and
Prussian, now worn by the Prussians,)
whose muskets are piled in heaps.
7. “The enemy shall fly towards Salzkotten,
and towards the heath. In both
places a great battle shall be fought, so
that people shall wade in blood to the
ankles. The pursuers from the town
must take care not to cross the Alme
bridge; for not one of those who cross it
shall return alive.
8. “The victorious prince shall enter,
in solemn procession, the castle of Neuhaus,
which shall be repaired (for the
occasion?) accompanied by many people
with green boughs in their hats. On the
Johannes Bridge, before Neuhaus, there
shall be such a crowd that a child shall
be crushed to death. While this goes on
a great assembly shall be held in and
before the Rathhaus (Town House.)
They shall hurry (or drag) a man down
from the Rathhaus, and hang him on a
lamp-post before it.
9. “When all these things shall have
come to pass, then shall there be a good
time in the land. The convent (of Abdinghof)
shall be restored; and it will be
better to be a swineherd here, in our
land, than a noble yonder in Prussia
(proper).”
Next comes an old traditionary
prophecy concerning Münster.
“Woe to thee, Münster! Woe to you,
priests, doctors, and lawyers! How shall
it be with you in the days of sorrow?
“For three days they shall go up and
down thy streets. Three times shall the
city be taken and lost.
“Let every man keep in the garret;
thus shall he be safe. A dreadful fire
shall break out in and destroy Ueberwasser,
so that it may be seen from the
cathedral place to the castle.
“The enemy shall be beaten, and shall
fly through Kinderhaus so fast that they
leave their cannon on the street. All this
shall happen in the same year in which
an illustrious person dies in the castle.
“The conquering prince shall make his
entry through the Servatii-Thor, (a gate).”
Part of this prophecy has been spread
over the district of Münster for sixty
years; part of it comes from the tailor
at Kinderhaus, who also prophesied
much to Blucher. He was one of
the seers, or, as they are called
in that country, “Spoikenkikers.”
“Spoikenkikers,” in high German, signifies
ghost or spirit; “Spoikenkikers” is our Scotch
word “Keeker,”—in high German,
“Spoikenkikers.”
The next is an old prophecy concerning
Osnabrück.
“Osnabrück shall suffer much for fourteen
days, and see a bloody contest in her
streets.
“Even the service of the Greek Church
shall be performed in the churches of
Osnabrück.”
This is quite possible, should Russians
enter Westphalia. See Jaspers, No. 9.
“A violent contest shall arise between
Catholics and Protestants. All the
churches shall be again taken possession
of by the Catholics.
“A priest, in the act of carrying the
most Holy (the Host) into the Lutheran
Church, shall be killed by a ball at the
church door.”
The three preceding prophecies are
very remarkable, from the minute details
which they contain, and which
seem to indicate that the seers described
$1 in visions or in
dreams. Of course, most of these
visions, referring to events yet future,
cannot be at present verified. But
the signs given by Anton, to know
when the time approaches, have come
to pass.
The following traditionary prophecy
about Cologne, was found by Magister
Heinrich von Judden, pastor of the
small church of St Martin, in the convent
of the brethren of the Holy Virgin
of Carmel, (in Cologne?):—
“O happy Cologne! when thou art
well paved, thou shalt perish in thine
own blood. O, Cologne! thou shalt
perish like Sodom and Gomorrha; thy
streets shall flow with blood, and thy
relics shall be taken away. Woe to thee,
Cologne! because strangers suck thy
breasts and the breasts of thy poor,—of
thy poor, who therefore languish in
poverty and misery.”
Old tradition concerning Coblenz:—
“Woe! woe! Where Rhine and
Moselle meet, a battle shall be fought
against Turks and Baschkirs, (Russians?)
so bloody, that the Rhine shall be dyed
red for twenty-five leagues.”
Traditions of battles in Westphalia:—
“A prodigious number of people shall
come from the east towards the west.
“The whole west and south shall rise
against them.
“The armies shall meet in the middle
of Westphalia.
“A dreadful battle shall take place on
the Strönheide, (a heath,) near Ahaus.
“At Riesenbeck, a bloody combat shall
be fought.
“At Lüdinghausen,” said a seer, “I
saw whole hosts of white-clad soldiers.
(Austrians?)
“Ottmarsbocholt will have much to
suffer.
“On the Lipperheide (a heath) a bloody
battle is fought.
“Also in Rittberg, and the whole
country round, a battle shall be fought.
“But the chief engagement shall be $1.”
Every one, says the author, who
takes the trouble, can hear all this
from the mouths of the peasantry. In
many places, the seers have even
described the positions of the troops,
and the direction in which the cannon
are pointed.
Prophecy of a Capuchin monk in
Düsseldorf, of date 1672:—
“After a dreadful war (Napoleon’s
wars?) shall there be peace; yet there
shall be no peace, because the contest of
the poor against the rich, and of the rich
against the poor, shall break out.
“After this peace shall come a heavy
time. The people shall have no longer
truth nor faith.
“When women know not, from pride
and luxuriousness, what clothes they shall
wear—sometimes short, sometimes long,
sometimes narrow, sometimes wide; when
men also change their dress, and wear
everywhere the beards of the Capuchins,[3]
then will God chastise the world. A
dreadful war shall break out in the south
(Hungary?) and spread eastward and
northward. The kings shall be killed.
Savage hordes shall overflow Germany,
and come to the Rhine. They shall take
delight in murdering and burning, so that
mothers, in despair, seeing death everywhere
before their eyes, shall cast themselves
and their sucklings into the water.
When the need is greatest, a preserver
shall come from the south. He shall defeat
the hordes of the enemy, and make
Germany prosperous. But, in those days,
many parts shall be so depopulated, that
it will be necessary to climb a tree to
look for people afar off.”
An old prophecy concerning the
battle of the $1:—
“A time shall come when the world
shall be godless. The people will strive
to be independent of king or magistrate,
subjects will be unfaithful to their princes.
Neither truth nor faith prevails more. It
will then come to a general insurrection,
in which father shall fight against son,
and son against father. In that time,
men shall try to pervert the articles of
faith, and shall introduce new books.
The Catholic religion shall be hard
pressed, and men will try with cunning to
abolish it. Men shall love play and jest,
and pleasure of all kinds, at that time.
But then it shall not be long before a
change occurs. A frightful war shall
break out. On one side shall stand
Russia, Sweden, and the whole north;
on the other, France, Spain, Italy, and
the whole south, under a powerful prince.
This prince shall come from the south.
He wears a white coat, with buttons all
the way down. He has a cross on his
breast, rides a gray horse, which he
mounts from his left side, because he is
lame of one foot. He will bring peace.
Great is his severity, for he will put down
all dance-music and rich attire. He will
hear morning mass in the church at Bremen.
(According to some traditions, he
will read mass.) From Bremen he rides
to the Haar, (a height near Werl;) from
thence he looks with his spyglass towards
the country of the Birch-Tree, and observes
the enemy. Next, he rides past
Holtum, (a village near Werl.) At
Holtum stands a crucifix between two
lime-trees; before this, he kneels and
prays with outstretched arms, for some
time. Then he leads his soldiers, clad in
white, into the battle, and, after a bloody
contest, he remains victorious.
“The chief slaughter will take place at
a brook which runs from west to east.
Woe! woe! to Budberg and Söndern in
those days! The victorious leader shall
assemble the people after the battle, and
address to them a speech in the church.”
So runs the above prophecy, according
to the concurring testimony of
many peasants of that country. It
was long ago printed in a small pamphlet,
in the convent at Werl. But, at
the removal of the convent, all its
books were lost or destroyed. The
tradition, however, remained among
the peasantry, and has even penetrated
into France; for when French
(troops?) came to Werl, they inquired
for the Birch-Tree. In Pomerania
also, natives of Westphalia, when
quartered there, have been questioned
about its position. It stood long between
Holtum and Kirch-Hemmerde,
villages lying between Unna and
Werl. When it withered, a new one
was, by royal order, planted on the
spot. This proves that the Government
knew of the prophecy or tradition,
and felt an interest in it. The
people believe so firmly in the prophecy,
that the peasantry near Werl
even opposed the introduction of new
hymn-books, under the impression
that they were the predicted $1. Bremen, Holtum, Budberg,
and Söndern are villages near Werl.
A crucifix stands at Holtum between
two young lime-trees; and a brook
there flows from west to east.
Another old prophecy of the battle
of the Birch-Tree. This prophecy was
printed at Cologne in 1701, in Latin.
The title, translated, is as follows:—
“A prophecy concerning the frightful
contest between South and North, and a
terrific battle on the borders of the duchy
of Westphalia, near Bodberg, (Budberg.)
From a book, entitled, A treatise on the
heavenly regeneration (or restoration,) by
an anonymous author, illuminated (or enlightened,)
by visions. With permission of
the Officialate at Werl. Cologne, 1701.”
It was translated and printed in
German by the monks of Werl, but,
as already stated, their library was
destroyed or dispersed.
“After these days shall dawn the sad
unhappy time, predicted by our Lord.
Men, in terror on the earth, shall faint
for expectation of the coming events.
The father shall be against the son and
the brother against the brother. Truth
and faith shall no longer be found. After
the nations, singly, have long warred
against each other, after thrones have
crumbled, and kingdoms been overthrown,
shall the entire South take arms against
the North. (Auster contra Aquilonem.)
Then country, language, and faith shall
not be contended for, but they shall fight
for the rule of the world.”
“They shall meet in the middle of
Germany, destroy towns and villages,
after the inhabitants have been compelled
to fly to the hills and the woods. This
dreadful contest shall be decided in Lower
Germany. There the armies shall pitch
camps, such as the world has not yet
seen. This fearful engagement shall begin
$1 near Bodberg. Woe!
woe! poor Fatherland! They shall
fight three whole days. Even when
covered with wounds, they shall mangle
each other, and wade in blood to the
ankles. The bearded people of the seven
stars (?) shall finally conquer, and their
enemies shall fly; they shall turn at the
bank of the river, and again fight with
the extremity of despair. But there shall
that power be annihilated, and its strength
broken, so that hardly a few will be left,
to tell of this unheard-of defeat. The
inhabitants of the allied places shall
mourn, but the Lord shall comfort them,
and they shall say, It is the Lord’s doing.”
The two preceding prophecies, both
old, and printed long since, have
probably a common origin, whatever
that may be. The tradition has probably
come to the people from the
monks of Werl.
Some predictions or visions, connected
with the prophecy of Werl:—
A seer, named Rölink, of Steinen,
who has been dead some time, prophesied
of three processions in Kirch-Hemmerde.
“The first shall be a funeral procession.
The names of several men shall be
hung up on the church.”
This happened when, in the war of
1813–15, some brave men of this
district fell in battle.
“The second procession shall go from
the old church to the new one.”
This took place when the Catholics
of Kirch-Hemmerde built a new
church; and the Host was carried
from the Simultankirche into the new
edifice.
“The third shall be after a dreadful
war. Then shall Catholics and Protestants
again go together in procession into
the old church, and have one religion.”
He said further,—
“When two towers are built between
Söndern and Werl, then shall a frightful
war soon break out.”
The towers are now there, having
been lately built. One is a chimney
for the Salt-Works; the other a
Bohrthurm, (a tower over the pit
whence the salt spring is pumped up.)
Another seer, named Ludolf, saw
the whole order of battle of both
armies, and pointed out in a corn-field
near Kirch-Hemmerde the spot, near
the $1, where he saw in his
vision a colonel fall from his horse,
struck by a ball. The horse, he said,
would run to a sheaf of oats, (therefore
late in autumn,) snap at it, and in the
same moment fall, also pierced by a
shot.
A third seer, Hermann Kappelmann,
of Scheidingen, near Werl, prophesied
as follows, thirty years ago
(1819,) before a whole company.
“The times are yet good, but they shall
change much. After many years a frightful
war shall break out. The signs shall
be: When in Spring the cowslips appear
early in the hedges, and disturbances prevail
everywhere; in that year the explosion
does not take place. But when,
after a short winter, the cowslips bloom
very early, and all appears quiet, let no
man believe in peace.
“When great wisps of straw stand on
the Bärenwiese, (Bear’s meadow,) then
shall the war break out.”
The Bärenwiese is a large common
meadow at Scheidingen. Soon after
the French and Polish revolutions of
1830 it was divided, and on that
account wisps of straw were set up.
The people believed the great war was
then at hand. Now there are once
more wisps of straw set up, to mark
the line of the railway to Cassel,
which is in progress.
“When you then hear cannon from the
side of Münster, then hasten to cross the
Ruhr, and take bread (a loaf) with you
sufficient for three days. He who only
puts his foot in the water shall be safe
from harm. Then you may return, but
whether you shall find your posts (or
poles) again, I cannot say. (Probably
marks of agricultural subdivisions.) After
a short contest shall follow peace and
quiet. The peace shall be announced at
Christmas from all the pulpits.”
Numberless traditions speak of the
burning of the town of Unna, round
which, and not through it, the armies
will march, on account of the conflagration.
Others speak of the burning
of Dortmund, on the east side.
Others, again, describe how the remains
of the enemy fly to Erwitte
and Salzkotten, and are there totally
cut to pieces. All the towns and
villages from Paderborn to the Rhine
have similar traditions. There is a
very old one concerning the Marienheide,
(a heath,)—namely, that there
the Whites shall drive the Blues
before them, and through the Lippe,
in which many shall be drowned.
Traditions concerning the years
1846–1850:—
“1846, I would not be a vine.”
“1847, I would not be an apple-tree.”
“1848, I would not be a king.”
“1849, I would not be a hare, a soldier,
or a gravedigger.”
“1850, I would not be a priest.”
In 1846, the crop of grapes was too
heavy for the vines.
In 1847, the apple-trees broke
under the weight of their fruit.
In 1848, as we know, kings were
at a discount.
In 1849, the hares suffered from
the suspension or abolition of the
game laws in Germany; the soldiers
had much to suffer; and the gravediggers,
in consequence of war and
cholera, were overwhelmed with work
in many places.
As to the priests in 1850, we heard
from several quarters, of an old
prophecy that there shall be a fearful
massacre of priests, against whom the
people shall be much embittered.
One seer declares, that such will be
the hatred of the peasantry towards
the priests, that a peasant, sitting
down to dinner with his family, and
having just stuck a fork into the
fowl, shall, on seeing a priest pass by
the house, lay down his fork, rush
out, beat out the priest’s brains with
his club, and then return to his meal
with satisfaction.
Another tradition, of which we
heard from several well-informed
persons, states that a pope shall come
as a fugitive to reside at Cologne,
with four cardinals, and there exercise
his ecclesiastical functions.
A prophecy, of date 1622, concerning
certain months of a year not
named.
“The month of May shall earnestly
prepare for war. But it is not yet time.
June shall also invite to war, but still it
is not time. July will prove so cruel,
that many must part from wife and
child. In August, men shall everywhere
hear of war. September and October
shall bring great bloodshed. Wonders
shall be seen in November. At this
time the child is twenty-eight years old,
(the powerful monarch) whose wet nurse
shall be from the east. He shall do
great things.”
Prophecies of the “Powerful Monarch:”—
One prophet says,—“He shall be of
an ancient noble house, and descend
from the top of the rocks. His mother
shall be a twin. He will be Emperor
of the Holy Roman Empire, (the German
Empire.) Holzhaüser says, ‘He shall
be born in the bosom of the Catholic
Church;’ his name shall be, ‘The Help of
God.’”
See the preceding prophecies, $1.
We have now given a sufficient
sketch of some of the more curious
and definite popular German prophecies.
The curate of Dortmund
adds a considerable number of others,
more vague, mystical, and in some
cases theological, which we omit, as not
adapted to our present purpose; and
others not bearing on Germany, of some
interest—especially a long one concerning
Italy, by the Franciscan monk,
Bartolomeo da Saluzzi—which want
of space prevents us from discussing
at this time.
Let us now consider the foregoing
prophecies in general. We must
admit, as it seems to us, that there
exist in Germany unfulfilled popular
prophecies, the authenticity of which
is respectably attested and generally
admitted.
We further observe, that, taking the
whole of them, as far as known to us,
we can trace the following points pervading
the entire series, more or less:—
1. A great war after a peace, about
this time.
2. It is preceded by political convulsions,
and lesser wars.
3. The East and North fight against
the South and West.
4. The latter finally prevail, under
a powerful prince, who unexpectedly
rises up.
5. The great struggle is short, and
occurs late in the year.
6. It is decided by the battle of the
Birch-Tree, near Werl.
7. After horrible devastations, and
murders, and burnings, caused by this
war, peace and prosperity return.
8. Priests are massacred and become
very rare; but
9. One religion unites all men.
10. All this takes place soon after
the introduction of railways into
Germany.
11. The present King of Prussia is
the last.
12. The “powerful prince” from
the South becomes Emperor of Germany.
13. France is, about this time, inwardly
divided.
14. The Russians come as enemies
to the Rhine, the French enter Germany
as friends—without entering
into further details.
We see moreover, that, admitting
the genuineness of the prophecies,
partial fulfilment has in several cases
taken place. Here it must be noted,
that our curate has chiefly confined
himself to the unfulfilled parts, and
has avowedly omitted many fulfilled
predictions. While we attach considerable
importance to the general
impression among the people of the
truth of these prophecies, which in
part depends on their partial fulfilment
in past times, our chief object has
been to put on record the more remarkable
of the unfulfilled predictions,
in order that they may be compared
with future events.
If we seek to form any idea of the
origin of these prophecies, we find
that there are three sources, from
which the people may have derived
the traditions.
1. They may possibly be, in some
cases at least, derived from the reflections
of sagacious men. Even Napoleon
predicted dreadful wars, and that
Europe must become either Cossack
or Republican. But although some
things may thus be explained, we do
not see how the minute details, in
other cases, can be thus accounted for.
2. Scriptural prophecies may have
been applied to modern events, which,
indeed, are no doubt foretold in
them, in a general way. We cannot
avoid observing the tolerably frequent
occurrence of Scripture language in
the predictions; but this also does
not account for all the details.
3. The seers or prophets may have
had genuine visions, or dreams, in
which they saw what they describe;
it has been seen that various prophets
use language implying this. And,
while the general resemblance of the
different visions naturally leads us to
suspect that the popular traditions
have a common origin; we can at
most conclude from this, that the
original seer or seers lived long ago,
which only increases the difficulty.
They were probably, like Brother
Herrmann, monks and ascetics, their
imaginations exalted by religious
fervour: in other words they were
nervous and excitable, and predisposed
to visions. Supposing their
visions known to the people, the feeling
of the marvellous, if excited along
with religious sentiments, may have
led to visions or second sight among
the peasantry, and thus visions may
have been multiplied and expanded
in details.
If we reflect on the many known
instances of prophetic dreams,
and on the alleged and respectably
attested cases of somnambulistic
prevision, we shall see reason to hesitate
before we deny the possibility of
the occurrence, in certain individuals,
of prophetic visions. We are far
from imagining that, if such have been
the case with our German seers, they
have enjoyed direct communications
from Heaven; on the contrary, were
we satisfied of the fact, we should
regard it as a phenomenon depending
on some obscure physical cause,
which may in time be discovered and
traced; and which, at all events,
exists by Divine permission.
Here we may allude to the remarkable
prophecy of Monsieur de Cazotte,
who, some years previous to 1787,
predicted to a large company of persons
of rank, science, and literature,
with much detail, the atrocities of the
Reign of Terror. He likewise told
many of those present, both male and
female, that they should perish on
the guillotine. To Condorcet he
said, that he should die in prison, of
the effects of a poison which he
should long, with the view of escaping
a public execution, have carried about
his person—which happened. He
also predicted the fate of Louis XVI.
and his Queen. This prophecy caused
much amazement, and soon became
known. Persons are yet alive, both
in France and England, who heard it
detailed before 1789. We have seen
one of them. Now, it might be said,
that Cazotte merely exercised a rare
sagacity, in judging of the course of
events, at a time when all France
was enthusiastically looking forward
to the blessings of liberty, and while
yet no one dreamed of violence or
bloodshed. But this would hardly
account for the details he gave. On
the other hand, he often uttered predictions;
and it is very remarkable,
although it has been too much overlooked,
that those who report his prophecies,
including the above one,
always state that, when about to predict,
he fell into a peculiar state, $1—yet not ordinary sleep. It can
hardly be doubted that this was a
trance, in which he saw visions.
That they were fulfilled to the letter
is surely, if only a coincidence, a
most wonderful one. If, again, it was
merely the result of sagacious reflection,
how came it that Cazotte alone,
of all the able thinkers then in Paris,
made these reflections, and was
laughed at for his pains?
The laborious, minute, and conscientious
researches of the Baron von
Reichenbach have proved, beyond a
doubt, that we are far from being
acquainted with all the physical influences
which surround us; and he has
even referred to a physical cause—$1
source of the belief in ghosts—by
proving that luminous appearances
are visible, to sensitive persons, over
recent graves. No one can fail to
see the resemblance between the Sensitives
of Baron von Reichenbach,
who are far from rare, and the Spoikenkiker,
or ghost seers, of the curate
of Dortmund.
We consider it probable, therefore,
that at different periods seers have
had visions, more or less distinct and
detailed, of what appeared to their
minds likely to happen; that these
visions have occurred in a state of
trance; that among ascetic monks,
who may be regarded as liable to such
trances, it may often have happened
that extensive knowledge of history
and of mankind has enabled them to
foresee the probable course of events;
that their predictions, becoming known
to the peasantry, have given a tone
to $1 visions, in which the events
are generally localised in the immediate
vicinity of the seer; and that
thus, by degrees, more detailed predictions
have arisen. Considering
the general ignorance and superstition
of the peasantry in all countries, it is
not wonderful that such predictions,
generally bearing on violent political
convulsions, war, and religion, the
subjects most interesting to their
minds, should acquire a hold over
them such as is found to exist in
many parts of Germany, in reference
to the prophecies above described. It
is even probable that the existence of
the predictions may have had a considerable
influence in preparing the
people for such sudden outbreaks as
those of 1848, and may thus, in some
measure, have contributed to their
own fulfilment.
We must admit that these remarks
do not much assist in explaining the
occurrence of minute details in these
predictions, many of which are said,
on good authority, to have been fulfilled.
But we do not feel ourselves
in possession of sufficient evidence to
justify us in arguing on the alleged
fulfilment as certain; and we have
therefore satisfied ourselves with laying
before the reader a brief sketch of
these predictions, the existence of
which, as an article of belief with
many thousands of people at this day,
is, under whatever point of view it
may be considered, very interesting.
W. G.
THE HISTORY OF A REGIMENT DURING THE RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN. [4]
573
The Russian Campaign of Napoleon
is unquestionably the most wonderful
episode in the history of war.
We are not only interested, but
astounded, by its study. It comprises
a series of events gigantic and unparalleled
in the annals of human strife.
From the note of preparation to the
final wail of despair, the reader’s imagination
is continually on the stretch
to realise and comprehend the prodigious
scale of its circumstances. At
the word of the great military magician,
half-a-million of men, levied from
half Europe, mustered in arms for
aggression. From France they came,
from Italy and Poland: Austria and
Prussia dared not refuse their contingents;
Illyria and Dalmatia sent forth
their infantry; to their astonishment
and dismay, Spanish and Portuguese
battalions were marched into the
dreary north under the banners of the
man against whose generals their brothers
and fathers were at that moment
contending on the mountains of their
native peninsula. The West was
arrayed against the East. Since the
birth of discipline and civilisation,
such an army had never been seen.
The events of its first and only campaign
were in proportion to its unprecedented
magnitude. In six months
the mighty armament returned, a
shattered wreck, having fought the most
desperate battle the world ever saw,
having witnessed the self-destruction
of a vast and wealthy capital—suicide
for the country’s salvation—and having
endured sufferings which may have
been equalled on a smaller scale, but
which certainly never before or since
fell to the lot of so numerous and
powerful a host.
After reading that delightful work
of Count Ségur, which combines the
fascination of a romance with the
value of history, few persons much
care to consult any other French
account of the great campaign. It
was with something of this feeling,
and with slender expectation of interest,
that we opened General de Fezensac’s
recently-published Journal. But
its perusal agreeably disappointed us.
Narratives of personal adventure have
a peculiar charm; and the unadorned
tale of a soldier’s hazards will often
rivet the attention of those who would
not persevere through the more copious
and important history of a great
war. M. de Fezensac has not attempted
the history of the campaign.
He confines himself to his own adventures
and those of the regiment he
commanded. At most does he include
in his delineations the exploits of the
3d (Ney’s) corps, (to which his regiment
belonged,) at the time when
cold, famine, fatigue, and the sword
had reduced it to little more than the
ordinary strength of a brigade, and,
subsequently, to a mere handful of
jaded, frost-bitten warriors. By a few
lines here and there, he supplies, with
true military brevity, that outline of
the operations necessary to connect
and complete the interest of his journal.
He avoids controversy; he is
slow to censure acts or impute motives;
his style is remarkably free from that
fanfarronade into which many French
writers unconsciously run when recording
the military achievements of
their countrymen. He tells only what
he himself saw, and he tells it modestly
and well, without attempt at rhetorical
adornment; rightly believing that
the events he witnessed and shared in
are sufficiently remarkable to need no
factitious colouring.
M. de Fezensac commenced the
campaign upon the staff. In the capacity
of aide-de-camp to Berthier, he
joined the headquarters of the Grand
Army at Posen, and marched with
them to Wilna. It was in the month
of June. Already, although the campaign
had been opened but a few days,
during which the Russians had everywhere
receded before the invaders,
certain ominous circumstances contradicted,
to observant eyes and reflecting
minds, those anticipations of
triumphant success so confidently and
universally entertained, a few short
weeks before, at Dresden. The fervent
heat was succeeded by torrents
of rain; mortality amongst the horses
commenced; the army, living upon
the country, suffered from want of
food and forage; already the number
of stragglers was great, and acts of
pillage and violence were frequent.
As an instance of these, when the Poles,
with Napoleon’s approval, organised
a civil government of Lithuania, one
of the sub-prefects, repairing to his
post, was plundered by the French
soldiers, and arrived almost naked in
the town he was sent to preside over.
The French Emperor’s seventeen days’
halt at Wilna, so severely censured by
historians, gave M. de Fezensac opportunity
to observe the details and
composition of the monstrous staff
and retinue that attended Napoleon,
of which he furnishes the following
curious account:—
“The Emperor had around him the
grand marshal, (Duroc,) the master
of the horse, (Caulaincourt,) his aides-de-camp,
his orderly officers, the
aides-de-camp of his aides-de-camp,
and several secretaries attached to his
cabinet. The major-general (Berthier)
had eight or ten aides-de-camp, and
the number of clerks necessary for the
great amount of work occasioned by
such an army; the general staff, composed
of a vast number of officers of
all grades, was commanded by General
Monthion. The administration,
directed by Count Dumas, intendant-general,
was subdivided into the administrative
service properly so called,
comprising directors, inspectors of reviews,
and commissaries; the service
of health, including physicians, surgeons,
and apothecaries; the service
of provisions in all its branches, and
workmen of every kind. When the
Prince of Neuchatel passed it in review
at Wilna, it looked, from a distance,
like a body of troops ranged in order
of battle, and, by an unfortunate
fatality, notwithstanding the zeal and
talents of the intendant-general, this
immense administration was almost
useless from the very commencement
of the campaign, and became noxious
at its close. Let the reader now picture
to himself the assemblage, at one
point, of the whole of this staff; let
him fancy the prodigious number of
servants, of led horses, of baggage of
all kinds that it dragged along with it,
and he will have some idea of the spectacle
presented by the headquarters
of the army. Also, when a movement
was made, the Emperor took with him
but a very small number of officers;
all the rest set out beforehand, or followed
behind. At a bivouac, the
only tents were for the Emperor and
the Prince of Neuchatel; the generals
and other officers slept in the open air,
like the rest of the army.
“There was nothing irksome in
our duty as aides-de-camp to the
major-general.... In his personal
intercourse with us, the Prince of Neuchatel
exhibited that mixture of goodness
and roughness which composed
his character. Often he appeared to
pay no attention to us, but, upon
occasion, we were sure to find his
sympathy; and during the whole of
his long military career, he neglected
the advancement of none of the officers
employed under his orders. The best
house in the town, after that taken
for the Emperor, was allotted for his
accommodation; and as he himself
always lodged with the Emperor, the
house belonged to his aides-de-camp.
One of these was charged with the
household details, whose regularity
was a pattern; the Prince of Neuchatel
himself, in the midst of all his occupations,
found time to give his thoughts
to these matters; he wished his aides-de-camp
to want for nothing, and had
often the goodness to inquire whether
such was the case.... We saw
little of him, having no duty to do
under his immediate eye; he passed
almost the whole day in his cabinet,
dispatching orders agreeably with the
Emperor’s instructions. Never was
there seen greater exactness, more
complete submission, more absolute
devotion. It was by writing during
the night that he reposed from the
fatigues of the day; often he was
roused from his sleep to alter all
that he had done on the previous
day, and sometimes his sole recompense
was an unjust, or, at least, a
very severe reprimand. But nothing
slackened his zeal; no amount of
bodily fatigue, or of assiduity in the
cabinet, exceeded his powers; no
trials wearied his patience. In short,
if the Prince of Neuchatel’s position
never gave him an opportunity to
develop the talents essential to the
commander-in-chief of great armies,
it is at least impossible to unite, in a
higher degree, the physical and moral
qualities adapted to the post he filled
near such a man as the Emperor.”
The peculiar talents of Berthier,
his patience, industry, and wonderful
habit of order, have been often admitted,
but we do not remember to
have seen his character placed in so
amiable a light as here by his former
aide-de-camp. M. de Fezensac continued
upon his staff until after the
battle of Borodino, when he was promoted
by the Emperor, on Berthier’s
recommendation, to the command of
the 4th regiment of the line, vacant
by its colonel’s death in that murderous
fight. He was doubly grateful
for this promotion, because it placed
him under the orders of Marshal Ney,
with whom he had served some years
previously. As to the regiment itself,
it was in no very flourishing state.
Of 2800 men who had crossed the
Rhine, 900 remained, so that the
four battalions formed but two upon
parade. The equipments, and especially
the shoes, were in bad repair;
supplies of provisions were irregular;
and constant change of place was indispensable,
for the troops ravaged
within twenty-four hours the country
they traversed. The majority of the
officers were raw youths from the
military schools, or old sergeants,
whose want of education should have
retained them in the ranks, but who
had been promoted to sustain emulation,
and to fill the enormous gaps
occasioned by destructive campaigns.
For the 4th was an old regiment,
formed in the first years of the Revolution,
and had fought through all
the German wars, and numbered Joseph
Buonaparte amongst its colonels.
Its present shattered and unprosperous
condition extended to the whole
of Ney’s corps, which was reduced to
a third of its original numbers. The
losses were unparalleled, and so was
the depression of the soldiers. Their
gaiety had disappeared; a mournful
silence replaced the songs and
pleasant tales with which they formerly
beguiled the fatigues of the
march. The officers themselves were
uneasy; they served for duty and for
honour’s sake, but without ardour or
pleasure. After a victory that opened
the road to Moscow, this universal
discouragement was strangely ominous.
With his regimental command commences
the interesting portion of M.
de Fezensac’s journal, of which his staff
experience occupies but a couple of
chapters. Often as it has been described,
he yet contrives to give freshness
to his details of Moscow’s appearance
after the terrible conflagration,
at whose flame was sealed the
doom of the Grand Army.
“It was both a strange and a horrible
spectacle. Some houses appeared
to have been razed; of others, fragments
of smoke-blackened walls remained;
ruins of all kinds encumbered
the streets; everywhere was a horrible
smell of burning. Here and there a
cottage, a church, a palace, stood erect
amidst the general destruction. The
churches especially, by their many-coloured
domes, by the richness and
variety of their construction, recalled
the former opulence of Moscow. In
them had taken refuge most of the
inhabitants, driven by our soldiers
from the houses the fire had spared.
The unhappy wretches, clothed in
rags, and wandering like ghosts amid
the ruins, had recourse to the saddest
expedients to prolong their miserable
existence. They sought and devoured
the scanty vegetables remaining in
the gardens; they tore the flesh from
the animals that lay dead in the
streets; some even plunged into the
river for corn the Russians had thrown
there, and which was now in a state
of fermentation.... It was with
the greatest difficulty we procured black
bread and beer; meat began to be
very scarce. We had to send strong
detachments to seize oxen in the
woods where the peasants had taken
refuge, and often the detachments
returned empty-handed. Such was
the pretended abundance procured us
by the pillage of the city. We had
liquors, sugar, sweatmeats, and we
wanted for meat and bread. We
covered ourselves with furs, but were
almost without clothes and shoes.
With great store of diamonds, jewels,
and every possible object of luxury,
we were on the eve of dying of hunger.
A large number of Russian soldiers
wandered in the streets of Moscow.
I had fifty of them seized; and
a general, to whom I reported the
capture, told me I might have had
them shot, and that on all future occasions
he authorised me to do so. I
did not abuse the authorisation. It
will be easily understood how many
mishaps, how much disorder, characterised
our stay in Moscow. Not an
officer, not a soldier, but could tell
strange anecdotes on this head. One
of the most striking is that of a Russian
whom a French officer found
concealed in the ruins of a house;
by signs he assured him of protection,
and the Russian accompanied him.
Soon, being obliged to carry an order,
and seeing another officer pass at the
head of a detachment, he transferred
the individual to his charge, saying
hastily—‘I recommend this gentleman
to you.’ The second officer,
misunderstanding the intention of the
words and the tone in which they
were pronounced, took the unfortunate
Russian for an incendiary, and
had him shot.”
The retreat commenced. After the
affair of Wiazma, Ney’s corps relieved
the 1st corps as rearguard, and the
4th regiment, rearmost of Ney’s corps,
had to repel the repeated attacks of
the Russian van and of the swarming
Cossacks. They were hard pressed;
but still the Emperor’s order was to
march slowly and preserve the baggage.
In vain Ney wrote to him
there was no time to lose, and that he
risked being anticipated by the Russians
at Smolensko or Orcha. At
Dorogobuje the marshal formed the
design of arresting the progress of the
Russians for a whole day; but the
attempt was unsuccessful, and the
French rearguard was driven onwards.
The cold had set in, and the
sufferings of the troops were terrible.
Famine was superadded to their other
miseries. The road resembled a
battle-field. Some, with frozen limbs,
lay dying on the snow; others fell
asleep in the villages, and perished in
the flames lighted by their comrades.
“At Dorogobuje I saw a soldier of
my regiment, in whom hunger had
produced the effect of intoxication.
He stood close to us without recognising
us, inquiring for his regiment,
naming the soldiers of his company,
and at the same time speaking to
them as to strangers; his gait was tottering,
his look wild. He disappeared
at the commencement of the affair,
and I saw him no more. In two days
from Dorogobuje, we reached Slobpnowa,
on the bank of the Dnieper.
The road was so slippery that the ill-shod
horses could hardly keep their
legs. At night we bivouacked amidst
the snow in the woods. Each regiment
in turn formed the extreme
rearguard, which the enemy unceasingly
followed and harassed. The
army continued to march so slowly,
that we were on the point of overtaking
the 1st corps, which immediately
preceded us. The encumbrance on
the bridge over the Dnieper was
extreme: for a quarter of a league
beyond, the road was still covered with
abandoned carriages and ammunition-waggons.
On the morning of the
10th November, before crossing the
river, measures were taken to clear
the bridge and burn all these vehicles.
In them were found a few bottles of
rum, which were of great service. I
was on the rearguard, and during the
whole morning my regiment defended
the road leading to the bridge. The
wood through which this road passes
was full of wounded whom we were
obliged to leave to their fate, and
whom the Cossacks massacred almost
by our sides. M. Rouchat, sub-lieutenant,
having imprudently approached
an ammunition-cart that was to
be blown up, was shattered to pieces
by the explosion. Towards night the
troops passed the Dnieper; the bridge
was destroyed.”
It was important to delay the
enemy’s passage of the river, and Ney
prepared to do so.
“That night he walked for a long
time in front of my regiment with
General Joubert and myself. He
pointed out to us the unfortunate
results of the failure at Dorogobuje.
The enemy had gained a day’s march;
had forced us to abandon ammunition,
baggage, wounded: all these misfortunes
would have been avoided had
we held Dorogobuje for twenty-four
hours. General Joubert spoke of the
weakness of the troops, of their discouragement.
The marshal replied
quickly, that the worst that could have
happened was to be killed, and that a
glorious death was too fine a thing to
be shunned. For my part, I contented
myself with remarking that I had not
left the heights of Dorogobuje till I
had twice received the order.”
The “bravest of the brave” could
see no terrors in death. His own
insensibility to it made him slow to
sympathise with others. A few days
later, M. de Fezensac learned the
death of M. Alfred de Noailles, who
had been one of his brother aides-de-camp
to Berthier.
“He was the first friend I had lost
in this campaign, and it caused me
very deep sorrow. Marshal Ney, to
whom I spoke on the subject, told me,
for sole consolation, $1. In similar
circumstances he always showed the
same insensibility: on another occasion
I heard him reply to an unfortunate
wounded man, who begged to be
carried away—‘$1;’
and he passed on. Most assuredly he
was neither cruel nor devoid of feeling;
but the frequency of the misfortunes
of war had hardened his heart. Penetrated
with the idea that the fate of
all soldiers is to die upon the field of
battle, he thought it quite natural they
should fulfil their destiny; and it has
been seen in this narrative that he
prized not his own life more highly
than the lives of others.”
The passage of the river was defended
for twenty-four hours. Two
days later, those of the weary rearguard
who were not prevented by
frozen limbs or the cold hand of
death from rising from their ice-bound
bivouac, joyfully beheld, at half a
league’s distance, the towers of Smolensko.
Joyfully, because they had
long looked for that town as the term
of their misery. Repose and food, so
greatly needed, were there anticipated.
But there, as on every occasion during
the retreat where alleviation was hoped
for, disappointment ensued. Wittgenstein
was pressing southwards from
the Dwina, Tchitchagoff northwards
to Minsk, the Austrians had retreated
behind the Bug, and the French were
in imminent danger of being intercepted
at the Beresina. A halt at
Smolensko was impossible, and orders
were given to continue the march.
Smolensko contained large stores of
provisions; but these availed little to
the famished troops, for the general
disorganisation had extended to the
commissariat, and waste was the
result. The Guard, which arrived first
with Napoleon, received abundant
supplies of all kinds; but then came
pouring in stragglers and undisciplined
bodies; the warehouses were broken
open and plundered, and rations for
several months were squandered in a
day. When the 3d corps, after defending
the approaches to the town,
entered in its turn, the work of destruction
was at an end, and Colonel
de Fezensac could find nothing either
for his regiment or himself. But
though they had nothing to eat, they
were expected to fight; for Ney, the
indefatigable, prepared obstinately to
defend the town. On the 15th November,
a severe combat occurred in
the suburb, in which the 4th regiment
was alone engaged, and during which
its colonel received from Ney the order
that daring leader was most rarely
known to give—namely, not to advance
too far. M. de Fezensac records
this order with as much honest pride
as he does the warm eulogium which
his regiment’s conduct elicited from
the marshal. For three days Smolensko
was held, and then the 3d
corps resumed its march. Meanwhile
the Emperor, Eugene, and Davoust,
with the Guard, the 4th and 1st corps,
were hard pressed at Krasnoi, the
two latter, especially, suffering most
severely.
“The Emperor, having not a moment
to lose to reach the Beresina,
saw himself compelled to abandon the
3d corps, and precipitated his march
to Orcha. During the three days’
fighting (at and near Krasnoi,) no
information was sent to Marshal Ney
of the danger about to menace him....
On the morning of the 18th
November, we set out from Koritnya,
and marched upon Krasnoi: on approaching
that town, a few squadrons
of Cossacks harassed the 2d division,
which headed the column. We
attached no importance to this; we
were accustomed to the Cossacks, and
a few musket-shots sufficed to drive
them away. But soon the advanced
guard fell in with General Ricard’s
division, belonging to the 1st corps,
which had remained behind, and had
just been routed. The marshal rallied
the remains of this division, and under
cover of a fog, which favoured our
march by concealing the smallness of
our numbers, he approached the enemy
until their cannon compelled him to
pause. The Russian army, drawn
up in order of battle, barred our further
passage; then only did we learn
that we were cut off from the
rest of the army, and that our sole
chance of salvation was in our despair.”
We know not whence M. de Fezensac
derives his statements of numbers,
but they frequently require correction.
At Borodino, for instance, he gives, as
an exact detail of the French loss,
6547 killed, and 21,453 wounded—making
a total of about 28,000.
Alison and other historians rate it
nearly twenty thousand higher; and
certainly nothing in the events of the
battle argues it as much less than that
of the Russians, which M. de Fezensac
estimates at about 50,000—figures
confirmed by other authorities. In
like manner, he states the entire
strength of the 3d corps, when it first
entered the fire of the Russian batteries
at Krasnoi, as barely 6000 combatants,
with six guns, and a mere
picket of cavalry. This is extraordinarily
discrepant with other accounts,
which make Ney’s loss, in the immediately
ensuing engagement, to be
nearly as great as the whole number
of bayonets allotted to him by M. de
Fezensac. Doubtless it was most
difficult to ascertain numbers correctly
during that confused retreat, where
there can have been little question of
muster-rolls and morning-states, and
many seeming contradictions may be
explained, by some writers estimating
only the effective fighting men, and
others including the unarmed and
stragglers who dragged themselves
along with the columns. But we
attach no importance to differences of
this kind as regards the Journal, which
we here notice, not as a work of historical
value—a character to which it
makes no pretensions—but as the interesting
memoir of a brave gentleman
and soldier, who has written down,
modestly and unaffectedly, his own
and his regiment’s share in a most
extraordinary campaign.
“Hardly had Marshal Ney withdrawn
his advanced guard from under
the enemy’s guns, when a flag of truce,
sent by General Miloradowitsch, summoned
him to lay down his arms.
All who ever knew him will understand
with what disdain the proposal
was received.... For sole reply,
the marshal made the messenger prisoner;
a few cannon-shot, fired during
this species of negotiation, serving as a
pretext; and then, without considering
the masses of the enemy and the small
number of his own followers, he ordered
the attack. The 2d division, formed
in columns by regiments, marched
straight to the enemy. Let me here
be allowed to pay homage to the devotedness
of those brave soldiers, and
to congratulate myself on the honour
of having marched at their head. The
Russians beheld them, with admiration,
marching towards them in the
most perfect order, and with a steady
step. Every cannon-ball carried away
whole files—every step rendered
death more inevitable; but the pace
was not for an instant slackened. At
last we got so near to the enemy’s
line, that the first division of my regiment,
crushed by the grape-shot, was
thrown back upon that which followed,
and disordered its array. Then the
Russian infantry charged us in its
turn, and the cavalry, falling on our
flanks, completely routed us. Some
sharpshooters, advantageously posted,
checked for an instant the enemy’s
pursuit; the division of Ledru deployed
into line, and six guns replied
to the numerous artillery of the Russians.
During this time, I rallied the
remains of my regiment upon the high
road, where the cannon still reached
us. Our attack had not lasted a quarter
of an hour, but the 2d division
no longer existed: my regiment lost
several officers, and was reduced to
two hundred men; the regiment of
Illyria, and the 18th, which lost its
eagle, were still worse treated; General
Razout was wounded, and General
Lenchantain made prisoner. The
marshal now made the 2d division
retire on Smolensko; at the end of
half a league, he turned it to the left,
across country, at right angles with
the road. The first division, having
long exhausted its strength by sustaining
the shock of the whole hostile
army, followed this movement with
the guns and some of the baggage;
those of the wounded who could still
walk dragged themselves after us. The
Russians cantoned themselves in the
villages, sending a column of cavalry
to observe us.
“The day declined: the 3d corps
marched in silence; none knew what
was to become of us. But Marshal
Ney’s presence sufficed to reassure us.
Without knowing what he would or
could do, we knew he would do something.
His self-confidence equalled
his courage. The greater the danger,
the more prompt was his determination;
and when once he had made up
his mind, he never doubted of success.
Thus, in that terrible hour, his countenance
expressed neither indecision nor
uneasiness; all eyes were fixed upon
him, but none dared question him.
At last, seeing near him an officer of
his staff, he said to him in a low voice:
$1—$1
replied the officer.—$1—$1—$1—$1—$1—$1, said the officer. This
singular dialogue, which I here set
down word for word, revealed the
marshal’s project of reaching Orcha
by the right bank of the river, and so
rapidly as still to find there the army,
which was making its movement by the
left bank. The plan was bold and ably
conceived; it will be seen with what
vigour it was executed.
“We marched across the fields,
without a guide, and the inexactness
of the maps contributed to mislead us.
Marshal Ney, endowed with that peculiar
talent of the great soldier which
teaches how to take advantage of the
slightest indications, observed some
ice in the direction we were following,
and had it broken, thinking it must be
a rivulet that would lead us to the
Dnieper. It really was a rivulet; we
followed it, and reached a village,
where the Marshal feigned to establish
himself for the night. Fires were
lighted and pickets thrown out. The
enemy left us quiet, expecting to have
us cheap the next day. Under cover
of this stratagem, the Marshal followed
up his plan. A guide was
wanted, and the village was deserted;
at last the soldiers discovered a lame
peasant; they asked him where was
the Dnieper, and if frozen. He replied,
that at a league off was the
village of Sirokowietz, and that the
Dnieper must there be frozen. We
set out, conducted by this peasant, and
soon reached the village. The Dnieper
was sufficiently frozen to be traversed
on foot. Whilst they sought a place
to cross, the houses rapidly filled with
officers and soldiers, wounded that
morning, who had dragged themselves
thus far, and to whose hurts the surgeons
could hardly apply the first
dressings; those who were not
wounded busied themselves in seeking
provisions. Marshal Ney, forgetful
alike of the day’s and the morrow’s
dangers, was buried in a profound
sleep.
“Towards the middle of the night
we crossed the Dnieper, abandoning
to the enemy artillery, baggage, vehicles
of every kind, and those wounded
who could not walk. M. de Briqueville,
(aide-de-camp of the Duke of
Placentia,) dangerously wounded the
day before, passed the river on his
hands and knees; I gave him in
charge to two sappers, who succeeded
in saving him. The ice was so thin
that very few horses could pass; the
troops re-formed on the other side of
the stream. Thus far success had
attended the marshal’s plan; the
Dnieper was crossed, but we were
still fifteen leagues from Orcha. It
was essential to reach it before the
French army left; we had to traverse
a strange country, and to repel the
attacks of the enemy with a handful
of exhausted infantry, unsupported by
cavalry or artillery. The march
began under favourable auspices, with
the capture of some Cossacks, surprised
asleep in a village. At dawn on the
19th we were following the road to
Liubavitschi. We were scarcely
delayed for a moment by the passage
of a torrent, and by some Cossack
detachments which retired on our
approach. At noon we reached two
villages situated on a height, and
whose inhabitants had scarcely time
to escape, leaving us their provisions.
The soldiers were giving themselves
up to the joy occasioned by a moment
of abundance, when there was
a sudden call to arms. The enemy
was advancing, and had already driven
in our pickets. We left the villages,
formed column, and resumed our
march. But we had no longer to
deal, as heretofore, with detached
parties of Cossacks; here were whole
squadrons, manœuvring in regular
order, and commanded by General Platow
himself. Our skirmishers made
head against them; the columns accelerated
their march, making their
arrangements to receive cavalry.
Numerous as these horsemen were,
we feared them little, for the Cossacks
never ventured to charge home a
square of infantry; but soon a battery
of several guns opened fire
upon us. This artillery followed the
movements of the cavalry, upon
sledges, wherever it could be of use.
Until nightfall, Marshal Ney never
ceased to struggle against all these
obstacles, skilfully availing himself of
the least advantages the nature of the
ground afforded. Amidst the balls
which fell in our ranks, and in spite of
the Cossacks’ yells and feigned attacks,
we marched at the same pace.
Darkness approached; the enemy redoubled
his efforts. We had to quit
the road, and to throw ourselves to
the left into the woods fringing the
Dnieper. But the Cossacks already
held these woods; the 4th and 18th
regiments, under command of General
d’Henin, were directed to drive them
thence. Meanwhile the hostile artillery
took position on the further brink
of a ravine we had to pass. There
General Platow reckoned on exterminating
us.
“I entered the wood with my regiment.
The Cossacks retired; but
the wood was deep, and tolerably
dense, and we had to face every way
to guard against surprise. Night
came, we no longer heard anything
around us; it was more than probable
that Marshal Ney was continuing his
advance. I advised General d’Henin
to follow his movement; he refused,
lest he should incur reproach from
the marshal for quitting, without orders,
the post assigned to him. At
this moment loud shouts, announcing
a charge, were heard at some distance
in our front; giving us the certainty
that the column was continuing its
march, and that we were about to be
cut off from it. I redoubled my entreaties,
assuring General d’Henin
that the marshal, with whose way of
serving I was well acquainted, would
send him no order, because he
expected commanding officers, thus
detached, to act according to circumstances;
besides which, he was too
far off to be able to communicate
with us, and the 18th regiment had
assuredly moved on long ago. The
general persisted in his refusal; all I
obtained from him was to move us on
to the place where the 18th ought to
be, and unite the two regiments. The
18th had marched, and in its place
we found a squadron of Cossacks.
Tardily convinced of the justice of my
remarks, General d’Henin determined
to rejoin the column; but we had
traversed the wood in so many directions,
that we no longer knew our
way. The officers of my regiment
were consulted, and we took the direction
the majority thought the right
one. I will not undertake to describe
all we had to endure during that cruel
night. I had but one hundred men
left, and we were more than a league
in rear of our main body, which we
must overtake through a host of enemies.
It was necessary to march
quick enough to make up for lost time,
and in sufficient order to resist the
attacks of the Cossacks. The darkness,
the uncertainty of our road, the
difficulty of making way through the
wood, all augmented our embarrassment.
The Cossacks called to us to
surrender, and fired pointblank into
the midst of us: those who were hit
remained behind. A sergeant had his
leg broken by a carbine ball. He fell
at my side, saying coolly to his comrades—$1 They
took his havresack, and we moved on
in silence. Two wounded officers had
the same fate. I observed with uneasiness
the impression our position
made upon the soldiers, and even upon
the officers, of my regiment. Men
who had shown themselves heroes in
the battle-field, now appeared anxious
and troubled; so true is it that the
circumstances of danger have often
greater terrors than the danger itself.
Very few preserved the presence of
mind that was then more necessary
than ever. I needed all my authority
to maintain order and prevent straggling.
An officer even ventured to say,
that we should perhaps be obliged to
surrender. I reprimanded him aloud,
and the more severely that he was
an officer of merit, which made the lesson
more striking. At last, after
more than an hour, we emerged from
the wood and found the Dnieper on
our left. We were in the right track,
therefore; and this discovery gave the
men a moment’s joy, of which I took
advantage to cheer them up, and inculcate
coolness, which alone could
save us. General d’Henin moved us
along the river’s bank to prevent the
enemy from turning us. We were far
from out of our difficulties; we knew
our way, but the plain over which we
marched permitted the enemy to fall
on us in a large body, and to use their
artillery. Fortunately it was dark,
and the guns were fired rather at random.
From time to time the Cossacks
approached with loud cries; we
stopped to drive them away with
musketry, and then set off again.
This march lasted two hours over the
most difficult ground, across ravines
so abrupt, that it required the utmost
efforts to ascend the opposite side, and
through half-frozen rivulets, where we
had water to our knees. Nothing
could shake the constancy of the soldiers;
the utmost order was preserved;
not a man left his rank.
General d’Henin, wounded by a fragment
of shell, concealed his hurt in
order not to discourage the soldiers,
and continued to command with unabated
zeal. Doubtless he may be
reproached with too obstinate a defence
of the wood, but in such difficult
circumstances error is pardonable;
and what cannot be disputed, is the
bravery and intelligence with which
he led us during the whole of this
perilous march. At last the enemy’s
pursuit slackened, and on an eminence
in our front fires were seen. It was
Marshal Ney’s rearguard, which had
halted there, and was now resuming
its march: we joined it, and learned
that upon the previous evening the
marshal had advanced against the
Cossack artillery, and forced it to
yield him passage.
“Thus did the 4th regiment extricate
itself from a position seemingly
desperate. The march lasted another
hour. The exhausted soldiers required
repose, and we halted in a village
where we found some provisions. But
we were still eight leagues from
Orcha, and General Platow would
doubtless redouble his efforts for our
destruction. The moments were precious;
at one in the morning the
assembly sounded, and we set out....
We marched unmolested
till the dawn. With the first sunrays
came the Cossacks, and soon our
road led us over a plain. General
Platow, desirous of profiting by this
advantage, advanced that sledge-artillery
which we could neither avoid
nor overtake; and when he thought
he had disordered our ranks, he commanded
a charge. Marshal Ney rapidly
formed each of his two divisions
into a square; the 2d, under General
d’Henin, being the rearmost,
was first exposed. We forced all
stragglers who still had a musket to
join our ranks; severe threats were
required to do this. The Cossacks,
but feebly restrained by our skirmishers,
and driving before them a crowd
of unarmed fugitives, strove to reach
the square. On their approach, and
under fire of the artillery, our soldiers
hastened their march. Twenty times
I beheld them on the point of disbanding
and flying in all directions, leaving
us at the mercy of the Cossacks;
but the presence of Marshal Ney, the
confidence he inspired, his calmness
in the moment of such great danger,
kept them to their duty. We reached
an eminence. The marshal ordered
General d’Henin to hold it; adding,
that we must know how to die there
for the honour of France. Meanwhile,
General Ledru marched to Jokubow,
a village on the edge of a wood.
When he had established himself
there, we marched to join him: the
two divisions took up a position, mutually
flanking each other. It was
not yet noon, and Marshal Ney declared
he would defend this village
till nine at night. General Platow
made twenty attempts to take it from
us; his attacks were constantly repulsed,
and at last, fatigued by such
a tenacious resistance, he himself took
position opposite to us.
“Early in the morning the marshal
had sent off a Polish officer, who
reached Orcha and described our
condition. The Emperor had left the
town the day before: the Viceroy and
Marshal Davoust still occupied it.
At nine that night we resumed our
march in profound silence. The Cossack
pickets, distributed along the
road, retired at our approach. The
march continued with much order.
At a league from Orcha, our vanguard
fell in with an advanced post, which
challenged in French. It was a division
of the 4th corps coming to our
assistance with the Viceroy. One
must have passed three days between
life and death to judge of the joy this
meeting gave us. The Viceroy received
us with lively emotion, and
warmly expressed to Marshal Ney his
admiration of his conduct. He congratulated
the generals and the two
remaining colonels. His aides-de-camp
surrounded us, and overwhelmed
us with questions on the details of
this great drama, and the part that
each of us had played in it. But time
pressed; after a few minutes we again
moved on. The Viceroy formed our
rearguard: at three in the morning
we entered Orcha. Thus terminated
this bold march, one of the most
curious episodes of the campaign. It
covered Marshal Ney with glory, and
to him the 3d corps owed its salvation;
if, indeed, the term of corps d’
armée may be applied to the 800 or
900 men who reached Orcha, remnant
of the 6000 who had fought at
Krasnoi.”
For eighteen days, over a distance of
sixty leagues, the 3d corps had formed
the rearguard. Diminished as its
numbers now were, it was no longer
available for that dangerous duty, and
it joined the main body. Scarcely
had it taken three hours’ repose in
some wretched houses of the faubourg
of Orcha, when the Russians, from
the other side of the Dnieper, set fire
to the town with shells, which were
more particularly aimed at some conspicuous
buildings, serving as provision-stores.
It was impossible to
serve out rations; at the risk of their
lives, a few soldiers brought off some
brandy and flour; but Davoust, now
in command of the rearguard, hurried
the troops’ departure, and by eight
o’clock the unfortunate 3d corps was
on the march to Borisow. A broad,
good road facilitated their progress,
and Colonel de Fezensac, no longer
occupied in repelling the enemy, was
able to investigate the state of his
regiment. Eighty men remained, out
of the 2800 that began the campaign;
eighty tattered, famine-stricken, desponding
wretches. They lived from
hand to mouth, almost by a miracle;
sometimes on flour steeped in water;
at others, with a morsel of honeycomb
or fragment of horseflesh; their sole
drink the melted snow. “At some
distance from Orcha, I fell in with M.
Lanusse, a captain of my regiment,
who had lost his sight by a shot, at
the taking of Smolensko; a sutler
belonging to his company was leading
and taking the greatest care of him.
He told me that after having been
taken and plundered by the Cossacks
at Krasnoi, he had contrived to escape,
and that he and his guide would do
their utmost to keep up with us. Soon
afterwards they were found dead and
stripped upon the road.”
Bad as the state of things already
was, it became worse after the passage
of the Beresina; for the cold,
abated for a while, resumed all its
severity, and heavy snow almost
stifled the scanty fires kindled by the
unhappy fugitives. “I myself was
at the end of my resources. I had but
a horse left; my last portmanteau had
been lost at the Beresina; I had nothing
but what I stood in, and we
were still fifty leagues from Wilna,
eighty from the Niemen; but, amidst
so many misfortunes, I took little
account of my personal sufferings and
privations. Like us, Marshal Ney
had lost everything; his aides-de-camp
were dying of hunger, and I
gratefully remember that more than
once they shared with me the scanty
food they managed to procure.” On
the 29th November, during a brief
halt of the 3d corps, a confused stream
of stragglers poured by, all of whom
had to tell of a miraculous escape at
the Beresina. “I remarked an Italian
officer, who scarcely breathed,
borne by two soldiers, and accompanied
by his wife. Greatly touched
by this woman’s grief, and by the
care she lavished on her husband, I
yielded her my place at a fire the men
had lighted. It needed all the illusion
of her affection to blind her to
the inutility of her care. Her husband
had ceased to live, and still she
called and spoke to him; until at last,
no longer able to doubt her misfortune,
she fell fainting upon his
corpse.”
“There would be no end to the
task,” continues M. de Fezensac, “if
one attempted to relate all the horrible,
affecting, and often incredible
anecdotes that signalised that terrible
time. A general, exhausted with
fatigue, had fallen upon the road. A
passing soldier began to pull off his
boots; the general, raising himself
with difficulty, begged him to wait
till he was dead before stripping him.
‘General,’ replied the soldier, ‘I would
willingly do so; but another would
take them; I may as well have the
benefit.’ And he continued to take
off the boots.
“One soldier was being plundered
by another; he entreated to be allowed
to die in peace. ‘Pardon me, comrade,’
was the reply, ‘I thought you
were dead;’ and he passed on. For
the consolation of humanity, a few
traits of sublime devotion contrasted
with the innumerable ones of egotism
and insensibility. That of a drummer
of the 7th regiment of light infantry
has been particularly cited.
His wife, sutler to the regiment, fell
ill at the beginning of the retreat. The
drummer brought her to Smolensko
in her cart. At Smolensko the horse
died; then the husband harnessed
himself to the cart, and dragged his
wife to Wilna. At that town she
was too ill to go any farther, and her
husband remained prisoner with her.
“A sutler of the 33d regiment had
been brought to bed in Prussia, before
the beginning of the campaign. She
followed her regiment to Moscow,
with her little daughter, who was six
months old when the army left that
city. During the retreat this child
lived by a miracle: her sole nourishment
was black pudding made of
horses’ blood: she was wrapped in a
fur taken at Moscow, and often her
head was bare. Twice she was lost;
and they found her again, first in a
field, then in a burnt village, lying on
a mattress. Her mother crossed the
Beresina on horseback, with water to
her neck, holding the bridle in one
hand, and with the other her child
upon her head. Thus, by a succession
of marvellous circumstances, this little
girl got through the retreat without
accident, and did not even take cold.”
For many many leagues before
reaching the Niemen, the harassed
remnant of the great French army
had looked forward to that river as the
term of pursuit. The idea that the
Russians would not pass the Niemen
had taken a strong hold of the imaginations
of both officers and soldiers.
At Kowno, a stand was made by the
rearguard; no very steadfast one,
certainly; but then, as ever, Ney
proved equal to the emergency. An
earthen work, hastily thrown up,
seemed to him sufficient to check the
foe for a whole day. Here were
posted two pieces of cannon, and some
Bavarian infantry; and the marshal
sought a moment’s repose in his
quarters. But the very first discharge
of the Russian artillery dismounted
a French gun; the infantry
took to flight—the gunners were
about to follow. Another minute,
and the Cossacks might enter the
streets unopposed. Just then Ney
appeared upon the ramparts, musket
in hand. His absence had been
nearly fatal; his presence restored
the fight. The troops rallied, and
the position was held till night, when
the retreat recommenced. The bridge
was crossed, and each man, as he set
foot south of the Niemen, deemed
himself safe. Great then was the
consternation of all, when, at the foot
of a lofty hill, over which winds the
road to Königsberg, an alarm was
given, and, at the same moment, a
cannon-ball plunged into their ranks.
The Cossacks had crossed the river
on the ice, and had established themselves
on the summit of the mountain.
This fresh danger, so totally
unexpected, completed the demoralisation
of the troops. Brave spirits,
which, till then, had steadfastly held
out, lost their firmness in face of this
new calamity. There is something
very affecting in the following passage:—
“Generals Marchand and Ledru
succeeded in forming a sort of battalion
by uniting the stragglers to the
3d corps, (again on rearguard.) But
it was in vain to attempt to force a
passage; the muskets were unserviceable,
and the soldiers dared not
advance. There was nothing for it
but to remain under fire of the artillery,
without daring to take a step
backwards, for that would have exposed
us to a charge, and our destruction
was then certain. This position
drove to despair two officers, who had
been a pattern to my regiment during
the whole retreat, but whose courage
at last gave way under long physical
exhaustion. They came to me and
said, that as they were no longer able
either to march or to fight, they should
fall into the hands of the Cossacks,
who would massacre them, and that,
to avoid this, they must return to
Kowno and yield themselves prisoners.
I made useless efforts to dissuade
them, appealing to their feelings
of honour, to the courage of
which they had given so many proofs,
to their attachment to the regiment
they now proposed abandoning; and
I conjured them, if death was inevitable,
at least to die in our company.
For sole reply they embraced me
with tears, and returned into Kowno.
Two other officers had the same fate;
one was intoxicated with rum, and
could not follow us; the other, whom
I particularly loved, disappeared soon
afterwards. My heart was torn: I
waited for death to come and reunite
me to my unhappy comrades, and I
should perhaps have wished for it but
for all the ties which, at that time,
still bound me to life.”
Once more Ney came to the rescue.
No accumulation of difficulties could
cloud his brow with uneasiness. Once
more his promptness and energy
saved his shattered corps. A flank
march was the means resorted to. On
the 20th December, the 3d corps
reached Königsberg. It then consisted
of about one hundred men
on foot, about as many cripples on
sledges, and a handful of officers.
“Monsieur le duc,” wrote Marshal
Ney to the Duke of Feltre, Minister
of War, from Berlin, on the 23d January
1813, “I avail myself of the
moment when the campaign is, if not
terminated, at least suspended, to
express to you all the satisfaction I
have received from M. de Fezensac’s
manner of serving. That young man
has been placed in very critical circumstances,
and has always shown
himself superior to them. I commend
him to you as a true French chevalier,
(veritable chevalier Français,)
whom you may henceforth consider
as a veteran colonel.”
M. de Fezensac almost apologises
for subjoining to his journal this
extract from a letter now in his
possession. He has no need to do
so. He may well and honestly exult
in such a testimonial from such a
man.
THE PENITENT FREE-TRADER.
585
Tufnell! For the love of mercy,
Let me go for half an hour—
I’ll be back before that proser
Hath discussed the price of flour.
Don’t you hear, he’s just beginning
To investigate the rate
Of the Mecklenburg quotations,
Metage, lighterage, and freight?
Next, I know, he’ll pass to Dantzic,
With a glimpse at Rostock wheat—
I have seen the whole already
In his Economic sheet.
See! upon the backward benches
There reposes stealthy Peel—
Dreaming, doubtless, that he’s smothered
In an atmosphere of meal.
Palmerston’s recumbent yonder—
Hawes is sleeping by the door;
Even Russell’s tiny nostril
Quivers with a nascent snore.
Let me go—nay, do not hold me
So intensely by the coat;
I assure you, on my honour,
I’ll be back in time to vote.
Oh, the night-winds wander sweetly
O’er my hot and throbbing brow!
What a contrast is the moonlight
To the scene I left just now!
Let me walk a little onward
Underneath the budding trees,
Where the faint perfume is wafted
On the pinions of the breeze:
Overhead a thousand starlets
Glisten in the robe of night,
And the earth is wrapped in slumber
With a pure and calm delight.
By your leave, good Master Tufnell,
I shall stay a little here;
You have plenty noodles yonder
Who are safe enough to cheer
Wilson’s dunderhead discourses,
Or the cant of Labouchere!
What a dolt was I to credit
All these wild free-trading schemes!
Cobden’s calico predictions,
Porter’s importation dreams!
For I loathed the mean alliance,
Even when I chose to wheel
In the wake of him who led us,
Pinning foolish faith to Peel.
Was I mad, to place my honour
In this most disgusting fix?
Half the world was rather crazy
In the days of Forty-six.
O the happy times of premiums!
O the balmy touch of scrip!
Would that I had sold my bargains
Ere they had me on the hip!
Every day a new allotment
Promised shining heaps of gold;
Every day the mounting market
Swelled my hopes a hundredfold.
I remember old Sir Robert,
With his shirt-sleeves rolled on high,
Lust of speculation gleaming
In his gray and greedy eye;
Turning sods with silver shovel,
Celebrating that event
With a speech on competition
At the opening of the Trent.
I have dined with royal Hudson,
And may dine again, perhaps,
Should another exaltation
Follow on this drear collapse.
All had drunk the wine of gambling,
All had quaffed the share champagne,
Wisdom’s warnings were rejected,
Prudence preached to us in vain.
Madness, frenzy, lust of riches,
Reigned within the minds of all,
That, we thought, must answer Peter
Which had served the turn of Paul.
If, by scorning honest labour,
Men made fortunes in a trice,
What might be the luck of Britain,
Casting with Free-traders’ dice?
I am strongly of opinion—
Looking to my country’s good—
That I’ve stuck by him of Tamworth
Rather longer than I should.
As concerning next election,
I’ve received some pregnant hints,
Both from country correspondents,
And the leading public prints.
Cultivation’s at a discount,
Rents are very slowly paid:
Some aver that sly Sir Robert
Has contrived to coin his spade;
Neither is there much progression
In the wool and cotton trade.
What the deuce would men be after?
If those fellows had their will,
England would be straight converted
To a monstrous cotton-mill.
Everywhere would ghastly chimneys
Vomit forth their odious mist,
Settling, like the breath of Satan,
O’er this island of the blest;
When the only occupation
Would be spinning yarn and twist!
Spin away, my brave compatriots!
Spin as largely as you can;
Who shall dare to set a limit
To the sale of shirts for man?
Whilst the raw material’s granted,
Spin away with might and main;
Use the time that’s still vouchsafed you,
For it may not come again.
There’s a smartish kind of notion
Running in the Yankees’ head,
That they need not be indebted
To your kindness for their thread.
In the meanwhile go for cheapness,
Smite the farmers hip and thigh—
Making honest people bankrupt
Is the way to make them buy.
Starve the masses of the nation,
Drive them all into the mills;
Clear the plains and sweep the valleys,
Desolate the Highland hills.
Let the rough hard-fisted yeoman,
All too clumsy for the loom,
Migrate to the western prairies,
Where for labour still there’s room.
Let the peasant and the cottar
Quit the useless plough and spade—
Built for them are costly mansions,
Raised for them are rates in aid.
To the workhouse let them gather,
Or by theft attain the jail;
Honesty has bread and water,
Crime is fed on beef and ale.
O the glorious consummation
Of this truly Christian scheme,
Such as never saint or prophet
Witnessed in ecstatic dream!
Wasted fields and crowded cities,
Swarming streets and desert downs,
All the light of life concentred
In the focus of the towns!
Yea, exult, ye foes of England!
In the downfall of the race
That of yore, in fiery combat,
Met your fathers face to face:
For the pride of lusty manhood,
And the giant Saxon frame,
Never more shall be embattled
In the coming fields of fame;
Shrunken sinews, sallow faces,
Twisted limbs, and factory scars—
These shall mark your next opponents
In the European wars.
Not such yeomen as with Alfred
Won their freedom long ago—
Such as on the plain of Crecy
Triumphed o’er a worthy foe—
Such as drove invasion backward,
Have their homes in Britain now!
This at least our sons may utter,
Blushing for their fathers’ shame—
Brain me with a billy-roller,
If I longer play this game,
Either for the crimp of Tamworth,
Or his first lieutenant, Graham!
No, by Jove! I will not suffer
Degradation of the kind—
What care I for Johnny Russell,
With his hungry host behind?
Let them blunder on insanely,
Digging holes within the sand,
Thinking, like the stupid ostrich,
To escape the hunter’s hand.
Let them shirk the facts before them,
Comforting themselves the while,
That their Economic asses
Can the public ear beguile.
Lord! to hear the blockheads braying,
Spite of proof before their eyes—
“I assure the house,” quoth Wilson,
“Wheat must very shortly rise.
It was so-and-so at Dantzic
More than twenty years ago;
Therefore wait a little longer—
’Twill be up again, I know.”
Jolly Villiers, on the other
Hand, with exultation vows,
More than one-and-ninety millions
Have been plundered from the ploughs;
And he hopes before another
Year shall run its destined course,
To congratulate the public
That affairs are worse and worse.
I, for one, am sick and weary
Of these everlasting prigs;
Quite disgusted with the shuffling
Of the miserable Whigs;
With their impudent averments,
And their flagrant thimblerigs!
Hark, the midnight chimes! I fancy
The palaver’s nearly over:
For to-night let Johnny Russell
And his colleagues rest in clover.
But, upon the next occasion,
When there’s talk about a tax,
Whether it shall weigh on foreign
Or on native British backs,
Master Tufnell must excuse me,
If I seek another lobby
Than the one that’s now frequented
By my former chief, Sir Bobby!
TENOR OF THE TRADE CIRCULARS.
589
$1
TO THE EDITOR OF BLACKWOOD’S MAGAZINE.
Sir,—That a period of severe commercial
suffering is approaching us, in
which the ruinous condition of the
agricultural classes will recoil disastrously,
not only upon the selfish
Free-trade agitators in the manufacturing
districts, but also upon the
importers of foreign produce, the
broker, the factor, the shopkeeper,
and the labourers in our towns, has
for some months been patent to all
who have dispassionately watched the
current of events, and been able to
draw correct conclusions from what is
going on before their eyes. It is not
to official tables of exports and imports
that such men look as the
indices of the nation’s prosperity.
They turn rather to $1 of these
operations, as disclosed in our commercial
circulars; to the degree of
confidence displayed by bankers in
their dealings with their customers,
and by merchants in their transactions
with each other; to the movements
of produce in our leading
markets, and to the amount of activity
which characterises the internal trade
and the consumption of the country.
They are guided, too, very materially,
by the general feeling of merchants
and traders, expressed in their daily
communications with each other, on
‘Change, or in the intercourse of
private life. Such a mode I propose
to employ, in investigating the real
condition of the cotton manufacturing
districts of the north of England; and
the result of this investigation, which
I shall now proceed to lay before
your readers, will, I fear, dissipate
somewhat rudely the dream of prosperity
in which her Majesty’s
Ministers, and their supporters in
Parliament and throughout the country,
are just now indulging.
In pursuing such an inquiry, the
condition of the port of Liverpool, the
great mart of this portion of the kingdom,
naturally suggests itself as of
prominent interest. In this port, by the
result of our vast operations in imported
foreign and colonial produce, the
actual results of our export trade in
manufactures, and the consuming
power of the large population which
draw their supplies from it, can be
tested with considerable fairness. In
an article in your last Number, I find
a quotation from the monthly circular
of Messrs T. and H. Littledale & Co.,
whom you truly designate as perhaps
the greatest brokers in the world. A
portion of this I must re-quote, in
order to enable your readers the
better to appreciate some later observations
of these gentlemen. On
the 4th of March, Messrs Littledale
wrote:—
“$1 The
serious falling off in the deliveries of
sugar, coffee, tea, and cocoa, for the two
months of this year, compared with those
of the last, but too truly confirms these
complaints, and are perhaps the most
alarming features in our present prospects.
As given in Prince’s public
prices current of the 1st inst., they stand
as follows:—
1850.
1849.
1848.
Sugar,
37,006
43,408
42,368 tons
Coffee,
3,795,712
4,907,691
pounds
Cocoa,
450,774
558,888
Tea,
5,375,648
5,502,931
The circular of this house, dated
the 4th of April, has since been published,
in which they confirm their
previous statement; and indeed show
that the condition of the country, as
tested by its consumption of imported
produce, is retrograding. We quote
the following as their summary:—
“$1—Another month
of dull spiritless trade, as well in our produce
markets as in the manufacturing
districts of Lancashire. The demand for
consumption has somewhat improved from
exhaustion of stocks in the hands of
dealers; but we regret to find the deficiency
in deliveries of the principal
articles noticed in our circular of last
month (tea excepted) has still further
increased, which speaks ill for the internal
state of the country; in fact, $1.
“Corn has fallen so low in value, that
$1.
This falls immediately on the wholesale
dealers, from them on the importing merchants,
and eventually, if no revival take
place, must act with double force on the
manufacturers in a diminished home
trade and in crippled exports, which
latter must ever depend on our power to
take the products of other countries as
returns for our manufactures. To what
class, then, are the present ruinous low
prices of grain a blessing? We emphatically
say $1; indeed it is quite
impossible for so large a portion of the
community as that connected with agriculture
to be depressed, and the other
portions long to continue prosperous; and
probably the best impulse we could receive,
in the present inactive state of our
colonial markets, would be an advance of
5s., to 10s. per qr., in the price of wheat.
There is no doubt, also, that the fearful
depreciation of railway property, which
appears a bottomless abyss of mismanagement
and ruin, tells cruelly on the available
resources of a very large proportion
of the people, and adds seriously to the
embarrassment of trade.”
In glancing over this circular in
detail, we find opposite nearly every
important item the words, “has
moved off at easier prices,” “is less
inquired for,” “is dull,” or some other
phrase significant of commercial depression;
yet, during the preceding
month, the stocks on hand, owing to
the prevalence of easterly winds,
which had kept a large number of
vessels windbound outside the Channel,
had received very little augmentation.
It must be borne in mind
that the dealings of this firm extend
over nearly every description of
foreign produce—certainly every large
one, timber and iron excepted;—and
that the money amount of their annual
transactions may be reckoned by many
millions sterling. Further inquiries
amongst other houses enable me to
state confidently that, with the exception
of a few trifling articles, the mass
of the produce, which is pouring into
Liverpool, arrives at an unprofitable
market. In cotton alone, amongst
the leading imports, a small margin
of profit may at present be secured,
the abundance of unemployed money
in the hands of the banks allowing the
speculators, for a short crop, to inflate
prices. Such a case, however, tells
nothing in favour of a sound state of
things. The question of most material
import is, whether either the
foreign demand, or the home consumption,
is so urgently requiring
supply, as to enable the manufacturer
of cotton goods to concede the advanced
rates demanded for the staple,
by the American grower, or the
speculator at home. Present appearances
scarcely warrant such an expectation.
The following opinion
upon the subject, given by a leading
firm in the trade, Messrs George
Holt & Co., in their circular of the
12th April, expresses the opinion of
all except the most sanguine:—
“We can hardly account for this tendency
of prices,”—(they had slightly advanced
during the week)—“or lay before
our readers any new circumstances affecting
the value of the staple. No doubt
confidence in the shortness of the American
crop remains, and probably is on the
increase. We may add also that stocks
in spinners’ hands are at a low ebb. Still
$1”
“Depression so long in existence!”
A great majority of the public, with
the speech from the Throne, and the
prosperity-speeches of movers and
seconders of the Address before them,
imagined that the cotton districts, at
all events, were flourishing!
A later circular of the produce
market, published upon the authority
of the entire brokers of the port, exhibits
the state of the general produce
market in even a worse light than
that of Messrs Littledale, quoted
above. I append it here:—
“Liverpool Prices Current, Imports,
&c. for the week ending $1. Arranged by a Committee of
Brokers.—T. M. Myers, $1.
“Sugar.—Holders continuing to offer
freely, there has been a fair amount of
business, but at rather lower prices;
450 hhds. B. P., of which 300 were new
Barbadoes, sold at 34s. 6d. to 41s., 3500
bags Bengal at 34s. to 40s., 1600 bags
Khaur at 28s. 6d., and 3500 bags Mauritius
at 36s. to 36s. 6d., being a decline of
6d. to 1s. per cwt.—$1—180 hhds.
Porto Rico, of the new crop, sold at 40s.
per cwt. duty paid; the export demand
continues slack, and sales are only 24
cases, 150 bags and brls. Brazil and 100
boxes Havanna.—Molasses.—The new
arrivals coming in have induced holders
of last year’s crop to take much lower
prices than have been hitherto accepted;
the sales are 500 puns. Porto Rico at
15s. 6d., 400 Cuba at 15s. 6d. to 16s., and
300 Barbadoes at 15s. per cwt.; the two
cargoes of new Porto Rico, just arrived,
have been sent to store, the importers
not being willing to accept the low price
offered by the Trade; the quotations are
reduced accordingly.—Coffee.—The recent
import of Jamaica has been freely
offered, and the slight improvement that
existed ten days ago is entirely lost,
prices being now as low as ever. 80
tierces have been sold, at 46s. 9d. to 54s.
for low to fine ordinary, and 62s. to 100s.
for low to fine middling—the latter
quotation being 15s. below the rates of
January. 100 bags native Ceylon were
sold early in the week at 52s. 6d., but
that price is not now obtainable, the
nominal value being about 48s. per cwt.—A
small parcel of Bahia Cocoa sold at
33s. per cwt.—Nothing done in Ginger
or Pepper, but a small lot of Pimento
brought 6⅛d. per lb., being an extreme
price.—Rice.—No sales of Carolina;
13,000 bags East brought 7s. 6d. for
broken, and 8s. 6d. to 9s. 9d. for low to
good white, being a decline of fully 6d.
per cwt.—Rum is difficult of sale, except
at lower prices; the business consists of
200 puns. Demerara, 32 to 37 per cent
O. P. at 2s. 2d. to 2s. 4½d. per gallon.”
There is a further decline, it will be
seen, in every important article; and
the most experienced houses, I find,
are at a loss to tell at what point it
will stop. It is generally admitted
that, but for the accommodation
which the large holders can command,
there must have been a general crash
long ere this, which would have overwhelmed
half the mercantile community
in ruin. This would have reacted
fearfully upon the shopkeepers
in the interior of the country, whose
credits would have been suddenly
stopped, whilst their overdue accounts
would necessarily have been sternly
exacted. In fact the bulk of this class
at present stand upon the verge of an
abyss, into which a sudden panic may
hurry them at any moment.
It will doubtless be urged that this
state of the produce market is only
temporary; that importations, having
become profitless, will be discontinued,
and the supply thus become equal to
the demand. This would be the natural
course of things under a sound
system; but no sign of cessation of
imports is at present to be seen; and
it is much to be questioned whether
any such cessation can take place,
without throwing a large portion of
our manufacturing population into
very serious distress, if not into
anarchy and outbreak. If importation
of produce is restricted, exportation
must be restricted in proportion.
The manufacturer has thrown himself
into almost total dependence upon
the foreign buyer of his wares. With a
flourishing home market for manufactures,
a glut of produce might be got
rid of without difficulty. But the same
cause—an inability of the masses to
consume—which depresses the prices
of produce, now exists equally with
respect to the home market for manufactured
goods; and to stop production
and exports, with a view to
enhance the value of the stocks of produce
already received in remittance
from the foreigner, would add another
element to the perplexity in which the
nation is plunged. This portion of
the subject, however, it is not for me
to discuss here. I only refer to it in
order to express the opinions which
are beginning to be mooted in influential
commercial circles.
In order to be enabled to state,
as much as possible upon my own
knowledge, the extent to which
the internal markets of the country
are depressed, and the consumption
of produce is declining, I have instituted
inquiries among some of the
leading houses in Liverpool, who
send travellers into the country,
and the reports given are fully as discouraging
as those given by Messrs
Littledale, as to the difficulty both of
making sales and collecting accounts.
From a gentleman connected with a
leading firm in the tea trade, I learn
that in the country over which their
travellers prosecute their business,
the orders which they receive are for
very limited quantities, and are, in
fact, demonstrative of what, in mercantile
parlance, is styled “a hand to
mouth” business. Excessive caution
and want of spirit characterise the
feelings of the retail trade everywhere.
Some of these parties, he suggests,
may have locked up a portion of their
capital in railway investments, or perhaps
lost it. Still, hand to mouth
orders—orders for a week’s instead of
a month’s consumption, would tell in
the long run, if they served to make
up the aggregate of past years. But
they do not. The consumption of this
necessary article is found to be declining;
and the objection of the
retail dealer to order as largely as
usual is accounted for, in the majority
of cases, by the inability of
the farming and middle classes to
pay their accounts as punctually as
heretofore. It must be borne in
mind, in treating of the consumption
of such an article as tea—and
I may include coffee, sugar, &c.—that
they frequently form the substitute
for the poor man’s meal. When
the consumption of tea declines, in
times acknowledged to be bad, it is
the worst sign of the condition of the
community.
Another gentleman connected with
an extensive firm in the grocery trade,
gives still more discouraging accounts.
The travellers of this firm extend their
operations over the whole of the Midland
Counties and the North of England.
Their reports to their employers
are most lugubrious. For
example, one of them, a few weeks
ago, remitted home £120, whereas his
accounts due were about £1500. As
to sales, these are most difficult to
make. Consumption is gradually
and rapidly declining. Retail dealers
in the country towns complain that
the farmers no longer expend the
money they have been accustomed to
do, when visiting markets; but confine
their consumption of food more
and more to the products raised upon
their own lands. One of the travellers
of this firm journeys through the
counties of Cumberland and Westmoreland,
in which for many years an
extensive trade has been carried on
in the curing of bacon and hams.
This trade he represents as now
almost extinct, or rapidly becoming so—the
parties engaged in it being unable
to compete with the importers
of the low-priced hams and bacon of
America. Of this class are the farmers
of the country which owns Sir
James Graham as their feudal lord,
and of whom that distinguished statesman
asserted, in the debate on the
Address, that they must be in a state
of plethoric prosperity, inasmuch as
he had never had his rents better paid
than at his last rent-day. The worthy
baronet forgot to say that rent is the
last debt that a tenant farmer will
omit to pay, the landlord having a
power which overrides the claims of
all other creditors. If he could have
added that his farmers’ tradesmen’s
bills had been equally well paid, he
would have imparted some information
most gratifying to the community.
Neither this house, nor any
other that I have conversed with, can
see any termination to the present
declining state of things. It is becoming
admitted, amongst the circles
with which their travellers mix, that
reductions of rent are wholly unequal
to meet the emergency of the present
crisis.
It is proper that I should refer to
one trade in Liverpool which is most
prosperous—in fact, the only prosperous
one. This is the trade of the
merchants engaged in, and others
connected with, the emigration of our
fellow-countrymen, to seek a home
in foreign lands. The following are
the statistics of this trade, kindly furnished
me by a gentleman officially
connected with the shipping of emigrants
from Liverpool:—
Ships.
Emigrants.
Emigration in
1847
514
128,447
Do.
1848
519
124,522
Do.
1849
565
146,162
During the present year the emigration
has been—
January,
6943
Persons.
February,
8779
„
March,
16,783
„
Cabin emigrants,
705
„
At the present moment, notwithstanding
the large increase in the
shipping—principally American—provided
for the trade, berths, and
these at very high prices, are most
difficult to be got, unless detention
is submitted to. Moreover, a great
change has taken place in the kind
of persons emigrating. Last year,
the same gentleman informs me, four-fifths
of the parties emigrating consisted
of substantial small farmers
from Ireland and elsewhere, and
skilled artisans from this country.
This year, a very superior class of
English farmers are leaving a land
which no longer affords them a living
in exchange for their honest industry.
The quays of Liverpool daily present
a scene, which few thinking men can
rejoice in, and which the country will
have to regret. The aged as well as
the mature, mothers with infants at
the breast, and stalwart youths and
maidens, going from vessel to vessel,
to select that particular one whose departure
from our shores will cut for
ever their connexion with the country
which they have loved, and in which
they leave behind the graves of
their fathers. It is melancholy to
think upon the misery there must be
amidst all this activity, with the momentary
absence of regret for old scenes,
and enjoyment of the new ones, into
which these poor people find themselves
thrown. Yet we cannot but
feel satisfied that they are about to
be bettered in condition by the change.
The depression complained of, as
existing in Liverpool, is by no means
confined to the classes immediately
connected with the staple commerce
of the port, but pervades all classes
of the community without exception.
The produce of half a world is stored
in the warehouses of Liverpool, or
floating in her magnificent docks.
The capital of her merchants is embarked
in every clime, and her
shipping crowds every foreign port;
yet her industrious population are
plunged in suffering and embarrassment,
and a portion of them—her
labouring classes, pressed down by
the influx of pauper competition from
the hordes of immigrants from ruined
Ireland—are continually upon the
verge of actual starvation. It is distressing
to witness the shifts to which
tradesmen are compelled to resort,
from time to time, in order to meet
engagements, and to stave off, by
sacrifices of their goods, the day of
ruin. “Selling off” announcements,
under all kinds of pretexts, meet the
eye in every direction, and yet tempt
in vain. The whole community appear
to be economising; and tardily
paid bills, and reduced expenditure
in the comforts, and even in some of
the necessities of life, is the rule, not
the exception. The extent to which
this is carried, and the suffering existing
amongst the middle classes, may
be judged of by the fact that it has
already affected the incomes of many
of the clergy of the town, by diminishing
the numbers of their congregations
and the yield of pew-rents.
In one instance which has been
mentioned to me, the income of a
clergyman, universally beloved, has
been thus cut down from £600
a-year, to little more than half;
and this is far from being a solitary
case.
The result of this state of things is
already being felt in a strong reaction,
amongst those once the loudest in its
advocacy, against the system of Free
Trade. Doubts are freely hazarded
with respect to the soundness of a
policy which has produced such fruit;
and the question is upon the lips of
numbers,—“Where is the prosperity
which was promised to us?” If Mr
Cobden or Sir Robert Peel were to
present themselves in Liverpool at
the present moment, they would have
to answer this question, not to the
uninquiring crowds who would have
cheered their fallacies three years
ago, but to men who have reflected
deeply, and had deep cause for such
reflection. The Right Hon. Baronet,
in particular, would perhaps have to
reply to another question, and to go
a little back in the history of his political
life. He would be asked not
only, Who had benefited by his
Free-trade measures?—a difficult one
enough to answer—but what class of
the community had been aggrandised
$1. To this vital subject the minds
of the intelligent mercantile community
of Liverpool, of all shades of
politics, are being rapidly directed.
The Free-trader sees, in the operation
of our monetary laws, one leading
source of the evil brought upon the
country by the carrying out of his
favourite measure. He is prepared
to acknowledge that Free-trade and
a Restricted Currency are incompatible
things. And the mercantile body
of all political parties still remember
the disasters of 1847 and 1848; and
the insulting manner in which their
prayer, in the October of the previous
year, for relief from the unexampled
money pressure, which was
then prostrating the most extensive
and solvent firms, was denied by a
flippant and shallow Chancellor of the
Exchequer, although at that moment
the nation was within a few days of
bankruptcy. These things are not
forgotten; and, from the impressions
which I have been able to form, from
a close examination of popular opinion,
I should not be surprised to see the
influential community of Liverpool
throwing politics and party to the
winds, and uniting their efforts to
procure a relief from the monstrous
system which at present withers and
strangles in its grasp the industry
of England—which tempts us one
day, by its lavish kindness, to erect
vast structures of commercial enterprise
and usefulness; and the
next day dashes them into wrecks
before our eyes, to be scrambled
for by greedy extortioners and selfish
usurers.
It is the fear of this power which,
to a great extent, is at the present
moment paralysing the enterprise of
the commercial communities, which
would otherwise have succeeded in
neutralising a portion at least, but
certainly only a portion, of the ruinous
effects of Free-trade. A few
years ago, no community embarked
more largely in those railway investments,
so strongly recommended to
them by the fosterer of the system, Sir
Robert Peel, than the mercantile
people of Liverpool. The extent to
which such investments were encouraged
by the lavish offer of banking
facilities to merchants and others,
may be judged of by the fact, that
the Directors of one Liverpool Bank
were, a few weeks ago, compelled to
acknowledge to their shareholders,
that nearly the whole of their subscribed
capital was advanced upon
railway stock; and that their Rest,
amounting to £100,000, had entirely
disappeared. This species of security
is now, by the caution with
which capitalists act, rendered totally
unavailable for the purpose of raising
money, when required for legitimate
commercial purposes. Hence the
timid apprehension with which men,
thus situated, regard the accumulation
of stocks of produce, for which
no remunerative market at present
offers itself; and the consumption of
which is so obviously on the decline.
Hence also the pressure to sell, when
they see cargo after cargo pouring in
to augment those stocks; the unwillingness
to part with funds, for which
the shopkeeper and the tradesman
are eagerly longing, to enable them
to sustain their tottering credit; and
that total suspension of all internal
enterprise and improvement, which
is driving so many thousands of our
skilled workmen to other countries,
and the labourer to that desolate
resort for the very poor—the Union
Workhouse. To the attempt to carry
out a Free-trade, involving the holding
of large stocks of produce and
extended operations in foreign markets,
with a currency artificially restricted
by the last Banking Act
of Sir Robert Peel, and further
restricted by the caution with which
bankers are now conducting their
business, since the severe warning
inflicted upon them in 1847, is
attributable not only the commercial
depression already noticed, but also
that fearful sacrifice of realised capital,
which has taken place from the
decline in the saleable value of railway
shares, and which, in Liverpool
alone, has rendered hundreds of once
wealthy men comparatively poor
ones, and brought many, in the
decline of their days, to a condition
lower than that even in which they
began the world.
Such is the condition generally of
the mercantile community of Liverpool—that
port of all others in the
kingdom which was most largely to
be benefited by the advent of the
Free-trade system. From the apex to
the base of the social fabric all is uncertainty,
fear, and suffering, too intense
any longer to be concealed from
the most superficial observer; and the
crisis has not yet been reached. The
reaction has still to come from the
manufacturing districts, which, up to
within the past few months, in the
enjoyment of a moderate amount of
activity, caused by a temporary revival
of the export demand, are only
now beginning to feel the results of
the system which, in their selfishness,
they invented for their own aggrandisement,
at the expense of the industry
of the whole empire.
The avowed object of the Free-trader
was to stimulate the export trade in cotton
goods, which it was always boasted
was the most valuable to the manufacturer.
So far as regards the quantity
of the raw material consumed for
the export trade, this is an undisputed
fact; but that the amount of skill and
labour employed in it is equal to that
expended upon goods consumed in the
home market is not true. In order to
arrive at an idea of the relative value
of the two trades, it will be necessary
for me to bring before the reader a
few figures and authorities. In the
excellent Commercial Glance, compiled
for many years by the late Mr John
Burn of Manchester, and now continued
by his son, the following statement
was given, as the mode in which
the cotton spun in 1845 was disposed
of. I take that year as being one of
great prosperity in the home market,
and as showing the state of things antecedent
to the introduction of free
trade in corn.
Statement of the Cotton Spun in England and Scotland in 1845, and of the quantity of Yarn produced, showing also how the quantity spun in England was disposed of.
Lbs.
Total cotton consumed, in lbs.,
555,527,283
Allowed for loss in spinning, 1¾ oz. per lb.,
60,760,796
Total yarn produced in England and Scotland,
494,766,487
Deduct spun in Scotland in 1845,
27,737,022
Total spun in England in 1845,
467,029,465
Lbs.
Exported in yarn during the year,
131,937,935
Exported in thread do.,
2,567,705
Exported in manufactured cotton goods,
302,360,687
Estimated quantity of yarn sent to Scotland and Ireland,
10,734,859
Exported in mixed manufactures, consumed in cotton banding, healds, candle and lamp wick, waddings, socks, calender bowls, paper, umbrellas, hats, and loss in manufacturing goods,
31,655,230
Balance left for home consumption and stock, 1st January
87,773,049
467,029,465
===========
I have the most perfect confidence
in the correctness of Mr Burn’s calculations,
being personally acquainted
with that gentleman, and knowing the
excellent sources from which he derives
his information, and the care
which he devotes to the accuracy of
all his facts. The result to which the
above statement leads is, that the consumption
of raw cotton in goods sold
in our home markets is 18·36 per cent
only, upon the total quantity of yarn
spun in England. This, a superficial
observer will say, is a very trivial
quantity for our boasted home consumption.
Let us see, however, in
what stage of manufacture, and in
what description of goods, the cotton
taken off by foreign markets principally
consists. In the first place,
131,937,935 lbs., or 28 per cent of the
total cotton spun, was exported, as
shown in the table above, in the shape
of yarn, an article but one remove
from the raw material, and the manufacture
of which employs machinery
principally, and leaves only a small
margin of profit to the country. With
respect to the description of goods, in
the manufacture of which for the
foreign market the remainder of the raw
material is consumed, little difficulty
is felt by persons acquainted practically
with the subject. Mr M‘Culloch,
in his Dictionary of Commerce,
page 456 of the edition of 1847—the
latest I have before me—remarks upon
the facts as striking, that, notwithstanding
the superiority of our machinery,
and this branch thus being
one in which we most greatly excel
our foreign rivals, the proportion of
fine to coarse yarns spun has materially
decreased; and that, in fact, the
actual quantity of fine yarns has decreased,
whilst the total consumption of
cotton has quadrupled during the last
twenty-five years. That the quantity
has decreased to this extreme extent
may well be doubted, although the
cheapening which has taken place in
silk and other fabrics during this period
has, we know, to a great extent
caused the disuse, for home consumption,
of many once highly prized
articles of the cotton manufacture.
We may accept, however, the admission
of Mr M‘Culloch, as bearing
upon the quality of those goods which
are taken off by the foreign trade, and
of which the great increase in the
manufacture must consist. These are,
confessedly, the coarse, heavy fabrics,
into the manufacture of which the
$1 amount of skill and labour
enters. We approach then, from this
point, to a view of the comparative
value to the country of the home and
the export trade in cotton goods. In
the same work, Mr M‘Culloch estimates
the total annual value of the
cotton manufacture of the kingdom
at £36,000,000 sterling, of which
£10,000,000 is put down for the cost
of the raw material, £17,000,000 for
wages, and £9,000,000 for profits,
wages of superintendence, and cost of
machinery, coals, &c. I am a little
inclined to believe that this calculation
is underdrawn, the leaning of
the author being to exaggerate the
importance of the export trade, the
declared value of which in 1845 was
£26,119,231, leaving a little under
£10,000,000 as the consumption
of the home market, or about two-fifths
of the consumption of the foreign.
In estimating the value to the
country, however, of the home trade,
we have a right to take into consideration
the fact that the great component
material of the goods which
we consume at home consists of labour;
for, whilst the proportion of the
raw material consumed in the home
trade was little over one-fifth of that
consumed in the foreign, the value of
the goods was two-fifths.
Admitting, however, Mr M‘Culloch’s
version of the case to be correct,
but at the same time bearing in mind
the fact of his being a somewhat prejudiced
authority, let us apply the
figures given to the present condition
of the manufacturing interest. The
average quantity of cotton taken
weekly from Liverpool for consumers’
use, was, from 1st of January to 12th
of April 1849, 29,475 bales. It has
been this year, up to the same date,
23,176 bales—a falling off of 6299
bales weekly, or a little above a fifth of
the preceding year’s importations. Perhaps
a portion of this decline in apparent
consumption may be accounted for by
the fact that the stock in the hands of
spinners has, to a considerable extent,
been allowed by them to become exhausted,
through their unwillingness
to pay the advanced prices recently
demanded for the raw material. With
respect to the prudence of this policy,
and its probable effect in still further
increasing the embarrassment of
affairs, I shall have something to say by
and by; at present, the question which
presses is—In what market has this
decreased consumption occurred? The
answer must be—In that market which
pays for the greatest amount of labour
expended upon the manufacture of
cotton goods—in the home market.
I have not within my reach the most
authentic record of the Cotton Trade,
for the period up to which I should
desire to extend my inquiries—viz.,
Burn’s Commercial Glance, which is
only made up half yearly. I have,
however, before me this gentleman’s
Monthly Colonial Circular, dated
March the 18th, in which I observe a
considerable increase in the exports
of plain calicoes, printed and dyed
calicoes, and cotton yarn to the following
markets, with a few exceptions,
for the first two months of the present
year:—Calcutta, Bombay (increase in
printed and dyed and in yarn, and
small decrease in plain only); Madras
(considerable increase in plain and
printed and dyed, and small decrease
in yarn); Singapore and Manilla
(small decrease in printed and dyed
and in yarn only); Batavia (large increase
in all kinds); Hong Kong and
Canton (large increase in plain, and
small decline in printed); Shanghae
(trade removed to other Chinese ports
in which there is a large increase):
Australian Colonies (increase in all
kinds); Mauritius (stationary); Cape
of Good Hope (increase in all); Coast
of Africa (decline in all); Jamaica
(decrease in plain and increase in
printed); Honduras (increase); other
West Indian ports (decrease); Cuba
and St Thomas (both increase);
French West Indies (increase in
printed and small decline in plain);
Brazils (large increase); Chili and
Peru (large decrease); Colombia (decrease);
River Plata (considerable
decrease); Mexico (increase in plain,
and decrease in printed); British
North America (season for shipments
not commenced); and United States
(increase in both printed and plain,
and a large business done, the shipments
for the two months being upwards
of half of the entire quantity
exported in 1849.) Compared with
the average of the same period of the
preceding three years, there is an increase
to nearly every market. With
respect to the shipments to European
markets, I cannot speak with precision
as to quantities, from the circumstance,
which I have named, of the accounts
not having been yet made up. From
the monthly return from the Board of
Trade, however, it appears that a
general increase has taken place in the
declared value of cotton manufactures
to all markets, the amount being in
1850, £3,264,350 for the two months,
against £2,837,300 last year. There
is a very trifling decline in the export
of yarns. From my own observation,
I should augur that the increase has
extended over March, to the United
States and the markets of the Pacific
especially—an unusual stimulus having
been given to the consumption of
these markets by the Californian discoveries.
By the bye, I ought to mention,
in connexion with the increase
in the declared value of our exports
this year, the fact that, owing to the
advance in the price of the raw material,
the value of goods exported will
be rated higher than last year. To
some extent, however, the severe
winter of this year preventing the
early opening of the navigation of the
rivers of the north of Europe, as compared
with the mild season last year,
may be a set-off. The Mediterranean
trade, and the operations of
the Greek houses, have also been
limited by our petty quarrel in this
part of Europe.
Assuming, however, the actual
quantity of cotton consumed by the
Export Trade to have been equal to
that consumed last year up to this
period, and allowing for 40,000 bales,
alleged by spinners to have been
drawn from their own stocks instead
of the Liverpool market, $1. When it is
considered that these goods consist of
the finer fabrics, in which the greatest
amount of labour is employed, and
upon which the largest percentage of
profit is realised, whilst those consumed
in the foreign markets are sold
at the lowest margin of profit, and
when exported frequently result in
heavy losses to the shipper, the extent
of the sacrifice made by the manufacturing
community, in their mad adoption
of a policy which has destroyed
the Home market, may readily be
seen.
The correctness of these calculations
has been borne out by the
general character of the Home Trade
during the past four months, in which
stagnation, and difficulty in accomplishing
sales to consumers and retailers
throughout the country, early
manifested themselves. In the month
of January, strong hopes were entertained,
by the majority of the houses
engaged in this branch of the business,
that the worst of the embarrassment
which had so long hung over the
cotton manufacturing districts had
passed over; and that a wholesome
and active trade was before them.
The circulars of the month of February,
and the reports given week by
week in the local journals published
in the manufacturing districts, resumed
their gloomy statements; and
the home demand, it became clear,
had returned to its previous lethargic
state. From communications entered
into with some of the country
houses, I have derived intelligence
respecting the result of their operations,
almost precisely similar to those
sent home by the representatives of
produce houses as given above. The
country buyers who come to the market
display an entire want of their
accustomed spirit, and buy sparingly
an inferior class of goods to those
which they have been, in former
years, in the habit of consuming. The
universal complaint of these parties,
and of commercial travellers engaged
in the Home Trade, is of declining
consumption and ill-paid accounts,
especially throughout the purely agricultural
districts. One circumstance
has tended in some measure to prevent
the trade becoming absolutely
ruinous—viz., the fact that cotton
fabrics are now resorted to by many
classes from motives of economy. The
farmer’s and the tradesman’s wife and
daughters make a fashion of necessity,
and substitute printed cotton dresses
for more expensive articles. A cotton
shirt supplies moderately well the
place of a linen one. Articles of elegance
and luxury, however, even of
this material, are complained of as
most difficult of sale. In some of the
large towns, a few houses are doing a
fair business in heavy fabrics, such as
fustians, moleskins, and other articles
worn by the artisans and other working
classes; and in some fancy goods
of the same description for the middle
classes. This fact, however, is in a
great measure an $1 of the declining
condition of the country generally,
the articles in question being
worn, in a majority of cases, as substitutes
for the more costly woollen
fabrics. Moreover, no profit accrues
to the manufacturer from these goods,
their production at existing rates of
the raw material being, on the contrary,
attended with absolute loss.
The retail trade in the manufacturing
towns themselves, represented as
being in such a satisfactory condition,
is anything but good, a considerable
portion of the population being employed
only two or three days in the
week, and the whole having been compelled
during the past two or three
years to submit to reduction of wages,
as the price of their boasted boon of
Free-trade. This is particularly the
case in the districts of Rochdale,
(John Bright’s district,) Heywood,
Bury, Middleton, &c. The effect of
preceding years’ short-time working
is still severely felt, last year having
been the only one since 1846—when
we had the boasted measure of Sir
Robert Peel, and the “heavy blow
and great discouragement” was inflicted
upon British agriculture and
our sugar-growing colonies—that the
manufacturing population have been
fully employed.
Such being the acknowledged condition
of the home market for manufactured
goods, the question naturally
presents itself—what has been the result,
so far as profit is concerned, of
the operations generally of the manufacturing
community during the past
four months? In reply to this question,
it will be very easy to prove that
thus far, in the present year, they have
been the reverse of remunerative.
The following extract from the circular
of Messrs M‘Nair, Greenhow, and
Irving, of Manchester—one of the best
published, although putting rather the
best face upon things—dated the 31st
of December last year, will show the
prospects with which manufacturers
entered upon the present year:—
“Manchester, $1.
“Exactly twelve months ago we represented
the transactions of the closing
month as having been almost unprecedented
in extent, considering the season
of the year; and to-day we are happy to
have in our power to communicate a
pretty similar statement with regard to
the present month, repeating what we
have often remarked, that $1 in
ordinary years is generally marked by
dulness and inactivity.
“The position of the market, as indicated
in our last (monthly) circular, continued
for about ten days afterwards
gradually acquiring greater force and depression,
and accompanied with a decline
in the value of many descriptions of
cloth and twist. At that period, from a
very prevalent belief that the commencement
of the new year would be characterised
by improvement, an active and vigorous
demand for export and the home
trade ensued, which has, notwithstanding
the interruption of the holiday season,
continued up to the present time, rendering
the stocks of all kinds of light goods,
as well as of some numbers of mule twist,
exceedingly light, and placing many
manufacturers and spinners under contract
for some time hence.”
Another authority, Messrs Hollinshead,
Tetley, & Co., an old-established
cotton firm of Liverpool, who are
generally in the possession of the best
information, remarked upon the prospects
of the district in their circular
of the first of January as follows:—
“Prospects for the general trade of the
country, at least as regards the principal
articles of export, more particularly cotton
fabrics, were perhaps never more promising;
and it is evident that the late disturbing
causes, political and social, in
Europe and India, with the effects produced
upon other countries, reducing the
consumption of cotton to 22,230 weekly
in 1847, and 27,602 in 1848, (previously
upwards of 30,000 bales weekly,) created
a vacuum which has not been filled up by
the increased consumption of 30,512 bales
weekly in the present year; indeed it
would seem that this large quantity (and
it has been proportionately great in other
cotton manufacturing countries) has only
been sufficient to supply the increasing
wants of the world, as we no longer hear
of glutted markets, but the report is of
light stocks almost everywhere. And
when we take into consideration the low
price of all articles of food, corn particularly,
(a questionable advantage, perhaps,
when unnaturally low, if the home market
is to be considered of any value,) the
great abundance of money, its low value,
not exceeding, perhaps, 2½ per cent per
annum in the London market, with a
larger amount of gold, &c. (£17,000,000)
in the Bank of England than was ever
known before, it is evident that a great
stimulus may be given to the trade of the
country, and that with the disfavour
shown to railway property it is most
likely the usual effects will follow—viz.,
extensive speculation and greatly enhanced
prices of all articles of import,
and of cotton in particular.”
The whole of the trade circulars,
indeed, both from Liverpool and Manchester
houses, expressed similar
views with respect to the prospects of
the present year; and seemed to expect
an increase in the aggregate manufactures
of the country. In reviewing
the actual state of things which has
taken place, I would direct your attention
particularly to the fact of spinners
and manufacturers being “under
contract” at this period, as stated in the
first circular from which I have quoted.
Such contracts could only have been
entered upon, consistently with prudence
at least, in the anticipation of
a continuance of the then existing
prices of the raw material, or upon
the assurance of a stock already in
hand. To a considerable extent spinners
did hold stock sufficient for the
fulfilment, profitably, of a portion of
their contracts, as is shown by the circumstance
that they have, since the
commencement of the year, worked up
about 40,000 bales of cotton more
than they have drawn from the Liverpool
market. That in the majority of
cases, however, the stocks held were
only sufficient to complete a portion
of the contracts entered into is a fact
which is quite beyond dispute; and
these parties have consequently been
driven into the market to purchase
the raw material at the ruling prices of
the day. In order to ascertain their
position, it will be necessary to trace
the relative prices of cotton and of
goods during the interval between
December 1849 and the present time.
Up to the commencement of that
month, the prices of the raw material
had been gradually rising; and the
almost universal complaint of spinners
and manufacturers had been of the
unwillingness of buyers to pay a proportionate
advance upon goods.
Thus, on the 1st of June last year, the
price of fair bowed cotton was 4¼d.
per lb., from which it advanced gradually,
owing to reports of a short
yield of the crop in America, until on
the 1st of January this year it stood at
6⅜d., being an advance of 2⅛d. per lb.
The price of best seconds water twist,
No. 20 was on the 1st of June 6¾d.,
and on the 1st of January 8¼d. The
price of best second mule, No. 40,
was at the same dates respectively
8½d. and 10½d. We had therefore—
Advance
upon cotton, .
2⅛d.
per lb.
Do.
upon yarn, No. 20,
1½d.
„
Do.
upon yarn, No. 40,
2d.
„
This was obviously a losing trade;
and it is acknowledged that, during
the whole of this period business was
only profitably carried on by the fortunate
few who had laid in stocks at
the low prices. On the 1st of February
the highest price was attained,
fair bowed cotton being quoted at 6⅞d.,
with No. 20 yarn at 8¾d., and No. 40
at 11¼d.—being an advance of ½ on
the raw material, ½d. on the No. 20
yarn, and ¾d. on No. 40. To counteract
the upward tendency of the market, a
600resort to the working of short time
was resolved upon, principally by the
spinners of coarse numbers; and the
consumption was thus materially reduced,
spinners and manufacturers
drawing upon their stocks on hand,
and thus keeping out of the markets
for the raw material. A gradual decline
in the price of cotton was the result—goods,
however, sharing in the
depression; and on the 1st of April
fair bowed was quoted at 6⅛d., or ¾d.
per lb. lower than in February. No.
20 yarn, the stocks having been
reduced by short-time working, had
declined only ½d. per lb.; No. 40, however,
had fallen to the same extent as
cotton. There was therefore no
increase of prosperity brought about
thus far by the short-time movement,
the price of goods remaining at the
same unsatisfactory point as compared
with the raw material.
At this date, Messrs Robert Barbour
and Brother of Manchester, in
their monthly circular, speak as follows
with respect to the general trade
of the cotton manufacturing districts:—
“We have to report a very dull and
unsatisfactory state of business in this
district during the month. There has
been a gradual decline in prices varying
from 2½ to 7½ per cent, so that some
kinds of goods can now be bought fully
10 to 12 per cent under the rates which
were demanded in January. These reduced
quotations have induced some parties
to enter the market, but still the
demand has been much under the average
of what is usually experienced at this
season of the year. The working of
‘short time’ is now generally adopted
by the producers of coarse yarn and heavy
goods, and several large mills continue
closed. The drooping tendency of some
descriptions of the finer fabrics has been
slightly counteracted during the last week
by more favourable intelligence from Calcutta
and China; still, however, our market
is unsteady, and it is more than
usually difficult to form any idea of what
is likely to be the future course of prices.
“In the goods market a general quietness
has prevailed throughout the month,
buyers acting with extreme caution, purchasing
only in small parcels for the supply
of their more pressing wants: prices,
consequently, have been irregular, and
some considerable sales have been made
by needy manufacturers at very low
rates.”
The dulness here spoken of is particularly
observable in the staple articles
consumed by the home trade.
Messrs Barbour and Brother state
that—
“36-inch shirtings have participated in
the general depression, and stocks are
beginning to accumulate. 66-reeds, 7¾
lb., have receded in value 6d. to 9d. per
piece, having been sold in February at 8s.
to 8s. 4½d., whilst now they are worth
only 7s. 6d. to 7s. 9d.”
Again:—
“Domestics T cloths and stout long
cloths continue neglected, notwithstanding
the curtailed production, and can now
be bought on easier terms. Average qualities
of domestics have been sold at 9d.
per lb., which is by no means remunerative
to the maker.”
The concluding paragraph of the
circular is very decisive as to the comparatively
profitless nature of the manufacture:—
“Cotton has now declined about 1d.
per lb. during the last three months. It is
still, however, much higher than is warranted
by the prices which can be obtained
for the manufactured article. Indeed,
$1.”
Since the date of the circular containing
these gloomy accounts, an
important change has taken place,
and the tide has set in strongly
against the manufacturing community.
Immediately subsequent to its
publication, the arrival of the American
mail-steamer brought news confirmatory
of the anticipations of a
short crop of cotton, and prices immediately
advanced, leaving the spinners
and manufacturers to recruit their
exhausted stocks at a further loss, as
compared with the prices of goods.
On the 5th of April, the receipts of
cotton at the ports of America were
shown to be 310,000 bales less than
at the same period of the preceding
year; whilst the stock computed to be
held in Liverpool was 511,000 bales,
as compared with 447,300 bales held at
the same date in 1849, or only 63,700
bales more than last year, although
spinners had decreased their consumption
by 6300 bales per week, and taken
40,000 bales from their own stocks.
The total crop of the United States,
which had been estimated in the beginning
of the year at from 2,250,000
to 2,300,000 bales, was only estimated
in the advices by the steamer
at 2,100,000 bales.
I fear that, to some readers, these
statistics may be rather tedious.
They are necessary, however, to
enable us fully to understand the position
in which this important branch
of the manufactures of the country,
and the large population dependent
upon it, have been placed by the intelligence
brought by another later
mail from the United States, which
arrived in the Mersey on the morning
of the 16th ult. I have stated that
the estimates formed of the probable
crop in America, at the beginning of
the year, varied from 2,250,000 to
2,300,000 bales. These had been
reduced, up to the arrival of the
steamer in the first week of April, to
2,100,000 bales. With this progressive
decline going on in the amount of
the crop, as estimated by competent
judges upon the spot, and with the
fact of decreased receipts at the American
ports before their eyes, the spinners
of this country have, with few
exceptions, resolutely refused to give
credit to the representations made to
them, and kept further exhausting
their stocks on hand, or buying only
to supply their immediate wants. The
arrival of the Niagara, however, has
put the question at rest, and not only
confirmed the statements as to the
crop being a short one, but established
the fact that it is likely to be much
shorter than was by anybody anticipated.
The following is the startling
disclosure made by Mr T. J. Stewart
of New York, one of the best authorities
in the United States, upon the
subject, in his circular of the 2d
ult.:—
“The crop proves to be a short one—and
if measured by the ability of the
world to consume, the shortest one since
’41–’42. The falling off in the receipts
regularly exceeds the progressive estimate
I made some time since, and on
which I made up my table of 2,100,000
bales. It will close $1. How far below, I cannot at present
say, but the interior of the country
is exhausted of supplies to so great a
degree, that it is evident that such a figure
is totally impracticable.”
The decrease in the stocks arrived
at the ports of America is put down
by him now at 470,000 bales. Of
this very insufficient crop of less than
2,000,000 bales—that of the preceding
year, I may remark, was 2,728,000—Mr
Stewart reminds us that $1. This, of itself, is a
somewhat startling fact, and proves
the rapid strides which America is
making toward depriving this country
of its manufacturing pre-eminence.
It is obvious, from the above circumstances,
that the American planters,
and the holders of cotton in that
country and in Liverpool, have the
manufacturer at this moment within
their grasp, and will be enabled to
extort from his necessities still higher
prices than those which have for
months past rendered his business a
losing one. The stocks of cotton held
in the manufacturing districts are unprecedentedly
light, and those of goods
have been of late considerably reduced.
But can an advance be secured
on the manufactured article, corresponding
with that demanded for the
raw material? Few people believe
this to be practicable. With the exception
of a little temporary activity
in the demand of goods for the East
Indian market, towards the middle of
last month, the gloomy feeling existing
in every branch of the trade had
deepened, and the demand for nearly
every article perceptibly lessened.
The accounts received by export
houses from foreign markets are not
of a character to encourage further
operations; and the demand for the
home trade remains very limited. In
broad terms, $1. With respect to the foreign
trade, the worst feature is the falling
off in the demand from the United
States, to which I showed that, in the
first two months of this year, we had
shipped goods equal to the one half of
last year’s exports. The returns for
these shipments may be expected to
be very unsatisfactory. On this subject,
the last steamer (the Niagara)
brought the following report:—
“The spring trade of New York $1. Early in January
there was an unusually active demand.
High prices were obtained, and
large sales were made; since then business
had fallen off, and $1. The stock of
British and other foreign dry goods was
not large, but the demand was small.”
From this market, expectations of
the most sanguine character had been
previously indulged in, which are thus
rudely dashed to the ground.
As yet the manufacturing community,
stunned by the conviction which
has been forced upon them of their
desperate position, have formed no
definite resolution as to the course to
be pursued. For a week or two longer,
it is possible that a portion of them
may make further fruitless efforts to
keep down the market for the raw
material, which will now be held by
speculators, aided by the abundant
funds in the hands of bankers, with
the certainty of ultimately realising
higher rates. In the opinion of parties
acquainted intimately with the
whole circumstances of the trade, the
only available course for spinners is
to decrease consumption still further,
by an extension of the system of
working short time, or by closing a
considerable portion of the mills altogether.
Profitable working, even
without an increase in the price of
the raw material, is out of the question,
with markets in their present
depressed condition. But with such
an advance as must be paid, if even
the present reduced rate of consumption
is to go on, the business would
be perfectly ruinous.
It is painful to reflect upon the
severe suffering which must be entailed
upon the operative and middle
classes, throughout the manufacturing
districts, by a general suspension of
operations, or even by an increase of
short-time working. These classes,
greatly reduced as their wages have
been during the past two years, have
not, I may repeat, recovered as yet
from the effect of the suspension of
manufacturing activity to which they
were forced in 1847 and 1848; and are
consequently in a much worse position
to be thrown again upon their own
resources. The neatly furnished cottage
no longer remains to be dismantled
for the purpose of providing
food for their families. The little
savings’ bank hoards disappeared in
those years, and have not since been
replaced. A few employers, no doubt,
may be disposed to allow to their
hands a pittance sufficient to provide
against actual deprivation; but it is
to be feared that the mass will act
with no such humane considerateness.
Another result of such a course must
be still farther to decrease the consumption,
and depress the prices, of
our large stocks of imported produce,
and thus to inflict heavy losses upon
their holders.
It is to me perfectly clear, and the
fact is tacitly admitted by a large
portion of the community engaged in
mercantile and manufacturing pursuits,
that a most trying and fearful
crisis is at hand; and that the present
summer will not end without her
Majesty’s Ministers, and the Free
Trade party, being compelled to acknowledge
that the speech from the
Throne, and the representations of
prosperity made by them at the
opening of Parliament, were, if not
deliberate perversions of the truth, at
all events most ill-considered and
hasty. We had in February last, it
is now evident, no such thing as even
prosperous manufactures, or a healthy
state of commerce. Whilst these representations
were being made, and
agricultural pursuits alone pointed to
as being in a state of temporary depression,
the leading manufacture of
the country was being carried on
without profit, and our merchants and
traders were feeling the ground shake
beneath their feet. It is of no use,
however, to refer to the past. The
questions for the nation now to consider
are—first, What is it which has
brought about this general prostration
of the country? and next, Where is
the remedy to be applied? It is idle
for the Free-traders to point any
longer to potato rots, to railway
manias, or to high prices of cotton, as
the cause of the failure of their predictions
of coming general prosperity.
The truth is palpably before the world
that the foreign trade, stimulate it as
we may, will not employ the industry
of the country; and that a prosperous
home trade is indispensably necessary
to render the foreign trade a profitable
one. It is equally idle to tell us that
the present state of things is only temporary,
and that a different result of
our recent policy will be attained by
and by. In what direction are we to
look for the change? Is any new
world about to be discovered? Is
there a single outlet to be found for
our manufactures, which we cannot
close up in a month? I confess that
I cannot discern a gleam of hope for
the future, or a prospect of the restoration
of this great nation to its wonted
prosperity, except in a total reversal
of the legislation of the past few
years, by which, and by which alone,
has been caused that prostration of its
industry and enterprise, which we are
now witnessing on every side—in our
own once happy land, and throughout
the length and breadth of that vast
colonial empire, once the pride of
Great Britain, and the envy of the
world, but now her shame, ruined
and robbed as it has been by the legislation
of designing or incapable statesmen.
With our agricultural population
fast sinking into pauperism and
insolvency, or taking flight from our
shores, as from those of an infected
land, to fertilise with their capital and
enterprise other soils, which own protective
governments and a kindred
people; with the landed aristocracy of
the kingdom, and squirearchy and the
yeomen, stripped of half their possessions—the
baronial hall no longer
distributing its hospitality to thousands,
and pinching poverty and thrift
marking the household arrangements,
where of old there was plenty, a cup
for the needy, and consolation and
succour for the afflicted; with the
middle classes in our towns forced
down in the social scale, and hovering
over the gulf of insolvency and ruin,
and the labourer turned out, a desperate
man, to wrest with the strong
hand the food which we deny him the
means to purchase, whilst we mock
him with its cheapness—the manufacturing
body will strive in vain for the
consummation of that object which,
in their selfishness, they proposed to
themselves as the result of the boasted
Free-trade policy—viz. the setting up
of their houses over those of the time-honoured
names of the land. Blindly
and madly they have detached the
handful of snow from the summit of
the mountain; with mocking jeers of
hideous and idiotic glee, they have
seen its gathering bulk, and watched
its progress as it rolled, prostrating
the cottage and the farmstead, and
spreading devastation over the vineyard
and the waving corn; and they
stand now shuddering at the mighty
avalanche which is thundering above
the tall chimney and the smoky town,
and will shortly involve themselves
in the general calamity and devastation.
Yes, the fears of these men are
at length beginning to be effectively
roused by the contemplation of the
work of their own hands. I say
$1, because the day of retribution
is only now coming upon them,
and making itself felt. The philosophers
of the loom and spindle talk
now “with bated breath” of the
efficacy of their universal specific.
There are doubting anxious faces on
‘Change, gloomy greetings as they
meet in the streets, and idle hands in
the once busy salerooms and warehouses.
Many, whose voices were
lately loud in cheering the flattering
tales and sophistries of their Cobdens
and Brights—some of those even
whose subscriptions enabled the former
to buy his Woodland farm, and
whose votes and influence hoisted the
blustering Quaker into a seat in the
Legislature, are now ready to acknowledge,
in private, that “there is some
mistake;” that they have, perhaps,
gone too far; and that, after all, Free
Trade is “only an experiment.”
Alas! it is one whose fatal effects
will have to be deeply deplored, and
from which the country will not recover
for years to come. A quarter
of a century of toil will scarcely replace
the capital which has been swept
away, up to the present period. More
remains to be swept away; but now
it will be the capital of the authors of
the calamity.
And this portion of these philosophers
are busily and eagerly striving
to persuade the farmer that he is foolishly
nervous under the apprehension
of permanent low prices; and that
these have now reached the level at
which the foreigner can no longer
supply us profitably. Unfortunately,
whilst they are sagely assuring the
world of this fact, grain and flour keeps
steadily pouring into our ports, at still
further reduced prices; and additional
evidence is daily being afforded of the
total ignorance of the subject displayed
in their statistics and calculations:
supplies are reaching us daily from
countries which were left altogether
out of the catalogue of those from
whose growers we were led to anticipate
competition. Thus from France,
a country which it was always said was
not able to grow sufficient for its own
consumption, the receipts at the port
of Liverpool during two weeks, in
which alone the quantity is quoted
separately, were as follows:—
French flour.
Week ending
March 19,
6000 barrels.
April 9,
6166
and 2419 American.
And from that country, and the whole
of the ports of the North of Europe,
distant from us by only a few days’
sail—by a voyage made in less time
than the average consumed in those
made from port to port on our own
coasts—supplies will continue to come,
at rates with which the British grower
can never hope to compete. In fact,
the farmer of the North of Europe may
in future be treated as a British subject—enjoying
all the immunities of
one, without contributing towards his
burthens. He is nearer the London
or the Liverpool markets than a Norfolk
or a Lincolnshire farmer; and
that he frequently pays less for the
conveyance of his produce than it
will be seen from the following table,
which contains the rates actually paid
in Liverpool by importing houses
during the years beginning in 1847 to
this year, such farmer pays:—
Coasting and Foreign Freights of Wheat to Liverpool.
1847.
1848.
1849.
1850.
Per quarter.
Per quarter.
Per quarter.
Per quarter.
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
$1
From
Stettin,
5 0
4 0 to
2 9
3 0
„
Dantzig,
4 6
4 0
4 0
3 0
„
Rostock,
6 0
4 0
4 0
„
Hamburg,
4 0 to
3 6
4 0 to
3 0
3 0
1 9
„
Rotterdam,
2 6
2 0 to
1 9
1 9
„
Antwerp,
3 0 to
2 6
2 6 to
1 6
1 3 to
1 0 !
„
Bremen,
3 3 to
3 0
1 6
„
Bruges,
1 6
1 6
„
Ghent,
1 6
1 6
„
New York, (last rates,)
3 0
$1
Colchester,
2 0
2 0
1 6
Woodbridge,
2 6
2 6
1 9
1 6
Salcombe,
2 6
2 6
2 0
Kingsbridge,
2 6
2 6
2 0
Lynn,
2 6
2 1
Ipswich,
2 3
1 9
1 9 to
1 6
1 6
Yarmouth,
2 1
1 10
Yet the freight on wheat was to be
a sufficient protection for the farmer!
I must here, sir, leave the subject
to your own powerful pen. I have
given you the facts as I have collated
them from the most authentic sources,
and the observations which I have
made personally; and they have more
than confirmed the impressions with
which I entered upon this inquiry.—
have the honour to be, &c.
ALISON’S POLITICAL ESSAYS. [5]
605
The collection of scattered periodical
essays, especially such as are of
a strictly political character, is an
adventure far more perilous to the
reputation of an author than the
issue of any single work deliberately
planned, and laboriously executed in
the closet. The historian, dealing
solely with the records of the past,
reviving or recreating pictures which
have long ago appeared upon the ancient
canvass, may without difficulty
arrange his scattered portraits and
groups in such an order, that they
shall impress the public mind with a
feeling of absolute novelty. A historical
paradox, if ingeniously conceived
and plausibly conveyed, is
sure to command attention. The
fickleness of the Athenians was by
no means idiosyncratic to that volatile
nation. All men weary of hearing
the same phrase and the same
judgment invariably repeated. They
suspect the justice of Aristides, or
the perfidy of Crookback Richard, on
account of the unanimous verdict,
and are by no means displeased when
any daring casuist steps forward,
armed with a tolerable array of
proof, to detract from the rigid virtue
of the one, or to palliate the vices of
the other. In truth, the materials of
all history are so various and conflicting
in their character, that an
artist of consummate skill, who is
withal not over-scrupulous, may
easily pass off fictions under the disguise
of broad reality. Historical
sketches, therefore, which relate to
past events, may be viewed in the
light either of lively episodes or of
profound commentaries; and their
republication, after a term of years,
can in no way affect the soundness of
the author’s judgment.
To republish criticisms, especially
such as relate to the works of cotemporaries,
is certainly a more delicate
task. It is easy to comment upon an
author whose works have been long
before the public, and frequently and
diligently scanned. High criticism
may discover beauties or detect faults
which have escaped the notice of less
keen and scrutinising observers; but,
in the aggregate, certainly in the majority
of cases, the broad opinion
which has been expressed by others
is allowed to remain unchallenged. The
influence of previous judgment invariably
sways the critic. None are rash
enough to deny the genius of Shakspeare;
at the same time, nothing is
more certain than that, were another
Shakspeare to arise amongst us at
this moment, there would be no kind
of unanimity as to his deserts. In
all ages and in all countries this has
been the rule. Personal spite, unacknowledged
and possibly unperceived
envy, party difference of
opinion, disparity of station, prejudice
of education—all these, in their
turn, have passed, like so many
clouds, between the sun of living
genius and the critics who surveyed
its orbit. Nor ought we to overlook the
fact that, in many instances, meteors
have been mistaken for suns, and the
eyes of the critic been dazzled by a
glare, to which his own willing imagination
lent at least one half its brilliancy.
Therefore it is that contemporary
criticism, when republished in
an abiding form, rarely satisfies the
expectation of the reader. His own
judgment has been formed, apart
from the considerations and prejudices
which are so apt to beset the critic;
and he conceives an unfavourable impression
of the literary acuteness of
the writer, when he finds a gross
discrepancy between the older and the
later estimate.
But far more trying to an author
is the republication of political essays,
composed during the progress of great
national events. This branch of
composition is peculiar to our own
age, in which periodical literature is
so marked and eminent a feature.
Pamphleteering is of venerable date.
Sir Thomas More, Milton, Marvell,
Swift, and Defoe, were all notable
pamphleteers; but periodical writing,
in the highest sense of the term,
is the invention of the present century.
That great and influential organs
of public opinion, ranking among
their contributors the men of the
highest intellect and the most laborious
acquirements, should have been
established in our time, marks not
only the development of the influence
of the press, but the importance
of the events which such men are imperatively
summoned to discuss. It
marks even more, for it has established
a power beyond the boundaries
of the old constitution, which, as it is
used or misused, cannot fail to affect
materially the destinies of Great
Britain.
Every political treatise referring to
events which have engrossed the attention
of the day, either as modifications
or as changes of our social system,
must be valuable in later years.
It must necessarily recommend or
condemn measures on account of
their probable operation in the time
to come; it must in some degree be a
prophecy, or else it is practically
worthless. The politician studies the
past merely as his guide for the
future. If he is learned, wise, and at
all an adept in the science which he
professes—than which no other is of
so momentous an import—he will
consider past history as the barometer
which must guide him in predicating
the approach either of a tempest or a
calm. Temporary clamour or occasional
obstruction will not lead him
to forsake clear principles of action, or
to recommend a grand constitutional
remedy in the case of a trifling local
disease. He must look forward
beyond the sphere of immediate
action—resolute in this belief, that
one false step, however small, may
upset the equilibrium of the State.
Expediency, the modern idol, finds
little favour in the eyes of the true
and sagacious statesman. He tests
measures by their intrinsic value,
regardless of the “pressure from
without;” and he looks upon Parliamentary
majorities as of less
moment than the maintenance of the
real interests of his country.
If we apply these remarks to our
later political history, and to the conduct
of those men whom circumstances
have elevated to the highest
stations in Government, we shall at
once perceive that the first great
principles of practical statesmanship
have been abandoned. The welfare
and integrity of the Empire has been
made a subsidiary object to the
triumph of party ambition; and
accordingly, CONSISTENCY, that grand
test of a politician’s sincerity and
soundness, is the very quality which
is wanting. To consistency, indeed,
neither Lord John Russell nor Sir
Robert Peel, for many years the rival
chiefs of party, can lay the slightest
claim. They have been playing a
long, and, doubtless, an interesting
game, with the map of Britain and
its dependencies before them as a
chess-board: they have directed the
whole of their energies to giving
checkmate to one another; and with
this view they have again and again
altered the relative positions of king
and queen, bishops, knights, castles,
and pawns. To counteract the last
move of his adversary was the great
object of each of these ingenious
players. It was a pretty trial of
dexterity and finesse; but we trust,
for the sake of the chessmen, that the
match is finally concluded. Talent
of this kind may, indeed, be available
when it is necessary to contend with
a foreign adversary; but it is worse
than mischievous when practised
systematically at home.
To have surveyed the political events
of the last twenty years with a calm
and dispassionate eye—to estimate
the consequences of each concession
to popular clamour, and each move
for party purposes—to form inductions
as to the future from the indelible
history of the past—to trace the
causes of social misery and disquiet
to their remote and recondite source—to
discern the coming cloud of
adversity in the midst of apparent
abundance—required more than common
thought, learning, sagacity, and
prescience; and the man who has
done all this, cannot fail to be ranked,
in the estimation of those whose judgment
is of real value, among the first
masters of political and economic
science. Many brilliant commentaries
upon passing events, which at
the first blush were received as absolute
oracles of wisdom, have utterly
failed in their predictions, and are
now consigned to oblivion. They
failed—if from no other cause, at least
assuredly from this—that they flowed
from the pens of partisans, whose whole
energies were devoted to the advancement
of themselves and their faction.
Party spirit, indeed, has of late years
almost entirely overshadowed that
patriotism which was once our
highest boast. Truth may be spoken
of an opponent—and very often
more than truth; but it is seldom
expressed with regard to the political
conduct of those whom men are accustomed
to regard as their friends.
Private motives are allowed to interfere
with the more rigorous functions
of the censor; the moralist is
changed into the apologetic rhetorician;
the judge becomes the interested
advocate.
Were the present crisis of our political
history less momentous than it
truly is—were not the great and
final struggle for a return to the principles,
by means of which our national
greatness was achieved, so near at
hand—we might, from motives and
considerations easily appreciable, have
left this volume of Mr Alison’s collected
political essays without any special
notice. For a long period of years,
embracing the most important changes
which have been made in the institutions
and relations of this country,
Mr Alison has been a constant contributor
to the Magazine, adopting his
own views, enforcing his own opinions,
without reference to the distinctions
of party or the position of individual
statesmen. We believe that, in some
respects, the attitude of the Magazine
has differed from that assumed by any
periodical publication in the country.
It has never been the organ of a Party,
and never subservient to a Government.
Many times we have been
compelled to differ from those whose
political opinions have been thought
most closely to approximate to our
own; and never have we hesitated to
express that difference in clear and
unambiguous terms, knowing that a
true and honourable conviction never
ought to be concealed, or can be without
affecting the integrity of those who
entertain it.
The present publication sufficiently
discloses the part which Mr Alison
has taken in the political discussions
which have arisen during that eventful
period. They are valuable to the
rising generation for two especial
reasons. In the first place, they are
a faithful record of the impressions
which passing events made upon the
mind of a highly-gifted, generous, and
independent man, the object of whose
life was apart from those pursuits
which inflame the passions, whilst
they warp the judgment, of the mere
partisan. In the second place, they
will enable the reader to trace, step
by step, the innovations which modern
Liberalism has made upon the older
limits of the constitution; and to estimate
the consistency of those who at
one time affected to be the opponents
of that Liberalism, and at another,
whether through weakness, or treachery,
or ambition, came forward to
assist in its blind and infatuated progress.
Perhaps the most interesting papers
in the present volume are those which
refer to the memorable and exciting
era of the Reform Bill. They are not
only interesting, but highly instructive
in a constitutional point of view, as
showing the utter disregard of the
Whig faction to the maintenance of
that political framework which, when
in power, they affect to worship with
almost superstitious veneration.
Never, probably, was there a period
in our history when the passions of
the populace were more dexterously
and deliberately excited by men of
high station, and by no means contemptible
intellect. Treason was
then in vogue: sedition openly encouraged.
Most of us can recollect the
ugly and ominous emblems which
were paraded through the streets of
the larger towns, and the violence
with which every one supposed to be
hostile to the popular measure was
assailed. Haughty aristocrats, like
the late Earl Grey, condescended to
treat with Jacobin clubs and political
unions; the physical power of the
masses was appealed to as an argument
of irresistible weight, and Whig
officials were privy to the plan of a
projected Birmingham insurrection.
The voice of reason was entirely stifled
amidst the general democratic howl,
and all suggestions as to a modification
of the grand electoral scheme
were treated with fierce hostility.
The framers of the measure had no
wish that its details should be narrowly
sifted, or submitted to the test
of principle. There was a deep meaning
in the phrase, which at that time
passed into a proverb, “The Bill—the
whole Bill—and nothing but the Bill!”
No other method of reform, however
large and comprehensive, would have
suited the junta who then deemed
themselves secure of an interminable
lease of power. And why? Because
any other measure which might have
embraced the claim of the Colonies to
a share in the Imperial representation,
would have interfered with their special
project of lowering the landed
interest, and giving a decided preponderance
in Parliament to the votes of
the urban population.
We are far from wishing to maintain
that the spirit which animated
the councils of the Conservative leaders
of the day was in all respects the
most prudent; or that they did not to
a certain extent accelerate the movement
by withholding minor concessions,
which might have been gracefully
and advantageously given. But
in justice to them it must be remembered,
that they had a great principle
to contend for—a principle too little
understood then, and perhaps only
now becoming generally appreciated on
account of the pernicious effects which
have resulted from its violation. The
older Representative system of Great
Britain might appear to the casual
eye artificial, unequal, and therefore
unjust; but it had this grand and wholesome
advantage, which we look for in
vain in its successor, that, by means
of it, not only were the great classes
of the community at home adequately
represented, but our fellow-subjects of
the Colonies could, and did, exercise a
direct influence within the walls of St
Stephen’s. To allow this influence to
be encroached on, however covertly
or plausibly, seemed tantamount to
an abandonment of the principle by
which the Conservative party had
been guided throughout; and subsequent
events have shown that no
exaggerated estimate was formed of
the tendencies of democratic rule.
This conviction of the prospective
danger of the Reform measure to the
integrity of the British Empire was,
we know, the main cause of that early,
though perhaps injudicious, resistance
to the extension of the electoral suffrage,
which finally gave way before
the impulse added to popular excitement
by the example of foreign revolution.
As regarded the welfare of
our Colonies, the Reform Bill was
virtually a death-blow. It laid the
foundation for a rapid succession of
measures, selfish in their tendency
and grossly impolitic, which have
already gone far to pervert the loyal
feelings of the Colonists, by teaching
them that the mother country has
decided upon a policy altogether injurious
to their interests as subjects of
the British Crown. They have had
no voice, no direction in the legislative
enactments which have since
that time so deeply affected their
prosperity; they have been governed
rather as tributaries than as portions
of the Empire; and their complaints
have been too often treated with
undisguised contumely, or, at best,
with haughty indifference. Our
opinion as to the importance of the
maintenance of our Colonial dominions,
and the imminent necessity which
exists of securing that maintenance
by giving them some effective
voice in the legislative councils of
Great Britain, has been repeatedly
expressed. No other step will suffice
to stay the tide of disaffection; and
happy will it be for all of us, if the
practical refutation of the Free-trade
delusion, now becoming every day
more obvious and acknowledged, shall
lead to such prudent measures, with
regard to our dependencies, as may
again consolidate into one great and
united mass, inspired by the same
feelings and actuated by the same
interests, the scattered elements of
British greatness and renown.
But apart altogether from Colonial
considerations, the Reform Bill has
been productive of the most serious
consequences to the internal economy
of this country. Under its benign
operation the National Debt, instead
of being diminished, is augmented;
whilst, at the same time, by a system
of ruinous cheapness, induced by the
free admission of foreign produce to
compete in the home market with our
own, incomes have been lowered by
nearly a half, and the means of paying
the increased taxation have been
proportionably curtailed. We do
not believe that the Whigs, while
straining every energy to carry the
Reform Bill, meditated the possibility
of any such results. We have their
own statements—at least those of
Lords Melbourne and John Russell—to
the contrary; and even were it
otherwise, we are not disposed to
attribute to that party so great a
share of political prescience, as to
assume that they foresaw the consequences
of their own deliberate act.
It was, however, foreseen by others.
In 1831, Mr Alison, arguing from
historical precedents, predicted that
the natural effect of the passing of the
Reform Bill would be the repeal of
the Corn Laws.
“When it is recollected,” wrote he, “that
300 English members of the Reformed
house are to be for the boroughs, and only
150 for the counties, it may easily be anticipated
that this effect is certain. And in
vain will the House of Peers strive to
resist such a result: their power must
have been so completely extinguished before
the Reform Bill is past, that any resistance
on their part would be speedily
overcome.
“This first and unavoidable consequence
of this great change will at once
set the manufacturing classes at variance
with the agricultural interest; and then
will commence that fatal war between
the different classes of society, which has
hitherto been only repressed by the
weight and authority of a stable, and, in
a certain degree, hereditary government,
composed of an intermixture of the representatives
of $1 interests. When it
is recollected that wheat can be raised
with ease in Poland at prices varying
from 17s. to 20s. a quarter, and that it
can be laid down on the quay of any
harbour in Britain at from 33s. to 40s.,
it may easily be anticipated what a revolution
in prices will, in the $1,
be effected by this measure. We say in
the $1 instance—for nothing seems
clearer than that the $1 effect will
be, by throwing a large portion of British
land out of cultivation, and in its stead
producing a more extensive growth of
grain on the shores of the Vistula, to
restore the equilibrium between the supply
of corn and its consumption, and, by
means of destroying a large portion of
British agriculture, raise the prices again
to their former standard.”
We have lately been favoured, from
certain quarters, with ingenious disquisitions
touching the probable future
price of grain in this country—disquisitions
to which we by no means
object, as, apart altogether from their
truth or their falsity, they manifest a
growing uneasiness as to the possibility
of maintaining the Free-trade
system for many months longer. We
may perhaps be allowed to take some
credit to ourselves for having effected
this change in the tone and sentiments
of gentlemen who, not long ago, were
clamorous in their praise of cheap food
and diminished agricultural prices.
In our January Number, by the aid of
the most intelligent, skilful, and experienced
agriculturists of Scotland,
we proved, beyond the power of refutation,
that no British farmer could
stand his ground against the present
influx of foreign corn, and that no
possible reduction of rent, short of its
annihilation, would enable him to meet
the deficiency. We were met, as
might naturally be expected, by the
double weapons of rancorous abuse
and deliberate falsification.[6] But these
having utterly failed in their purpose,
our antagonists have since changed
their ground altogether, and are now
attempting to argue, against the experience
of each successive week, that
the present fall of prices is merely
temporary, and that wheat must
again rise to something like its former
level. How long they may continue
in their endeavours to propagate this
fresh delusion we know not. They
cannot mislead the farmers, at whose
door ruin is at present knocking with an
unmistakeable sound. The only men
they can mislead are their unhappy
dupes, who have been taught to believe
that the prosperity of Britain depends
solely upon one of the weakest, most
unstable, and most precarious of its
manufactures.
In the same article from which we
have just quoted, Mr Alison wrote as
follows:—
“Now, the misery arising from the
reduction of the resources of the farmer
could not be confined to his own class in
society; it would immediately and
seriously affect the manufacturing and
commercial interests. The great trade
of every country, as Adam Smith long ago
remarked, is between the town and the
country: by far the greatest part of the
produce of our looms is consumed by those
who, directly or indirectly, are fed by the
British plough. Not the haughty aristocrat
only, who spends his life in luxurious
indolence among his hereditary trees, but
the innumerable classes who are maintained
by his rents and fed by his expenditure—the
numerous creditors who draw
large parts of his rents through their
mortgages, and live in affluence in distant
towns upon the produce of his land—the
farmers, who subsist in comparative
comfort on the industry which they exert
on his estates—the tradesmen and artisans,
who are fed by his expenditure or
the wants of his tenantry—all would suffer
alike by such a change of prices as should
seriously affect the industry of the cultivators.
Every shopkeeper knows how
much he is dependent on the expenditure of
those who directly or indirectly are maintained
by the land, and what liberal purchasers
landlords are, compared to those
who subsist by manufactures; and it is
probable that the first and greatest sufferers
by the repeal of the Corn Laws would be
many of those very persons whose blind
cry for Reform had rendered it unavoidable.
“Now, the discouragement of British
agriculture consequent on a free-trade in
corn would be $1, although the
benefit to the inhabitants of towns could
only be temporary. After the destruction
of a large portion of British agriculture
had been effected, by the immense inundation
of foreign grain, prices would rise
again to their former level, because the
monopoly would then be vested in the
hands of the foreign growers; and the
bulky nature of grain renders it $1
impossible to introduce an $1 supply
of that article by sea transport. But the
condition of British agriculture would
not be materially benefited by the change;
because prices would rise $1 in consequence
of the British grower being,
for the most part, driven out of the field;
and could be maintained at a high level
only by his being $1 from an extensive
competition with the foreign cultivator.
Should the British farmers, recovering
from their consternation, recommence the
active agriculture which at present maintains
our vast and increasing population,
the consequence would be, that prices
would immediately fall to such a degree,
as speedily to reduce them to their
natural and unavoidable state of inferiority
to the farmers of the Continent.
“In considering this subject, there are
two important circumstances to be kept
in view, proved abundantly by experience,
but which have not hitherto met with
the general attention which they deserve.
“The first of these is, that, in agriculture—differing
in this respect from
manufactures—the introduction of machinery,
or the division of labour, can
effect $1 in the price
of its produce, or the facility of its production;
and perhaps the best mode of
cultivation yet known is that which is
carried on by the greatest possible application
of human labour, in the form of
spade cultivation. The proof of this is
decisive. Great Britain, with the aid of
the steam-engine, can undersell the
weavers of Hindostan with muslins manufactured
out of cotton grown on the
banks of the Ganges; but it is undersold
in its own markets by the wheat-grower
on the banks of the Vistula, or in the
basin of the Mississippi. It is in vain,
therefore, for a state like England, burdened
with high prices and an excessive
taxation—the natural consequence of
commercial opulence—to hope that its
industry can, in agriculture as in manufactures,
withstand the competition of
the foreign grower. Machinery, skill,
and capital can easily counteract high
prices in all other articles of human consumption:
in agriculture, they can produce
no such effect. This is a law of
nature which will subsist to the end of
the world.
“The second is, that a comparatively
small importation of grain produces a
prodigious effect on the prices at which
it is sold. The importation of a tenth
part of the annual consumption does not,
it is calculated, lower prices a tenth, but
$1—and so on with the importation
of smaller quantities. This has always
been observed, and is universally acknowledged
by political economists. Although,
therefore, the greatest possible importation
of foreign grain must always be a
part only of that required for the consumption
of the whole people, yet still
the effect upon the current rate of prices
would be most disastrous. The greatest
importation ever known was in 1801,
when it amounted, in consequence of the
scarcity, to an $1 part of the
annual consumption; but the free introduction
of much less than that quantity
would reduce the price of wheat in the
first instance, in an ordinary year, to 45s.
the quarter.
“The repeal of the Corn Laws, therefore,
is calculated to inflict a $1
wound on the agricultural resources of
the empire, and permanently injure all
the numerous classes who depend on that
branch of industry, and confer only a
$1 benefit, by the reduction of
prices, on the manufacturing labourers.
The benefit is temporary, and mixed up,
even at first, with a most bitter portion of
alloy; the evil lasting, unmitigated by
any benefit whatever.”
We are now in the course of enduring
that precise phase of suffering,
arising from the repeal of the Corn
Laws, which was predicted by Mr
Alison more than eighteen years ago;
and it is solely from the extent of that
suffering that we are inclined to form
a better augury for the future than
we could have ventured to have done
in the course of the bygone year.
Three months have not passed since,
at the opening of Parliament, the
Whig Ministry with unparalleled audacity
ventured to congratulate the
country on its general prosperous
condition! Themselves indeed they
might congratulate, that, by means of
an income and property tax, imposed
under false pretences by a former
Premier, the public revenue was still
sufficient to meet its ordinary engagements;
but what other ground of
congratulation there was, no host of
witnesses could tell. Could they
venture to congratulate the country
$1 on the state of the manufacturing
districts? Has this little interval of
three months, at a time of universal
peace and unparalleled cheapness,
sufficed to change universal prosperity
into widespread and acknowledged
depression? Not so. The depression
had begun long before—it commenced
so soon as falling prices
warned the agricultural consumers of
the fate which was in store for them;
and if Ministers did not know this,
they are utterly unfit to retain their
places longer. The continuance of
that depression can be only measured
by the existence of the Free-trade system.
If that is allowed to go on, and
if there be indeed, as is now the common
cant of the Liberal journalists, no
possibility of retracing our steps, the
next move will be one of plunder.
No foreign trade can compensate for
the tithe of the loss sustained by the
depreciation of property at home.
That cheapness which means nothing
else than curtailment of individual
profits, from the highest to the lowest,
cannot possibly coexist with expensive
government and enormous taxation.
The public creditor will be
marked for the next blow; and his
situation is the more precarious from
the peculiar monetary history of the
country, and the first important measure—pity
also that it had not been
the last!—which Sir Robert Peel was
instrumental in carrying through the
House of Commons.
We are not only hopeful but sanguine
as to the power of Great Britain
in extricating herself from a difficulty,
not transient as before, but settled in
its character, because we believe that
the downfal of a wretched, presuming,
and ignorant faction cannot be much
longer delayed. We have been
cursed, for many years back, by the
predominance of a race of quacks, impostors,
sham economists, and political
adventurers, who, through favour of
the Reform Bill, have forced their
way into Parliament, after having
failed in the ordinary occupations of
trade, and have succeeded in palming
their crude and pestilential doctrines
upon Ministers too occupied with
individual ambition to care much for
the public welfare. Does any one
believe that such men have any interest
in maintaining the public credit,
or that they would not, did an opportunity
occur, attempt to defraud the
creditor, as they have already succeeded
in diminishing the means of
the debtor? Surely a thoughtful
review of the political events which
have occurred within the last five
years is enough to remove any lingering
credulity on this point. We do not
ask any one to adopt our views, or to
accept our construction. Let him deliberately
reflect upon the language of
these men in 1845, when the political
and commercial fever was at its height—when
private individuals were persuaded
that they might rear fortunes
without the drudgery of industry, and
when statesmen were preparing to
recommend the same false principle
for the general guidance of the nation.
How the upstart economists swaggered,
strutted, and cackled then! Not
a whit less incompetent and treacherous,
as guides in their own path, than
were the mushroom clerks and pimpled
adventurers of the Stock Exchanges
in another, they stood forth
like so many political John Laws,
proclaiming that unbounded wealth,
increased demand for labour, and
endless influx of capital would be the
immediate result of their magnificent
free-trading schemes. They had
figures and blue-books, returns, calculations
and balance-sheets, painfully
concocted by plodding theorists, ready
at hand to back up their asseverations,
and to satisfy the doubts of the most
sceptical. This is peculiarly an age
in which men are befooled by figures.
A century ago, it was enough that a
statement should pass from writing
into print, and be included in the
columns of a journal, in order to secure
its currency as a point of popular belief.
The increase of journalism has in
some respects remedied this, most
men being now alive to the fact that
typography possesses no peculiar immunity
from falsehood. But figures
are—or at least were a few years ago—untainted
in their reputation. Few
people were cautious enough to resist
a tempting calculation. It never entered
into their heads to suppose that
there lay gross error, radical fallacy,
and often deliberate fraud, in the imposing
array of cyphers which were
ostentatiously paraded for their inspection.
If half-a-dozen unscrupulous
swindlers determined to start a railway,
nothing more was required to
secure a rush for the scrip, than a
summary of phantom traffic, exhibiting
a clear return of some fifteen or
twenty per cent after deduction of
the working expenses. We all know
what has been the result of that widespread
infatuation. In precisely the
same manner did the economists concoct
their accounts, when they issued
their Free-trade prospectus. Less
honest, or perhaps more daringly
fraudulent than the railway projectors,
they did not propose to grant
any compensation for the land at all,
but their traffic tables were undoubtedly
an arithmetical $1!
Two millions per week of clear gain was
about the smallest estimate; and to
this result various persons, whose previous
biography, now that they have
emerged as public characters, might
be interesting, pledged their valuable
reputations!
That they imposed upon the leaders
of party, as well as upon a large section
of the nation, is no matter of
marvel. Statesmen are not exempt
from folly, imprudence, or delusion,
any more than private persons. One
may be cold, selfish, and greedy;
another rash, unscrupulous, and obstinate;
but, as there are few fish which
will not take a bait, so there seem to
be few modern statesmen proof against
the temptation of altering their policy,
if, by doing so, they believe that they
can secure possession of an unlimited
lease of power. In the present case
the bait was dexterously spun between
the two rivals, and the anxiety
of both to secure it was so
great, that neither took the precaution
of examining curiously into the
nature of its actual texture.
There is hardly a man in the country,
from the peer to the artisan, who
is not asking himself at this moment,
what he has gained by Free-trade.
So far as the agricultural interest is
concerned, there is no dubiety on the
point. The landlord is dunned for
reduction of rent, is discontinuing his
improvements, reducing his establishment,
and setting his house in order
for an altered style of living. The
tenant is wellnigh ruined, furious
that he has been betrayed, economising
labour as he best can, or seriously
meditating emigration. The labourer
finds his wages reduced, his small
comforts curtailed or abolished, work
scarce, and the workhouse at no great
distance. Let them all take comfort.
According to our hopeful economists,
this is a mere “transition state of
suffering.” What the next state is to
be, no prophet of them all can foretell.
Meantime certain Solons advocate
a wholesale emigration—rather a
strange panacea for a nation about to
be so prosperous!
Go to the towns or the manufacturing
districts, and ask how they are prospering.
The cotton trade is threatening
to shut up. The travellers are
returning disconsolate to their employers
with the news that orders are
every day becoming more scarce, and
money payments even scarcer. There
is no joy or exultation now in Leeds
or Bradford. The journeymen operatives
are combining against the slop
system. The Morning Chronicle
harrows up the feelings of its readers,
by tearful tales of the misery and
destitution which prevails throughout
the large towns of the empire, and no
human being can deny the truth of
the appalling statements. Scottish
philanthropists, on their midnight
visits to the wynds of Edinburgh, are
struck with amazement at the squalor
and vice which they encounter, and
not less with the shoals of destitute
creatures who are hurrying, with perverse
infatuation, from the free open
country to the fated atmosphere of a
loathsome city garret. They want to
check the stream, and drive the current
back again. But whither? In
the country there is no work for these
people. Machinery has forced the
hand-loom from the villages; Free
Trade is reducing the wages of the
spade to nothing. From the Western
Highlands, and from Ireland, those
who have money enough left to secure
a passage on ship-board are emigrating
by thousands—it is, we are told
by a correspondent, the briskest trade
in Liverpool. Those who have no
money left are trooping to the towns,
with the prospect before them of a
fate which might rend the heart of the
most callous. Who would wish to be
a statesman, if for the consequences
of all his deeds he must be held accountable
hereafter?
Ask the master-manufacturers
themselves how they are getting on,
now that they have succeeded in their
darling scheme of securing cheap
food, and paralysing the home trade?
You may ask if you will, but you will
hardly obtain an answer, save through
the medium of the trade circulars, all
filled with dismal forebodings. Were
another Cobden testimonial to be proposed
just now, the subscriptions
would scarcely purchase many shares
in the most depreciated of the lines.
Ask the gentlemen of the railway
interest, what cause is in operation to
crush down their traffic and annihilate
their dividends? They will tell
you to a man that it is the universal
agricultural depression. Ask the
iron-masters how they are thriving?
At this moment they are trembling
for the stability of their colossal
fortunes.
It is utterly impossible that this
state of matters can continue much
longer. If we do not reverse our
mad and desperate policy—and that
soon—the pressure of taxation, still
retaining its former money-level,
whilst the production which contributes
to it is depreciated by a half,
will become so unendurable, that any
remedy, however desperate, will find
numerous advocates; and amongst
the foremost and most clamorous of
these will be the leading sham economists.
The stateliest ship, when the
water is gaining upon her hold, must
perforce part with her guns—the
parallel case is being practically exhibited
just now, by the efforts of the
financial reformers to get rid of our warlike
establishments. If we cannot part
with our defences, we must do without
something else. There is in the
mean time a talk of reducing salaries,
paring down judicial emoluments,
and retrenching diplomatic expenses.
Lord John Russell, with no very
good grace, has been forced to refer
these matters to a committee, for the
evident purpose of securing the longest
possible period of delay. But the
tax-gatherer will not be idle in his
function, and still the clamour will
increase. Superfluities will go first—but
no surrender of superfluities
will meet the exigency. Men, when
pressed to the last extremity, become
reckless of their personal obligations;
and we have already heard from various
quarters intimations that, if the
land is to be permanently depreciated,
the creditor who has lent his money
on the security of that land must be
prepared to share the burden of the
loss with the owner. There is a
smack of wild justice in this, not at
all unpalatable to the taste of a burdened
debtor. Sir Robert Peel’s
favourite question, “What is a
pound?” will be argued afresh, after a
fashion little likely to secure the approval
of the original propounder of
the query. We shall be told, truly
enough, that the pound is the mere
conventional representation of a certain
amount of produce; and a very
large body of men will begin to talk
of paying off their debts, both private
and public, upon a principle which, if
once adopted, would destroy the whole
credit of the country. Three years
ago, Mr Doubleday demonstrated
that, if the repeal of the Corn Laws
should have the effect of reducing the
price of wheat on the average to 4s.
or 4s. 6d. per bushel, only two courses
are left—either to repeal the taxes
down to five-and-twenty millions at
most; or to alter the currency law of
1819, and reduce the value of money
to half the present value. We have
now almost touched the mark.
All this was clearly foreseen and
foreshadowed by Mr Alison, in his
memorable paper of 1831; and we
beg of our readers to peruse with attention
the following extract, as of
primary importance at the present
juncture of affairs:—
“Such a change of prices might be
innocuous, if individuals and the public
could begin on a new basis, and there
were no subsisting $1,
which must be provided for at a reduced
rate of incomes. But how is such a
state of things to go on, when individuals
and the State are under so many engagements,
which cannot be averted without
private or public bankruptcy? This is
the question which, in a complicated
state of society such as we live in, where
industry is so dependent on credit, is
the vital one to every interest.
“There is hardly an individual possessed
of property in the country who is not
immediately or ultimately involved in
money engagements. The landlords are
notoriously and proverbially drowned in
debt, and it is calculated that $1
of the produce of the soil finds its way
ultimately into the pocket of the public
or the private creditor. Farmers are all
more or less involved in engagements
either to their landlords or to the banks
who have advanced their money; merchants
and manufacturers have their bills
or cash-accounts standing against them,
which must be provided for, whatever
ensues with regard to the prices of the
articles in which they deal; and private
individuals, even of wealthy fortunes,
have provisions to their wives, sisters,
brothers, or children, which must be made
up to a certain money amount, if they
would avert the evils of bankruptcy.
Now, if the views of the Reformers are
well founded, and a great reduction is
effected in the price of grain, and consequently
in the money-income of every
man in the kingdom, through the free
trade in corn, how are these undiminished
money-obligations to be made good out
of the diminished pecuniary resources
of the debtors in them? Mr Baring
has estimated that the change in
the value of money, consequent on the
resumption of cash-payments, altered
prices about 25 per cent; and everybody
knows what widespread, still existing,
and irremediable private distress $1
change produced. What, then, may be
anticipated from the far greater change
which is contemplated as likely to arise
from a free-trade in grain?
“But, serious as these evils are, they
are nothing in comparison with the
dreadful consequences which would result
to $1 from the change, and
the widespread desolation which must
follow a serious blow to the national
faith.
“It is well known with what difficulty
the payment of the annual charge of the
National Debt is provided for, even under
the present scale of prices; and how
much those difficulties were increased by
the change of prices, and the general
diminution of incomes, consequent on
the resumption of cash-payments. Indeed,
such was the effect of that change
that, had it not been counterbalanced by
a very great increase, both of our
agricultural and manufacturing produce
at the same time, it would have rendered
the maintenance of faith with the
public creditor impossible. Now, if such
be the present state of the public debt,
even under the unexampled general
prosperity which has pervaded the empire
since the peace, and with all the
security to the public faith which arises
from the stable, consistent, and uniform
rule of the British aristocracy, how is the
charge of the debt to be provided for
under the diminished national income
arising from the much hoped-for change
of prices consequent on the Reform Bill
and repeal of the Corn Laws, and the
increased national impatience, arising
from the consciousness of the power to
cast off the burden for ever?—Great and
reasonable fear may be felt, whether,
under any circumstances, the maintenance
of the national faith inviolate is practicable
for any considerable length of
time: no doubt can be entertained that,
under a Reform Parliament, and a free
trade in grain, it will be impossible.”
We forbear quoting the picture
which our author has drawn of the
awful consequences which must instantly
follow on a crash of the
national credit—not because we consider
it in any degree overcharged,
but because we are now satisfied that
the country is alive to its danger. We
are too well accustomed to the braggadocio
of modern journalism to attach
much weight to the expiring
vociferations of men who have done
their utmost to lead us into the present
dilemma; and who now, finding
themselves powerless to advise, are
vainly attempting to keep up a delusion
which the experience of each
succeeding week is dissipating with
extraordinary rapidity. The most talented
of the Free-trading journals virtually
confess that the experiment has
altogether failed. They are not able
to point out one single iota of advantage
which has resulted from it, beyond
the purely supposititious one
that, for a time, it secured the tranquillity
of Great Britain. This is at
best an ignoble argument in behalf
of a bad measure; but we believe it
to be utterly without foundation, inasmuch
as there probably never was a
great question agitated in which less
interest was evinced by the masses of
the nation than in that of the Corn
Laws. But we should be sorry, indeed,
to rank the loyalty of the British
people so low, or to suppose that
the crown of these realms rested upon
so weak a foundation, as the adoption
of such a view as this must necessarily
infer. The journals to which we
allude are by no means unconscious
of the loss which we have incurred,
or of the danger in which we presently
stand. The insane boast of Mr Villiers,
at the opening of the session,
that a depreciation of ninety-one millions
had taken place in the annual
produce of British labour, found no
echo in the columns of our more
sharp-sighted contemporaries. They
are now attempting to show that this
calculation was an utter mistake; that
importations are gradually diminishing;
and that prices must necessarily
rise. Most glad should we be if their
views upon this subject were sound;
but, unfortunately, stern experience
points to a different result. We complain,
and that with perfect justice,
that they will not face the difficulty,
and tell us what is to be done, supposing
prices remain as they are.
Agricultural quackery has done its
utmost, and has been extinguished
by the shout of general derision. No
man in his senses believes that production
can be artificially stimulated,
or the earth so manured as to yield
double crops to supply the frightful
deficiency in the annual balance-sheet
of the farmer. Both arms of husbandry
are shattered. Cattle-feeding
has been made, by Sir Robert Peel’s
tariff, as profitless as tillage; and all
countries have been invited, and are
availing themselves of the invitation,
to inundate our markets with their
produce. Under such a state of
things, what hope is there of recovery—what
chance of manufactures reviving,
so long as the best customers
for manufactures are borne down?
Are they not borne down? Let us see.
The depreciation of food was stated
by Mr Villiers at £91,000,000. The
whole land rental of the United Kingdom
is, according to a late statistical
authority, £58,753,615. Let us suppose
that rents are reduced by one-third—a
reduction which, considering
that mortgages and public burdens still
remain undiminished, will cripple the
means of most of the proprietors in
the kingdom—and the rental will fall
to about £39,169,000. Still there will
remain a loss of nearly £52,000,000
annually, to be borne by the tenantry;
in other words, low prices will
have to that extent affected their
power of purchase. The real case is
even stronger than the hypothetical
one, because the farmers, who constitute
the larger consuming body, are
at present receiving no such remission
of rent. Of £178,000,000, the estimated
amount of British manufactures,
we export £58,000,000, and
there remain for home consumption
goods to the value of £120,000,000.
Upon the sale of these depends not
only the prosperity, but the existence
of the manufacturers; and yet people
are astonished that their wares do
not go off as formerly! How, in the
name of common sense, can they be
expected to go off, when no margin
of profit is left, in his own trade, to
the great consumer? What these
reasonable gentlemen anticipate is
this—that the proprietor shall have
no surplus from his rent, or the farmer
any remuneration from his toil
and capital; and yet that they shall
continue to purchase all articles of
manufacture as before!
We observe that a contemporary
journal, which naturally feels rather
sore on the subject of the Corn Laws,
has twitted Mr Alison with a failure
of prophecy, in not having allowed for a
sufficient lapse between the passing of
the Reform Bill and the notable era
when the lion and the lamb coalesced—when
Sir Robert Peel finally became
a convert to the dazzling discoveries
of Mr Cobden. Our respected brother
seems to think that Mr Alison must
feel disappointed that the march of
democracy has been so slow; that the
avatar of Free-trade was so long in
coming; and that our fields were not,
several years ago, abandoned by the
disappointed husbandman. For the
satisfaction of the kindly critic, we
shall quote the following passage,
penned in 1832, immediately after
the passing of the Reform Bill, and
then, perhaps, refresh his memory as
to the manner in which the later measure
was carried:—
“Dark and disastrous, however, as is
the future prospect of the British empire,
we do not think its case hopeless, or that,
after having gone through the degradation,
distraction, and suffering which
must follow the destruction of the Constitution,
it may not yet witness in the
decline of its days some gleams of sunshine
and prosperity. The laws of nature
have now come to aid the cause of order;
its usual suffering will attend the march
of revolution; experience will soon dispel
the fumes of democracy; the reign
of Political Unions, of Jacobin Clubs,
and tricolor flags, must ere long come to
an end; the suffering, anxiety, and distress
consequent on their despotic rule,
the suspension of all confidence, and the
ruin of all credit, must consign them to
the dust, amidst the execrations of their
country, if they are not subverted by the
ruder shock of civil warfare and military
power. The distress, misery, and stagnation,
in every branch of industry,
already consequent on the Reform Bill,
have been so extreme, that they must
long ago have led to its overthrow, not
only without the resistance, but with
the concurrence, of all the Reformers
who are not revolutionists, had it not
been for the delusion universally spread
by the revolutionary journals, that the
existing distress was not owing to Reform,
but to the resistance which it had
experienced, and that the danger of
revolution, great in the event of the
measure being thrown out, was absolutely
nugatory in the event of its being
passed. These two sophisms have alone
carried the bill through the resistance
it experienced from the property, education,
and talent of the country, and
blinded men’s eyes to the enormous evils
which not only threatened to follow its
triumph, but attended its progress. But
these delusions cannot much longer be
maintained. Reform is now victorious:
the bill is passed unmutilated and unimpaired;
and its whole consequences
$1. When it is discovered
that all the benefits promised from it are
a mere delusion; that stagnation, distress,
and misery have signalised its
triumph; that trade does not revive with
the contracted expenditure of the rich,
nor confidence return with the increased
audacity of the poor; that the ancient
and kindly relations of life have been
torn asunder in the struggle, and the
vehemence of democracy has provided
no substitute in their stead; that interest
after interest, class after class, is successively
exposed to the attacks of the
revolutionists, and the ancient barrier
which restrained them is removed: the
eyes of the nation must be opened to
the gross fraud which has been practised
upon it. Then it will be discovered that
the aristocratic interest, and the nomination
boroughs, which supported their
influence in the Lower House, were the
real bulwark which protected all the
varied interests of the country from the
revolutionary tempest, and that every
branch of industry is less secure, every
species of property is less valuable, every
enterprise is more hazardous, every disaster
is more irretrievable, when its
surges roll unbroken and unresisted into
the legislature.
“It is upon this very circumstance,
however, that our chief, and indeed our
only hope of the country is founded.
Hitherto the great body of the middle
classes have stood aloof from the contest,
or they have openly joined the reforming
party. They were carried away by the
prospect of the importance which they
would acquire under the new Constitution,
and did not perceive that it was
their own interests which were defended,
their own battle which was fought, their
own existence which was at stake, in
the contest maintained by the Conservative
party. Now the case is changed.
The old rampart is demolished, and,
unless these middle ranks can create
a new one, they must be speedily themselves
destroyed. From the sole of their
feet to the crown of their head, the
middle classes of England at present
stand exposed to the revolutionary fire;
every shot will now carry away flesh
and blood. Deeply as we deplore the
misery and suffering which the exposure
of these unprotected classes to the
attacks of revolution must produce, it
is in the intensity of that suffering,
in the poignancy of that distress, that
the only chance of ultimate deliverance
is to be found. Periods of suffering are
seldom, in the end, lost to nations, any
more than to individuals; and it is years
of anguish that expiate the sin, and tame
the passions, of days of riot and licentiousness.
“The Constitution, indeed, is destroyed,
but the men whom the Constitution formed
are not destroyed. The institutions which
protected all the classes of the state, the
permanent interests which coerced the
feverish throes of democracy, the conservative
weight which steadied all the
movements of the people, are at an end;
the peril arising from this sudden removal
of the pressure which hitherto regulated
all the movements of the machine is extreme,
but the case is not utterly hopeless.
It is impossible at once to change
the habits of many hundred years’ growth;
it is difficult in a few years to root out
the affections and interests which have
sprung from centuries of obligation; it
is not in a single generation that the
virtues and happiness, fostered by ages
of prosperity, are to be destroyed. As
long as the British character remains unchanged;
as long as religion and moral
virtue sway the feelings of the majority
of the people; as long as tranquil industry
forms the employment of her inhabitants,
and domestic enjoyments constitute
the reward of their exertion,—the cause
of order and civilisation is not hopeless.
Revolutions, it is true, are always effected
by reckless and desperate minorities in
opposition to opulent and indolent majorities;
but it is the ennobling effect of
civil liberty to nourish a spirit of resistance
to oppression, which outstrips all the
calculations of those who ground their
views upon what has occurred in despotic
monarchies.”
And so it happened. The reaction
throughout the country was complete.
The Conservative party rallied; and
rallied so effectively, that, with many
converts in its ranks, and the rising
youth of the new generation to back it,
a great majority in the House of Commons
was secured, and the leadership
intrusted to the hands of one who, in
despite of previous lapses, appeared
at that time to have earned the distinction
by his zeal, and who gained
it by the force of his protestations.
Had the leader been true to the cause
which he then professed, we should
have been spared the ungracious duty
of commenting upon a solemn treachery,
to which history affords no
parallel, and the memory of which
will live long after the grave has closed
above the head of the principal delinquent.
How was it possible that such
an event could fail again, for a time,
to disunite a party, formed out of the
ruins of the old one by a rapid and
indiscriminate conscription? That
dependence and faith which high and
chivalrous spirits are so ready to place
in one beneath whose colours they
have fought—the ready trustingness
of youth—the great prestige which
surrounds the name of a veteran and
successful statesman—the belief in
his superior sagacity—the recollection
of blandishments and flattery, so
prized by the young when proceeding
from the lips of honoured age,—all
these things combined to break up
the Conservative party, and to place
the reins of government once more in
the hands of the eager Whigs. Perhaps
it is better so. There is no risk
now of a second betrayal, whatever
may be the future fortunes of the
Country Party; and on the head of
him who caused the social change let
the whole consequences rest. England’s
political annals have at least
gained one character more by the act.
The future historian who shall chronicle
the transactions of the last five
years, whatever be his creed or his
politics, will speak with veneration
and honour of Lord George Bentinck,
for whose early fate more
honest tears were shed, than have
often been paid as a tribute to the
patriot who has fallen in battle, the
defender of his country’s cause.
We have not left ourselves much
room to glance at the three interesting
papers in this volume, on the
subject of the two French Revolutions
of 1830 and 1848. They will be read
with profound attention by thousands
who may have passed them over
cursorily in their anonymous original
form; because Mr Alison’s profound
and intimate knowledge of the working
of French diplomacy, of the turbulent
and dangerous element which
lies, like molten lava, beneath the
surface of French society, and of the
secret causes of those outrages which,
from time to time, have shaken that
unhappy country, must needs give an
additional assurance of their value.
It is curious to observe how entirely
the speculations of the author, as to
the consequences which might arise
from the first of those sudden revolutions,
are borne out by the marvellous
issue of the second. The falsity
of the system which made the stability
of a government and the existence of
a dynasty mainly depend upon the
doubtful adherence, and still more
doubtful valour, of a civic National
Guard, was clearly pointed out and
exposed at the time when the Liberal
press of England was loud in its
approbation of the citizen soldiers
who had violated their oaths, and the
citizen king, who, more fortunate than
his worthless father, had succeeded in
supplanting his kinsman and rightful
sovereign.
“Of the numerous delusions,” wrote
Mr Alison in 1831, “which have overspread
the world in such profusion during
the last nine months, there is none so
extraordinary and so dangerous as the
opinion incessantly inculcated by the
revolutionary press, that the noblest virtue
in regular soldiers is to prove themselves
traitors to their oaths; and that a
$1 is the only safe and constitutional
force to which arms can be
intrusted. The troops of the line, whose
revolt decided the three days in July in
favour of the revolutionary party, have
been the subject of the most extravagant
eulogium from the Liberal press throughout
Europe; and even in this country, the
Government journals have not hesitated
to condemn, in no measured terms, the
Royal Guard, merely because they adhered,
amidst a nation’s treason, to their
honour and their oaths.
“Hitherto it has been held the first
duty of soldiers to adhere, with implicit
devotion, to that $1 which is the
foundation of military duties. Treason
to his colours has been considered as
foul a blot on the soldier’s scutcheon as
cowardice in the field. Even in the most
republican states, this principle of military
subordination has been felt to be the
vital principle of national strength. It
was during the rigorous days of Roman
discipline, that their legions conquered
the world; and the decline of the empire
began at the time that the Prætorian
Guards veered with the mutable populace,
and sold the empire for a gratuity
to themselves. Albeit placed in power
by the insurrection of the people, no men
knew better than the French Republican
leaders that their salvation depended on
crushing the military insubordination to
which they had owed their elevation.
When the Parisian levies began to evince
the mutinous spirit in the camp at St
Menehould in Champagne, which they
had imbibed during the license of the
capital, Dumourier drew them up in the
centre of his intrenchments, and, showing
them a powerful line of cavalry in front,
with their sabres drawn, ready to charge,
and a stern array of artillery and cannoneers
in rear, with their matches in
their hands, soon convinced the most
licentious that the boasted independence
of the soldier must yield to the dangers
of actual warfare. ‘The armed force,’
said Carnot, ‘is essentially obedient;’
and in all his commands, that great man
incessantly inculcated upon his soldiers
the absolute necessity of implicit submission
to the power which employed them.
When the recreant Constable de Bourbon,
at the head of a victorious squadron of
Spanish cavalry, approached the spot
where the rearguard, under the Chevalier
Bayard, was covering the retreat
of the French army in the valley of
Aosta, he found him seated, mortally
wounded, under a tree, with his eyes
fixed on the cross which formed the hilt
of his sword. Bourbon began to express
pity for his fate. ‘Pity not me,’ said
the high-minded Chevalier; ‘pity those
who fight against their king, their
country, and their oath!’
“These generous feelings, common
alike to republican antiquity and modern
chivalry, have disappeared during the
fumes of the French Revolution. The
soldier who is now honoured is not he
who keeps, but he who violates his oath;
the rewards of valour are showered, not
upon those who defend, but on those who
overturn the government; the incense of
popular applause is offered, not at the
altar of fidelity, but at that of treason.
Honours, rewards, promotion, and adulation,
have been lavished on the troops of
the line, who overthrew the government
of Charles X. in July last; while the
Royal Guard, who adhered to the fortune
of the fallen monarch with exemplary
fidelity, have been reduced to $1 from the bounty of strangers in a
foreign land. A subscription has recently
been opened in London for the most destitute
of these defenders of royalty; but
the Government journals have stigmatised,
as ‘highly dangerous,’ any indication
of sympathy with their fidelity or
their misfortunes.
“If these ancient ideas of honour,
however, are to be exploded, they have
at least gone out of fashion in good company.
The National Guard who took up
arms to overthrow the throne, have not
been long of destroying the altar. During
the revolt of February 1831, $1,
the emblem of salvation, was taken down
from all the steeples in Paris by the
citizen soldiers, and the image of our
Saviour effaced, by their orders, from
every church within its bounds! The
two principles stand and fall together.
The Chevalier ‘without fear and without
reproach’ died in obedience to his
oath, with his eyes fixed on the Cross;
the National Guard lived in triumph,
while their comrades bore down the venerated
emblem from the towers of Notre
Dame.”
Singular was the retribution which
awaited France. The “Ulysses” of
Europe, as he has been styled—the
old, crafty, insincere, penurious, yet
plausible and half-sagacious man,
sate in apparent peace upon his
throne for wellnigh eighteen years,
negotiating alliances, maintaining a
fair outward character, pandering to
popularity, identifying himself with
the $1, and identifying his
sons with the army—and all this to
fall at last before the worst planned
and most poorly contrived insurrection
which was ever attempted in the
streets of a European capital. Surrounded
by his citizens, the citizen
king went down. We know now,
from the revelations of De la Hodde
and others, what was the true nature
and commencement of that beggarly
conspiracy. We know that a few
hundred suspected and ill-organised
Socialists, along with a handful of
newspaper editors, not two of whom
possessed sufficient personal courage
to lay hand on a loaded musket, contrived
to overawe Paris, to bully the
redoubted National Guard, and to send
poor old Ulysses again upon his
travels, without much chance of finding
a second imperial Ithaca. Farce
and tragedy are here so closely interwoven
that it is wellnigh impossible
to separate their texture. The dethronement
of such a king may be a
grand European disaster, but it militates
nothing against the principle
or the sanctity of royalty. It was
but a simple Presidency gone a-begging.
The King of the Bourse or the
Railway Monarch had about them
nearly as much of that divinity which
should surround the royal character
as Louis Philippe, the chosen of the
shopkeepers, and the veteran dabbler
in the funds. No true greatness, no
high nobility of soul, elevated him to
the throne of France—ignoble beyond
all precedent was the manner in which
he was compelled to leave it. The
retreat of Charles X. was a triumph
compared with his panic-stricken and
unfollowed flight.
The following are Mr Alison’s remarks
upon the last of these Revolutions.
The reader will not fail to
observe the extreme similarity between
the two astounding Revolutions,
and the precise nature of the
cause which enabled both of them to
be successfully carried through by an
otherwise contemptible rabble.
“Who is answerable for this calamitous
Revolution, which has thus arrested
the internal prosperity of France, involved
its finances in apparently hopeless embarrassment,
thrown back for probably half
a century the progress of real freedom in
that country, and perhaps consigned it to
a series of internal convulsions, and
Europe to the horrors of general war for
a very long period? We answer without
hesitation, that the responsibility rests
with two parties, and two parties only—the
King and the National Guard.
“The King is most of all to blame, for
having engaged in a conflict, and, when
victory was within his grasp, allowing it
to slip from his hands from want of resolution
at the decisive moment. It is too
soon after these great and astonishing
events to be able to form a decided opinion
on the whole details connected with
them; but the concurring statements from
all parties go to prove that on the $1
day the troops of the line were perfectly
steady; and history will record that the
heroic firmness of the Municipal Guard
has rivalled all that is most honourable in
French history. The military force was
immense; not less than eighty thousand
men, backed by strong forts, and amply
provided with all the muniments of war.
Their success on the first day was unbroken;
they had carried above a hundred
barricades, and were in possession
of all the military positions of the capital.
But at this moment the indecision of the
King ruined everything. Age seems to
have extinguished the vigour for which
he was once so celebrated. He shrank
from a contest with the insurgents, paralysed
the troops by orders not to fire on
the people, and openly receded before the
insurgent populace, by abandoning Guizot
and the firm policy which he himself
had adopted, and striving to conciliate
revolution by the mezzo termini of
Count Molé, and a more liberal cabinet.
It is with retreat in the presence of an
insurrection, as in the case of an invading
army; the first move towards the rear is
a certain step to ruin. The moment it
was seen that the King was giving way,
all was paralysed, because all foresaw
to which side the victory would incline.
The soldiers threw away their muskets,
the officers broke their swords, and the
vast array, equal to the army which
fought at Austerlitz, was dissolved like
a rope of sand. Louis Philippe fell without
either the intrepidity of the royal
martyr in 1793, or the dignity of the
elder house of Bourbon in 1830; and if it
be true, as is generally said, that the
Queen urged the King to mount on horseback
and die as ‘became a King’ in
front of the Tuileries, and he declined,
preferring to escape in disguise to this
country, history must record, with shame,
that royalty perished in France without
the virtues it was entitled to expect in
the meanest of its supporters.
“The second cause which appears to
have occasioned the overthrow of the
monarchy in France, is the general, it
may be said universal, defection of the
National Guard. It had been openly announced
that 20,000 of that body were
to line the Champs Elysées $1
on occasion of the banquet; it was
perfectly known that that banquet was
a mere pretext for getting the forces
of this Revolution together; and that the
intention of the conspirators was to
march in a body to the Tuileries after it
was over, and compel the King to accede
to their demands. When they were called
out in the afternoon, they declined to act
against the people, and by their treachery
occasioned the defection of the troops of
the line, and rendered farther resistance
hopeless. They expected, by this declaration
against the King of their choice,
the monarch of the barricades, to secure
a larger share in the government for
themselves. They went to the Chamber
of Deputies, intending to put up the
Duchess of Orleans as Regent, and the
Count of Paris as King, and to procure a
large measure of reform for the constitution.
What was the result? Why, that
they were speedily supplanted by the rabble
who followed in their footsteps, and who,
deriding the eloquence of Odillon Barrot,
and insensible to the heroism of the
Duchess of Orleans, by force and violence
expelled the majority of the deputies from
their seats, seized on the President’s
chair, and, amidst an unparalleled scene
of riot and confusion, subverted the Orleans
dynasty, proclaimed a Republic, and
adjourned to the Hotel de Ville to name
a Provisional Government!...
“Here, then, is the whole affair clearly
revealed. It was the timidity of Government,
and the defection of the National
Guard, which ruined everything,—which
paralysed the troops of the line, encouraged
the insurgents, left the brave Municipal
Guards to their fate, and caused
the surrender of the Tuileries. And what
has been the result of this shameful treachery
on the part of the sworn defenders
of order—this ‘$1’ prætorian guard
of France? Nothing but this, that they
have destroyed the monarchy, ruined industry,
banished capital, rendered freedom
hopeless, and made bankrupt the
State! Such are the effects of armed men
forgetting the first of social duties, that
of fidelity to their oaths.”
Of the other papers contained in
this volume, that on the subject of
“the British Peerage,” written at a
time when certain worthy fellows out
of doors seemed to be determined that
crown, mitre, and coronet should go
together into one blazing bonfire,
similar to that which lately received
the state chair of Louis Philippe—and
when certain peers within testified
their respect for the dignity and privileges
of their order, by doing their
best to have it swamped by new creations—will
especially challenge notice
as a stately, dignified, and elaborate
composition. Other essays, such as
those on Crime and Transportation,
Ireland, the Navigation Laws, and
the Commercial Crisis of 1837, evince
the care and attention which Mr Alison
has bestowed on the leading topics
of economy and government with
which modern statesmen are inevitably
compelled to grapple. Of their
intrinsic merit we shall say nothing.
They have often been cited as the
ablest expositions of the peculiar views
which they advocate, and all of them
bear the impress of a mind earnest in
its convictions, and thoroughly practical
in its tendency. Mr Alison does
not, like too many writers of the day,
content himself with finding out what
is faulty, or defective, or radically
vicious in any branch of our social
economy—he indulges in no vague
and pointless declamation; but while
he lays bare the wound, distinctly and
emphatically inculcates the proper
remedy. Many persons there are, of
course, who will not subscribe to his
doctrines, but we believe there are
very few who will question the sincerity
or deny the philanthropy of his
views. And when it is considered
that the three massive volumes, of
which this is the first, were composed
at intervals of short respite from the
toil of an engrossing profession, and
form but a small portion of the literary
labours of the author, it may be questionable
which is most to be wondered
at—the largeness of his information,
or the unwearied energy of his mind.
These certainly are not the columns
in which this work of Mr Alison can
be discussed with absolute impartiality,
nor is the writer of this article
free from a pardonable bias. Where
affection, veneration, and gratitude
for many wholesome lessons, conveyed
with a kindliness which has made those
lessons still more valuable, are warm
at the heart, criticism is impossible;
and it would be absurd and false to
feign that we approach this book with
any idea of fulfilling the critical
function. Yet thus much may we
be allowed to say, that for integrity
of purpose, honesty of design,
clear and unvarying adherence to
principles, laboriously sought for and
conscientiously adopted—for the virtue
and total absence of selfishness
which distinguish the patriot, and for
the grace and accomplishment which
adorn the scholar and the gentleman,
it would be difficult to find within
the four seas that encircle Britain
a superior to the author of these
Essays, and of the famous History
of Europe.
OVID’S SPRING-TIME FROM THE TRISTIA.
621
For once the zephyrs have removed the cold:
One year is over, and a new begun.
So short a winter, I am daily told,
Never yet yielded to this northern sun.
I see the children skipping o’er the green,
Plucking the faint unodorous violet,
A gentle stranger, rarely ever seen.
With other flowers the mead is sparsely set—
Brown birds are twittering with the joy of spring:
The universal swallow, ne’er at rest,
Aye chirping, glances past on purple wing,
And builds beneath the humble eaves her nest.
The plant, which yester-year the share o’erthrew,
Looks up again from out the opening mould;
And the poor vines, though here but weak and few,
Some scantling buds, like ill-set gems, unfold.
W. E. A.
Dies Boreales.
622
No. VII.
CHRISTOPHER UNDER CANVASS.
$1
Scene—$1Time—$1A.M.
North—Talboys.
NORTH.
Perturbed Spirit! why won’t you rest? What brings thee here?
TALBOYS.
Seward snores.
NORTH.
Why select Seward?
TALBOYS.
I do not select him—he selects himself—singles himself out from the whole
host; so that you hear his Snore loud over that of the Camp—say rather
his Snore alone—like Lablache singing a Solo in a chorus.
NORTH.
It must be Buller.
TALBOYS.
Buller began it——
NORTH.
List! How harmonious in the hush the blended Snore of Camp and Village!
How tuned to unison—as if by pitch-pipe—with the dreamy din of our
lapsing friend here, who by and by will awake into a positive Waterfall.
TALBOYS.
The Snore of either army stilly sounds. At this distance, the Snore disposes
to sleep. Seward must have awakened himself—there goes Buller——
NORTH.
Where?
TALBOYS.
Shriller than Seward—quite a childish treble—liker the Snore of a female—
NORTH.
Females never snore.
TALBOYS.
How do you know? I won’t answer for some of them. Lionesses do—not
perhaps in their wild state—but in Zoological Gardens.
NORTH.
Not quite so loud, Chanticleer—you will disturb my people.
TALBOYS.
Disturb your people! Why, he has already stirred up the Solar System.
“The Cock that is the Trumpet of the Morn,
Doth, with his lofty and shrill-sounding throat,
Awake the God of Day.”
Taking the distance of the Earth from the Sun, in round numbers, at Ninety-Five
Millions of Miles, pretty well for a bird probably weighing some six
pounds not merely to make himself heard by the God of Day, but by one
single crow to startle Dan Phœbus from his sleep, and force him $1
to show his shining morning face at Cladich.
NORTH.
Out of Science, we seldom think of the vastness of the System of the Universe.
Our hearts and imaginations diminish it for the delight of love. In
our usual moods we are all Children with respect to Nature; and gather up
Stars as if they were flowers of the field—to form a coronet for Neæra’s hair.
TALBOYS.
What ailed poor dear Doctor Beattie at Cocks in general? I never could
understand the Curse.
“Proud harbinger of Day,
Who scarest my visions with thy clarion shrill,
Fell Chanticleer! who oft hath reft away
My fancied good, and brought substantial ill!
Oh, to thy cursed scream discordant still
Let Harmony aye shut her gentle ear;
Thy boastful mirth let jealous rivals spill,
Insult thy crest, and glossy pinions tear,
And ever in thy dreams the ruthless fox appear.”
You Poets, in your own persons, are a savage set.
NORTH.
I am not a Poet, sir; nor will I allow any man with impunity to call me so.
TALBOYS.
But Doctor Beattie was, and a Professor of Moral Philosophy to boot, at
Aberdeen or St Andrews, or some other one of our ancient Universities—for
every stone-and-lime building in Scotland is ancient; and. goodness me!
hear him cursing cocks, and dooming the whole Gallic race to every variety
of cruel and ignominious deaths, in revenge for having been disturbed from
his morning dreams by a Gentleman with Comb and Wattles crowing on his
own Dunghill, in red jacket, speckled waistcoat, and grey breeks, the admiration
of Earochs and How-Towdies.
NORTH.
Doctor Beattie was a true Poet—and had an eye and an ear for Nature.
Yet now and then he shut both—
“Hence the scared owl on pinions grey
$1;
And down the lone vale sails away
To more profound repose.”
I have seen that Stanza quoted many thousand times as exquisite. It is criminal.
An owl was never heard, scared or unscared, to “break from the
rustling boughs.” Silently as a leaf he leaves his perch; you hear no rustle,
for he makes none—any more than a ghost.
TALBOYS.
Nor are the other lines good—for they present the image of a long rectilinear
flight, which that of an owl in no circumstances is; and, in a fright,
he would take the first blind shelter.
NORTH.
Poets seldom err so—yet I remember a mistake of Coleridge’s about that
commonest of all birds, the Rook.
“My gentle-hearted Charles! when the last Rook
Bent its straight path along the dusky air
Homewards, I blest it! deeming its black wing
(Now a dim speck, now vanishing in light)
Had crossed the mighty orb’s dilated glory,
When thou stood’st gazing; or, when all was still,
$1; and had a charm
For thee, my gentle-hearted Charles, to whom
No sound is dissonant which tells of life!”
TALBOYS.
There is much silliness in the Sibylline Leaves. For Charles read Charlotte.
’Tis more like Love than Friendship—effeminate exceedingly; and,
“no sound is dissonant which tells of life,” reminds one of the Sunday Jackasses
on Blackheath.
NORTH.
“‘$1’ Some months after I had written this line,” says Coleridge
in a note, “it gave me pleasure to find that Bartram had observed the
same circumstance of the Savanna Crane. ‘When these birds move their
wings in flight, their strokes are slow, moderate, and regular; and even when
at a considerable distance, or high above us, we plainly hear the quill-feathers;
their shafts and webs, upon one another, creak as $1.’” That a Rook may fly “creaking” when moulting,
or otherwise out of feather, I shall not take upon me to deny; but in
ordinary condition, he does not fly “creaking.” Coleridge was wont, in his
younger days, to mistake exceptions for general rules. In such a case as this,
a moment’s reflection would have sufficed to tell him that there could not have
been “creaking” without let or hindrance to flight—and that the flight
of a rook is easy and equable—“The blackening train o’ craws to their repose.”
What creaking must have been there! But Burns never heard it.
TALBOYS.
One Burns, as an observer of nature, is worth fifty Coleridges.
NORTH.
Not an arithmetical question. Why, even dear Sir Walter himself occasionally
makes a slip in this way.
“Beneath the broad and ample bone,
That buckled heart to fear unknown,
A feeble and a tim’rous guest
The field-fare framed her lowly nest!”
The Field-fare is migratory—and does not build here; in Norway, where it
is native, it builds in trees—often high up on lofty trees—and in crowds.
TALBOYS.
I believe, sir, they have been known to breed in this country—and perhaps
here they build on the ground.
NORTH.
Don’t be nonsensical. Our Great Minstrel knew wood-craft well; and
hill-craft and river-craft; yet in his fine picture of Coriskin and Coolin,
“The wildest glen but this can show
Some touch of nature’s genial glow:
On high Benmore green mosses grow,
And heath-bells bud in deep Glencroe,
And copse on Cruachan Ben;
But here, above, around, below,
In mountain or in glen,
Nor tree, nor shrub, nor plant, nor flower,
Nor aught of vegetative power
The weary eye may ken.
For all is rocks at random strewn,
Black waves, bare crags, and banks of stone,
As if were here denied
The summer’s sun, the spring’s sweet dew,
That clothe with many a varied hue
The bleakest mountain’s head;”
would you believe it, that he introduces Deer—$1 Deer!
TALBOYS.
“Call it not vain, they do not err
Who say that, when the Poet dies,
Mute nature mourns her worshipper,
And celebrates his obsequies;
Who say tall cliff and cavern lone
For the departed bard make moan;
That mountains meet in crystal rill,
That flowers in tears of balm distil;
Through his loved groves that breezes sigh,
And oaks in deeper groan reply,
And rivers teach their rushing wave
To murmur dirges round his grave.”
NORTH.
And there the Last Minstrel should have ceased. What follows spoils all—fanciful,
fantastic—not imaginative, poetical. The Minstrel is at pains to let
us know that
“Mute nature does $1 mourn her worshipper!”
that not
“O’er mortal urn
These things inanimate can mourn.”
What, then, is the truth? To explain the mystery of flowers distilling tears
of balm, we are told that
“The maid’s pale shade, who wails her lot,
That love, true love, should be forgot,
From rose and heather shakes the tear
Upon the gentle Minstrel’s bier—”
The Phantom Knight shrieks upon the wild blast—and the Chief, from his
misty throne on the mountains, fills the lonely caverns with his groans—while
his
“Tears of rage impel the rill!
All mourn the minstrel’s harp unstrung,
Their name unknown, their praise unsung!”
Had Sir Walter been speaking in his own person he never would have written
thus—nor thus contradicted and extinguished the Passion in the stanzas you
so feelingly recited. But he puts the words into the lips of an old Harper
improvising at a Feast—on which occasion anything will pass for poetry—even
to the mind of the true Poet himself—but, believe me, it is sheer nonsense—and
by power of contrast recalls Wordsworth’s profound saying—
“The Poets, in their elegies and lays
Lamenting the departed, call the groves—
They call upon the hills and streams to mourn
And senseless rocks; nor idly; for they speak
In these their invocation, with a voice
Obedient to the strong creative power
Of human passion. Sympathies there are
More tranquil, yet perhaps of kindred birth,
That steal upon the meditative mind,
And grow with thought. Beside yon spring I stood,
And eyed its waters till we seemed to feel
One sadness, they and I. For them a bond
Of brotherhood is broken; time has been
When, every day, the touch of human hand
Dislodged the natural sleep that binds them up
In mortal stillness; and they ministered
To human comfort.”
TALBOYS.
Are all these the Cladich Cock and his echoes? No, surely. Farm crows to
Farm, from Auchlian to Sonnachan. You might almost believe them bagpipes.
And so it is—that is a bagpipe. On which side of the Loch? Why, on
neither—beg pardon—on both; forgive me—on the Water;—incredible—in
the Camp! No snore can long outlive that—the People are up and doing.
In my mind’s eye I see women slipping easily into petticoats—men laboriously
into breeches——
NORTH.
My more Celtic imagination sees chiefly kilts. But pray, may I ask again,
Talboys, what brought you here at this untimeous hour of the Morn?
TALBOYS.
I feel that I ought to apologise for my unwelcome intrusion on your privacy,
sir; but on my honour I believed you were in the Van. Yesterday I was so
engrossed by you and Shakspeare, that during our colloquy I had not a moment
to look at the Wren’s Nest.
NORTH.
Its existence is believed in by few of the natives. I know no such place
for a murder. There would be no need to bury the body—here at this Table
he might be left sitting for centuries—a dead secret in a Safe.
TALBOYS.
No need to bury the body! You have no antipathy, I trust, sir, to me?
NORTH.
We are not responsible for our antipathies——
TALBOYS.
I allow that—but we are for every single murder we commit; and though
there may be no need to bury the body, murder will spunk out——
NORTH.
We are willing to run the risk. What infatuation to seek the Lion in his
Den—the Wren in his Nest! Sit down, sir, and let us have, in the form of
dialogue, your last speech and dying words on Othello.
TALBOYS.
Hamlet, sir?
NORTH.
Othello.
TALBOYS.
Romeo and Juliet?
NORTH.
Othello.
TALBOYS.
Well—Lear let it be.
NORTH.
Mind what you are about, Talboys. There are limits to human forbearance.
Swear that after this morning’s breakfast you will never again utter the
words Othello—Iago—Cassio—Desdemona——
TALBOYS.
I swear. Meanwhile, let us recur to the Question of Short and Long
Time.
NORTH.
When Shakspeare was inditing the Scenes of the “Decline and Fall”—“The
Temptation”—“The Seduction”—or whatsoever else you choose to call
it—the Sequence of Cause and Effect—the bringing out into prominence and
power the successive Essential Movements of the proceeding transformation
were intents possessing his whole spirit. We can easily conceive that they
might occupy it absolutely and exclusively—that is to say, excluding the
computation and all consideration of actual time. If this be an excessive
example, yet I believe that a huddling up of time is a part of the poetical state;
that you must, and, what is more, may, crowd into a Theatrical or Epic Day,
far more of transaction between parties, and of changes psychological, than
a natural day will hold—ay, ten times over. The time on the Stage and in
Verse is not literal time. Not it, indeed; and if it be thus with time, which
is so palpable, so selfevidencing an entity, what must be the law, and how
wide-ranging, for everything else, when we have once got fairly into the Region
of Poetry?
TALBOYS.
The usefulness of the Two Times is palpable from first to last—of the
Short Time for maintaining the tension of the passion—of the long for a
thousand general needs. Thus Bianca must be used for convincing Othello
very potently, positively, unanswerably. But she cannot be used without supposing
a protracted intercourse between her and Cassio. Iago’s dialogue with
him falls to the ground, if the acquaintance began yesterday. But superincumbent
over all is the $1 that Iago begins the
Temptation, and that Othello extinguishes the Light of his Life all in
one day.
NORTH.
And observe, Talboys, how this concatenation of the passionate scenes
operates. Marvellously! Let the Entrances of Othello be four—A, B, C, D.
You feel the close connexion of A with B, of B with C, of C with D. You
feel the coherence, the nextness; and all the force of the impetuous Action and
Passion resulting. But the logically-consequent near connexion of A with C,
and much more with D, as again of B with D, you $1. Why? When
you are at C, and feeling the pressure of B upon C, you have lost sight of the
pressure of A upon B. At each entrance you go back one step—you do
not go back two. The suggested intervals continually keep displacing to
distances in your memory the formerly felt connexions. This could not so
well happen in real life, where the relations of time are strictly bound upon your
memory. Though something of it happens when passion devours memory. But
in fiction, the conception being loosely held, and shadowy, the feat becomes
easily practicable. Thus the Short Time tells for the support of the Passion,
along with the Long Time, by means of virtuous instillations from the hand or
wing of Oblivion. From one to two you feel no intermission—from two to
three you feel none—from three to four you feel none; but I defy any man to
say that from one to four he has felt none. I defy any man to say honestly,
that “sitting at the Play” he has kept count from one to four.
TALBOYS.
If you come to that, nobody keeps watch over the time in listening to
Shakspeare. I much doubt if anybody knows at the theatre that Iago’s first
suggestion of doubt occurs the day after the landing. I never knew it till you
made me look for it—
NORTH.
For which boon I trust you are duly grateful.
TALBOYS.
’Tis folly to be wise.
NORTH.
Why, Heaven help us! if we did not go to bed, and did not dine, which of us
could ever keep count from Monday to Saturday! As it is, we have some of
us hard work to know what happened yesterday, and what the day before.
On Tuesday I killed that Salmo Ferox?
TALBOYS.
No—but on Wednesday I did. You forget yourself, my dear sir, just like
Shakspeare.
NORTH.
Ay, Willy forgets himself. He is not withheld by the chain of time he
is linking, for he has lost sight of the previous links. Put yourself into
the transport of composition, and answer. But besides, every past scene—or
to speak more suitably to the technical distribution of the Scenes, in our
Editions—every past $1, (which different occupation, according to the technicality of the
French Stage, of the Italian, of the Attic, of Plautus, of Terence, constitutes
a Scene)—every such past marked moment in the progress of the Play has
the effect for the Poet, as well as for you, of protracting the time in retrospect—throwing
everything that has passed further back. As if, in travelling fifty
miles, you passed fifty Castles, fifty Churches, fifty Villages, fifty Towns,
fifty Mountains, fifty Valleys, and fifty Cataracts—fifty Camels, fifty Elephants,
fifty Caravans, fifty Processions, and fifty Armies—the said fifty
miles would seem a good stretch larger to your recollection, and the five
hours of travelling a pretty considerable deal longer, than another fifty miles
and another five hours in which you had passed only three Old Women.
TALBOYS.
My persuasion is, sir, that nobody alive knows—of the auditors—that the first
suggestion of doubt and the conclusion to kill are in one Scene of the Play. I
do, indeed, believe, with you, sir, that the goings-out and re-enterings of
Othello have a strangely deluding effect—that they disconnect the time more
than you can think—and that all the changes of persons on the stage—all
shiftings of scenes and droppings of curtains, break and dislocate and dilate
the time to your imagination, till you do not in the least know where you
are. In this laxity of your conception, all hints of extended time sink in
and spring up, like that fungus which, on an apt soil, in a night grows to a
foot diameter.
NORTH.
You have hit it there, Talboys. Shakspeare, we have seen, in his calmer
constructions, shows, in a score of ways, weeks, months; that is therefore
the true time, or call it the historical time. Hurried himself, and hurrying
you on the torrent of passion, he forgets time, and a false show of time, to the
utmost contracted, arises. I do not know whether he did not perceive this
false exhibition of time, or perceiving, he did not care. But we all must see
a reason, and a cogent one, why he should not let in the markings of protraction
upon his dialogues of the Seduced and the Seducer. You can conceive
nothing better than that the Poet, in the moment of composition, seizes
the views which at that moment offer themselves as effective—unconscious or
regardless of incompatibility. He is whole to the present; and as all is
feigned, he does not remember how the foregone makes the ongoing impracticable.
Have you ever before, Talboys, examined time in a Play of Shakspeare?
Much more, have you ever examined the treatment of time on the
Stage to which Shakspeare came, upon which he lived, and which he left?
TALBOYS.
A good deal.
NORTH.
Not much, I suspect.
TALBOYS.
Why, not at all—except t’other day along with you—in Macbeth.
NORTH.
He came to a Stage which certainly had not cultivated the logic of time
as a branch of the Dramatic Art. It appears to me that those old people,
when they were enwrapt in the transport of their creative power, totally forgot
all regard, lost all consciousness of time. Passion does not know the clock
or the calendar. Intimations of time, now vague, now positive, will continually
occur; but also the Scenes float, like the Cyclades in a Sea of Time, at
distances utterly indeterminate—Most near? Most remote? That is a Stage
of Power, and not of Rules—Dynamic, not Formal. I say again at last as at
first, that the time of Othello, tried by the notions of time in $1, or tried, if
you will, by the type of prosaic and literal time, is—Insoluble.
TALBOYS.
To the first question, therefore, being What is the truth of the matter? the
answer stands, I conceive without a shadow of doubt or difficulty, “The time
of Othello is—as real time—INSOLUBLE.”
NORTH.
By heavens, he echoes me!
TALBOYS.
Or, it is proposed incongruously, impossibly. Then arises the question,
How stood the time in the mind of Shakspeare?
NORTH.
I answer, I do not know. The question splits itself into two—first,
“How did he $1 the time?” Second, “How did he conceive it in
the progress of the Play?” My impression is, that he projected extended
time. If so, did he or did he not know that in managing the Seduction he
departed from that design by contracting into a Day? Did he deliberately
entertain a double design? If he did, how did he excuse this to himself?
Did he say, “A stage necessity, or a theatrical or dramatic necessity”—namely,
that of sustaining at the utmost possible reach of altitude the tragical passion
and interest—“requires the precipitation of the passion from the first breathing
of suspicion—the ‘Ha! Ha! I like not that,’ of the suggesting Fiend to the
consecrated ‘killing myself, to die upon a kiss!’—all in the course of fifteen
hours—and this tragical vehemency, this impetuous energy, this torrent of
power I will have; at the same time I have many reasons—amongst them the
general probability of the action—for a dilated time; and I, being a magician
of the first water, will so dazzle, blind, and bewilder my auditors, that they
shall accept the double time with a double belief—shall feel the unstayed
rushing on of action and passion, from the first suggestion to the cloud of
deaths—and yet shall remain with a conviction that Othello was for months
Governor of Cyprus—they being on the whole unreflective and uncritical
persons?”
TALBOYS.
And, after all, who willingly criticises his dreams or his pleasures?
NORTH.
And the Audience of the Globe Theatre shall not—for “I hurl my dazzling
spells into the spungy air,” and “the spell shall sit when the curtain has fallen.”
Shakspeare might, in the consciousness of power, say this. For this is that
which he has—knowingly or unknowingly—done. Unknowingly? Perhaps—himself
borne on by the successively rising waves of his work. For you
see, Talboys, with what prolonged and severe labour we two have arrived at
knowing the reality of the case which now lies open to us in broad light.
We have needed time and pains, and the slow settling of our understandings,
to unwind the threads of delusion in which we were encoiled and entoiled.
If a strange and unexplained power could undeniably so beguile us—a possibility
of which, previously to this examination, we never have dreamt, how
do we warrant that the same dark, nameless, mysterious power shall not
equally blind the “Artificer of Fraud?” This is matter of proposed investigation
and divination, which let whoever has will, wit, and time, presently
undertake.
TALBOYS.
Why, we are doing it, sir. He will be a bold man who treats of Othello—after
Us.
NORTH.
Another question is—What is the Censure of Art on the demonstrated
inconsistency in Othello? I propose, but now deal not with it. Observe that
we have laid open a new and startling inquiry. We have demonstrated the
double time of Othello—the Chronological Fact. That is the first step set in
light—the first required piece of the work—$1. Beyond this, we have
ploughed a furrow or two, to show and lead further direction of the work in
the wide field. We have touched on the gain to the work by means of the
duplicity—we have proposed to the self-consciousness of all hearers and
readers the psychological fact of their own unconsciousness of the guile used
towards them, or of the success of the fallacy; and we have asked the solution
of the psychological fact. We have also asked the Criticism of Art on the
government of the time in Othello—supposing the Poet in pride and audacity
of power to have designed that which he has done. Was it High Art?
TALBOYS.
Ay—was it High Art?
NORTH.
I dare hardly opine. Effect of high and most defying art it has surely; but
you ask again—did he know? I seem to see often that the spirit of the Scene
possessed Shakspeare, and that he fairly forgot the logical ties which he had
encoiled about him. We know the written Play, and we may, if we are
capable, know its power upon ourselves. There $1 the Two Times, the Long
and the Short; and each exerts upon you its especial virtue. I can believe
that Shakspeare unconsciously did what Necessity claimed—the impetuous
motion on, on, on of the Passion—the long time asked by the successive
events; the forces that swayed him, each in its turn, its own way.
TALBOYS.
Unconsciously?
NORTH.
Oh heavens! Yes—yes—no—no. Yes—no. No—yes. What you will.
“Willingly my jaws I close,
Leave! oh! leave me to repose.”
TALBOYS.
Consciously or unconsciously?
NORTH.
Talboys, Longfellow, Perpetual Præses of the Seven Feet Club, we want
Troy, Priam, Achilles, Hector, to have been. Perhaps they were—perhaps
they were not. We must be ready for two states of mind—simple belief,
which, is the temper of childhood and youth—recognition of illusion with self-surrender,
which is the attained state of criticism wise and childlike. At
last we voluntarily take on the faith which was in the goldener age. The
child believed; and the man believes. But the child believes $1; and the
man who perceives how $1 is a shadow, believes $1 beyond. $1 he
believes in play—$1 in earnest. The child mixed the two—the tale of the
fairies and the hope of hereafter. Union, my dear Boys, is the faculty of the
young, but division of the old. I speak of Shakspeare at five years of age;
not of Us, whom, ere we can polysyllable men’s names, dominies instruct how
to do old men’s work and to distinguish.
TALBOYS.
My dear sir, I do so love to hear your talkee talkee; but be just ever so
little a little more intelligible to ordinary mortals—
NORTH.
You ask what really happened? The Play bewilders you from answering—accept
it as it rushes along through your soul, reading or sitting to hear and
see. The main and strange fact is, that these questions of Time, which, reading
the Play backwards, force themselves on us, never occur to us reading
straight forwards. Two Necessities lie upon your soul.
TALBOYS.
Two Necessities, sir?
NORTH.
Two Necessities lie upon your soul. You cannot believe that Othello,
suspecting his Wife, folds his arms night after night about her disrobed bosom.
As little can you believe that in the course of twelve hours the spirit of
infinite love has changed into a dagger-armed slayer. The Two Times—marvellous
as it is to say—take you into alternate possession. The impetuous
motion forwards, in the scenes and in the tenor of action, which belong to the
same Day, you feel; and you ask no questions. When Othello and Iago speak
together, you lose the knowledge of time. You see power and not form. You
feel the aroused Spirit of Jealousy: you see, in the field of belief, a thought
sown and sprung—a thought changed into a doubt—a doubt into a dread—a
dread into the cloud of death. Evidences press, one after the other—the
spirit endures change—you feel succession—as cause and effect must succeed—you
do not compute hours, days, weeks, months;—yet confess I must,
and confess you must, and confess all the world and his wife must, that the
condition is altogether anomalous—that a time which is at once a day of the
Calendar and a month of the Calendar, does not happen anywhere out of
Cyprus.
TALBOYS.
It has arisen just as you say, sir—because Two Necessities pressed. The
Passion must have its torrent, else $1 will never endure that Othello shall
kill Desdemona. Events must have their concatenation, else—but I stop at this
the incredible anomaly, that for Othello himself you require the double time!
You cannot imagine him embracing his wife, misdoubted false; as little can
you his Love measureless, between sunrise and sunset turned into Murder.
NORTH.
Even so.
TALBOYS.
My dear sir, what really happened?
NORTH.
Oh! Talboys, Talboys. Well then—$1 that Othello killed her upon the
first night after the arrival at Cyprus. The Cycle could not have been so
run through.
TALBOYS.
How then in reality did the Weeks pass?
NORTH.
That’s a good one! Why, I was just about to ask you—and ’tis your indisputable
duty to tell me and the anxious world—how.
TALBOYS.
I do not choose to commit myself in such a serious affair.
NORTH.
Suppose the framing of the tale into a Prose Romance. Surely, surely,
surely, no human romancer, compounding the unhappy transactions into a
prose narrative, could, could, could have put the first sowing of doubt, and
the smothering under the pillows, for incidents of one day. He would have
made Othello for a time laugh at the doubt, toss it to the winds. Iago would
have wormed about him a deal slowlier. The course of the transactions in the
Novel would have been much nearer the course of reality.
TALBOYS.
In Cinthio’s Novel—
NORTH.
Curse Cinthio.
TALBOYS.
My Lord, I bow to your superior politeness.
NORTH.
Confound Chesterfield. My dear friend, Reality has its own reasons—a
Novel its own—and its own a Drama. Every work of art brings its own
conditions, which divide you from the literal representation of human experience.
Ask Painter, Sculptor, and Architect. Every fine art exercises its
own sleights.
TALBOYS.
In the Novel, I guess or admit that they would have been a month at
Cyprus ere Iago had stirred. What hurry? He would have watched his
time—ever and anon would have thrown in a hundred suggestions of which we
know nothing. Let any man, romancer or other, set himself to conceive the
Prose Novel. He cannot, by any possibility, conceive that he should have
been led to make but a day of it. Ergo, the Drama proceeds upon its own
Laws. No representation in art is the literal transcript of experience.
NORTH.
The question is, what deviations—to what extent—does the particular Art
need? And why? The talked Attic Unity of Time instructs us. But
Sophocles and Shakspeare must have one view of the Stage, in essence. You
must sit out your three or four hours. You must listen and see with expectation
$1, like a bow drawn. To which intent Action and Passion must
press on.
TALBOYS.
Compare, sir, the One Day of Othello to the Sixteen Years of Hermione!
There, intensest Passion sustained; here, the unrolling of a romantic adventure.
Each true to the temper imposed on the hearing spectator.
NORTH.
Good. The Novel is not a Transcript—the Play is not a Transcript. Ask
not for a Transcript, for not one of those who could give it you, will. A
$1 and demand—and we have it in Othello.
TALBOYS.
And put up we must with Two Times—one for your sympathy with his
tempest of heart—one for the verisimilitude of the transaction.
NORTH.
Think on the facility with which, in the Novel, Iago could have strewn an
atom of arsenic a day on Othello’s platter, to use him to the taste; and how,
in the Play, this representation is impossible. Then, the original remaining
the same, each manner of portraiture $1, and each, after $1.
TALBOYS.
Did not Shakspeare know as much about the Time which he was himself
making $1, as much and more?
NORTH.
I doubt it. I see no necessity for believing it. We judge him as we judge
ourselves. He came to his Art as it was, and created—improving it—from
that point. An Art grows in all its constituents. The management of the
Time is a constituent in the Art of “feigned history,” as Poetry is called by
Lord Bacon. But I contend that on our Stage, to which Shakspeare came,
the management of Time was in utter neglect—an undreamed entity; and I
claim for the first foundation of any Canon respective to this matter, acute
sifting of all Plays $1.
TALBOYS.
Not so very many—
NORTH.
Nor so very few. Shakspeare took up the sprawling, forlorn infant, dramatic
Time. He cradled, rocked, and fed it. The bantling throve, and crawled
vigorously about on all-fours. But since then, thou Tallometer, imagine
the study that $1 have made. Count not our Epic Poems—not our Metrical
Romances—not our Tragedies. Count our Comedies, and count above all our
Novels. I do not say that you can settle Time in these by the almanac.
They are the less poetical when you can do so; but I say that we have with
wonderful and immense diligence studied the working out of a Story. Time
being here an essential constituent, it cannot be but that, in our more exact
and critical layings-out of the chain of occurrences, we have arrived at a
tutored and jealous respect of Time—to say nothing of our Aristotelian lessons—totally
unlike anything that existed under Eliza and James, as a
general proficiency of the Art—as a step gained in the National Criticism.
TALBOYS.
Ay, it must be difficult in the extreme for us so to divest ourselves of our
own intellectual habits and proficiency as to take up, and into our own, the
mind of that Age. But, unless we do so, we are unable to judge what might
or might not happen to any one mind of that age; and when we affirm that
Shakspeare must have known what he was doing in regard to the Time of
Othello, we are suffering under the described difficulty or disability—
NORTH.
Why, Talboys, you are coming, day after day, to talk better and better
sense—take care you do not get too sensible—
TALBOYS.
We must never forget, sir, that the management of the Time was on that
Stage a slighted and trampled element—that what Willy gives us of it is
gratuitous, and what we must be thankful for—and finally, that he did not
distinctly scheme out, in his own conception, the Time of Othello—very far
from it.
NORTH.
I verily believe that if you or I had shown him the Time, tied up as it is,
he would have said, “Let it go hang. They won’t find it out; and, if they
do, let them make the best, the worst, and the most of it. The Play is a good
Play, and I shall spoil it with mending it.” Why, Talboys, if Queen Elizabeth
had required that the Time should be set straight, it could not have been
done. One—two—six changes would not have done it. The Time is an
entangled skein that can only be disentangled by breaking it. For the fervour
of action on the Stage, Iago could not have delayed the beginning beyond
the next day. And yet think of the Moral Absurdity—to begin—really as if
the day after Marriage, to sow Jealousy! The thing is out of nature the
whole diameter of the globe. His project was “after a time t’ abuse Othello’s
ear,” which is according to nature, and is $1 the impression made—strange
to say—from beginning to end. But the truth is, that the Stage three
hours are so soon gone, that you submit yourself to everything to come within
compass. Your Imagination is bound to the wheels of the Theatre Clock.
TALBOYS.
Yet, in our conversation on Macbeth, you called your discovery an “astounding
discovery”—and it is so. The Duplicity of Time in Othello is a hundred
times more astounding—
NORTH.
And the discovery of it will immortalise my name. I grieve to think that
the Pensive Public is sadly deficient in Imagination. I remember or invent
that she once resisted me, when I said that “Illusion” is one constituent
of Poetry. Illusion, the Pensive Public must be made to know,
is WHEN THE SAME THING IS, AND IS NOT. Pa—God bless him!—makes
believe to be a Lion. He roars, and springs upon his prey. He at once
believes himself to be a Lion, and knows himself to be Pa. Just so with the
Shakspeare Club—many millions strong. The two times at Cyprus $1;
the reason for the two times—to wit, probability of the Action, storm of the
Passion—$1; and if any wiseacre should ask, “How do we manage to
stand the $1 together-proceeding of two times?” The wiseacre is answered—“We
don’t stand it—for we know nothing about it. We are held in a confusion
and a delusion about the time.” We have effect of both—distinct knowledge
of neither. We have suggestions to our Understanding of extended time—we
have movements of our Will by precipitated time.
TALBOYS.
We have—we have—we have. Oh! sir! sir! sir!
NORTH.
Does any man by possibility ask for a scheme and an exposition, by
which it shall be made luminous to the smallest capacity, $1 we are able
distinctly all along to know, and bear in mind, that the preceding transactions
are accomplished in a day, and at the same time and therewithal,
distinctly all along to know and bear in mind that the same transactions
proceeding before our eyes take about three months to accomplish? Then,
I am obliged—like the musicians, when they are told that, if they have
any music that may not be heard, Othello desires them to play it—to
make answer, “Sir, we have none such.” It is to ask that a deception
shall be not only seemingly but really a truth! Jedediah Buxton, and Blair
the Chronologist, would, “sitting at $1 play,” have broken their hearts.
You need not. If you ask me—which judiciously you may—what or how
much did the Swan of Avon intend and know of all this astonishing legerdemain,
when he sang thus astonishingly? Was he the juggler juggled by
aërial spirits—as Puck and Ariel? I put my finger to my lip, and nod on
him to do the same; and if I am asked, “Shall a modern artificer of the
Drama, having the same pressure from within and from without, adopt this
resource of evasion?” I can answer, with great confidence, “He had better
look before he leap.” If any spectator, upon the mere persuasion and power
of the Representation, ends with believing that the seed sown and the harvest
reaped are of one day, I believe that he may yet have the belief of extended
time at Cyprus. I should say by $1! Or if you wish this more intelligibly said, that he shall
continually $1 the past notices. Once for all, he shall $1 that the $1.
TALBOYS.
Inquire, sir, what intelligent auditors, who have not gone into the study,
have thought; for that, after all, is the only testimony that means anything.
NORTH.
Well, Talboys, suppose that one of them should actually say, “Why, upon
my word, if I am to tell the truth, I did take note that Iago began ‘abusing
Othello’s ear’ the day after the arrival. I did, in the course of the Play,
gather up an impression that some good space of time was passing at Cyprus—and
I did, when the murder came, put it down upon the same day with the
sowing of the suspicion, and I was not aware of the contradiction. In short,
now that you put me upon it, I see that I did that which thousands of us do
in thousands of subjects—keep in different corners of the brain two beliefs—of
which, if they had come upon the same ground, the one must have annihilated
the other. But I did not at the time bring the data together. $1”
TALBOYS.
Assume, sir, for simplicity’s sake, that Shakspeare knew what he was doing.
NORTH.
Then the Double Time is to be called—an Imposture.
TALBOYS.
Oh, my dear sir—oh, oh!
NORTH.
A good-natured Juggler, my dear Talboys, has cheated your eyes. You
ask him to show you how he did it. He does the trick slowly—and you see.
“Now, good Conjuror, $1.” “I can’t. I cheat you by
doing it quickly. To be cheated, you must $1 see what I do; but you must
$1 that you see.” When we inspect the Play in our closets, the Juggler
does his trick slowly. We sit at the Play, and he does it quick. When you
see the trick again done the right way—that is quick—you cannot conceive
how it is that you no longer see that which you saw when it was done
slowly! Again the impression returns of a magical feat.
TALBOYS.
I doubt, if we saw Othello perfectly acted, whether all our study would
preserve us from the returning imposture.
NORTH.
I will defy any one most skilful theatrical connoisseur, even at the tenth,
or twentieth, or fiftieth Representation, so to have followed the comings-in and
the goings-out, as to satisfy himself to demonstration, that interval into
which a month or a week or a day can be dropped—$1.
TALBOYS.
When do you purpose publishing this your “astounding Discovery?”
NORTH.
Not till after my death.
TALBOYS.
I shall attend to it.
NORTH.
In comparing Shakspeare and the Attic Three, we seem to ourselves, but
really do not, to exhaust the Criticism of the Drama. Is Mr Sheriff Alison
right, when he said that the method of Shakspeare is justified only by the
genius of Shakspeare? That less genius needs the art of antiquity? Our
own art inclines to a method between the two; and we should have to account
for the theatrical success, during a century or more, of such Plays as the
Fair Penitent, Jane Shore, &c.
TALBOYS.
Why, sir, does Tragedy displace often from our contemplation, Comedy?
Not when we are contemplating Shakspeare. To me his method, in reading
him, appears justified by the omnipotent Art, which, despite refractoriness,
binds together the most refractory times, things, persons, events $1.
NORTH.
Most true. We feel, in reading, the self-compactness and self-completeness
of each Play. Thus in Lear—
TALBOYS.
In Lear the ethical ground is the Relation of Parent to Child, specifically
Father and Daughter. If the treatment of that Relation is full to your satisfaction,
that may affect you as a Unity. Full is not exhaustive; but one part
of treatment demands another. Thus the violated relation requires for its
complement the consecrated relation.
NORTH.
In Hamlet?
TALBOYS.
The ethical ground in Hamlet, sir, is the relation of Father and Son, very
peculiarly determined, or specialtied. Observe, sir, how the $1 relation
between Father and Daughter, the $1 between Father and Son occurs in
Polonius’s House. Here, too, a slain Father—a part of the specialty. Compare,
particularly, the dilatory revenge of Hamlet, and the dispatchful of
Laertes. Again, the relation of Gertrude the Mother and Hamlet the Son—so
many differences! And the strange discords upon the same relation—my
Uncle-Father and Aunt-Mother—the tragic grotesque.
NORTH.
Eh?
TALBOYS.
Then in Lear the House of Gloster counterparts Lear’s. And compare the
ill-disposed Son-in-law Cornwall, and the well-disposed Son-in-law Albany.
The very Fool has a sort of $1 relation to Lear—“Nuncle”—and “come
on, my Boy.” At least the relation is in the same direction—old to young—protecting
to dependent—spontaneous love to grateful, requiting love, and an
intimate, fondling familiarity. Compare in Hamlet, Ophelia’s way of taking
her father’s death—madness and unconscious suicide—the susceptible girl,—and
the brother’s to kill the slayer, “to cut his throat i’ the church”—the energetic
youthy man, ferox juvenis—fiery—full of exuberant strength;—all variations
of the grounding thought—relation of Parent and Child.
NORTH.
Of Othello?
TALBOYS.
The moral Unity of Othello can be nothing but the Connubial Relation.
How is this dealt with? Othello and Desdemona deserve one another—both
are excellent—both impassioned, but very differently—both frank,
simple, confiding—both unbounded in love. But they have married against
the father’s wish—privily, and—he dies—so here is from another sacred quarter
an influence thwarting—a law violated, and of which the violation shall be
made good to the uttermost. So somebody remarks that Brabantio involves
the fact in the Nemesis, “She has deceived her Father, and may thee.” Then
the pretended corrupt love of her and Cassio is a reflection in divers ways of
the prevailing relation—for a corrupt union of man and woman images ex
opposito the true union—and then it comes as the wounding to the death.
Again, Rodrigo’s wicked pursuit of her is an imperfect, false reflection. And
then there is the false relation—in Cassio and Bianca—woven in essentially
when Iago, talking to Cassio of Bianca, makes Othello believe that they are
speaking of Desdemona. Then the married estate of Iago and Emilia is
another image—an actual marriage, and so far the same thing, but an
inwardly unbound wedlock—between heart and heart no tie—and so far not
the same thing—the same with a difference, exactly what Poetry requires.
Note that this image is also participant in the Action, essentially, penetratively
to the core; since hereby Iago gets the handkerchief, and hereby, too, the
knot is resolved by Emilia’s final disclosures and asseverations sealed by her
death. Observe that each husband kills, and indeed stabs his wife—motives
a little different—as heaven and hell.
NORTH.
The method of Shakspeare makes his Drama the more absolute reflection
of our own Life, wherein are to be considered two things——
TALBOYS.
First—if the innermost grounding feeling of all our other feelings is and
must be that of Self—the next, or in close proximity, Sympathy with our
life—then by the overpowering similitude of those Plays to our lives—of the
method of the Plays to the method of our life—that Sympathy is by Shakspeare
seized and possessed as by no other dramatist—the persuasion of reality being
immense and stupendous. Elements of the method are, the mixture of comic
and tragic—the crossing presentment of different interests—presentment
of the same interests from divided places and times—multiplying of agents,
that is number and variety—being of all ranks, ages, qualities, offices—coming
in contact—immixt in Action and Passion. This frank, liberal, unreserved,
spontaneous and natural method of imitation must ravish our sympathy—and
we know that the Plays of Shakspeare are to us like another world of our
own in its exuberant plenitude—a full second humanity.
NORTH.
Opposed to this is the severe method of the Greek Stage—selecting and
simplifying.
TALBOYS.
Of the modern craftsmen, to my thinking Alfieri has carried the Attic severity
to the utmost; and I am obliged to say, sir, that in them all—those Greeks
and this Italian—the severity oppresses me—I feel the rule of art—not the
free movement of human existence. That I feel overpoweringly, only in
Shakspeare.
NORTH.
Ay.
TALBOYS.
Alfieri says that the constituent Element of Tragedy is Conflict—as of
Duty and Passion—as of conscious Election in the breast of Man and Fate.
NORTH.
He does—does he?
TALBOYS.
There is Conflict—or Contrast—or Antithesis—the Jar of two Opposites—a
Discord—a Rending—in Lear; between his misplaced confidence and its
requital—between his misplaced displeasure and the true love that is working
towards his weal. And, again, between the Desert and the Reward of Cordelia—with
more in the same Play.
NORTH.
Schiller says of Tragic Fate,
“The great gigantic Destiny
That exalts Man in crushing him.”
Welcker has, I believe, written on the Fate of the Greek Tragedy, which I
desire to see.
TALBOYS.
Are Waves breaking against a Rock the true image of Tragedy?
NORTH.
Hardly; any more than a man running his head against a post, or stone
wall is. The two antagonistic Forces, Talboys, must each of them have, or
seem to have, the possibility of yielding; the Conflict or Strife must have a
certain play. Therefore I inquire—Is the Greek Fate the most excellent of
Dramatic means? and is the Greek Fate inflexible? And, granting that the
Hellenic Fate is thoroughly sublime and fitting to Greek Tragedy, and withal
inflexible—does it follow that Modern Tragedy must have a like overhanging
tyrannical Necessity?
TALBOYS.
No.
NORTH.
No. The Greek Tragedy representing a received religious Mythology, we
may conceive the poetical, or esthetical $1 of a Fate known for unalterable,
to have been tempered by the inherent Awe—the Holiness. There is a
certain swallowing-up of human interests, hopes, passions—this turmoiling,
struggling life—in a revealed Infinitude. Our Stage is human—built on the
Moral Nature of Man, and on his terrestrial Manner of Being. It stands
638$1 the Heavens—$1 the Earth. In Hamlet, the Ghost, with his command
of Revenge, represents the Impassive, Inflexible—with a breath
freezing the movable human blood into stillness—everything else is in
agitation.
TALBOYS.
Say it again, sir.
NORTH.
Beg my pardon and your own, fully and unconditionally, Talboys, this very
instant, for talking slightingly of the Greek Drama.
TALBOYS.
Not guilty, my Lord. Of all Dramas that ever were dramatised on the
Stage of this unintelligible world, the Greek Drama is the most dramatic, saving
and excepting Shakspeare’s.
NORTH.
Ay, wonderful, my dear Talboys, to see the holy affections demonstrated
mighty on the heathen Proscenium. Antigone! Daughter and Sister. Or
in another House, Orestes, Electra.
TALBOYS.
Macbeth murders a King, who happens to be his kinsman; but Clytemnestra
murders her husband, who happens to be a King—the profounder and
more interior crime.
NORTH.
We see how grave are the undertakings of Poetry, which engages itself to
please, that it may accomplish sublimer aims. By pleasure she wins you
to your greater good—to Love and Intelligence. The heathen Legislator,
the heathen Philosopher, the heathen Poet, looks upon Man with love and
awe. He desires and conceives his welfare—his wellbeing—his Happiness.
TALBOYS.
And the Poet, you believe, sir, with intenser love—with more solemn awe—with
more penetrant intuition.
NORTH.
I do. And he has his way clearer before him.
TALBOYS.
The Legislator, sir, will alchemise the most refractory of all substances—Man.
His materials are in truth the lowest and grossest, and most external
relations of Man’s life.
NORTH.
They are.
TALBOYS.
And these he would, with instrumentality of low, gross, outward means,
subjugate or subdue under his own most spiritual intuitions.
NORTH.
A vain task, my dear Talboys, for an impossible. He must lower his
intuition—his aim—to his means and materials. The Philosopher walks in a
more etherial region. Compared to the Legislator, he is at advantage. But
he has his own difficulties. He must $1!
TALBOYS.
He might as well try, sir, to trace outline, and measure capacity of a mist
which varies its form momently, and, without determinate boundary loses
itself in the contiguous air. His work is to define the indefinite.
NORTH.
And then he comes from the Schools, which in qualifying disqualify also—from
the Schools of the Senses—of the Physical Arts—of Natural Philosophy—of
Logical, Metaphysical, Mathematical Science. These have quickened,
strengthened, and sharpened his wit; they have lifted him at last from emotions
to notions; but—Love is understood by loving—Hate by hating—and
only so! Sensations—notions—Emotions! I say, Talboys, that in all these
inferior schools you may understand a part by itself, and ascend by items
to the Sum, the All. But in the Philosophy of the Will, you must from the
centre look along the radii, and with a sweep command the circumference.
You must know as it were Nothing, or All.
TALBOYS.
Ay, indeed, sir; looking at the Doctrines of the Moral Philosophers, you
are always dissatisfied—and why?
NORTH.
Because they contradict your self-experience. Sometimes they speak as
you feel. Your self-intelligence answers, and from time to time, acknowledges
and avouches a strain or two; but then comes discord. The Sage
stands on a radius. If he looks along the radius towards the circumference,
he sees in the same direction with him who stands at the centre; but in every
other direction, inversely or transversely. Every work of a Philosopher gives
you the notion of glimpses caught, snatched in the midst of clouds and of
rolling darknesses. The truth is, Talboys, that the Moral Philosopher is in the
Moral Universe a schoolboy; he is gaining, from time to time, information by
which, if he shall persevere and prosper, he shall at last understand. Hitherto
he but prepares to understand. If he knows this, good; but if the schoolboy
who has mastered his Greek Alphabet, will forthwith proceed to expound
Homer and Plato, what sort of an $1 may we not expect? Rather,
what expectation can approach the burlesque that is in store!
TALBOYS.
All are not such.
NORTH.
The Moral Sage may be the Schoolboy in the Magisterial Chair. With
only this difference, that he of the beard has been installed in form, and the
Doctor’s hat set on his head by the hand of authority. But the ground of
confusion is the same. He will from initial glimpses of information expound
the world. He will—and the worst of it is that—he must.
TALBOYS.
A Legislator, a Philosopher, a Poet, all know that the stability and welfare
of a man—of a fellowship of men—is Virtue. But see how they deal with
it.
NORTH.
Don’t look to me, Talboys; go on of yourself and for yourself—I am a
pupil.
TALBOYS.
The Legislator, sir, can hardly do more than reward Valour in war; and
punish overt crime. The Philosopher will have Good either tangible, like an
ox, or a tree, or a tower, or a piece of land; or a rigorous and precise rational
abstraction, like the quantities of a mathematician. For Good, $1, go to the Poet. For Good—for Virtue—$1, go to the
Poet.
NORTH.
The Philosopher separates Virtue from all other motions and states of the
human will. The Poet loses or hides Virtue in the other motions and states
of the human will. Orestes, obeying the Command of Apollo, avenges his
Father, by slaying his Mother, and her murderous and adulterous Paramour.
So awfully, solemnly, terribly—with such implication and involution in human
affections and passions, works and interests and sufferings, the Poet demonstrates
Virtue.
TALBOYS.
And we go along with Orestes, sir; the Greeks did—if our feebler soul
cannot.
NORTH.
Yes, Talboys, we do go along with Orestes. He does that which he $1
do—which he is under a moral obligation to do—under a moral necessity
of doing. Necessity! ay, an Αναγκη—stern, strong, adamantine as that
which links the Chain of Causes and Events in the natural universe—which
compels the equable and unalterable celestial motions beheld by our
eyes—such a bounden, irresistible agency sends on the son of the murdered,
with hidden sword, against the bosom that has lulled, fed, $1 him!—He
must.
TALBOYS.
Love, hate, horror—the furies of kinned shed blood ready to spring up
from the black inscrutable earth wetted by the red drops, and to dog the heels
of the new Slayer—of the divinely-appointed Parricide! So a Poet teaches
Virtue.
NORTH.
Ay, even so; convulsing your soul—convulsing the worlds, he shows you
Law—the archaic, the primal, sprung, ere Time, from the bosom of Jupiter—Law
the bond of the worlds, Law the inviolate violated, and avenging her
Violation, vindicating her own everlasting stability, purity, divinity.
TALBOYS.
Divine Law and humble, faithful, acquiescent human Obedience! Obedience
self-sacrificing, blind to the consequences, hearing the God, hearing the
Ghost, deaf to all other Voices—deaf to fear, deaf to pity!
NORTH.
Now call in the Philosopher, and hear what he has to preach. Something
exquisite and unintelligible about the Middle between two Extremes!
TALBOYS.
Shade of the Stagyrite!
NORTH.
The pure Earth shakes crime from herself, and the pure stars follow their
eternal courses. The Mother slays the children of a brother for the father’s
repast. And the sun, stopt in the heavens, veils his resplendent face. So
a Poet inculcates Law—Law running through all things, and binding all
things in Unity and in Sympathy—Law entwined in the primal relations of
Man with Man. To reconcile Man with Law—to make him its “willing
bondsman”—is the great Moral and Political Problem—the first Social need
of the day—the innermost craving need of all time since the Fall. The Poet
is its greatest teacher—a wily preceptor, who lessons you, unaware, unsuspecting
of the supreme benefit purposed you—done you—by him, the Hierophant
of Harmonia.
TALBOYS.
You ordered me, sir, some few or many hours ago—some Short or Long
Time since—to swear that after this Morning’s Breakfast I would never more
so much as confidentially whisper into a friend’s ear the words—Othello!
Desdemona! And I swore it. I am now eager to swear it over again; but
I begin, sir, to entertain the most serious apprehensions that that time will
never arrive.
NORTH.
What time?
TALBOYS.
$1 Breakfast. We have been sitting here, sir, $1 Breakfast for ages,
in the Wren’s Nest. During our incubation, what a succession of changes
may there not have been in Europe! Revolution on Revolution—blood poured
out like water——Hark, the Tocsin!
NORTH.
The Gong.
TALBOYS.
The $1 Gong! The tremulous thunder meets an answering chord
within me. Six o’Clock in the Morning—and no victuals have I gorged since
Eleven Yestreen. Good-by to the Wren’s Nest—the very Cave of Famine.
This is Turkey-egg—Goose-egg—Swan-egg—Ostrich-egg day. I see Buller
eyeing open-mouthed, with premeditating mastication, my pile of muffins.
Gormandising sans Grace. Take care you don’t trip, sir, over the precipice—’twould
be an ugly fall—into the basin. Now we are out of danger. But
don’t skip, sir—don’t skip—till we emerge—on the open ground—then we
may dance among the daisies.
LETTER FROM MAJOR-GENERAL SIR WILLIAM NAPIER.
640
Clapham, London, $1.
Sir,—The writer of the article headed “The Ministerial Measures,” in your
Magazine, has been so complimentary to me that I feel ashamed of pointing
out an error.
He says I wrote my History on $1. Had he said $1, I should not have winced, though I really endeavoured to write it
on the principles of truth and knowledge of the subject. But for Whig principles!
God save the mark!—I never thought of them save to censure; and
really my History is throughout, by implication, and in many places directly,
condemnatory of the Whigs’ policy, and of their extreme arrogance, and
presumptuous, erroneous views of the Peninsular War.
I trust the writer will, therefore, acquit me of any such foolish, factious
design as writing a history upon Whig principles.
I remain, Sir, your obedient Servant,
W. Napier, $1.
$1
[We gladly give place to the gallant General’s communication. The writer
of the article in question meant simply to convey his impression, that the able
and eloquent History of Sir William Napier was not constructed on $1
principles; and consequently, that the letter which he embodied in his paper
was to be regarded as the testimony of a political opponent.]
$1
1. Correspondence respecting the demands made upon the Greek Government, and
respecting the Islands of Cervi and Sapienza. Presented to both Houses of Parliament,
by command of Her Majesty. February 1850.
4. Journal de la Campagne de Russie en 1812. Par M. de Fezensac, Lieutenant-General.
Librairie Militaire, Paris 1850.
5. Essays; Political, Historical, and Miscellaneous. By Archibald Alison, LL.D.
Author of “The History of Europe,” &c. Three vols. 8vo. William Blackwood &
Sons, Edinburgh and London.
6. Vide the Economist newspaper of January 19, 1850.