CONTENTS
1837–1838.
Death of William IV.—Princess Alexandrina Victoria summoned to the Throne—Ignorance of the Public about the young Queen—Her early training—Severance of the Crown of Great Britain and Hanover—Prorogation of Parliament—Early Railways—Electric Telegraph—The Coronation—Popular Reception of Wellington and Soult—State of Parties—Result of General Election—Rebellion in Canada—The Earl of Durham—Debate on Vote by Ballot.
1837–1842.
Lord Melbourne’s services and character—Prevailing discontent of the Working Classes—Its Causes—The Chartists—Riots at Newport and elsewhere—Fall of the Ministry—Sir Robert Peel sent for—The “Bedchamber Question”—Melbourne recalled to Office—The Penny Post—Its remarkable Success—Betrothal of the Queen—Character of Prince Albert—Announcement to Parliament—Debates—Marriage of the Queen and Prince Albert—War declared with China—Capture of Chusan—Bombardment of the Bogue Forts—Peace concluded under the Walls of Nankin.
1841–1846.
Unpopularity of the Whigs—Fall of the Melbourne Ministry—Peel’s Cabinet—The Afghan War—Murder of Sir A. Burnes and Sir W. Macnaghten—The Retreat from Cabul—Annihilation of the British Force—The Corn Duties—The Pioneers of Free Trade—Failure of Potato Crop in Ireland—Lord John Russell’s conversion to Free Trade—Peel and Repeal—Rupture of the Tory Party—The Corn Duties repealed—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Review of Peel’s Administration.
1833–1849.
The Churches of England and Scotland—“Tracts for the Times”—Newman, Keble, and Pusey—“Ten Years’ Conflict” in Scotland—Disruption of the Church—Dr. Chalmers—Rise of the Free Church—Affairs of British India—First Sikh War—Battles of Meeanee, Moodkee, Ferozeshah, Aliwal and Sobraon—Second Sikh War—Murder of Vans Agnew and Anderson—Battle of Ramnuggur—Siege and Fall of Mooltan—Battles of Chilianwalla and Goojerat—Annexation of the Punjab.
1846–1850.
The Irish Famine—Smith O’Brien’s Rebellion—Widow Cormack’s Cabbages—The Special Commission—Revival of the Chartist Movement—The Monster Petition—Its Exposure and Collapse of the Movement—Revolutionary Movements in Britain compared with those in other Countries—Growing Affection for the Queen—Its Causes—Royal Visit to Ireland—The Pacifico Imbroglio—Rupture with France Imminent—Civis Romanus Sum—Lord Palmerston’s Rise—Sir Robert Peel’s Death—The Invention of Chloroform.
1849–1851.
Prince Albert’s Industry—His proposal for a Great Exhibition—Adoption of the Scheme—Competing Designs—Mr. Paxton’s selected—Erection of the Crystal Palace—Colonel Sibthorp denounces the Scheme—Papal Titles in Great Britain—Popular Indignation—The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill—Defeat of Ministers on the Question of the Franchise—Difficulty in finding a Successor to Russell—He resumes Office—Opening of the Great Exhibition—Its success and close.
1851–1853.
Louis Napoleon’s Coup d’État—Condemned in the English Press—Lord Palmerston’s Indiscretion Rebuked by the Queen—He Repeats it and is Removed from Office—Opening of the New Houses of Parliament—French Invasion Apprehended—Russell’s Militia Bill—Defeat and Resignation of Ministers—The “Who? Who?” Cabinet—Death of the Duke of Wellington—His Funeral—The Haynau Incident—General Election—Disraeli’s First Budget—Defeat and Resignation of Ministers—The Coalition Cabinet—Expansion of the British Colonies—Repeal of the Transportation Act.
1853–1854.
The “Sick Man”—Position of the Eastern Question—Projects of the Emperor Nicholas—The Custody of the Holy Places—Prince Menschikoff’s Demand—Russian Invasion of Moldo-Wallachia—The Vienna Note—Declaration of War by the Porte—Destruction of the Turkish Fleet—Resignation of Lord Palmerston—Great Britain and France Declare War with Russia—State of the British Armaments.
1854–1856.
Mr. Gladstone’s War Budget—Humiliation and Prayer—The Invasion of the Crimea—The Battle of Alma—A Fruitless Victory—Effect in England—War Correspondents—Balaklava—Cavalry Charges by the Heavy and Light Brigades—“Our’s Not to Reason Why”—Russian Sortie—Battle of Inkermann—Breakdown of Transport and Commissariat—Hurricane in the Black Sea—Florence Nightingale—Fall of the Coalition Cabinet—Lord Palmerston Forms a Ministry—Victory of the Turks at Eupatoria—Unsuccessful Attack by the Allies—Death of Lord Raglan—His Character—Battle of Tchernaya—Evacuation of Sebastopol—Surrender of Kars—Conclusion of Peace.
1857–1858.
The Lorcha Arrow—War with China—Defeat of the Government—Dissolution of Parliament—Palmerston returns to Office—Startling News from India—Mutiny at Meerut—The Chupatties—Loyalty of the Sikhs—Lord Canning’s Presence of Mind—Disarmament of Sepoys at Meean Meer—The Rising at Cawnpore—Nana Sahib’s Treachery—The Massacre—Siege of Delhi—The Relief of Lucknow—Death of Havelock—Sir Hugh Rose’s Campaign—The Ranee of Jhansi—Capture and Execution of Tantia Topee—End of the East India Company’s Rule—Marriage of the Princess Royal.
1858–1860.
Commercial Panic in London—Suspension of the Bank Charter Act—The Orsini Plot—The Conspiracy to Murder Bill—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Lord Derby’s Second Administration—Disraeli’s Reform Bill—Vote of No Confidence—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Lord Palmerston’s Second Administration—Threatened French Invasion—The Volunteers—The Paper Duty Repealed by the Commons and Restored by the Lords—A Constitutional Problem—Its Solution—War with China—British and French Defeat at Pei-ho—Return of Lord Elgin to China—Wreck of the Malabar—Capture of the Tangku and Taku Forts—Occupation of Tien-tsin—Murder of British Officers and others—Capitulation of Pekin—Destruction of the Summer Palace—Treaty with China.
1861–1865.
The American Civil War—Recognition of Confederate States as Belligerents—English Opinion in Favour of the Confederates—The Trent Affair—Dispatch of Troops to Canada—Death of the Prince Consort—His Last Memorandum—The Cruiser Alabama—Claims against Great Britain—Arbitration—Award Unfavourable to Great Britain—Public Indignation—Marriage of the Prince of Wales—The Schleswig-Holstein Difficulty—Neutrality Observed by Great Britain—Popular Sympathy with Denmark—Dissolution of Parliament—Result of the Elections—Death of Lord Palmerston.
1866–1872.
Mr. Gladstone’s Reform Bill—The Cave of Adullam—Defeat and Resignation of the Ministry—Retirement of Earl Russell—Lord Derby’s Last Administration—Disturbance in Hyde Park—Commercial Panic—Completion of the Atlantic Cable—Mr. Disraeli’s Reform Bill—Secessions from the Cabinet—The Fenians—War with Abyssinia—Retirement of Lord Derby—The Irish State Church—Dissolution of Parliament—Liberal Triumph—Mr. Gladstone’s Cabinet—Disestablishment of the Irish Church—Death of Lord Derby—Irish Land Legislation—National Education—Army Purchase—The Ballot Bill—Adoption of Secret Voting.
1870–1880.
The Franco-German War—Russia seizes her Opportunity—The Irish University Bill—Defeat and Resignation of Ministers—Mr. Gladstone resumes Office—Dissolution of Parliament—Conservative Victory—The Ashanti War—Mr. Disraeli’s Third Administration—Mr. Gladstone Retires from the Leadership—Annexation of the Fiji Islands—Purchase of Suez Canal Shares—Visit of the Prince of Wales to India—The Queen’s New Title—Threatening Action of Russia—The Bulgarian Massacres—Disraeli becomes Earl of Beaconsfield—The Russo-Turkish War—Great Britain Prepares to Defend Constantinople—Secession of Lord Carnarvon and Lord Derby—The “Jingo” Party—The Berlin Congress and Treaty—“Peace with Honour”—Massacre at Cabul—War with Afghanistan—The Zulu War—Disaster of Isandhlana.
1879–1881.
The Condition of Egypt—Mr. Goschen’s Commission—Ismail’s Coup d’état—His Deposition by the Sultan—Establishment of the Dual Control—The First Midlothian Campaign—Commercial and Agricultural Depression—Sudden Dissolution of Parliament—Lord Derby joins the Liberals—Second Midlothian Campaign—Great Liberal Victory—Mr. Gladstone’s Second Administration—Charles Stuart Parnell and the Irish Home Rule Party—War with Afghanistan—Battle of Maiwand—General Roberts’s March—Defeat of Ayub Khan and Evacuation of Cabul and Candahar—Revolt of the Transvaal—Battles of Laing’s Nek and Majuba Hill—Establishment of the Boer Republic—Weakness of the Conservative Opposition—The Fourth Party—Irish Affairs—Boycotting—A New Coercion Bill—The Irish Land Bill—Resignation of the Duke of Argyll—Death of Lord Beaconsfield—Military Revolt in Egypt—Bombardment of Alexandria—Expedition against Arabi—Battles of Kassassin and Tel-el-Kebir—Overthrow of Arabi.
1881–1887.
Imprisonment of Irish Members of Parliament—Assassination of Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke—Prevalence of Outrages in Ireland—A New Coercion Bill—Trial and Execution of the Phœnix Park Murderers—The Dynamite Conspiracy—Corrupt Practices Act—The Affairs of Egypt—General Gordon sent to Khartoum—Gordon Besieged—Inaction of the Government—Relief of Khartoum Undertaken—Too Late!—Death of Gordon—Lord Wolseley’s Campaign—Abandonment of the Soudan—Mr. Gladstone’s Reform Bill—The Question of Redistribution of Seats—The Frontier Question in Afghanistan—Defeat of Ministers on the Budget and their Resignation—Lord Salisbury’s First Administration—Dissolution of Parliament—The Irish Party and the Balance of Power—Mr. Gladstone’s Third Administration—His Conversion to Home Rule—Rupture of the Liberal Party—The Home Rule Bill Rejected—Dissolution of Parliament—Unionist Victory—Lord Salisbury’s Second Administration—Lord Randolph Churchill Resigns—The Round Table Conference.
1887–1897.
Adoption of the Closure by the House of Commons—The Queen’s Jubilee—Thanksgiving Service in Westminster Abbey—The Imperial Institute—“Parnellism and Crime”—Appointment of Special Commission of Judges—Their Report—Fall of Parnell—Disruption of the Irish Party—Deaths of Parnell and W. H. Smith—The Baring Crisis—The Local Government Bill—Establishment of County Councils—Free Education—Death of the Duke of Clarence—General Election—Mr. Gladstone’s Fourth Midlothian Campaign—The Newcastle Programme—Victory of Home Rulers—The Second Home Rule Bill—Its Rejection by the Lords—Parish Councils and Employers’ Liability Acts—Mr. Gladstone Resigns the Leadership—Lord Rosebery becomes Prime Minister—Disunion of Ministerialists—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Lord Salisbury’s Third Administration—General Election—Unionist Triumph—The Eastern Question—Massacres in Armenia—Lord Rosebery Resigns the Leadership—Trouble in the Transvaal—Dr. Jameson’s Raid—The German Emperor’s Message—The Venezuelan Dispute—President Cleveland’s Message.
Material Progress during the Reign—Modern Locomotion—The Bicycle—Motor Carriages—The Proposed Channel Tunnel—Steam Navigation—Ironclads—The Telephone—The Phonograph—Electricity as an Illuminant—Photography—Its Effect on Painting and Engraving—Victorian Architecture—Absence of Principle in Design—Universal Education—Its Effect on Moral Character and Literary Habits—The Predominance of Fiction—The Growth and Character of British Journalism—The Advance of Natural Science—Surgery and Medicine—Vaccination—Antiseptic and Aseptic Treatment—Bacteriology—The Röntgen Rays—Sanitary Legislation—Conclusion.
PART TWO: THE DIAMOND JUBILEE CELEBRATIONS
The Central Idea of the Celebrations—The Imperial Character of the Pageant—The Colonial Premiers Invited—The Decorations—Influx of Visitors—Grand Stands—Precautions against Accidents—Thanksgiving Services on Accession Day—The Queen’s Arrival in London—Night in the Streets.
The Weather—A brilliant day for a brilliant pageant—The Queen’s Message to her people—The Colonial Procession—The Royal Procession—Loyal enthusiasm—The Queen’s reception at the City boundary—The Service at the steps of St. Paul’s—The halt at the Mansion House—In the Borough—Return to the Palace—Presents to the Queen—Congratulations from abroad—The Royal Dinner.
Illuminations in London—Festivities in the Provinces and the Colonies—Addresses of Congratulation from the Lords and Commons—Gathering of School Children on Constitution Hill—State Performance at the Opera—The Princess of Wales’s Dinners to the Poor—State Reception—Special Performance at the Lyceum—Torchlight Evolutions by Etonians at Windsor—Naval Review at Spithead—The Fleet Illuminated—The Colonial Troops at the Naval Review.
The Queen’s Visit to Kensington—Garden Party at Buckingham Palace—Review at Aldershot—Gift of a Battleship—The Prince of Wales’s Hospital Fund—The Jubilee Medals—Conclusion.
SIXTY YEARS A QUEEN.
From the
Painting by F. WINTERHALTER
Graciously lent by Her Majesty specially for “Sixty Years a Queen.”
a Queen
SIR HERBERT MAXWELL, BART, M.P.
BY SPECIAL PERMISSION.
HER MAJESTY’S PRINTERS, LONDON.
PUBLISHED BY HARMSWORTH BROS. LIMITED,
24, TUDOR STREET, E.C.
PREFACE
AN attempt has been made in the following pages to give a general view of the principal events in the reign of Queen Victoria and the changes resulting from the development of the means of travel and communication, the accumulation of wealth, the acquirement of political power by the people, and the spread of education among them. In making this attempt the author had to choose between compiling a dry chronicle, and placing before his readers the salient points in a period of rapid and successful progress. He chose the latter; but, in order to carry his purpose into effect within the limits assigned to him, he had to pass in silence over the names of many persons distinguished in politics, science, literature, art, and warfare. Those, or the descendants of them, whose achievements entitle them to an honoured place in the annals of their age, will understand that it was possible only to find room for mention of a few of the illustrious band who have contributed to the great work of empire and civilisation.
Especially in regard to literature, it may be felt that the reference to that department is out of all proportion to its importance. But the subject is so vast that it is almost hopeless to deal with, to any good purpose, in two or three pages. Attention has, however, been drawn in the concluding chapter to the effects of universal compulsory education on our national prosperity, moral character, and intellectual life. In respect of its action on the material well-being of the population, it is not unreasonable to attribute to its influence part of the marked decrease in pauperism in the last quarter of a century, even if the more equable diffusion of wealth be reckoned the principal factor in that process. If the results quoted cannot be proved to be the direct outcome of universal education, at all events they synchronise in a remarkable manner with the period of its existence.
Turning next to the literary habits of the people, it is not possible to doubt the important bearing which recreative reading has upon the national character. We are not, and probably never shall be, a nation of students, but we have become within the limits of the present reign a nation of readers. The press of the country is free—free in a sense that has never been tolerated in any other State. Public men and measures are submitted to searching criticism in a degree that would be wholly intolerable but for the general high tone maintained in British journalism. There are few things more remarkable in our civilisation than the abundance of excellent writing supplied to the daily and weekly press, and the sound morality which pervades it.
Next to the newspaper press, and hardly inferior to it in influence, is the mass of fiction produced year after year in ever-increasing volume. To ascertain how vastly its attractions prevail over those of historical, poetic, philosophic, or scientific works, it is only necessary to consult the returns of any free library. For good or for ill, the thoughts of countless readers, old and young, are continually engaged on the fictitious fortunes, dilemmas, and vicissitudes of imaginary individuals. On the whole, the influence of this literature is harmless and in some degree salutary, though it is true that within recent years a school of novelists has arisen, containing some skilful and attractive writers, who rely on winning popularity by going as near as they dare to the worst kind of realism pursued by certainiv French authors. It will do incalculable damage, not only to English literature, but to the English character, if the public, in whose hands is the verdict, encourage perseverance in this line. Hitherto, in the present century, fiction has been maintained in Great Britain at a higher level than it has ever touched before. The most popular writers of romance—Scott, Marryat, Thackeray, Dickens (not to mention any living authors)—dealt, indeed, with the foibles, crimes, and misfortunes of men and women, but they never failed to keep a high ideal before their readers. Their favourite characters were depicted as at war with evil: not always successful, not without frailty, and even folly; but no religion ever preached a purer morality than did these masters in the story-teller’s craft. It will be deplorable if people learn to employ their leisure, not in narratives of heroism, self-denial, and innocent love, but in studies of degradation and despair, and restless stirring of sexual problems.
Some of the most striking and valuable discoveries in physical science receive mention in the course of this narrative, as being among the more memorable features of the reign, but it has been impossible even to allude to countless others, almost as important to the welfare and progress of humanity. Less obvious to the general public, but not less remarkable, has been the application of the exact and comparative method to intellectual research, so that, although students still differ, and are likely to continue to the end of time to differ on some of the conclusions at which they arrive, for the first time in the world’s history they are of one mind about the right system of enquiry.
There are still to be witnessed in the Queen’s realm those violent contrasts between vast wealth and grinding poverty, which must ever arise in every civilised State in periods of great commercial and productive activity. They are a standing perplexity and distress to philanthropists; but one of the brightest features in the reign of Queen Victoria, of infinitely deeper significance than the accumulation of riches by the nation and by individuals, is the degree to which that wealth has penetrated the middle and industrial classes.
The effect of the application of steam to machinery, which coincided so nearly with the beginning of the present reign, was, indeed, injurious to certain limited industries, but the general result has been a continuous rise in the wages paid to artisans. The first few years of the factory system, coupled with a lamentable ignorance of, and indifference to, sanitary principles, brought a terrible increase of disease, squalor, and suffering in their train. This soon attracted the attention of philanthropists, among whom the leading place must be assigned to the Earl of Shaftesbury; and year by year the two rival political parties have vied with each other in applying remedial and protective legislation to the evils of overcrowding, insanitary dwellings, and other dangers besetting extraordinary industrial activity. There are slums still, but they must be hunted for, instead of forcing themselves on attention as was the case not long ago in almost every large town. Artisans’ dwellings, far exceeding in comfort, in solidity, and in sanitation anything that our forefathers may have dreamt of, are now the rule and not the exception.
Mere quotation of figures will not make clear the increased share of the national wealth which now finds its way into the pockets of the working classes, because the unprecedented cheapness of all the necessaries and many of the luxuries of life (intoxicants alone excepted) has raised the buying power of wages in a degree which cannot be estimated. Mr. W. H. Mallock, a well-known writer on this subject, has recently devoted some close enquiry to it, and has brought out some remarkable results. He quotes the calculation of statisticians upon the income of the nation in 1851, when it was estimated at £600,000,000, and in 1881, when it was reckoned at £1,200,000,000, having doubled itself in thirty years. He then deducts from these totals the amounts assessed to income-tax, arriving by this process at the total paid in wages (or the total of all incomes under £150), which was £340,000,000 in 1851, and £660,000,000 in 1881. In those thirty years the wage-earning class had increased in number from 26,000,000 to 30,000,000, or 16 per cent., while the wages paid to them had increased by nearly 100 per cent. In fact the income of the working classes in 1881 was about equal to that of the whole nation in 1851, with largely increased purchasing power, owing to reduction in prices.
v But this does not exhaust the evidence of the diffusion of wealth which has been going on, a process which is apt to be overlooked in the attention attracted to the building up of a few colossal fortunes. Mr. Mallock shows, by taking the increase in the number of incomes between £150 and £1,000 a year, how greatly the middle classes have increased in numbers. Persons assessed for taxation on incomes between these limits have increased in number during the period under consideration from 300,000 to 990,000, that is, in a ratio of nearly 250 per cent. It is hardly possible to over-estimate the importance of these figures in their bearing on the prospects of the stability of the present social system in Great Britain. Had this enormous increase in wealth been accumulated in a few hands, it must have given a great impetus to the revolutionary agencies always present under settled governments. But its dispersal among a multitude of owners broadens the foundations of authority, and at the same time acts as a powerful check upon legislation for a limited class.
It must be admitted that, side by side with the advance in general welfare, certain less desirable incidents of our civilisation claim attention. One of these is the recurrence of disputes on a large scale between employers and workmen, resulting in industrial strikes far exceeding in extent and intensity anything of the sort that could be organised before the legislature relaxed the laws against conspiracy and combination. Although labour disputes are conducted now with a general absence of the violence which almost invariably accompanied them in earlier days, they are not without deplorable results in the losses entailed on the working classes during their continuance, and in the damaging effect they sometimes bring upon the industries affected. But the principle of arbitration is gradually winning its way, and the fact that on several recent occasions recourse to this reasonable method has proved successful in averting a prolonged struggle, encourages the hope that employers and employed are beginning to recognise their common advantage in conciliation.
It is less easy to prescribe a remedy for the admitted evil of the excessive aggregation of the people in centres of industry, and the corresponding depletion of the rural districts. This tendency has been at work ever since Virgil wrote his—
and perhaps from long before. Increased facilities of locomotion, and the stimulus lent by education to intellectual energy, have intensified the movement; but at all events the worst effects of it on the national physique are being mitigated by the attention directed to sanitary engineering.
One of the results of general education has been to give greater breadth and accuracy to the popular aspirations for the Empire. Five and twenty years ago the British Colonies were regarded, even by experienced statesmen, with a degree of indifference, which it is difficult for the present generation to realize. It seemed to be assumed that, sooner or later, each of them would throw off the bond attaching it to the Mother country, and that nothing was to be gained by maintaining a union of which the value could not be shown in a profit and loss account. A complete change has come over public opinion in this respect. Imperial federation is in the air; the precise means by which it is to be secured have not been formulated, but the sentiment is as strong in the general mind of the natives of these islands as it seems to be in that of the Queen’s subjects in India, in Canada, and in Australasia. Although the presence of a large proportion of the Dutch race in our South African Colonies renders the feeling in that land less pronounced, it is not unreasonable to hope that even there just laws, wise administration, and the prestige of a mighty empire will prevail to dispel suspicion and establish a lasting harmony.
The example of good government, which has been set forth at home during the present reign, is one in which every Briton may take a just pride. Party politics are as vehement as ever, and sometimes descend into acrimony; but the last traces of corruption have disappeared from public life, and all the acts of administration are open to the most searching scrutiny.
vi Not less remarkable is the change which has come over the habits of all classes in regard to alcoholic indulgence, which, throughout the last century and a considerable portion of the present one, remained as a reproach on our social life. Formerly, though intemperance was looked on as undesirable, it was not thought discreditable, or, at least, not incompatible with the discharge of the most important offices. But at the present time indulgence in drink is regarded as a bar to all except ordinary manual labour, and even in that department the working man is steadily emancipating himself from the thraldom which, at no distant date, lay so heavily upon all classes.
These, and many others such as these, are some of the features which distinguish the longest reign in our annals. So important are they, regarded as affecting the happiness of millions of human beings, that the remarkable length of the reign sinks into secondary moment compared with its character. It has been an age of material progress more swift and political change more permanent than any which preceded it, and there have not been wanting those who viewed each successive step in the movement with apprehension, predicting disaster to cherished institutions—to the monarchy itself. The result, so far, has been to falsify those predictions. The British monarchy reposes at present on surer foundations than military prowess or legislative sagacity can supply; it rests on the genuine affection of the people. Power has been committed to them during these sixty years in no illiberal measure; in a very practical sense they are masters, under the Almighty, of the destiny of the empire, for they can, by their votes, put those Ministers in power who shall do their pleasure. How comes it that this power has been exercised with a moderation very different from that which there is plenty of historical precedent for anticipating? There are doubtless many contributory causes—an abundant employment owing to the expansion of industry, cheap food, the diffusion of wealth, the readiness of the British people to avail themselves of new lands, the hold which religious principles keep upon them, and the instinctive conservatism which affects, often unconsciously to themselves, all but those who adopt extreme views in politics. All these, and many more, must be taken into account in considering what has taken place; but there is one which a watchful observer will reckon more direct in its effect than any of them—namely, the personal character of the Monarch. Vigilant as she is known to have been in attention to public affairs, conscientious as she has shown herself in complying with the limitations of our Constitution, Queen Victoria has set before her people a perfect Court and a model home. Not by design has this been done, not by laborious compliance with irksome rules or straining for public approval, but by the action of a true nature, guided by a vigorous intellect and resolute will.
What might have been the result of the enormous development of popular power if the Monarch had been one whose character had attracted no affection or respect, it is idle to speculate. It is enough that every true Briton is able to say, with heartfelt gratitude: “Thank Heaven that throughout this critical period of change we have remained the subjects of Victoria the Great and Good!”
SIXTY YEARS A QUEEN:
TOLD BY
SIR HERBERT MAXWELL, Bart., M.P.
HER MAJESTY QUEEN VICTORIA IN CORONATION ROBES.
WINDSOR CASTLE.
SIXTY YEARS A QUEEN
CHAPTER I.
1837–1838.
Death of William IV.—Princess Alexandrina Victoria summoned to the Throne—Ignorance of the Public about the young Queen—Her early training—Severance of the Crown of Great Britain and Hanover—Prorogation of Parliament—Early Railways—Electric Telegraph—The Coronation—Popular Reception of Wellington and Soult—State of Parties—Result of General Election—Rebellion in Canada—The Earl of Durham—Debate on Vote by Ballot.
AT the present day, tidings, however fateful or momentous, flash silently over unconscious fells and floods to the uttermost limits of Empire; but it was otherwise sixty years ago. Throughout the brief night of June 19, 1837, the land echoed to the furious galloping of horses and the ceaseless rattle of flying wheels; for William the King lay dying at Windsor Castle.
He drew his last breath before dawn on the 20th, and mounted messengers thronged the highways yet more thickly than before in the early hours of morning. |Death of William IV.| Among them were two of very high degree—Dr. Howley, Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Marquis of Conyngham, Lord Chamberlain—charged to proceed post haste to Kensington Palace in order to summon the Princess Victoria to the throne of Great Britain and Ireland. Leaving Windsor shortly after two in the morning, they did not reach Kensington till five o’clock. The Palace was wrapped in silence; it was with great difficulty that even the gate-porter could be roused, and there was further delay inside the courtyard. At last the Archbishop and the Lord Chamberlain obtained admission, were shown into a room, and left to themselves. |Princess Alexandrina Victoria summoned to Throne.| After waiting some time they rang the bell, and desired the sleepy servant who answered it to convey to the Princess their request for an immediate audience, on business of extreme urgency. Again the impatient dignitaries were left alone, and once more they pealed the bell. This time they were informed by the Princess’s attendant that Her Royal Highness was asleep, and must on no account be disturbed.
“We are come,” was their reply, “on business of State to the Queen, and even her sleep must give way to that.”
The attendant yielded, and then, to quote the simple but vivid description by Miss Wynn, “in a few minutes she (the Queen) came into the room in a loose white nightgown and shawl, her4 nightcap thrown off, and her hair falling on her shoulders, her feet in slippers, tears in her eyes, but perfectly collected and dignified.”
H.R.H. VICTORIA MARIA LOUISA, DUCHESS OF KENT, AND HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AT THE AGE OF THREE.
Next, the Prime Minister, Lord Melbourne, was summoned, and Charles Greville has described in his diary how the young Queen met the Privy Council at eleven o’clock.
“Never was anything like the first impression she produced, or the chorus of praise and admiration which is raised about her manner and behaviour, and certainly not without justice. It was very extraordinary, and something far beyond what was looked for. |Ignorance of Public about the young Queen.| Her extreme youth and inexperience, and the ignorance of the world concerning her, naturally excited great curiosity to see how she would act on this trying occasion, and there was a considerable assemblage at the palace, notwithstanding the short notice that was given.”
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AT THE AGE OF ELEVEN.
Bowing to the lords present, Queen Victoria, quite simply dressed in black, took her seat, and proceeded to read her speech in clear, calm accents. Then, having taken the oath for the security of the Church of Scotland, she received the allegiance of the Privy Councillors present, the two Royal Dukes having precedence of the others.
“As these two old men,” wrote Greville, “her uncles, knelt before her ... I saw her blush up to the eyes, as if she felt the contrast between their civil and natural relations.”
At noon the Queen held a Council, at which the excellent impression she had made already was confirmed. Throughout the trying ceremonies of the first day of her reign she bore herself with a dignity and composure which amazed, as much as it delighted, her Ministers.
Princess Alexandrina Victoria, upon whose young shoulders the weight of the Empire had been laid so suddenly, was the only child of Edward, Duke of Kent, fourth son of George III., by her Serene Highness Victoria Maria Louisa, daughter of the Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, and widow of the Prince of Leiningen. William IV., third son of George III., had left no children born in wedlock; on his death, therefore, the succession devolved on his niece, who was born on May 24, 1819, and was therefore just over eighteen at her accession. Nothing would have5 been more natural than that the character of the Princess, as heiress to the Crown, and the qualifications for rule of which she might have given promise even at that tender age, should have been widely and eagerly discussed, or, at least, that the late King’s Ministers should have formed some opinion of them; but this was not the case. The gossiping Greville repeatedly lays stress on the seclusion in which Her Royal Highness had been brought up, her inexperience, and the complete ignorance of the public about her character and even her appearance; so much so, that “not one of her acquaintance, none of the attendants at Kensington, not even the Duchess of Northumberland, her governess, have any idea of what she is or promises to be.” It may easily be imagined, therefore, how greatly the severity of the sudden ordeal to which the girl-Queen was exposed was intensified by the anxious and curious interest of those who were present at her first Council.
HER MAJESTY’S FIRST COUNCIL, AT KENSINGTON PALACE, June 20, 1837.
- Her Majesty.
- Duke of Argyll, Lord Steward.
- Earl of Albemarle, Master of the Horse.
- The Right Honourable G. Byng, Comptroller.
- C. C. Greville, Esq., Clerk of the Council.
- Marquess of Anglesea.
- Marquess of Lansdowne, President of the Council.
- Lord Cottenham, Lord High Chancellor.
- Lord Howick, Secretary at War.
- Lord John Russell, Secretary of State for the Home Department.
- The Right Honourable T. Spring Rice, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
- Viscount Melbourne, First Lord of the Treasury.
- Lord Palmerston, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
- The Right Honourable J. Abercrombey, Speaker of the House of Commons.
- Earl Grey.
- The Earl of Carlisle.
- Lord Denman, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench.
- The Right Honourable F. Erskine, Chief Judge of the Bankruptcy Court.
- Lord Morpeth, Chief Secretary for Ireland.
- The Earl of Aberdeen.
- Lord Lyndhurst.
- The Archbishop of Canterbury.
- His Majesty the King of Hanover.
- The Duke of Wellington.
- The Earl of Jersey.
- The Right Honourable J. W. Croker.
- The Right Honourable Sir R. Peel, Bart.
- H.R.H. the Duke of Sussex.
- Lord Holland, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
- Sir J. Campbell, Her Majesty’s Attorney-General.
- Marquess of Salisbury.
- Lord Burghersh.
- The Right Honourable T. Kelly, Lord Mayor of London.
Of all the illustrious personages here represented, Her Majesty is now the sole survivor.
For the seclusion in which the Princess Victoria had been brought up, sufficient cause will be apparent to those who have studied the domestic annals of the Court during the reigns of her6 uncles George IV. and William IV., which were, in truth, in accord with the worst traditions of Royalty. |Her early training.| The Duke of Kent had died shortly after the birth of his daughter, and his widow, over-anxious, perhaps, to screen the young life from contagion of evil, sought to protect the Princess Victoria by a training which, in most modern families, would be regarded as unnecessarily severe. But deep-rooted custom requires drastic treatment to remove it. On weak or light natures such discipline is too often seen to work disastrous reaction; happily, the young Queen was inspired by an intellect of such fibre, and a spirit of such temper, that she responded to her early training by establishing and maintaining in her Court such a high moral ideal as has never been known since the days of the mythical Round Table.
Her Majesty the Queen was born in the ground-floor room occupying the farthest angle of the building on the extreme right of the picture. A tablet within the room records the fact.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AT THE AGE OF FOUR.
Queen Victoria’s accession was the cause of the departure from England of a Prince deservedly unpopular, whose signature stands first among those appended to the Act of Allegiance executed at Kensington Palace. |Severance of the Crown of Great Britain and Hanover.| Hitherto, for more than one hundred and twenty years, succession to the throne of Great Britain had carried with it the crown of Hanover; but, inasmuch as that crown was limited to the male line, it passed, on the death of King William, to his eldest surviving brother, the Duke of Cumberland. It is not necessary to discuss here the character of that Prince—it is enough to say that his departure to take up his inheritance in Hanover was probably cause of regret to very few persons in this country and reason for rejoicing to a great many. Nor, in looking back over the history of the past sixty years, can any thoughtful person fail to recognise advantage in the severance of the monarchies of Great Britain and Hanover. Any loss of prestige or dignity which might have been anticipated has been amply outweighed by the freedom enjoyed by this country from continental complications. England, while she has forfeited no weight in the Councils of Europe, is in a far stronger position to enforce her will when necessary, and the development of rapid and easy transit have protected Englishmen from any disadvantage that might have been apprehended from an exclusively insular Court.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AS PRINCESS VICTORIA.
One of the incidents of the ceremony of accession commented on with most interest was the fact that, in signing the Oath for the security of the Church of Scotland, the Queen wrote only “Victoria,” instead of her full name “Alexandrina Victoria.” Surely it was a happy inspiration which prompted the choice of the single name—prophetic, as it has turned out, of the character of the coming reign. Probably not one in a thousand of her subjects are aware that Her Majesty has two baptismal names, though there is historic interest attached to their origin. The Duke of Kent gave his daughter the name of Alexandrina in compliment to the Empress of Russia, intending her second name should be Georgiana. The Regent, however, objected to the name Georgiana being second to any other in this country; so, as the Princess’s father was determined that Alexandrina should be the first name, it was decided she should not bear the other one at all.
On July 17 the Queen went in State to the House of Lords to prorogue Parliament. |Prorogation of Parliament.| After listening to an Address made by the Speaker on behalf of the House of Commons, and giving her consent to certain bills, Her Majesty proceeded to read her speech to Parliament in clear and unfaltering accents. The concluding paragraph, viewed in the light of subsequent events, must be admitted to have been more amply fulfilled than most human promises, however sincerely spoken:—
BUST OF HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AS PRINCESS VICTORIA.
“I ascend the throne with a deep sense of the responsibility imposed on me; but I am supported by the consciousness of my own right intentions, and by my dependence on the protection of Almighty God. It will be my care to strengthen our institutions, civil and ecclesiastical, by discreet improvement wherever improvement is required, and to do all in my power to compose and allay animosity and discord. Acting upon these principles, I shall, upon all occasions, look with confidence to the wisdom of Parliament and the affection of my people, which form the true support of the dignity of the Crown and ensure the stability of the Constitution.”
Every opportunity which was afforded to Parliament and the public of passing judgment on the Queen’s demeanour tended to deepen the favourable impression already created. Greville—the “Man in the Street” of those days—he of whom Lowe afterwards wrote—
is not an authority on which too much reliance should be placed, yet his diary is useful as a reflection of passing events. It is full of enthusiastic praise of the new Monarch.
“All that I hear of the young Queen leads to the conclusion that she will some day play a conspicuous part, and that she has a great deal of character.... Melbourne thinks highly of her sense, discretion, and good feeling; but what seems to distinguish her above everything are caution and prudence, the former in a degree which is almost unnatural in one so young, and unpleasing because it suppresses the youthful impulses which are so graceful and attractive.... With all her prudence and discretion she has great animal spirits, and enters into the magnificent novelties of her position with the zest and curiosity of a child.... The smallness of her stature is quite forgotten in the majesty and gracefulness of her demeanour.”
HER MAJESTY TAKING THE OATH ON HER ACCESSION.
Sixty years ago! It is the second and third generation from that time which now cries “God save the Queen! Long live Victoria!” Never before in the history of our nation has it fallen to the lot of any historian to tell the story of such a long reign, to chronicle such unbroken national progress, to trace such a series of peaceful changes, to record such accumulation of wealth and diffusion of comfort in a like period.
Sixty years ago! The population of these islands was then some twenty-five millions; it amounts now to upwards of thirty-eight millions. |Early Railways.| The Liverpool and Manchester Railway, about thirty miles long, had been open for eight years, causing far-sighted folk to predict an important change in the mode of travelling. The Liverpool and Birmingham Railway was opened in the year of the Queen’s accession. In 1838 the line between London and Birmingham was finished, and trains were timed to do the distance—112¼ miles—at the average speed of twenty miles an hour. The London and Croydon Railway began running in 1839, and in 1840 there were 838 miles of railway open in the United Kingdom. At the present time there are 20,000 miles open, owned by companies which in 1894 had an authorised capital of £1,099,013,785, earning a gross revenue of £84,310,831, and a net profit of £37,102,518.
This engine was constructed by Messrs. Stephenson & Co. in 1829, to compete in the trial of locomotive engines held at Rainhill, on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway in October of that year, where it gained the prize of £500. The “Rocket” worked on the Liverpool and Manchester line till 1837, when it was removed to the Midgeholm Railway, near Carlisle. It ceased running in 1843–4, and was presented to the South Kensington Museum in 1862.
In order to convey the impressions of an educated traveller by the new mode of transit, the temptation to quote once more from the lively Greville is irresistible. In July 1837 he became tired of hearing nothing in London except about the Queen and the coming elections, so he resolved to see the new Birmingham and Liverpool Railway. Reaching Birmingham in 12½ hours by coach, he “got upon the railroad at half-past seven in the morning. Nothing can be more comfortable than the vehicle in which I was put, a sort of chariot with two places, and there is nothing disagreeable about it but the occasional whiffs of stinking air which it is impossible to exclude altogether. The first9 sensation is a slight degree of nervousness and a feeling of being run away with, but a sense of security soon supervenes, and the velocity is delightful.”
The “velocity” referred to was regulated to an average of about twenty miles an hour; but the diarist makes mention of a foolhardy driver who ventured to run forty miles an hour, and was promptly dismissed by the directors.
This engine, No. 1870 of the North Eastern Railway, was built in 1896 by the Gateshead works. It is a “non-compound” engine, with the largest coupled driving wheels hitherto known, viz., 7 ft. 7 in. The diameter of the cylinders inside is 20 in. A sister engine (No. 1869) was constructed at the same time, and the weight of each of them with tender fully loaded is over 90 tons.
This engine was designed by Sir Daniel Gooch in 1836 and built by Robert Stephenson & Co. in 1837. It was one of the first engines belonging to the Great Western Railway Company, and continued at work until 1870, running a total distance of 429,000 miles.
The application of another of the forces of Nature to the service of human intercourse has brought about a change in political, military, social, and commercial relations even more complete than that wrought by steam. |Electric Telegraph.| The invention of the electric telegraph coincided very nearly with the beginning of Queen Victoria’s reign. In 1835 Mr. Morse, an American citizen, produced a working model of an instrument designed to communicate alphabetical symbols by the interruption of the electric current, but he failed to persuade Congress to furnish him with the funds necessary to the practical application of his discovery. Next year he tried to take out a patent for it in this country; but, meanwhile, Cooke and Wheatstone had anticipated him with one instrument, and the brothers Highton with another, both of which were soon in use on railways. The growth of this means of communication may be seen in the “Post Office Annual,” which shows that in the year 1895–96 about seventy-nine million telegrams were delivered through the Post Office, besides those dealt with by certain public companies.
LA BELLE ALLIANCE.
This sketch represents Marshal Soult meeting his old antagonist, Lord Hill, at the Duke of Wellington’s. “At last,” he says, “I meet you, I, who have run after you so long!” “La Belle Alliance” is well known as the name of a particular spot, which was one of the points of attack at the Battle of Waterloo.
The Queen’s Coronation was deferred till June 1838. It would be tedious to dwell on the splendour of the ceremonial. |The Coronation.| Perhaps the most readable, and not the least truthful, account has been preserved in one of Barham’s Ingoldsby Legends—Mr. Barney Maguire’s Account of the Coronation, set to the tune of The Groves of Blarney, and beginning—
A. Lord Willoughby de Eresby. B. The Duke of Norfolk. C. The Marquis of Conyngham. D. The Archbishop of Canterbury. E. Her Majesty the Queen. F. Lord Melbourne. G. The Bishop of London. H. The Duke of Wellington. J. The Duchess of Sutherland.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN RECEIVING THE SACRAMENT AFTER HER CORONATION IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY,
June 28, 1838.
Lord Willoughby de Eresby, as Hereditary Lord High Chamberlain, held the Crown, and Lord Melbourne as First Lord of the Treasury, the Sword of State. The Duke of Norfolk was Earl Marshal, the Marquis of Conyngham Lord Chamberlain, the Duke of Wellington Lord High Constable of England, and the Duchess of Sutherland Mistress of the Robes.
THE CORONATION OF HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY, June 28, 1838.
The moment depicted is when the Archbishop, having placed the Crown on the head of the Queen, and the emblems of sovereignty in her hands, has returned to the altar. It was at this time that the members of the Royal Family, the peers and the peeresses assumed their coronets. The whole Abbey rang with cheers and cries of “God save the Queen,” and the animation of the scene reached its climax.
Sat in the House of Commons for forty-seven years. He introduced the great Reform Bill in 1831 and was twice Prime Minister (1846–52, and 1865–6). He was raised to the Peerage in 1861.
Two personages in the procession, who had met under far different circumstances in earlier years, met with a tremendous ovation wherever they moved. One of these was the Duke of Wellington—our Great Duke—and the other was the veteran Duke of Dalmatia—the puissant Maréchal Soult of the Peninsula and Waterloo—once the redoubtable foe of England. Mr. Justin McCarthy has suggested that “the cheers of a London crowd on the day of the Queen’s coronation did something genuine and substantial to restore the good feeling between this country and France, and efface the bitter memories of12 Waterloo.” On the other hand, the anti-monarchical party in France attributed the popular reception of Soult in London to the prevalence of sympathy with Republican views. |Popular Reception of Wellington and Soult.| Certain it is that when, in later years, Soult championed the English alliance in the French Assembly he referred with feeling to his reception at Queen Victoria’s coronation: “I fought the English,” he said, “down to Toulouse, when I fired the last shot in defence of national independence; in the meantime I have been in London, and France knows how I was received. The English themselves cried ‘Vive Soult!’ They cried ‘Soult for ever!’” One may formulate rules of diplomacy and international courtesy, but who shall weigh the effect of sympathy between a generous people and a former gallant foe?
Parliament had voted £243,000 for the expenses of George IV.’s coronation—perhaps the effect of a newly-extended franchise may be traced in the more economical figure of £70,000, which sufficed for that of our present Queen.
SIR ROBERT PEEL
(1788–1850).
Was appointed Chief Secretary for Ireland in 1812, Home Secretary in 1822, and again in 1828–30 under the Duke of Wellington. In 1830 he reconstructed the Metropolitan Police. He was Prime Minister in 1834–5, and again from 1841 to 1846. His second Administration was distinguished by the total abolition of the Duty on Corn.
The battle of Reform had been fought out in the country and in Parliament five years before the accession, and there were, as yet, no signs—to quote Sir Robert Peel’s famous expression at Tamworth—of the Constitution being “trampled under the hoof of a ruthless democracy.” On the whole, life—its business and pleasures—seemed to be going forward on much the same lines as before the great Act, dreaded, as it had been, as intensely by one party, as it had been pressed forward and welcomed by the other. Lord Melbourne was the head of a Whig Administration, of which, as everybody knows, the late King had waited impatiently for the first decent opportunity to get rid. But Melbourne and Lord John Russell (who, with the office of Home Secretary, was leader of the House of Commons) had to reckon with an advance wing of their own party, already known as Radicals, and were at least as profoundly averse from their projects as they were from the Tory policy. |State of Parties.| Melbourne and Russell desired to put down Radicalism and proceed with moderate and safe reforms, above all in Ireland, where the chronic discontent was being fanned to eruption by the exertions of Daniel O’Connell. The King’s death had relieved the Whig Cabinet from the adverse influence of the Court; moreover, the reliance placed from the first by the young Queen upon Lord Melbourne, and the intimate relations between them, brought about by the circumstances of the case, enabled the Whigs to assume the peculiar rôle of their opponents—that of the special supporters of the throne.
The Tories,B on the other hand, approached with much misgiving the General Election, which, according to the law as it then stood, followed of necessity on the demise of the monarch. They knew that the Duchess of Kent had favoured Whig principles in the education of the Queen; they saw that13 Melbourne’s personal charm had secured for him complete ascendancy in the councils of the new Sovereign, and they had nothing to expect in the country but reverse.
However, the unpopularity of the new Poor Law told against Ministers in the rural constituencies, and the elections left parties almost unchanged. |Result of General Election.| When the first Parliament of Queen Victoria assembled on November 20, 1837, the Whig Government reckoned a majority of about thirty in the House of Commons. “Of power,” wrote the contemporary compiler of the Annual Register, “in a political sense, they had none. They could carry no measure of any kind but by the sufferance of Sir Robert Peel.”
One incident in the short winter session of 1837, often as it has been recorded, retains a lasting interest because of the subsequent celebrity of the individual who gave rise to it. Mr. Benjamin Disraeli, the son of a distinguished man of letters, had just entered Parliament for the first time as Member for Maidstone. He chose a debate on Irish Election Petitions as the opportunity for his maiden speech. “A bottle-green frock coat,” writes an eye-witness, “and a waistcoat of white, of the Dick Swiveller pattern, the front of which exhibited a network of glittering chains; large, fancy pattern pantaloons, and a black tie, above which no shirt-collar was visible, completed the outward man. A countenance lividly pale, set out by a pair of intensely black eyes, and a broad but not very high forehead, overhung by clustering ringlets of coal-black hair, which, combed away from the right temple, fell in bunches of well-oiled ringlets over his left cheek.”
The Cabin here represented is that at Crow West Junction, Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway.
Not a prepossessing personality in the eyes of the British House of Commons, and when the young orator proceeded to launch into profuse and florid metaphor, accompanied by exaggerated theatrical gestures, the forbearance usually shown towards a new member’s first appearance was overborne by impatience at Disraeli’s ludicrous affectation. He spoke amid incessant interruption and laughter. “At last, losing his temper, which until now he had preserved in a wonderful manner, he paused in the midst of a sentence, and looking the Liberals indignantly in the face, raised his hands, and opening his mouth as widely as its dimensions would admit, said in a remarkably loud and almost terrific tone, ‘I have begun several times many things, and I have often succeeded at last; ay, sir, and though I sit down now, the time will come when you will hear me.’” The contrast between the early manner of this statesman, and his peculiarly quiet and leisurely bearing in the debates of later years, betrays the close study which he devoted to outward effect.
THE FIRST TELEGRAPH STATION (SLOUGH STATION, G.W.R., 1844).
14 The Prime Minister, William Lamb, second Viscount Melbourne, was a typical Whig, genuinely disposed to moderate reform, but in the habit of meeting Radical suggestions with the discouraging question, “Why not leave it alone?” Of similar political temperament was his lieutenant in the Commons, Lord John Russell. It very soon became evident that the Radicals, though diminished in numbers by the result of the elections, were likely to give Ministers trouble in the new Parliament. In the Upper Chamber, Lord Brougham, who had conceived a violent dislike to Melbourne, began to employ his fiery energy and power of acrid invective against the Government, and showed himself ready to place himself at the head of the Radicals. In his first serious attack on Ministers he allied himself with the Tory Lord Lyndhurst. The opportunity arose out of events in Canada, to which it is necessary briefly to refer.
This Coach, used at Her Majesty’s Coronation, was designed by Sir William Chambers, and finished in the year 1761. The paintings, of which the following are the most important, were executed by Cipriani. The Front Panel:—Britannia seated on a throne holding a Staff of Liberty, attended by Religion, Justice, Wisdom, Valour, Fortitude, Commerce, Plenty, and Victory, presenting her with a Garland of Laurel; in the background a view of St. Paul’s and the River Thames. The Right Door:—Industry and Ingenuity giving a Cornucopia to the Genius of England, and on each side History recording the Reports of Fame, and Peace burning the Implements of War. The Back Panel:—Neptune and Amphitrite issuing from their palace in a triumphant car, drawn by sea-horses, attended by the Winds, Rivers, Tritons, and Naiads, bringing the tribute of the world to the British shore. Upper part of Back Panel:—The Royal Arms, ornamented with the Order of St. George; the Rose, Shamrock, and Thistle entwined. The Left Door:—Mars, Minerva, and Mercury supporting the Imperial Crown of Great Britain, and on each side the Liberal Arts and Sciences protected. The design of the Coach itself is in keeping with the above ideas. The length of the Carriage is 24 feet; width, 8 feet 3 inches; height, 12 feet; length of pole, 12 feet 4 inches; weight, 4 tons. The harness is made of red morocco leather. On State occasions eight cream-coloured horses, as here represented, are used.
On January 1, 1844, the following message was received from Slough by this instrument:—“A murder has just been committed at Salt Hill, and the suspected murderer was seen to take a first-class ticket for London by the train which left Slough at 7.42 p.m. He is in the garb of a Quaker, with a brown great coat on, which reaches nearly down to his feet. He is in the last compartment of the second first-class carriage.” The murderer, Tawell, was identified, apprehended, and convicted. This was the first occasion on which a telegraphic message overtaking a criminal led to his arrest.
By the Constitution of 1791 Canada had been divided into two Provinces, Upper and Lower Canada, each with its separate Governor, Executive Council (corresponding to a Privy Council), Legislative Council, appointed by the Crown for life, and Representative Assembly. The bulk of the people of Lower Canada were of French descent, Catholics, and intensely conservative of the mode of life and habits of France before the Revolution. English law had been established there by proclamation in 1763, but by the wise Act of 1774 French civil law was restored, and free exercise of the Roman Catholic religion guaranteed. Probably all would have gone tranquilly with the Province had its French population been left to themselves. But they had restless neighbours in Upper Canada. Englishmen, and especially Scots and Ulstermen, had settled there in large numbers, busy, pushing15 men of business, traders, and farmers, developing their land with energy, overflowing, as their children multiplied, into the territory of their French fellow-subjects, and there forming a British party, impatient of the antique legal procedure, the foreign law of land tenure, and the sleepy, unbusiness-like ways of the Lower Province. Hence arose friction which soon became chronic. |Rebellion in Canada.| The Legislative Council, nominees of the Crown, naturally favoured the British section, thereby finding themselves at issue with the Representative Assembly. Discontent had been smouldering for many years, and at last matters came to a crisis. The Representative Assembly resolved to resist further encroachment. Headed by Louis Papineau, a militia officer and Member for Montreal, they drew up a protest and laid their grievances before the Governor, Lord Gosford. They complained of arbitrary infringement of the Constitution and other matters, demanded that the Legislative Council should be made elective, and ended by refusing to vote supplies. Public meetings were held, and addressed in inflammatory language by Papineau, who dwelt on the example set by the United States in resisting tyranny. Lord Gosford met matters with a high hand. Warrants were issued for the arrest of certain representatives; resistance to their execution resulted in violence, and the transition to rebellion was as speedy as probably it was involuntary. Proximus ardet—the flame spread to Upper Canada, of which the people had grievances of their own, though of a different kind from those of their French neighbours, and a rising took place under the leadership of one McKenzie, a revolutionary journalist. But the chief danger arose from the sympathetic action of certain American citizens, who, to the number of several hundreds, assembled under a person named Van Rensselaer, and took possession of Navy16 Island in the Niagara River, forming part of Canadian territory. At the present day, with the dense population of the United States and rapid means of transit, such a position of affairs would undoubtedly prove extremely critical; happily the British authorities proved able to deal with it successfully. The rebels being ill-prepared for impromptu war, Lord Gosford put down the rising in Lower Canada, though not without considerable bloodshed. In Upper Canada, the Governor, Major Head, better known afterwards as Sir Francis Head, an amusing writer, sent every regular soldier at his command to the assistance of Lord Gosford, and, declaring he would rely on the loyal Canadians to suppress the rebellion, handed over 6,000 stand of arms to the Mayor of Toronto. The people responded gallantly, delighted by this mark of confidence; ten or twelve thousand men assembled under arms, and a single encounter with McKenzie’s force was enough to decide the fate of the revolt. Desultory skirmishing took place with bodies of American “sympathisers” at various points along the frontier before the affair could be said to be over, and there can be no doubt that, had the United States Government adopted a less friendly attitude, British rule in Canada might have stood in very great jeopardy.
TRAINS ON THE LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY, RUNNING AT THE TIME OF HER MAJESTY’S ACCESSION.
The upper figure represents a first-class train, carrying Her Majesty’s Mails, and the lower one a second-class train with open carriages.
The Imperial Parliament was summoned to meet on January 16, 1838, to consider the Canadian situation. A Bill was introduced suspending the Constitution of Lower Canada, and empowering the Queen to appoint a Governor and Special Council, who should assume for the time all the functions of the legislature in that Province. The Duke of Wellington, as leader of the Opposition in the Lords, and Sir Robert Peel in the Commons, supported the Government, and the only opposition was offered by the Radicals. Brougham attacked the Bill in a speech of which Melbourne complained as “a most laboured and extreme concentration of bitterness.” In the other House the chief point of interest to readers of the debate at this day lies in a speech by Mr. W. E. Gladstone, the Tory Member for Newark, who taunted Mr. Joseph Hume and the Radicals with their failure to perform in session their boastful promises during the recess.
This is the carriage which has been used by Her Majesty for many years on her journeys to and from Scotland. It contains sitting and sleeping compartments (the former having padded walls and ceiling, lined with watered silk), and accommodation for Her Majesty’s personal attendants. It is about 60 feet long.
The Governor appointed under the Act was the Earl of Durham, a man of remarkable ability, who had embraced Radical principles with great ardour. This, however, did not prevent him interpreting his office as that of a practical dictator—he far exceeded the powers vested in him by the Act.|The Earl of Durham.| In dealing with offenders he would not stoop to the only way of obtaining convictions—that of packing juries—and adopted the arbitrary course of ordering into exile those connected with the late rebellion, on pain of death if they returned. Looking back to the existing state of things, it is impossible to question the real clemency and wisdom of the new Governor’s ordinances; nevertheless, they were at once attacked in the Imperial Parliament, and vigorously denounced as tyrannical and unconstitutional. Lord Durham had made many enemies in both17 Houses. Lord Lyndhurst and the Tories joined forces with Lord Brougham and the Radicals in pressing Ministers to disallow the ordinances of which they had already approved. Brougham perceived the opportunity of discomfiting the hated Melbourne, and he pressed it. The Ministry were not strong enough to resist. Lord Durham was recalled, and, though his recommendations were ultimately carried into effect by making Canada a self-governing colony, he never recovered the unmerited disgrace he had suffered. Proud, impetuous, and sensitive, he fell into ill-health, and died in 1840 at the age of forty-eight. His end must ever be regarded as one of those misfortunes arising out of Party government, for his policy has been amply vindicated since, lying as it does at the foundation of the whole modern scheme of Colonial government.
THE RIGHT HON. CHARLES PELHAM VILLIERS.
Born 1802. Is a grandson of the First Earl of Clarendon, and has represented Wolverhampton in Parliament continuously from 1835 to the present day. He took part, with Cobden and Bright, in the Free Trade movement, and in the passing of the Ballot Act. He and Mr. Gladstone are the only survivors of those who sat in Queen Victoria’s first Parliament.
THE THREE SINGLES.
Lord Brougham in 1837 had opposed the Government measures relating to Canada. For some time he stood alone, and it was not until the Bill for Abolishing the Canadian Legislature had made considerable progress, that he found himself supported by the Earl of Mansfield and Lord Ellenborough. But though acting together on this occasion, each had his own separate motive and argument, and perhaps there were not three members of the House of Peers who better deserved to be acting singly and without party connection. Lord Brougham is here represented with the Earl of Mansfield on his right arm and Lord Ellenborough on his left.
One other debate in the Commons during this session must be referred to, if it be only to mark the wide interval which separates the Liberal Party of the present day from the Whig leaders at the beginning of the reign. On February 15 Mr. Grote brought forward his annual motion in favour of the Ballot in Parliamentary elections. |Debate on Vote by Ballot.| Hitherto little interest had been attached to the project, owing to the disfavour with which it was regarded by all but extreme Radicals. On this occasion, however, several Ministers and many supporters of the Government were known to have pledged themselves at the polls to the principle of secret voting. Lord John Russell had declared that to carry such a measure would be tantamount to a repeal of the Reform Act of 1832; that for the Government to promote it would be a breach of faith to those who had supported the extension of the franchise, and he refused to be any party to “what neither his sense of prudence nor of honour would justify.” Sir Robert Peel supported the Government in resisting the motion, and it was rejected by a majority of 117 in a House of 513 Members. This was hailed as a moral victory by the supporters of the Ballot. Brougham was jubilant, and told the Lords they must make up their minds to this fresh reform. A few days later he declared in Greville’s room that it would become law in five years from that time, and many people regarded it as paving the way to Republican government. On the other hand Greville quotes Charles Villiers, “one of the Radicals with whom I sometimes converse,” as declaring that it would prove a Conservative measure, and that better men would be chosen. In effect, it took, not five years, but thirty-four, to reconcile Englishmen to the practice of secret voting; and Mr. Villiers has lived to see that the protection thereby afforded to the voter has certainly not operated to the exclusion of Conservatives from office. But it would be unphilosophic to argue that what was conceded in 1872 to an experienced and educated electorate, without evil consequences, might have been bestowed with equal safety in 1838, only five years after the great measure of enfranchisement.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN 1839,
Attended by Viscount Melbourne, the Marquis of Conyngham, who raises his hat, the Hon. George S. Byng, the Earl of Uxbridge, and Sir George Quinton.
CHAPTER II.
1837–1842
Lord Melbourne’s services and character—Prevailing discontent of the Working Classes—Its Causes—The Chartists—Riots at Newport and elsewhere—Fall of the Ministry—Sir Robert Peel sent for—The “Bedchamber Question”—Melbourne recalled to Office—The Penny Post—Its remarkable Success—Betrothal of the Queen—Character of Prince Albert—Announcement to Parliament—Debates—Marriage of the Queen and Prince Albert—War declared with China—Capture of Chusan—Bombardment of the Bogue Forts—Peace concluded under the Walls of Nankin.
THE ardour and intelligence with which the Queen applied herself to master the details of ceremony and business incident to her position at the head of a great Empire, did not protect her from censorious and even malicious criticism. It was natural, perhaps, that the exclusive confidence reposed by Her Majesty in Lord Melbourne should excite the jealousy of others, whose exalted rank gave them what they considered a superior claim to access to the presence.
Lord Melbourne’s constant attendance at Court had compelled him to change his demeanour in a very remarkable degree. |Lord Melbourne’s services and character.| Hitherto, his affectation had been to conceal all traces of seriousness in transacting business; he would sprawl on a sofa, blow a feather about the room, balance a chair, or dandle a cushion while receiving deputations—the very incarnation of indolence—to the despair of those who anxiously desired to engage his attention, and who could scarcely be persuaded by those who knew him best that he had spent strenuous hours in getting up the subject under discussion, was perfectly acquainted with all its details, and was, besides, listening most attentively to all that was said. His physician, Dr. Copeland, knew how really hard the Prime Minister worked, and told Bishop Wilberforce that he (Melbourne) used to transact business all day in his bedroom with his secretaries in order that bores might be dismissed with the information that “my lord had not yet left his bedroom.”
But besides this tiresome frivolity of manner, there was another habit in regard to which Melbourne had to put severe restraint on himself in the Royal presence. It had been his custom to season his conversation with a multitude of indecorous oaths. Mr. Denison (afterwards Speaker, and subsequently Viscount Ossington) spoke to him one day about some points in the Poor Law Bill, then under consideration. Melbourne was just going out for a ride, and referred Denison to his brother George. “I have been with him,” replied Denison, “but he damned me, and damned the Bill, and damned the paupers.” “Well, damn it! what more could he do?” quoth Melbourne, and rode off.
In spite of all his affectation and a degree of underlying weakness, this Minister performed a singularly valuable public service to his country in the support and advice he afforded the Queen at the most critical time of her life; a service that was explicitly and handsomely acknowledged in the House of Lords by his chief opponent there, the Duke of Wellington, in 1841.
Corporation of Glasgow.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN 1839.
There was a great deal of brooding discontent in the country at the opening of Queen Victoria’s reign, which soon passed into a phase calling for active measures of repression. Some have recognised in the Chartist movement the chagrin of the working classes, who having imparted to the mills of State the impetus necessary to grind out political rights for their employers—the merchants, farmers, and middle class generally—found themselves no better equipped for political action than they were before. |Prevailing discontent of the Working Classes.| But such a suggestion finds no reflection in actual experience of popular movements. Agitators might declaim in vain against the injustice of a restricted franchise if their hearers had no other cause for discontent. The real root of bitterness lay in the suffering and distress caused by the severe winter of 1837–8, the high price of bread,C and, on the top of all, detestation of the new Poor Law. |Its causes.| It is genuine grievances such as these which, from time to time, force on the attention of those who suffer from them the glaring contrast between the privations of the many and the superfluities of the few. So, in 1838, hungry crowds were easily persuaded to listen to denunciations of the privileged classes; to believe that the Queen and a dilettante Prime Minister were insensible to their sufferings so long as their own tables were abundantly supplied;20 and that Government was no more than a machine for enriching the classes at the expense of the masses.
Sketches, 1837.
DANIEL O’CONNELL, M.P.,
1775–1847.
Known as “The Liberator.” Was an Irish barrister. Elected to the House of Commons in 1828, he was the principal advocate of Catholic Emancipation, and founder of the “Loyal National Repeal Association.” The sketch represents him on the watch for an opportunity to attack the Government with the weapon of “Repeal.”
It has to be remembered, also, that during the development of crowded centres of population, consequent on the rapid increase in various industries, the artizan and mining classes found themselves at a great disadvantage in negotiating with their employers, owing to the stringent laws regulating trades unions. A whole generation was to pass away before, in 1875, Mr. (now Viscount) Cross should pass a measure abolishing criminal proceedings in cases of breach of engagement, placing employer and workman on equal terms before the law, and enacting that nothing which it was legal for a single workman to do should be illegal when done by a combination of workmen or a trades union.
The Whig leaders having declined to re-open the question of electoral reform, a document was drawn up at a conference between a few Radical members of Parliament and the representatives of the Working Men’s Association, formulating the demands made on behalf of the proletariate. Universal male suffrage, annual Parliaments, vote by ballot, abolition of the property qualification required at that time from a member of Parliament, payment of members, and equal electoral districts, were the six points insisted on; of which three, it will be seen, have since been practically carried into effect. |The Chartists.| “There is your Charter!” exclaimed O’Connell, handing it to the secretary of the Working Men’s Association; “agitate for it, and never be content with anything less.” The term took the popular fancy; the programme became known as the Charter, and those who supported it were hereafter known as Chartists.
Not a very formidable programme after all, nor one that might not be advanced by constitutional means, but one that, like many other popular agitations, fell into dangerous paths by the imprudent zeal of some of its advocates, and still more, by the violence of the discontented, unfortunate, or predatory waifs of civilisation, ever ready to promote any social change for the sake of what plunder it may bring within their reach.
The Peninsula of Aden was added to Her Majesty’s dominions by conquest in 1839. Its situation at the mouth of the Red Sea, on the direct route to India and the East, makes it invaluable as a coaling-station both for naval and mercantile purposes. In this district rain falls only about once in three years. The town is supplied with wells and storage tanks cut in the solid rock, the construction of which cost over £1,000,000.
In November 1839 the miners of the Newport district of Monmouthshire assembled to the number of 10,000 under a tradesman called Frost and attempted to release from gaol one Vincent, who had been imprisoned for using seditious language. |Riots at Newport and elsewhere.| The mayor and magistrates of Newport, with a handful of soldiers, offered a gallant resistance; the rioters were dispersed with a loss of ten killed and fifty wounded, the mayor, Mr. Phillips, receiving two gunshot wounds. Frost and two others were afterwards convicted of high treason and sentenced to death. But the dawn of milder methods of government had begun: the death sentence was commuted by the Royal mercy to one of transportation for life: even that was subsequently relaxed, and Frost was allowed to return to England some years later to find himself and the Chartists an unquiet memory of the past.
But in spite of the punishment of the Newport rioters, and hundreds of others in different places,21 Chartism continued to spread until it became merged in the more intelligent and fruitful agitation for the repeal of the Corn Laws.
“WILLIAM FAWCETT,” THE FIRST P. & O. STEAMSHIP, IN THE GUT OF GIBRALTAR, 1837.
This was the first steamer employed in carrying mails to the Peninsular ports in 1837. Tonnage, 206; horse-power, 60.
This great question was brought under the consideration of Parliament, in the session of 1839, by Lord Brougham in the Lords on February 18, and the following day by Mr. Charles Villiers in the Commons; but the motion for inquiry was negatived without a division in the former and by a majority of 189 in the latter. Both Parliament and country, however, were to hear plenty about the Corn Duties in the next few years.
The Whig Ministry were now approaching the end of their second year of office, and steadily losing favour in the country. They had earned the enmity of the Chartists by their apathy to further reform; and the novel advantage of Royal confidence in and affection for a Whig Prime Minister did not affect the general drift of middle-class opinion. Meanwhile, Peel was indefatigable on the platform securing popular support for the new Conservatism.
Drifting thus helplessly in the doldrums of unpopularity the Government suddenly foundered on April 9, the immediate cause being a Bill for the suspension of the Constitution of Jamaica. |Fall of the Ministry.| The second reading was carried, indeed, by a majority of five; but the resignation of the Ministry was immediately placed in Her Majesty’s hands and accepted. It put an end to an intolerable situation. Three days before the division Greville wrote in his diary: “The Government is at its last gasp: the result of the debate next week may possibly prolong its existence, as a cordial does that of a dying man, but it cannot go on. They are disunited, dissatisfied, and disgusted in the Cabinet.”
A MODERN LINER COMING UP THE THAMES.
The Royal Mail Steamer “Caledonia,” belonging to the P. & O. Company, is given as a contrast to the “William Fawcett.” Tonnage, 7,758, horse-power, 11,000.
The Queen sent first for the Duke of Wellington, but he, having probably little relish for leading a Government without a majority in the House of Commons, excused himself on the grounds of his age and deafness, and advised Her Majesty22 to lay the task on Sir Robert Peel. That statesman replied, that having been party to a vote of the House which brought about the situation, nothing should make him recoil from the obvious difficulty of it, and he formed a Cabinet without delay. |Sir Robert Peel sent for.| Then arose a peculiar and unforeseen difficulty, known as “The Bedchamber Question.” |The “Bedchamber Question.”| Peel found no difficulty in filling up the important posts in the Government, until it was explained to him that the Court Offices were vacated with the Administrative ones, and that they also must be supplied. He took up a Red Book, as he afterwards explained in Parliament, learnt from it for the first time what were the different appointments, and submitted to the Queen a list of names to replace all except those below the rank of Lady of the Bedchamber. But Her Majesty had other views, and the reader will more readily understand her reluctance to part with those personal attendants, of whom she had grown fond, by remembering the singular isolation of her youth, and the very few acquaintances she possessed at the beginning of her reign.
A difficulty of such slender proportions seems one that might have been got round, but it was not to be. The Queen was inflexible, and Peel, on principle, resigned his office. |Melbourne recalled to Office.| Lord Melbourne and his colleagues were recalled; explanations followed in both Houses, and the incident disappeared in a cloud of angry gossip. Peel was relieved from a position the reverse of enviable, and Melbourne had to stand the brunt of a tirade from the relentless Brougham and resume the reins which he had allowed to slip from a somewhat reluctant hand.
Interior, showing sorters at work, and exterior with net extended for taking in mails, and bag hung ready for delivery while the train is in motion.
As for the cause of dispute, it was not finally disposed of till after the Queen’s marriage, when, on the suggestion of Prince Albert, it was settled that on a change of Ministry the Queen should arrange for the voluntary resignation of any ladies whom, being relations or very intimate friends of leaders in opposition, it might, in the opinion of the Prime Minister, be inconvenient to retain in office.
SIR ROWLAND HILL,
1795–1879.
Originator of the system of uniform Penny Postage with prepayment by stamps.
It sometimes happens that Ministries which are least conspicuous by the brilliancy of their career or the talents of those who compose them, nevertheless confer the most lasting benefits on the nation. The crowning achievement of the Melbourne administration originated neither with a Minister, nor with one of those permanent officials upon whom Ministers rely to make up for their own inexperience of departmental work, but with a humble school teacher. Nobody at this day connects penny postage with the name of Mr. Spring Rice, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who paved the way for it in the Budget of 1839,23 but it is inseparably associated with the memory of its inventor, Sir Rowland Hill. The son of a schoolmaster, Rowland had an extraordinary inborn love for arithmetic, and became mathematical master in his father’s school. |The Penny Post.| This natural talent, it is said, was directed to the study of Post Office statistics by an anecdote told of Coleridge, who happened to see a poor woman in the Lake district refuse to accept delivery of a letter from a postman because she could not afford to pay the postage—one shilling. Coleridge, hearing that the letter was from her brother, good-naturedly insisted on paying the fee, notwithstanding the woman’s reluctance; but no sooner was the postman’s back turned than she showed him that the letter consisted of nothing but a blank sheet. It had been agreed between her and her brother that he should send her such a blank sheet once a quarter so long as things went well with him, marking the cover so that she should not require to accept delivery, and that in this way she should get his mute message without need to pay postage. Hill detected the economic fallacy which opened the way to such innocent roguery, and rested not till he had devised means to remedy it. He published his design in pamphlet form in 1837, advancing the bold proposition that the smaller the fee charged for carrying letters the greater would be the multiplication of correspondence, and the larger the profit to the Department. He proposed an uniform charge upon letters of one penny a half ounce, irrespective of distance. It was the application to the public service of a commercial principle by which large fortunes have been repeatedly realised in private business, but the plan was unhesitatingly condemned by the Post Office authorities. The Postmaster-General, Lord Lichfield, spoke of it in the House of Lords as the wildest and most extravagant scheme of all the wild and extravagant ones he had ever listened to. Colonel Maberley, Secretary to the Post Office, declared the experiment was certain to fail, though he was of opinion that no obstruction should be placed in the way of it, lest the Government should afterwards be blamed for not giving it a trial. Lastly, Sydney Smith may be quoted as representing educated public opinion: “A million of revenue is given up,” he said, “to the nonsensical Penny Post Scheme, to please my old, excellent, and universally dissentient friend, Noah Warburton. I admire the Whig Ministry, and think they have done more good things than all the Ministries since the Revolution; but these concessions are sad and unworthy marks of weakness, and fill reasonable men with alarm.”
Mr. Warburton and Mr. Wallace were the two members of Parliament who most warmly advocated the project of Rowland Hill. But credit is due to the courage shown by Mr. Spring Rice, Chancellor of the Exchequer, who, in the face of a deficit of three-quarters of a million, was bold enough to adopt the scheme and make provision for it in his Budget. Sir Robert Peel and Mr. Goulbourn criticised the proposal mainly on the ground that it involved a risk of loss to the revenue which ought not to be incurred in the existing state of the finances; but on a division the24 resolution was carried by a majority of 102, and the Bill carrying it into effect subsequently passed without a division. This reform, the offspring of the genius of an obscure mathematical teacher, and so modestly brought to light, has since been adopted by every civilised community in the world. To realise the boon thereby conferred on commercial and general intercourse it is only necessary to recall the postal regulations in force in Great Britain previous to 1839. Letters could not be prepaid; the charge for postage varied according to distance, and also according to the weight, shape, and size of letters. Thus, a letter posted in London for Brighton cost the recipient a fee of eightpence; the rate from London to Aberdeen was 1s. 3½d., and to Belfast 1s. 4d. No wonder, then, that, in a time of expanding trade, the Chancellor of the Exchequer found himself supported in his proposal by countless petitions from commercial centres in favour of cheaper postage. But there was more than this: there was the flagrant injustice of the system of official franks. Members of the Government and of Parliament had the privilege of free postage, not only for their own letters but for those of their friends by simply writing their names on the cover. This privilege had grown to the dimensions of a gross abuse; people who enjoyed the friendship of a Minister were not the least shy of pestering him for franks; the revenue was defrauded, and those who were least able to bear the cost had to pay a high fee in order to recoup the Department for the loss on letters written by wealthy people.
This building, erected in the reign of George IV., is still used as the central office for sorting and forwarding the mails.
From a print of that date.
Such being the case for reform from a popular point of view, it was hardly less urgent from a departmental one. The Post Office had then, as it has now, a monopoly of conveying correspondence; but the high rates charged had driven people to various means of infringing that monopoly. There had arisen all sorts of illegal and clandestine enterprises for carrying letters at cheap rates. It had been proved before the Committee which considered Mr. Hill’s scheme that five-sixths of the correspondence between London and Manchester had been smuggled for many years; one great firm having despatched sixty-seven letters by unlawful agency for every one that went through the Post Office. Between 1815 and 1835 the population had increased by thirty per cent., and the stage-coach duty by 128 per cent., yet the revenue of the Post Office had remained stationary.
The proposed reduction from an average rate of sixpence farthing to one penny was certainly a startling one. The Committee above referred to had recommended an uniform twopenny rate, but Spring Rice told the House of Commons that he had become convinced that the loss to the revenue (for no practical man, except, perhaps, Rowland Hill himself, doubted that loss there must be) would be less from a penny rate. He estimated in his Budget the sacrifice at about £700,000.
This building, completed in 1895, is occupied by the official, financial, and clerical staffs of the Post Office.
The wildest enthusiasts can never have contemplated what have been the actual results as revealed by the Post Office returns of 1895–6. In 1837 there were 80,000 letters and 44,000 newspapers delivered through the Post Office in the United Kingdom—a total of 124,000 deliveries. In the twelve months of 1895–6 the returns show that the deliveries (exclusive of telegrams) amounted to the stupendous figure of 3,031,553,196, representing 2,248 times the volume of business transacted in 1837, and producing a nett profit of £3,632,122. |Its remarkable Success.| Certain races of primitive savages, it is said, have never acquired the art of counting beyond two; everything beyond a pair being reckoned as “plenty.” Such figures as those quoted above baffle even ordinary civilised powers of calculation; very few persons are able to apprehend the idea of a million; much less can they grasp the reality of growth represented in thousands of millions. Perhaps, the magnitude of the Post Office business at the present day can be best illustrated by its miscarriages. The value of property found in letters opened in the Returned Letter Offices in 1896 amounted to £580,000.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN LEAVING WINDSOR CASTLE FOR THE REVIEW,
September 28, 1837.
The Queen, who is in semi-military habit and rides a white horse, is attended by her uncle, the King of the Belgians, on her right, with Lord Hill, Commander of the Forces, on her left, and the Duke of Wellington behind.
The Penny Post, then, endures as the single masterpiece of the Melbourne Ministry, affording another example, if one were wanting, how men become famous for the achievements on which they pride themselves least. Macaulay, having returned from India at this time, had re-entered Parliament as member for Edinburgh, and joined the Cabinet as Secretary for War. Greville quotes him as having declared that he wished he could destroy all that he had written up to that date, for he thought “his time had been thrown away upon opuscula unworthy of his talents.” He had resolved to apply himself to serious work—the History of England. But much of his literary renown rests on these opuscula: most people esteem Macaulay the essayist far more highly than Macaulay the historian or Macaulay the Minister. Greville himself, in relating this anecdote, unconsciously illustrates the inability of men to judge of their own performances. Speculating what Macaulay might have been “if he had wasted his time and frittered away his intellect as I have done mine,” the26 diarist proceeds, “if I had been carefully trained and subjected to moral discipline, I might have acted a creditable and useful part.” Possibly; but in that case the journal, by which alone Greville is remembered, had never been written.
This large building, officially known as the “G.P.O. West,” occupies the corner of Newgate Street opposite to the General Post Office at St. Martin’s-le-Grand. It was erected in 1870–74, and is entirely devoted to telegraphic business. The uppermost three floors are operating rooms, of the interior of one of which we give a view on page 31.
Before the close of the year announcement was made of an event of the highest importance, which was to affect in a very large degree the material progress of the nation as well as the character and happiness of the monarch. |Betrothal of the Queen.| On November 23 the Queen held a Privy Council at Buckingham Palace, and made known her intention to marry her cousin, the Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.
“About eighty Privy Councillors were present,” writes Greville, “the folding doors were thrown open and the Queen came in, attired in a plain morning gown, but wearing a bracelet containing Prince Albert’s picture. She read the declaration in a clear, sonorous, sweet-toned voice, but her hands trembled so excessively that I wonder she was able to read the paper which she held.”
Messrs. Graves.
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS PRINCE ALBERT AT THE TIME OF HIS MARRIAGE.
Prince Albert, the second son of Ernest, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, by Louisa, daughter of Augustus, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Attenburg, was very nearly the same age as the Queen, having been born on August 26, 1819. Royal alliances are so often the outcome of purely political or prudential calculation that people are apt to assume that the deeper personal feelings are not allowed to weigh with the persons most concerned; but young men and women are not the less human because they are born in the purple, and Queen Victoria’s marriage was as much a love match as that of any village maid. |Character of Prince Albert.| But she had set her affections on one of a disposition and habits not commonly to be found in any station of life. Not only was Prince Albert remarkably handsome and amiable, but he had sedulously cultivated natural gifts of a very high order. He had made himself a good musician, he had penetrated far in natural science, made a special study of social politics, and was well read in general literature. He was known to have steered a clear course among the temptations which peculiarly beset a young man of princely rank and fortune. All this he might have been, and yet, had there not been something to balance it, he might have proved no fitting consort of the young Queen of the English. But there was another side to his character. Erudite, he was completely without the fastidious or shy manner which sometimes imparts a blemish to learning, for his manner in society was extremely fascinating;27 of artistic tastes, he was soon to prove himself capable in business. Last, but not least, in view of an English public, he was an accomplished horseman, and devoted to field sports.
THE LANDING OF PRINCE ALBERT AT DOVER, February 6, 1840.
His Royal Highness experienced very bad weather in crossing the Channel.
The Queen opened Parliament in person on January 16, 1840, and her speech included the formal announcement of her betrothal to Prince Albert. |Announcement to Parliament.| Strangely enough the first criticism came from the Duke of Wellington, of all her subjects the least likely to question Her Majesty’s decision. He complained that it ought to have been officially declared that Prince Albert was a Protestant, and he moved to insert the word “Protestant” in the Address in reply to the speech from the throne. Lord Melbourne thought the amendment was superfluous, but it was agreed to without a division.
Less harmonious were the proceedings of the following week in the other House, when Lord John Russell moved for a grant of £50,000 a year to the Queen’s consort, to be paid out of the Consolidated Fund. |Debates.| Colonel Sibthorpe, a Tory member, well-known for his eccentricity, moved an amendment to substitute £30,000, which was supported by Sir Robert Peel and the Opposition. Lord John resisted it with great warmth, declaring that “no Sovereign of this country had been insulted in such a manner as her present Majesty had been”; but the Government were badly defeated by a combination of Tories and Radicals, and Colonel Sibthorpe’s amendment was carried by a majority of 104.
in the British Museum.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN HER BRIDAL DRESS.
The fact is that people who have grown up familiar only with the present relations of the Royal family with the public can hardly realise how prevalently censorious opinions were held regarding the Queen, and how much prejudice Prince Albert had to live down. |A famous duel.| On the 17th of the very month in which these debates took place, a duel was fought between Mr. Horsman, Whig member for Cockermouth, and Mr. Bradshaw, who had used discourteous and disloyal language about the Queen in a speech made at Canterbury. Horsman had said that Bradshaw had the tongue of a traitor and the heart of a coward. After an exchange of shots, the seconds induced Bradshaw to retract and apologise. It may be mentioned here that the abolition of duelling was one of the first objects to which Prince Albert devoted his efforts after his naturalisation. He proposed the substitution of Courts of Honour to arbitrate in quarrels between gentlemen, and though he did not prevail on the Commander-in-Chief to establish these, there can be no doubt that the Prince’s personal influence was greatly the cause of suppressing a system which was in full force during the early years of the reign.
28 The Queen’s marriage to Prince Albert was celebrated on February 10, 1840. During the summer of that year the Queen was fired at by a lunatic potboy as she drove up Constitution Hill with the Prince, but happily escaped all injury. |The Queen fired at.| One sometimes hears doubts expressed about the necessity for the elaborate precautions taken for the safety of Royal personages, who, it is supposed by some people, might safely trust themselves more freely to the goodwill of their subjects. But there is nothing more certain than this—that, however popular or deserving a monarch may be, there are always crazed or desperate individuals with schemes of insult or violence, waiting an opportunity to carry them out.
A. Prince George of Cambridge. B. Duchess of Cambridge. C. Princess Mary. D. Prince Ernest. E. Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha. F. Queen Adelaide. G. Prince Albert. H. The Queen. J. Duke of Sussex. K. Archbishop of Canterbury. L. Duchess of Kent. M. Princess Augusta of Cambridge. N. Duke of Cambridge. P. Princess Sophia Matilda.
THE MARRIAGE OF THE QUEEN AND PRINCE ALBERT AT THE CHAPEL ROYAL, ST. JAMES’S, February 10, 1840.
THE “VOLAGE” AND “HYACINTH” ENGAGING TWENTY-NINE CHINESE JUNKS.
The relations of Great Britain and the East India Company with China had for some years been drifting into very unfriendly conditions, arising out of the opium trade. The Chinese Government had strictly prohibited the importation of opium—a measure commanding the sincere sympathy of those in this country who condemned all use of opium as an unmitigated physical and moral evil. But India derived enormous profits from the opium trade, and her traders used every device to evade the restrictions. It was suspected, and the Foreign Secretary, Lord Palmerston, endorsed the suspicion, that the policy of the Chinese Government had nothing to do with the morality of the trade, but was concerned only to protect the native opium industry. |War declared with China.| The wheels of diplomacy ran heavily between the “Heavenly Dynasty” and the British Foreign Office for many years, till at last they were brought to a stand by the sudden outbreak of war. Lord Palmerston had appointed three superintendents to look after the interests of British traders in Chinese ports, and invested them with a semi-diplomatic character. Thus it came to pass that when, after months of procrastination, Her Majesty’s Government at last announced that “they could not interfere for the purpose of enabling British subjects to violate the29 laws of the country with which they traded,” thus practically forbidding the opium trade, Captain Elliott, the chief superintendent, read between the lines of the despatch, and, on the Chinese authorities seizing a large quantity of opium in British vessels, requested the Governor of India to send warships for the protection of Englishmen trading in China. The request was promptly complied with by the despatch of two frigates, the Volage and the Hyacinth, which attacked a Chinese fleet of twenty-nine junks below Hong Kong, blew up one of them, sunk three, and knocked the rest about in fine style.
CHINESE JUGGLERS.
Sir J. Graham, who attacked the Government with a Motion in regard to the conduct of the Chinese War in 1840 and nearly defeated them, is here represented as drawing forth reels of Chinese Papers and Blue Books from Lord Palmerston. John Bull, in the background, is remarking, “What an enormous quantity of paper for any man to swallow!”
A strong armament of fourteen warships and several transports was assembled at Singapore, the command of which was given to Admiral Elliott. |Capture of Chusan.| Before his arrival, however, in the Melville, 74, the second in command, Commodore Sir J. Gordon Bremer, captured the island of Chusan, on July 5, with its capital—a walled city six miles in circumference. Negotiations for peace were then opened, but the Chinese authorities prolonged them on so many various pretexts, while busily erecting batteries at the Bogue, near Canton, that Commodore Bremer broke off the proceedings and prepared for action. |Bombardment of the Bogue Forts.| The Bogue Forts were bombarded, and two of them were captured on January 7, 1841; after further fruitless parleying the bombardment was re-opened on February 19, and the whole chain of defences were taken. After each successive engagement, Captain Elliott, the civil superintendent, attempted to obtain a pacific settlement with the enemy; but forbearance was invariably interpreted by the Mandarin as a sign of weakness, and it was not till the troops under Sir Hugh Gough, had fought their way to the walls of Canton that Captain Elliott was able to announce that terms of peace had been agreed to, just forty-five minutes before a general attack on Canton was to have taken place.
|Peace concluded under the Walls of Nankin.| Once more peace negotiations broke down: hostilities were resumed; Chusan was re-occupied; Amoy, believed by the Chinese to be impregnable, was taken by assault on August 25, 1842; the capture of Chinghai and Ningpo followed; and when Sir H. Gough appeared before Nankin the Chinese Government finally agreed to accept the terms imposed as the conditions of peace. Five millions and three-quarters sterling were exacted as an indemnity; the island of Hong Kong was ceded to Great Britain, and five principal Chinese ports were thrown open to British trade.
A. Duchess of Gloucester. B. Duchess of Kent. C. Duke of Sussex. D. Queen Adelaide. E. Archbishop of Canterbury christening F. the Royal Infant. G. Archbishop of York. H. The Queen. J. Prince Consort.
THE CHRISTENING OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL AT BUCKINGHAM PALACE, February 10, 1841.
Her Majesty’s eldest child, the Princess Royal, was born November 21, 1840, and christened Victoria Adelaide Mary Louisa.
CHAPTER III.
1841–1846.
Unpopularity of the Whigs—Fall of the Melbourne Ministry—Peel’s Cabinet—The Afghan War—Murder of Sir A. Burnes and Sir W. Macnaghten—The Retreat from Cabul—Annihilation of the British Force—The Corn Duties—The Pioneers of Free Trade—Failure of Potato Crop in Ireland—Lord John Russell’s conversion to Free Trade—Peel and Repeal—Rupture of the Tory Party—The Corn Duties repealed—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Review of Peel’s Administration.
THE closing months of the Melbourne Ministry afford melancholy matter for chronicle. The Government went on steadily losing popularity in the country and forfeiting respect in Parliament. |Unpopularity of the Whigs| The sword, long impending, descended at last. Mr. Baring, who had succeeded Spring Rice as Chancellor of the Exchequer, had to confess to a deficiency in his Budget of nearly two millions, which he proposed to meet by a re-adjustment of the sugar and timber duties, which brought about the defeat of the Government by a majority of thirty-six. Still, Ministers did not resign. Russell had determined at length to make a bid for the Free Trade vote, and gave notice of his intention to propose a permanent reduction in the duty on corn. But the announcement fell flatly; people only saw in this sudden conversion another desperate effort to retain office, for the Whigs hitherto had been inflexible in resistance to Free Trade demands. Melbourne had sworn roundly that of all the mad projects he had ever heard of the surrender of duties was the maddest; and Russell had been equally explicit, though employing fewer expletives. The duty on imported corn had been established by legislation in 1815, and was on a sliding scale according to current prices. The impost was 27s. on each quarter of wheat when the price fell below 60s.,31 and diminished in proportion as the price rose till it stood at 1s. when the price of the quarter was 73s. and upwards.
This ship was built and is maintained by the Post Office specially for the laying and repairing of submarine telegraph cables. She is fitted with sheaves in the bows, over which the cables are led. The “Alert” is another ship employed for the same purpose.
The next move in Parliament was a vote of no confidence, moved by Sir Robert Peel, and then at last Lord John Russell announced that Her Majesty had been advised to dissolve Parliament immediately. |Fall of the Melbourne Ministry.| Writs were made returnable on August 19, by which date the political tables had been completely turned. The Conservatives who went to the country in a minority of thirty returned with a majority of seventy-six. It is notable that in recording this result the Annual Register for the first time exchanges the title of Whigs for that of Liberals.
The number of telegraphic messages transmitted from the various London offices in the year 1895–6 was 27,025,193, and the total for the United Kingdom, 78,839,610. As many as six messages—three in each direction—are now transmitted along a single wire at the same time.
Before following the fortunes of the Administration formed by Sir Robert Peel, reference must be made to mournful news which, while people at home were crowding round the hustings and polling booths, were slowly approaching this country from Central Asia. |Peel’s Cabinet.| The most serious reverse to British policy and the greatest disaster to British arms which have happened in the present century were the outcome of events which may thus briefly be recapitulated. In 1837 Captain Alexander Burnes, Orientalist and traveller, arrived as British agent at Cabul, capital of the province of that name, in the north of Afghanistan. The Prince of that fragment of the ancient Empire of Ahmed Shah was Dost Mahomed Khan, an usurper, it is true, but a popular hero, a soldier of remarkable ability, and a sagacious and bold ruler. Dost professed the friendliest feelings towards England, but, for some reasons now unknown, was profoundly distrusted by the Foreign Office. Captain Burnes thoroughly trusted Dost, but his repeated assurance failed to convince his employers that in his disputes with neighbouring States, Dost greatly preferred relying on English influence to accepting the advances continually made to him by Russia and Persia. Burnes was instructed to regard Dost as dangerously treacherous, and at last Lord Auckland, Governor-General of India, made a treaty with Runjeet Singh, hostile to Dost, and with the purpose of restoring Shah Soojah-ool-Moolk, whom Dost had deposed from the throne of Cabul. |The Afghan War.| A British force invaded Cabul, overthrew the brave Dost, and enthroned Soojah, whom nobody wanted. But Dost Mahomed was a foe of no ordinary mettle. On November 2, 1840, he encountered the allied force of the English and Shah Sooja at Purwandurrah, and if he32 did not actually win the battle, the gallantry of his Afghan cavalry caused it to be drawn. Dost, however, was too wise to believe that he could resist for long the force of England. On the evening after the battle he rode into his enemy’s camp and placed his sword in the hand of Sir W. Macnaghten, the British Envoy at Soojah’s Court. Dost was honourably treated, his sword was returned to him, he was sent to India and provided with a residence and pension.
LORD AUCKLAND,
1784–1849.
Governor-General of India, 1835–1841.
But Dost was the darling of his people. They hated Soojah, whom the English had forced on them, and they rose in revolt against him. |Murder of Sir A. Burnes and Sir W. Macnaghten.| Burnes was the earliest victim, for although, in truth, he had all along stood stoutly for Dost, the insurgents believed him to have betrayed their ruler. He and his brother and all their party, man, woman, and child, were hacked to pieces. Akbar Khan, second and favourite son of Dost Mahomed, now put himself at the head of the insurrection, and the shameful part of the story began. Hitherto, there had been blunders enough in English dealings with this brave people: but there is nothing to blush for in blunders provided they are clear of disgrace; one cannot, however, ignore the truth that, after a few weeks’ fighting, British troops, having been repeatedly beaten, became so demoralised that their officers could not get them to stand before the fierce Afghans. General Elphinstone, the chief in command, was an experienced, able soldier; but his health had broken down before the insurrection began, and he had written to the Governor-General begging to be relieved of his command, which he felt he was physically unfit to continue. Unfortunately there was some delay in appointing his successor, and the trouble came before Elphinstone could be relieved. Against the personal courage of Brigadier Shelton, the second in command, no reflections have ever been made, but he proved lamentably supine at moments when prompt action was most required. Affairs went from bad to worse with the British force in cantonments outside Cabul, until at last Elphinstone, grievously weakened by disease, could be brought to contemplate no course but abject surrender. Abject surrender! not quite unconditional, it is true, but on most humiliating terms, including the release of Dost Mahomed and the immediate evacuation of Cabul by the British.
CABUL IN 1839.
Cabul, the seat of government of the Ameer of Afghanistan, is at the present time (1897) an open town, though it was formerly surrounded by walls of brick and mud. The only building of any importance is the Bala Hissar, or Citadel, containing the apartments of the Ameer. Besides being a place of great strategic importance, Cabul is the centre of the trade of Central Asia.
LORD ELLENBOROUGH,
1790–1871.
Governor-General of India, 1841–1844.
Bad as this was there was darker disgrace to come. The evacuation was delayed—on the part of the British from a foolish “Micawber” hope that “something would turn up”—on the part of the Afghans, no doubt, in order that the advent of winter should make the passes impracticable. Macnaghten, the British Envoy, seems to have been infected by the prevailing demoralisation, and fell into a trap prepared for him by Akbar Khan. At the very moment when he (Macnaghten) was negotiating openly with the chiefs in Cabul he entered into a conspiracy with Akbar to destroy them, to establish Shah Soojah as nominal monarch, and to secure the appointment of Akbar as Vizier. Macnaghten’s punishment made no long tarrying, for Akbar was acting a subtle part. Macnaghten, accompanied by three officers, rode out one morning to a conference with Akbar on the west bank of the Cabul river. It was a solitary place, as befitted the discussion of the contemplated treachery, but they had not been conferring long before33 they were surrounded by a crowd of armed country people. The British officers remonstrated with Akbar; at that moment Macnaghten and his companions were seized from behind; a scuffle took place; Akbar drew a pistol, a gift from the Envoy himself, and shot him in the body. Macnaghten fell from his horse and was instantly hewn in pieces; Captain Trevor was killed also, and the other two officers, Mackenzie and Laurence, were carried off to the town.
THE REMNANT OF AN ARMY.
The gate shown is the Cabul Gate of Jellalabad. It was from the top of that gate that the sentry on duty first caught sight of the solitary figure, clad in sheepskin coat and riding a bay pony, lean, hungry, and tired, who alone survived the massacres in the Khyber and Jugdulluck Passes. Dr. Brydon’s form was bent from weakness, and he was so worn out with fatigue that he could scarcely cling to the saddle. The snow-covered mountain in the background is the Ram Koond.
Deeper and deeper grows the horror—more profound the shame—as the story proceeds. General Elphinstone and Brigadier Shelton lay in their cantonments with 4,500 fighting men, with guns, and camp followers to the number of 12,000. Macnaghten’s bloody remains were dragged in triumph through the streets of Cabul, yet not an arm was raised to avenge him. Major Eldred Pottinger was for cutting their way out and dying on the field, but no one would listen to him: negotiations were opened with Akbar Khan, and the British force were allowed to march out, leaving all their guns except six, all their treasure and six officers as hostages. |The Retreat from Cabul.| They started, upwards of 16,000 souls, to march through the stupendous Khyber Pass to Jellalabad in the very depth of winter. Akbar Khan’s safe-conduct proved the shadow of a shade; either he would not, or, as seems to have been the case, he could not, protect them from hordes of fanatic Ghilzies, who hovered along the route—shooting, stabbing, mutilating the wretched fugitives. Akbar, indeed rode with Elphinstone, and probably it was true, as he declared, that he could do nothing with his handful of horse to keep off the infuriated hillmen. At last it became evident that a choice must be made of a few who might be saved either from a bloody death or from perishing of cold in the snow and searching wind. Akbar proposed to take all the women and children into his own custody and convey them to Peshawur. The awful nature of the dilemma may be imagined when such a proposal was agreed to. Lady Macnaghten was placed in charge of the assassin of her husband: with her went Lady Sale, Mrs. Trevor, and eight other Englishwomen; and, as an extreme favour, a few married men were allowed to accompany their wives. General Elphinstone and two other officers were also taken as hostages. The rest struggled on as far as the Jugdulluck Pass. Then came the end: the hillsides were crowded with fierce mountaineers; the 44th Regiment were ordered to the front; they mutinied and threatened to shoot their officers, broke their ranks, and were cut down in detail by the Afghans. A general massacre followed. |Annihilation of the British Force.| Out of more than 16,000 souls who marched out of Cabul, a sorry score of fugitives were all that left that horrible defile alive. Sixteen miles from Jellalabad, only six remained: still the murdering knife was plied, until, at last, one solitary haggard man, Dr. Brydon, rode into Jellalabad to tell of the literal annihilation of the army of Cabul, and announce to General Sale, commanding in that place, that his wife was in the hands of Akbar Khan.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN 1838.
This portrait was painted from life at Buckingham Palace by Mr. Sully, an American Artist, whose daughter, about the same age as Her Majesty, took the Queen’s place and wore the jewels while these were being painted into the picture. Her Majesty came in while the young lady was thus attired and conversed with her.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, ABOUT 1845.
This illustration is from a very beautiful coloured lithograph prepared in 1851 in compliance with Her Majesty’s kind suggestion that a portrait should be prepared which, in those days of expensive prints, might be sold at a price within the reach of her less well-to-do subjects.
There is little more to add. It had been part of Elphinstone’s shameful bargain with Akbar Khan that Jellalabad and Candahar should be evacuated before the army of Cabul should reach the former place, and orders had been sent to General Sale in Jellalabad and General Nott in Candahar to abandon these towns. Luckily, these officers were of the right British stamp, and they refused to obey. Akbar Khan besieged Sale in Jellalabad; Sale not only held that place but gave battle to the Afghans outside the fort, routed them, and made ready to co-operate with General Nott at Candahar for a forward movement on Cabul. But the faculties of Lord Auckland, the Governor-General, seemed paralysed. Regardless of British prestige, the very keystone of our rule in India, he ordered the precipitate recall of all the troops in Afghanistan. Luckily, again, his term of office was just drawing to a close, and Lord Ellenborough came out to take the reins of government. At first he issued a proclamation endorsing the withdrawal from Afghanistan, but more spirited counsel prevailed in the end. The re-conquest of Cabul was accomplished by the entry of General Pollock into the capital on September 15, 1842, when it was found that the unfortunate Shah Soojah had paid the penalty of the greatness thrust on him by English diplomacy, and had been assassinated by the people he had been set to rule. Of the English ladies and children who had been taken under the protection of Akbar Khan the story has been written in a once famous book, Lady Sale’s Journal. The husband of that lady, General Sir Robert Sale, was sent to recover the captives, who had suffered innumerable hardships. General Elphinstone had died—the best thing that could happen for his fame; the rest were found in a hill fort in the Indian Caucasus, in charge of a chief, who, having heard of Akbar Khan’s defeat, was easily bribed to surrender his trust. The retreat from Cabul had begun on January 6, but the news did not reach England till March 7.
Gallery.
RICHARD COBDEN,
1804–1865.
The son of a yeoman farmer in Sussex. Entered Parliament as Member for Stockport in 1841 and immediately took the lead in the House of Commons of the party identified with the cause of Free Trade, a cause he had already done much to strengthen. He opposed the Crimean War, and brought about the fall of the Palmerston Government in 1857, by carrying a vote condemning their action in regard to the Chinese War. He negotiated the commercial treaty with France in 1860.
The Tories—or, as they must in future be called, the Conservatives—had been carried to power by a strong wave of reaction in 1841, but it was the destiny of their leader, Sir Robert Peel, to shake the fabric of the Party to its base. There was a story current, of dubious authenticity, about this statesman, how that in his early days his father, also Sir Robert, warned Lord Liverpool35 that if the young man did not get office immediately he would go over to the Whigs and be lost to his party, whereupon Liverpool immediately appointed him Irish Secretary. No doubt Peel was far more disposed for progress and reform than the average Whig, and there was something paradoxical in the fate that made him leader of the Tories. At first all went smoothly; the leader of the House of Commons was chief of the Ministerial forces and master of the Opposition also. But the first note of approaching storm was sounded on the eve of the meeting of Parliament in February, 1842. The Duke of Buckingham, Lord Privy Seal, resigned his office and seat in the Cabinet on January 31. The reason for this, as the Duke afterwards announced in Parliament, lay in the following expression in the Queen’s Speech:—“I recommend to your consideration the state of the laws which affect the importation of corn, and of other articles, the produce of foreign countries.” |The Corn Duties.| This little sentence, wedged in among the usual ceremonial or occasional paragraphs, contained the kernel of the Ministerial programme, and at once excited extraordinary interest in the country. On February 9, when Peel was to propound his scheme, the delegates of the Anti-Corn Law League marched down in procession to Westminster, and it required all the force of the police on duty to keep them from taking possession of the lobby of the House of Commons.
Birmingham Liberal
Association.
JOHN BRIGHT, 1811–1889.
He was the son of a Rochdale cotton spinner; entered Parliament as M.P. for Durham in 1843, and represented Manchester 1847–54, and Birmingham from that date to his death. He was appointed President of the Board of Trade in 1868, and in 1873 and again in 1881 Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. He was a member of the Society of Friends, and one of the most eloquent and convincing speakers of the century. He is principally remembered for his advocacy of the Repeal of the Corn Laws.
J. Flaxman, R.A.] [In the Royal Collection.
SILVER GILT BOWL.
This beautiful specimen of art workmanship was made for King George IV. when Prince of Wales; the gilding alone cost £2,000. The ladle was made for the baptism of the present Prince of Wales.
This League was a remarkable organisation under a no less remarkable leader. Richard Cobden, the son of a yeoman farmer, was employed in his youth in a London warehouse, and then became partner in a Manchester cotton factory. He first attracted notice as a pamphleteer, attacking some of the most cherished traditions of British statesmanship. He travelled far and wide on the business of his firm, and in every country he visited his thoughtful mind gathered material for the doctrines inseparably associated with his name. |The Pioneers of Free Trade.| He first entered Parliament in 1841, being recognised at that time as the leader of the movement in the country against the corn duties. Mr. Charles Villiers had won for himself the position of parliamentary head of the Free Trade party; to him Cobden came not as a rival but as a wise, resourceful ally. A third figure was soon to be added to this famous group in the person of John Bright, a Quaker manufacturer in Rochdale. A notable trio, each supplying the complement of the other’s qualities; Villiers, of aristocratic birth and connections, well acquainted with the rules and peculiar temperament of the House of Commons, ardent, industrious, and well informed; Cobden, a man of the people, temperate, just, “the apostle of common-sense,” and singularly persuasive; Bright, intensely—sternly in earnest, possessing gifts of oratory denied to his colleagues, but exercising them with a discretion rare among fluent speakers. Lastly, one attribute shared equally by each of the three men—absolute integrity and complete disinterestedness. They were Radicals, but they dissociated themselves from all ties of political party, looking for no reward from either side, but ready to support any Minister who would carry out their views.36 Their appeal was addressed to the understanding, not to the passions, of men: their aim was to secure cheap food for the masses, but they never stooped to inflammatory tirades against the classes. Hence the steady, rapid growth of the League, and its irresistible influence on the Queen’s Ministers. Mr. Villiers had advocated for many years the total abolition of the corn duties, and nothing less would now satisfy the League. Russell, who scouted the very idea of absolutely free imports, had yielded so far as to propose, in 1841, a fixed duty on foreign corn, greatly less than the existing rate, which varied between 27s. and 1s. per quarter, according to the market price. Peel came forward in 1842 with a more liberal remission of duty, but although his Bill was passed by a very large majority, all it did was to make the country party behind him uneasy without conciliating the Anti-Corn Law people. No one but men of the Manchester school—“Cobdenites,” as they afterwards came to be called—no one, either Whig or Tory, dreamt of denying that protection was desirable, even necessary, for agriculture. Peel’s first measure was framed to protect wheat growers against a fall in the average price below 56s. a quarter, and also to protect the consumer against a higher price. But the corn duties had been fixed in 1815: a whole generation had grown up under them: their outworks could not be tampered with without risking the stability of the whole structure. It required a momentum of extraordinary force to carry the movement against them to success. That impetus came, in the autumn of 1845, from two sources equally unforeseen. |Failure of Potato Crop in Ireland.| First arrived news of a destructive disease, wasting the potato crop in Ireland. Potatoes had grown to be to the Irish peasant what wheat is to English, what oats still were to Scottish labourers. The Government were informed that one-third of the food of the people was already destroyed, that the disease was still spreading, and no estimate could be formed of how much of the crop could be saved. Deadly disaster was imminent, and the Cabinet was summoned to many anxious deliberations. The Prime Minister advocated that in order to avert famine all ports should be thrown open to corn ships. He coupled this advice with the warning that, once the duties were suspended, he did not think it would be possible to re-establish them. The warning weighed more with the Cabinet than the advice. Three Ministers only—Lord Aberdeen, Sir James Graham, and Sidney Herbert—supported Peel’s proposal. It was set aside, and a Commission was appointed instead to take measures to mitigate the immediate necessity in Ireland.
GENUINE AGITATION.
A Scene from “Julius Cæsar,” with Wellington as Ghost.
In reply to questions drawing attention to the Repeal Agitation in Ireland, the Duke of Wellington in the Lords, and Sir Robert Peel in the Commons, expressed (May 9, 1843) the resolution of the Government to uphold the Union at all costs, and hinted at the probable adoption of coercive measures. The artist has made O’Connell himself the victim of agitation at this implied threat.
PAPA COBDEN TAKING MASTER ROBERT A FREE TRADE WALK.
The reference is to Sir Robert Peel’s gradual conversion to the views of the “Manchester School.”
The other source of impetus referred to was Lord John Russell’s declaration at this juncture of his total conversion to the principle of free trade in corn. His proposed modification in 1841 of the duties had been less liberal than that of Peel38 in 1842. It had been a fixed duty instead of a sliding scale. |Lord John Russell’s conversion to Free Trade.| But there is no reason to doubt the sincerity of his conversion or to suspect him of merely desiring to gain a party advantage. The circumstances of the Anti-Corn Law party at the moment were not such as to tempt the leader of the Opposition to embrace their programme out of a mere desire to steal a march on his opponents.
1. Her Majesty the Queen. 2. Prince Consort. 3. Duke of Cambridge. 4. Duke Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld. 5. Princess Augusta of Cambridge. 6. Duchess of Cambridge. 7. Duchess of Kent. 8. King of Prussia. 9. Earl Delawarr, Lord Chamberlain. 10. Earl of Liverpool, Lord Steward. 11. Duke of Sussex. 12. Duchess of Buccleuch, Mistress of the Robes. 13. Bishop of London. 14. Archbishop of Canterbury. 15. Prince George of Cambridge.
THE CHRISTENING OF THE PRINCE OF WALES IN ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR, January 25, 1842.
Tonnage of Colonial Shipping. Same scale as larger diagram.
THE GROWTH OF BRITISH COMMERCE, AS INDICATED BY THE TONNAGE OF BRITISH SHIPS IN 1837 AND IN 1897.
The diagram illustrates at once the difference in type between the ships of the two dates, and the increase in tonnage of the whole mercantile marine, the latter being indicated by the comparative lengths of the ships. Each dotted square represents a million tons.
The “Great Eastern” was designed by Mr. Isambard K. Brunel, and built by Mr. Scott Russell of Millwall, at a cost of £732,000. Her keel was laid in May 1854 and she was launched on January 31, 1858. Her length was 692 feet; width between bulwarks, 83 feet; height, 60 feet; tonnage, 22,500; displacement when loaded, 27,384 tons; horse-power, 11,000. 30,000 wrought-iron plates were used in her hulk. She was built on the “cellular” principle, with two skins 2 feet apart, and driven by both paddle wheels and screw. As a passenger steamer she did not succeed; but she laid the first successful Atlantic cable (1866) and picked up and repaired the earlier one which had parted in mid-ocean. She was afterwards purchased for public exhibition and finally broken up in 1891.
A CONTRAST BETWEEN THE CARES OF OFFICE AND THE EASE OF OPPOSITION.
Lord Aberdeen. Lord Palmerston.The immediate effect of Russell’s conversion, coming on the top of alarming news from Ireland, was to send Peel forward on a course he had been contemplating for years. |Peel and Repeal.| He read a memorandum to the Cabinet on December 2 recommending that Parliament should be summoned early in January, and that he should submit a Bill for the practical and immediate repeal of the Corn Laws. Lord Stanley and the Duke of Buccleuch refused their support to this policy. The Duke of Wellington said he was still in favour of maintaining the Corn Laws, but that if Peel considered that their repeal was necessary for the maintenance of his position “in Parliament and in the public view,” he would support the measure. The Cabinet adjourned till next day. By some accident—it was said that a lady was the means of it—the Times became possessed of the secret, and on December 4 the startling announcement appeared in its columns that the Cabinet had resolved on the Repeal of the Corn Laws. The only modern parallel to the consternation ensuing in the clubs and the country may be found in that which took place when, in 1886, it was made known that Mr. Gladstone’s Cabinet had decided to give Home Rule to Ireland. Many refused to believe the statement in the Times, alleging that it was impossible that a Cabinet secret could have leaked out in this way. The Standard published an emphatic, though not authoritative, contradiction of the story. Excitement and dismay, delight and disgust, contended for mastery wheresoever a few men gathered together: in a few days all was known. Lord Stanley—the “Rupert of debate,” as Disraeli afterwards called him—and the Duke of Buccleuch resigned their seats in the Cabinet. Peel would not consent to proceed without the unanimous consent of39 his colleagues; on December 5 he went to Osborne and tendered his resignation to the Queen. |Rupture of the Tory Party.| Lord John Russell was at once sent for to form a Ministry: he attempted to do so, but failed: Lord Grey’s distrust of Lord Palmerston’s foreign policy proving a fatal obstacle to it. Peel, on being required to do so by the Queen, withdrew his resignation and resumed the duties of office. The Duke of Buccleuch returned as Privy Seal, but Lord Stanley was not to be reconciled, and Mr. Gladstone entered the Cabinet for the first time as Colonial Secretary.
AN AWKWARD SITUATION.
The Irish Famine of 1845 caused Sir Robert Peel to embrace the principle of Free Trade; and his party, incensed at what they considered his “treason,” rejected his Coercion Bill, and brought about the fall of his ministry.
Parliament met on January 22, 1846. Expectation was at the boiling point; it was one of those rare occasions, happening not more than once or twice in an ordinary reign, when the ears of the whole country await an announcement of interest to every class in it. Adopting an unusual, almost unprecedented, course, the Prime Minister rose immediately after the speeches of the mover and seconder of the Address: he entered into no details of the measure foreshadowed in the Queen’s Speech, but he removed all shadow of doubt that the Ministry had resolved on the total repeal of the corn duties. |The Corn Duties repealed.| Those who know the ways of the House of Commons will best understand the significance of a comment made by one who was present. “He did not get a solitary cheer from the people behind him except when he said that Stanley had always been against him ... and then the whole of those benches rung with cheers.” Perhaps nothing in his speech gave deeper offence to his Party than the concluding sentence, in which he declared that he found it “no easy task to ensure the harmonious and united action of an ancient monarchy, a proud aristocracy, and a reformed House of Commons.”
The year 1838 was the starting point of Atlantic Ocean racing. In that year the Great Western and the Sirius crossed in 18 days and 15 days respectively. The first Cunarder, the Britannia, appeared in 1840, and made the westward passage in 14 days. The following year she crossed eastward in 10 days. In 1851 the record was reduced to 9 days 18 hours westward by the Baltic, and 9 days 20 hours 16 min. eastward by the Pacific. In 1863 the Scotia, of the Cunard line, crossed eastward in 8 days 3 hours, and in the following year returned in 8 days 15 hours 45 min. Five years later the City of Brussels, of the Inman Line, travelled between New York and Liverpool in 7 days 22 hours 3 min., but the Baltic, of the White Star Line, lowered this by 2 hours four years later. The Arizona and Alaska improved the speed between 1880 and 1885, the latter making the passage eastward in 6 days 22 hours. The ill-fated Oregon came eastward in 6 days 11 hours 9 min. in 1884, while the Etruria went westward in 6 days 1 hour 55 min. In 1889 the City of Paris lowered the eastward and westward journeys to 5 days 22 hours 50 min., and 5 days 19 hours 18 min., respectively, while two years later the Teutonic reduced this still further by 3 hours each way. Finally the Campania and Lucania appeared in 1893, the latter establishing the record eastwards of 5 days 8 hours 38 min. and westwards of 5 days 7 hours 23 min. Mails have been carried per the Lucania between New York Post Office and the London Central Office in 156·7 hours.
The spokesman of the angry Tories was one of whom much was to be heard in coming years. Benjamin Disraeli had done nothing as yet to redeem the apparently hopeless failure of his maiden speech in 1837. Outwardly, a remarkable figure enough, in a Parliamentary sense he was no more than obscure when he rose from his seat on the Government benches to lead the first attack on the new policy. He was bitter, he was personal, but he was adroitly opportune; and his fame as a statesman dates from that day.
Portrait Gallery.
THE SEVENTH EARL OF SHAFTESBURY,
1801–1885.
The Rt. Hon. Anthony Ashley-Cooper entered Parliament, as M.P. for Woodstock, in 1826. He was then known as Lord Ashley. In 1842 he secured the exclusion of women and children from mines, and in 1844 the passing of the Ten Hours Bill. He succeeded to the Earldom in 1851. His life was devoted to practical philanthropy.
The immediate result was a split—a secession. The House of Commons ratified Peel’s policy by a majority of ninety-seven, but Disraeli himself has put on record the feelings which animated Peel’s ancient supporters. |Defeat and Resignation of the Government.| “Vengeance had succeeded in most breasts to the more sanguine sentiment: the field was lost, but at any rate there should be retribution for those who had betrayed it.”
The opportunity for vengeance was not long delayed. The Corn Bill left the House of Commons on May 15. On June 25 it passed the third reading in the House of Lords, and the most momentous measure of Queen Victoria’s reign awaited only the Royal Assent to complete it. On that very night the House of Commons were to divide on one of those Bills conferring extraordinary powers on the Executive in Ireland which it has been the fate of successive Governments to introduce—Coercion Bills, as they are called for short. The Protectionists perceived what lay in their power: if they threw their weight in with the regular Opposition and O’Connell’s Irish Catholics, they could defeat their lost leader. About eighty of them did so: the rest stayed away and Ministers were left in a minority of seventy-three.
Peel resigned: “he had lost a party but won a nation.” He never returned to office, but, though he did not live to see it, the principles for which he fought and fell became those of the Conservative party.
Messrs. Graves).
THE QUEEN, PRINCE CONSORT, AND PRINCESS ROYAL, AT WINDSOR CASTLE, 1843.
During the five years of his last Administration he had restored equilibrium to the national finances. He turned the deficit of two millions to which he succeeded to a surplus of five millions in 1845. He carried the grant to the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth against the votes of half his own party, though it cost him the loss of his colleague, Mr. W. E. Gladstone. |Review of Peel’s Administration.| Mr. Gladstone himself lived to abolish the grant, for it was he who ruled the whirlwind that swept away the Irish State Church in 1866, and the Maynooth grants disappeared with it. Peel’s Administration must also be credited with a marked advance in legislation for the working classes. Lord Ashley (better known in later years as Earl of Shaftesbury) had obtained the appointment of a Commission to inquire into the employment of women in collieries: the horrible evils thereby brought to light, the infamous degradation of women and girls, harnessed like beasts of draught with a girdle round their waist—unclothed, unwashed, and sometimes hopelessly crippled—deeply moved the public mind, and the Act of 1842, prohibiting the employment of females in mines, passed almost without opposition. More prolonged was the resistance to the Factory Act of 1844, regulating the hours of labour of youthful persons. This beneficent legislation should not be overlooked in the glare of conflict over the Corn Laws.
HER MAJESTY RECEIVING KING LOUIS PHILIPPE AT WINDSOR CASTLE, October 8, 1844.
Louis Philippe was the first French Monarch who ever set foot in the British Islands on a visit of peace. The Prince Consort met him at Portsmouth and accompanied him to Windsor, where the Queen awaited him. At the banquet “he talked to me,” writes the Queen, “of the time when he was in a school in the Grisons, a teacher merely, receiving twenty pence a day, having to brush his own boots, and under the name of Chabot.” On the following day he was installed Knight of the Garter. He left England on the 13th.
CHAPTER IV.
1833–1849.
The Churches of England and Scotland—“Tracts for the Times”—Newman, Keble, and Pusey—“Ten Years’ Conflict” in Scotland—Disruption of the Church—Dr. Chalmers—Rise of the Free Church—Affairs of British India—First Sikh War—Battles of Meeanee, Moodkee, Ferozeshah, Aliwal and Sobraon—Second Sikh War—Murder of Vans Agnew and Anderson—Battle of Ramnuggur—Siege and Fall of Mooltan—Battles of Chilianwalla and Goojerat—Annexation of the Punjab.
THE upheavals which took place simultaneously in the Established Churches of England and Scotland, during the early years of Victoria’s reign, and so profoundly stirred religious sentiment in both countries, can scarcely have arisen from independent centres of disturbance, though the connection between them is not easy to trace. |The Churches of England and Scotland.| They were the outcome of an awaking from the condition of inactivity and routine into which both these Protestant Churches had passed after the agitating events of the seventeenth century, and an attempt on the part of the more active intellects, both in clergy and people, to restore ecclesiastical authority and discipline.
of Mr. McLean.
JOHN HENRY NEWMAN,
1801–1890.
Cardinal-Deacon of the Church of Rome. Was the son of a London Banker. Took orders in the Anglican Church in 1824; was appointed Incumbent of St. Mary’s, Oxford, in 1828, and held that appointment until 1842. He seceded to the Church of Rome in 1845, and was created a Cardinal in 1879 by Leo XIII.
Oxford.
Dr. E. B. PUSEY,
1800–1882.
Regius Professor of Hebrew at Christ Church College, Oxford, 1828. He wrote several of the “Tracts for the Times.” On the secession of Newman he became the virtual leader of the Tractarian movement.
The movement in England has been reckoned by the late Cardinal Newman, himself one of the leading spirits in it before42 his secession to Rome, as beginning with a sermon preached by John Keble in the University pulpit, Oxford, on July 14, 1833, afterwards published under the title “National Apostasy.” |“Tracts for the Times.” Newman, Keble, and Pusey.| About the same time began the publication of “Tracts for the Times,” conducted by a group of earnest, active men, including Newman, Keble, Pusey, and others, advocating a revival of High Church observances as a means of quickening spiritual life and a restoration of the patristic doctrines and practice in Church government and services. From these tracts the movement became known as “Tractarian,” till in 1841 their publication came to a sudden end by reason of the famous Tract No. 90, written by Newman, and deeply offensive to Protestant feeling in England. Newman joined the Church of Rome in 1845, and thereafter the term “Puseyite” was popularly used to designate this party.
THE REV. JOHN KEBLE,
1792–1866.
One of the leaders of the Tractarian movement. He is best known by his hymns published under the titles of “The Christian Year” (1827) and “Lyra Innocentium” (1847). He was Professor of Poetry at Oxford, 1831, and Vicar of Hursley, near Winchester, 1835–1866. Keble College, Oxford, was erected to his memory.
DR. THOS. CHALMERS,
1780–1847.
As minister of the Tron Church, Glasgow (1815), he obtained a great reputation. He was appointed Professor of Moral Philosophy at St. Andrew’s, 1823, of Theology at Edinburgh in 1828, and led the great secession in 1843. He was the first Moderator of, and was elected Principal and Primarius Professor of Theology in, the Free Church of Scotland.
The corresponding movement in the Established Presbyterian Church of Scotland, commonly referred to as the Ten Years’ Conflict, arose out of a question of Church government rather than one of theology. |The “Ten Years’ Conflict” in Scotland.| Lay patronage had been imposed on the Church of Scotland by the Act of 1712. The revival of spiritual activity, which in England took the shape of the Tractarian movement, was equally perceptible in Scotland, and resulted in the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland passing the Veto Act in 1834, by which it was declared to be a fundamental law of the Church that no pastor could be appointed to a parish against the will of the majority of the congregation. It was not long before this led to appeals from the Ecclesiastical to the Civil Courts. |Disruption of the Church.| In 1842 the General Assembly presented to the Queen a “claim, declaration, and protest,” accompanied by an address praying for the abolition of patronage, to which the Home Secretary made reply that the Government could not interfere. In March 1843, the House of Commons decided by 211 votes to 76 against attempting to redress the grievance, and on May 18 following, the non-intrusion party withdrew from the General Assembly and constituted the first Assembly of the Free Church, under the leadership of Dr. Thomas Chalmers. |Dr. Chalmers.| The action was all the more significant because Chalmers, the most powerful and popular preacher in the Scottish Church of that day, and a distinguished leader of ecclesiastical thought, had hitherto been a powerful champion of the connection of Church and State. But he had thrown himself with great earnestness into the work of reclaiming the masses and bringing them into direct relations with the Church, and he felt convinced that this great work could not be carried to success unless the Church were free to choose her own instruments. |Rise of the Free Church.| Four hundred and seventy parish ministers resigned their livings and joined the Free Church. A sustentation fund was set up, based on a calculation made by Chalmers that a penny a week from each43 member of a congregation would produce a stipend of £150 a year for 500 ministers. It amounted to no less than £367,000 in the first year of disruption.
AN OLD SO’GER IN MARCHING ORDER.
General Sir Charles Napier,
1782–1853.
The existence of British territory in India, side by side with territory under British protection and States wholly under native rule, was a condition of things neither conducive to peace nor likely to be of a permanent nature. |Affairs of British India.| A single spark dropped among the warlike races inhabiting that vast peninsula was often enough to cause wide-spreading conflagration; and, however agreeable it might be to British consciences, it would be unphilosophic in the highest degree to attribute the blame for such outbreaks exclusively to the native rulers and people. Trouble broke out early in 1843 which led to the annexation by the British of Scinde, a fine territory lying between the Indian Ocean and the Cutch on the south, and southern Afghanistan and the Punjab on the north. Scinde had been divided into three provinces—Hyderabad, Khyrpore, and Meerpore—each ruled by a group of Ameers or hereditary chiefs, descended from Beloochee conquerors, who, it was said, most cruelly oppressed the people under them. Successive treaties had been effected with these rulers by the Indian Government, but the disaster which fell on the British arms in Cabul seems to have encouraged them to withhold some of the tribute due by them under the latest treaty, and they began warlike preparations. |The First Sikh War.| In 1842 Lord Ellenborough appointed Sir Charles Napier Commander-in-Chief of the British troops in Scinde, with instructions to inflict signal punishment on any chiefs detected in treachery, at the same time empowering him to make a fresh treaty, relieving the Ameers from the payment of any subsidy for the support of British troops. This treaty was at length signed, though it must be confessed that the Ameers were only induced44 to consent to it by the threatening display of Napier’s force. On February 15, 1843, the British Residency at Hyderabad was attacked by 8,000 troops with six guns, led by one or more of the Ameers, and the garrison of 100 men under Major Outram was driven out after a gallant resistance. |Battles of Meeanee, Moodkee, Ferozeshah, Aliwal and Sobraon.| Napier marched to Muttaree the following day with a force of 3,000, attacked the Ameers, who had an army of 22,000 Beloochees, on the morning of the 17th at Meeanee, six miles from Hyderabad, defeated them, and captured their whole artillery, ammunition, baggage, and considerable treasure. The British loss amounted to 256 killed and wounded. Hyderabad was occupied, but the Ameer of Meerpore was still under arms, holding a strong position at Dubba, about four miles from Hyderabad, with 20,000 men. Napier attacked him, and a battle lasting for three hours ended in the complete defeat of Shere Mahomed and the occupation of Meerpore by the British. Sir Charles Napier continued warlike operations at intervals against the hill tribes north of Shikarpore, and there can be but one opinion of the masterly way in which he handled the troops under his command. But the policy of the Governor-General was open to some difference of opinion. He had carried things with a high hand in dealing with the Ameers, and early in 1844 he was recalled by the unanimous vote of the Court of Directors of the East India Company, and Sir Henry Hardinge was appointed in his place.
THE BATTLE OF SOBRAON, February 10, 1846.
This illustration is reduced from a popular, but somewhat quaint, coloured print representing the 31st Regiment, with Major-General Sir Henry Smith’s division, in action at Sobraon. It forms an instructive contrast with the military prints of the present day.
SIR HENRY, AFTERWARDS VISCOUNT, HARDINGE AND HIS STAFF AT FEROZESHAH.
Hardinge applied himself to the peaceful preparation of railroad schemes for the development of India, but at the close of 1845 events again forced the Government forward on the path of fresh conquest. At that time the Punjab, a kingdom consisting both of independent Sikh States and those under British protection, was under nominal rule of the boy-king, Dhuleep Singh, and his mother, the Ranee; but his government at Lahore was distracted by faction and lay at the mercy of his own powerful army. In December 1845, the Sikh forces, for some reason which has never been clearly explained, began massing on the British frontier, and crossed the Sutlej, 15,000 or 20,000 strong, on the 13th. Sir Hugh Gough advanced by forced marches to meet them, attacked them at Moodkee and defeated them, capturing seventeen guns. The Sikhs retired to a strongly-entrenched camp at Ferozeshah, whither Gough, reinforced by Sir John Littler’s division from Ferozepore, followed them on the 21st. The Sikh army was now upwards of 50,000 strong, with 108 heavy guns in fixed batteries. The British force consisted of 16,700 men and sixty-nine guns, chiefly horse45 artillery. There ensued one of the severest conflicts in the history of our Indian Empire. Beginning on the 21st it lasted through part of the 22nd, and ended in the gallant Sikhs being driven across the Sutlej with the loss of many killed and wounded, and no less than seventy guns. The Governor-General, Sir Henry Hardinge, acted as a volunteer, second in command to Sir Hugh Gough, in this memorable action.
FIELD MARSHAL HUGH, VISCOUNT GOUGH,
1779–1869.
Entered the Army in 1794 and served at the Cape of Good Hope and in the Peninsular War. He commanded at the Battles of Moodkee, Ferozeshah, and Sobraon, and was raised to the Peerage as a reward for these great victories. In the second Sikh War in 1848 he commanded in the actions at Chilianwalla and Goojerat.
Early in January 1846, Sirdar Runjoor Singh, again advancing towards the frontier, took up a strong position on the British side of the Sutlej, threatening Gough’s line of communications with Loodiana. Major-General Sir Harry Smith attacked him at Aliwal on January 28, and, notwithstanding the great superiority in numbers of the enemy, obtained a brilliant victory over the Sikhs, capturing their camp and fifty-two guns. But more fighting had to be done before the army of the Punjab could be finally subdued. |The Second Sikh War.| The Sikhs still lay at Sobraon with 30,000 of their best troops, defended by a triple line of breastworks, flanked by redoubts, and armed with seventy guns. Here Sir Hugh Gough attacked them on the morning of February 10, the Governor-General again being present as second in command. At nine o’clock, after an hour’s cannonade, Brigadier Stacey advanced to storm the entrenchments with four battalions, which behaved with splendid gallantry under a very heavy and well-directed fire. They stormed the position, and, being well supported, forced their way into the fortress. By eleven o’clock all was over. The Sikhs were in full flight across the Sutlej, leaving behind them piles of dead and wounded, sixty-seven guns, 200 camel swivels, and all their baggage and ammunition. The British loss consisted of 320 killed, including seventeen officers (among whom were Major-General Sir Robert Dick, General McLaren, and Brigadier Taylor), and 2,063 wounded, including 139 officers. But the carnage among the Sikhs was far more terrible. It is supposed that not less than eight or ten thousand of them perished in action or were drowned in crossing the river under the fire of the British artillery. On February 22 Gough occupied the citadel of Lahore; the Governor-General issued a proclamation from that place, and a treaty was subsequently concluded establishing Dhuleep Singh as Maharajah, tributary to the British Government.
War broke out again in the Punjab in 1848. On April 17 Mr. Vans Agnew and Lieutenant Anderson, British Agents at Mooltan, were murdered. On August 18 General Whish besieged Mooltan with 28,000 men. |Murder of Vans Agnew and Anderson. Battle of Ramnuggur.| Lord Gough arrived on November 21, and took command of the entire British force. Next day he advanced to attack the enemy at Ramnuggur, where both banks of the river were held by the Sikhs. By a most unfortunate piece of strategy the cavalry division, consisting of the 3rd Dragoons and the 5th, 8th, and 14th Light Horse, supported by Horse Artillery, were ordered forward under General Cureton to dislodge the enemy from the left bank of the river. This they accomplished46 with admirable gallantry, but not without suffering terrible loss, owing to the difficult nature of the ground. Colonel Havelock fell at the head of the 14th Light Dragoons; General Cureton and Captain Fitzgerald were also killed. On December 2 Lord Gough crossed the Chenab, and the enemy, after exchanging a cannonade for several hours, retired towards the north-west.
Sketch in the South
Kensington Museum.
CHARLES DICKENS, 1812–1870.
WITH HIS WIFE AND WIFE’S SISTER.
While the events recorded in these chapters were enacting, those books were appearing in rapid succession which have made Dickens’s name a household word. Dickens was born at Portsmouth, where his father held an appointment in the Navy Pay Office. In early life he learned by experience what poverty meant; but his earliest writings, the “Sketches by Boz” (1836), brought him immediate celebrity. The “Pickwick Papers” appeared in 1837, then in succession, “Oliver Twist,” “Nicholas Nickleby,” “The Old Curiosity Shop,” and “Barnaby Rudge.” “David Copperfield” appeared in 1850, and “Edwin Drood” was in course of publication (1870) when its author died. He is buried in Poet’s Corner, Westminster Abbey.
Meantime, General Whish was carrying on the siege of Mooltan with an army of 32,000 men and 150 guns. It is impossible to speak too highly of the splendid defence made by the Sikhs under Moolraj. |Siege and Fall of Mooltan.| By December 29 the British siege guns were bombarding the city walls at eighty yards range. On the 30th the principal magazine in the citadel blew up with a terrific explosion, and the town was in flames. Still the brave garrison fought on. The bombardment continued without intermission for fifty hours. On January 2, 1849, the town, or the wreck of what had once been a town, was taken by assault; but the citadel still held out. From the 4th to the 18th it was incessantly bombarded, and mines were exploded at intervals under the walls, till at last, on the 21st, two wide breaches had been made, and a general assault was ordered for the following day. Moolraj anticipated this by unconditional surrender. His garrison, less than 4,000 men, marched into the British lines to lay down their arms; the last man to leave the fort, in the heroic defence of which he had won undying glory, was Moolraj, dressed in gorgeous silks, splendidly armed, riding a superb Arab with a scarlet saddle-cloth.
Portrait Gallery.
SIR JOHN FRANKLIN,
1786–1847.
Entered the Navy in 1801, and was present at the Battles of Copenhagen and Trafalgar. He conducted several Expeditions to the Arctic regions. In March 1845 he sailed in command of the Erebus and Terror in search of the “North-West Passage.” Nothing was heard of them for years, but in 1859 the Fox, fitted out by Lady Franklin and commanded by Sir Leopold McClintock, found relics, now in Greenwich Hospital, which left no doubt of the total loss of the ships and all lives.
After the fall of Mooltan General Whish joined forces with Lord Gough, who, as described above, had driven the enemy from their encampment at Ramnuggur on November 22. It was believed that the rebellion was broken, and that the Sikhs would not again meet our army in the field. But our generals had still to learn the extraordinary resolution and resources of this fine race. Chuttur Singh and his son Shere Singh still commanded nearly 40,000 men with sixty-two guns, and had captured Attock, a fort defended by Major Herbert. |Battles of Chilianwalla and Goojerat.| Gough advanced to attack the chiefs on January 13, 1849, in their position on the Upper Jhelum near the village of Chilianwalla, a name of melancholy associations in British annals. The Sikhs, indeed, withdrew, but they carried with them four British guns and five stand of colours. The British loss was terrible, amounting to twenty-six officers and 731 men killed, and sixty-six officers and 1,446 men wounded. Lord Gough was blamed for bad generalship in this action: he was recalled from his command, and Sir Charles Napier was appointed in his place. But fortune was kind to a brave soldier. Before the orders from home could reach him, Gough, having followed the enemy, retrieved the disaster of Chilianwalla by inflicting on Shere Singh a crushing defeat at Goojerat on February 21, pursuing him into the Khoree Pass. On March 6 Shere Singh surrendered unconditionally, and on the 29th a proclamation was issued by the Governor-General permanently annexing the Punjab to the British Empire.
NAVAL REVIEW OF 1845.
Her Majesty and the Prince Consort in the Royal Yacht reviewing the Experimental Squadron at Spithead, July 15, 1845.
CHAPTER V.
1846–1850.
The Irish Famine—Smith O’Brien’s Rebellion—Widow Cormack’s Cabbages—The Special Commission—Revival of the Chartist Movement—The Monster Petition—Its Exposure and Collapse of the Movement—Revolutionary Movements in Britain compared with those in other Countries—Growing Affection for the Queen—Its Causes—Royal Visit to Ireland—The Pacifico Imbroglio—Rupture with France Imminent—Civis Romanus Sum—Lord Palmerston’s Rise—Sir Robert Peel’s Death—The Invention of Chloroform.
Invented by A. Siebe, 1839. Now in the Patents Museum. South Kensington.
THE condition of affairs in Ireland, with which it had fallen to the Russell Ministry to deal on entering office in 1846, had become truly appalling. Nearly a million of money had been expended by Peel’s Government in relief of the distress caused by the failure of the potato crop in 1845, and the disease had reappeared with greater intensity in the following season. |The Irish Famine.| Further measures of relief were brought forward by the Prime Minister; charitable subscriptions poured in from every town in England and Scotland; nearly every country in Europe, including even Turkey, contributed help in the hour of need, and the United States Government freighted some of their war vessels with grain for their starving cousins.
AN INTERESTING GROUP; OR, “MISFORTUNE MAKES STRANGE BEDFELLOWS.”
Lord Lincoln, Sir Robert Peel, Mr. Goulbourne, Mr. Disraeli, Lord George Bentinck, and Mr. O’Brien.
Lord George Bentinck’s plan of relief works for Ireland, which mainly took the form of railway extension, was at first opposed by the Government, but afterwards adopted by them, thus bringing this “interesting group” of men into line.
Nevertheless, the situation was one of extraordinary perplexity. In the footprints of famine stalked sedition. Agrarian murders rose to a frightful figure; secret societies grew apace; midnight drilling went on in almost every county; and that very peasantry whose destitution had touched the hearts of the whole civilised world, proved themselves able to buy enormous quantities of arms and ammunition. In Clonmel alone, 1,138 stand of arms were sold in a few days, and everywhere, to quote a letter written at the time, “the peasantry are armed or are arming almost to a man. The stores of the armourer are more48 frequently exhausted than the provision stores.” So brisk was the demand as to cause a revival of the gun trade in Birmingham, where the existing stock of small arms was entirely cleared out. But there could be no doubt of the reality and severity of the distress. It was worst in the south and west; famine and famine-fever carried off thousands, and the population of Ireland, which had stood at eight millions in 1845, could only be reckoned at six millions in 1848. The difference, however, was not entirely due to deaths by starvation or disease. The westward stream of emigration had set in, and tens of thousands of Irish families sought and found the means of better existence in the land of plenty beyond the Atlantic.
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE OF WALES Christmas 1846.
But the ferment of rebellion was spreading swiftly among those who remained. All the misery of the famine was laid at the door of the land system; not unfrequently coroners’ juries returned verdicts of wilful murder against the Prime Minister or Lord Lieutenant, holding them directly responsible for not averting the disasters of the country. Once more the Government had to undertake the hateful task of bringing forward a Coercion Bill, for the people seemed on the brink of civil war. Technically that limit was actually transgressed, though the means were ludicrously inadequate to the end—repeal of the Union. The “Young Ireland” party, inflamed by the successful revolution in France, separated from and plunged ahead of O’Connor’s Repealers. O’Connor had precipitated the rupture by endeavouring to induce his party to pledge themselves against any except constitutional means. His proposal was laughed to scorn. William Smith O’Brien, brother of Lord Inchiquin, claiming descent from Brian Boruibh, placed himself at the head of the “Confederates,” as the new party was called, with Meagher, Dillon, and others as his lieutenants; the United Irishman newspaper was started in opposition to the less inflammatory Nation, the organ of the older party. It was managed by John Mitchell, who filled its columns week by week with the most violent and acrid sedition.
HER MAJESTY AND THE PRINCE CONSORT WITH THE ROYAL CHILDREN, 1846.
The Princess Royal (born 1840), Prince of Wales (1841), Princess Alice (1843), Prince Alfred (1844), and Princess Helena (1846).
The first light-vessel was moored at the Nore in 1732. Since that date, to the untechnical eye, the change in the outward appearance of a lightship has not been great; but the efficiency of the light has been increased, since 1837, from about 1,500 candles to about 20,000 candles. The Spurn Lightship shows a light of the power just named, and in foggy weather sounds a powerful siren in place of the old-fashioned gong.
It was impossible for the Government to allow this sort of stuff to be circulated among an excitable peasantry, smarting under imaginary wrongs and real distress and armed to the teeth; but the existing law contained no provisions framed to stop it. The Prime Minister, therefore, introduced and passed what is known as the Treason Felony Act, making written incitement to insurrection a crime punishable with transportation, and enabling the Executive to imprison persons charged with contravention of it. Mitchell was arrested at once, but Smith O’Brien continued to hold armed meetings in various parts of Ireland: matters looked threatening, and there was grave apprehension in England as to the result. On the morning of August 7 it was turned into mirth by the arrival in London from Liverpool of one of the first telegraphic despatches of importance ever published in this country. |Smith O’Brien’s Rebellion.| Rebellion had actually broken out: Smith O’Brien in person had led a considerable force to attack a body of fifty or sixty police, who defended themselves in the house of one Widow Cormack, near Ballingarry, in Tipperary. A good deal of firing took place but very little bloodshed; thanks, on the one hand, to the indifferent arms carried by the rebels, and, on the other, to the forbearance of the police, who could easily have shot O’Brien, so theatrically did he expose himself during the brief contest. |Widow Cormack’s Cabbages.| The chief damage was done to the poor widow’s cabbages, which the Confederates trampled to pieces in the garden adjoining the house. The affair was soon over: the patriots, not relishing a few rounds from the muskets of the police, melted quickly away, and the heroic O’Brien was arrested in the act of taking his railway ticket at Thurles50 station. It is unlucky for any cause—it is worse, it is fatal to it—when it becomes ridiculous, and people have never since been able to mention Smith O’Brien’s cabbage garden without a grin. But the general state of Ireland had grown to be no laughing matter. |The Special Commission.| The number of persons arrested for complicity in seditions, or for the frequent murders of landlords, agents, and policemen far exceeded what the ordinary tribunals of the country could deal with, and a special Commission of judges was appointed to try them.
The present Lighthouse was erected in 1881, when Smeaton’s celebrated tower was removed to the Hoe at Plymouth, except the lowermost courses, which are shown in the picture and still remain on the rock. The lantern sends out a series of flashes of 79,000 candle-power.
With the exception of Smeaton’s tower at the Eddystone and that on the Bell Rock, this was the only rock Lighthouse on the coast of Great Britain in 1837. It was built on oak piles, and in stormy weather rocked like a ship. Its lantern was furnished with twenty-seven argand lamps with reflectors, giving a light of about 3,000 candle-power. It was superseded by the present granite tower in 1861.
The spirit of revolution was astir in many lands besides Ireland in the year when Louis Philippe was forced from the throne of France. In England the Chartist movement was sympathetically inflamed into renewed activity. |Revival of the Chartist Movement.| A Chartist convention assembled in London in spring and made arrangements for a monster demonstration to be held on Kennington Common on April 10. But the Convention had hardly begun deliberating before disunion appeared in its councils. There were two parties among the Chartists—the constitutional Radicals and the physical force party. The latter were for assembling on Kennington Common under arms; but the venerable leader of the whole movement, Feargus O’Connor, would have nothing to do with unconstitutional or violent proceedings. The consequence of this was a rupture in the camp. Every preparation was made by the authorities to protect London from the ravages of a mob: the troops were under arms: the police mustered in great force: thousands of special constables were sworn in, and the Chartist procession was prohibited. But about 20,000 Chartists did assemble on the Common to listen to harangues by O’Connor and others. O’Connor then went to the Home Office, interviewed Sir George Grey, and told him the meeting had taken place without disorder. “Are you going back to it?” asked Grey. “No,”51 replied O’Connor, “I’ve had my toes trodden on till I’m lame: my pocket has been picked, and I’ll have no more to do with them.”
The series of circular glass prisms collects the rays from the lamp—usually an oil lamp with several concentric wicks—and concentrates them into a horizontal beam of great power. The Lantern illustrated is that of the Lighthouse at Spurn Point, and is the most powerful oil Lantern yet made; it has a maximum intensity of 179,000 candles. But this power is greatly exceeded by the electric lights at St. Catherine’s, the Lizard, and elsewhere.
Shewing the interior, and the method of morticing the stones for greater security. The Lantern is a double dioptric one, and consists of two such arrangements as that shewn on the left of this page placed one above the other. The fog-signal is an explosive one of gun-cotton.
It was ridicule—that universal solvent—which finally shattered this once formidable Chartist League. A monster petition to Parliament had been in course of signature for some months. |The Monster Petition.| Feargus O’Connor, in presenting it, declared that 5,700,000 names were attached to it. It was remitted in the ordinary course to the Committee on Public Petitions, who employed a number of clerks to examine the signatures. The result was speedily made known. Instead of nearly six million names, less than two million were appended to it. Whole sheets of these were found to have been written by the same hand. |Its Exposure, and Collapse of the Movement.| But the crowning exposure, which convulsed the whole nation with laughter, appeared from the analysis of the names themselves. Those of the Queen and Prince Albert, of Ministers and leaders of Opposition were of frequent occurrence; noted names in fiction, especially that of “Cheeks the Marine,” a familiar character in Marryat’s novels, then very popular, appeared in every sheet, besides all sorts of ribaldries, indecencies, and buffooneries. Chartism was a genuine and an earnest movement: it was an upheaval against class privileges, a revolt against class grievances. But these privileges and grievances were in course of removal; the extension of the franchise had brought about repeal of the corn laws, laid the foundation of free trade, and redressed some, at least, of the evils prevalent in factories and mines. Much remained to be done, which has been done since, but Chartism was to have no hand in the doing of it. As a political force it collapsed; as a social movement it crumbled away under the intolerable ridicule of the Monster Petition.
It will be long before English statesmen forget the lessons of 1848–9. During these years the whole of Europe was convulsed by violent popular conflicts with authority. In France the Bourbon dynasty collapsed with the abdication of Louis Philippe, and then, to repeat Mr. Justin McCarthy’s happy phrase, “came a Red Republican rising against a Republic that strove not to be red,” to be drowned in blood by Cavaignac. |Revolutionary Movements in Britain compared with those in other Countries.| The Pope was chased from Rome, the Emperor of Austria from Vienna, the Italian princes from their duchies, the German rulers from their principalities; there were sanguinary struggles in Poland, in Naples, in Sardinia; while Great Britain had only to blush for Widow Cormack’s cabbages and the picking of Feargus O’Connor’s pocket at Kennington. Yet there was no doubt of the earnestness of the leaders of agitation and insurrection in England: no question about the reality of the grievances.
HER MAJESTY IN THE WALKING COSTUME OF 1846.
Freedom of speech and freedom of the press, no ineffective safety valves in times of discontent, were tolerated in the United Kingdom—then, as now—far beyond the limits of public security, as these were reckoned by every other European State. But the chief safety of England lay in the faith of the masses in the power of Parliament to devise measures of redress, and their confidence that the Sovereign would interpose no bar to remedial legislation. Nor have that faith and confidence been betrayed. Throughout all the years that have elapsed since the dissolution of the Chartist League, Parliament has been diligent in devising measures to meet the ever-changing and growing wants of the people, and the Royal Assent has always been cordially given to them. The Queen and her Consort do not appear very prominently or very often in the chronicles of these early years, but all the time there had been growing silently that popular affection for the Sovereign which disappeared entirely from practical politics with the active reign of George III. The qualities of Prince Albert, his industry, his untiring anxiety for the welfare of the people, his unobtrusive influence in favour of freedom, were becoming known: the Crown was becoming more than the decorative centre of the Court—the mere frontispiece of the aristocracy—it was becoming recognised as the actual head of the British people.
|Growing Affection for the Queen. Its Causes.| The growing affection of the people for their Queen was stimulated about this time by the act of a harebrained scamp who, on May 17, discharged a rusty pistol, loaded, it is believed, with no deadly missile, at Her Majesty as she was driving in Constitution Hill with three of her children. The fact that the wretch was an Irishman was regarded rightly as being of no political significance, and it was a happy—it was more, it was a wise—project which was carried into effect by the visit of the Queen and Prince Albert, with the Prince of Wales and Princess Royal, to Ireland in August 1849. |Royal Visit to Ireland.| The Royal yacht was escorted by four warships, but the reception they met with at Cork, at Dublin, and at Belfast proved that to be but a formal precaution. Perhaps, had it been possible in later years that the Monarch and her family should become more familiar to the warm-hearted Irish, many subsequent misfortunes and misunderstandings might never have taken place.
IMPORTS 1837: £55,000,000. EXPORTS 1837: £42,000,000.
A COMPARATIVE VIEW OF THE IMPORTS AND EXPORTS OF THE UNITED KINGDOM IN 1837 AND 1897.
THE GRECIAN DIFFICULTY.
Mr. Punch: “Why don’t you hit one of your own size?”
The Parliamentary session of 1850 must ever be memorable for two events—the sudden rise of Lord Palmerston into fame and popularity, and the equally sudden removal of the most illustrious figure in the House of Commons. The debate, which was the occasion of the first, and immediately preceded the second of these events, arose out of one of the most trivial and least creditable matters that ever agitated the Councils and menaced the peace of a great nation. Certain British subjects had suffered loss in the destruction of their property during the disturbances at Athens in 1847, and had lodged claims for compensation against the Greek Government. |The Pacifico Imbroglio.| The principal sufferer was a Portuguese Jew, named Pacifico, a British subject in virtue of having been born in Gibraltar. The Greeks were needy and delayed a settlement. Then there was Mr. Finlay, too, the historian of Greece, long resident at Athens, who had a grievance of a different sort, arising out of a demand made by the Greek Government that he should surrender a piece of land at less than he considered its value. The strange thing was that Palmerston took up these private claims as an international question, although neither of the claimants had tried the experiment of litigation in the Greek courts. A British squadron was ordered to the Piræus, all the Greek vessels in that harbour were seized, and Athens was blockaded. The Greeks appealed to the governments of France and Russia, who remonstrated with Great Britain touching this high-handed dealing with a weak State. Russia was rudely outspoken and menacing: she was told bluntly by Lord Palmerston that it was none of her business. France was more conciliatory, and by her aid a convention in regard to the disputed claims was arranged in London. But there was so much delay in communicating the result to the British Ambassador in Athens, Mr. Wyse, that he was left in ignorance that a modified payment had been agreed on, and continued to press for payment of the full claims. |Rupture with France Imminent.| Thereupon arose serious misunderstanding between the British and French Governments, England being accused of breach of faith. Appearances were certainly against her; the French Ambassador was recalled from London, and two great nations seemed on the brink of war.
No. 8.
YE COMMONS RESSOLVED INTO A COMMYTTEE OF yE WHOLE HOUSE.
The Government had a wretchedly bad case to defend in Parliament; a case, too, which had been damaged by the introduction of that element which had told with such fatal effect against the Chartists and Smith O’Brien’s Confederates—the element of ridicule. For the grasping Jew Pacifico had specified in his bill against the Greek Government various possessions strangely out of keeping with what had always been his modest household. Among the articles alleged to have been destroyed by fire were a bedstead, valued at £150, sheets for the same at £30, and a pillow-case at £10. Ministers already beaten in the Upper House stood in a critical position in the Lower. But Lord Palmerston rose to the occasion, and exhibited eloquence which hitherto he had not been54 suspected of possessing. He spoke with great vigour for nearly five hours, and wound up with a peroration which, spoken by a man of other mould than “Old Pam,” might have savoured of claptrap, and read in cold blood at this day, seems to rise no higher than what Americans call “spread-eagleism.” |Civis Romanus Sum.| “If,” he asked, “a subject of ancient Rome could hold himself free from indignity by saying Civis Romanus sum, shall not a British subject also, in whatever land he may be, feel confident that the watchful eye and strong arm of England will protect him against injustice and wrong?” Civis Romanus carried the House and the country with the speaker: Palmerston’s appeal saved the Government.
THE LIFEBOAT OF 1837.
The form of Lifeboat introduced by Henry Greathead in 1789, having a curved keel, and rendered additionally buoyant by means of cork, was still the recognised form in 1837, and boats built by him have been in use until quite recently. The Lifeboat crews on the north and east coasts still prefer, and use, a boat of very similar shape.
|Lord Palmerston’s Rise.|
THE LIFEBOAT OF 1897.
This is the standard self-righting boat of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, and is the outcome of innumerable experiments. The Institution has a fleet of 298 Lifeboats, and has been the means of saving, since 1824, no fewer than 39,815 lives. The Illustration shews the Newquay boat entering the water by means of the slip way.
Sir Robert Peel made his last speech in opposition to the vote of confidence: though, in referring to Palmerston’s defence of the Government, he declared that “his speech made us all proud of the man who made it.” He delivered his last vote on the fourth day of the debate, about four o’clock in the morning of June 29. Next day at noon he attended a meeting of the Royal Commissioners of the Great Exhibition which was to be held the following year. After the meeting he mounted his horse, went to write his name in the Queen’s book at Buckingham Palace, and then rode up Constitution Hill. He stopped to talk to the Hon. Miss Ellis, whom he met riding down from Hyde Park: something frightened his horse, which, by a sudden bound, unseated him. Peel in falling kept hold of the reins and pulled the horse on the top of him. He was internally and fatally injured, one of his ribs having been broken and forced into the lung. |Sir Robert Peel’s Death.| He died on July 2, after terrible suffering. The doctors were unable to deal with the injuries owing to the intense agony caused by the slightest movement. It brings to one’s apprehension what an incalculable boon to suffering humanity has since that time been discovered in the use of anæsthetics. Chloroform had already been invented, it is true, in 1850; but its employment was little understood. Three years earlier Charles Greville had witnessed one of the first operations under chloroform in St. George’s Hospital. How many suffering ones and friends of suffering ones have had cause to echo the feeling expressed in his journal: “I have no words to express my admiration for this invention, which is the greatest blessing ever bestowed on mankind, and the inventor of it the greatest of benefactors, whose memory ought to be venerated by countless millions for ages yet to come.” In spite of this, it is greatly to be feared that the names of Guthrie the American and Soubeiran the Frenchman, who simultaneously discovered chloroform in 1831, and Lawrence of London and Simpson of Edinburgh, who first employed it in our hospitals, have been almost forgotten by the many.
CHAPTER VI.
1849–1851.
Prince Albert’s Industry—His proposal for a Great Exhibition—Adoption of the Scheme—Competing Designs—Mr. Paxton’s selected—Erection of the Crystal Palace—Colonel Sibthorp denounces the Scheme—Papal Titles in Great Britain—Popular Indignation—The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill—Defeat of Ministers on the Question of the Franchise—Difficulty in finding a Successor to Russell—He resumes Office—Opening of the Great Exhibition—Its success and close.
REFERENCE has been made already to the wise restraint which Prince Albert imposed upon himself in respect to politics and legislation; but those would greatly misinterpret the motives and impulses of that active intellect who should attribute this reserve either to apathy or constitutional indolence. Prince Albert did not admit that, because he was withheld by recent developments of representative government from personal interference in legislation and diplomacy, it was the less incumbent upon him, as Consort of the Head of the State, to make himself thoroughly informed on all the leading political questions of the day, as well as on the special work of the public departments. |Prince Albert’s Industry.| Added to this was the active part he took in schemes of social and commercial improvement, and in scientific and artistic progress. An early riser at all times, it was his custom, summer and winter, to dispose of a couple of hours’ work before breakfast, and it is no figure of speech to say that few of the Queen’s subjects can have been more constantly or more laboriously employed than her husband. The Prince had lived down any popular prejudice which he had to encounter in the early years of his married life; people had come to understand and appreciate his abilities and disposition, and the time had come when his genius and industry were to bear remarkable fruit.
THE FIRST STEAM LIFEBOAT, “DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND.”
Built in 1890; is propelled by a turbine, driven by powerful steam engines, and is capable of being steered by means of the jets of water from the turbine, even if the rudder is disabled. She is 50 feet long, 14 feet 4 inches extreme breadth, 3 feet 6 inches deep, and is built of steel in fifteen watertight compartments. She is stationed at New Brighton, Cheshire; a similar boat is at Harwich; and a third is now being built.
Prince Albert was President of the Society of Arts, a body which, dating from the middle of the eighteenth century, had, from time to time, offered prizes for specimens of British textile, ceramic, and other manufactures; but the project of holding a competitive Exhibition on an international scale originated with the Prince himself. |His Proposal for a Great Exhibition.| In the course of July 1849 he had laid his proposals before some of the members of the Society, and means were at once adopted to arouse the interest of manufacturers at home, abroad, and in the colonies, and to56 open negotiations with foreign governments. The idea caught on at once; the States of Europe were at peace, and nothing could more surely tend to obliterate the recollection of recent disturbances than to join in friendly rivalry in the arts of peace. |Adoption of the Scheme.| A Royal Commission was appointed to carry out the preparations, and the scheme was formally inaugurated on March 21, 1850, at a banquet given by the Lord Mayor to the Chief Magistrates of all the towns in the United Kingdom, to which Prince Albert and the foreign Ambassadors were also invited.
A. Master. B. Purser. C. Clerk. D. Midshipman. E. Rear-Admiral. F. Petty Officer. G. Boatswain. H. Carpenter. J. Seaman.
UNIFORMS OF THE BRITISH NAVY, 1837.
In the early part of the reign there was no regulation dress for seamen, and even in the case of officers the regulations were not enforced as they are now.
Somerset House had been placed at the disposal of the Commissioners for the purposes of the Exhibition, but the fervour with which all nations embraced the idea soon made it manifest that no permanent edifice could contain more than a small fraction of the exhibits. There was no time to be lost—the 1st of May 1851 had been fixed for the opening ceremony. |Competing Designs.| The difficulty was not the cost, for a guarantee fund of £200,000 had been speedily subscribed; but the designs and specifications had to be submitted, the materials prepared, and the erection completed, all within the space of nine months. A site in Hyde Park was chosen, and the Commissioners set to work to examine no fewer than 245 designs and specifications sent in by architects all over the world. |Mr. Paxton’s selected.| They had almost decided in favour of a design by a French architect, when a certain Mr. Joseph Paxton—not a professional architect, but superintendent of the Duke of Devonshire’s gardens at Chatsworth—produced a scheme so original and simple that it was adopted at once in preference to all others. It was an enormous conservatory of glass and iron—1,848 feet long, 408 feet broad, and 66 feet high—with transepts constructed so as to contain some of the elms still growing in Hyde Park. The decision of the Commissioners was not arrived at till July 26: not a single casting or piece of material had been prepared yet; but the contractors, Messrs. Fox, Henderson & Co., undertook to deliver the building ready for painting and fitting on December 31. |Erection of the Crystal Palace.| The ground lying between Albert Gate and Knightsbridge Barracks on the east and west, between Rotten Row and St. George’s Place on the north and south, was handed over to them on July 30; the first column was raised on September 26, and on the stipulated day Messrs. Fox and Henderson handed over the structure of the Crystal Palace, as it was called, to the Commissioners. Though the great fabric vanished with the leaves of a single summer, yet this achievement of the contractors deserves record among the most famous exploits of industrial enterprise, affording, as it did, a practical57 illustration of the dominant object of the Great Exhibition, as Prince Albert had defined it in his speech at the Mansion House; namely, “To give us a true test and living picture of the point of development at which the whole of mankind has arrived ... a new starting point from which all nations will be able to direct their further exertions.”
A. Seaman (Full Dress). B. First Class Petty Officer, White (Summer) Full Dress. C. Chief Petty Officer. D. Seaman (Landing Order). E. Admiral. F. Captain. G. Midshipman. H. Lieutenant. J. Boatswain.
UNIFORMS OF THE BRITISH NAVY, 1897.
There were frondeurs, of course, as there always are in the projection of any scheme involving novelty; and the Times lent its sonorous voice to swell the clamour raised against the desecration of Hyde Park by the introduction of a commercial speculation. It may appear to some that the British retain to this day some traces of insular prejudice against foreigners, but such a feeling was far more prevalent in 1850 than one is apt to realise now. |Colonel Sibthorp denounces the Scheme.| It found fitting expression in the House of Commons from the lips of Colonel Sibthorp, who declared that “when Free Trade had left nothing else wanting to complete the ruin of the Empire, the devil had suggested the idea of the Great Exhibition, so that the foreigners who had first robbed us of our trade might now be enabled to rob us of our honour.”D The circumstances of the moment secured the gallant Colonel more sympathy than his grotesque speech and exaggerated fears would otherwise have won for him. The Protestant spirit of England had taken alarm at a Papal bull re-establishing in Great Britain a hierarchy of bishops deriving titles from the sees to which they were appointed. |Papal Titles in Great Britain.| This might have seemed a higher compliment to Great Britain than the arrangement under which the Roman Catholic bishops, which had existed ever since the Reformation, held their appointments, under fictitious titles in partibus infidelium. But a good deal had occurred in recent years to arouse Protestant jealousy of Papal aggression. The Tractarian movement had resulted in the secession of Newman, Manning, and other conspicuous clergy and laymen to the Church of Rome;58 people both in London and Rome had begun to prognosticate a general secession from the Church of England, and there was something peculiarly startling in the appointment at this juncture of Cardinal Wiseman as Archbishop of Westminster. |Popular Indignation.| Most Englishmen greatly preferred that the Pope should continue to regard and call them “infidels,” than that he should be permitted to bring them under his immediate patronage in this formal and ostentatious manner; and the feeling of irritation was intensified by Wiseman’s pastoral letter to the English people on October 7, 1850, in which the new Archbishop announced that “your beloved country has received a place among the fair churches which, normally constituted, form the splendid aggregate of Catholic communion.” Either the Protestant Reformation, for which Great Britain had paid so heavy a price, was a precious reality, in which case, so it appeared to most Englishmen, this was an insolent and significant aggression by the Court of Rome, or it was an obsolete blunder, and Rome was going to forgive it and resume her spiritual sway over our people.
THE BOY WHO CHALKED UP “NO POPERY,” AND THEN RAN AWAY.
Lord John Russell’s Ecclesiastical Titles Bill of February was materially modified and made much less stringent before it was reintroduced in March.
The Prime Minister lost no time in showing how the affair presented itself to his mind. |The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill.| Within less than a month he had proclaimed that the Pope’s action was “a pretension of supremacy over the realm of England, and a claim to sole and undivided sway, which is inconsistent with the Queen’s supremacy, with the rights of our bishops and clergy, and with the spiritual independence of the nation as asserted even in Roman Catholic times”; and he vindicated the sincerity of these expressions by introducing, immediately after the meeting of Parliament in February 1851, a Bill to prevent the assumption by Roman Catholics of titles taken from any place within the United Kingdom.
Portrait Gallery.
THOMAS CARLYLE,
1795–1881.
The son of a stonemason; born at Ecclefechan, Dumfries, and educated at Edinburgh University. His essays and historical writings, set forth in virile and rugged English, have had a very great influence on literature and on popular thought, both in England and America. “Sartor Resartus” appeared in 1833–4; the “French Revolution” in 1837; “Cromwell’s Letters and Speeches” in 1847; “Frederick the Great” in 1858–65.
It was a hazardous measure to steer through the Imperial Parliament. Outside popular passion was aflame; effigies of the Pope and Wiseman, sixteen feet high, had been dragged through the streets of London on the Fifth of November instead of the usual Guy Faux. On the other hand, both the Radicals and the Irish Catholics in the House might be counted on to offer fiercest opposition to the Bill. Ministers themselves dreaded enacting anything that savoured of religious intolerance, and the Queen herself has left on record her feelings about the subject.
“I would never have consented,” she wrote to the Duchess of Gloucester, “to anything which breathed a spirit of intolerance. Sincerely Protestant as I have always been, and always shall be, and indignant as I am at those who call themselves Protestants while they are, in fact, quite the contrary, I much regret the unchristian and intolerant spirit exhibited by many people at the public meetings. I cannot bear to hear the violent abuse of the Catholic religion, which is so painful and so cruel towards the many good and innocent Roman Catholics. However, we must hope and trust this excitement will soon cease, and that the wholesome effect of it upon our own Church will be lasting.”
No wiser words have ever been written or spoken by a monarch. It was both necessary and desirable to give effect to the national repugnance to spiritual interference; but it was imperative that spiritual freedom should be left absolutely unfettered. The progress of the measure through the House59 of Commons was like that of Samson’s foxes through the Philistines’ corn; it kindled every slumbering sentiment of acrimony and hatred. The Radicals, through Mr. Roebuck, exclaimed against it as “one of the meanest, pettiest, and most futile measures that ever disgraced even bigotry itself.” The Irish employed all their inexhaustible resources in resistance; nor was their opposition modified in the least degree by the Government agreeing to exclude Ireland from the Bill. Nevertheless, after four nights’ debate on the motion for leave to introduce the Bill, the division list showed a majority of 332 in favour of it.
THE FIRST OF MAY, 1851.
The Duke of Wellington presenting a casket to his godson, Prince Arthur (Duke of Connaught). The Prince Consort holds a plan of the Great Exhibition, which is seen in the distance.
But just as Peel fell on the morrow of his great victory on the Corn Laws, so within a week of the division on the Ecclesiastical Titles Bill Russell encountered defeat in resisting a motion to extend the Franchise. He resigned office: the Queen sent for Lord Stanley, who recommended that an attempt should be made by Russell to form a coalition Cabinet with the help of the party of the late Robert Peel. |Defeat of Ministers on the Question of the Franchise.| But the recent debate had raised implacable bitterness between the Peelites and the Whigs. Next, Lord Aberdeen refused to attempt the formation of a Ministry, on the ground that no Ministry could stand which would not undertake to deal with Papal aggression, which he was determined not to do. Lord Stanley then reluctantly tried his hand and failed. The situation was more embarrassing than any that had arisen since 1812, when the Lords Wellesley, Moira, Grey, and Grenville had successively failed to form a Cabinet. The deadlock brought about a touching incident. Her Majesty resolved to ask the advice of her well-tried servant, the Duke of Wellington, then in60 his eighty-third year. He gave it in terms as concise as one of his own general orders: “That the party still filling the offices, till Her Majesty’s pleasure shall be declared, is the one best calculated to carry on the Government at the present moment.” |Lord Russell Resumes.| On March 3, therefore, Lord John Russell, on Her Majesty’s invitation, returned to office. The Ecclesiastical Titles Bill was resumed, but the more stringent clauses were withdrawn, and in the form in which it finally received the Royal Assent it did no more than declare the illegality of the English titles assumed by the Roman Catholic hierarchy.E
THE OPENING CEREMONY OF THE GREAT EXHIBITION OF 1851.
The Queen, Prince Consort, Duchess of Kent, and the Royal Children on the Dais; members of the Ministry on the left; Foreign Ambassadors on the right.
While this agitation and these debates were in progress, it may be believed that many people were far from hospitably disposed towards the crowds of foreigners which the Great Exhibition was designed to draw to London. |Opening of the Great Exhibition.| But all hostile criticism was reduced, first to whispers, by the marvellous success of the structure itself, and then to silence, by the splendour of the opening ceremony and of the display within the building. It is the poet’s gift to store the essence of events in very small phials, and Thackeray’s May Day Ode vividly reflects the feelings of the nation on that far-off spring morning:
A generation has sprung up since that day, satiated with marvels and surprised by no achievement of hand and brain. But no such visible, tangible accomplishment in the arts of peace had ever been manifested up to that time; if Prince Albert’s idea had been one of startling novelty, the celerity of its realisation was still more startling.
HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE CONSORT.
From the Portrait painted in 1859.
62 “God bless my dearest Albert!” wrote the Queen with no feigned emotion, “God bless my dearest country, which has shown itself so great to-day! One felt so grateful to the great God, who seemed to pervade all and bless all.”
THE WHITE STAR LINE R.M.S. “TEUTONIC” AS AN ARMED CRUISER AT THE NAVAL REVIEW, August 4, 1889.
Addressing the members of the Institute of Naval Architects on March 30, 1887, upon the “Merchant Service and the Royal Navy,” Sir N. Barnaby, late Director of Naval Construction, referred to the arrangements which had then recently been completed between the Admiralty and the White Star and other Companies for the retention of their steamers for war purposes, and pointed out that “this seed, for which we have to thank Mr. Ismay, was planted at the Admiralty nine years ago; ... the outcome of proposals made by Mr. Ismay as far back as 1878,” when he urged upon the attention of the Admiralty that a fast mail or passenger steamer might be as efficient a factor in a naval war as an ordinary war cruiser, and offered to make an agreement to hold at the disposal of the Admiralty, upon terms then specified, certain ships for the purposes of the State in time of war.
More than mere womanly emotion, this, in presence of an exciting scene. The May Day poet put on it the same interpretation:
One note of discord, and one only, was heard; rather, one note necessary to make the complete harmony was silent. It would have fulfilled the international character of the Exhibition and emphasised it as an echo of the message of peace on earth and goodwill towards men had the Corps Diplomatique availed themselves of Prince Albert’s invitation to present an address to the Queen. But, strangely as it may sound at the present day, most of the great Continental rulers held severely aloof from the whole project of the Exhibition. They were apprehensive of the effect which contact with English institutions, so dangerously liberal, might have on their own subjects, and the foreign Ambassadors agreed, by a majority of three, to decline to present an address.
The success of the opening ceremony attended the Exhibition to its close on October 15. |Its Success and Close.| Between six and seven millions of persons visited it, and the surplus funds accruing to the Commissioners, amounting to upwards of £200,000, were afterwards applied, on Prince Albert’s suggestion, to the purchase of the South Kensington estate, now occupied by various institutions for the encouragement of Science and Art.
As inaugurating an era of universal peace, which its most enthusiastic supporters expected it to do, the Great Exhibition of 1851 proved a failure; but as a means of diffusing among the people of Great Britain views about foreigners more enlightened than those they entertained before, as an impetus to commerce and manufacture and a stimulus to artistic production, the “Crystal Palace” has fully fulfilled the most sanguine anticipation.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE.
Buckingham Palace occupies the site of old Buckingham House, which was altered and enlarged to fit it for a Royal Residence by John Nash in the reigns of George IV. and William IV. It was altered again in 1837 for Queen Victoria, and the east front (that shown in the Illustration) added in 1850, when the Marble Arch was removed from the front of the Palace to its present site at the north east corner of Hyde Park. The lake in the foreground is the ornamental water in St. James’s Park.
CHAPTER VII.
1851–1853.
Louis Napoleon’s Coup d’État—Condemned in the English Press—Lord Palmerston’s Indiscretion Rebuked by the Queen—He Repeats it and is Removed from Office—Opening of the New Houses of Parliament—French Invasion Apprehended—Russell’s Militia Bill—Defeat and Resignation of Ministers—The “Who? Who?” Cabinet—Death of the Duke of Wellington—His Funeral—The Haynau Incident—General Election—Disraeli’s First Budget—Defeat and Resignation of Ministers—The Coalition Cabinet—Expansion of the British Colonies—Repeal of the Transportation Act.
THE Great Exhibition closed on October 15, 1851, and hardly had the contractors begun to dismantle the glittering fabric, before the vision of universal peace, which some |Louis Napoleon’s Coup d’État.| spirits had hailed in it, was rudely shattered by events in France. The coup d’état whereby Prince Louis Napoleon Bonaparte seized on the government of the country and suspended the Constitution took place on the morning of December 2. This event concerns the present narrative only in one respect. When the news came to England it caused an almost unanimous feeling of horror at the massacre of peaceful citizens. The Queen, who was at Osborne, was informed on December 4 of what had taken place, and at once wrote to the Prime Minister, enjoining on him the necessity “that Lord Normanby (her Ambassador at Paris) should be instructed to remain entirely passive, and should take no part whatever in what is passing.” These instructions were conveyed to Lord Normanby next day by the Foreign Minister, Lord Palmerston. But, in a despatch written by Lord Normanby to Lord Palmerston on December 6, informing him that he had made known to M. Turgot, the French Foreign Minister, that he had received Her Majesty’s commands to make no change in his relations with the French Government in consequence of what had passed, the following startling passage occurred:—“Monsieur Turgot said that ... he had two days since heard from M. Walewski (French Ambassador in London) that your lordship had expressed to him your entire approbation of the act of the President, and the conviction that he could not have acted otherwise than he had done.”
THE “JUDICIOUS BOTTLE-HOLDER,” OR DOWNING STREET PET.
“Bless you! it’s all chaff—won’t came to a fight. Old Nick’s got no constitution—and then, I’m Bottle-holder on t’other side, too!”
|Lord Palmerston’s Indiscretion.| On reading a statement attributed to her Foreign Minister so far at variance with her own opinion and the decision of her Cabinet, the Queen wrote to Lord John Russell, asking him if “he knew anything about the alleged approval, which, if true, would again expose the honour and dignity of the Queen’s Government in the eyes of the world.”
H.M.S. “BRITANNIA,” 1837.
This, the most formidable line-of battle ship afloat at the time of Her Majesty’s Accession, was built in 1820 and carried 120 guns. She was the Flag ship at Portsmouth from 1835 to 1840. In 1850 she was converted into a Training Ship, and was finally broken up in 1869. The Silver Model, from which this Illustration was photographed, was presented to Her Majesty the Queen, together with a similar one of the ill-fated Victoria—the typical ship of 1887—by the officers and men of the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, and Auxiliary Naval Forces, and was exhibited amongst the Jubilee Presents.
This “first class battleship,” which has but lately undergone her sea trials, is of the same size as the Majestic and the Magnificent. She was built by the Clydebank Shipbuilding Company, and may be taken as the representative ship of the year. Displacement, 15,000 tons; horse-power, 12,000; speed, 17½ knots.
The word “again” used by the Queen in this letter had reference to Lord Palmerston’s action in regard to the visit of Kossuth, the Hungarian refugee, to England in the previous October. There had been much sympathy in England with the cause of Hungarian independence; Kossuth had been fêted in many towns as an illustrious patriot and exile, and Palmerston consented to receive a visit from him. This was more than the susceptibilities of the Austrian Government could endure; Russell having summoned a Cabinet Council to consider the intended reception by the Foreign Minister, Palmerston reluctantly yielded to the opinion of his colleagues, and the reception was given up. But he consoled himself by receiving at the Foreign Office addresses from Radical meetings, in which the Emperors of Russia and Austria were described as “odious and detestable assassins” and “merciless tyrants and despots”; and, in expressing himself “extremely flattered and highly gratified” at the terms directed towards himself, he added that “it could not be expected that he should concur in some of the expressions which had been used in the addresses.” It was in receiving the deputation conveying these addresses that this characteristically English Minister earned one of his most-enduring nicknames. He said in the course of his speech that the conduct of Foreign Affairs required “a great deal of good generalship and judgment, and during the pending struggle a good deal of judicious bottle-holding was obliged to be brought into play.” However much this allusion to the prize65 ring may have scandalised some of the “unco guid,” it was just one of those sayings that tickle the popular fancy, and the “Judicious Bottle-holder” furnished the subject of one of Punch’s lively cartoons.
The Boxer, a twin-screw vessel, built by Messrs. Thornycroft, of Chiswick, is one of the fastest ships in the world. Her length is 200 feet; speed, 29·17 knots. Her sister-ship, the Desperate, has steamed 30 knots.
The Victoria was built in 1887 by Sir W. G. Armstrong, Mitchell. & Co., and was one of three “first-class armourclads” which were armed with 110-ton guns—the heaviest ordnance ever made. She was of steel, 10,500 tons displacement. The loss of this magnificent ship, with the Admiral, 30 officers, and 320 men out of a crew of 600, on the 22nd June 1893, through colliding with H.M.S. Camperdown while executing manœuvres off the Syrian coast, is one of the most tragic events in recent history.
But it was necessary to put a check on the Foreign Secretary’s recklessness. It was intimated to him that his conduct was calculated to place the Sovereign in a most painful position towards her allies, and this rebuke, Russell wrote to the Queen, it was hoped would “have its effect on Lord Palmerston.” This incident closed on December 4, only two days after the French coup d’état, and when it became apparent that the Foreign Secretary had perpetrated a further indiscretion, strong measures had to be taken. The dismissal of a Minister is an extreme exertion of the Royal Prerogative, though it is one that was not uncommon in former reigns. Nevertheless, it is the only expedient when a Minister refuses to carry out the policy of the Queen’s Government or enters upon an independent one of his own.
After some correspondence between Russell and Palmerston, the former wrote, on December 17, informing Palmerston “that the conduct of Foreign Affairs could no longer be left in his hands with advantage to the country,” and offering him the Lord-Lieutenancy of Ireland. |Dismissal of Palmerston.|Of course Lord Palmerston resigned, and the Queen accepted the resignation. “The distinction,” wrote Her Majesty to the Prime Minister, “which Lord Palmerston tries to establish between his personal and his official acts is perfectly untenable.”
This is the latest of the “first class cruisers”; displacement, 14,200 tons; horse-power, 25,000; speed, 22 knots. Built by the Clydebank Shipbuilding Company.
In this year (1852) the Houses of Lords and Commons took possession of the new Palace of Westminster, built from the design of Barry on the site of the old Palace, destroyed by fire in 1835. The style of architecture selected—the Tudor-Gothic—is not one which lends itself readily to grand or massive treatment, owing to the infinite repetition66 of detailed ornament; but it has this to recommend it, that it is exclusively indigenous to England, and the architect was successful in erecting on a very unpromising site a crowning example of that particular form of Gothic building. |The New Houses of Parliament.| The cost of the new Palace as it stands amounted to about £3,000,000; but it should be said that Barry’s design has never been completed. It was intended to extend the buildings to form a quadrangle round the court at the foot of the Clock Tower, to accommodate various Public Departments now housed in Whitehall and Downing Street.
THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
The political convulsions in France were mildly reflected in Great Britain during the year 1852—the year of three Administrations. In the first-named country, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, Prince-President of the Republic which he had turned into a farce, had secured the good will of the Army by restoring to them their Napoleonic Eagles, and then, with the whole armed force of the nation at his back, had issued an appeal to the people in the form of a plebiscite. By 7,824,189 votes to 253,145 they had bestowed on him the title and dignity of Emperor Napoleon III. Such an appeal and such a response could only be interpreted as the resurrection of the Napoleonic idea. |French Invasion Apprehended.| In the forefront of the policy of the new Emperor must surely be found vengeance for Waterloo and the humiliation of England. If this was not expressed in so many words, there were frequent passages in the speeches of Louis Napoleon which could bear no other interpretation. England awoke to her danger; the “nation of shopkeepers” did not wait for legislative measures, but quietly began arming and drilling, encouraged by the authorities, thus laying the foundation of that splendid defensive force of artillery and infantry of which the Volunteers are composed at this day. Great Britain possessed in 1852 a small army—about 24,000 infantry at home—absolutely without any reserve force. The Cabinet devised a scheme for creating a local Militia, to be drilled for fourteen days in each year, and to serve exclusively within their own counties. |Resignation of Ministers.| Prince Albert saw grave defects in the plan, and the Duke of Wellington liked it even less than he did; nevertheless Lord John Russell introduced his Bill to give effect to it. Then came Palmerston’s opportunity. He was a free agent now, and rendered good service in opposing an inadequate and almost wholly useless measure.67 On his motion the Government were defeated by eleven votes on February 20, and next day the resignation of Ministers was in the hands of the Queen. The Earl of Derby (the irreconcilable Lord Stanley of Peel’s Cabinet) undertook to form a Ministry, which, inasmuch as it could only be drawn from Protectionist ranks, was in a hopeless minority in the House of Commons. Lord Malmesbury took the seals of the Foreign Office, and Mr. Disraeli became, per saltum, Chancellor of the Exchequer and Leader of the House of Commons—an instance unique in recent times of such a position being assumed by one who had never before held office. |The “Who? Who?” Cabinet.| The rest of the Cabinet was made up of men then untried and unknown, though some of them afterwards rose to distinction, and got the name of the “Who? Who?” Ministry. The origin of the nickname was a conversation overheard in the House of Lords between the Prime Minister and the Duke of Wellington, who was eagerly questioning Lord Derby about the composition of his new Cabinet. The old Duke had grown very deaf, and all his inquiries were plainly audible to the House, as well, of course, as the Premier’s replies. “Who? Who?” asked the old Duke, as, hand to ear, he strove to identify the unfamiliar names, and “Who? Who?” became the title of the new Government. Weak as it was, however, and holding office as it did on sufferance only, the Derby Ministry was able to prepare and carry a Militia Bill which satisfied even so critical an expert as the Iron Duke himself.
THE FUNERAL OF THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON PASSING APSLEY HOUSE, November 18, 1852.
THE PROTECTION GIANT.
“Fee, fi, fo, fum!
I smell the blood of an Englishman!
Be he alive or be he dead,
I’ll grind his bones to make my bread!”
(Mr. Punch’s idea of the policy of Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli.)
Brief as was the duration of the Derby Ministry it outlived the days of one of its warmest friends. The Duke of Wellington drew his last breath at Walmer Castle on September 14, 1852. |Death of the Duke of Wellington.| To say that he was the most popular individual in the United Kingdom would be to apply a term which perhaps, of all others, he would have relished least; but without doubt “the Duke” was the best beloved. The first soldier in Europe, thirty-seven years of peace had not dimmed the lustre of his great renown in war, nor prevailed to68 make the nation forget his services in the hour of England’s greatest need. If, as a statesman, he could not command the same unanimous meed of “Well done!” he had established a standard of public life too often obscured in the heat of party strife. Vittoria, Salamanca, Talavera, Waterloo—the radiance from those far off conflagrations still glowed round that venerable head, but it was the honest purpose, bluntly spoken and fearlessly acted on, that won for Wellington a place in the hearts of his countrymen far more enduring than the reward of any commander, however successful—of any orator, however powerful.
AS IT IS TO BE WHEN COMPLETED.
From a Photograph taken in the Cathedral, to which the statue has been added from the sculptor’s model in the Architectural Court of the South Kensington Museum. The lower illustration represents the sarcophagus in the Crypt which contains the body of the Duke; the Funeral Car is also preserved in the Crypt. The tomb in the background is that of Nelson.
There was the precedent of the obsequies of Nelson to justify the Queen in commanding a funeral of the Great Duke at the public expense; but Her Majesty was desirous to associate her people with herself in doing honour to the memory of her greatest subject. The body of the Duke, therefore, was put in charge of a guard of honour till the meeting of Parliament in November, when the consent of both Houses was immediately given to a funeral at the public expense and the interment of Wellington in St. Paul’s Cathedral, beside the tomb of Nelson. All the Great Powers of Europe, save one, sent representatives to the ceremony. It would have caused no surprise had France, with a Napoleon once more in supreme power, refused to allow her Ambassador to attend the funeral of her ancient foe, but Louis Napoleon told Count Walewski he wished to forget the past and to continue on the best of terms with England. It was not France, but Austria, who was conspicuous by the absence of her Ambassador from St. Paul’s on this November day; and the reason was found in an extraordinary circumstance which had occurred a few weeks previously. |The Haynau Incident.| An Austrian notable, General Haynau, arrived in England early in September, on an unofficial visit. He had earned an unenviable reputation for cruelty in putting down insurrections in Italy and Hungary; ugly stories had been circulated about the flogging of Hungarian women and other barbarities, enough, whether true or not, to make his name detested by all who sympathised with the national movement on the Continent. One day he went to inspect Barclay’s brewery, and as soon as his identity with the “Austrian butcher” became known to the workmen there, they rushed at him with loud cries, pelted him, tore his coat and tried to cut off his long moustaches. Escaping from the brewery, he was assailed with equal fury in the69 street, and had to take refuge in a public house till the police came to his assistance. The Austrian Chargé d’Affaires appealed for redress, and Lord Palmerston called in person to express the deep regret of Her Majesty’s Government at the outrage.
WEIGHING ANCHOR ON A MODERN WARSHIP.
This Photograph was taken on board H.M.S. Repulse, off the Isle of Portland. A portion of the anchor, covered with mud, is seen just over the ship’s side. The ships in the background are H.M.S. Resolution (on the left), and H.M.S. Royal Sovereign (in the centre).
H.M.S. “WARRIOR,” THE FIRST ENGLISH IRONCLAD.
The first ironclad built was the Gloire, designed by M. Dupuy-de-Lôme for the French Government. It was regarded by the English Naval Authorities as of doubtful practical value; but it soon became necessary for them to adopt the principle of defensive armour for our own ships. The Warrior, built by private contract at a cost of £376,000, was completed in October, 1861. She has a length of 380 feet, breadth 58 feet, displacement 9,210 tons, horse-power 1,250; and, whilst she has the general form of a wooden ship, with overhanging bows and stern, she embodied many of the ideas—such as that of watertight compartments—which have been adopted in all the more recent warships.
Parliament had been prorogued on July 1 by the Queen in person and dissolved immediately after by Royal Proclamation. The elections which followed left the relative strength of parties nearly the same as in the old Parliament, that is, with no working majority on either side. |Disraeli’s First Budget.| The new Parliament met on November 4, and on December 3 Mr. Disraeli introduced his Budget in a speech which lasted five hours. The debate which followed is memorable as the occasion of the first encounter between two men who, for a quarter of a century afterwards, were to be as conspicuously the protagonists of their respective parties as Pitt and Fox had been at the beginning of the century. Disraeli—by this time fully conscious, and embittered by the consciousness, that he was fighting for a losing cause—concluded a speech full of stinging invective at two o’clock on the morning of December 11. To answer him rose one whom Macaulay had described in 1838 as “the rising hope of those stern and unbending Tories who follow reluctantly and mutinously a leader (Peel) whose experience is indispensable to them, but whose cautious temper and moderate opinions they abhor.” Mr. Gladstone had been a Member of Parliament for more than twenty years, and was already distinguished for power and poignancy in debate; but the moment had come when, for the first time, the House of Commons was to come under the full influence of his superb command of language, his impressive use of gesture and his singularly resonant voice.
Gladstone’s speech closed the debate on Disraeli’s First Budget, and it was decisive. The Government suffered defeat by nineteen votes, and next day Lord Derby went to Osborne to tender his resignation. Her Majesty laid her commands on the Earl of Aberdeen who, as a Peelite Conservative, assisted by the Whig Marquis of Lansdowne, proceeded to form a Coalition Cabinet.
THE GREAT STEAM-HAMMER AT WOOLWICH ARSENAL.
Maximum striking power, 1,000 tons.
Before entering upon a review of the events which brought to a violent close the peace which Great Britain had maintained for thirty-nine years with the other European Powers, the present seems a fitting place to give a sketch of salient points in the expansion of British Colonies in various parts of the world—Colonies which, for the greater part, had no existence before Queen Victoria came to the throne. |Expansion of British Colonies.| It was in 1858 that the discoveries of gold in British territory, as well as in California, had begun to fill the channels of trade and enrich the manufacturers of the home country in a degree beyond all previous experience. The great Continent of Australia, discovered by Captain Cook in 1770 and by him named New South Wales, was hardly known to people in England during the first forty years of the present century except as a penal settlement, although a number of British emigrants found their way there when the Army and Navy were reduced after the long European wars had come to an end in 1815. But it was not until the gold-fields were discovered in 1851 that the full tide of immigration set in. The growth and development of the European community since that time have been immense. From the original settlement at Botany Bay in 1788 have arisen the States of New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, and Western Australia, each with its separate representative constitution and legislature, and a governor appointed by the Queen. The population, rapidly increasing, already amounts to three millions and a quarter, with an annual export trade of more than £70,000,000. The gold-fields, since their discovery in 1851, have added about £300,000,000 to the wealth of the world, nor is there any near prospect of the supply failing. On the contrary, the newly-opened mines at Coolgardie, in Western Australia, promise to prove the richest field in the whole island.
THE SOUTH BORING MILL AT WOOLWICH ARSENAL.
Showing the machinery for boring and rifling heavy ordnance.
New Zealand was first colonised in 1839, though Europeans had settled there as far back as 1814, and in 1841 it was created by letters patent a colony distinct from New South Wales. The chief wealth of this island is pastoral and agricultural, though New Zealand contributes also to the Pactolus flowing north, having exported gold to the value of more than a million sterling in 1895.
Tasmania, formerly Van Diemen’s Land, is another insular possession of Great Britain in the South Pacific, originally occupied in 1803 as a penal71 settlement; and the Australasian Dominions of the Crown were completed by the annexation of the Fiji group of islands in 1874, and British New Guinea in 1888. This vast territory, with its almost inexhaustible mineral wealth and fertility, may be said with almost literal accuracy to be the peculiar creation of the reign of Queen Victoria.
In 1853 an important change in the penal code of Great Britain was effected by the Act altering the punishment of transportation of convicts into that of penal servitude. |Repeal of the Transportation Act.| The Lord Chancellor admitted, in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, that transportation answered the end of punishment better than anything else which could be devised; it was the strongest deterrent, short of a capital sentence, which could be employed without the infliction of physical pain, and, had the United Kingdom only been concerned, no alteration in the law would have been proposed. But the interests of the Colonies must be taken into account also; the strong representations laid before the Government by the Colonists, coupled with the extraordinary discoveries of gold in Australia, made it imperative that these growing communities should cease to be the slumping ground for the refuse of British civilisation, and other provision must be made for the disposal of criminals. The measure became law, and the Australasian settlements, relieved from the slur which had become wellnigh intolerable, entered on a career of expansion and profitable industry of which no man can yet foretell the ultimate result.
THE BRITISH EMPIRE, 1897.
British possessions shaded or underlined. Views of the principal Colonial towns are given on subsequent pages. * Egypt under British occupation since 1882.
Besides British India, of which the growth and consolidation is described elsewhere, the chief expansion of the Empire and its protectorate during the present reign has taken place in South Africa. The Cape Colony was ceded to the British Crown in 1814; the Colony of Natal was added to it in 1843, was erected into a separate Colony in 1856, and was made self-governing in 1893. Basutoland was annexed to the Cape Colony in 1871, but in 1884 it was constituted a separate Crown Colony, and neither it nor Bechuanaland, which, having been annexed in 1885, is governed from the Cape, have yet developed representative institutions.
TORPEDO STORES AT PORTSMOUTH.
Containing Torpedoes to the value of £150,000.
In dealing with its great Dominion in South Africa the British Government is confronted with a problem which has never presented itself in Australasia. There the aboriginal population has died72 out everywhere, except in New Zealand, from the mere contact with civilisation, and, except in the Island of New Guinea of which the Germans possess a moiety, British influence is not hampered by any competing European race. But it is far otherwise in South Africa. There, also, what may be regarded as the aboriginal races, the Hottentots and Bushmen, have been crushed wellnigh out of existence, but they have been replaced on the one hand by the powerful Bantu people, consisting of Kaffirs, Zulus, Bechuanas, and other Negroid tribes, and on the other by the Boers, descended from Dutch settlers of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. The Administration of South Africa has to provide for the development of British enterprise and to secure peaceful relations between the diverse elements of the population. It cannot be doubted that South Africa contains the material of enormous wealth. The climate of the high veldt, a wide belt of land ranging between 4,000 and 5,000 feet above sea-level, is exceedingly salubrious. Diamonds and gold already have been worked in large quantities, though a few years ago their very existence was unsuspected. At the present time the yield of gold is equal to that of either Australia or America, amounting to one-fifth of the total annual output of the world. Should the gold ever be worked out there is abundant mineral wealth of other kinds, including an almost virgin coal-field, covering an area of nearly a thousand square miles between Pretoria and Delagoa Bay.
A LANDING-PARTY OF SEAMEN.
Punch, at the time of the Siege of Sebastopol, depicted a couple of seamen, on board a man-of-war off that town, asking for a day’s holiday “to go shooting with them soldiers.” On the same principle of sharing the fun it has come to be the practice to include a party of bluejackets among the forces engaged in any of our “little wars.”
In America, the most notable feature in the recent history of the British possessions is found in the growth of wealth and population in the Dominion of Canada. It has been shown how that Colony rose in rebellion in the first year of the present reign, and how Lord Durham framed a Constitution for it in his report. Lord Durham died, and his scheme lay in a pigeon-hole of the Colonial Office till 1867, when it was virtually carried into effect by Lord Carnarvon’s Act for the Confederation of the British North American Provinces. Upper and Lower Canada, the English and French territories of the rebellion, are now known as the Provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and with them are confederated New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, British Columbia, Manitoba, and the North-West Territories. The population of Canada has risen from about one million and a half in 1841 to five millions at the present day, and progress in commerce and wealth has been equally rapid.
EVENING AT BALMORAL OLD CASTLE—THE STAGS BROUGHT HOME.—September 1853.
CHAPTER VIII.
1853–1854.
The “Sick Man”—Position of the Eastern Question—Projects of the Emperor Nicholas—The Custody of the Holy Places—Prince Menschikoff’s Demand—Russian Invasion of Moldo-Wallachia—The Vienna Note—Declaration of War by the Porte—Destruction of the Turkish Fleet—Resignation of Lord Palmerston—Great Britain and France Declare War with Russia—State of the British Armaments.
“WE have on our hands a sick man—a very sick man; it will be a great misfortune if one of these days he should slip away from us before the necessary arrangements have been made.”
|The “Sick Man.”|This sentence, spoken on January 9, 1853, by Nicholas, Czar of Russia, to the British Minister at St. Petersburg, Sir George Hamilton Seymour, supplied a phrase which has become historic, and remains as appropriate to the present state of Turkey-in-Europe as it was forty-four years ago. The Ottoman Empire in Europe had become an anachronism, not because it was a heritage won by mediæval conquest, for that may be assigned as the origin of almost every European State, but because the Turk maintained his rule in modern times by mediæval methods. In the days when nations were kept in subjection by the violence of their governors, the Turk had been a standing menace to all Europe, for he was as powerful as any Christian Monarch; but in proportion as the other nationalities acquired the solidarity which follows on the growth of constitutional rights and the limitation of absolute rule, he became a terror only to the subject races within the Ottoman dominions. To the rising tide of Western civilisation he opposed the breastwork of philosophic indifference, though the ancient Saracen instinct for war still caused him to adopt eagerly the successive inventions in military armament. The weakest principality had nothing to fear in the nineteenth century from Turkish invasion, but the most powerful states had realised that it would be a formidable task to make the Porte comply with the concert of Europe—such is the quality of genuine vis inertiæ. Nevertheless the real guarantee for the integrity of the Ottoman Empire had come to be—not her army and fleet, nor the fervour of her Moslem subjects—but the mutual jealousy and suspicion existing between other Powers regarding the disposal of Ottoman territory. It had come to this, then, that the Christian states acquiesced in the continuance of the74 Ottoman Empire in Europe as a kind of buffer state—a barrier against such a collision of interests and ambitions as might revive warfare on a Napoleonic scale. The heirs of the “sick man” dreaded his death because of the conflict sure to ensue among his heirs.
THE LARGEST GUN OF 1837.
The illustration shows a gun’s crew working the 67-cwt. gun, which was the largest in use in the early part of Her Majesty’s reign. It threw a solid shot of 68 lbs. weight. At the Rotunda at Woolwich there is a gun of this size which was used in the trenches at Sebastopol, and had its trunnions shot away.
Three European Great Powers were more closely affected than others by the Eastern question—Russia, by reason of her office as guardian of the Eastern Church, as well as by her hereditary policy of absorbing neighbouring territories—Austria, on account of her claim to the Danubian provinces of the Porte—and England, because she could not suffer the advance of Russia between her and her Asiatic dominions. The interest of England may seem to have been less direct than that of the other Powers; nevertheless, the continual encroachment of Russia in Asia, and the steady extension of the Russian frontier towards that of British North-West India, had so powerfully impressed British statesmen with the danger of a collision in that quarter, that the integrity of the Ottoman Empire had become a cardinal principle in the Continental diplomacy of England.
The huge 110-ton guns of Sir W. G. Armstrong, Mitchell, & Co. are mounted in the Sanspareil and Benbow, and the Victoria carried two of them to the bottom when she sank. There are considerable disadvantages attaching to the use of artillery so enormous, as will be understood when it is stated that the cost of each round fired with full charge and armour-piercing projectile is £200; that the gun would become practically useless after firing 75 rounds of this description (of course a much smaller charge is used when practising); and that the energy developed amounts to 60,000 foot-tons—about enough to lift the whole ship six feet in the air. For these and other reasons the 67-ton gun shown on next page is now being supplied in preference to the larger one. The 110 ton gun is capable of piercing a solid mass of wrought iron 30½ inches thick, at a distance of 1,000 yards; the much smaller 9·2-inch (22-ton) gun was tested in 1887, and threw a shot nearly 12 miles, its trajectory rising to a height greater, by 2,000 feet, than that of Mont Blanc.
But the Emperor Nicholas of Russia had convinced himself that the “sick man” was at the point of death, and that it was essential to the peace of Europe that his heirs should divide the inheritance before his demise. |Projects of the Emperor Nicholas.| The sentence at the head of this chapter was spoken by the Czar when he revived proposals which he had made to the Duke of Wellington and Lord Aberdeen, then Foreign Secretary, on the occasion of his visit to England in 1844. These proposals had been embodied in a celebrated memorandum drawn up by Count Nesselrode, to the effect that the Turkish Empire should be maintained in its integrity as long as possible, but that as soon as its fall could be averted no longer, England, Austria, and Russia should act on a common understanding and divide the dominion among themselves. Nesselrode’s memorandum had been received and placed in the archives of the Foreign Office, and no disclaimer of assent to the propositions therein had ever been made on the part of Her Majesty’s Government. Silence is often assumed to indicate consent, so when Nicholas, believing in 1853 that the Porte was indeed on the point of dissolution, renewed his proposal for a partition of the Turkish Empire, it was at least excusable that he should reckon on the co-operation of Great Britain. Lord Aberdeen, who had been Foreign Secretary when the Czar was in England in 1844, was Prime Minister in 1853. Nicholas disclaimed any intention of a Russian occupation of Constantinople; he suggested that Bulgaria and Servia might be constituted independent States under Russian protection, and declared that he would acquiesce in the annexation of Egypt and Candia by75 Great Britain. All this, and much more, he explained to Sir Hamilton Seymour, assuring him that if Great Britain and Russia came to an understanding on the subject, it mattered nothing to him how the other Powers might view it.
THE OLD ’UN AND THE YOUNG ’UN.
Old Nicholas (Emperor of Russia): “Now then, Austria; just help me to finish the Port(e).”
The Emperor of Russia, disappointed in his overtures to England, endeavoured to obtain the assistance of Austria against Turkey.
At this juncture a fresh controversy was stirred in connection with Ottoman rule. |The Custody of the Holy Places.| In the sixteenth century a treaty was concluded between the Sultan and François I., King of France, whereby the custody of the Holy Places in Palestine had been committed to the monks of the Latin Church, who were placed under the protection of the Crown of France. Subsequently firmans had been granted to the Greek Church, conferring rights at variance with the exclusive guardianship claimed by the Latin Church. Incessant disputes arose on a ludicrously minute point, such as might have puzzled diplomatists in the era of the Crusades, but one which seemed strangely out of keeping with statesmanship of the nineteenth century, namely, “whether, for the purpose of passing through the building into their grotto, the Latin monks should have the key of the chief door of the Church of Bethlehem, and also one of the keys of each of the two doors of the Sacred Manger, and whether they should be at liberty to place in the Sanctuary of the Nativity a silver star adorned with the arms of France.” The French Republic, and afterwards the French Empire, as heirs of the Crown of France, championed the cause of the Latin monks, even threatening to occupy Jerusalem; until, in February 1853, the Porte issued a firman in order to reconcile in a reasonable way the conflicting claims of the two Churches. But reason was the last influence to prevail in an unreasonable quarrel. |Prince Menschikoff’s Demand.| Russian forces, before the issue of the firman, had already begun massing on the frontiers of Moldavia, and immediately after the issue of the firman, Prince Menschikoff arrived at Constantinople with a numerous military suite, endeavoured to force on the Porte an agreement establishing a Russian protectorate of Christians within Turkish Dominions, and threatened a rupture of diplomatic relations unless this was agreed to at once. Reschid Pasha asked for a delay of five or six days to consider such a momentous question; it was refused; whereupon the Ottoman Council promptly declined to become a party to the proposed convention. Menschikoff immediately left Constantinople; the Russian Government continued warlike preparations, which were met by similar measures on the part of the Porte, as a simple measure of self-defence.
THE LARGEST GUN OF 1897.
The deck of H.M.S. Repulse cleared for action; the captain of the barbette is taking the enemy’s distance. The 67-ton guns in the foreground are the largest which are now being built; they are lowered behind the steel shield by hydraulic machinery for charging.
On July 2 the Russian army under Prince Gortchakoff crossed the Pruth and occupied the Turkish territory of Moldavia and Wallachia. |Russian Invasion and The Vienna Note.| Of course this was an act of war, but no collision actually took place, and representatives of the four Great Powers—Austria, France, Great76 Britain, and Prussia—met at Vienna in July and agreed on a Note embodying terms for the peaceful settlement of the dispute. It were natural to expect that a document of such moment should have been framed in language of the utmost precision and incapable of bearing ambiguous interpretation. Nevertheless this short Note contained five passages so vague and ambiguous that they might have been construed into giving away the whole case of Turkey, though this was undoubtedly far from the intention of the authors. Russia, perceiving her advantage, accepted the Note at once; but the Ministers of the Sultan declined to do so, unless the five objectionable passages were modified. Nesselrode stated explicitly the reasons which prevented Russia from agreeing to any modification. These reasons enlightened the British Cabinet for the first time as to the construction put on the Note by Russia, which was directly contrary to that intended by the Four Powers.
A. 11th Light Dragoons. B. 12th Lancers. C. 5th Dragoon Guards. D. 1st Lifeguards.
E. Private, Rifle Brigade. F. Private, Line. G. Private, Grenadier Guards. H. Officer, Infantry of the Line. J. Officer, 13th Light Dragoons. K. Officer, 2nd Dragoon Guards. L. Gunner, Field Battery, R.A. M. Trooper, 8th Hussars.
UNIFORMS OF THE BRITISH ARMY IN 1837.
England, therefore, was compelled to acquiesce in Turkey’s refusal to sign the Note, at the same time urging her not to regard the occupation of Moldavia and Wallachia as an act of war. The state of affairs towards the end of September is concisely described in a note written by Prince Albert to Baron Stockmar: “Meyendorff is in the Vienna Cabinet; Louis Napoleon wishes for peace, enjoyment, and cheap corn; the King of Prussia is a reed shaken by the wind; we are paralysed through not knowing what our agent in Constantinople is or is not doing; the Divan has become fanatically warlike and headstrong, and reminds one of Prussia in 1806; the public here is furiously Turkish and anti-Russian.”
On October 5 the Porte issued a formal declaration of war. On the 14th the combined fleets of England and France, which were lying in Besika Bay, moved into the Dardanelles on the invitation of the Sultan. Mediation was at an end.
A Turkish squadron of twelve sail in the Black Sea were attacked on the 30th while lying at anchor at Sinope and completely destroyed, with the loss of 4,000 men, leaving only about 400 alive. |Destruction of the Turkish Fleet.| The news of this massacre, enacted almost under the very guns of the allied fleet, spread like wildfire through France and Great Britain, and ignited every warlike spirit that still slumbered. It was alleged that the Turkish admiral had hauled down his flag before the overwhelming force which attacked him, and that the Russians had paid no attention to this signal of surrender.
The Cabinet was much more divided in opinion than the nation. Lord Palmerston, the Home Secretary, startled the nation by resigning office on December 16, not, however, as was generally assumed, on account of difference about the Eastern Question. |Resignation of Lord Palmerston.| “No one,” wrote Prince Albert, “will believe the true cause of his retirement—his dislike of Lord John’s plan of Reform, and treachery is everywhere the cry. It is the Eastern Question that has turned him out, and Court intrigues!” Everybody, in fact, believed that Palmerston had left the Cabinet rather than assent to abandoning Turkey to the tender mercies of Russia. Prince Albert was vehemently accused by a portion of the Press of being favourable to the designs of Russia: how far this was from the truth people afterwards came to learn from his own letters written while these events were in progress. The cry went forth that Palmerston was the only man who could save the honour of England; in a few days he withdrew his resignation and confidence was restored.
A. Trooper, 17th Lancers. B. Trooper, 10th Hussars. C. Trooper, 2nd Life Guards.
D. Private. Coldstream Guards. E. Trooper. 1st Royal Dragoons. F. Private, King’s Royal Rifles. G. Officer, Royal Artillery. H. Officer, Line. J. Officer, Black Watch. K. Gunner, Royal Horse Artillery. L. Private, Line.
UNIFORMS OF THE BRITISH ARMY IN 1897.
On February 7 the Russian Ministers left London and Paris; the English Minister left St. Petersburg on the same day. |Great Britain and France Declare War with Russia.| On the 27th the ultimatum of England was despatched to Count Nesselrode. On March 24 Her Majesty’s formal declaration of war against the Emperor of Russia was read from the steps of the Royal Exchange, and the reasons for this act were published at length in the London Gazette. England had been slow—culpably slow, declared Derby and Disraeli—in resorting to an appeal to arms, but, having made it, the spirit of her greatest poet pervaded the Councils of her Ministry:—
WHAT IT HAS COME TO.
Lord Aberdeen holding back the British Lion.
REVIEW OF THE CHANNEL SQUADRON BY HER MAJESTY, August 11, 1853.
A few guns of 4′7 in. and 6 in. calibre awaiting inspection.
Before the actual declaration of war, large numbers of British troops had embarked for the East, and a powerful fleet had been assembled at Spithead for service in the Baltic under Admiral Sir Charles Napier. To Prince Albert’s watchful influence must be attributed the degree to which the nation now found itself prepared for the coming struggle. For the warlike habits of our people had been lulled by the peace which, uninterrupted for nearly forty years, had prevailed between78 England and other European powers. It would be difficult to realise at this day how far the nation had lapsed into unreadiness. Prince Albert incessantly strove to arouse it from this perilous lethargy. One result of his efforts had been the establishment during the summer of 1853 of a temporary camp of exercise at Chobham, a complete novelty to the generation of that time. Aldershot, as a place of arms, had no existence then, but the system initiated at Chobham has become part of our regular military organisation. Another result had been the establishment of a permanent Channel Fleet, which was reviewed by the Queen at Spithead on August 11, 1853, and described by Prince Albert as “the finest fleet, perhaps, which England ever fitted out; forty ships of war of all kinds, all moved by steam-power but three.... The gigantic ships of war, among them the Duke of Wellington with 131 guns (a greater number than was ever assembled before in one vessel), went, without sails and propelled only by the screw, eleven miles an hour, and this against wind and tide! |State of British Armaments.| This is the greatest revolution effected in the conduct of naval warfare which has yet been known ... and will render many fleets, like the present Russian one, useless.” Speaking of men-of-war fitted with the auxiliary screw, he went on: “We have already sixteen at sea and ten in an advanced state. France has no more than two, and the other Powers none.... I write all this, because last autumn we were bewailing our defenceless state, and because you know that, without wishing to be mouche de coche, I must rejoice to see that achieved which I had struggled so long and so hard to effect.”
Great Britain, then, at the outbreak of the Russian War, possessed a fleet stronger than the combined flotillas of any other three Great Powers. Her land forces were far less satisfactory, for though they were perfectly disciplined and well-equipped according to the existing state of military science, they were few in numbers and almost totally without reserves, for the new Militia could not count for much as yet.
ROYAL SPORTS.—THE QUEEN AND PRINCE CONSORT, WITH THE PRINCE OF WALES, IN THE HIGHLANDS, 1853.
CHAPTER IX.
1854–1856.
Mr. Gladstone’s War Budget—Humiliation and Prayer—The Invasion of the Crimea—The Battle of Alma—A Fruitless Victory—Effect in England—War Correspondents—Balaklava—Cavalry Charges by the Heavy and Light Brigades—“Our’s Not to Reason Why”—Russian Sortie—Battle of Inkermann—Breakdown of Transport and Commissariat—Hurricane in the Black Sea—Florence Nightingale—Fall of the Coalition Cabinet—Lord Palmerston Forms a Ministry—Victory of the Turks at Eupatoria—Unsuccessful Attack by the Allies—Death of Lord Raglan—His Character—Battle of Tchernaya—Evacuation of Sebastopol—Surrender of Kars—Conclusion of Peace.
WHEN Mr. Gladstone introduced his War Budget on May 8, he said that the prosperity of trade and elasticity of the Revenue warranted him in meeting the expenses of the campaign out of current taxation. He calculated on this being possible by doubling the Income Tax and increasing the duty on malt and spirits. |Mr. Gladstone’s War Budget.| Lord Aberdeen, replying to Lord Roden in the House of Lords, stated that a Day of Humiliation and Prayer would be set apart for the success of British arms. The Queen immediately wrote to the Prime Minister, reminding him that she had not been consulted about this, and objecting to the term “humiliation.”
“To say (as we probably should) that the great sinfulness of the nation has brought about this war, when it is the selfishness and ambition and want of honesty of one man and his servants which has done it, while our conduct throughout has been actuated by unselfishness and honesty, would be too manifestly repulsive to the feelings of everyone, and would be a mere bit of hypocrisy. Let there be a Prayer expressive of our great thankfulness for the immense benefits we have enjoyed, and for the immense prosperity of the country, and entreating God’s help and protection in the coming struggle. In this the Queen would join heart and soul. If there is to be a day set apart, let it be for Prayer in this sense.”
The Day of Solemn Fast, Humiliation, and Prayer was fixed, but, in accordance with the Queen’s feeling, there were no abject expressions used in the Prayers prescribed, only a committal of the cause of England into the hands of the Almighty to “judge between them and her enemies.”
Her Majesty’s possession.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, 1841.
Varna, a fortified seaport of Bulgaria, on the shore of the Black Sea, half way between the Bosphorus and the mouth of the Danube, was the rendezvous appointed for the British and French forces. Lord Raglan, who, as Lord Fitzroy Somerset, had lost an arm under the Great Duke at Waterloo, was Commander-in-Chief of the British Army; Maréchal Saint-Arnaud that of the French; and the veteran Omar Pasha that of the Turkish. The Russian commanders had learnt that, whatever might be the incapacity of the Sublime Porte for rule, its troops were composed of excellent fighting material when well commanded. The Turkish garrison of Silistria, on the Danube, maintained such a stubborn defence for many weeks under two English officers, Captain Butler, of the Ceylon Rifles, and Lieutenant Nasmyth, of the East India Company’s Service, that at last the Russians had to raise the siege, on June 22, after losing more than 12,000 men. At Giurgevo, again, on July 7, General Soimonoff (who afterwards fell at the Battle of Inkermann) was badly beaten, and soon afterwards the whole of the Russian forces were withdrawn beyond the Pruth, and Turkish territory was free from invaders. This movement was due, no doubt, in some measure, to the action of Austria, who had demanded the evacuation of the Principalities, backed her demand by a threatening movement of troops, and actually concluded a convention with the Porte on June 14.
HER MAJESTY IN THE ROYAL PEW, ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR, 1846.
The great arsenal and harbour of Russia was Sebastopol in the Crimea, and it was on this point that the attention of Ministers in London and Paris was chiefly concentrated. There has been great variance in the accounts of how it came to be decided that the attack of the Allies should be directed on that town. It is sufficient to state here that, on June 29, a despatch was sent to Lord Raglan, strongly urging the necessity of a prompt attack upon Sebastopol and the Russian fleet, but leaving the final decision to the discretion of the Allied Commanders. Lord Raglan did not read these instructions as leaving him any choice, but regarded them, as he afterwards stated, as “little short of an absolute order from the Secretary of State,” and prepared to obey it. He was a veteran soldier, it is true, but he had acquired his experience in campaigns before the days of steam and electricity, and the incessant and rapid interchange of despatches between Downing Street and the seat of war no doubt was somewhat bewildering.
A. Corporal. B. Sergeant. C. Officers—Undress. D. Officers—Full Dress. E. Privates.
UNIFORMS OF THE ROYAL MARINES, 1837.
The French Commander-in-Chief, Saint-Arnaud, received similar injunctions from the Emperor Louis Napoleon, who was as strongly in favour of the project as Palmerston and the Duke of Newcastle; Lord Raglan, therefore, encountered no opposition from him on the score of strategy. |The Invasion of the Crimea.| After three months of inaction at Varna, during which the troops suffered severely from cholera, the invasion of the Crimea was undertaken; the Allied Forces set sail for Eupatoria, and on September 21 the Duke of Newcastle telegraphed to the Queen that 25,000 English, 25,000 French, and 8,000 Turks had safely disembarked at Kalamita Bay, near the mouth of the River Alma, about eight miles north of Sebastopol, without meeting any resistance. The advance on Sebastopol began on September 19, and on the 20th the Allies encountered the Russian army, under Prince Menschikoff, strongly entrenched on the heights south of the River Alma. Menschikoff of deliberate purpose had allowed them to disembark unmolested; he had chosen what he believed to be an impregnable position, where he intended to keep them in play till the arrival of reinforcements should enable him to leave his entrenchments and overwhelm the invaders with superior numbers; he watched them crossing the stream below his position in full confidence that they were entering the trap prepared for them. But he had underrated the individual prowess of British and French soldiers. They had discipline, individual gallantry, and physique in a high degree, but these are often only so many contributions to the aggregate of disaster unless directed by sagacious generalship, and the tactics of the Allied Forces at the Alma were of the headlong character of a schoolboy’s playground. Maréchal Saint-Arnaud was in an agony of illness of approaching death, as it turned out—and there was little cohesion or concert between the English on the left and the French on the right of the attacking line. Only one thing was plain to the men of both armies—there were the Russian batteries, on the heights beyond the river, with heavy columns of infantry hanging like a grey cloud along the crests—the one thing to do was to get at them. Saint-Arnaud, addressing his Generals of Division, Canrobert and Prince Napoleon, said: “With such men as you I have no orders to give; I have but to point to the enemy!”
Royal Marine Artillery—
A. Company Sergeant-Major.
B. Gunner. C. Officer.
Royal Marine Light Infantry—
D. Officer.
E. Drummer.
F. Sergeant. G. Private.
UNIFORMS OF THE ROYAL MARINES, 1897.
At two o’clock the Allies crossed the river under a plunging fire, and advanced up the opposing slopes in face of the batteries and a searching fire of musketry; the great redoubt was carried by82 assault; the British battalions, deployed in double rank, according to the unique practice of English field drill, poured a withering fire into the solid columns of the enemy and plied the deadly bayonet at closer quarters. |The Battle of the Alma.| About four o’clock the Russians wavered, fell back, and broke; the position was carried and the first European field since Waterloo had been won.
Gallery, Crystal Palace.
COL. BELL, OF THE ROYAL WELSH FUSILIERS,
Obtained the Victoria Cross for gallantry in the Battle of the Alma, when he seized upon, and captured, a gun which the enemy was carrying off the field.
With pardonable emulation historians of both nations have claimed the chief glory of the day for their own people, nor does it profit now to weigh out the laurels to each with scrupulous precision. The brunt of the fighting no doubt fell to the English share; that was their good luck in what Mr. McCarthy has termed a “heroic scramble”; theirs too was the heaviest loss. One thing is certain that the day was won by the Allies, not by the skill of their generals, but by the valour and endurance of the troops, and that the two qualities which ensured success were those which chiefly distinguished the two nations respectively—the resolute steadiness and courage of the one, and the brilliant dash and fury of the other.
Gallery, Crystal Palace.
COL. LLOYD LINDSAY, OF THE SCOTS FUSILIER GUARDS
(now Lord Wantage, K.C.B.), seized the colours and rallied his men when thrown into disorder in the Battle of the Alma. For this act, and for gallantry at Inkermann, he was awarded the Victoria Cross.
The Battle of Alma was won, but the fruits of victory—where were they? The English had lost 2,000 men in two hours’ fighting, including twenty-six officers killed; the 23rd Welsh Fusiliers having suffered worst, with eight officers killed and five wounded and nearly 200 casualties in their ranks. |A Fruitless Victory.| The French returned their loss at 1,200. What was to be set to the credit of the account? Menschikoff was in full retreat with his army in great confusion, which required only the pressure of pursuit to convert into a hopeless rout. Raglan, the pupil of the Great Duke, surely had learned a sounder lesson than to allow the enemy time to reorganise his disordered divisions. Raglan, of course, was for pursuit, but Saint-Arnaud, physically and mentally shattered, objected for the reason that he was weak in cavalry; the English commander hesitated, perhaps on good grounds, to proceed alone, and the opportunity was lost.
The news of victory caused a great revulsion of feeling in England. People had become impatient during the summer months of inaction at Varna, and disheartened by the failure of Sir Charles Napier to carry all before him in the Baltic. Bomarsund, it is true, had been taken, but Cronstadt and Sweaborg had proved impregnable. Complaints were general about the want of vigour displayed in carrying on the war, and dissatisfaction not only prevailed among the uninformed public, but even found expression from the lips of Cabinet Ministers.
MR. (NOW SIR) WM. H. RUSSELL, LL. D.
The first of War Correspondents. Born in 1821; joined the staff of the Times in 1843, and has represented that paper in all the considerable wars which have occurred since.
A novel feature in the Expedition to the Black Sea was the presence with the army of war correspondents, representing the leading daily papers. This was a symptom of that growth of journalistic enterprise83 which was to receive such notable impetus in the following year by the abolition of the newspaper stamp duty. |War Correspondents.| The name of Mr. W. H. Russell, representing the Times, will be long remembered as that of the pioneer in this new and exciting form of literature. The vivid descriptions sent home of the splendid conduct of British troops in the field, and the excellent relations established between them and their ancient foes the French, were eagerly perused in England, and sent up the enthusiasm to fever heat.
But if the war letters in the newspapers were of good service in allaying public impatience by reporting valorous exploits and heroic endurance, they tended to intensify the anxiety when the campaign became prolonged towards winter, without any decisive result. It had been expected that Sebastopol would be carried by a coup-de-main; so it might have been, perhaps, had the victory of Alma been followed up, even on the day after the action. But the views of Maréchal Saint-Arnaud prevailed again; the project of assaulting Sebastopol on the north side was abandoned; and the Allies undertook the terribly hazardous, though, as it happened, successful flank march upon Balaklava, which, with its convenient harbour, was selected as the English base and depôt, while the French chose Kamiesch Bay.
The Battle of Alma took place on September 20; on the 23rd General Todleben, commanding the defences of Sebastopol, sunk seven war vessels at the mouth of the harbour. The Allied Fleet, from which this operation was plainly visible, were thus effectually shut out; the golden opportunity of the speedy capture of the city by a combined land and sea attack had gone by. Such an attack was made on October 17, but the fleet could only play at long bowls, and the French batteries were silenced in a few hours. The first attempt ended in failure. There was nothing for it but a prolonged siege, and the Allied Land Forces were insufficient to invest the town effectively. Moreover they were threatened by a Russian army outside, constantly reinforced by fresh troops from the interior. The besiegers themselves had to stand on the defensive.
IN THE BATTERIES BEFORE SEBASTOPOL.
Sketched on the spot.
On October 25 General Liprandi attacked the English camp at Balaklava with 20,000 or 30,000 men. It is a day to be much remembered in British war annals with profound but melancholy pride, because of the blunder which cost the British Army the loss of two-thirds of its Light Cavalry. |Balaklava.| The action began by the capture by the Russians of four redoubts held by the Turks. Then took place a cavalry encounter which, though it has been eclipsed in memory by the subsequent exploit of the Light Brigade, was, in truth, not less splendid and far more fruitful. The Russian horse, numbering some 3,00084 sabres advanced against the British Heavy Cavalry Brigade under General Scarlett. |Cavalry Charges by the Heavy and Light Brigades.| Immensely outnumbered as they were, and hampered by tent ropes and enclosed ground, the Scots Greys and Enniskillens charged them impetuously. For a minute or two it seemed as if these fine regiments must be swallowed up in the dense columns of the enemy, but the Royals and 4th Dragoon Guards moving up on the left, and the 5th Dragoon Guards on the right, charged the enemy on either flank, and forced them to give way and fly. The whole affair was over in less than five minutes.
Lord Raglan, who was anxiously waiting for infantry reinforcements, seeing the Russians preparing to move the guns from the captured redoubts, sent an order to Lord Lucan to prevent them doing so. “Try to prevent the enemy carrying away the guns.” What guns? Captain Nolan, who carried the order, pointed to a battery of eight Russian guns at the end of the valley, supported by artillery on either flank. “There, my lord, is our enemy,” said he, “and there are our guns.” Lord Lucan hesitated at first, but the order seemed explicit, and he directed Lord Cardigan to form his Light Brigade into two lines. In the first line were four squadrons of the 13th Light Dragoons and 17th Lancers; in the second were four squadrons of the 4th Light Dragoons and 11th Hussars, with one squadron of the 8th Hussars as a kind of reserve. The command was given, and it was obeyed. Six hundred and seventy-three men rode down that valley of death straight for the guns, on a venture as hopeless and devoted as that of Sir Giles de Argentine at Bannockburn, and hardly less futile. Only one hundred and ninety-five returned.
THE CHARGE OF THE HEAVY BRIGADE AT BALAKLAVA.
On the following day the Russians made a sortie in force upon the English position at Inkermann, and although they were repulsed by Sir de Lacy Evans’s division, there can be no possible doubt that the Allied Forces at this period were in imminent peril of a terrible disaster. Five days before the cavalry action of Balaklava, Raglan had informed the War Office that his army was reduced to 16,000, and that he doubted if he could maintain it in the field during the winter, even if Sebastopol85 should be taken first. Week after week the condition of the troops was painted in gloomier colours by the war correspondents. |Breakdown of Transport and Commissariat.| The transport system had broken down; supplies of all sorts were running short; the hospital arrangements were miserably inadequate for the numerous wounded and the still more numerous sick. The Turkish troops—men of the same race who had fought so well under English officers at Silistria—proved useless—worse than useless, for they had to be fed—under their own pashas in the trenches before Sebastopol.
THE CHARGE OF THE LIGHT BRIGADE AT BALAKLAVA.
The French Emperor took alarm. Hitherto nearly all the fighting had fallen to the share of the British, and England had very few troops ready to send as reinforcements. Louis Napoleon proposed to send 20,000 French troops if England would supply the necessary transports. This was undertaken at once; huts, warm clothing, blankets, tinned meat, and other stores were sent out in ample quantities, but very few of the cargoes reached their destination. Winter had burst upon the Black Sea with almost unexampled fury; the transports and cargo ships were scattered. Two French men-of-war and twenty-four British transports went to the bottom in the hurricane; the elements seemed to combine with man’s mismanagement for the annihilation of the Allied Forces. What our soldiers had to bear, half clothed, half starved, in those bitter trenches, may be read in Kinglake’s narrative.
While the authorities at home were straining every nerve to send succour to the fast-dwindling army in the field, news came to England of another great battle, far more sanguinary than any previous encounter, in which once more the brunt had fallen on the British. |Battle of Inkermann.| The Grand Dukes Nicholas and Michael, with the whole forces in Sebastopol, reinforced by large bodies of troops newly arrived from the Danubian provinces, in all not less than 50,000 men, had attacked the right of the English lines early in the dark morning of November 5.86 The fighting continued till late in the afternoon, the French being engaged also; but General Canrobert (who had succeeded to the command vacated by the death of Saint-Arnaud), in his telegram to the Emperor, chivalrously attributed the victory to “the remarkable solidity with which the English army maintained the battle, supported by a portion of General Bosquet’s division.” The English loss in the Battle of Inkermann amounted to 2,573 killed and wounded, of which 145 were officers, including four generals; the French lost 1,800, while the Russian casualties were made out in their official returns at 11,959 killed, wounded, and prisoners.
THE BATTLE OF INKERMANN.
The Allies paid a heavy price for this victory, but the carnage was not in vain. The power of Russia was crippled for a moment, and time was given for the succour which busy hands and brains were preparing in London and Paris. The most heartrending spectacle of all was the state of the hospitals at Scutari. No sooner did a description of them reach London than a fund was opened to supply their wants. More than £25,000 was collected, and English women organised themselves as nurses, and placed themselves under the direction of Miss Florence Nightingale. |Florence Nightingale.| No commander so puissant—no statesman so powerful—that his name shall out-last that of this devoted Englishwoman, whose services, in spite of the usual routine official objections, were accepted by Mr. Sidney Herbert, the Secretary at War.F Miss Nightingale arrived at Scutari, with thirty-seven nurses, on the morning of the Battle of Inkermann, and so clearly did this devoted band prove their usefulness, that Miss Stanley, the Dean of Westminster’s sister, followed not long after with forty additional assistants. To Florence Nightingale is due the glory of having initiated a movement which has extended far beyond the limits of the Crimean Campaign. No army now moves on active service without its train of skilled nurses, and the Geneva Convention has been the direct result of this first mission of mercy.
MISS FLORENCE NIGHTINGALE IN ONE OF THE WARDS OF THE HOSPITAL AT SCUTARI.
From Sketches made on the spot.
It would be no pleasant task to retrace at length the sorrowful story of the siege. British army organisation had broken down hopelessly, and people in England were maddened by the descriptions in the Press, perhaps in some instances exaggerated, how their brothers and sons were dying in the trenches, not by steel and shell, but from the starvation, disease, exposure, vermin, to which the culpable incapacity of British officials, as it was believed, had exposed them. |Fall of the Coalition Cabinet.| It was the system, rather than its agents, which was to blame; but shoulders had to be found87 to bear the blame, and Parliament took the only means in its power, by passing a vote of censure on Ministers, who were defeated on a motion by Mr. Roebuck by the crushing majority of 157. The Coalition Government had collapsed.
Gallery, Crystal Palace.
LIEUT.-COLONEL SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, BART., V.C.
At the Battle of Inkermann, ammunition failing, both British and Russians hurled stones at each other. In the midst of the mêlée, Lieut.-Colonel Russell, of the Grenadier Guards, led a party into the midst of the enemy, and dislodged them from the Sand-bag Battery. He was nearly bayonetted; his life was saved by a private in the Grenadiers named Palmer.
After an ineffective attempt by Lord Derby to form a Cabinet, Lord Palmerston—the only possible man in the existing state of public opinion—became Prime Minister. Things had begun already to go better with the Allies before Sebastopol. |Victory of the Turks at Eupatoria.| Omar Pasha, with his despised Turks, defeated an army of 40,000 Russians under General Liprandi at Eupatoria on February 18, being supported by an effective fire from the Allied Fleet.
The news reached Czar Nicholas on March 1; he was suffering at the time from the effects of influenza, but his health was not the subject of any alarm to his Court. Nevertheless he died on March 2; peace negotiations were immediately opened at Vienna, and the new Czar consented to send a representative to the Conference “in a sincere spirit of concord.”
Great Britain was represented by Lord John Russell and France by M. Drouyn de Lhuys, but the proceedings were rendered abortive by the refusal of Russia to consent to the neutralisation of the Black Sea.
of Messrs Graves.
FIELD-MARSHAL LORD RAGLAN, 1788–1855.
Lord Fitzroy James Henry Somerset, created Baron Raglan in 1852, was the eighth and youngest son of the Fifth Duke of Beaufort. He was Military Secretary to the Duke of Wellington, 1819–1852, Master-General of Ordnance, 1852, and was appointed Commander-in-Chief of the Forces in the Crimea, 1854.
The war went on; the Allies being strengthened in a minute degree by the active adherence of the little kingdom of Sardinia, of which the gallant and resolute monarch, Victor Emmanuel, perceived ultimate88 advantage to his designs on the throne of Italy through alliance with Great Britain and France in a war which concerned him about as much as it did the Queen of the Sandwich Islands. The bombardment of Sebastopol was resumed on April 10, and 400 great guns battered away without much result. But the trenches were drawing ever closer round the doomed city, and the Allies made a successful expedition to Kertch on May 24, where they destroyed immense stores provided for the Russian army, as well as a convoy of cargo ships in the Sea of Azoff. On June 18 a combined assault was delivered on the Malakoff and Redan Forts, but the Allies were repulsed with heavy loss. It had been undertaken against the judgment of Lord Raglan, who yielded reluctantly to General Pelissier’s urgent request. |Death of Lord Raglan.| He took this reverse grievously to heart: harassed as he had been by the censures passed at home on his administration, his health gave way under this additional blow, and he succumbed to dysentery on the 29th.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN INVESTING THE EMPEROR NAPOLEON III. WITH THE ORDER OF THE GARTER AT WINDSOR CASTLE, April 18, 1855.
The friendly feeling between England and France which sprang out of their common interests in the war against Russia, found expression in an interchange of visits between the Sovereigns of the two countries. The Emperor Napoleon III. and his beautiful Empress visited the Queen at Windsor in April 1855. They were met at Dover by the Prince Consort on the 16th, and remained at Windsor until the 21st. One of the most impressive ceremonies of their visit was the Installation of the Emperor as a Knight of the Garter.
Gallery, Crystal Palace.
MAJOR (NOW GENERAL) CHRISTOPHER TEESDALE, C.B., R.A., AT KARS, September 29, 1855.
He was awarded the Victoria Cross for gallant conduct in throwing himself into the midst of the Russians, who had penetrated under cover of night into the Yuksek Tabia redoubt; also for saving, at great personal risk, the enemy’s wounded from the fury of the Turks.
In assuming the chief command of the British Army in this war, Lord Raglan had undertaken a task of peculiar and, in some respects, novel difficulty. He brought ripe experience, it is true, acquired under the greatest soldier of the century, but the lapse of years had brought about so many changes in military appliances and scientific inventions, that much of that experience was rendered obsolete. He was the first British general who had to conduct operations in the field advised, controlled, directed, censured by telegraphic89 despatches from the War Office. He had, moreover, to act in concert with an ally, brave, indeed, but sensitive, and it was of the nature of things that their counsels should sometimes clash, at least, that their judgment should not always be identical. Little reference has been made to the angry impatience expressed in the English press and Parliament in regard to what was freely condemned as the incapacity and dilatoriness of Lord Raglan, because time and reflection have amply vindicated his renown. But it must have been galling to him at the time, and greatly aggravated the difficulties of his position. The best evidence of his genuine force of character is found in the patient courage with which he fulfilled his office to the last, and the enthusiastic devotion which he won from all ranks serving under him.
The command of the British forces devolved upon General Simpson. On August 16 General Liprandi made a formidable attempt to raise the siege by an attack on the French and Sardinian position on the Tchernaya, but was repulsed with tremendous slaughter. |Battle of Tchernaya.| This was the last encounter in the open field. The final assault on the town was opened by a tremendous fire from the Allied batteries on September 5, and the bombardment continued without intermission throughout the 6th and 7th. On the morning of the 8th the French made a splendid dash at the Malakoff Fort, the key of Sebastopol, and captured it. The English fared not so well in an attempt to storm the Redan and suffered severely in a repulse. But the defence was at an end.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN DISTRIBUTING MEDALS TO THE HEROES OF THE CRIMEA, ON THE HORSE GUARDS PARADE, May 21, 1855.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AND THE PRINCE CONSORT LANDING AT BOULOGNE, August 18, 1855.
This was the first visit of an English Sovereign to France since Henry VI. was crowned in Paris in 1422. The Royal Visitors were received by the Emperor on the landing stage at Boulogne, and conveyed to the Palace of St. Cloud. During their stay in Paris they paid several visits to the Palais des Beaux Arts, a part of the Exposition Universelle in which they were greatly interested.
REVIEW IN THE CHAMPS DE MARS AT PARIS, August 24, 1855.
During their stay in Paris, Her Majesty the Queen and the Prince Consort were present at a grand review of troops held in the Champs de Mars. Especial interest was attached to the spectacle, as at the moment the armies of France and England were fighting side by side in the final struggle in the Crimea. Canrobert, one of the heroes of the war, was present, and was decorated by the Queen with the Order of the Bath. Her Majesty, with the Empress and Princess Mathilde, are sitting together in the balcony, while the Emperor and the Prince Consort are below watching the movements of the long series of battalions.
After repeated attempts to retake the Malakoff, the Russian commander resolved on evacuating the town. Fortunately the wires connected with the magazine in the Malakoff were discovered in time by the French and cut, for arrangements had been made for blowing up all the forts. |Evacuation of Sebastopol.| One after another they went up with terrific din during the night; early on the morning91 of the 9th the Russians executed a masterly evacuation across a floating bridge, leaving their town in flames and their fleet at the bottom of the harbour. Sebastopol had fallen, but not into the hands of the Allies; it had been erased from the face of the earth.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN VISITING THE TOMB OF NAPOLEON I. IN THE INVALIDES, PARIS, August 24, 1855.
late Mrs. Cameron.
SIR JOHN F. W. HERSCHEL, BART.
1792–1871.
Astronomer. Son of Sir Frederick W. Herschel. His first great work was his Catalogue of Double and Triple Stars; later on he catalogued the nebulæ, and made researches in Sound and Light. He discovered the solvent effects of hyposulphite of soda on silver salts—the basis of photographic processes. Created a Baronet in 1838, Master of the Mint 1850–55. For many years he was among the most prominent of English scientists.
The Congress of Paris met on February 26, 1856, and a treaty of peace was signed by the plenipotentiaries of the Great Powers on March 30. |Conclusion of Peace.| The most important Article was that which guaranteed the perpetual neutrality of the Black Sea; Russia received back the ruins of Sebastopol in exchange for the wreck of Kars, and the Eastern Question was laid to rest, at least for a season.
This great reflecting telescope, still the finest in the world, is 56 feet long; the speculum or mirror of copper and tin at the bottom of the tube is 6 feet in diameter and weighs nearly 4 tons. Its nominal magnifying power is 6,000, and it reflects about 165,000 times as much light as the naked eye itself would receive. It was designed and constructed in 1845 by the late Earl of Rosse, and has rendered great service to science.
For this result England had to pay down four and twenty thousand lives and add forty-one millions to her National Debt; but she learned in addition to take vigilant precaution against the enervating influence of prolonged peace. To this may be added the bracing moral effect which follows on the supreme and disciplined exercise of a nation’s power.
ACTION AT FATSHAN, CHINA, June 1, 1857.
The Chinese fleet of about ninety junks was completely destroyed in two severe engagements, in which the Chinese fought their guns with unexampled constancy. Owing to the shallowness of the water the British attacked in small boats.
CHAPTER X.
1857–1858.
The Lorcha Arrow—War with China—Defeat of the Government—Dissolution of Parliament—Palmerston returns to Office—Startling News from India—Mutiny at Meerut—The Chupatties—Loyalty of the Sikhs—Lord Canning’s Presence of Mind—Disarmament of Sepoys at Meean Meer—The Rising at Cawnpore—Nana Sahib’s Treachery—The Massacre—Siege of Delhi—The Relief of Lucknow—Death of Havelock—Sir Hugh Rose’s Campaign—The Ranee of Jhansi—Capture and Execution of Tantia Topee—End of the East India Company’s Rule—Marriage of the Princess Royal.
IT is well that the next chapter in British warfare is a short one, for it is one which Britons can peruse with little pride. It is prefaced by a paragraph in the Queen’s Speech at the opening of Parliament on February 3, 1857: “Acts of violence, insults to the British flag, and infraction of treaty rights, committed by the local Chinese authorities at Canton, and a pertinacious refusal of redress, have rendered it necessary for Her Majesty’s officers in China to have recourse to measures of force to obtain satisfaction.”
R.A.] [From the “Life of Dr.
Arnold,” by permission
of Mr. Murray.
THOMAS ARNOLD, D.D.,
1795–1842.
Appointed Head Master of Rugby School in 1827, he infused a new tone and spirit into English Public School Education. He was the first to introduce modern languages, modern history, and mathematics into the regular school course.
A dispute had arisen out of circumstances even more trivial than the question of custody of the Holy Places, which led to the Crimean war. A vessel termed a “lorcha,” lying in the Canton river in October 1856, was boarded by Chinese officials, who took away twelve men accused of piracy, although the lorcha Arrow was flying the British flag. |The Lorcha “Arrow.”| The British Consul at Canton demanded the release of these men, according to the treaty of 1843; but the Chinese Governor Yeh declared that the Arrow was not a British vessel but a Chinese pirate, and refused to comply with the Consul’s demand. It was proved, however, that the Arrow had been duly registered as a British vessel, though her registration had actually expired ten days before the arrest of the men. Mr. Parkes, the British Consul, appealed to Sir John Bowring, British Minister at Hongkong. Bowring was determined to stand no nonsense from the Chinaman: nor was he going to trouble himself whether the Arrow was entitled to fly the British ensign94 or not! As a matter of fact, he wrote to Parkes that the expiry of the registration had deprived her owners of the right, but that as the Chinese did not know that, they must be held responsible for insulting the flag. Anyhow, it was enough for Bowring that Chinese officials had dared to take men by force from under that flag, whether it had been hoisted rightfully or wrongfully. He sent an ultimatum to Yeh, demanding the release of the men and an ample apology within forty-eight hours, or he would begin hostilities. Yeh released the men, and promised that greater caution should be observed in future, but he refused to apologise, maintaining that the Arrow was in fact a Chinese vessel. Incredible as it may seem that such powers should be vested in a British Minister, and still more so, that he should employ them in such a miserable quarrel, nevertheless Bowring ordered up the fleet and Canton was severely bombarded for several days. |War with China.| Yeh made the tactical blunder of offering a reward for the heads of Englishmen. He got no heads, but he forfeited the respect which England always pays to an honourable foe.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN THE ROBES OF THE ORDER OF THE GARTER.
Painted in 1859.
INTERIOR OF THE GUN-COTTON FACTORY AT WALTHAM ABBEY.
The picture represents the Pulping and Moulding Room. Gun-cotton consists of cotton-waste subjected to the action of nitric acid, washed, boiled, chopped into pulp, and pressed into blocks.
There was considerable sensation when the news came to England. Lord Derby moved a vote of censure in the Lords, and the only answer the Lord Chancellor could make to the enquiry whether, supposing a Chinese owner of a Chinese vessel bought a British ensign, that made her a British vessel, was that the Chinese had no right to assume that the flag was hoisted illegally. The House of Lords supported the Government, but it went worse with them in the Commons. |Defeat of the Government, and Dissolution.| On the motion of Mr. Cobden, Ministers were defeated by a majority of sixteen. Mr. Disraeli had dared the Government to go to the country on the question. “I should like,” he had said, in the measured, biting accents of his later manner, “to see the proud leaders of the Liberal party—no reform, new taxes, Canton blazing, Pekin invaded!” Palmerston took up the gauntlet; he appealed to the country, and he put his policy—thorough95 “Jingo,” as it would be termed nowadays—before the constituencies in such sort that he was returned to power stronger than before. Never was a Minister more thoroughly justified in settling his plans for a long spell of office. |Palmerston returns to Office.| But Palmerston himself is said to have observed once that “the life of a Ministry was never worth three months’ purchase,” of which the fate of his own second Administration was a striking illustration. It lasted just long enough to enable him to announce to the House of Commons in February 1858 that Canton had fallen before a combined English and French force; for the French in the interval had managed to pick a quarrel with the Chinese. A treaty was concluded securing access to the interior of China for Englishmen and Frenchmen, establishing diplomatic relations between England and France and the Court of China, and securing the toleration of Christianity.
BARREL-ROOM AT THE SMALL ARMS FACTORY, ENFIELD.
WINDING CORDITE IN THE GOVERNMENT FACTORY.
Cordite is composed of gun-cotton and nitro-glycerine. In the form of greasy cord it is wound on reels, and afterwards cut into lengths.
On June 25, 1857, the Queen issued Letters Patent conferring on Prince Albert the title of Prince Consort, a name which had been popularly applied to him for many years in England, and by which he was known henceforward to the world. The change may seem an unimportant one, but it created some unreasonable dissatisfaction at the time, and the Press of the country betrayed no enthusiasm in its favour.
The transit of news had been greatly accelerated over large tracts of the globe by the use of electricity, but it still took many weeks to convey intelligence between Great Britain and her Empire in India. Little did the people who assembled in London on June 23, 1857, to celebrate the centenary of the Battle of Plassey, by which Bengal was added to the British Dominions, imagine that at that very moment Bengal was the scene of a conflict as mighty in scope as it was horrifying in detail. |Startling News from India.| The story burst upon England with the suddenness of a tornado. The Sepoy army had risen in revolt, murdered their officers, proclaimed the King of Delhi Emperor of India, and the whole peninsula was in rebellion. There had been awful massacres too; English men, women, and children had been slaughtered in hundreds; most hideous of all there were circumstantial stories of outrage, followed by torture, committed upon our women. A terrible moan for vengeance rose throughout the land. There were few families who had not relations, or at least friends and acquaintances, among the British communities in India; the suddenness of the news was not96 the most appalling part of it; it was the ghastly details of the story that so deeply moved the nation. Black and bloody as the reality afterwards proved to be, the mutineers were not shown to have been guilty of the worst horrors imputed to them in the early days of the rising. Englishwomen perished as women perished in the worst of mediæval massacres, but they were not subjected to outrage or torture, as was circumstantially affirmed and universally believed at first.
MACHINE-GUN SHOP AT THE SMALL ARMS FACTORY, ENFIELD.
THE FIRE-ARMS OF THE EARLY YEARS OF HER MAJESTY’S REIGN.
1. “Brown Bess” (smooth-bore flint-lock).
2. Baker’s rifle (flint-lock).
3. Baker’s rifle, with sword-bayonet.
4. Brunswick rifle (percussion).
5. Minié rifle (1851).
The above were all in use at the time of the Crimean War.
THE RIFLES OF THE LATER YEARS OF HER MAJESTY’S REIGN.
6. Enfield long rifle (1853).
7. Snider-Enfield rifle (1864).
8. Martini-Henry rifle (1871).
9. Lee-Metford magazine rifle, with short
sword-bayonet (the present regulation weapon).
This great convulsion is always referred to as the Indian Mutiny, because of the violent revolt of so many native regiments in the British service; but it was far more than a mutiny; it was an insurrection of the Indian races against the European conqueror, a common rising of Hindoo and Mahomedan against the Christian power. Disaffection to British rule had never ceased to smoulder: how should it, seeing that so many native rulers had been deposed, so many others placed in inglorious dependency or on pension? The misrule and oppression of these potentates had been forgotten by the people who once groaned under them, just as the Jacobites who shouted for “the auld Stuarts back again” forgot what the people had endured under the Stuart kings. Dost Mahomed had shown an example how the Feringhi could be dealt with, and there were a thousand grievances against English officers and magistrates to be wiped out.
Lord Dalhousie had resigned the Governor-Generalship in March 1856, and his eight years of rule had been regulated by a policy of annexation. Deeply penetrated with the capacity of the Indian races and their country for moral and material development, he perceived how fatal was the native system of rule to all progress. Consequently he was not rigidly scrupulous in every case about the precise justice of the means by which one principality after another was added to the British dominions. The greatest happiness of the greatest number often involves disappointment and even direct injury to the few. Dalhousie vindicated his policy by the splendid energy he showed in making roads, railways, and telegraphs, in reducing taxation, and in general measures for the good of the people; but he undoubtedly left a feeling of soreness and resentment that only waited a fitting opportunity to take effect.
Out of this discontent arose a widespread conspiracy against British rule in the beginning of 1857. It is believed by some that the military rising was premature, and disconcerted the measures of those organising the general revolt. Be that as it may, the earliest overt acts of rebellion took place among the troops.
CYCLIST CORPS.
The value of the bicycle in actual warfare has yet to be proved; but, like the field telegraph and the military balloon, it has already taken its place in the equipment of European Armies. The Corps represented is the 2nd V.B. West Kent Regiment.
The effect of the Minié rifle, carried by some of the Russian troops in the Crimea, had been so remarkable, that the British military authorities had decided that the day of “Brown Bess”—the smooth-bore musket—had gone by. In common with the rest of the forces, therefore, the Enfield rifle was served out to the Indian troops in 1856. Now the paper of the cartridges used97 in this weapon was greased, and the idea was industriously circulated among the Sepoys that the lubricant used was a mixture of the fat of cows and pigs—a most ingenious falsehood, if falsehood it were—a most unlucky fact, if fact it were—for the native troops were composed partly of Mahomedans, to whom, of all animals, the hog is most loathsome, and partly of Hindoos, by whom, of all animals, the cow is held most sacred. Falsehood or fact, the story served a sinister purpose, for although the issue of the objectionable cartridges was stopped in January, and Lord Canning, the Governor-General, issued a Proclamation in May to the Army of Bengal, declaring that the story of an intentional affront to religion and caste on the part of the Government was utterly groundless, the early months of 1857 witnessed repeated instances of military insubordination, and some of the native regiments had to be disbanded. On Saturday, May 9, eighty-five men of the Bengal Cavalry were sentenced at Meerut to long periods of imprisonment and hard labour for refusing to use the cartridges issued to them. |Rising at Meerut.| Next day, Sunday, the whole native garrison at Meerut, the largest military station in India, mutinied, killed several of their officers, massacred98 some Europeans, and breaking open the gaol, released their imprisoned comrades. The European troops at Meerut drove them out of their cantonments; but allowed the mutineers to march to Delhi, where the octogenarian representative of the Great Mogul still held his court as a subject of Queen Victoria and pensioner of the East India Company. This old man they proclaimed Emperor of India, and the military mutiny assumed at once the character of national rebellion. All the patriotism that had been outraged, all the aspirations that had been crushed, all the private interests that had suffered by Lord Dalhousie’s annexation of the Punjab, of Oude, of Sattara, and of Jhansi, found their outlet and opportunity in the mutiny of the garrison of Meerut. The great Koh-i-noor diamond, symbol of the sovereignty of Lahore, had been displayed at the Great Exhibition of 1851: the diamond might be gone beyond recall, but the tyranny of the Sikh Ameers had passed from memory also, and a resolute effort might restore them. There are known various modes of pre-historic telegraph. In the Scottish Highlands of old the fiery cross, passed from hamlet to hamlet, summoned the clansmen to arms; on the Borders the bale-fires leapt from height to height to rouse the land: not less sure and hardly less swift was the symbol of “chupatties,” little unleavened cakes, of which two were left with the head man of each village of Northern India on an appointed morning, with directions to make similar cakes and pass them on. When the standard of rebellion was hoisted on the citadel of Delhi, the train had been laid and all was in readiness for an explosion which should shatter to fragments British rule in India.
“TROOPING THE COLOURS” ON HER MAJESTY’S BIRTHDAY.
The annual “trooping of the colours” of the Household Troops on the Horse Guards Parade is the prettiest military pageant to be seen nowadays in London.
Crystal Palace.
THE BATTLE OF KOOSHAB, February 8, 1857.
The Persian War of 1856–1857 was undertaken to establish the independence of Afghanistan, and the Persians were defeated in an action at Kooshab, about forty-four miles from Bushire. When the 3rd Bombay Light Cavalry charged the enemy’s square, Lieut. Moore, who was foremost, leapt into the square and had his horse killed under him. Lieut. Malcolmson fought his way to his brother officer and rescued him. Both officers were awarded the Victoria Cross.
But there was one factor essential to making the convulsion complete, and that was the co-operation of the Sikhs—the most warlike population of India—the people who, only eight years before, had inflicted on British arms what we must be honest enough to own as the defeat of Chilianwalla. While the rebellion was spreading like wildfire through the whole of the rest of the North-West, and blazing through Oude into Lower Bengal, while regiment after regiment was rising, shooting its officers, and joining the native population in pillage and massacre of Christians, the Sikhs never wavered in fidelity to British rule. |Loyalty of the Sikhs.| That was what saved the British Indian Empire—that, and the way in which British officials behaved in the hour of trial.
Crystal Palace.
CAPTAIN DIGHTON PROBYN AT AGRA.
In the action against the mutineers at Agra, in August 1857, Captain (now Lieut.-General Sir) Dighton Probyn distinguished himself by leading his squadron against an overwhelming mass of the enemy’s infantry. He received the Victoria Cross for his gallantry on this occasion.
VISCOUNT CANNING,
1812–1862.
Governor-General and First Viceroy of India.
Of course, severe reflections have been passed on those in command of European troops at Meerut and in the neighbourhood of Delhi for allowing the revolted regiments to pass unmolested from the former to the latter place. There was indecision shown, no doubt. The Commandant at Meerut telegraphed to Delhi what99 had occurred, and did no more. Next day the Mahomedans of Delhi rose and joined the Sepoys, and the Europeans in the Residency could only blow up their magazine to prevent it falling into the hands of the rebels. It is easy to sit in an elbow chair and pronounce the opinion that if the authorities at Meerut had showed presence of mind the rebellion might have been quashed at the outset; but it is a fearful thing for soldiers to have to turn their arms suddenly against their comrades; and any hesitation or weakness shown on that occasion may be forgotten in the tribute due to the whole body of military and civil officers for their conduct in what followed.
Lord Canning played a splendid part. Of all moods of the human creature there is none so ungovernable as fear. The suddenness of the outbreak, the rapidity of its spread, the atrocious massacres which marked its progress, created a wild panic in Calcutta and other European communities. |Lord Canning’s Presence of Mind.| Canning was assailed on all sides by the insane counsels of terror. He was urged to take the most savage methods of reprisal. The dethroned King of Oude was living near Calcutta. Of all Dalhousie’s annexations perhaps that of Oude was the one which most afflicted sensitive consciences; and the people of Calcutta, convinced that the King of Oude was preparing schemes of vengeance, besought the Governor-General to seize his person. Canning responded by receiving the King and his Vizier to reside in his own house. The clamours against him rose to frenzy: people nicknamed him “Clemency Canning”; they shrieked for his recall; but through all the tumult this great man kept his head cool and his nerve steady.
TYPES OF OUR INDIAN CAVALRY.
1. Guide Cavalry. 2. 1st Bengal Cavalry. 3. 1st Punjab Cavalry. 4. Major, 11th Bengal Lancers. 5. 1st Contingent, India Horse. 6. 4th Bombay Poonah Horse. 7. 1st Madras Lancers. 8. 4th Contingent, Lancers (Hyderabad).
STATE ELEPHANTS OF THE VICEROY OF INDIA.
The elephant in the centre of the group was taken from the Nawab of Bengal at the Battle of Plassey in 1757, and was 140 years old when the photograph was taken.
GOVERNMENT HOUSE, CALCUTTA.
The official residence of the Viceroy of India. Built in 1799–1804 by Lord Wellesley at a cost of about £150,000. Calcutta is the seat of Government of the Empire of India; population (1891), 862,000. The total population of India in 1891 was 287,000,000, of whom only 238,500 habitually spoke English, and of these less than half were British born.
Happily there were other cool heads besides the Governor-General’s. On May 11 information of the outbreak at Meerut was telegraphed from Calcutta to Lahore, the capital of the Punjab. The Governor, Sir John (afterwards Lord) Lawrence was absent at Rawul Pindee, having left full power in the hands of the Judicial Commissioner, Mr. Robert Montgomery. Four thousand Sepoy troops lay at Meean Meer, five or six miles from Lahore, and Mr. Montgomery had to decide on the instant whether these should be assumed to be contemplating mutiny. He came to a speedy decision. They must not be allowed the chance. There was a great ball in Lahore that night; among the guests were the civil and military chiefs of the district. Mr. Montgomery consulted with them and it was resolved to disarm the native troops. A parade was ordered for daybreak at Meean Meer: twelve guns loaded with grape were placed along one side of the parade ground. The troops were formed up in line of contiguous columns facing the guns and ordered to pile arms. They obeyed, for to hesitate was death. The rifles were carried off in carts, and the station was left in possession of 1,300 European troops. This was perhaps the most critical moment of the Mutiny. Nothing short of Mr. Montgomery’s firmness, supported by the military commanders, could have ensured the safety of the Punjab.
A. Post and Telegraph Offices. B. High Court. C. Clock Tower. D. University. E. Secretariat.
PUBLIC BUILDINGS, BOMBAY.
Bombay is for Europeans the Gate of India, the port of arrival and departure for both passengers and mails. It is in direct communication by railway with Calcutta and Madras. Population (1891), 822,000.
NATIVE HOUSES IN THE FORT, BOMBAY.
The darkest page of the book of Mutiny is that which contains the story of Cawnpore. In May 1857 there were 3,000 native troops at that place, and about 300 Europeans, under command of Sir Hugh Wheeler, an old man of seventy-five. Wheeler had reason to expect his force to mutiny, and appealed to Nana Sahib, a neighbouring prince representing the dethroned Mahratta Peishwah of Poonah, to help him. Nana had an undoubtedly genuine grievance against the Government. On the death of the last Peishwah, Lord Dalhousie had refused to continue the pension to his adopted son Nana, thereby violating the Hindoo principle that all the rights of sonship, material as well as spiritual, are conveyed by adoption. Nana, whose real name was Seereek Dhoondoo Punth, was rich and hospitable, and delighted in entertaining English officers and their ladies at his residence101 near Cawnpore. He responded cordially to Sir Hugh’s invitation, and came at once to Cawnpore with 300 men and two guns, to help to keep order. |The Rising at Cawnpore.| His arrival coincided with the revolt of the garrison, and he placed himself at once at the head of the mutineers. Wheeler had taken refuge in an old hospital building with about 1,000 Europeans, of whom 280 were women and girls, with about the same number of children. A hasty entrenchment was thrown up, and Wheeler refused Nana’s summons to surrender. For nineteen days, under the tropical sun of June, this handful of brave men maintained the defence of their crumbling mud wall against thousands of rebels. The assailants were reinforced by a contingent of Oude men, who made a fierce assault on the place; but the English were fighting for more than their mere lives; the presence of their women and children made each man bear himself like a Paladin. The attack was repulsed, and this prolonged resistance soon began to tell on the prestige of Nana, for Hindoos and Mahomedans alike appreciate prowess in the field. He offered terms to the besieged: “All those who are in no way connected with the acts of Lord Dalhousie, and who are willing to lay down their arms, shall receive a safe passage to Allahabad.”
STATUE OF THE QUEEN AND TELEGRAPH OFFICE, BOMBAY.
The Statue, executed in white marble by Noble, was unveiled by Lord Northbrook in 1872. A native superstition ascribes the origin of the recent plague to vengeance for an insult offered to this statue, which was one morning found bedaubed with tar.
The terms were accepted. The little garrison had done all that flesh and blood and gallant souls could do. The survivors of the siege embarked in boats on the Ganges, prepared by Nana’s102 orders. The women and children were all aboard, the men were following. At that moment a bugle sounded; instantly the straw awnings of the boats burst into flame, and the native rowers leaped out. A fire of grape and musketry poured down on the frail craft, and continued till Tantia Topee, Nana’s lieutenant, sounded the “Cease fire!” Then the survivors, 125 Englishwomen and children, many of them sorely wounded, were collected and driven back to the town. One only of the boats escaped, drifting down the Ganges, a |The Massacre.| target for innumerable marksmen on both banks. A dozen men landed to drive off the assailants; in their absence the boat was captured, and those on board—sixty-five men, twenty-five women, and four children—were haled back to Cawnpore. The men were shot on the spot; the women and children were crammed into the prison-house with the others. Cholera and dysentery soon carried off eighteen women and seven children—more fortunate than their companions.
SUTTEE CHOWRA GHAT.
On the banks of the Ganges; the scene of the first massacre of Cawnpore.
THE STATUE ERECTED OVER THE WELL AT CAWNPORE
Into which the bodies of the English women and children were thrown after the massacre in the prison.
BENARES FROM THE GANGES.
Benares is the sacred city of the Hindoos. It contains innumerable temples and shrines, the most sacred being that of Bisheswar, dedicated to the worship of Shiva; its dome is overlaid with gold. To Buddhists the stupa now called Damek, three miles to the north of Benares, erected on the spot where Buddha first expounded his doctrine, is a place of pilgrimage. But the most prominent object from the river is the Mohammedan mosque built by Aurungzeb, son of Shah Jehan. Its slender minarets are 147 feet high.
Nana’s visions of rule were becoming overcast. The English had rallied from the first shock of the Mutiny; troops, before which he knew his men dared not stand, were drawing near; Havelock had already routed Tantia Topee, with 4,000 of Nana’s best fighting men, and Neill was at Allahabad. The rebellion was mastered, but Nana’s vengeance, if it was to be balked of its full scope, at least should be complete on those who were in his power. A company of Sepoys was ordered up to the house where the Englishwomen were imprisoned. Unhappy creatures, their approaching fate cannot have caused them much concern; they were in every circumstance of suffering and misery already. For nearly four weeks they had not been able to change their tattered clothing, nor had a drop of water to wash in. The Sepoys began firing through the windows, but there were traces of mercy in their hearts; they fired high and ineffectively, and were marched home again. In the evening five men were sent up and entered the house; awful sounds were heard within, and twice one of the butchers came103 out and exchanged his broken, bloody sword for a fresh weapon. At length all was still; the five men, weary with slaughter, came out and went off, locking the door behind them. Next morning they returned with a fatigue party, cleared out that fearful house of blood, and flung the bodies down a dry well.
THE CASHMERE GATE, DELHI.
There is nothing in English history, at least during the last six centuries, approaching in horror to the massacre of Cawnpore, and it is well that one is not often called on to witness—to share in—the fury, the wild cry for revenge, that rose from England when the tale came to be told there. Nana Sahib waited to encounter the victorious Havelock on July 16; he was completely defeated, fled from the field in the direction of Nepaul, and has never since been heard of. Of the twelve men who left the boat which floated down the Ganges, four escaped after extraordinary adventures, by favour of a friendly rajah—the sole survivors of the European community at Cawnpore.
BLOWING UP OF THE CASHMERE GATE, DELHI.
This was one of the most daring exploits in a campaign remarkable for deeds of gallantry. Advancing across a broken drawbridge in broad daylight, in the face of the enemy’s defences, Lieutenants Home and Salkeld, with native sappers to carry the gunpowder, succeeded in laying eight bags of powder against the gate. Home leaped into the ditch unhurt; Salkeld, who held a lighted port fire, was badly wounded and fell back on the bridge, handing the port-fire as he fell to Sergeant Burgess, who was immediately shot dead. Sergeant Carmichael then advanced, picked up the port-fire, and lighted the fuse, but fell mortally wounded. The gate was blown in, killing all its defenders but one, and the British entered without opposition.
On June 8 General Wilson appeared before Delhi, but his force was far too small to attempt to invest a city held by 30,000 insurgents.|Siege of Delhi.| General Nicholson reinforced him in August, and on September 20 the place was taken by assault, Nicholson falling dead at the head of the storming columns.
Messrs. Graves.
FIELD-MARSHAL LORD CLYDE, 1792–1863.
Born at Glasgow; entered the army in 1808, and served with great distinction in the Peninsula, China, the Punjab, the Crimea, and was Commander-in-Chief in the operations for the suppression of the Indian Mutiny. For his services in this campaign he was raised to the peerage. He is buried in Westminster Abbey.
Seeing that it has been necessary to relate some of the many atrocities perpetrated by the rebel leaders, it would be unfair to keep regarding one that was enacted here by an English officer. A brave young fellow called Hodson, commanding an irregular force well-known as Hodson’s Horse, asked General Wilson’s permission to capture the King of Delhi and his family. Wilson consented, provided the old King’s life should be preserved. The King and his sons had taken refuge in an immense enclosure, the tomb of the Emperor Hoomayoon, adjoining the city, where he was guarded by a strong armed force. Hodson quietly rode up with a small escort and called on the troops to lay down their arms. Believing, no doubt, that the English officer104 had ample force at hand to enforce his command, they instantly obeyed. The King’s life was spared, according to orders, but, shameful to say, Hodson summoned the three Princes—the King’s sons—before him, and shot them with his own hand. It was a horrible act, but in the spirit of vengeance then prevalent, many were found to justify it, and Hodson was never brought to trial. He was killed in action at Lucknow not long after.
1. Sir Henry Havelock. 2. Sir James Outram. 3. Sir Colin Campbell. 4. Sir John Inglis. 5. Sir Hope Grant. 6. Major-General Sir W. R. Mansfield. 7. Sir William Peel. 8. Brigadier Hon. Adrian Hope.
THE RELIEF OF LUCKNOW, November 17, 1857.
This picture represents the meeting of General Sir Henry Havelock, Sir James Outram, and Sir Colin Campbell at the Mess House of the 32nd Regiment, in Lucknow, in November 1857. It was executed from sketches taken on the spot by Egron Lundgren.
CAPTAIN SIR WILLIAM PEEL, R.N.,
In command of the Naval Brigade at Lucknow.
While these events were passing, General Anson, Commander-in-Chief of the forces in India, died on June 27. It was decided to send out Sir Colin Campbell to replace him. On being asked when he would be ready to start Sir Colin answered with characteristic promptitude: “To-morrow”; and he sailed the following day without waiting to prepare his outfit.
Sir Henry Lawrence,G Chief Commissioner of Oude, had fortified and provisioned the Residency of Lucknow where, on July 2, he was besieged, having with him a single battalion of Europeans and all the European inhabitants of the station. |The Relief of Lucknow.| Lawrence was killed at the opening of the siege, but the little garrison held out with magnificent resolution till, on September 25, they were relieved by Havelock and Outram. But these generals were in turn hemmed in by immense masses of rebel troops, and it was not until Sir Colin Campbell fought his way to Lucknow, on November 17, that the garrison with the women and children could be considered to be relieved. One of those who endured105 this long and painful siege was that Dr. Brydon, who had ridden alone into Jellalabad after the awful retreat from Cabul in 1842.
SIR HENRY HAVELOCK,
1795–1857.
Portrait Gallery.
LIEUT.-GENERAL SIR JAMES OUTRAM, 1803–1863.
The Residency was evacuated on the 22nd, and Havelock, outworn with the heroic exertions of the past six months, died on the 24th. |Death of Havelock.| If Lord Canning’s calm resolution and Mr. Montgomery’s bold promptitude were the chief agents in checking the proportions of the rebellion, it was Havelock’s masterly generalship and cool courage in face of overwhelming numbers that first broke the military spirit of the insurgents. Soon after Havelock’s death, Sir Colin was obliged to suspend operations at Lucknow in order to repair a disaster which had overtaken General Wyndham, who had been defeated by the Gwalior rebel army at Cawnpore. Having done so, and captured that place of dreadful memory, he rejoined Sir Hope Grant at Lucknow, which was taken by assault on March 19, 1858.
RUINS OF THE BAILEY GUARD, THE RESIDENCY, LUCKNOW.
THE TAJ MAHAL, AGRA.
This building, erected in 1629–1648 to serve as the Mausoleum of Arjamand Benu Begam, wife of the Emperor Shah Jehan, is reputed the most beautiful specimen of architecture in India, perhaps in the world. It is of white marble and precious stones, and possesses a feminine grace and charm which no photograph can reproduce.
It throws some light on the magnitude of what is usually called the Indian Mutiny, that upwards of 2,000 of the enemy were killed in the final attack, and 100 of their guns taken. Those who had begun by putting down a mutiny had to end by re-conquering the greater part of India.
Sir Colin Campbell (now Lord Clyde) continued the campaign in Oude after the Fall of Lucknow, ably assisted by Jang Bahádur of Nepál, until that province was entirely subdued by the end of 1858. Sir Hugh Rose (afterwards Lord Strathnairn) was opposed to the last in Central India by the Ranee of Jhansi, a Princess of extraordinary character, who rode in battle like a modern Joan of Arc, and fell, sabre106 in hand, at the head of her troops. Tantia Topee, the former lieutenant of Nana, was the last to hold out, but at length he, too, was taken in April 1859, and hanged for his share in the horrors of Cawnpore.
It was not possible that such a convulsion should pass through the peninsula of Hindostan without shaking down everything that could be shaken in its institutions. |End of the East India Company’s Rule.| The English public—the average English Parliament man—knew of the existence of British rule in India, and could lay finger on Calcutta in the map. But that was about the utmost precise knowledge of Indian affairs possessed by most people, until attention was violently forced to them by the Great Mutiny. Then it dawned upon them that this mighty dominion was governed by the directors of a trading company, who exercised all the powers of empire, civil and military, deriving their authority from a charter signed by Queen Elizabeth. Various limitations and reforms, indeed, had been imposed by Parliament on “John Company”; still, the whole system had become an archaism, as uncertain in practice as it was indefensible in theory. The time for sweeping changes had come, not because the directors of the East India Company had abused their authority; but the safety of the Empire required that the Crown should enter now upon the heritage won by the commercial enterprise of its subjects. The Act for the better government of India was framed on a series of Resolutions laid before a Committee of the whole House, and became law in the autumn of 1858. It provided that the Administration of India should pass wholly out of the hands of the Company into those of the Queen, governing through a Secretary of State and a Council of fifteen, seven of whom were to be nominated by the Court of Directors and eight by the Crown. The Governor-General was made a Viceroy, the Indian Navy was discontinued, and the twenty-four European Regiments in the Company’s Service were amalgamated with the Royal army.
THE REGALIA.
1. Imperial State Crown, made for Queen Victoria, 1838. It contains the ruby given to Edward the Black Prince by the King of Castile, 1367, and 2,783 diamonds, besides pearls, rubies, sapphires, and emeralds.
2. The old Sceptre.
3. The Queen Consort’s Crown, made for Mary of Modena, Queen of James II.
4. Top of Salt Cellar used at Coronation banquet.
5. (In centre of picture.) Monde of the old Imperial Crown.
6 and 7. The Sceptre with the Cross, and the Orb, both made for the Coronation of Charles II.
8. St. Edward’s Crown, used at the Coronation of Queen Victoria.
The total value of the Regalia exceeds £3,000,000.
HER ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCESS ROYAL AT THE TIME OF HER MARRIAGE.
Notice must be paid here to a happy event, which brought to a close the unpleasant feelings subsisting between the Courts of Great Britain and Prussia, owing to the unfriendly and insincere conduct of the King |Marriage of the Princess Royal.| of Prussia during the Crimean Campaign. On January 25, 1858, the Princess Royal was married in the Chapel Royal, St. James’s, to the Crown Prince of Prussia, who, in later years, bore such a distinguished part as the Emperor Frederick William of Germany.
2. Prince Consort.
3. Princess Royal.
4. Crown Prince of Prussia.
5. Prince of Wales.
6. Prince Alfred.
7. Prince Arthur.
8. Prince Leopold.
9. Princess Alice.
10. Princess Helena.
12. King of Prussia.
13. Queen of Prussia.
14. Duke of Saxe-Coburg.
15. Archbishop of Canterbury.
16. King of the Belgians.
17. Duchess of Kent.
18. Duke of Cambridge.
19. Duchess of Cambridge.
20. Princess Mary of Cambridge.
22. Lady Villiers.
23. Lady Stanley.
24. Lady Murray.
25. Lady Molyneaux.
26. Lady Susan Pelham Clinton.
27. Earl of St. Germans.
28. Marquess of Breadalbane.
29. Earl of Clarendon.
THE MARRIAGE OF T.R.H. THE PRINCESS ROYAL AND THE CROWN PRINCE FREDERICK WILLIAM OF PRUSSIA, January 25, 1858.
BALMORAL CASTLE.
Her Majesty’s Highland residence was built in 1853 from designs by H.R.H. the Prince Consort. It is of white Crathie granite. There are 30,000 acres of deer forest within the bounds of the royal demesne.
CHAPTER XI.
1858–1860.
Commercial Panic in London—Suspension of the Bank Charter Act—The Orsini Plot—The Conspiracy to Murder Bill—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Lord Derby’s Second Administration—Disraeli’s Reform Bill—Vote of No Confidence—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Lord Palmerston’s Second Administration—Threatened French Invasion—The Volunteers—The Paper Duty Repealed by the Commons and Restored by the Lords—A Constitutional Problem—Its Solution—War with China—British and French Defeat at Pei-ho—Return of Lord Elgin to China—Wreck of the Malabar—Capture of the Tangku and Taku Forts—Occupation of Tien-tsin—Murder of British Officers and others—Capitulation of Pekin—Destruction of the Summer Palace—Treaty with China.
PALMERSTON’S Government, apparently one of the most popular that had ever been formed, had to bow under the adverse influence of events beyond its control. |Commercial Panic.| In addition to the commotion radiating from the centre of disturbance in India, there had been widespread commercial disaster at home, following on a period of excited speculation. On November 12 the Bank Charter Act had been suspended, and the Bank of England received authority to exceed the statutory limits in meeting demands for discount and advances, because of the numerous failures and prevailing money-panic.
Crayon Drawing.
WILLIAM MAKEPEACE THACKERAY,
1811–1863
Thackeray, whose father was in the Indian Civil Service, was born at Calcutta and educated at the Charterhouse and Cambridge. He studied in Paris as an artist, but took to literature and wrote for Fraser’s Magazine and (from 1842) for Punch. It was not until 1847 that, with the publication of “Vanity Fair,” he became a serious competitor for popular favour with Dickens. In 1859 he became the first editor of the Cornhill Magazine.
LORD MACAULAY,
1800–1859.
Thomas Babington Macaulay was the son of Zachary Macaulay the philanthropist. Educated at Trinity College, Cambridge, he was called to the Bar in 1826. In 1834 he went to Calcutta as a member of the Supreme Council; on his return he became Secretary at War, and, in 1846, Paymaster to the Forces. His “Essays” began to appear in the Edinburgh Review in 1825; his “Lays of Ancient Rome” were published in 1842. He was engaged on the final chapters of his “History of England” when he died, in 1859. He was raised to the peerage in 1857.
|The Orsini Plot.|
The Island of Ceylon has a population exceeding 3,000,000. Its principal product is tea, of which in 1896 over 100,000,000 lbs. were exported. The chief town is Colombo. Kandy, situated on a beautiful lake in the interior, was the capital of the native kingdom before its annexation by the British in 1815.
But the squall that was to overturn the Ministry came from a quarter which nobody could have foreseen. On January 14 a murderous attack was made on the Emperor and Empress of the French in Paris. An Italian refugee, Felice Orsini, well known in England, waited, with a number of fellow-ruffians, at the door of the Opera House in the Rue Lepelletier, and threw three bombs, charged with a powerful explosive, at the Imperial carriage as it drew up. The effect was appalling: the intended victims escaped unhurt, but ten persons were blown to death among the bystanders, and no less than 156 were wounded, of whom Orsini himself was one. All this was dreadful enough, and yet the connection thereof with the stability of Palmerston’s Administration might seem exceedingly remote. It was established in the following way. Orsini, a man of good birth and attractive exterior, had been very well received in English society, and his appeals on behalf of109 the Italian provinces of Austria had received polite attention, and, among enthusiastic advocates of freedom, a great deal of sympathy. London was then, as it remains to this day, a sanctuary for political refugees from all the ends of the earth. Palmerston, however, had enough common-sense and honesty to recognise that it was one thing to allow fugitives to shelter in England, and quite another to take no precautions as to their good behaviour, and he prepared and introduced a Bill to strengthen the law dealing with conspiracy to murder. This was vehemently opposed on the first reading by Lord John Russell, but Disraeli and the Conservatives helped to carry that stage by a large majority. In the interval, however, before the second reading, public opinion had undergone a marked change. The tone of the French Press had become intensely insulting towards Great Britain; people in London had got it in their heads that the Conspiracy to Murder Bill had been prepared at the dictation of the French Ambassador, and Palmerston was suspected of being at his old game of truckling to Louis Napoleon. |Government Defeat and Resignation.| The suspicion was fatal to him. An amendment to the second reading, moved by Mr. Milner Gibson, was supported by Disraeli and 146 Conservatives, and carried against the Government by a majority of nineteen. Palmerston resigned at once, and Lord Derby began his second administration with his eldest son, Lord Stanley, at the Colonial Office, Lord Malmesbury at the Foreign Office, and Disraeli leading the House of Commons as Chancellor of the Exchequer.
A. Gunner, Artillery. B. Sapper, Engineers. C. Officer Queen’s Westminster. D. Officer, Victoria Rifles. E. Private, Six-foot Guards. F. Private, Artists.
UNIFORMS OF VOLUNTEERS, 1860.
A. Private, London Rifles. B. Gunner, Artillery. C. Sapper, Engineers. D. Officer, 1st Middlesex. E. Officer, and V.B. Royal Fusiliers. F. Private, Artists. G. Private, London Scottish.
UNIFORMS OF VOLUNTEER BATTALIONS, 1897.
Disraeli had once taunted Palmerston with having no domestic policy. “His external system,” he said, “was turbulent and aggressive, that his rule at home may be tranquil and unassailed.” That was, in truth, the greater part of the secret of Palmerston’s popularity; he refrained from exciting apprehension and stirring combustible questions. He made no enemies at home, though he might be careless in giving offence110 abroad. But that was a rôle not at all suited to Disraeli’s ambition. He knew that at any moment something might happen to drive his party out of office, and he resolved to prepare a soft place to fall on. It would be a fine stroke to take Lord John Russell’s favourite project out of his hands, to “dish the Whigs” by lowering the franchise. John Bright had returned to active politics and was stirring up the people in the north to agitate for Reform. |Disraeli’s Reform Bill.| He would take the wind out of Bright’s sails too; and he persuaded Lord Derby to let him bring in a Reform Bill of his own.
ROBERT SOUTHEY, LL.D.,
1774–1843.
Poet Laureate 1813–1843.
Gallery.
WILLIAM WORDSWORTH,
1770–1850.
Poet Laureate 1843–1850.
It was an unlucky device. The Bill was not a very formidable one, but it disturbed a great question. Two members of the Cabinet, Mr. Walpole and Mr. Henley, threw up their offices rather than join in work which they, in common with most Conservatives in the country, considered alien from Conservative principles. The Whigs and Radicals would have no hand in such a measure, which they exposed as a sham, and Russell persuaded the House to reject it by a majority of thirty-nine. Neither did the Bill serve its author’s purpose in the country. When Lord Derby appealed to the constituencies, the response came, at the end of May 1859, in the form of a feeble accession to Conservative numbers, not strong enough to avert defeat by thirteen votes on a vote of want of confidence, moved by a young member put up by the combined Whigs, Radicals, and Peelites—the Marquis of Hartington (now Duke of Devonshire). The only effects of Disraeli’s stratagem had been to disgust and disunite his own party, and to cause his opponents to sink their differences in united action.
H. H. Cameron.
LORD TENNYSON,
1809–1892.
Appointed Poet Laureate 1850. His first published verses appeared in a volume of “Poems by Two Brothers” in 1827. He was created Baron Tennyson in 1884.
On Lord Derby’s resignation, Lord Palmerston formed a strong Cabinet, including Lord Granville, Mr. Gladstone, Sir George Cornewall-Lewis, Mr. Sidney Herbert, and Mr. Cardwell. |Lord Palmerston’s Second Administration.| Lord John Russell refused any post except that of Foreign Secretary, which shut out Lord Clarendon, who declined any other appointment. At the moment, as it happened, England was keeping scrupulously clear of the conflict between France and Austria. The Queen’s speech to the new Parliament had announced that “a strict and impartial neutrality” should be maintained, and this was done in spite of persistent attempts on the part of Louis Napoleon to secure the assistance of Great Britain in the deliverance of Italy, in spite, too, of the strong sympathy entertained by Mr. Gladstone and others in the Cabinet for the cause of Italian nationality. There was, however, a shrewd distrust of the French Emperor growing in the111 minds of the British public at this time, which made it easier than it had otherwise been for the Government to steer clear of foreign complications. |Threatened French Invasion.| In fact, the development of the arsenal at Cherbourg and the assembly there of a powerful fleet were interpreted, perhaps not without justice, as indicating a contemplated invasion of England. The Volunteer movement first assumed important proportions in the year 1859 under this feeling of apprehension.
sang the Laureate, and the storm was expected to come from the French quarter. However, whatever aggressive intentions may have passed through the mind of Napoleon III. were dissipated by the formidable front assumed by the people of Great Britain. |The Volunteers.| The immense improvement which had been recently effected in arms of precision caused irregular troops to assume far greater importance in the calculations of an intending invader than they ever had before; and the same cause, by encouraging fine marksmanship and developing competitive skill at the targets, has imparted to the Volunteers of 1859 a permanence quite without precedent in the history of similar martial movements.
Gallery.
ROBERT BROWNING,
1812–1889.
Poet. His last volume, “Asolando,” was published on the day of his death, December 12, 1889. He and Tennyson lie in adjoining graves in “Poet’s Corner,” Westminster Abbey.
Mr. Gladstone’s Budget of 1860 contained a proposal which brought about his final rupture with the Conservative party. He proposed to repeal the paper duty.|Question of the Paper Duty.| Now the burdens upon journalism, originally imposed with the deliberate intention of limiting the number and regulating the political character of newspapers, had already been greatly reduced since the beginning of the reign. The stamp duty had stood at a penny on each copy of a newspaper till 1855, when it was abolished; but there remained still a pretty heavy tax on paper. Mr. Gladstone’s proposal to abolish it was met with strong opposition from all sections of politicians, and, strangely enough, from paper manufacturers themselves, as well as from the proprietors of high-priced journals. There was, besides, a vague, but very general,112 dread of the effect on the public mind of the multiplication of cheap literature. Nevertheless, the Budget Resolutions removing the paper tax passed through Committee, though the last of them was only carried by a majority of nine votes. At the present day, the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s proposals, having passed through that ordeal, would be regarded as impregnable. It was otherwise in 1860. Lord Lyndhurst, then in his eighty-ninth year, and so frail in body that a rail had to be fixed opposite his seat to support him in speaking, joined the opposition raised in the House of Lords to the repeal of the paper tax, and made a marvellously vigorous and effective attack on the proposal. The Lords vetoed the repeal by a majority of eighty-nine.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS IN 1860.
- Rt. Hon. Edward Ellice.
- Rt. Hon. Sir Francis T. Baring.
- Lord H. G. Vane.
- Richard Cobden, Esq.
- John Bright, Esq.
- Lord Elcho.
- Rt. Hon. Edward Cardwell, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.
- Sir Roundell Palmer.
- Rt. Hon. Milner Gibson, President of Board of Trade.
- Rt. Hon. Charles Pelham Villiers, President of Poor Law Board.
- W. Massey, Esq.
- Viscount Palmerston, First Lord of the Treasury.
- Sir Denis Le Marchant, Bart.
- Rt. Hon. the Speaker.
- Thomas Erskine May, Esq. C.B.
- Lord Charles Russell.
- Mr. Lee.
- Rt. Hon. Sir John Pakington.
- Sir Hugh M’Calmont Cairns.
- Col. J. W. Patten.
- Rt. Hon. Sotheron Estcourt.
- Lord John Manners.
- Sir Edward Lytton Bulwer Lytton, Bart.
- Rt. Hon. Major-General J. Peel.
- Lord Stanley.
- Rt. Hon. B. Disraeli.
- Rt. Hon. Spencer H. Walpole.
- Rt. Hon. J. W. Henley.
- Lord John Russell.
- Rt. Hon. W. E. Gladstone, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
- Rt. Hon. Sir George Grey, Secretary of State.
- Rt. Hon. Sir Charles Wood, Bart., Secretary of State for India.
- Rt. Hon. Sir George Cornewall Lewis, Bart., Secretary of State for War.
Ministerialists were very indignant; the House of Lords had violated the Constitution; they had refused to sanction the repeal of a tax ordered by the House of Commons, and thereby infringed the privileges of that Chamber. |A Constitutional Problem.| The next step would be that the Lords would claim the right of imposing taxation—the cherished monopoly of the House of Commons. It was certainly an awkward question, but Palmerston was equal to the occasion. He averted a popular storm by moving for a Select Committee to examine and report on113 the degree, if any, in which the Lords had exceeded their powers. The Committee sat for two months, and reported that no breach of privilege was involved in the refusal of the Lords to ratify the repeal of a tax. It was not the re-imposition of a tax, for, although the Lords have no power to impose taxation, a tax can neither be repealed or imposed without the concurrence of both Houses. In the end the difficulty was got over by Palmerston, who moved certain resolutions affirming the exclusive right of the House of Commons to impose or remit taxation.
ATTACK ON FORTS ON THE PEI-HO RIVER, May 20, 1858.
The Chinese had completed batteries and earthworks armed with eighty-seven guns, and had obstructed the river with junks chained together. The British and French squadrons forced a passage, and the Plenipotentiaries (Lord Elgin and Baron de Gros) proceeded to Tien-tsin and opened negotiations. The Treaty then obtained was to be ratified at Pekin within twelve months; but the Plenipotentiaries appointed in accordance with this clause met, in June 1859, a still more determined resistance.
|War with China.|
Hongkong is the principal centre of British trade with China. Ceded to Great Britain 1842.
QUEBEC.
The Capital of the former province of Lower Canada is largely inhabited by people of French descent, and French is currently spoken.
Serious trouble had broken out again between Great Britain and China. Mr. Bruce, brother to the Earl of Elgin, had set out for Pekin as British Plenipotentiary, in company with the French Plenipotentiary, as provided by the Treaty of Tien-tsin. They were escorted by a squadron, chiefly consisting of gunboats, under Admiral Hope; but on arriving at the mouth of the Pei-ho they found the passage obstructed by booms and defended by recent fortifications. As the authorities at Tien-tsin returned evasive answers to the Admiral’s remonstrances, he determined to force a passage. The gunboats advanced up the Pei-ho on June 24, when suddenly a tremendous fire was opened on them from masked batteries in the forts. The Kestrel was sunk, the Lee had to be run ashore to avoid sinking, the Plover, which carried the Admiral’s flag, was disabled, so that he had to shift his flag to the Cormorant, and the Admiral himself, being severely wounded, had to hand over the command to Captain Shadwell. It was determined to make an immediate attempt to carry the forts by assault. A body of 1,000 men, including sixty French, were landed at 7 p.m., but, owing to the mud, which was knee, and even waist-deep, only about fifty men succeeded in reaching the furthest of three ditches surrounding the south fort. Their ammunition was wet, all the scaling ladders, except one, either had been broken by the tremendous fire from the fort or had stuck in the mud. Ten brave fellows rushed forward with this one, but three of them were shot dead at once, and five were desperately wounded. There was nothing for it but114 retreat. The loss in this disastrous affair was eighty-nine officers and men killed and 345 wounded.
MONTREAL.
This is the largest town in Canada; population (1891), 216,650. On the extreme right of the picture can be seen three or four spans of the Victoria Tubular Bridge, nearly two miles long, crossing the St. Lawrence river.
The government of Canada is (under the Sovereign) vested in a Governor-General and a Privy Council, and the legislative power is exercised by a Parliament of two Houses, called the “Senate” and “House of Commons.” Canada has an area of 3,315,000 square miles, and a population of over 5,000,000 (4,833,239 in 1891).
Of course such a treacherous act
could not go unpunished. An ultimatum
was sent demanding an apology
and the fulfilment of the Treaty of
Tien-tsin, including the payment of
the war indemnity of 4,000,000 taels.
Lord Elgin and Baron Gros, the
Plenipotentiaries who acted for the
Allies in the Treaty of Tien-tsin, proceeded
to Hongkong to enforce the
demands of England and France, supported
by an army under Sir Hope
Grant, in which several Sikh regiments
volunteered to serve, and a French
contingent under General Cousin de
Montauban, afterwards distinguished as
Comte Palikao. The Plenipotentiaries
came near
to perishing
on the voyage out.
|Wreck of the “Malabar.”|
The Malabar frigate, which conveyed them, was
totally wrecked on a reef at Point de Galle, in Ceylon, those on board
escaping with great
difficulty, and with the
loss of many valuable
papers and much property. However, Lord
Elgin and Baron de Gros arrived at Hongkong
in another vessel on July 21. They
found that the Chinese Council had returned
an insolent answer to Mr. Bruce’s ultimatum,
which left no alternative but immediate
action. The Allied Forces advanced on
July 26, the English from Chefow, and the
French from Tah-lien-hwan; they captured
the Tangku Forts, with forty-five guns, on
August 14, and the Taku Forts, containing
about 400 guns, on the 20th, the English
loss on the latter occasion amounting to
seventeen killed and 183 wounded. Sir
Hope Grant’s despatches contain cordial
references to the gallantry displayed by his
French allies in the assault. Tien-tsin was115
next occupied on August 23, and preparations
were made
for an immediate advance
on Pekin.
|Occupation of
Tien-tsin.|
The Chinese forces had disappeared, but the
Government, anxious at all hazards to
keep the “barbarians” from approaching
the capital, opened negotiations for
peace, and on September 13 Lord Elgin’s
secretaries, Mr. Parkes and Mr. Loch,
with Mr. Bowlby, the Times’ correspondent,
and some British and French
officers, rode on to Tungchow a town
within twelve miles of Pekin, to arrange
the preliminaries of an interview between
the Plenipotentiaries of the Allies and
the Chinese. A camping ground was allotted for the Allied Forces about five
miles short of Tungchow, but before Grant and de Montauban could occupy
it, a large Chinese army had surrounded the position. Mr. Parkes, Mr. Loch, and their party, protected
by a flag of truce, went back to Tungchow to remonstrate against this dangerous violation of the agreement;
they were treacherously seized and thrust into loathsome dungeons, crowded
with filthy Chinese prisoners, where thirteen out of twenty-six of them died from
savage ill-treatment by their captors.
|Murder of British Officers and others.|
Captain Brabazon, R.A., Lieutenant Anderson,
and Mr. Bowlby were among these victims, their hands and feet having been so tightly bound with
cords that the flesh burst and fatal mortification ensued.
TORONTO.
Capital of Ontario, and the second largest town in Canada.
The Allied Army resumed its march on Pekin; the Emperor’s Summer Palace, a magnificent collection of buildings, treasure-houses, and gardens, was taken on October 6; on the 12th everything was ready for the bombardment of the capital, and it was made known to the Chinese Government that this would begin the following day at noon, unless the city were surrendered previously. |Capitulation of Pekin.| The Emperor had fled, but on the morning of October 13 the Governor of Pekin capitulated. The Allies entered, and before noon the English and French ensigns were flying side by side on the citadel.
The western terminus of the Canadian Pacific Railway, and the principal port on the Pacific coast of British North America.
The Canadian Pacific Railway, in passing over the “Rockies,” opens up some of the finest scenery in America.
Manitoba is a district of enormous farms. The Capital, Winnipeg—known as Fort Garry until its incorporation in 1873—is one of the “newest” cities in the British Empire. Its population in 1871 was 241; in 1891, 25,642. It is the centre for the distribution of the produce of Western Canada.
Not till then did Lord Elgin learn the horrible fate of the captives. He decided at once that exemplary vengeance116 must be inflicted, but not according to the traditional custom of reprisals, by inflicting torture and death on the persons of individuals. No doubt the Chinese officials would have handed over to him as many vicarious victims as he chose to demand, but Lord Elgin decreed such a monumental act of indignation as should never be effaced from the memory of the people of China. The Summer Palace was the most precious possession of the Heavenly Dynasty. Therein had been stored the best of the art treasures of many generations; the ingenuity of architects, gardeners, and craftsmen of all kinds had been exhausted in erecting and decorating its courts and pagodas and laying out the fantastic grounds. Lord Elgin ordered its total destruction. |Destruction of the Summer Palace.| The French and English soldiers were allowed to plunder it first; jewellery, plate, and other costly articles were “looted” in immense quantity, and then the whole vast edifice was delivered to the flames. A monument was set up on the site, bearing an inscription that this was done as the punishment for national cruelty and treachery. A Convention between the British and Chinese Plenipotentiaries was concluded on October 24, and Pekin was evacuated by the Allied troops on November 5.
HER MAJESTY AND THE PRINCE CONSORT AT A REVIEW AT ALDERSHOT, June 1859.
On the left is General Knollys, afterwards Comptroller of the Household to the Prince of Wales, in command of the troops.
THE QUEEN AND PRINCE CONSORT FORDING THE POLL TARFF, October 9, 1861.
The story of this, the last excursion taken by the Queen in company with the Prince Consort, is told in a very interesting chapter of Her Majesty’s “Leaves from the Journal of our Life in the Highlands.” On the previous night the Royal party had stayed, unexpected and unrecognised, at the inn of Balwhinnie, “where,” says Her Majesty, “there was hardly anything to eat; only tea and two miserable starved Highland chickens, without any potatoes; no pudding, and no fun.” But in this last particular the succeeding day’s exploits certainly cannot have been deficient.
CHAPTER XII.
1861–1865.
The American Civil War—Recognition of Confederate States as Belligerents—English Opinion in Favour of the Confederates—The Trent Affair—Dispatch of Troops to Canada—Death of the Prince Consort—His Last Memorandum—The Cruiser Alabama—Claims against Great Britain—Arbitration—Award Unfavourable to Great Britain—Public Indignation—Marriage of the Prince of Wales—The Schleswig-Holstein Difficulty—Neutrality Observed by Great Britain—Popular Sympathy with Denmark—Dissolution of Parliament—Result of the Elections—Death of Lord Palmerston.
THE election of Abraham Lincoln as President of the United States, and the consequent decree abolishing slavery, brought about the secession of the Southern States and the outbreak of civil war on a vast scale early in 1861. |The American Civil War.| It was not to be expected that such a convulsion among people of British speech and descent could run its course without taking effect on a country so intimately associated with the United States as Great Britain was in commerce, literature, and social relations. The first difficulty arose out of the question whether the Southern States—the Confederates, as they were designated—should receive recognition as belligerents, or whether they should be regarded as rebels against the Federal Government. Lord John Russell, having consulted the law officers of the Crown, announced on May 8 that the Government had decided to recognise the belligerency of the Southern Confederation, and a proclamation of neutrality was issued on May 13. This act was interpreted as unfriendly by the Federal Government, who claimed that no State in the Union had a constitutional right to secede, that it could only rebel, and that the British Government had unduly favoured the rebels by prohibiting Her Majesty’s subjects from enlisting in the service of either Federals or Confederates. On the other hand, the Northern or Federal Government had proclaimed the blockade of the Southern ports, thereby implying that Confederates were belligerents and not rebels, for no Government can blockade its own ports, it can only close them. So far, therefore, from favouring the Confederate cause by recognising its belligerency, Her Majesty’s Government adopted the only course enabling them to respect the Federal blockade and to restrain English traders from breaking it.
H.R.H. EDWARD, DUKE OF KENT,
1767–1820.
Fourth son of King George III., and father of Her Majesty Queen Victoria.
But for some occult reason, the Federal cause was unpopular in this country from the beginning; the initial reverses sustained by the armies of the North were hailed with satisfaction in the English118 Press; and this, combined with a rash expression used in public by Lord Palmerston about the “unfortunate rapid movements” of Federal troops in the action at Bull’s Run, caused a very sore feeling against Great Britain among both leaders and people in the Northern States.
H.R.H. VICTORIA MARIA LOUISA, DUCHESS OF KENT.
H.R.H. the Duchess of Kent was the daughter of H.S.H. Francis, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld; married July 11, 1818, Edward, Duke of Kent, fourth son of George III., and was the mother of Her Majesty Queen Victoria. Died March 16, 1861. Her Majesty, therefore, lost both mother and husband within nine months.
An unfortunate incident arose early in the war to intensify this feeling, and the corresponding unpopularity of the Federals in England. Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States, being anxious to obtain recognition by European Courts, sent two Envoys, Mr. Mason to represent him at the Court of St. James’s, and Mr. Slidell at the Court of the Tuileries. These two gentlemen, escaping by night from Charleston, then under blockade, embarked at Havana in the English mail steamer Trent. |The “Trent” Affair.| A Federal sloop-of-war was cruising about in search of the Confederate privateer Sumter, and her commander, Captain Wilkes, on hearing about the Confederate Envoys, resolved to get possession of them. Intercepting the Trent in the Bahama Channel, he hailed her to heave to, fired a couple of shots across her bows, boarded her, and carried off Messrs. Mason and Slidell. Of course this act was wholly unjustifiable by international law, and President Lincoln at once directed Mr. Seward to reply by complying with Earl Russell’s demand for the surrender of the Confederate Envoys. They were liberated accordingly on January 1, 1862, and sailed for Europe. But unluckily Lord Palmerston had no reason to calculate on this ready compliance with British demands. Captain Wilkes had received approval of his conduct from the Federal Secretary to the Navy, a vote of thanks to him had been passed by the Washington House of Representatives, and he had been fêted wherever he went. All this was taken as indicating President Lincoln’s intention to defend the action of his officer: indeed, but for what was going on in England, Lincoln’s best intentions might have been overborne by the tide of public opinion. Simultaneously with the despatch of Lord John Russell’s demand for the surrender of the119 prisoners, 8,000 troops were embarked in England for service in Canada, and every preparation was made for immediate war. This not only cost Great Britain about a million of money, but also deprived President Lincoln’s act of all grace in the eyes of English people.
The colony of New South Wales, originally comprising the eastern half of the continent of Australia and the island of Tasmania, was formally founded by an expedition under the command of Capt. Arthur Phillip. The first landing was effected at Botany Bay, and the City of Sydney was founded on January 26, 1788. New South Wales became a self-governing colony in 1855. Population (1893), 1,277,870; imports (1895), £15,992,415; exports (1895), £21,934,785.
The Trent difficulty was the last public question in which the Prince Consort was to take part. A memorandum dated December 1, 1861, written by him and conveying to Lord Russell the Queen’s remarks on the drafts of despatches he was about to forward to Lord Lyons, was the last State paper to which the Prince Consort set his hand. He had been ill for some days previously, and soon afterwards gastric fever developed itself. In spite of the tender attention of the Queen and the Princesses, the malady continued, not much worse, apparently, but no better. |Death of the Prince Consort.| Congestion of the lungs set in, and at midnight on Saturday, December 14, the tolling of the great bell of St. Paul’s Cathedral announced to the people of London that the Monarch’s Consort was no more—that their Queen was a widow.
On the railway between Adelaide and Brisbane; the largest work of the kind south of the Equator. Opened May 1, 1889.
THE TOWN HALL, CENTENNIAL HALL, AND CATHEDRAL, SYDNEY.
THE QUEEN AND PRINCE CONSORT.
The Prince died in his forty-third year. It is pretty well understood by this time how well he had discharged the duties of a difficult station as Consort of the Crown, how true was the love which united him to the Queen, how deep was her sorrow at parting with him after twenty-one years of wedded life. He had lived down the prejudice which undoubtedly was prevalent at the time of, and for some years after, the marriage. Without appearing in political affairs120 with such prominence as might have aroused the susceptibilities of a self-governing people, his attention to public affairs was as incessant as that of any Cabinet Minister. The writing tables of the Queen and the Prince stood side by side; he was ever at hand to advise Her Majesty in her correspondence with Ministers; many of her letters and memoranda to the Cabinet are in the Prince’s handwriting. When the final solution of the Trent dispute was communicated to Her Majesty on January 9, 1862, she wrote to the Prime Minister: “Lord Palmerston cannot but look on this peaceful issue of the American quarrel as greatly owing to her beloved Prince, who wrote the observations on the draft to Lord Lyons, in which Lord Palmerston so entirely concurred. It was the last thing he ever wrote.”
The only danger to the Prince Consort’s place in the affections of the British people in his later years was of the nature of that which over-took Aristides. There is a certain monotony in virtue, like that of uninterrupted serene weather, which weighs upon natures of a less lofty tenour. But no sooner was the Prince departed than the nation realised the value of the part he had performed, and it has never since ceased to be grateful for the energy he displayed in promoting every scheme of social or intellectual advancement, and stimulating the growth of commercial and industrial enterprise.
This monument, which is of marble, gold, bronze, and mosaic work, was designed by Sir G. Gilbert Scott, R.A., and is 175 feet high. The statue of the Prince, of bronze gilt, is by Foley. Above the arches runs this inscription: “Queen Victoria and her people to the memory of Albert, Prince Consort, as a tribute of their gratitude for a life devoted to the public good.” The cost of the Memorial exceeded £130,000.
|The Cruiser “Alabama.”|
So named in memory of the Prince Consort, whose Memorial it faces. It was opened by the Queen in 1871. The Hall itself is oval, 200 feet by 160 feet, and 140 feet high to the dome. It accommodates 10,000 persons, and cost £200,000.
The next controversy endangering friendly relations between the Governments of Queen Victoria and President Lincoln arose out of Confederate privateering. Many of the private dockyards of Great Britain were turning out vessels as fast as they could to sell to the Confederate leaders. One of these ships, the Alabama, built in Messrs. Laird’s yard at Birkenhead, became the terror of Federal commerce, having captured between sixty and seventy merchantmen in two years. At last she was sunk by the Federal ship-of-war Kearsarge, but her fame did not perish with her; it was the cause of an important alteration in international law. The fact is, the Alabama was, for all intents and purposes, an English pirate. Built and armed in England, most of her crew and all her gunners were English, some of the latter being actually in English pay, as belonging to the Royal Naval Reserve. She approached her prizes flying the British colours at her peak, and only hauled them down when her prey could not escape. She was constantly in English harbours, and never in a Confederate one. While she was being built at Birkenhead, the American Minister appealed in vain to the British Government to detain her under the Foreign Enlistment Act; she was allowed to go to sea. Later on, two ironclads were on the point of leaving the Mersey for the Confederate service. Again Mr. Adams, the American121 Minister, demanded their detention, adding in his letter to Lord Russell, “it would be superfluous in me to point out to your lordship that this is war.” The ironclads were detained, but President Lincoln, Earl Russell, and Lord Palmerston had all passed away before the dispute about the Alabama was brought to a close. The American civil war had ended, General Grant was President of the United States, and Mr. Gladstone Prime Minister of England, when the question came up for final settlement. When it had been raised first, Lord Palmerston’s Government had refused to admit any responsibility; then followed Lord Derby’s third administration in 1866, and Lord Stanley as Foreign Secretary consented to the proposal for arbitration. But the introduction of various claims on the part of private individuals, arising out of events long antecedent to the civil war caused the postponement of any agreement until the year 1871. Each nation then appointed a Commission to meet at Washington to discuss all the subjects of international controversy, of which the Alabama claims were the principal. The British Commissioners were Earl de Grey (the present Marquis of Ripon), Sir Stafford Northcote (afterwards Earl of Iddesleigh), Mr. Montague Bernard, Sir Edward Thornton, British Ambassador at Washington, and Sir John Macdonald, Prime Minister of the Canadian Parliament. The Conference resulted in the Treaty of Washington, of which the opening clause gave occasion to considerable resentment in the minds of the British public. It was no less than an apology—dignified but explicit—on the part of the Queen’s Government, for having permitted the escape of the Alabama and other cruisers from British ports, to the injury of American commerce. England, it was loudly protested, had never apologised to any other Power; she would never had been so humiliated had “Old Pam” remained at the head of affairs; the whole British case had been given away before the matter got to the stage of arbitration. So said the British Press, and so said a large section of the public. However, Great Britain having professed herself ready to pay something to secure the friendship of President Grant’s Government, the claims went before a tribunal of five arbitrators, of whom one was appointed by Queen Victoria, and one each by President Grant, the King of Italy, the Emperor of Brazil, and the President of the Swiss Confederation. This tribunal assembled at Geneva in 1872, and decreed that Great Britain should pay an indemnity of £3,250,000 for the acts of the Alabama and other Confederate cruisers. The fine was paid, but the impression produced on the minds of the British people cannot be said to have been favourable to the doctrine of arbitration. It was felt that John Bull had been made to “knuckle down” to Brother Jonathan, and the amicable intentions of the British Commissioners at Washington of promoting cordial relations between the British and American peoples were frustrated almost as thoroughly as they might have been had the dispute been fought out in the ordinary way.
MARRIAGE OF H.R.H. PRINCESS ALICE TO H.R.H. PRINCE LOUIS OF HESSE IN THE DRAWING ROOM AT OSBORNE, July 1, 1862.
On the left are Her Majesty the Queen, the Prince of Wales, Prince Alfred, and Prince Leopold, and Ernest, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, attended by the Duchess of Wellington and the Duchess of Athole. On the right are the parents and brother of the bridegroom. The bridesmaids were Princesses Helena, Louise, and Beatrice, and Princess Anna of Hesse.
On March 10, 1863, took place the marriage of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales, to the Princess AlexandraH, eldest daughter of Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg, heir to the throne of Denmark. |Marriage of the Prince of Wales.| The announcement of the betrothal had been favourably received in Great Britain, but, on the arrival of the bride-elect in London, her exceeding personal beauty, her charm of manner and amiability, produced a remarkable effect, and public feeling rose to a very high degree of enthusiastic approval. London hastened to cover up the dingy traces of an English winter with gay bunting; the lively Danish national colours, scarlet and white, draped all the thoroughfares; and everywhere might be seen the Dannebrog—the national ensign of Denmark—streaming side by side with the British standard in the keen wind and bright sunshine of March.
THE MARRIAGE OF H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES TO H.R.H. PRINCESS ALEXANDRA OF DENMARK IN ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR, March 10, 1863.
Her Majesty the Queen occupies the royal closet above the group of bridesmaids. Next the Prince of Wales are his supporters, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and the Crown Prince of Prussia. The Archbishop of Canterbury and Dean Wellesley officiate. The bridesmaids were the Ladies Victoria Scott, Diana Beauclerk, Elena Bruce, Victoria Howard, Emily Villiers, Agneta Yorke, Feodore Wellesley, and Emily Hare. The English Princes and Princesses are to the left of the bridal group; the mother and sisters of the bride to the right.
The course of events on the Continent at this time gave to the royal marriage an appearance of political significance which, in reality, it did not possess. In olden times, no doubt, the espousal of the heir of England to the daughter of Denmark would have implied a political and military alliance, offensive and defensive, between the two Crowns. But in Europe of the nineteenth century it is peoples, not princes, who hold the decrees of peace and war. It was this very fact which, shortly after the Prince of Wales’s marriage, seemed likely to precipitate a conflict between Great Britain and Denmark on the one side, and Austria and Prussia on the other. Englishmen had grown 124proud of their beautiful Princess, and were chivalrously disposed to take up the cause of her little country. They forgot or did not know that it was only the adopted country of her family.
H.R.H. THE PRINCESS OF WALES AT THE TIME OF HER MARRIAGE.
The crisis arose on the death of Frederick VII., King of Denmark. The succession, as had been decreed by the Great Powers in 1852, devolved on the father of the Princess of Wales, who became King Christian IX. of Denmark. |The Schleswig-Holstein Difficulty.| There had existed between Germany and Denmark a long-standing dispute about the possession of the Duchies of Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg. The King of Denmark was also Duke of Holstein and Lauenburg, just as, previous to Queen Victoria’s accession, the King of England had been also King of Hanover. But the vast majority of the population of these Duchies was purely German, and the German Confederation had been anxious for a long time to admit them to their common nationality. The Danish Government, on the other hand, desired to incorporate these provinces in the Kingdom of Denmark. Prince Frederick of Schleswig-Holstein-Augustenburg disputed the succession of Christian IX. to the Duchies in question. The Germanic Diet, under the influence of Herr von Bismarck, supported Prince Frederick’s claim, and an allied army, provided by Austria and Prussia, crossed the frontiers of Holstein and Schleswig to enforce it. The Danish army was mobilised, and Denmark entered upon a hopeless contest—hopeless, seeing that she, one of the weakest of European States, was pitted against two of the most powerful.
A. Princess Helena. B. Prince and Princess of Wales. C. The Queen. D. Princess Beatrice. E. Prince Arthur. F. Princess Royal. G. Princess Alice and Prince Louis of Hesse.
A ROYAL FAMILY GROUP.
Photographed from life on the day of the wedding of the Prince and Princess of Wales.
It must be confessed that the Danes had not unreasonable grounds for believing they would not be left to meet such odds single-handed. Lord Russell had often warned the Danish Government that unless it respected the liberty of its German125 subjects, Denmark must look for no help from England in a conflict with the Germanic Powers. The Danes protested that they had scrupulously followed this advice, and there can be no doubt that they had been encouraged to look for the support of Great Britain if any attempt were made to infringe legitimate Danish authority, and that both Lord Russell and Lord Palmerston contemplated armed intervention between Denmark and her possible aggressors as a duty which Great Britain might have to undertake. But Great Britain had too much at stake to risk a conflict single-handed with Austria and Prussia, who, as Lord Palmerston wrote to Lord Russell, “could bring 200,000 or 300,000 men into the field.” England was not more bound by the Treaty of Vienna than France was; France refused to act, and England adopted the prudent, but apparently cold-blooded, part of looker-on. Public opinion in Great Britain ran pretty high in favour of the Danes, and many Englishmen felt ashamed of the part their country was made to play. They could not understand how Palmerston, of all men, could act so unhandsomely, and perhaps the only thing that saved the Government from defeat on a vote of censure, was that Disraeli, who moved it, shrank from advocating the only logical alternative to their policy—a declaration of war.
The sixth Parliament of Queen Victoria was dissolved on July 6, 1865, having attained the unusual age of six years and thirty-six days. |Dissolution of Parliament.| The chief feature of the general election which followed was the number of seats gained by the Radicals at the expense of the remnants of the Whig party or Moderate Liberals. Mr. Gladstone, reckoned as a Liberal-Conservative up to this time, though well known to be inclining more and more to the policy typified by John Bright, was unseated for Oxford University by Mr. Gathorne-Hardy (now Earl of Cranbrook), and the last tie which attached him to the Conservatives was severed by his subsequent election for South Lancashire.
THE PARLIAMENT HOUSE, MELBOURNE.
The first settlement on the site of the present city of Melbourne was made in 1836; it is now the largest city in Australia, with a population (1891) of 490,896. The Colony of Victoria, of which it is the capital, was separated from New South Wales in 1851, and received a self-governing constitution in 1855. Population (1895), 1,181,769. Imports (1895), £12,472,344. Exports (1895), £14,547,732.
THE TOWN HALL, AND PART OF COLLINS STREET, MELBOURNE.
Palmerston’s appeal to the country had been answered by an expression of confidence in him, but that confidence was of a very complex kind. The Radicals voted for him, because, as long as126 he was in Parliament, no other man could lead the Liberal party; but they distrusted his foreign policy, and chafed at his indifference to questions of reform. The Liberals voted for him, because he represented exactly the views of moderate Liberalism; and the attitude of many Conservatives was accurately expressed in a letter written by Mr. W. H. Smith, Liberal-Conservative candidate for Westminster, to Colonel Taylor, the Whip of the Conservative party, thanking him for the support he had received from Conservatives in his unsuccessful contest against Mr. Mill. “I believe in Lord Palmerston,” he said, “and look forward ultimately to a fusion of the moderate men following Lord Derby and Lord Palmerston into a strong Liberal-Conservative party.”
|Death of Lord Palmerston.|
The population of Brisbane increased between 1881 and 1891 from 31,000 to 93,000. Queensland, of which it is the capital, was separated from New South Wales and constituted a self-governing Colony in 1859. It had in 1895 a population of 460,550. Imports (1895), £5,349,007. Exports, £8,982,600.
But the strong link which for so long had bound the present to the past, and acted as a check on precipitate legislation, snapped at last. Palmerston died on October 18, 1865, aged eighty-one years, less two days, having sat in the House of Commons for fifty-eight years, which, as Mr. Cardwell observed, was just one-tenth of its whole existence. The feeling in the country was more profound than any which had been manifested since the death of Wellington. In the course of these pages no attempt has been made to palliate or conceal some of the errors of judgment, the faults of statesmanship, even the occasional want of sincerity to Parliament and the public which formed blemishes in his career, especially in the earlier part of the Queen’s reign. In spite of these blots—and some of them were far from venial—he had lived to secure the confidence of his Sovereign and the affection of her people. A great deal of this was owing to his personal character and manner and his kindly humour. It is no slight upon Scotsmen or Irishmen to say that the chief secret of his universal popularity was that he was such a thorough Englishman. Some of his sayings had a much deeper meaning than their tone of levity implied. Two of them will bear repetition here, seeing how accurately the lapse of years has fulfilled the prediction contained in them. Palmerston was known to be opposed to any further extension of the franchise. Somebody once observed to him that it really would not make much difference, for the same class of member would be returned as before. “Yes,” replied Palmerston, “the same men will get in as before, but they will play to the shilling gallery instead of to the boxes.” The late Earl of Shaftesbury put on record one of Palmerston’s latest sayings. Palmerston always distrusted Mr. Gladstone as a politician, and made no secret of it. But he always was extremely anxious for Mr. Gladstone’s return for Oxford University. “He is a dangerous man,” he said to Lord Shaftesbury: “keep him in Oxford, and he is partially muzzled, but send him elsewhere, and he will run wild.” This came to Mr. Gladstone’s ears, so, after his defeat at Oxford in 1865, he opened his campaign in South Lancashire by saying to the electors assembled in the Free Trade Hall of Manchester: “At last, my friends, I have come amongst you.... I am come among you unmuzzled.”
THE QUEEN AT OSBORNE, 1866.
On the seat are the Princesses Helena and Louise. Her Majesty is attended by John Brown.
CHAPTER XIII.
1866–1872.
Mr. Gladstone’s Reform Bill—The Cave of Adullam—Defeat and Resignation of the Ministry—Retirement of Earl Russell—Lord Derby’s Last Administration—Disturbance in Hyde Park—Commercial Panic—Completion of the Atlantic Cable—Mr. Disraeli’s Reform Bill—Secessions from the Cabinet—The Fenians—War with Abyssinia—Retirement of Lord Derby—The Irish State Church—Dissolution of Parliament—Liberal Triumph—Mr. Gladstone’s Cabinet—Disestablishment of the Irish Church—Death of Lord Derby—Irish Land Legislation—National Education—Army Purchase—The Ballot Bill—Adoption of Secret Voting.
RETIRING INTO PRIVATE LIFE.
Lord Brougham: “Eh, Johnny, ye’ll find it mighty dull here!” Lord John Russell was raised to the Peerage in 1861.
THE only changes in the old Cabinet, consequent on the death of its great chief, were the advance of Earl Russell to the Premiership and the appointment of Lord Clarendon to the Foreign Office. But the change in the House of Commons was as momentous as it was abrupt. The place of its old leader—the safe, the leisurely, the unemotional Palmerston—was filled by the restless and ardent, the uncertain Gladstone. The Conservatives were dispirited and anxious; they were afraid of what the new House of Commons might be led to do; party feeling began to acquire a new bitterness, the offspring of fear, which was to grow more and more intense until the final retirement of Mr. Gladstone in 1895. The Radicals, on the other hand, were sanguine and jubilant. Reinforced in numbers, and relieved from the restraint which the irresistible prestige of Palmerston had imposed on their aspirations, they felt that the moment for action had come; they had got a leader after their own hearts, and the first thing to do was to extend the franchise. But there was disappointment in store for them. Mr. Gladstone introduced his Bill on128 March 12; it pleased nobody. The Radicals detected in it the frigid hand of the Whigs, and the moderate Liberals, secretly detesting all schemes for a Democratic franchise, began by viewing it coldly, and gradually drifted into opposition with the Conservatives. Its most formidable opponent rose from the Ministerial Benches. Mr. Robert Lowe, whom an intimate acquaintance with Australasian politics had imbued with profound distrust for Democratic institutions, made a brilliant and fearless onslaught on the measure, and received all that rapturous applause which is the invariable reward of a strong man turning his weapons against his own party. Gradually he drew to himself a compact band of malcontents, whose memory might have passed into oblivion long ere this but for a happy metaphor employed by Mr. John Bright, who likened them to the men who gathered to David in the Cave of Adullam. |The Cave of Adullam.| “Every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him.” People were tickled with the illustration: straightway the Liberal dissentients were dubbed Adullamites, and “a cave” has remained ever since the recognised term for a group of men combining to act against their own party.
In point of size, Adelaide holds the third place among Australian cities with a population (1891) of 133,252. South Australia now stretches right across the continent, and has an area of 578 million acres and a population (1895) of 357,405. It was first colonised in 1836, and constituted a self-governing Colony in 1856. Imports (1895), £5,680,880; exports, £7,352,742.
Mr. Lowe’s band proved strong enough to kill the measure. It passed the second reading, indeed, by a majority of five, but it perished in Committee, and the Ministry resigned. It was the closing scene of Earl Russell’s long career, which somehow had missed the success which his achievements seemed to have earned. Born in the very holiest of holies of the Whig sanctuary, with natural abilities far more varied, with acquired culture far more extensive, with greater advantages from family connection than Palmerston could boast, and without Palmerston’s headstrong tendencies, he never attained more than a fraction of the influence and popularity which Palmerston had so fully secured. Indispensable for more than a generation to every Whig or Liberal Cabinet, he had become associated more with the failures than the successes of his party, and people ungratefully remembered him rather as the betrayer of Denmark than as the pioneer of Reform.
The Swan River Settlement was founded in 1826, and made a separate Colony, under the name of Western Australia, in 1829. It remained a Crown Colony until 1890, when it became a self-governing community. Population (1897), 138,000 (estimated). Imports (1895), £3,774,951; exports, £1,332,554.
|Lord Derby’s last Administration.|Once more it was Lord Derby’s fate to form a stop-gap Administration, and no sooner was the new Ministry complete, early in July, than the country suddenly threw off the indifference it had shown to Mr. Gladstone’s offer of an extended franchise, and public meetings were held all over the129 country vehemently demanding Reform. It was too late in the session, of course, to do anything that year in Parliament, but the agitation sufficed to show that there was at least one weak man in the Cabinet. The Reform League summoned a meeting in Hyde Park for the evening of July 23, which it was decided to prohibit, and amiable, gentle Mr. Walpole, the Home Secretary, issued a notice that the Park gates would be closed at 5 p.m. Notwithstanding this announcement, processions with bands and banners arrived at the appointed hour, and Mr. Beales, President of the League, demanded admittance, which was refused. Mr. Beales was an experienced barrister, and knew very well what he was about. He was of opinion that in denying the right of public meeting in Hyde Park, the Home Secretary was acting beyond his powers, and, content with asserting this right in a formal way, he intended to adjourn the meeting and claim redress by constitutional means. But a meeting in Hyde Park, no matter for what purpose, invariably attracts thousands of idlers and roughs, who have no part and no interest in the question to be discussed. Mr. Beales and the earnest reformers adjourned to Trafalgar Square and passed resolutions to their hearts’ content; but the rough and idle part of the crowd remained about Hyde Park. The gates were strong enough to resist any pressure, but the railings were old and frail. |Disturbance in Hyde Park.| People climbing on them felt them shake and creak; half a dozen fellows gave a push together in Park Lane—the railings gave way; in an instant the whole length from Hamilton Gardens to the Marble Arch went down, and the Park was filled with a tumultuous, rollicking mob. The grass and the flower-beds were the only property that suffered; the police took a few prisoners, and the crowd dispersed peacefully at nightfall. Mr. Beales took a small deputation to the Home Secretary next day, urging him to withdraw the troops and police, and trust the people to take care of the town. Mr. Walpole consented; it may have been prudent to do so, but the manner of doing it was unfortunate. It is a dangerous precedent for a Home Secretary to show himself afraid of the consequence of carrying out his own decrees.
THE MARRIAGE OF PRINCESS HELENA AND PRINCE CHRISTIAN OF SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN-SONDERBURG-AUGUSTENBURG, IN THE PRIVATE CHAPEL AT WINDSOR CASTLE, July 5, 1866.
130 The summer of 1866 will be remembered long in the City of London by reason of the commercial disaster and monetary panic which followed sharply on a period of speculative inflation, the combined result of active trade and the new law of limited liability. |Commercial Panic.| The suspension early in May of the great discount firm of Overend and Gurney, with liabilities figured at £19,000,000, was followed within the same week by the failure of several banks and the suspension of the Bank Charter Act. On May 11 the Bank rate was raised to 10 per cent. and continued at that point till August 17. The shock was one from which the credit of the country took a long time to recover, and the amount of private misfortune and loss of income reacted on almost every department of trade, though the public revenue maintained a surprising degree of elasticity.
B. Trooper, South Australian Cavalry.
C. Trooper, New South Wales Cavalry.
D. Trooper, Bodyguard, Canada.
E. Trooper, Canadian Dragoons (Winter Dress).
G. Sergeant, Cape Town Highlanders.
H. Officer, 8th Battalion Active Militia of Canada.
J. Officer, Royal Malta Artillery.
K. Trooper, Canadian Dragoons.
L. Gunner, Royal Canadian Artillery (Winter Dress).
TYPES OF COLONIAL TROOPS, 1897.
A brighter passage in the record of 1866 is that which commemorates the completion of telegraphic communication between Great Britain and America. Attempts had been made in 1857, 1858, and 1865 to lay a cable across the Atlantic, all of which ended in failure; but Mr. Cyrus Field would not abandon his dream. |The Atlantic Cable.| The Great Eastern steamship sailed from Berehaven on July 12, and on July 27 the first messages were exchanged between the old and new worlds. A feat hardly less inspiring was performed later in the same season, in the recovery of the broken cable of 1865, which was spliced, thereby effecting a second connection between the two continents.
Mr. Disraeli, as has been said, had undertaken the task in which Mr. Gladstone had failed, and brought in a Reform Bill early in the session of 1867. It cost the Government a heavy price at the outset: Lord Carnarvon, Lord Cranbourne (now Marquis of Salisbury), and General Peel resigned their seats in the Cabinet because they disapproved of it. The Bill went forward, and, after undergoing many changes, finally passed in a form conferring household suffrage in boroughs and a £12 franchise in counties. |“A Leap in the Dark.”| “No doubt,” said Lord Derby on the third reading of the Bill in the Lords, quoting a remark made by Lord Cranbourne in the other House, “no doubt we are making a great experiment and ‘taking a leap in the dark,’ but I have the greatest confidence in the sound sense of my fellow-countrymen.” But another saying by Lord Derby gives a truer insight into the real object of a Conservative Government in doing work so repugnant to its accredited principles. Somebody having observed to him that the measure was dangerously democratic—“We have dished the Whigs!” was all that Derby replied.131 Mr. Disraeli, in reference to the same subject, made use of a phrase which gave bitter offence to some of his party, and deepened the distrust with which the old school of Conservatives regarded him almost to the end of his life. On October 29, 1867, he was entertained at a banquet by the Conservatives of Edinburgh, and when passing in review the events of the session, and especially his Reform Act, he said: “I had to prepare the mind of the country, and to educate—if it be not arrogant to use such a phrase—to educate our party.”
HOBART, TASMANIA.
Tasmania, formerly known as Van Diemen’s Land, was taken possession of by the British in 1803. It was governed from Sydney until 1825, when it became an independent province; and it received its existing Constitution in 1855. Population (1895), 160,834; imports, £1,094,457; exports, £1,373,063.
LAUNCESTON, TASMANIA.
The stream of emigration westward which set in after the Irish famine in 1848 had resulted in creating a very large Irish population in the United States. All these emigrants had brought with them a bitter hatred of England, on whom they laid the blame of all the sufferings of their own people. They had found in America the true remedy for their wrongs, which, had they realised it, arose not so much from political, as from physical causes. By moving to a spacious land where labour was in demand, they escaped from the evils which must always press upon a congested population with no proper outlet for its energy. But still they loved old Ireland and hated England, and, finding themselves of political importance in the new land, for the Irish vote soon became indispensable to the Democratic party, they busied themselves with projects for the deliverance of their country. They found plenty of encouragement from Americans, for the feeling in the Northern States was very bitter against England after the close of the civil war. Thousands of Irishmen had learnt the art of war and the use of weapons in the Federal armies; a military organisation was set on foot in the belief that Great Britain and the United States were on the point of going to war. |The Fenians.| This organisation, which adopted the title of Fenian, had for its leader a man of great ability and experience, James Stephens. The Government received due warning of what was in preparation; in fact, the leaders of the movement in Ireland openly proclaimed their intention of restoring by force of arms the independence of Ireland. They had plenty of funds: every Irish man and maid in America contributed something to such a glorious purpose. A steady stream of American-Irish, most of them old soldiers of the civil war, set in from across the Atlantic, and scattered themselves among the towns and villages of Ireland. At last Stephens himself arrived, who, having been mixed up in the rising of 1848, was promptly arrested and lodged in Richmond Prison, Dublin, in November, 1865. All Ireland was convulsed with delight when, a few days later, he was found to have escaped.
132 The absence of Stephens from America had evil results to the Fenians there. One party was for invading Canada, a project which Stephens had never favoured. No sooner was his back turned, than a party of Fenians actually crossed the Niagara river, occupied a fort, and defeated a force of Canadian volunteers. Just as in 1838, when the Canadians were in revolt, the United States Government had saved the position for Great Britain by enforcing the neutrality of their frontier, so now it acted a similar part, and put an end to what might have become a highly dangerous state of affairs. Stephens never reappeared, but the preparations he had started were continued. With the pathetic hero-worship of the Celt, the Irish peasantry were confident that their lost leader would return among them soon and lead them to victory. But one brief taste of prison discipline had been enough for this doughty champion, and he is believed to have spent the rest of his life abroad in comparative affluence, derived from the subscriptions collected from his dupes.
WELLINGTON, NEW ZEALAND.
The first body of immigrants arrived at Port Nicholson in 1840. In the same year the whole of the islands were annexed by Great Britain, and Wellington and Auckland were founded. Constitutional government was conferred in 1853. In 1865 Wellington became the seat of government. The population of the islands in 1895 was 698,706; imports, £6,400,129; exports, £8,550,224.
In February 1867 the Government frustrated a Fenian plot to seize Chester Castle; there was an attempt at a general rising in Ireland, which ended in the loss of a few lives in harebrained and disconnected attacks on police barracks in Cork, Limerick, Louth, and elsewhere, and a number of American-Irish were arrested. Two of these prisoners were being conveyed across Manchester in a prison van, when it was suddenly attacked by a party of armed Fenians. A policeman was shot dead, the prisoners were rescued and were never recaptured.
THE PINK TERRACES, ROTOMAHANA, NEW ZEALAND.
The water from the hot springs, on its way to Lake Rotomahana (“Warm Lake”), left a deposit which gradually assumed the forms shown in the illustration. The water was exquisitely blue; the terraces on one side of the lake were white, on the other a transparent pink. Both were completely destroyed in the great eruption of 1886.
THE WHITE TERRACES, ROTOMAHANA, NEW ZEALAND.
The only other serious act of the Fenians was an attempt to release two prisoners confined in Clerkenwell Gaol, who, considering the means adopted, might very well pray to be delivered from their friends. A barrel of gunpowder, placed against the outer wall, was exploded at four in the afternoon, throwing down about sixty yards of masonry and wrecking several houses in the street.133 But for a warning received by the Governor of the gaol that an attempt was to be made to blow it up, the prisoners would have been at exercise in the yard at the time of the explosion, and almost certainly must have been killed. As it was, twelve persons were killed and 120 were wounded.
Born in Ceylon. Commander-in-Chief of Bombay, 1865, and of India, 1870. Raised to the Peerage, 1869, for his services in Abyssinia.
|War with Abyssinia.|
PARLIAMENT HOUSE AND TABLE MOUNTAIN, CAPE TOWN.
See historical notes on Cape Colony, page 71. Area, including dependencies (estimated), 292,000 square miles; population, 1,800,000, of whom 39,000 are British born; imports (1895), £19,094,880; exports, £16,904,756, including diamonds, £4,775,016; gold, £7,975,637; wool, £2,000,000.
The arms of a great and growing empire are seldom allowed to rust from disuse, no matter how pacific the intentions of its rulers may be. Parliament was called together in November 1867 to vote supplies for an Expedition which it had been found necessary to send out to Abyssinia, under the command of Sir Robert Napier. Theodore, King of Abyssinia, a passionate and semi-barbarous despot, had cultivated amicable relations with Great Britain for a number of years, chiefly on account of his friendship for Mr. Plowden, formerly English Consul at Massowah. But Mr. Plowden was dead—killed in an encounter between Theodore and his rebellious subjects; and Captain Cameron, who succeeded to the Consulate at Massowah, had not succeeded in ingratiating himself with the King. Theodore appealed to Queen Victoria to help him against the Turks, and on receiving no immediate reply to his letter, lost his temper and threw all the British subjects he could catch into the cavernous dungeons of his capital, Magdala. Among these captives was Captain Cameron. Mr. Rassam was sent on an embassy to remonstrate with Theodore, who, however, was not inclined to listen to reason. On the contrary, he had the envoy seized, with his companions, Lieutenant Prideaux and Dr. Blane, loaded with chains, and thrust into prison. Lord Stanley now sent to demand the release of the prisoners within three months, and declared that immediate invasion would follow if this were refused. It was a delicate business to convey despatches to the tyrant in his rock fortress, and Theodore never received the ultimatum. The expedition set out: 400 miles of very mountainous country had to be traversed, but everything had been admirably prepared in the matter of transport and commissariat, and Napier was an experienced commander. The ease of the victory which awaited him has done something to diminish the fame which is really his due for accomplishing a very difficult task. He encountered the Abyssinian army under the walls of Magdala on April 10, 1868; the King’s soldiers fought with headlong gallantry, and fell in heaps before the terrible fire of British Infantry. Charge after charge was repelled, until Napier found that his enemy had vanished, leaving some 2,000 dead and wounded on the field, while in his own force the casualties amounted to no more than nineteen wounded. The fierce old King so far bowed under chastisement that the captives were released, but he refused to surrender. It then became necessary to enforce the lesson that, if Great Britain does not take up arms lightly,134 neither does she lay them down without exacting all her demands. Napier determined to take Magdala by assault. Perched high on a precipitous rock, it occupied a position which, in old times and without modern appliances, must have been pronounced inaccessible. But there are few places to which courage equipped by science can be denied admission: the northern gate was stormed, and lying within it was found the old lion King. Preferring death to dishonour he had perished by his own hand.
SEARCHING TABLES AT THE DE BEERS’ DIAMOND MINE, KIMBERLEY, SOUTH AFRICA.
Lord Derby’s health had given him repeated warning that the time had come when he must seek release from public duties. He retired from office in February 1868, and Mr. Disraeli became Prime Minister. “The time will come when you will hear me.” Few—very few—who had heard that vaunt shouted across the House in 1837 were there to witness its complete fulfilment in 1868. It was a position of the highest honour, but not one of great power to which Disraeli had succeeded, and he was not called on to occupy it long. He could not reckon on a majority on any question upon which the Opposition should act together under a resolute leader. Such a question and such a leader were soon found.
TOWN HALL, DURBAN.
Durban, the largest town in Natal, had a population in 1894 of 27,984. Natal has an estimated area of 20,461 square miles, and a population (1891) of 543,913. Imports, from Great Britain (1895), £1,602,023; exports, to Great Britain, £716,645.
|The Irish State Church.|
Sons, Glasgow.
DAVID LIVINGSTONE,
1813–1873.
African Missionary and Explorer. Born at Blantyre, near Glasgow, and in his youth worked in cotton-mills in that town. Sent to Africa by the London Missionary Society in 1838, he thenceforth spent his life in exploring and evangelizing that continent. In 1865 and 1870 expeditions were sent in search of him. He died at Ilala. His body was brought to England, and buried in Westminster Abbey.
In choosing the Established Protestant Church of Ireland for attack, Mr. Gladstone selected the weakest spot in the Constitution; one, nevertheless, which the Conservative party were bound to defend to their last man. The Irish peasantry, except those of the greater part of Ulster, were Roman Catholics, and Roman Catholics of a peculiarly devout and enthusiastic kind. The Protestant Establishment was an alien Church, and could never be anything else; a monument of conquest which it had been unwise to set up. It presented itself to Mr. Gladstone as the very core and pillar of disaffection, and it was very easy to make out a strong case for its abolition. In March 1868 he brought forward three resolutions, declaring that it was the opinion of the House of Commons that the Established Church of Ireland should cease to exist, and the first division showed a majority of sixty-one in favour of the project and against the Government. In consequence of this Disraeli advised the Queen to dissolve Parliament, which was done in July. Writs were made returnable in November, and the interval was spent in such canvassing and platform work as the country had never experienced before. |Liberal Triumph.| Mr. Gladstone was beaten in Lancashire, Mr. W. H. Smith ousted Mr. Mill from Westminster, and Mr. Roebuck lost his seat at Sheffield; nevertheless, the general result of the polls was an immense gain to the Liberals, showing a majority for them of 120 in the New Parliament. Mr. Gladstone, having found a seat at Greenwich, set to work to obey the Queen’s bidding in forming a Ministry. |Mr. Gladstone’s Cabinet.| The most notable accession to the Cabinet was that of Mr. Bright, who became135 Secretary of State for India, thus marking an epoch in Parliamentary history by the formal recognition of the extreme Radicals as a party in the State. The great business of the session of 1869 was, of course, the Bill to disestablish and disendow the Irish Church. No Irish question can be touched without releasing the springs of oratory of a quality beside which the most impassioned appeals of average English or Scottish speakers seem tame and halting. In the Commons the fight was a foregone conclusion; but the Irish Church was an exceedingly wealthy corporation, and the disposal of its possessions, to the value of sixteen millions sterling, afforded matter for long and complicated debates in Committee. The Lords could not be persuaded even to delay the Act on which the country and the House of Commons had spoken with so much decision. The Bill passed its second reading by a majority of thirty-three, and received the Royal Assent on July 26, 1869. Lord Derby had made his last speech on the second reading of this measure, which he resisted with much of his ancient vigour and all his splendid eloquence. |Death of Lord Derby.| He died in October of the same year, and, in the opinion of most men qualified to form one, Parliament lost in him its most polished orator.
SIR EDWIN LANDSEER, R.A., 1802–1873.
This distinguished animal painter was born in London. He was knighted in 1850, and in 1865 was offered and declined the office of President of the Royal Academy. The picture represents him in the studio of Baron Marochetti, at work on one of the lions for the Nelson column. These were cast in bronze, and placed in position in January 1867.
The Irish people at first showed few signs of gratitude for the disestablishment of their State Church. The Fenians were giving fresh signs of activity, agrarian crime was of frightful frequency during the winter of 1869–70, and the virulence of the anti-British press became day by day more intense. Troops were poured into the country to repress disturbance, and Mr. Gladstone set about preparing fresh measures of conciliation. The Irish land system, theoretically almost identical in general principles to that of Great Britain, not only differed from it in important details, but had come to be worked on wholly different lines from those pursued by English and Scottish landlords. |Irish Land Legislation.| In Great Britain the tendency had been to throw small unprofitable holdings into substantial farms which should be worth the efforts of energetic men of means to cultivate. The landlord, as a rule, equipped the farm with suitable buildings and fences, and frequently lived on his estates during most of the year. In Ireland, with few exceptions, buildings and improvements of every sort were executed by the tenant, who was allowed to subdivide his holding into mere patches of land, with a hovel run up at the expense of the occupant. The peasantry were bound to their holdings by the capital they had sunk in them; they could not in every season wring the rent out of the land; huge masses of arrears accumulated, often ending in eviction, which meant practical confiscation of such permanent improvements as had been effected. All the evil effects and bitter feelings arising out of this decrepid mode of tenure were intensified by the ever-increasing tendency of landowners to absenteeism, and by the prevailing difference in the religion of proprietors and peasantry.
CRICKET IN THE EARLY YEARS OF THE REIGN.
Sussex v. Kent, at Brighton, 1842.
In Ulster, indeed, the conditions were different. Not only was there a large Protestant element in the farming and labouring class, but the custom of tenant-right had grown up, protecting the tenant against disturbance as long as he paid his rent, securing his right to compensation on leaving for improvements executed by himself, and, most important of all, giving him a saleable property in the goodwill of the tenancy. The Ulster tenantry, as a rule, were prosperous. Mr. Gladstone refused to see in their prosperity only the result of their greater industry and capacity for business: he set it down to the system of dual ownership involved in the recognition of tenant-right, and this system he resolved to apply to every part of Ireland by creating a statutory partnership between landlord and tenant. It is hardly possible to conceive a reform more vital than that initiated by this measure in the social fabric of Ireland; for, except in the north-east of Ulster, agriculture forms the sole important industry of that country. Yet the Conservative Opposition, led by Mr. Disraeli, made no attempt to resist it; the case for legislation was too clamant.
FASHIONS IN 1864.
The safest way to take a lady down!
Far-reaching as the Irish Land Bill has proved in its effects, it was hardly of greater moment than a measure introduced two days later by Mr. W. E. Forster, establishing a scheme of elementary education. |National Education.| The Government had been not more than two years in office, and had amply fulfilled the first part of an ambitious programme by passing three measures of extraordinary importance, dealing with the Irish Church, Irish land tenure, and national education; yet the tide of popular favour which had carried them into power began to show unmistakeable signs of ebbing. The legislation of 1871, actual and proposed, served to add to the number of malcontents. |Army Purchase.| The first step taken was against the system of purchase in the army. It was the recognised practice in all except a few special corps in the British army for an officer to purchase his first commission, as well as every subsequent step in regimental promotion. There was a regulation scale of prices, but there was also an extra regulation payment, winked at by the authorities. An officer’s commission thus became a valuable property to him, which he could dispose of on leaving the service. It was a system which few people could defend successfully in theory, but it was one that had worked well in practice; and the project to sweep it away created a vigorous opposition. But what makes the Parliamentary fight over army purchase of moment in history is the means by which Mr. Gladstone carried his purpose in the teeth of the House of Lords. The abolition of purchase had been part only of a sweeping measure of army re-organisation brought in by Mr. Cardwell. In order to save part of the Bill, the Government threw overboard137 every section of it except the purchase clauses. The Lords, desiring to defeat what was left of the original Bill, declared they would not accept the purchase clauses until the whole scheme of army reform was before them. A sigh of relief escaped from military men; the system endeared to them by custom and association had been saved by the action of the Upper House. But they had to learn how resolute and adroit was he with whom they had to reckon. Mr. Gladstone had a theatrical surprise in store for everyone. He gave the go-by to Parliament by announcing that, whereas army purchase had been created by Royal warrant, it could be rendered illegal by the same means; and, therefore, he had advised the Queen to cancel the old warrant and issue a new one. It was a complete victory over the House of Lords; they were forced to pass the Bill so obnoxious to them, otherwise the officers of the army would have been deprived of the compensation provided for the sums they had paid for their commissions. But the victory was very damaging to Mr. Gladstone’s Government.
CRICKET IN THE LATER YEARS OF THE REIGN.
England v. Australia at Lords, June 22, 23, 24, 1896. Dr. Grace is at the further wicket.
FASHIONS IN 1870.
He: “Shall we—a—sit down?” She: “I should like to, but my dressmaker says I mustn’t.”
Most educated people were tired, and perhaps ashamed, of the uproar and scandal inseparable from the old system of elections, and the Government brought in a Bill to abolish the hustings and make the proceedings more orderly, against which few voices would have been raised, had it not contained provisions for voting by Ballot. |The Ballot Bill.| The idea of secret voting was repugnant to the national sense of what is fair and above-board; but the Bill eventually got through the House of Commons, though shorn, at the instance of Mr. Vernon Harcourt and Mr. James (now Lord James of Hereford), of the provisions for throwing the expenses of elections on the rates. The measure was rejected by the House of Lords, but the Government succeeded in passing it during the session of 1872. The result upon the balance of parties in the House of Commons has been singularly small, and certainly the Conservatives, who had most reason to dread the effect of secret voting on the fortunes of their party, have had no reason to complain of the result.
MARRIAGE OF HER ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCESS LOUISE TO THE MARQUIS OF LORNE, K.T., AT ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR, March 21, 1871.
The officiating clergy are the Bishop of London, the Bishop of Oxford, and the Dean of Windsor. Next the bride on the left is the Queen, then the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, the Princess of Wales and her two sons, and other members of the Royal Family. The bridegroom is supported by Earl Percy and Lord Ronald Gower, behind whom are the Duke and Duchess of Argyll, his parents. Mr. Disraeli is in the right hand corner of the picture, and Mr. Gladstone sits in the centre of the same row.
CHAPTER XIV.
1870–1880.
The Franco-German War—Russia seizes her Opportunity—The Irish University Bill—Defeat and Resignation of Ministers—Mr. Gladstone resumes Office—Dissolution of Parliament—Conservative Victory—The Ashanti War—Mr. Disraeli’s Third Administration—Mr. Gladstone Retires from the Leadership—Annexation of the Fiji Islands—Purchase of Suez Canal Shares—Visit of the Prince of Wales to India—The Queen’s New Title—Threatening Action of Russia—The Bulgarian Massacres—Disraeli becomes Earl of Beaconsfield—The Russo-Turkish War—Great Britain Prepares to Defend Constantinople—Secession of Lord Carnarvon and Lord Derby—The “Jingo” Party—The Berlin Congress and Treaty—“Peace with Honour”—Massacre at Cabul—War with Afghanistan—The Zulu War—Disaster of Isandhlana.
THE hurricane which, breaking over Western Europe in the summer of 1870, had swept away the Imperial Dynasty of France before the close of the year, was not felt in Great Britain with any alarming effect. |The Franco-German War.| Nothing occurred seriously to endanger her neutrality; she was enjoying a period of commercial prosperity strangely in contrast to the savage strife beyond the sea, until a sudden and ominous act on the part of the Russian Government redoubled the anxious vigilance of Her Majesty’s Government. The Treaty of Paris had established the neutrality of the Black Sea, throwing open its waters to the mercantile marine of all nations, and interdicting them to the flag of war, “either of the Powers possessing its coasts, or of any other Power.” |Russia Seizes her Opportunity.| By this provision Russia now proclaimed she would no longer be bound. She could not have chosen a better opportunity for her own purpose. The Western Alliance was dislocated; two of the signatories to the Treaty of Paris were engaged in mortal strife; a third—Austria—could not be expected to take action independently of Prussia; was it incumbent on Great Britain—the fourth Power—to139 vindicate, single-handed, the sanctity of the treaty? Few responsible people could be found to contemplate seriously such a course; yet it was peculiarly galling to the national pride to have to acquiesce in the action of Russia. Lord Granville proposed a conference of the Powers to be held in London, and the proposal was accepted. The Conference met on January 17, 1872, and solemnly proceeded to abrogate that which they were in no position to maintain—the neutralisation of the Black Sea. Reflection on the situation of Europe at that time can lead to no other conclusion but that Great Britain was sagaciously steered without loss of honour through a very difficult channel; but none the less unfavourable to the Government was the impression created at the time, that the country had suffered a degree of humiliation in permitting a treaty which had cost her so dear to be torn up.
HER MAJESTY WITH THE PRINCESS BEATRICE.
April 1871.
But Mr. Gladstone, full of serious purpose, was blind to the symptoms of failing prestige—indifferent to the warning conveyed by loss of successive seats at by-elections. He had dealt with two limbs of the upas-tree; there remained the third—that of Irish education, and he bared his arms to attack it. |The Irish University Bill.| On February 13 he introduced a Bill dealing with the Irish Universities. It was a masterly measure, a scheme of extraordinary complexity, dealing with a very complicated and unsatisfactory state of things. It is not necessary to examine its details at this time; it is, perhaps, enough to say that the Prime Minister’s plan was one that, while it offended and alarmed every one deriving benefit from the existing state of things, failed to satisfy any of the religious bodies—Protestant, Catholic, or Nonconformist—which desired a change. Disraeli’s words spoken on the second reading came home to many hearts on both sides of the House. “You have now had four years of it,” he said. “You have despoiled churches; you have threatened every corporation and endowment in the country. You have examined into everybody’s affairs. You have criticised every profession and vexed every trade. No one is certain of his property, and nobody knows what duties he may have to perform to-morrow. I believe that the people of this country have had enough of confiscation.” |Defeat and Resignation of Ministers.| The Bill was rejected by a majority of three votes, and Mr. Gladstone resigned office; but, on the Queen sending for Mr. Disraeli, he declined to form “a weak and discredited Administration,” and the Government resumed its functions.
CRITICS.
Mr. Gladstone: “H’m, flippant!”
Mr. Disraeli: “Ha, prosy!”
Mr. Disraeli’s “Lothair” and Mr. Gladstone’s “Juventus Mundi” appeared almost simultaneously in 1870.
Ministers were in an unenviable position. The increasing bitterness of parties had brought about a disregard of those unwritten laws which had contributed so much in the past to the amenity of public life and to earning for the House of Commons the character of being “the best club in London.” There were bitter dissensions among Ministers themselves, of which Lord Ripon and Mr. Childers gave evidence by leaving the Cabinet. In four years the Conservatives had gained fifteen seats in by-elections, against which Ministerialists could only set two captured from the enemy. Still, the Government could reckon on a majority of140 ninety in the House of Commons, and no one dreamt of their appealing to the country while all the omens remained adverse. Nevertheless, Mr. Gladstone startled everybody by issuing a manifesto, in January 1874, announcing the dissolution of Parliament. |General Election.| Never did a politician play more completely into his opponent’s hands, though the Conservatives went to the polls full of misgiving about the effect of the new-fangled Ballot. The result proved that their fears were unfounded. The followers of Mr. Disraeli in the new Parliament outnumbered those of Mr. Gladstone by half a hundred.
THE PROCESSION ON THE OCCASION OF THE THANKSGIVING SERVICE AT ST. PAUL’S FOR THE RECOVERY OF H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES PASSING LUDGATE CIRCUS, February 1872.
His Royal Highness had been seized with typhoid fever in November 1871, and for several days in the early part of December his life was despaired of. Her Majesty and the other members of the Royal Family were twice summoned to Sandringham, where he was being nursed by the Princess of Wales and Princess Alice of Hesse.
The closing months of Mr. Gladstone’s Administration were marked by a short war on the Gold Coast, arising out of a dispute with Koffee Calcalli, King of Ashanti, who had claimed a tribute formerly paid to him by the Dutch for some territory which they sold to Great Britain in 1872. |The Ashanti War.| Failing to obtain acknowledgment of his claim, the King of Ashanti attacked the Fantis, a tribe under British protection, and it became necessary to chastise him. The difficulty of doing so lay, not in the character of the people of Ashanti, for, though brave and warlike, they could not stand before modern arms of precision, but in the nature of the climate and the difficulty of transport. The campaign had to be limited to the cool season; it was entrusted to Sir Garnet Wolseley, who well sustained the reputation he had earned in the Red River Expedition in 1870. The Expedition left England on September 12, 1873, and returned on March 21, 1874, having in the interval captured and destroyed Coomassie, the capital, brought the King to terms, and laid a perpetual interdict on the hideous human sacrifices which formed one of his most cherished141 institutions. The Ashanti warriors defended their forest roads gallantly, and the British loss was heavy in proportion to the numbers engaged. The total cost of this Expedition was reckoned at a little short of one million sterling.
THE ASHANTI WAR: THE 42ND HIGHLANDERS CROSSING THE OMDALI.
The new Ministry was formed with unexampled celerity. Mr. Gladstone, accepting the verdict of the country, did not attempt to meet the new Parliament, but resigned on February 18, 1874. |Mr. Disraeli’s Third Administration.| Three days later the Queen had approved of the names submitted to her by Mr. Disraeli for all the offices in the Government, both in the Cabinet and outside it. Lord Salisbury, sometimes known then as “the terrible Marquis,” and Lord Carnarvon, both of whom had seceded in 1867 on the question of the franchise, resumed their former seats at the India and Colonial Offices respectively. The Liberal party were languishing in that political anæmia which follows on overwhelming defeat, when they received an additional blow in the retirement of Mr. Gladstone from the leadership. Some hard things were said about one who thus abandoned his party at the lowest ebb of their fortunes, and uncomplimentary contrasts were drawn between him and Disraeli, who had cheered his followers by his constant presence in adversity which seemed irredeemable. After some months of indecision, during which the Liberal leadership was administered by a kind of junta, the Marquis of Hartington assumed the thankless task of leading the deserted and dispirited Opposition, an office made all the more difficult by the occasional raids upon the debates made by Mr. Gladstone as often as some subject which specially interested him turned up, such as the Public Worship Bill, and the Bill abolishing patronage in the Church of Scotland.
THE ASHANTI WAR: THE ENTRY INTO COOMASSIE, February 4, 1874.
MARRIAGE OF H.R.H. THE DUKE OF EDINBURGH AND THE GRAND-DUCHESS MARIE OF RUSSIA AT THE WINTER PALACE, ST. PETERSBURG, January 23, 1874.
View of the interior of the chapel of the Winter Palace. The bride and bridegroom are standing before the altar, and over them the Metropolitan of St. Petersburg elevates the cross. The Emperor and Empress of Russia stand together against the great piers supporting the dome, and near them are the Czarewitch with his wife, the Princess Dagmar, and the Princess of Wales, her sister. In the foreground are the Prince of Wales and the Crown Prince of Prussia, and among others present are the Crown Princess of Prussia, the Crown Prince of Denmark, Prince Arthur, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, and a long train of Grand Dukes and Nobles.
Mr. Disraeli was not new to office, but he found himself in power for the first time. With a good working majority behind him in the House of Commons, a helpless Opposition before him, and a surplus of six millions at the Treasury, the natural question in everybody’s mouth was “What will he do with it?” There were still many of his own party who mistrusted his love of display and his magnificent conception of empire as likely to impel him along some hazardous course of conquest abroad or legislation at home, but their apprehensions were soon allayed. |Annexation of the Fiji Islands.| In leading the House, Disraeli exchanged his formidable gifts of invective for a manner and speech conciliatory to men of all parties. The domestic programme of the Government for the sessions of 1874 and 1875 was unambitious but useful, and the only extension of British dominion abroad was the peaceful annexation of the Fiji Islands at the request of King Cakobau and his council.
the Linnean Society.
CHARLES R. DARWIN, LL.D.,
1809–1882.
Naturalist. Born at Shrewsbury; educated there and at Edinburgh and Cambridge. His researches into the “Origin of Species,” “The Descent of Man,” &c., have revolutionized modern ideas on these subjects.
PROFESSOR
SIR RICHARD OWEN,
1804–1892.
Naturalist, and one of the greatest authorities on comparative anatomy and osteology. First Hunterian Professor of the Royal College of Surgeons (1836), and first Superintendent (1856–1883) of the Natural History Department of the British Museum, now housed in the building here shown, in the arrangement of which he was greatly interested. It was said of him that he could describe any animal from a single bone.
THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM, SOUTH KENSINGTON.
Built in 1873–1880 from designs by Mr. Alfred Waterhouse, R.A., at a cost of £352,000.
But towards the end of 1875 there came the occasion for the display of some spirit, in which may be traced the beginning of reaction against the “Little Britain” school of politicians. When a singular opportunity presented itself of strengthening our communications with the East, Disraeli fearlessly seized it. The Suez Canal had been open since 1869, and Great Britain, though she was the Power which made most use of it, had no pecuniary interest in it. The funds necessary for the work had been subscribed almost entirely by the Egyptian Government and by private speculators in France. Of the 400,000 original shares, the Khedive of Egypt held 176,000; but the Khedive’s expenditure had been for years far beyond his revenues, and his shares were thrown upon the market in 1875. Disraeli was struck by the proposition advanced by Mr. Greenwood, a journalist of some note, that these shares should be bought by the British Government, and the purchase was completed on November 25, the price paid being £4,000,000. |Suez Canal Shares.| Sir Stafford Northcote, on whom fell the duty of asking Parliament for the money, was opposed to his chief’s policy in this matter, and must have felt some misgiving in repelling the attacks made upon it by the Liberals, but he did so effectively. Mr. Gladstone emerged from his retirement to fling himself into the debate, and declared that to spend the national funds in such an object was “an unprecedented thing”;—“So is the Canal!” retorted Northcote. It is only just to Disraeli’s statesmanship to notice what an excellent investment, in a monetary sense, was made for Great Britain by the purchase of these shares. The original sum of four millions has been entirely paid off out of income derived from the shares, which, for a number of years, have been paying from 17 to 21 per cent. The shares purchased have risen in value from four to eighteen millions, and the proportion of British tonnage to the whole tonnage of all nations using the Canal is 75 per cent. It would, however, be claiming too much for Disraeli’s commercial acumen to suppose that he realised what should become the ultimate monetary value of these shares. What he perceived was the importance of Great Britain acquiring a voice in the management of the new and dominant highway to India. The public had received recently the means of estimating the stupendous responsibility resting on the shoulders of those charged with the administration144 of British India. The results of the first census ever taken there were published in 1875, showing the total population of the British dominion in India to consist of twenty-three distinct nationalities, amounting to 190,563,048 souls—nearly five times that of the United Kingdom. This did much to dispel an idea dimly present in the minds even of educated persons, that the Queen’s Indian subjects consisted of one dusky race, speaking one language and divided into two religions—Mahomedan and Hindoo.
Messrs. Graves.
H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES, K.G.
It was a congenial duty for the Prime Minister, entertaining these lofty views of the burden and glory of empire, to ask the House of Commons to vote £142,000 to defray the expenses of a visit about to be paid by the Prince of Wales to India. |The Prince of Wales Visits India.| His Royal Highness had already visited the principal Colonies, but the customs of Oriental Courts, the ceremony and display considered indispensable, and, above all, the necessity for exchanging costly presents with the various Princes, rendered the expenses far beyond what any ordinary tour would involve. The money was cheerfully voted, for the public approved of the energy shown by the heir to the Crown in acquiring a personal acquaintance with all parts of the British Empire. |The Queen’s New Title.| There was less unanimity in the reception of the next important proposal of the Government, made after the Prince’s return from India in 1876, namely, to supply such addition to the titles of the Sovereign as had been rendered appropriate by her assumption, in 1858, of the direct government of India.
Portrait Gallery.
EDWARD ROBERT, FIRST EARL OF LYTTON,
1831–1891.
Only son of Lord Lytton, the novelist. Viceroy of India, 1876–1880; Ambassador to France, 1887–1891. Known in literature as “Owen Meredith.”
Meanwhile, the Eastern Question had burst out again. Insurrections in the Turkish provinces of Bulgaria, Servia, and Montenegro had been suppressed by the Porte with that ferocity so characteristic of Turkish misrule; Russia had begun moving troops towards the Danube, and a large section of the English public avowed sympathy with her, or with any other Power that would put an end to the sickening brutalities in Bulgaria. |The Bulgarian Massacres.| Mr. Gladstone threw Homer and theology to the winds, and the country rang with his denunciations of “the unspeakable Turk.” Those who accuse Disraeli of undue solicitude for popularity should study the course he steered in the storm that was raging round him. But before it came to its height, he had spoken his last words in the House of Commons. On August 11, 1876, Mr. Evelyn Ashley charged the Government with negligence and the British Ambassador at Constantinople with mischievous and dilatory tactics, in their dealings with the Porte and their toleration of massacres. Disraeli replied in one of the most effective speeches he ever delivered, concluding with the words: “What our duty is at this critical moment is to maintain the Empire of England. Nor will we ever agree to any step, though it may obtain for a moment comparative quiet and a false prosperity, that hazards the existence of that Empire.” Next morning the Prime Minister’s place on the Treasury Bench was filled by Sir Stafford Northcote; a well-kept secret was revealed; Mr. Disraeli, on whose health the stress of forty years of active145 Parliamentary life had told with serious effect, had accepted a peerage, and gone to the House of Lords as Earl of Beaconsfield. Not, however, to escape responsibility. Throughout that autumn and winter the Government was vehemently denounced in the country for their toleration of Turkish misdeeds, but Lord Beaconsfield remained firm in his resolution to refrain from embarrassing the Porte or countenancing the designs of Russia. Before Parliament met, cooler counsels had begun to prevail, and when the Czar declared war against the Sultan, on April 24, the Bulgarian atrocities faded out of sight, and British sympathy flowed out towards the weaker combatant. |The Russo-Turkish War.| The gallantry of Osman Pasha’s troops, his double victory over the Russians at Plevna in July, and the heroic defence of the Shipka Pass, brought our old Crimean allies into high favour; but it was when the tide of victory had turned, when the Turkish armies had been crushed under the resistless preponderance of the Northern Power, when Russia was at the gates of Constantinople, and the Porte forced to accept an armistice, sent a Circular Note to the Great Powers, and a special appeal to Great Britain, praying for help in her extremity, that the policy of Beaconsfield was brought to the test.
THE IMPERIAL DURBAR AT DELHI, January 1, 1877: PROCLAMATION OF HER MAJESTY AS EMPRESS OF INDIA.
The Viceroy (Lord Lytton) is seated on the dais, with Lady and the Hon. Miss Lytton behind him, and surrounded by his Secretaries and Aides-de-Camp. Major Burns, Chief Herald, stands on the steps, and a group of heralds occupies the centre. In the circle, amongst the native Princes, sit Sir R. H. Davies (Lieut-Governor of the Punjab, immediately to the left of the Chief Herald, and Sir R. Temple, Lieut-Governor of Bengal), and the Duke of Buckingham (Governor of Madras) to his right. The two native Princesses are the Begum of Bhopal and the Rana of Dholepore; of the latter only the head is seen, on the extreme right.
Parliament was summoned hastily on January 17, 1878, and Northcote gave notice that a Vote of Credit for £6,000,000 would be moved for immediately, for the Cabinet had decided to defend the Sultan’s capital against the Czar. |Secession of Lord Carnarvon and Lord Derby.| The British fleet was ordered, on January 15, to enter the Dardanelles, a step which caused the instant resignation by Lord Carnarvon of his seat in the Cabinet, followed a couple of months later, by that of a far more important Minister—the Foreign Secretary. To send warships into the Dardanelles would have been an empty menace unless it had been supported by corresponding preparation of146 land forces, but calling out the Army Reserve, the occupation of Cyprus by a British force, and the dispatch of 7,000 Indian troops to the Mediterranean, proved too much for the nerves of Lord Derby; he resigned his office, and two years later severed his connection with the Conservative party and accepted office in Mr. Gladstone’s Second Administration.
THE PAS-DE-DEUX,
From the Scène de Triumph in the Grand Anglo Turkish Ballet d’Action, executed by the Earl of Beaconsfield and the Marquis of Salisbury.
The resolute attitude of the Queen’s Government found an echo in the country, and the chorus of a popular music hall ditty supplied a nickname, the exact equivalent of the French term chauviniste. Everybody at this day understands what is meant by the “Jingo party” or the “Jingo policy,” though perhaps the origin of the phrase may come to be forgotten. It is found in the lines shouted by enthusiastic audiences in the early months of 1878:
It was the policy of England in a nutshell, and it had its effect abroad. The Russians had suffered heavily in the war: they were in no spirit to renew it with a powerful, wealthy, and fresh enemy. They agreed not to occupy Gallipoli, provided the English fleet withdrew from the Sea of Marmora. |The Berlin Congress and Treaty.| Both nations were disposed to accept Prince Bismarck’s proffered mediation, and it was agreed to submit the Treaty of San Stefano to a Congress of the Powers at Berlin. This famous Congress, at which Great Britain was represented by her Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary—Lord Beaconsfield and Lord Salisbury—effected a re-arrangement of the Danubian provinces, a rectification of the frontier of Greece, the cession to Russia of Batoum and Kars, with that part of Bessarabia which had been taken from her by the Treaty of Paris, and the occupation by Great Britain of the island of Cyprus, coupled with an obligation to defend Turkey in the possession of her Asiatic dominions. If it was not a settlement containing the elements of durability, nor conveying much direct advantage to Great Britain, at least it prohibited that which Great Britain was determined not to allow—the handing over to Russia of the key of the Mediterranean, the highway to India—and Beaconsfield was entitled to claim, as he did on his return before a rapturous crowd in Downing Street, that Her Majesty’s Plenipotentiaries had succeeded in securing “Peace with Honour.”
Bart., P.R.A.] [By permission of
the Garrick Club.
SIR HENRY IRVING.
Henry Irving was born at Keinton, near Glastonbury, in 1838. He made his first appearance on the stage at Sunderland in 1856. His connection with the Lyceum dates from 1866, and his management of that theatre from December 1878. He was knighted in 1895.
But terrible news arrived before the close of the year. History—the disastrous history of 1841—repeated itself with extraordinary exactness. Sir Louis Cavagnari had been sent as envoy to Cabul early in 1878 to watch and, if possible, counteract the effect of the persistent advance of Russia towards the frontier of British India. He was lodged with a small escort, in comfortable, but defenceless, quarters in the Bala Hissar or citadel of Cabul. The Amir Yakoob soon began to show impatience at the presence of the British in his capital. He was in difficulties also with his own troops, who were clamorous for arrears of pay. On September 3 a riotous mob collected in front of the British Embassy; blows were struck and shots fired, and soon Cavagnari and his household were closely besieged. He had with him a secretary, a surgeon, and Lieutenant Hamilton, commanding the escort of twenty-six troopers and fifty147 men of the corps of Guides. These made a brave defence, but at last the buildings were set on fire, and the envoy and every soul with him perished in the flames. |Massacre at Cabul.| The Amir represented to the Viceroy that this was the result of a mutiny against his own authority, and this seems to have been the case; he was powerless to prevent what perhaps he did not greatly deplore. Not the less necessary was it to exact punishment for the massacre. General Stewart, who had just evacuated Candahar under provisions of the recent treaty, re-occupied it; General Baker advanced by the Shutar Gardan and seized Kushi. On October 6 General Roberts (now Lord Roberts), acting in concert with General Baker, defeated a large force of Ghilzais, with artillery, on the heights of Chardeh, and then fought his way to Cabul, which he entered on the 12th.
WATERLOO BRIDGE AND THE NORTHERN BANK OF THE THAMES IN 1840.
This bank is now occupied by the Victoria Embankment and Charing Cross Station.
All this time Yakoob Khan had been making friendly professions, and remained with the British field force during its operations. But there was reason to suspect his complicity in the massacre; he tendered his abdication to General Roberts, and was sent as a State prisoner to India. Then followed painful scenes in Cabul, the assassins of Cavagnari’s party being hunted out and many of them publicly hanged. The townspeople remained sullen: the Afghan warriors left Cabul and collected at Ghazni, where an aged Mollah was preaching a holy war. By the beginning of December the whole country was under arms, burning to reenact the scenes of 1842. But they had a different man from General Elphinstone to deal with in General Roberts. He continued to receive reinforcements from India, and made such good use of them that, after much hard fighting, the insurgent tribes under Mohamed Jan were completely dispersed.
THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE,
Begun in 1868 and opened in 1882 by Her Majesty, were designed by G. E. Street, R.A. The cost of the buildings was about £700,000, and of the land upon which they stand £1,453,000. The Clock-tower and the “Griffin” in the middle of the road mark the site of Temple Bar.
TEMPLE BAR IN 1837.
This, the western gate of the City of London, was built by Sir Christopher Wren in 1670. Above it, on iron spikes, used to be displayed the heads and limbs of executed traitors. Up to 1851 it was the custom to close the gates when the Sovereign was to enter the City in State, until a herald had knocked upon them with his bâton, when the procession, after some parley, was admitted. The Bar was removed in 1878.
But there were many claimants to the throne of the Amir. Among these was Abdurrahman, who lived in Turkestan, subsidised and protected by Russia. This prince appeared in Northern Afghanistan in March 1880, and a formidable rising took place in support of his claim. On April 19 General Stewart encountered a force, about 15,000 strong,148 at Ahmed Kel, and a fierce encounter took place. For some time it seemed as if the furious onslaught of the Afghans must prevail; the British infantry were driven back; it was only by means of his artillery that Stewart saved the day and the enemy was routed in the end.
In this position affairs in Afghanistan must be left, in order to trace the momentous course of events at home, which wrought a remarkable change on the character and object of the war. But before reverting to the fortunes of the Beaconsfield Ministry, it is necessary to make mention of another and more lamentable war which took place in another quarter of the globe simultaneously with the Afghan Campaign. The River Tugela formed the boundary between the British Colony of Natal and the territory of the Zulus, the most powerful nationality in South Africa. Land disputes between the Zulus and the Dutch Boers of the Transvaal Republic had been brewing for many years, and at last hostilities broke out between them. |The Zulu War.| The Boers were badly beaten by a young Zulu chief called Sikukuni, and both sides appealed to the British Government to intervene. Sir Theophilus Shepstone was sent into the Transvaal to adjudicate between them, and sought to solve the problem by annexing the whole territory, not without the consent of the Republican leaders, the disputed land being handed over to the Zulus. This settlement might have proved effective but for the outrageous behaviour of Cetchwayo, King of the Zulus, who suddenly developed a most violent temper, probably arising from a growing taste for British rum. Even then, had matters been left in the hands of Sir Henry Bulwer, the Governor of Natal, matters might have been maintained on a friendly footing. Unfortunately, Sir Bartle Frere, the Queen’s High Commissioner in South Africa, saw grounds for apprehension in the immense force maintained by Cetchwayo on the frontier, and began moving troops from Cape Colony into Natal. He endeavoured to exact guarantees from the Zulu king of an extremely onerous nature, fixing January 11, 1879, as the limit for their acceptance. Sir Bartle Frere’s action can only be justified by the supposition that war was, sooner or later, inevitable, a belief which neither Sir Henry Bulwer nor the Colonial Office entertained. Cetchwayo allowed the prescribed day to pass without complying with the High Commissioner’s demands. On149 the very next day British troops under Lord Chelmsford invaded Zululand, the force advancing in three columns, under Colonel Glyn, Colonel Pearson, and Colonel Durnford. Colonel Durnford’s column occupied a camp at Isandhlana on January 21; and the following day, being attacked by about 20,000 Zulus, were almost annihilated. |Disaster of Isandhlana.| The 1st Battalion of the 24th Foot was destroyed, thirty officers and 500 men being slain. Colonel Durnford and Colonel Pulleine were killed, and immense quantities of stores fell into the hands of the enemy. It was a terrible retribution for having underrated the resources and numbers of the enemy and for imperfectly reconnoitring his position. A similar disaster very nearly befell Colonel Pearson’s column. On the day after the tragedy at Isandhlana he was beleaguered at the mission station of Ekowe. For more than two months his little garrison of 1,200 held out against incessant assaults by immense numbers of Zulus, till, in the last days of March, provisions had run dangerously low. On April 1 Lord Chelmsford, having received reinforcements from England, advanced with 4,000 British troops and 2,000 friendly natives, defeated the besiegers, and raised the siege.
PRINCES STREET, EDINBURGH, IN 1897.
The Scott Monument was erected in 1840–1844 from designs by George Kemp; the statue is by Steele. Between it and the Castle are seen the Royal Institution (built in 1836) and the National Gallery (1850–1858).
From a Photograph] [by Valentine & Sons, Dundee.
SACKVILLE STREET, DUBLIN, IN 1897.
In the foreground is the statue, by Foley, of Daniel O’Connell; beyond the bridge is the monument of Sir John Gray, and, seen just behind it, the General Post Office. In the distance is the Nelson Column.
The invasion of Zululand had now assumed the proportions of a great campaign. About 20,000 British and 4,500 Colonial troops were in the field. The Government, dissatisfied with Lord Chelmsford’s initial want of success and subsequent hesitation, sent out Sir Garnet Wolseley to supersede him. But before he arrived a decisive victory had been fought on July 4, whereby the power of the Zulus was hopelessly broken. Lord Chelmsford’s reputation, endangered at Isandhlana, was redeemed at Ulundi, just as Lord Gough’s disaster at Chilianwalla had been repaired at Goojerat before Sir Charles Napier came to supersede him.
The native chiefs now crowded in to make submission. Cetchwayo was a fugitive with a handful of followers, and a force of cavalry scoured the country in pursuit of him, till, on August 28, the war was brought to an end by the capture of the unhappy king by Lord Gifford’s party. It had cost Great Britain dearly in lives and money; one of the most tragic incidents in it was the death of Prince Napoleon, eldest son of the late Emperor of the French, who served on Lord Chelmsford’s staff as a volunteer. He was slain on June 2, when employed on surveying duty, having ridden into an ambush of Zulus.
RORKE’S DRIFT.
This post was held by Lieut. Chard, R.E., and Lieut. Bromhead with eighty men of the 24th Regiment. Having heard of the disaster at Isandhlana, they hastily improvised defences of bags and biscuit-tins, and were almost immediately attacked by about 4,000 Zulus. During the night the enemy six times obtained a foothold within the defences, and even burnt the hospital; but they were again and again repulsed at the bayonet’s point. In the morning, when the little garrison was relieved, 351 Zulus lay dead around the entrenchments.
OSBORNE HOUSE.
Built by Her Majesty in 1840, largely from designs by H.R.H. The Prince Consort. It is surrounded by a park of about 2,000 acres. The Queen’s apartments are in the wing to the right of the picture.
CHAPTER XV.
1879–1881.
The Condition of Egypt—Mr. Goschen’s Commission—Ismail’s Coup d’état—His Deposition by the Sultan—Establishment of the Dual Control—The First Midlothian Campaign—Commercial and Agricultural Depression—Sudden Dissolution of Parliament—Lord Derby joins the Liberals—Second Midlothian Campaign—Great Liberal Victory—Mr. Gladstone’s Second Administration—Charles Stuart Parnell and the Irish Home Rule Party—War with Afghanistan—Battle of Maiwand—General Roberts’s March—Defeat of Ayub Khan and Evacuation of Cabul and Candahar—Revolt of the Transvaal—Battles of Laing’s Nek and Majuba Hill—Establishment of the Boer Republic—Weakness of the Conservative Opposition—The Fourth Party—Irish Affairs—Boycotting—A New Coercion Bill—The Irish Land Bill—Resignation of the Duke of Argyll—Death of Lord Beaconsfield—Military Revolt in Egypt—Bombardment of Alexandria—Expedition against Arabi—Battles of Kassassin and Tel-el-Kebir—Overthrow of Arabi.
THE position and condition of Egypt had grown to be a matter of anxiety to the Powers of Western Europe, owing to events which it is only possible to recapitulate here in the briefest terms. |The Condition of Egypt.| Ruled by the Khedive as an autonomous State, Egypt was also technically a province of the Ottoman Empire and paid an annual tribute of £695,792 to the Sultan of Turkey. But the creation of the Suez Canal, the investment of European capital therein, and the importance to maritime nations of that highway, rendered the good government of Egypt a subject of international concern. The Khedive, Ismail Pasha, actuated, no doubt, in part, by a resolve to develop the resources of his country, but also by aims of personal indulgence and aggrandisement, had launched into schemes of such scale and cost that the Egyptian Treasury was virtually bankrupt in 1877. A Commission of Inquiry, presided over by Mr. Goschen, resulted in the appointment of Mr. Rivers Wilson and M. de Blignières, representing Great Britain and France respectively, as Members of the Khedive’s Cabinet. The plan failed to work smoothly; the Khedive became leader of the Opposition to his own Government, and in February 1879 he was compelled to submit to conditions imposed by the Cabinets of Great Britain and France, excluding him from Cabinet Councils, appointing his son Tewfik President of the Council, and vesting in the English and French Ministers absolute power of veto upon all measures. Ismail Pasha accepted these conditions, but on April 7 he suddenly dismissed the Cabinet and appointed one entirely composed of natives of Egypt. On June 26, in consequence of representations from the Governments of Germany, Austria, Great Britain, France, and Russia, the Sultan deposed Ismail and151 created his son Tewfik Khedive in his place. A new scheme of government was adopted, whereby Tewfik appointed his own Cabinet, and the dual control of Great Britain and France was established by the appointment of two Controllers, Mr. Baring (now Lord Revelstoke) and M. de Blignières, with full powers to regulate expenditure, with seats in the Cabinet, not removable except by their own Governments, and with power to appoint and dismiss all subordinate officials. By the close of 1879 the credit of Egypt, which had been apparently hopelessly shattered by Ismail’s decree in May 1876, suspending payment and unifying the general debt, was restored by the liquidation of all debts due by the State.
OLD OSBORNE HOUSE (1833).
This, then, was the state of affairs in Egypt towards the close of Lord Beaconsfield’s last Administration. The country had been redeemed from insolvency by the joint action of Great Britain and France, the arbitrary action of her rulers had been put under control, and her internal affairs had been started on such a footing as should protect the people from oppression and grievous taxation.
THE MARRIAGE OF H.R.H. THE DUKE OF CONNAUGHT AND PRINCESS LOUISE MARGARET OF PRUSSIA AT ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR, March 13, 1879.
The bridegroom, attended by the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh, waits at the altar; Her Majesty, with the Princess Beatrice, and the Princess of Wales with her children, are included in the Royal group. The bride is escorted by the Crown Prince of Germany on her right, and her father, Prince Frederick Charles, on her left. The foremost figures on the left are the King and Queen of the Belgians; next them are Prince William (now the German Emperor) and his mother, the Princess Royal, and to her left Princess Frederick Charles, mother of the bride.
Meanwhile the course of domestic politics in Great Britain claimed the immediate attention of152 statesmen. On November 24, 1879, Mr. Gladstone, once more the actual, though not the nominal, leader of the Opposition, started from Liverpool on a memorable tour. The Earl of Dalkeith was then member for Midlothian. He was the eldest son of the Duke of Buccleuch, at that time the most notable Scottish peer, of immense influence north of the Tweed and leader of the Conservative Party in the North. Mr. Gladstone had conceived the chivalrous idea of doing battle with this doughty chief on his own ground. |The First Midlothian Campaign.| The first “Midlothian Campaign” lasted till December 5, and it took the country by storm. The failure of the City of Glasgow Bank in the previous year had not only brought disaster to thousands of persons in the North, but it had emphasised in a peculiar manner the end of a period of prosperity. Agriculture, especially, began to feel the full effects of foreign competition; farmers, whose rents had been gradually increasing as the value of land rose with favourable markets, now found it impossible to meet their obligations out of income. There was the usual tendency to lay the blame of individual misfortune on the Government, and Mr. Gladstone, though his attacks on the policy of the Cabinet were based principally on their foreign policy, which he denounced as aggressive, evoked an immense amount of sympathy and encouragement from those who listened to him or read his speeches.
R.A.] [From the “Life of
Archbishop Tait,”
by permission of
Messrs. Macmillan.
ARCHIBALD C. TAIT,
Archbishop of Canterbury,
1811–1882.
Was of Presbyterian descent. Went to Balliol College, Oxford, in 1830, and was one of the four Tutors who publicly protested against Newman’s “Tract XC.” (see page 42). Head Master of Rugby, 1842; Dean of Carlisle, 1850; Bishop of London, 1856; Archbishop of Canterbury, 1868.
Hay Cameron.
BENJAMIN JOWETT, D.D.,
Master of Balliol,
1817–1893.
Educated at St. Paul’s School, he went to Balliol College, Oxford, in 1835 as scholar; became a Fellow in 1838; Tutor in 1842; Regius Professor of Greek, 1855; Master, 1870; Vice-Chancellor of Oxford University, 1882. He was one of the authors of “Essays and Reviews” (1861) and a leader in University reform. His influence upon modern thought has been very great.
|Sudden Dissolution of Parliament.| Ministers had still a year more to exist before an appeal to the country should be necessary, and all was going quietly in Parliament, when, on March 8, people were taken by surprise on hearing it announced that the dissolution was to take place at once, and a manifesto from the Prime Minister, in the form of a letter to the Duke of Marlborough, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, was published in the newspapers, setting forth the imminence of trouble from Irish sedition, and calling on the nation to be on its guard.
These works, originated in 1826 in a small factory employing a score of operatives, now give employment to about 5,000, and cover between fifty and sixty acres. The sewing machine—itself an invention of the period covered by these pages—has enormously increased the demand for thread. The total imports of cotton into the United Kingdom, which were 592,000,000 lbs. in 1840, had grown to 1,757,042,672 lbs. during 1895.
The country neither realised the magnitude of the crisis, nor did it perceive grounds for relying more on the Conservatives to deal with it than on the Liberals. The Opposition was greatly strengthened at this juncture by the accession of Lord Derby to the Liberal Party, and the veteran Gladstone, forgetting his resolution, six years before, to spend the rest of his years in retirement,153 went forth exulting on his second Midlothian Campaign. |Second Midlothian Campaign.| The walls of the Tory Jericho of the North went down before the blast of his trumpet; the Buccleuch was defeated; only nine Conservatives were returned from Scotland. The Irish vote, an important element in all the great towns, went solid for the Liberals in obedience to Parnell’s order “to vote against Benjamin Disraeli as they should vote against the enemy of their country and their race.” Instead of the majority of fifty which they counted in the old Parliament, the Conservatives returned to the new one in a minority of forty-six.
ROYAL PLATES: SPECIMENS OF SERVICES MADE FOR HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN.
1. Royal Worcester Plate, emblazoned with the Royal Arms, border of light blue and gold. 2. Royal Worcester Plate, with openwork border, gilt, and having turquoise panels. Enamelled by Thomas Bott. Exhibited at the International Exhibition of 1862. 3. Plate, richly gilt, ornamented with the Royal Crown and the Arms of the City of London. Used by Her Majesty at the Civic Banquet celebrating her Accession, 1837.
There was much speculation as to whom the Queen would send for to form a Ministry. Lord Granville and Lord Hartington were the nominal leaders of the victorious party in either House, but the victory was due to Mr. Gladstone’s crusades—everybody agreed in that. On April 22 Her Majesty sent for Lord Hartington; next day he and Lord Granville were received to an audience, and thereafter all doubts were set at rest by Mr. Gladstone receiving the Royal commands.
ROYAL DESSERT PLATES.
4. From a Service made for the Prince of Wales shortly before his marriage. It has the Prince’s initials in gold, entwined with the Princess’s in flowers. 5. From a Service made for the Duke of Edinburgh on his marriage. Turquoise and gold border, with painted panels. 6. From a Service made for the Duke of Albany on his marriage. Turquoise, with monogram, birds and flowers painted in white.
After the Fenian movement, partly owing to vigorous measures on the part of the Executive and partly to dissension among its own leaders, had collapsed, Irish disaffection to British rule took the form of a constitutional agitation for the establishment of a separate Legislature for Ireland. “Home Rule for Ireland” became the watchword and goal of a determined group of members of Parliament, acting under Mr. Isaac Butt, an able and successful lawyer and powerful speaker, who began political life as a Conservative. This third party acted together throughout the Parliament of 1874–80. It was154 practically the creation of Mr. Butt, but it soon carried its aims far beyond what he considered legitimate, and adopted methods of obstructing Parliamentary business, against which he protested in vain. |Irish Home Rule.| A stronger man than Butt came to the front in the person of a Protestant Irish landlord, Charles Stuart Parnell, one of the most remarkable figures in recent political life. Though not gifted with the native richness of rhetoric which distinguishes so many of his countrymen, Parnell quickly acquired an ascendancy in the Home Rule party in virtue of his genius for strategy, his resolute will, and a kind of hauteur which lifted him above petty jealousy and interference. From the first he discerned that the true way to attain Home Rule, if it might be attained at all, was to maintain scrupulous independence of both Conservatives and Liberals, to raise every possible obstruction in the way of legislation, and, in short, to render the Irish party so intolerable to all Governments, that Home Rule should be granted as the only means of getting out of an impossible situation. In 1878 a debate took place on the circumstances of the murder of the Earl of Leitrim, and Butt was obliged to dissociate himself from all sympathy with the sentiments expressed by some of his colleagues, and he resigned the leadership in favour of Parnell. After the General Election the Home Rulers in Parliament numbered sixty, perfect in discipline and devotion to their new chief.
SAVING THE GUNS AT MAIWAND.
The E/B Battery of Royal Horse Artillery, assisted by a few native sappers, whilst limbering up, fought the Ghazis with hand-spikes and other improvised weapons. They lost heavily both in officers and men, but succeeded in carrying off the guns, and were specially thanked by the Viceroy and the Commander-in-Chief.
Frederick Sleigh Roberts is the son of the late General Sir A. Roberts. Born in 1832, and educated at Eton, Sandhurst, and Woolwich. Gained the V.C. for rescuing a standard at Khodagunj, in the Indian Mutiny.
The pacification of Afghanistan by General Roberts was not of long duration. After those concerned in the massacre of Cavagnari’s party had been punished with exemplary, if not excessive, severity, attempts were made to conciliate the people, and the Conservative Government offered to recognise any Amir at Cabul who might be elected, except Yakub Khan. Candahar was to be separated from Cabul, becoming an independent State under British protection, with Shir Ali as Amir. Then came the change of Government in England, bringing about an important modification in British policy towards Afghanistan. It was resolved to evacuate both Cabul and Candahar, resigning the country to the claimant Abdurrahman. |War with Afghanistan.| The advance, however, of a rival claimant from Herat, in the person of Ayub Khan, caused the Government of India to direct General Burrows to defend the passage of the River Helmund. Beyond that river lay the territory of the Wali of Zamindawir, an ally of the British in resisting Ayub Khan’s invasion. But the Wali’s army mutinied and deserted to Ayub, and General Burrows decided to retire to Kushk-i-Nakhud,155 thirty miles in rear of the Helmund. Ayub then crossed the river, and directed his march to Maiwand, a Pass over the hills twelve miles north of Burrows’s camp. General Burrows, in total ignorance of the real strength of the enemy, resolved to march there and clear the Pass. On July 27 he started with a force of 2,500 men, six nine-pounders, and some smooth-bores. Unfortunately, instead of keeping to his purpose of occupying Maiwand, which lay on his right, General Burrows made the fatal mistake of attacking a column of the enemy which appeared on his left. He found himself engaged with Ayub’s whole army, variously estimated at from 12,000 to 20,000 of all arms. The British troops fought gallantly, but some blunders, of a nature never clearly explained, made their position untenable. The order was given to retreat, not before some of the Indian troops had broken and fled. Next day the broken remnants of General Burrows’s Brigade struggled into Candahar, having fought their way through hordes of armed villagers along the route, who rose in excitement at the news of the defeat of the British. All that mortal man could do to atone for his want of generalship was done by General Burrows, who fought with desperate gallantry at Maiwand; but half his Brigade perished, and probably it would have been annihilated but for the steadiness of the Horse Artillery in action and in covering the retreat.
MARCH OF GENERAL SIR F. ROBERTS, G.C.B., V.C., FROM CABUL TO CANDAHAR: CROSSING THE ZAMBURAK KOTAL.
General Primrose was in command at Candahar, where he was besieged by Ayub on August 8. He was relieved by General Sir Frederick Roberts, who left Cabul on August 9 with a flying column,156 nearly 10,000 strong, and performed a march which has become celebrated in British war annals, arriving at Candahar on the 31st, having covered 318 miles in twenty-three days. |General Roberts’s March.| On September 1 he attacked and completely routed Ayub Khan, who fled to Herat. The war was over: it had cost £5,750,000; Lord Ripon, who had succeeded Lord Lytton as Viceroy, was directed by the India Office to abandon the purpose with which it had been undertaken, and by the end of 1880 the British had evacuated both Cabul and Candahar.
THE VICTORY OF CANDAHAR.
The trouble which broke out in the British Dominion of South Africa in 1880 must be regarded as the direct effect of the system of British party politics. Forasmuch as, taking their cue from Mr. Gladstone, the Opposition had vehemently denounced the annexation of the Transvaal, on the overthrow of the Conservatives the “patriot” section of the Boers not unnaturally expected the restoration of their independence. But these hopes were dispelled by Mr. Gladstone and Lord Kimberley, the Colonial Secretary, in the debate on the Queen’s speech to the new Parliament. They declared that Great Britain was under pledges to the native population which made it impossible for her to recede. |Revolt of the Transvaal.| The effect of this was to exasperate the Boers to the last degree. They rose in armed revolt, and proclaimed an independent Republic on December 16, 1880. Detachments of British troops were beleaguered by the insurgents at several places, and a detachment of the 94th Regiment, under Colonel Anstruther, marching to the relief of Pretoria, suffered defeat, all of them being slain or captured. The whole Dutch population of the Transvaal were under arms by the beginning of 1881, and their skill as riflemen rendered them a foe far more formidable than might have been expected from their numbers.
It is a painful duty to record faithfully the events of the succeeding weeks. On January 24, Sir George Colley, Governor of Natal, entered the Transvaal with 1,000 troops, attacking the Boers at Laing’s Nek on the 28th, when he was repulsed with the loss of seven officers and eighty men killed and 100 wounded. On February 7 Colley was attacked on the Ingogo River, and, though the enemy retired at sunset, the British loss amounted to six officers and sixty-two men killed and157 sixty-four wounded. On February 26 General Colley returned to the attack on the Boers’ camp at Laing’s Nek. He decided on occupying Majuba Hill, overlooking the enemy’s position; and, owing to the great fatigue endured during the ascent, in which his men were occupied for eight hours of darkness, he neglected to intrench the ground. The position was naturally an exceedingly strong one, yet on the following morning, the 27th, it was stormed by the Boers. The British force, 627 strong, was routed, with very heavy loss, and Sir George Colley was among the slain. |Establishment of the Boer Republic.| Sir Evelyn Wood, who had arrived in the neighbourhood with reinforcements, now succeeded to the chief command, and entered into negotiations with the Boer commander, Joubert. These resulted in the conclusion of peace on March 21, the terms including recognition of the Queen’s suzerainty over the Transvaal, but securing complete self-government to the Boer Republic.
“FLOREAT ETONA!”
An eye-witness of the attack on Laing’s Nek thus describes the incident depicted: “Poor Elwes fell among the 58th. He shouted to another Eton boy (adjutant of the 58th, whose horse had been shot): ‘Come along, Monck! Floreat Etona! we must be in the front rank,’ and he was shot immediately.”
The task of the Government within the walls of the House of Commons was rendered an easy one during 1880 and 1881, by reason of the spiritless and disorganised condition of the Opposition under the mild and forbearing generalship of Sir Stafford Northcote. The Conservatives, moreover, found themselves under the obligation of voting continually in the same lobby as their natural opponents, in resistance to the demands of the Parnellite Party and in support of measures for the protection of life and property in Ireland. Little resistance, indeed, would have been encountered by Ministers, but for the spirited action of a small knot of members below the Gangway. This group, led by Lord Randolph Churchill, and comprising Mr. Arthur Balfour, Sir John Gorst, and Sir Henry Drummond Wolff, allowed no subject to be dealt with without the closest and most persistent scrutiny. |The Fourth Party.| Their diligence, their individual and varied ability, and their permanent presence on the same bench, soon caused them to be known as the Fourth Party; and the intrepidity of their attacks on the Government was not more remarkable than the freedom with which they taunted the Tory leaders for their inaction, especially Northcote, Cross, and Smith.
More and more did the Irish Question absorb the attention of Parliament and the public. Parnell was busy at the work of land agitation, and explained the means by which landlords were to be driven from Ireland. Speaking at Ennis, he exclaimed, “What is to be done with a tenant bidding for a farm from which another tenant has been evicted?” “Shoot him!” cried a voice in the crowd. “No,” said Parnell, “I do not say shoot him; there is a more Christian and charitable way of dealing with him. Let him be shunned in the street, in the shop, in the market-place—even in the places of worship—as if he were a leper of old.”
One of the earliest cases in which this advice was carried into effect was that of Captain Boycott, the Earl of Erne’s agent. The Land League issued orders that he was to be treated “as a leper of old”; his men deserted him on the eve of harvest; tradesmen refused to supply goods; not a soul158 in the district dared to be known to have intercourse with him. |Boycotting.| Captain Boycott was a man of spirit: he brought a hundred Ulstermen to gather the crops on his large farm; the Irish Government massed 7,000 troops and police to protect them, and henceforth the verb “to boycott” became the recognised expression for a system which brought infinite suffering on many poor people.
THE IRISH FRANKENSTEIN.
Mr. Parnell is regarding with amazement the monster whom he has evoked.
But a terrible era of violence and crime, inaugurated by the murder of Viscount Mountmorres on September 25, 1880, proved that the old methods of terrorising were far from obsolete, and that the “more Christian and charitable” boycotting was only a supplement to them. The transparency of the veil thrown over the connection of the Land League with atrocious crimes made it necessary to strengthen the hands of the Executive by the introduction of a fresh Coercion Bill, with clauses specially framed to deal with the new system of intimidation known as boycotting. Mr. Forster, by a merciful instruction to substitute buckshot for ball in the cartridges of the Irish police, earned for himself from the Irish Party the nickname of “Buckshot” Forster. The debates on this measure are memorable for the resistance offered to it by the Parnellite party, which led to the adoption of the “12 o’clock rule” and of the closure.
No sooner had the new Coercion Bill received the Royal Assent, on March 21, than Mr. Gladstone announced another great measure dealing with Ireland, framed to conciliate disaffection and redress the complaints of Irish farmers. |The Irish Land Bill.| The Irish Land Bill occupied the House of Commons during four months of 1881. |Resignation of the Duke of Argyll.| Its introduction caused the secession of the Duke of Argyll from the Cabinet, because, as he explained to the Lords, though in favour of increasing the number of landowners in Ireland, he would have no hand in destroying ownership altogether.
The Earl of Beaconsfield died on April 19, 1881. |Death of Lord Beaconsfield.| If Sir Robert Peel must be reckoned the founder of the Conservative Party, Benjamin Disraeli must be claimed as its architect.
Chancery Lane.
LORD BEACONSFIELD’S STATUE.
The statue erected to the memory of the Earl of Beaconsfield in Parliament Square is annually decorated, on “Primrose Day” (April 19) with palms and flowers, and vendors of primroses drive a busy trade in “button-holes” amongst the onlookers. A similar tribute is annually paid to the memory of General Gordon, whose statue stands in the centre of Trafalgar Square; and for the last two years the Nelson Column itself has, on “Trafalgar Day,” been hung with festoons of evergreens.
For some time previous to this, affairs in Egypt had not been running smoothly under the dual control. A military party had been formed, under the lead of Ahmed Arabi Bey, calling itself national, but really military, aiming at the effacement of the Khedive and the fulfilment of the shadowy purpose of “Egypt for the Egyptians.” |Military Revolt in Egypt.| Various disturbances took place in Alexandria during 1881, but in May 1882 matters wore such a threatening aspect that the allied English and French fleets were sent to anchor off that city. The Khedive, in his extremity, had promoted Arabi to be War Minister, who used his power to put the fortifications of Alexandria in a thorough state of defence and began massing troops in the town. On July 7 Admiral Sir Beauchamp Seymour, commanding the British fleet, warned Arabi that unless these warlike preparations were discontinued, he should be obliged to open fire. No notice being taken of this, ships were provided for the safety of European inhabitants, and on the 10th the British ultimatum159 was sent, demanding the instant cessation of the works of defence and their surrender to the British flag. Arabi having failed to comply with this also, the British ships, consisting of eight powerful ironclads and five gun-vessels, cleared for action and took up their positions, the French fleet retiring to Port Said. The bombardment began on the morning of July 11, briskly replied to by the guns in the forts, and continued all day till 5.30 p.m. Resumed next day, it was continued at intervals till the afternoon, when it was found that, under cover of a flag of truce, Arabi had withdrawn his troops and abandoned the forts and town. A frightful scene began directly military authority was withdrawn: the populace broke loose, pillaging and firing the shops and houses, and massacring about 2,000 Europeans who had not availed themselves of the opportunity to escape. Arabi, the Khedive’s War Minister, was at the head of the Khedive’s army, yet Great Britain assumed the task of dispersing this army in order to re-conquer the country for the Khedive.
A “SELF-DENYING” POLICY!
François (our ally): “C’est tres bien fait, mon cher Jean! You ’ave done ze vork! Voyons, mon ami; I shall share viz you ze glory!”
To the unofficial mind the reasons for the destruction of Alexandria and the invasion of Egypt remain somewhat vague; Mr. Gladstone, however, found little difficulty in persuading the House of Commons to entrust him with a Vote of Credit for £2,300,000; and towards the end of August an army, consisting of about 23,000 of all arms and ranks, landed on the Mediterranean shores of Egypt; subsequently reinforced by 11,000 more. In addition to these, there was an Indian contingent landed from the South, consisting of nearly 8,000 men, making the total strength of the British land forces in Egypt 40,560 men, under the command-in-chief of Sir Garnet Wolseley. It was found on landing, on August 22, that the enemy had placed dams across the Canal to cut off the water supply, and it became necessary to dislodge him from his position at Tel-el-Mahuta. This was effected without much difficulty on August 24, the Egyptian troops, about 10,000 strong, showing little inclination for fighting. |Battles of Kassassin and Tel-el-Kebir.| General Graham then advanced, on the 26th, with 2,000 men, to seize Kassassin Lock, which controlled the supply of fresh water. Here he was attacked, on the 28th, by a greatly superior force, and for a time the British were in a critical position. General Graham, however, managed to hold his own, and heliographed for reinforcements, which arrived in good time. The Egyptians fought well during the afternoon, but at sunset Sir Baker Russell led up the Household Cavalry, the 7th Dragoon Guards, and Horse Artillery, with four guns, and a brilliant charge of these fine troops threw the enemy into confusion, causing him to break and fly from the field. The total British loss was only eleven killed and sixty-eight wounded.
KASSASSIN: THE CHARGE OF THE HOUSEHOLD CAVALRY.
“Punch.”
FIELD MARSHAL VISCOUNT WOLSELEY.
Son of Major Garnet Wolseley. Born near Dublin in 1833. Commanded the Red River Expedition of 1870 and the Ashanti Expedition of 1873, and was sent out in 1879 as Governor of Natal and the Transvaal, and High Commissioner. He commanded the forces in Egypt in 1882 and again in 1884–5.
Arabi held a strongly-fortified position at Tel-el-Kebir. On September 9 he attempted a reconnaissance, with 8,000 men and twenty-four guns, but was driven back with the loss of some of his guns. Tel-el-Kebir offered a front to the British advance of about four miles of earthworks,160 with redoubts at intervals carrying guns. The flanks were protected by similar works. Wolseley struck his camp on the evening of September 12, and advanced during the night with 2,000 cavalry, 11,000 infantry, and sixty guns. At dawn on the 13th General Graham’s Brigade on the right, and Sir Archibald Alison’s Highland Brigade on the left, were within a quarter of a mile of the Egyptian lines. An irregular fire was opened upon them; they dashed forward to the assault, scaled the outer defences, bayonetted the gunners, paused to re-form, and advanced against the inner and stronger works. It remains a question of honourable rivalry which were first inside the Egyptian position, the Highlanders on the left or Graham’s infantry on the right. At all events, within half an hour the whole of Arabi’s defences were captured, his army was routed and flying under pressure of the British cavalry. The British loss in this well-managed affair was very slight, considering the strength of the position and the strength of Arabi’s army, supposed to amount to about 25,000 men. Eleven officers and forty-three men were killed, and twenty-two officers and 320 men wounded. The Egyptian loss was believed to be about 1,000; of prisoners, 3,000 were taken, with sixty guns. The campaign was practically over. Arabi’s troops disbanded themselves, and Arabi himself was arrested in Cairo. Being brought to trial as a rebel, he pleaded guilty, and sentence of death was passed on him. This sentence was commuted immediately by the Khedive for one of perpetual banishment from Egypt.
The net result of these events was the withdrawal of the condominium or dual control by England and France, the restoration of the Khedive’s authority, and the reconstruction of the administrative and social system. But the British continued to occupy Egypt as security for the pacific fulfilment of the reforms insisted on by the English Plenipotentiary, Lord Dufferin.
THE DUKE OF CONNAUGHT AT THE BATTLE OF TEL-EL-KEBIR.
AFTER THE BATTLE: ARRIVAL OF LORD WOLSELEY AND STAFF AT THE BRIDGE OF TEL-EL-KEBIR.
CHAPTER XVI.
1881–1887.
Imprisonment of Irish Members of Parliament—Assassination of Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke—Prevalence of Outrages in Ireland—A New Coercion Bill—Trial and Execution of the Phœnix Park Murderers—The Dynamite Conspiracy—Corrupt Practices Act—The Affairs of Egypt—General Gordon sent to Khartoum—Gordon Besieged—Inaction of the Government—Relief of Khartoum Undertaken—Too Late!—Death of Gordon—Lord Wolseley’s Campaign—Abandonment of the Soudan—Mr. Gladstone’s Reform Bill—The Question of Redistribution of Seats—The Frontier Question in Afghanistan—Defeat of Ministers on the Budget and their Resignation—Lord Salisbury’s First Administration—Dissolution of Parliament—The Irish Party and the Balance of Power—Mr. Gladstone’s Third Administration—His Conversion to Home Rule—Rupture of the Liberal Party—The Home Rule Bill Rejected—Dissolution of Parliament—Unionist Victory—Lord Salisbury’s Second Administration—Lord Randolph Churchill Resigns—The Round Table Conference.
THE effort made by the Government to conciliate the hostility of the people of Ireland by the Land Act did not at first offer much prospect of success. There was no diminution in the tyranny of the Land League or in the number of cruel outrages traceable to that organisation. A Cabinet Council was summoned hurriedly early in October 1881, the result of which was the arrest of Mr. Parnell and two other members of Parliament under the Protection of Life and Property Act, and their imprisonment in Kilmainham. |Imprisonment of Irish Members.| They remained in confinement as “suspects” until May 2, 1882, when they were released unconditionally, a step which led to the immediate resignation of Earl Cowper, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, and his Chief Secretary, Mr. Forster.
HERBERT SPENCER.
Born in Derby 1820. Educated as a Civil Engineer, but abandoned that profession in favour of literature and philosophy. He was one of the earliest exponents of the doctrine of evolution.
There was great jubilation over this among the Nationalists. It was a distinct surrender on the part of the Government to the party of separation: and the suppressed Land League was revived openly under the name of the National League. The response to the new policy of conciliation and condonement came in terrible fashion. Earl Cowper and Mr. Forster had been succeeded in the Lord Lieutenancy and Chief Secretaryship by Earl Spencer and Lord Frederick Cavendish. On May 6 the last-named gentleman, a brother of the present Duke of Devonshire, after attending the installation of his chief, took a car to drive out to the Chief Secretary’s Lodge. Overtaking Mr. Burke, a162 permanent official at the Castle, Lord Frederick dismissed his car and walked on with him through the Phœnix Park. |Assassination of Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke.| It was a fine spring evening, between seven and eight o’clock; just as they were passing an opening in the trees on their right, giving a view of the Viceregal Lodge, two men came along the path to meet them. One of them, Brady, a man of immense size and strength, stooped down as if to tie his shoe-lace. As the two gentlemen passed him, he sprang erect, gripped Mr. Burke by the waist, and stabbed him in the back. The other ruffian, Kelly, slashed Burke across the throat as he fell. Lord Frederick, attempting to defend his friend with an umbrella, received a fatal thrust in the breast from Brady’s knife, and fell dead also.
DISTRIBUTION OF EGYPTIAN WAR MEDALS BY HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AT WINDSOR, November 21, 1882.
On the 8th of the following month a gentleman called Walter Bourke, riding with a soldier as escort near Gort, was shot at, and both were killed; and in like manner, on the 29th, Mr. Blake, a land agent, and his steward, Mr. Keene, were murdered by concealed assassins near Lough Rea. Ireland had come to a desperate condition; it was garrisoned with not less than 20,000 cavalry and infantry and 20,000 mounted constabulary, yet the Executive seemed powerless to cope with an almost universal conspiracy against life and property. The murdered Cavendish was succeeded as Chief Secretary by Mr. G. O. Trevelyan, and the first act of the Government was to introduce a fresh Coercion Bill, of extraordinary severity, creating special tribunals for the trial of suspects and criminals, conferring rights of search on the police, and giving further powers for dealing with incitement to crime. The Bill was vehemently opposed by Mr. Parnell and his party; nevertheless, the Government pursued their apparently hopeless policy of conciliation by introducing and carrying through the Arrears of Rent Bill, whereby about two millions of money was applied to release Irish tenants of a moiety of the liabilities which the Land League had forbidden them to fulfil, and the balance of arrears was wiped out at the expense of landlords.
2, 3. The Bride and Bridegroom.
4. Prince of Wales.
5. Grand Duke of Hesse.
6. Princess Beatrice.
7. Princess of Wales with her three daughters.
8, 9. Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh.
10, 11. Duke and Duchess of Teck.
13. Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar.
14. Princess Victoria of Hesse.
15. Archbishop of Canterbury.
16. Dean Wellesley.
17. King of the Netherlands.
18, 19. The Bride’s Parents.
20. Queen of the Netherlands.
THE MARRIAGE OF THE DUKE OF ALBANY AND PRINCESS HELEN OF WALDECK AND PYRMONT AT ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR, April 27, 1882.
The additional powers conferred on the police by the Crimes Act of 1882 resulted in the capture of the gang who had planned and carried out the murders in the Phœnix Park. In January 1883 seventeen persons were arrested in Dublin, and on one of them, Farrell, turning informer, it came out that they were members of a secret society. Their principal object had been to make away with Mr. W. E. Forster when he was Chief Secretary, and on various occasions he had escaped assassination by what seemed the narrowest chances. |Trial and Execution of the Phœnix Park Murderers.| Among those arrested was James Carey, who had given the signal for the murder of Burke by raising a white handkerchief, and who turned Queen’s evidence. He was allowed to go free after the trial, while five of his gang were hanged, the remainder being sentenced to various terms of penal servitude. Finally, this bloody chapter was brought to a close in the murder of Carey himself, by a man named O’Donnell, who had travelled in the same ship with him to Cape Town. O’Donnell was brought home to England and hanged early in December.
While the trial of the Phœnix Park assassins was proceeding, another formidable conspiracy was brought to light. A gang of Irish-Americans had come to this country with the object of terrorising the Government by a series of explosions of nitro-glycerine. |The Dynamite Conspiracy.| On the evening of March 15, 1883, part of the Local Government Board Offices in Whitehall was wrecked by the explosion of a canister of dynamite placed inside one of the balustrades. Simultaneously, another explosion took place at the office of the Times, in Printing House Square. By the help of informers, the police were enabled to arrest a number of persons in London, Birmingham, and Glasgow, all of whom were brought to trial, and most of them proved to be active agents in a heinous conspiracy against life and property. The formidable power which modern explosives had brought within the reach of secret societies made it necessary to make the law dealing with such crimes more stringent, and Sir William Harcourt, the Home Secretary, on April 9, introduced a Bill to cope with what he termed “the pirates of the human race.” He assured the House that the danger was so grave and imminent that the Bill must pass through all its stages on that day. It was read a first, a second time, passed through Committee, and was read a third time, all within little more than an hour. Taken up to the Lords on the same evening, it was dispatched there with equal promptitude, and received the Royal Assent next day—an example of rapid legislation almost without parallel.
A much-needed boon was conferred this year (1883) upon Parliamentary candidates in the passage of the Corrupt Practices at Elections Bill. |Corrupt Practices Act.| The old and evil electioneering traditions were put an end to now by the statutory measure introduced by the Attorney-General, Sir Henry James (now Lord James of Hereford); a statutory and moderate limit to candidates’ expenses, based on the number of electors in each constituency, was fixed, which might not be exceeded on pain of voiding the election.
The Clydebank works cover an area of 75 acres, and employ 6,500 workmen.
The Government were called upon early in 1884 to realise the full weight of the responsibility they had assumed in regard to Egyptian affairs. |The Affairs of Egypt.| The Mahomedan Arabs of the Soudan had been brought under Egyptian rule in 1870; gross misgovernment had brought about bitter disaffection, and the troubles of Lower Egypt before and during Arabi’s revolt, afforded these wild tribes an opportunity for throwing off the yoke. Mohamed Ahmed appeared among them as the Mahdi, or Redeemer, who, besides being a religious enthusiast, was a daring and skilful commander in the field. In 1883 the Egyptian Government sent an army of about 11,000 men under command of Colonel Hicks, a retired officer of the Indian army, to restore the Khedive’s authority in the Equatorial Provinces. This force was attacked on November 1 in a rocky defile; for three days they defended themselves; on the fourth their ammunition was all spent, and every man in the Egyptian army, with many British officers, perished. Of course, this tremendous victory was accepted by the Arabs as complete proof of the Mahdi’s divine mission: the insurrection spread like wildfire, and the Khedive, acting under advice of the British Government, decided not to attempt the re-conquest of these provinces.
These shears, photographed at the works of the Glasgow Iron and Steel Company, are capable of cutting through solid steel slabs 4 feet wide and 12 inches thick. The slabs travel over the “live rollers” in the floor to and from the shears. The use of steel in large quantities, both for shipbuilding and for the making of rails, was rendered possible by the introduction of the “Bessemer Process” (named after its inventor, Sir Henry Bessemer) in 1860. Steel which had hitherto cost £50 or £60 a ton, now cost but £7 or £8, and rapidly superseded iron. The Bessemer “Converter” has, however, itself given place to the Siemens open-hearth furnace.
But the relief of Sinkat, Tokar, Khartoum, and other stations, garrisoned by Egyptian troops under command of European officers, was imperative. Expeditions to the relief of the two places first named were attacked by the Arabs and cut to pieces, and instructions were telegraphed for the immediate evacuation of Khartoum. But in Khartoum there were not less than 11,000 persons, many of them Christians and many in the Egyptian civil service, and to transport these safely down the Nile would be an operation of exceeding difficulty and hazard. |General Gordon sent to Khartoum.| General Gordon, commonly called “Chinese Gordon,” a man of remarkable character, happened to be in London at the time, preparing to start for the Congo in the service of the King of the Belgians. He had been Governor of the Soudan in 1874, under Ismail, and to him the British Government appealed in their perplexity. He readily consented to throw up his engagement under the King of the Belgians, and to proceed to Khartoum, telegraphing to the garrison of that place: “You are men, not women. Be not afraid. I am coming.” Meanwhile, the Mahdi had scored another signal success. Baker Pasha, formerly a well-known officer in the English cavalry, advanced in January, with a force of 3,500, to the relief of Tokar and Sinkat; he was attacked near Trinkitat and overwhelmed; his half-trained Egyptians fled, and were cut down to the number of 2,200, and sixteen European officers perished. Then Sinkat fell, the throats of all the garrison being cut, and Tokar surrendered.
165 The safety of Lower Egypt being threatened by the Mahdi’s continued success, the British Government undertook the defence of a frontier line drawn through Souakim. General Graham ascended the Nile with about 4,000 troops, and inflicted a severe defeat on the Arabs, under Osman Digna, at El Teb, on February 29. Again, on March 11, Graham attacked Osman Digna’s camp at Tamai, captured, and gave it to the flames.
FRAMING AND PLATING SHEDS, SHOWING MACHINERY FOR DRILLING HOLES IN STEEL PLATES FOR SHIPBUILDING.
The works of Messrs. Harland and Wolff, which, some forty years ago covered two or three acres, and employed a couple of hundred men, now cover nearly eighty acres, and pay wages amounting to £12,000 to £14,000 per week. The tonnage of the vessels built during 1896 amounted to 81,000 tons, considerably more than the output of all the five Government yards.
General Gordon reached Khartoum on February 18. Finding that things were even worse than he expected, he decided to avail himself of the services of Zebehr Pasha, and telegraphed to Cairo for the Government to allow him to come. Sir Evelyn Baring strongly advised that consent should be given, but Zebehr was of evil repute as a slave-driving chief; stringent instructions were sent from London that he was on no account to be employed, and that if he attempted to join Gordon he was to be detained by force. The Mahdi’s forces invested Khartoum on March 23. Gordon, who had to contend with treachery inside the walls, as well as the open enemy outside, displayed extraordinary energy and ingenuity in defence, continuing to send urgent appeals for assistance, both for Khartoum and for Berber, which was also beleaguered. Berber fell before the end of May; still the British Government turned a deaf ear to Gordon’s messages. |Gordon Besieged.| At last the gallant General appealed from the Government to the “millionaires of England and America” to send him money enough to raise 2,000 or 3,000 Turkish troops to save Khartoum. It is, perhaps, well that by the beginning of May the enemy had gathered so closely round Khartoum that Lord Granville’s response never reached Gordon. It was to the effect that Her Majesty’s Government was not prepared to supply either Turkish or any other troops for military expeditions, and Gordon was reminded that the mission he had undertaken was of a pacific nature! But the spirit of the British people was galled by the indifference shown by the Government to the fate of their devoted servant; expressions of indignation grew louder and more frequent both in Parliament and in the press, and, at last, early in August, a vote of credit for £300,000 was obtained for the purpose of “preparations, as distinct from operations,” for a possible expedition to Khartoum. Lord Wolseley went out to view the military aspect of affairs, and before long a strong force was ascending the Nile.
A. Col. Frank Rhodes. B. General Sir Herbert Stewart (mortally wounded). C. Col. Talbot.
TOO LATE!
After a gallant dash across the desert, the small force under General Stewart arrived within striking distance of Khartoum only to find that Gordon was dead.
the Artist.
GENERAL CHARLES G. GORDON,
1833–1885.
Served in the Crimean War, and in China in 1860–62. In 1862 he took command of a small and heterogeneous force which, as “The Ever-victorious Army,” suppressed the Tai-ping rebellion and saved the Chinese empire. The story of his mission to Khartoum in 1884 is told in these pages.
Too late! Help had been withheld too long. On the last day of the year a tiny scrap of paper reached the British head-quarters on the Nile—“Khartoum all right. C. G. Gordon. December 14, 1884”; but on February 5, 1885, arrived a telegram in London announcing that the place had fallen. |Too Late!| When Parliament opened, on the 19th, Mr. Gladstone endeavoured to excuse the Government for their undoubted share in the disaster. “General Gordon contentedly forbore,” he said, “indeed more than contentedly—he determinedly forebore—to make use of the means of personal safety which were at all times open to him.” The words seemed to be swept from the Prime Minister’s lips by a hurricane of indignant exclamations, and he withdrew them. They meant that Gordon might have escaped down the river in a steamer, leaving the loyal Egyptians in Khartoum to their fate. He was not that kind of man. Party discipline prevailed to protect the Government from overthrow on a vote of censure: they managed to put into their lobby 302 against 288.
Khartoum fell on January 26, 1885, after a siege of 317 days, and after the garrison and townsfolk had endured extreme privations for several weeks. Gordon was shot down near the palace, and a horrible massacre followed, in which it was reckoned about 4,000 people were butchered.
Lord Wolseley’s expeditionary force, amounting to about 14,000 men, inflicted several defeats on the Mahdi’s troops, notably at Abu Klea and Gubat. But the British losses were exceptionally severe, not only on account of the invincible courage of the Arabs167 and their desperate mode of fighting, but because of sickness and climate. |Abandonment of the Soudan.| For example, out of General Stewart’s desert force of 2,000, no less than thirty officers, including General Stewart himself and 450 men perished. The Mahdi died of fever in July, and the Government decided on withdrawing from the Soudan and fixing the frontier of Egypt at the second Nile cataract.
Mr. Franz Hanfstaengl.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN WEARING THE SMALL IMPERIAL CROWN, 1885.
It is necessary at this point to revert to the session of 1884. Mr. Gladstone had resolved on a further extension of the Parliamentary electorate by carrying out the equalisation of the county and borough franchise. |Mr. Gladstone’s Reform Bill.| His Bill was received by the Conservative Opposition with that half-hearted resistance which comes of inward disapproval, tempered by dread of alienating the new electors, whom they were not strong enough to exclude. In the end they took their stand on the ground that no such Reform Bill should pass without a corollary measure redistributing seats. It passed the Commons, but the House of Lords declined to consider it until they had the redistribution scheme before them. In vain Lord Granville pledged the Government to introduce a Redistribution Bill the following year, if their Lordships would allow the Franchise Bill to pass at once. Lord Salisbury declared that he was not going to discuss redistribution with a rope round his neck. At last, after much wrangling, after the usual denunciations of the House of Lords on public platforms, and after sundry processions and demonstrations in London, it was agreed to hang up the Franchise Bill, prorogue Parliament, and call it together in the autumn to consider the complete scheme. This was done accordingly; the Franchise Bill was passed, and the Redistribution Bill read a second time, and the Committee stage postponed till after the Christmas recess.
But before that subject could be taken up again, the troubles of the Government had multiplied. Not only had Khartoum fallen, thereby rendering the Nile expedition as fruitless as it was costly, but the violation by the Russians of the Afghan frontier, seemed to render war with Russia all but inevitable, if our treaty engagements were to be held sacred. |The Afghan Frontier.| “The House will not be surprised,” said the Prime Minister, referring to the defeat of the Amir’s troops by General Komaroff, “when I say, speaking with measured words in circumstances of great gravity, that to us ... this attack bears the appearance of an unprovoked aggression.” Still more profound grew the conviction that the country was on the eve of a great war when, on April 27, Mr. Gladstone came down to the House to ask for a vote of credit for £11,000,000. But he did not tell the House, in the course of a magnificent and most stirring speech, that the168 Government practically had averted the danger by recalling Sir Peter Lumsden, the British Commissioner in Afghanistan, thereby condoning the offence of the Russians which he (Mr. Gladstone) had denounced already as “unprovoked aggression.”
All Parliamentary business, it was understood, including, the redistribution of seats, was to be speedily disposed of in order to make an early appeal to the constituencies under the new franchise. |Defeat and Resignation of Ministers.| But, in an unlucky hour for his colleagues, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Childers, decided to include in his Budget provision for increasing the duties on beer and spirits. There is no more perfectly organised body than the Licensed Victuallers; none whom ordinary members are more unblushingly anxious to conciliate on the eve of a general election. Early in June the Government were beaten on Mr. Childers’ proposal by a majority of twelve votes, and resigned.
MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCESS BEATRICE TO PRINCE HENRY OF BATTENBERG, AT WHIPPINGHAM CHURCH, July 23, 1885.
The Queen and the bride are accompanied on either side by the Prince and Princess of Wales. The bridegroom is supported by Prince Francis Joseph of Battenberg and Prince Alexander of Bulgaria. The Bridesmaids are the Princesses Louise, Victoria and Maud of Wales, Princesses Marie, Victoria and Alexandra of Edinburgh, Princesses Irene and Alix of Hesse, and Princesses Victoria and Louise of Schleswig-Holstein. The Archbishop (Benson) of Canterbury and Canon Prothero officiate.
The Queen accepted Mr. Gladstone’s resignation by telegram, and entrusted Lord Salisbury with the task of forming a new Cabinet. No easy duty on the brink of a general election, even had the Conservative Party been at Peace within itself. |Lord Salisbury’s First Administration.| But it was far from being so: a determined revolt was being conducted by Lord Randolph Churchill and his sympathisers—the “rapier and rosette” Tories—against Sir Stafford Northcote’s ineffective leadership. Amiable, cultivated, experienced, and sagacious as he was, Northcote had failed to gain the confidence of the combative spirits in his party, who recognised their real captain in the brilliant but erratic Churchill. Lord Salisbury solved the difficulty of uniting these discordant elements by removing Northcote to the Lords, with the title of Earl of Iddesleigh and the office of First Lord of the Treasury, placing Churchill in the Cabinet as Secretary of State for India, and committing the leadership of the Commons to Sir Michael Hicks-Beach as Chancellor of the Exchequer.
1, 2. Sovereign, first issue.
3. Florin, first issue.
4. Crown piece, 1845.
5, 6. “Godless” florin (the words “Dei Gratiâ” being omitted from the legend).
7. Sovereign, second issue.
8. £5 Piece, Jubilee issue.
9, 10, 11. Double florin, half-crown and shilling, Jubilee issue.
12, 13. Half-crown, new issue.
14, 15. Florin and shilling, new issue.
16. Maundy fourpenny piece.
17. Bronze penny, 1870.
*** The Queen’s head is the same (except in scale) on all coins of the same issue.
This “Cabinet of Caretakers” had but a short existence. The new Ministry met Parliament on July 6, and finished the necessary work of the session in six weeks. It was understood that Parliament was to be dissolved in time for a general election in November. It proved a restless autumn. In almost every constituency canvassing and speech-making went on without intermission for three months, Mr. Gladstone leading the van with his third Midlothian campaign. He gave no countenance to the demand for Irish Home Rule; on the contrary, he implored the British electors to return such a Liberal majority as should render his party independent of the Irish vote in Parliament. In response to this flashed out a general order from Parnell, directing Irishmen in English and Scottish constituencies to vote solid against the Liberals, who had “coerced Ireland and deluged Egypt with blood.” The Irish leader’s policy was to keep the two great parties balanced by the Home Rule vote, and the result of the elections was as nicely adjusted as that skilled tactician could have desired; 335 Liberals returned to the new Parliament were exactly balanced by 249 Conservatives and 86 Home Rulers.
The copper Penny of the early years of the reign.
Of course, when Parliament re-assembled in February 1886, it was merely a question of how many weeks or days should precede the downfall of a Ministry in such a hopeless minority in the Commons. |Mr. Gladstone’s Third Administration.| Meanwhile strange rumours had been in circulation that Mr. Gladstone had decided to accept the doctrine of Home Rule for Ireland, against which he and his party had fought hitherto with as much obstinacy as the Conservatives. On December 16 the sketch of a scheme attributed to him appeared in some of the newspapers, and, in spite of an ambiguous disclaimer from himself, people gradually became aware that Mr. Gladstone had resolved to extricate his170 party from their subjection to the Irish party in Parliament by the astounding expedient of granting the essence of their demands.
Designed by Robert Stephenson and Sir William Fairbairn, and opened in 1850. It is 1,571 feet in length, and 100 feet above the water. The widest spans are each 470 feet.
Lord Salisbury’s Government fell on January 25: Mr. Gladstone became Prime Minister, and in his Cabinet were included some of his colleagues who had pronounced most emphatically and most recently against Home Rule, although the Lords Hartington, Derby, and Selborne stood significantly aloof. The mine was laid: the only indication of the coming explosion was the resignation, on March 26, by Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Trevelyan of their seats in the Cabinet. The train was fired on April 8, when Mr. Gladstone introduced his Bill for the better government of Ireland. The permanent furniture of the House of Commons does not permit of more than some 400 out of its 670 members being seated within its walls. An attempt was made to admit the presence of a larger number to hear the explanation of this most momentous measure; even so, only seventy or eighty additional seats could be provided by filling the floor of the chamber with chairs. Probably there never was such a scene of anxious expectation in the modern history of Parliament.
This bridge, rather more than a mile in length (the principal spans being 1,710 feet each), was designed by Sir John Fowler and Sir Benjamin Baker. It was commenced in 1883, and opened by the Prince of Wales in 1890. It contains about 44,500 tons of Siemens steel, and cost over £2,000,000.
The division on the second reading was taken on June 7, the corresponding Monday to that on which Mr. Gladstone’s previous Administration had fallen in 1885. Ninety-three Liberals voted against the Bill, and Ministers were left in a minority of thirty. The Liberal party was rent from summit to base, not less completely than the Conservatives had been torn asunder by the action of their leader in 1846. |Dissolution of Parliament.| The Prime Minister advised the Queen to dissolve Parliament. Sudden and sharp was the appeal; firm and not to be misunderstood was the response. Mr. Gladstone went out on his fourth Midlothian campaign, and encountered no difficulty in retaining his own seat, as no opponent came forward to challenge it. But the country turned a deaf ear to his appeal. It preferred to listen to Lord Randolph Churchill’s characteristic denunciation of the Home Rule Bill, than which he vowed that “the united and concentrated genius of Bedlam and Colney Hatch would strive in vain to produce a more striking tissue of absurdities.” He declared that the real reason they were asked to accept such a measure was only, “to gratify the ambition of an old man in a hurry.” The result of the elections showed 316 Conservatives, 78 Liberal Unionists, 191 official Liberals, and 85 Parnellites: or a majority in the new House of 113 against Mr. Gladstone’s Irish policy.
When the Queen sent for Lord Salisbury, he invited Lord Hartington to join him in forming a coalition Cabinet; but the time for that was not yet—a purely Conservative Ministry, therefore, was formed. |Lord Salisbury’s Second Administration.| Everything promised fair for the endurance of Lord Salisbury’s second Administration, but a rude shock was in store for it almost on the threshold of its career.
THE TOWER BRIDGE: THE RAISING OF THE BASCULES ON THE OPENING DAY.
The bridge, which cost over £830,000, was commenced in 1886, and opened by the Prince of Wales, June 30, 1894. The bascules each weigh 1,000 tons.
By far the most striking figure in the Conservative ranks of the House of Commons was Lord Randolph Churchill.171 He became Chancellor of the Exchequer in the new Cabinet and leader of the House of Commons. Right well he led it through the six weeks of autumn session following on the elections. His admirers were delighted—his critics reconciled—by his adroit exchange of the manners of a political bravo for those of a responsible statesman; and that, too, without sacrifice of power in debate or pungency in retort. What was the dismay of Ministerialists when, in a moment of caprice, impatient because he could not get exactly his own way on a question of military and naval expenditure, Churchill threw up his office and left the Cabinet! |Lord Randolph Churchill Resigns.| This happened in December 1885; active negotiations were going on at the time for the redintegration of the old Liberal Party. Mr. Chamberlain and Sir George Trevelyan, as Unionists, had consented to confer with Sir William Harcourt and Mr. John Morley, as Home Rulers, at a “round table,” under the presidency of Lord Herschell (also a Home Ruler). |The Round Table Conference.| In the opinion of most people, the return of at least half the Liberal Unionists to their former allegiance might be expected, as the outcome of this conference. The stability of the Ministry, therefore, was peculiarly jeopardised by any appearance of internal disunion at this juncture. The crisis passed over in safety. Mr. Goschen, an old colleague of Mr. Gladstone, having been First Lord of the Admiralty in his first Administration, now determined to throw in his lot with the Unionists, and accepted the office vacated by Lord Randolph. The Round Table Conference separated without having found a basis of agreement, and the main body of Liberal Unionists remained staunch in support of Ministers.
MANCHESTER SHIP CANAL AND BARTON AQUEDUCT.
The Canal, 35½ miles long, which has made Manchester practically a sea-port, was commenced in 1887 and opened by Her Majesty the Queen in 1893. It cost 15½ million pounds. The Bridgwater Canal is carried across it in a swinging aqueduct at Barton. The lower illustration shows the aqueduct partially swung open; the ends of the water-way are of course closed and a barge may be seen therein, whilst the horse drawing it is on the tow path above. The Ship Canal is seen beneath.
From a Photograph] [by E. Ward.
BARTON AQUEDUCT.
The question still remained—who was to lead the House of Commons? The answer was a remarkable one. Mr. W. H. Smith, in spite of the mediocrity of his powers of oratory, had risen to very high office in successive Conservative Cabinets. As a man of business his reputation was unsurpassed, and he had secured the respect and confidence of all sections of the House of Commons by his well-known indifference to office and independence of its emoluments. Upon him the choice fell; he exchanged the post of Secretary for War for that of First Lord of the Treasury, and justified his appointment by leading the House of Commons with admirable temper and judgment during five trying sessions.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION ON JUBILEE DAY PASSING HYDE PARK CORNER.
CHAPTER XVII.
1887–1897.
Adoption of the Closure by the House of Commons—The Queen’s Jubilee—Thanksgiving Service in Westminster Abbey—The Imperial Institute—“Parnellism and Crime”—Appointment of Special Commission of Judges—Their Report—Fall of Parnell—Disruption of the Irish Party—Deaths of Parnell and W. H. Smith—The Baring Crisis—The Local Government Bill—Establishment of County Councils—Free Education—Death of the Duke of Clarence—General Election—Mr. Gladstone’s Fourth Midlothian Campaign—The Newcastle Programme—Victory of Home Rulers—The Second Home Rule Bill—Its Rejection by the Lords—Parish Councils and Employers’ Liability Acts—Mr. Gladstone Resigns the Leadership—Lord Rosebery becomes Prime Minister—Disunion of Ministerialists—Defeat and Resignation of the Government—Lord Salisbury’s Third Administration—General Election—Unionist Triumph—The Eastern Question—Massacres in Armenia—Lord Rosebery Resigns the Leadership—Trouble in the Transvaal—Dr. Jameson’s Raid—The German Emperor’s Message—The Venezuelan Dispute—President Cleveland’s Message.
THE session of 1887 was an exceedingly laborious one in the House of Commons. The debate on the Address, prolonged by all the arts of obstruction to inordinate length, furnished a convincing argument that further changes in the rules of procedure were indispensable if the House were to retain any control whatever over its own business, and these rules, including that regulating the application of the closure, were remodelled and adopted after long and heated discussion.
In pleasing contrast to the heat and rancour of proceedings within the walls of Parliament were those organised throughout the country to celebrate the completion of the fiftieth year of Queen Victoria’s reign. |The Queen’s Jubilee.| The weather throughout the summer months was of exceptional splendour, as if to give emphasis to the popular term “Queen’s weather.” London lay for weeks under a cloudless sky, and no day in the year was more perfect than Jubilee Day, June 21. |Thanksgiving Service in Westminster Abbey.| On that morning the Queen went in procession from Buckingham Palace to Westminster Abbey to attend a thanksgiving service, accompanied by a number of European monarchs, princes, and distinguished persons, as well as by many Indian potentates, gorgeously attired in many-coloured silks and jewels. Temporary galleries, fitted up in the abbey church, afforded seats for peers and members of Parliament and173 officers of the Army, Navy, and Civil Service, and, as the wearing of uniforms was obligatory, the display of bright colour was such as may very seldom be seen in Great Britain. The coronation chair was set on a daïs covered with red cloth, between the sacrarium and the choir, and here the Queen took her seat with the robes of state placed on her shoulders while the service, which lasted just an hour, was performed.
THE JUBILEE PROCESSION PASSING DOWN REGENT STREET.
The escort of Princes in the foreground: the Indian escort immediately precedes the Royal Carriage.
It would be impossible, within reasonable limits, even to mention the various schemes started, institutions founded, or funds set on foot to commemorate the Royal Jubilee of 1887. |The Imperial Institute.| Of these the most conspicuous outwardly has taken the form of that pile of architecture in South Kensington, known as the Imperial Institute, in the foundation, permanent organisation, and direction of which the Prince of Wales has taken as energetic a part as his father had done in the temporary Exhibition of 1851.
THE JUBILEE SERVICE IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY, June 21, 1887.
The most conspicuous figures on the Queen’s right are the Prince of Wales and the Crown Prince of Germany (afterwards the Emperor Frederick), and to her left the Crown Princess and the Princess of Wales.
During this year a series of events took their rise out of the publication in the Times of a number of articles headed “Parnellism and Crime,” in which Mr. Parnell and his colleagues were charged with active complicity in the long prevalence of outrage and terrorism in Ireland. |“Parnellism and Crime.”| The facsimile of a letter, purporting to be written by Parnell, was published on April 18, containing the following sentence, referring to the Phœnix Park murders:—“Though I regret the accident of Lord F. Cavendish’s death, I cannot refuse to admit that Burke got no more than his deserts.” This letter was repudiated by Parnell in his place in the House of Commons; but the Government resisted a motion to the effect that the Times, in publishing these articles, had been guilty of breach of privilege.174 Mr. Gladstone then moved for a Select Committee to enquire into the truth of the charges, but this also was refused by the Government. The request for a Select Committee was renewed in the following year by Mr. Parnell, in order to enquire into the authenticity of certain letters produced in an action for libel brought against the proprietors of the Times by Mr. O’Donnell, one of Mr. Parnell’s followers. |Appointment of Special Commission of Judges.| Mr. W. H. Smith stated, in reply (July 12), that, in the opinion of the Government, a Select Committee of the House of Commons was not a suitable tribunal to try charges arising out of the action of political parties, but that the Government were willing to appoint a Special Commission of Judges to enquire into the whole allegations. Unfortunately, the debates on the Bill necessary to constitute this Commission were excessively heated. The fact, an infelicitous one, it must be allowed, that the Attorney-General, a member of the Government, had acted as leading counsel for the Times in the late trial, gave colour to the unfounded charge that the Government had been acting all along in collusion with the Times.
THE OPENING OF THE IMPERIAL INSTITUTE BY HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, May 10, 1893: THE ROYAL PROCESSION.
THE IMPERIAL INSTITUTE.
The Commission consisted of Sir James Hannen, Sir J. C. Day, and Sir A. L. Smith. Once more the Attorney-General appeared as leading counsel for the Times, and from the outset the enquiry had all the appearance of a Ministerial impeachment of certain Irish members. The exposure of the atrocious character of Pigott, one of the chief witnesses relied on by the Times, and his subsequent suicide, caused that part of the charge which depended on the authenticity of certain letters attributed to Parnell to be abandoned. |Their Report.| The judgment of the Commission was not delivered until February 13, 1890. While exonerating the Irish members from some of the heaviest charges made against them by the Times, and175 pronouncing the facsimile letter to be a forgery, it was to the effect, inter alia, that (1) they had joined a conspiracy to promote by coercion and intimidation an agrarian agitation against the payment of rent, in order to expel “the English garrison” of landlords from Ireland; (2) that they had disseminated newspapers tending to incite to the176 commission of crime; (3) that although some of the respondents did express bonâ fide disapproval of crime and outrage, they all persisted in the system of intimidation which led to crime, with knowledge of its effect; (4) that they made payments to procure the escape of criminals from justice and to compensate persons injured in the commission of crime, and (5) that they invited and obtained assistance and subscriptions from known advocates of crime and dynamite.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN AND THE ROYAL FAMILY. PAINTED ON THE OCCASION OF HER MAJESTY’S JUBILEE IN 1887.
2. The Prince of Wales.
3. The Princess of Wales.
4. Prince Albert Victor.
5. Prince George of Wales.
6. Princess Louise of Wales.
7. Princess Victoria of Wales.
8. Princess Maud of Wales.
9. Crown Princess of Germany.
10. Crown Prince of Germany.
11. Prince William of Prussia.
12. Princess William of Prussia.
13. Prince Frederick William of Prussia.
14. The Hereditary Princess of Saxe-Meiningen.
15. The Hered. Prince of Saxe-Meiningen.
16. Princess Theodore of Saxe-Meiningen.
17. Prince Henry of Prussia.
18. Princess Irene of Hesse.
19. Princess Victoria of Prussia.
20. Princess Sophie of Prussia.
21. Princess Margaret of Prussia.
22. The Grand Duke of Hesse.
23. Princess Louis of Battenberg.
24. Prince Louis of Battenberg.
25. Princess Alice of Battenberg.
26. The Grand Duchess Eliza of Russia.
27. The Grand Duke Serge of Russia.
28. The Hereditary Grand Duke of Hesse.
30. The Duke of Edinburgh.
31. The Duchess of Edinburgh.
32. Prince Alfred of Edinburgh.
33. Princess Marie of Edinburgh.
34. Princess Victoria Melita of Edinburgh.
35. Princess Alexandra of Edinburgh.
36. Princess Beatrice of Edinburgh.
37. Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein,
Princess Helena of Great Britain and Ireland.
38. Prince Christian of Schleswig-Holstein.
39. Prince Christian Victor of Schleswig-Holstein.
40. Prince Albert of Schleswig-Holstein.
41. Princess Victoria of Schleswig-Holstein.
42. Princess Louise of Schleswig-Holstein.
43. Princess Louise, Marchioness of Lorne.
44. The Marquis of Lorne.
45. The Duke of Connaught.
46. The Duchess of Connaught.
47. Princess Margaret of Connaught.
48. Prince Arthur of Connaught.
49. Princess Victoria Beatrice Patricia of Connaught.
50. The Duchess of Albany.
51. Princess Alice of Albany.
52. Prince Charles Edward, Duke of Albany.
53. Princess Beatrice, Princess Henry of Battenberg.
54. Prince Henry of Battenberg.
55. Prince Alexander Albert of Battenberg.
THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, WITH HIS TRAIN-BEARER.
On the whole, the prestige of the Government was greatly compromised by its connection with this great trial, and the Times paid £5,000 solatium to Mr. Parnell on account of the libel. Parliament was prorogued early, on August 12, 1890, in order to meet again before Christmas to take up the Irish Land Bill and the Tithes Bill, which had been sacrificed for want of time. The prospects of a discredited Government in meeting an exhilarated Opposition were far from auspicious, but an unexpected event in the interval altered the whole scene. A divorce suit was brought against Mr. Parnell by Captain O’Shea, formerly one of his party in Parliament, but latterly known to have departed from his allegiance, and the co-respondent in the suit allowed judgment to go against him without offering any defence.
In no other country, perhaps, has the private misconduct of a public man such fatal effect on his career as in Great Britain, where flagrant immorality proved against a statesman puts an immediate end to his reputation and influence. |Fall of Parnell.| Parnell fell; Parnell, who for sixteen years had led the Irish Party with unswerving will and undisputed authority; Parnell, whose sagacious leadership had brought the vision of Home Rule to the very brink of accomplishment. Mr. Gladstone wrote that, in his opinion, Mr. Parnell’s “continuance at the present moment in the leadership would be productive of consequences disastrous in the highest degree to the cause of Ireland.” The ecclesiastical authorities in Ireland pronounced against him, and the weight of priestly authority in the political affairs of that country can hardly be overestimated. The Irish Party in Parliament was divided. The majority of forty-five, henceforth known as Anti-Parnellites, renounced their old chief at a stormy meeting in Committee Room 15 of the House of Commons; but the minority of twenty-six remained staunch. The crisis saved the Government.
by F. Hollyer.
LORD LEIGHTON, P.R.A.,
1830–1896.
Frederick Leighton was born at Scarborough. Painter, sculptor, musician, and polished orator, he will long be remembered as the ideal President of the Royal Academy. The portrait represents him in his robes as D. C. L.
SIR JOHN EVERETT MILLAIS, P.R.A.,
1829–1896.
Born at Southampton; exhibited his first picture in 1846, and in 1848 became a member of the “Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood” with Rossetti, Holman Hunt, F. Madox Brown, and others. Elected President of the Royal Academy on the death of Lord Leighton, he survived him only six months.
Parnell died on October 6, 1891. |Deaths of Parnell and W. H. Smith.| On the same day the Queen lost one of her most devoted servants, and the House of Commons its leader, in the person of William Henry Smith, whose health had broken down under the strain of constant attention to the ever-increasing work of Parliament. Added to this anxiety177 came the financial crisis brought about by the failure, in November 1890, of the great house of the Barings to meet their enormous liability of £22,000,000. The stability of the whole of British finance was threatened, but the Governors of the Bank of England came to the rescue, undertaking the liquidation of the concern and opening a guarantee fund, which was subscribed readily, and thus the disaster was averted.
The two measures by which Lord Salisbury’s second Administration will remain distinguished in the memory of most people were immediate and exceedingly far-reaching in their effect; that, namely, which revolutionised the whole system of local government by the creation of County Councils, and that which rendered elementary education free of payment of school fees. |County Councils.| Of the first of these measures, Mr. Ritchie, President of the Local Government Board, was the author, and it was produced during the session of 1888. Member though he was of a Conservative Cabinet, the most ardent Radical could not complain that Mr. Ritchie had not dealt with ancient institutions in a sweeping manner. The levying of county rates, the maintenance of roads and bridges, asylums, the conduct of registrations, and nearly all the duties hitherto reposed in country gentlemen in their capacity of members of Quarter Sessions, were transferred to purely elective councils chosen by the ratepayers. London, as defined by the Metropolis Management Act, was constituted a county, and the old Metropolitan Board of Works ceased to exist.
by permission of the Artist.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, 1890.
|Free Education.| Free education was given a place in the Government programme of 1891, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Goschen, was able to produce a surplus of £2,000,000 in his Budget—just about the sum estimated as the cost of remitting school fees out of the public funds; half of it was taken in order to render elementary education free from September 1 following.
The mysterious epidemic which, for want of a more precise term, is known by the Italian one of influenza, carried off a very large number of persons in the winter and spring months of 1892, 1893, and 1894. |Death of the Duke of Clarence.| Of these the most distinguished by position was the Duke of Clarence, eldest son of the Prince of Wales, and consequently ultimate heir to the throne of Great Britain. He died on January 14, 1892, shortly before the date fixed for his marriage with the Princess May of Teck.
The summer of 1892 was a period of great political agitation, in preparation for the General Election, which was fixed to take place in July. Mr. Gladstone, notwithstanding his fourscore and two years, set out with no manifestation of failing vigour on his fourth Midlothian campaign. |Mr. Gladstone’s Fourth Midlothian Campaign.| The object nearest to his heart was clearly the concession of Home Rule to Ireland; but there was put forward also on behalf of the Gladstonian Liberal party a scheme of general social legislation, known as the Newcastle Programme, containing a long list of measures, some of them of a very drastic nature, calculated to attract the support of the labouring classes. The indifference felt by the bulk of English and Scottish electors to the establishment of an Irish parliament was overborne by the hopes excited among disestablishers, prohibitionists, eight-hours’-day men, land-law reformers, and other enthusiasts, and their votes went to secure the victory for the cause of Home Rule. The Unionists, who had entered office in 1886 with a majority of 116 in the House of Commons, had suffered so many losses by defection and in by-elections that they could only reckon a majority of sixty-six when Parliament was dissolved. This178 was changed by the general election, into a minority of forty, which was the exact figure by which was carried, when Parliament re-assembled in August, a vote of no confidence in Lord Salisbury’s Administration, after which Mr. Gladstone proceeded to form his fourth and last Cabinet.
THE ALBERT MEMORIAL CHAPEL, WINDSOR, ON THE OCCASION OF THE FUNERAL OF H.R.H. THE DUKE OF CLARENCE, January 1892.
The Duke’s coffin stands between the tomb of the Prince Consort at the further end and that of the Duke of Albany (who died in 1884) at this end of the Chapel.
On February 13, 1893, the Prime Minister proceeded to fulfil his chief pledge to the electorate by introducing his second Home Rule Bill. |The Second Home Rule Bill.| Mr. Gladstone’s speech lasted two hours and a quarter, a marvellous performance for an octogenarian; and although he failed to excite the same enthusiasm among his followers as was so remarkable on the former occasion, the Bill eventually passed the second reading by 347 votes against 304. But the opposition in Committee was so vigorous and sustained, that the Government resolved to force the Bill through by applying the closure at fixed dates to groups of clauses, so that the whole Bill should be through Committee by the end of July; and this was effected, after animated resistance had been offered to what was denounced as the “gag.”
BRINGING HOME THE BODY OF H.R.H. PRINCE HENRY OF BATTENBERG.
Prince Henry had volunteered for the Expedition to Coomassie in the autumn of 1895; he was taken ill with fever on the march and died on his way home. He was buried in Whippingham Church, near Osborne, February 4, 1896. The picture represents the transference of the body from H.M.S. Blenheim to the Royal Yacht Alberta.
It was September before the measure reached the Upper House, whence it was thrown out by the unprecedented proportion of 419 to 14 votes. |Its Rejection by the Lords.| Among the majority were numbered no less than sixty-two peers whom the Queen had created on Mr. Gladstone’s own recommendation. The attention of the Ministerial party was then directed to stirring up popular indignation against the House of Lords on account of their resistance to the popular will. But it has to be confessed that this appeal evoked remarkably little response. On the other hand, considerable impatience was manifested on the part of many supporters of the Government at the general election, on account of the neglect to carry out the multiform promises contained in the Newcastle programme. Accordingly, Parliament was summoned together for a winter session in November in order to consider the Parish Councils and Employers’ Liability Bills. These important measures, which went through the successive stages to completion in the course of 1894, remain the principal179 achievement of Mr. Gladstone’s last year in the public service. |Mr. Gladstone Resigns the Leadership.| Early in 1894 his withdrawal from active politics was announced; the leadership of the House of Commons devolved upon Sir William Harcourt, and, although Mr. Gladstone did not resign his seat for Midlothian, he brought to a close a period of sixty-two years’ attendance in the House of Commons. His last utterance from the Treasury Bench was a vehement denunciation of the action of the House of Lords in dealing with the Bills last referred to.
THE HOUSE OF COMMONS: Mr. GLADSTONE INTRODUCING THE HOME RULE BILL, February 13, 1893.
Mr. Gladstone stands at the table: on the seat behind him are Mr. John Morley, Sir W. Harcourt, Mr. Marjoribanks (now Lord Tweedmouth), Mr. Mundella and Sir C. Russell (Lord Russell), and Mr. Herbert Gladstone sits in the “gangway.” Mr. Asquith can be seen between Mr. Gladstone and the clerk at the table. On the front Opposition bench, beginning at the further end, are: Sir E. Clarke, Sir R. Webster (leaning forward), Mr. Goschen, Mr. Balfour, Lord Randolph Churchill, and Mr. Edward Carson.
The removal of such a puissant personality from their head could not but have a serious effect on the Ministerial array, composed as it was of such Old Liberals as had embraced Home Rule out of confidence in Mr. Gladstone, New Liberals of an extremely Democratic type under the nominal lead of Mr. Labouchere, the Labour representatives, Parnellites and Anti-Parnellites (the last-named being further split into sections at war among themselves). On no single subject were these various groups united save in a desire to get Home Rule out of the way. Home Rule, indeed, had been disposed of, but not in the only way to satisfy its advocates. The difficulty of the situation was intensified by the successor to Mr. Gladstone chosen by Her Majesty. |Lord Rosebery becomes Prime Minister.| In sending for her Foreign Minister, the Earl of Rosebery, she was acting, doubtless, on the advice of Mr. Gladstone himself, but in the choice of a peer there was abundant cause of dissatisfaction to most of the Ministerialists in the House of Commons, who had placed the “mending or ending”—preferably the ending—of the House of Lords in the forefront of their programme. Besides, it was considered by very many that Sir William Harcourt had done more to earn the leadership of the party than Lord Rosebery, and it soon became apparent, not only that this appointment was a cause of further disunion in the Home Rule ranks, but that Lord Rosebery and Sir William Harcourt were far from cordial in their official relations. On June 21, 1895, a180 listless debate was in progress on the Army Estimates, the House was far less than half full, when Mr. Brodrick moved a reduction of £100 in the salary of the Secretary for War, Mr. Campbell-Bannerman, in order to call attention to the alleged deficiency in the stores of small-arms ammunition. Mr. Campbell-Bannerman offered his personal assurance that the amount in store was adequate, but the Opposition declined to accept it in view of the official figures laid before the House. A division was called; there was nothing to indicate the critical nature of it till Mr. Ellis, the chief Ministerial Whip, to whom the Clerk at the Table had handed the paper automatically, passed it on to Mr. Douglas, the chief Opposition Whip, when it was found that the Government were in a minority of eight—132 votes to 125.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, January, 1893.
HER MAJESTY WITH HER GREAT-GRANDSON PRINCE EDWARD OF YORK, THIRD IN THE DIRECT LINE OF SUCCESSION TO THE THRONE.
A mishap like this might have passed without immediate effect on the fortunes of the Government, had it not been that the form of the amendment carried was one reflecting on the departmental administration of one of the Secretaries of State. |Lord Salisbury’s Third Administration.| Lord Rosebery tendered his resignation, and the Queen sent for Lord Salisbury, who commenced at once to form his third Administration. The Liberal Unionist contingent, with the Duke of Devonshire as their chief, elected to maintain their organisation independent of their Conservative allies; but the Ministry was formed by a coalition of the two wings of the Unionist party. They approached the general election in July with such confidence of success as very rarely can be entertained under a system of household suffrage; but the result far exceeded their most sanguine calculations. Sir William Harcourt lost his seat for Derby on the first day’s polling, the prelude of such discomfiture as has scarcely any parallel in the history of a political party. Reckoning the Gladstonian or Home Rule majority in the previous Parliament at forty-three, it was converted at the polls of 1895 into an Unionist majority of 152. The new Ministry, in entering office, found domestic affairs in a very tranquil state; but troubles had been gathering for some time, endangering the peaceful relations of Great Britain with several foreign Powers, which called for the exercise of all Lord Salisbury’s experience and foresight in undertaking once more the administration of foreign affairs.
St. James’s, proprietor of the copyright.
THE MARRIAGE OF T.R.H. THE DUKE OF YORK AND PRINCESS VICTORIA MARY (MAY) OF TECK, AT THE CHAPEL ROYAL, ST. JAMES’S, July 6, 1893.
Next the bridegroom is his father, the Prince of Wales, and the tall figure of the King of Denmark is seen between him and the Princess of Wales. Her Majesty the Queen has on her right the young Prince Alexander of Battenberg and his mother the Princess Henry; and behind her Majesty’s chair are Prince Henry of Battenberg and the Duke of Cambridge. Following the line to the right from the Duke, we see the Duchess of Fife, the Grand Duke of Hesse, the Duke of Fife, Prince Waldemar of Denmark, Prince Edward of Saxe-Weimar, Prince Philip of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, the Lord Steward, Lord Chamberlain, and other officials. The first two bridesmaids are the Princesses Victoria and Maud of Wales, then Princesses Victoria Melitia of Edinburgh and Victoria of Schleswig-Holstein, and behind them Princesses Alexandra of Edinburgh and Victoria Patricia of Connaught, and on the extreme right of the picture, Princesses Beatrice of Edinburgh and Margaret of Connaught. The Princesses Victoria Eugenie and Alex of Battenberg are nearest the spectator, and seated in front is the Duchess of Teck. In the foreground to the left stands the Czarewitch—now Czar of Russia—with Princess Louis of Battenberg seated on his right, and Princess Henry of Prussia to his left. Before him are seated the Grand Duke and Duchess of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. Immediately behind the bride’s head is seen the Duke of Edinburgh; next him, towards the left of the picture, the Duchess of Edinburgh and the Duke of Connaught; and towards the right the Duchess of Connaught and Prince Christian (next the Prince of Wales). Archbishop Benson of Canterbury performs the ceremony, the Bishop of Rochester stands behind him, and nearer the foreground, between the Archbishop and the Czar, are the Duke of Teck and two of his sons; the third son, Prince Alexander George, is seen just behind the Czar’s shoulder. On the extreme left is Prince Henry of Prussia, and next him Prince Louis of Battenberg, and the Sub-Dean of the Chapels Royal.
WHO SAID “ATROCITIES”?
The Eastern question had passed once more into an acute stage. The incorrigible vices of the Government of Turkey had led to a series of horrible massacres of the Christian subjects of the Sultan in Armenia. |The Eastern Question.| Sympathy with the sufferers was readily aroused in this country; Mr. Gladstone, though no longer in Parliament, responded to appeals made to him by various individuals,182 and wrote a number of letters, in which, though at first he was careful to use no expression to increase Lord Salisbury’s difficulties, he gradually glided into his accustomed vehemence, and indicated his desire that England should take vengeance on the “Assassin of Europe,” single-handed, if need be. In the course of 1896 he appeared on a public platform in Liverpool, and supported this view with great energy. This precipitated a further calamity on the Liberal party, for, in the course of 1896, Lord Rosebery announced that he differed so strongly from the views expressed by Mr. Gladstone, and was, besides, so sensible of the want of cordiality in the support given to him by some of his followers, that he felt compelled to resign his leadership. It would be premature to attempt more than brief allusion to events which are still in progress. The insurrection of the Cretan subjects of the Porte, the invasion of the island by Greece, and the war which ensued between Turkey and Greece, in which the latter so quickly collapsed, have proved, thus far, to be disturbances severely localised by means of the Concert established among the Great Powers, who, while resolved to compel the Sultan’s Government to administer his realm with humanity and even justice, have resisted the attempt made by the Greeks to wrest away part of his territory by violence.
THE STATE DINING-ROOM AT BUCKINGHAM PALACE.
The tables set for the wedding breakfast of Princess Maud of Wales. Princess Maud, youngest daughter of the Prince and Princess of Wales, was married to Prince Carl, second son of the Crown Prince of Denmark, July 22, 1896.
The affairs of the Transvaal rose into prominent notice towards the close of 1895. Commercial enterprise had for some time been actively directed towards South Africa, notably by the British South Africa Company, at the head of which was Mr. Cecil Rhodes, the Premier of the Cape Colony, who had been sworn a member of Her Majesty’s Privy Council. |Trouble in the Transvaal.| Miners and settlers in general poured into the Transvaal to the number of 60,000, converting the quiet village of Johannesburg into a large and busy town. The Transvaal Government viewed this movement with no favour; the industry of the Boer population was chiefly a pastoral one, and President Krüger steadily refused to comply with the claim of the new-comers to rights of citizenship. The Uitlanders, as the new settlers were called, numbered three to one of the native Boers, and were paying nine-tenths of the taxation: meetings, summoned to protest against the action of the President and Volksraad, were prohibited; a deaf ear was turned to all petitions for redress, and, at last, a movement was started to obtain by compulsion what was refused by law. A force of all arms, commanded by Dr. Jameson, and comprising several officers in the British service, invaded the Transvaal in the expectation of a concerted rising in Johannesburg. This did not take place: after a smart encounter with the Boers, the English force surrendered on January 1, 1896. The principal officers were put on their trial under the Foreign Enlistment Act, and183 sentenced to various terms of imprisonment, and, in some instances, to forfeiture of their commissions. The claim for indemnity put forward by the Government of the South African Republic has not yet been settled. A Select Committee of the House of Commons was appointed to investigate the origin and conduct of what has become known as the “Johannesburg movement,” and its enquiry is still proceeding. Perhaps the most important result of the Transvaal raid will prove to be the insight suddenly afforded into the true sentiments of the German Government towards Great Britain. The numerous bonds uniting the German and British Courts, added to the racial sympathies existing between the two nations, had given rise to the belief that the policy of Germany was more friendly towards Great Britain than that of some of the other great Powers. This belief was rudely dispelled by a message from the German Emperor to President Krüger encouraging him in resistance in any dispute that might arise with the British Government.
A. Major White. B. Dr. Jameson. C. Capt. Coventry. D. Sir J. Willoughby.
DR. JAMESON’S RAID: THE LAST STAND OF THE INVADERS, NEAR KRUGERSDORP, January 2, 1896.
While the trouble with the Transvaal was still pending, there came a still more formidable surprise from a quarter whence it was little expected. A controversy between Great Britain and the insignificant South American Republic of Venezuela had been dragging its course for many years on the subject of a disputed frontier between the latter country and British Guiana. |The Venezuelan Dispute.| Suddenly, on December 17, President Cleveland startled the world by a message to Congress declaring that the action of the British Government in this matter was an infringement of the Monroe doctrine; that it was the duty of Congress to resist the infringement of that doctrine, and that a Commission should be appointed by the Executive to examine and report on the rights of the case. Then, continued the President, it would be “the duty of the United States to resist by every means in its power, as a wilful aggression upon its rights and interests, the appropriation by Great Britain of any lands which, after investigation, may be determined of right to belong to Venezuela.”
This was open menace, and it required the utmost forbearance on the part of the British Cabinet to avoid precipitating a conflict. Finally, the question of the Venezuelan Frontier was referred to arbitration, and diplomacy seems in a fair way to earn one of its best merited triumphs.
THREE GENERATIONS AFLOAT.
To the right is the Queen’s steam yacht Victoria and Albert; in the centre the Prince of Wales’s Britannia; and to the left the German Emperor’s Meteor.
CHAPTER XVIII.
Material Progress during the Reign—Modern Locomotion—The Bicycle—Motor Carriages—The Proposed Channel Tunnel—Steam Navigation—Ironclads—The Telephone—The Phonograph—Electricity as an Illuminant—Photography—Its Effect on Painting and Engraving—Victorian Architecture—Absence of Principle in Design—Universal Education—Its Effect on Moral Character and Literary Habits—The Predominance of Fiction—The Growth and Character of British Journalism—The Advance of Natural Science—Surgery and Medicine—Vaccination—Antiseptic and Aseptic Treatment—Bacteriology—The Röntgen Rays—Sanitary Legislation—Conclusion.
ALLUSION has been made in earlier chapters to the development during the reign of Queen Victoria of the powers of steam applied to locomotion, of electricity applied to the conveyance of news, to the institution of the penny post, and to the invention of anæsthetics in surgery. |Material Progress during the Reign.| But no survey, however brief, would be satisfactory which took no note of a few other stages in the progress of applied knowledge—progress which, up to the present moment, shows no sign of slackening.
Ringmer.
AN EARLY BICYCLE.
This is probably the earliest Bicycle seen in England; it was made in 1868 by Mr. W. F. Martin.
First, as to locomotion: when Sir Walter Scott was writing the opening chapters of the “Heart of Midlothian,” in 1818, he referred to the wonderful development of facilities for travel, and may have thought he was exceeding the limits of the probable when he penned the sentence: “Perhaps the echoes of Ben Nevis may soon be awakened by the bugle, not of a warlike chieftain, but of the guard of a mail coach.” Scott was by no means deficient in imaginative power, but the maximum speed he can have contemplated was ten miles an hour, for the standard of speed in those days was the pace of a horse (we still reckon the strength of our engines at so many “horse” power). |Modern Locomotion.| What would he think now, were it possible for him to take his seat in a luxurious saloon and be whirled round the flanks of Ben Nevis, along the West Highland Railway? Eleven years after the publication of the “Heart of Midlothian” a competition of locomotives was held on the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, and the prize was taken by Messrs. Stephenson’s “Rocket.” Weighing 7 tons 9 cwts., this engine was able to draw a load of 9 tons 10 cwts. at an average speed of thirteen miles an hour. One of the first-class express engines on the London and North-Western line at the185 present day weighs 77 tons 2 cwts., and draws a load of 160 tons, at an average speed of forty-seven miles an hour.
1781–1848.
Railway Engineer. Born at Wylam, Northumberland. Son of a colliery fireman. Constructed his first locomotive in 1814. Planned and constructed the first railways—Stockton and Darlington, 1815–25, Liverpool and Manchester, 1825–30. Was chief engineer to most of the lines constructed until 1840, when he retired, leaving his business to his son Robert.
But it is not only by steam that the standard of speed in locomotion has been displaced. |The Bicycle.| The invention and constant improvement of the bicycle has not only caused the rise of a most important industry in their manufacture (about half a million cycles are being turned out of the factories annually, representing a value of at least £5,000,000), but it has supplied a means of locomotion of incalculable convenience to persons of all classes and of both sexes. This invention must be reckoned a great boon, not only as a means of recreation to persons in crowded towns, to whom the cycle affords easy access to the country, but also to working-men living at a distance from their employment.
With respect to the mechanical propulsion of carriages along ordinary streets and highways, stringent regulations were in force until 1896, under which such carriages were not permitted to travel at a higher speed than four miles an hour. |Motor Carriages.| But the invention of “motor” carriages, propelled by steam, gas, oil, or electricity, convinced the authorities that these restrictions should be relaxed. This accordingly was done by Act of Parliament, and their removal was celebrated, on November 14, 1896, by the excursion of a number of horseless carriages from London to Brighton. Evil weather marred the display, nevertheless large numbers of persons turned out to witness it. It is too early to predict the extent to which horses may be displaced by motor carriages, but it can scarcely be doubtful that their obvious imperfections will yield to the ingenuity of inventors, so as to render them at least dangerous rivals to the old kind of equipage.
Before leaving the subject of terrestrial locomotion, allusion must be made to the project of carrying a tunnel under the Straits of Dover to the French coast, to enable trains to be run without interruption from Great Britain to the Continent. |The Proposed Channel Tunnel.| The tunnel, the favourite scheme of Sir Edward Watkin, Chairman of the South-Eastern Railway, was begun some years ago, and was actually carried for several hundred yards under the sea. But the strategic advantages of an island realm are too substantial to be sacrificed by the creation of a highway, command of which would certainly be insisted on by any Power or combination of Powers which, in the future, might overcome Great Britain in arms.
THE MOTOR-CAR PARADE, November 14, 1896: THE START FROM THE HOTEL METROPOLE.
|Steam Navigation.| Turning now to locomotion by sea, or navigation, steam had been applied to the propulsion of vessels as early as 1802, and its use had been gradually extended till, in 1835, the first steamer with mails for Egypt and India was despatched from Falmouth; but it was not until the second year of the present reign, 1838, that the first vessel entirely186 propelled by steam crossed the Atlantic. Greatly as the appearance and strength of our mercantile marine fleet has been altered to meet the requirement of speed, a still greater contrast is presented in the construction of warships since the invention of rifled ordnance. When our Queen ascended the throne, the famous wooden walls of Old England were moved by sails alone. Greater speed was subsequently secured by the introduction of engine room to vessels of the old type, with paddles or screw-propellers. But experience proved how easily engines might be thrown out of gear by a single shot, a danger which grew more imminent with every fresh improvement in guns. |Ironclads.| Then began the long contest between armour-plating and projectiles: the armour had to be made thicker and ever thicker to resist the increasing weight and velocity of projectiles, until, by the reduction of masts and spars to the bare necessities of signalling, the submergence of the hull to reduce the vulnerable surface, the increase of engine space, and the reduction of the armament to a few pieces of great power, our battleships have lost almost all semblance of the fabrics which used to move in such stately manner under towers of canvas, and have acquired the character of floating forts. Still, Britannia rules the waves; her seamen, of whom it was predicted that the adoption of steam would deprive of their superiority, have no equals in the world; and her people have proved, by their enthusiasm in furnishing the necessary funds, that they will endure almost any sacrifice rather than suffer the British Navy to be second in power to any other.
Portrait Gallery.
ISAMBARD K. BRUNEL,
1806–1859.
Son of Sir Marc Isambard Brunel, engineer of the Thames Tunnel. Designed the Clifton Suspension Bridge, the Great Western (the first great ocean steamer) and the Great Eastern (see page 38), and was engineer of the Great Western Railway.
|The Telephone.| The revolution in intercourse between distant places effected by the electric telegraph has been noticed already, but even that has been outdone in rapidity by later applications of the electric current; for, just as spoken language is swifter than written words, so the telephone has overcome the limits hitherto imposed by space on conversation. It was a great marvel when, in 1852, the completion of a cable under the Channel rendered communication possible between London and Paris by means of a code of signals; but now statesmen and commercial men may discuss affairs confidentially by telephone; nay, a lover in Paris may listen with rapture to the very accents of his beloved lingering in London.
|The Phonograph.| One of the most remarkable modifications of the telephone is Edison’s phonograph, whereby the human voice and other sounds are recorded on a delicate membrane, which afterwards, for an indefinite period, is capable of being made to repeat or transmit these sounds. Future generations will be able thereby to listen to the actual voice and accents of the departed.
The illustration represents the shield which protects the excavators. This is from time to time driven forward, and another section of the iron lining of the tunnel is inserted piece by piece between it and the sections already completed. Compressed air is used in that portion of the tunnel which is beneath the river to prevent the water entering. The Blackwall Tunnel, opened by the Prince of Wales, May 22, 1897, was constructed similarly.
Not the least important of the recent modes of employing electricity is its use as an illuminant. |Electricity as an Illuminant.| At the beginning of the reign the streets of London and other towns, as well as many of the houses, were lit by gas; though as late as fifteen years ago it was still the custom in some old-fashioned hotels to charge half-a-guinea for the use of a pair of wax candles. But the invention of an illuminant which neither exhausts nor pollutes187 the air breathed by human beings, nor involves risk of accidental conflagration, which is easily manageable and throws off no smoke and very little heat, has been one of the benefits conferred by science so characteristic of this age.
These works occupy about 28 acres, and employ between three and four thousand workmen.
|Photography.| The researches of Daguerre and Nicéphore de Niepce had established, before Queen Victoria ascended the throne, the possibility of obtaining permanent images by the action of light on silver-plated copper, but the first notable advance in the new art of photography was the invention of the calotype by Fox Talbot, who applied iodide of silver to paper, which was rendered sensitive to light by further treatment. Then, in 1850, came the collodion process, and the subsequent discovery of dry-plate processes brought photography within easy compass of amateurs, and greatly enhanced the value of photography as an aid to science. The exposure of thirty minutes, required under the Daguerrotype process, has been reduced to one-fifteenth of a second by the use of gelatine emulsion. The latest manifestation of photographic skill is certainly very marvellous, namely, the kinematograph. By a rapid succession of instantaneous exposures a series of plates is obtained so closely consecutive that when the images are reflected in equally rapid succession upon a screen, men and animals may be seen the size of life in natural movement.
Finishing the upper works of H.M.S. Jupiter at Clydebank. In the dock are also five torpedo-boat destroyers.
Photography has had a powerful effect on the art of painting, not only by the cheap reproduction of acknowledged masterpieces, which is not without risk of encouraging conventionalism in design, but by creating a more exacting standard of fidelity to nature. |Its Effect on Painting and Engraving.| While it has caused some painters to seek after intense realism, it has led others to a reactionary course which they term impressionism. Judging roughly from the vast numbers of pictures painted and exhibited each year, and from the immense prices given for the works of favourite masters, both living and dead, it is difficult to believe that, however great may be the aggregate expenditure by the purchasing public on photographs, it has interfered appreciably with the sale of pictures.
One branch of art certainly has suffered by the rivalry of sun pictures, namely, the various kinds of engraving. Wood-engraving, indeed, had already run188 to seed during the present century, from the affectation of craftsmen to a freedom and rapidity of which the material was not really capable: but engraving on copper and steel, etching, lithography, and, above all, mezzotint engraving (said to have been the joint invention of Prince Rupert and one of his officers named Siegen), had lost none of their delicacy and power when photography invaded their province. Excellent results are obtained from the best methods of photogravure and photolithography, and, where absolute accuracy of detail is required, they leave little to be desired; but the extent to which cheap “process” plates have supplanted the older arts of book illustration affords much to deplore from an artistic standpoint.
Made by Mr. S. A. Varley in 1866. The principle of the dynamo was discovered also, and almost simultaneously, by Sir Charles Wheatstone and Dr. Werner Siemens.
MICHAEL FARADAY,
1791–1867.
Son of a blacksmith, and apprenticed to a bookseller, he developed a passion for science which ultimately led to most important discoveries in electricity and magnetism. The sketch represents him lecturing as Fullerian professor at the Royal Institution.
In one respect the reign of Queen Victoria offers a strange and rather melancholy contrast to all that have preceded it, inasmuch as it is the first during which the architects of this country have been totally destitute of any peculiar style of building. |Victorian Architecture.| Never were builders more ingenious or more skilful, never was there such vast expenditure in the erection of private or public buildings, but never before were architects so completely reliant on the past for design. Is it proposed to build a church, a public institution, or a dwelling-house? If you have the money you shall have one as well built as human hands can accomplish. But you must name your style—Greek, Palladian, Norman, Early English, Tudor, Jacobean, or Georgian—your architect will carry out a masterpiece in any one of them; but if you say Victorian, or the style of the day, he will give you François Ier to-day, Queen Anne to-morrow, and Pericles the day after. Buildings grow apace, and they are soundly and tastefully constructed, but British architecture is dead.
The same may be said of design in general. People of taste look with horror upon the fashions of the early years of the reign; the heavy mahogany furniture, the flowered wall-papers, the tapestry, the plate, the ornaments, are all condemned as barbarous; and the mode consists of Chippendale and Sheraton furniture and so-called “art” fabrics and papers. But how little this depends on more than fleeting fancy may be seen when it is considered how the taste has changed within a few years in the matter of table-glass. Ten years ago nothing would please but blown glass of the thinnest; Mr. Ruskin convinced us that the two qualities of glass which should be emphasised in the design were transparency and ductility. But we have thrown that doctrine to the winds now, and a visit to one of the leading warehouses will show how completely we have reverted to the brilliant, many-facetted bottles and glasses of fifty years ago.
ELECTRIC LIGHTING STATION, DAVIES STREET, WESTMINSTER.
It is natural, in considering the phenomenon of a great nation wholly without any stable principles to guide it in art, to ask what has the State done during sixty years in the matter of public education? |Universal Education.| Ask rather, what it has left undone!189 Certainly our rulers cannot be charged either with negligence or parsimony in this respect. Five years before the accession of Queen Victoria not a shilling of money was voted by Parliament towards elementary education. In 1833, for the first time, a grant of £20,000 was made for that purpose; at the present day the vote annually made for Education, Science, and Art exceeds ten millions. Even this is not enough to satisfy some people, as was made plain by the question addressed by an elector to a candidate for a Scottish constituency at a recent election. “Is Maister Wilson,” asked this enthusiast, “in favour of spending £36,000,000 a year on the Airmy, and only £12,000,000 on eddication? That’s to say, twelve millions for pittin’ brains into folks’ heads, and thirty-six millions for blawin’ them oot.”
MANCHESTER TOWN HALL.
During the present reign most of our leading towns have built handsome and commodious Town Halls. That of Manchester, designed by Mr. Alfred Waterhouse, R.A., is a well-known example. It was opened in 1877. Its clock-tower is 285 feet high; the interior of the hall is decorated with historical paintings by Ford Madox Brown.
A generation has grown up under universal compulsory education, and it is possible already to calculate some of the effects of that far-reaching measure on the material prosperity, moral character, and literary habits of our people. In regard to the first two, statistics go to show that, notwithstanding an increase of nearly 35 per cent. in the population since the introduction of compulsory education in 1871, there had been a decrease between that year and 1894 of nearly 25 per cent. in the number of paupers, from 1,079,391 to 812,441. The convictions for crime showed a corresponding diminution from 12,953 to 9,634, or rather more than 25 per cent.; while, during a similar period, the number of “juvenile offenders” had been reduced to the enormous extent of over 71½ per cent.
TRURO CATHEDRAL.
This is the only Anglican Cathedral built in England during the Queen’s reign. The foundation-stone was laid by the Prince of Wales, May 20, 1880, and the Cathedral was opened in his Royal Highness’s presence, November 3, 1887. A portion of the nave and the central tower have yet to be built. The architect is Mr. J. L. Pearson, R.A.
As to the impulse given to the demand for literature by the extension of education, there need be no doubt whatever; the enormous supply continually pouring from the press of the country is sufficient proof of that. In respect of books, the returns from the numerous public libraries in the country show that works of fiction are in request far beyond all the other branches of literature put together. |The Predominance of Fiction.| Some sinister conclusions have been drawn from that fact, but it is not always remembered that most of those who frequent free libraries are hard-working people, who turn to books for recreation rather than instruction. On the whole, English fiction remains wholesome, a result which, notwithstanding the democratic nature of our Constitution, is owing, undoubtedly, in large measure to the tone maintained in her Court by our present Monarch.
CENTRAL PARCELS POST OFFICE, MOUNT PLEASANT.
This spacious but unimposing building occupies the site on which, a few years ago, stood the Clerkenwell House of Correction. Parcel postage was first introduced on August 1, 1883, and the number of parcels forwarded between post offices in the United Kingdom during the succeeding twelve months was about 25,000,000. During twelve months of 1895–96 the number of “inland” parcels despatched reached the enormous total of 60,500,000.
That ephemeral, but not the less potent, form of literature known as the Press, may be said almost truly to be the creation of the Victorian age. Newspapers, as we know them, are the outcome of two circumstances, the removal190 of the paper tax in 1861 and the spread of telegraphic communication. |The Growth of Journalism.| Every industry, every sect, every amusement, every shade of opinion, now has its special organs in the press; and perhaps nothing is more remarkable than the enterprise and high quality of the provincial journals, as distinguished from those published in the Metropolis. British journalism differs in several important respects from that of all other European countries. In the first place, it is absolutely free: there is nothing approaching a censorship of the Press, and in those rare instances in which, during the present reign, publishers have been interfered with by the State, as has occasionally happened in Ireland, the offence has not been a political one, but such incitement to crime or disorder as would be punishable in any private individual. It is matter for just pride that this liberty is exceedingly seldom abused. Another point of difference is that the British Government has no official or semi-official organ in the press. Official announcements are communicated, when necessary, to press agencies, and through them find their way into journals of all shades of politics. Lastly, the British press has maintained, as a rule, its impersonality. There has been a slight tendency of recent years to exchange the editorial “we” for a more familiar style, but this has been confined so far to journals of little influence. Leading articles and critical reviews are almost invariably anonymous, whereas in France the weight attached to these is proportioned to the repute of the name by which they are signed. In order to give some idea of the daily output of the newspaper press in London alone the following instance may be given:—On Monday, February 13, 1893, Mr. Gladstone introduced his second Home Rule Bill in the House of Commons. On the following morning there were despatched from a single establishment, that of W. H. Smith and Son, 374,218 newspapers, weighing upwards of 44 tons.
THE MARRIAGE OF THE CZAR OF RUSSIA TO PRINCESS ALIX OF HESSE, GRANDDAUGHTER OF THE QUEEN, AT ST. PETERSBURG, November 26, 1894.
It would be impossible within due limits to pass in review, even in the191 most sketchy fashion, the advance made in natural science, especially as each province of the whole realm of knowledge has become divided and sub-divided into sections, each the peculiar department of specialists.|The Advance of Natural Science.| Three hundred years ago it was possible for Francis Bacon to survey the entire firmament of human understanding, but in the nineteenth century the task accomplished in the Advancement of Learning and the Novum Organum has developed to a scale only to be compassed in such a prodigious publication as the “Encyclopædia Britannica,” of which the latest edition consists of twenty-five volumes in quarto, containing upwards of 20,750 pages printed in double columns, contributed by no less than 1,200 different writers, besides translators and revisers.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, THE PRINCE OF WALES, THE CZAR AND CZARINA AND THEIR INFANT DAUGHTER.
Photographed at Balmoral, November 1896.
In no department of science, perhaps, has progress brought such immediate benefit to the people as in that of surgery and medicine. |Surgery and Medicine.| The introduction of anæsthetics has been mentioned in an earlier chapter; the present year, 1897, is the jubilee anniversary of that blessed event. The vaccination laws were consolidated in 1871, and universal vaccination insisted on, with the result that a loathsome disease, which formerly brought unspeakable misery upon all civilised nations has been practically vanquished. The deaths from small-pox in England, which, at the close of the last century, were reckoned at 3,000 per million, had sunk in the decade from 1878–87 to 54 per million. Attempts have been made persistently by a small minority to resist compulsory vaccination. Persons inclined to listen to arguments against this legislation on the score of undue interference with liberty, should study the Report of the Local Government Board upon an outbreak of small-pox in Sheffield in 1887–88. Of 6,088 persons attacked 590 died; among children under ten years of age, 5 per 1,000 of those vaccinated were attacked and ·09 per 1,000 died; of the unvaccinated, 101 per 1,000 were attacked and 44 per 1,000 died.
PROFESSOR RUSKIN.
John Ruskin was born in London in 1819, and matriculated at Christ Church, Oxford, in 1836. He published the first volume of “Modern Painters” in 1841, and was elected first Slade Professor of Art in the University of Oxford, 1870.
LORD LISTER, P.R.S.
Born 1827. Discovered the antiseptic method in surgery. Created a Baronet in 1883, and a Baron in 1897.
Although it is the name of a Frenchman, the late M. Pasteur, which is most conspicuously associated with recent progress in pathology, it was Sir Joseph (now Lord) Lister who was led by Pasteur’s researches into the theory of fermentation to discover the antiseptic system of surgery. He employed carbolic acid, previously known as little more than a laboratory product, in destroying microbes which had found access to a wound, and thereby first made surgery scientific. But192 Lister did more than that; the antiseptic treatment was superseded in turn by the aseptic, in which, by sterilising everything that might come in contact with wounds, access was refused altogether to microbes, and henceforward operations surpassing the most ambitious dreams of the old school of surgery were rendered possible. From the work of Pasteur and Lister has arisen the science of bacteriology, which, in the hands of Professor Koch, of Berlin, and others, is being developed into the systematic “cultivation” of the germs of specific diseases.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN, 1897.
The authorized Diamond Jubilee Portrait.
Mr. Disraeli was once greatly laughed at for announcing that the policy of his Administration was Sanitas sanitatum, omnia sanitas. Since then the two great political parties have vied with each other in framing legislation for the sanitation of cities and all human dwellings. |Sanitary Legislation.| It may be difficult to decide which has had most hand in the good result already shown in the mortality returns, legislators or men of science; at all events, they are worthy rivals. The annual death-rate in England during the first ten years of the present reign was 22·4 per 1,000; it was a shade higher in the decade from 1861–70, standing at 22·5 per 1,000. Then came the age of sanitation and the dawn of bacteriology; the death-rate sank in 1871–80 to 21·4 per 1,000, and in 1881–90 to 19·1 per 1,000.
Son, High Holborn.
RADIOGRAPH OF THE HAND OF H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES.
British surgeons have not been slow to avail themselves of the discovery, by Professor Röntgen, of certain non-luminous rays beyond the spectrum, which are capable of penetrating substances hitherto considered impermeable. By laying such a structure as a human limb upon a properly sensitised surface, and exposing it to these rays thrown from a tube excited by electricity, a permanent image is obtained of the bones and denser portions of the structure. By this means the exact position of any foreign substance, such as a bullet or needle, or the nature of a dislocation or fracture, may be ascertained with precision; and already it has been found possible to examine the condition of the internal organs of a living person.
In bringing to a close this brief survey of the reign of twelve lustres—the longest reign in the history of Great Britain—we may note with gratitude that not one of the many influences that have contributed to the moral or material well-being of the subjects of the empire shows any sign of abating in force. It is a task of no little difficulty and complexity to reconcile the rival, and sometimes conflicting, interests arising in a vast population, and, at the same time, to maintain our lead in the competitive industry of nations; yet it is one which the personal character of the Monarch, in conjunction with the constitutional development of the last sixty years justify the Legislature in undertaking with courage and good hope.
BUCKINGHAM PALACE: THE GARDEN FRONT AND THE LAKE.
SIXTY YEARS A QUEEN.
The Diamond Jubilee Celebrations.
By ALFRED C. HARMSWORTH.
CHAPTER I.
The Central Idea of the Celebrations—The Imperial Character of the Pageant—The Colonial Premiers Invited—The Decorations—Influx of Visitors—Grand Stands—Precautions against Accidents—Thanksgiving Services on Accession Day—The Queen’s Arrival in London—Night in the Streets.
WE have traced the history of our great Queen down to the point where her Record Reign reaches its culmination in the festivities of June, 1897. Nothing now remains but to give some account of these Imperial celebrations—Imperial in the truest sense of the word, because faithful subjects of Her Majesty, of every colour and every creed, came from the four corners of the most majestic Empire that has ever existed to pay homage to the Lady Ruler over all. Pen and pencil must necessarily fail to do justice to so unique a demonstration of an Empire’s love and devotion, but the reader of these words may rely upon it that our account is true in every detail. Such a record will be found useful not only by those who actually took part in the Diamond Jubilee festivities and who wish to refresh their memories, but also by those to whom they will be matter of history.
The possibilities of a great celebration in 1897 were first discussed after the Jubilee of 1887, although it was not until 1896 that public interest was thoroughly aroused in the great event. Men felt vaguely that the sixtieth anniversary of the reign of the best-beloved of all British Sovereigns demanded an especial effort on the part of all loyal subjects; but as to the manner in which the event should be celebrated, opinions were as various as the men who gave utterance to them. One194 only definite desire was in everybody’s heart—that the Queen should come down among her people and receive their congratulations in person. This was the central idea round which all schemes clustered, and this was the idea to which the Queen gave her sanction. In March of 1897 it was officially proclaimed that Her Majesty would go in procession to St. Paul’s to offer up her thanks to the Supreme Being for all the blessings of her long reign.
THE RIGHT HON. JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN.
Born in London in 1836. He was educated at University College School, and afterwards joined his father, who was a member of the firm of Nettlefold and Chamberlain, screw manufacturers, of Birmingham. He was elected Chairman of the Birmingham Education League in 1868, member of the Town Council in the same year, and of the School Board in 1870; of the last he became Chairman in 1873. He was Mayor of Birmingham during the years 1874–75-76, and has represented that town in Parliament since 1876. He accepted the Presidency of the Board of Trade with a seat in Mr. Gladstone’s Cabinet in 1880, and in 1886 the Presidency of the Local Government Board, but resigned in March of that year when his political chief declared in favour of Home Rule for Ireland. After the general election of 1895 he became Secretary of State for the Colonies in Lord Salisbury’s Administration. He is the Leader in the House of Commons of the Liberal wing of the Unionist Party. He married (as his third wife) Miss Endicott, an American lady, in 1888.
And here let honour be rendered to whom honour is due. From the Colonial Secretary, Mr. Chamberlain, emanated the action which gave the event its Imperial character—the invitation of the Colonial Premiers and the representative detachments of men from the various forces of Colonial and other troops serving under her throughout our world-wide Empire. |Colonial Premiers Invited.| A brilliant military pageant might have been effected by the employment only of the troops of our regular army; but we have other forces across the seas, small it may be in numbers, but magnificent in physique and all that constitutes martial efficiency, whose presence on such an occasion would add lustre and a peculiar significance to the great function.
Meanwhile our grey old London set about adorning itself for the great event. To transform a working city like London into a temporary fairyland is a task of herculean proportions, but it was done! The Corporation voted £25,000 to a decoration fund, and the most moderate estimate fixes the cost of London’s holiday garb at £250,000. Venetian masts appeared suddenly in all the streets along which the procession was to make its way; and as the fateful day drew near, festoons of flowers and loyal inscriptions were suspended from these. Cunningly concealed in the hanging bouquets of flowers were electric lamps destined to make the streets even more brilliant at night than they were in the daytime.
THE DECORATIONS IN ST. JAMES’S STREET.
The actual route literally blazed with colour.|The Decorations.| Flags were at a premium and so were coloured stuffs and flowers, for the Jubilee had asked more than the supply, and in many cases the North country mills were working day and night to make good the deficiency. When at last the great city had finished her toilet, not even her own children recognized her.
St. James’s Street sat at the head of all, a perfect poem of decorative beauty. There were two massive Corinthian pillars at either end, their capitals of gold surmounted by large globes, their bases adorned with choice growing palms and flowers. Forty venetian masts capped195 with the Imperial crown stood on each side of the street, and from mast to mast were laced festoons of evergreens, from which hung baskets of rare flowers, birds in flight, and globes of red, white, and blue glass, which sparkled in the sunlight and turned the roadway into a pathway of quivering light.
Other thoroughfares vied with St. James’s Street. In the Strand the omnibuses ran under swaying lines of many-coloured globes hanging across the roadway from one flower-bedecked venetian mast to another. Round the pillars of the Mansion House and the Royal Exchange were serpentine trails of tiny gas jets winding far up under the dark eaves of the roof, and from Buckingham Palace to St. Paul’s vast buildings were literally outlined with tiny gas and electric light lamps. The Fire Monument and other public monuments came in for special decorative attention, and in some cases hundreds of pounds were spent in beautifying them for the great show.
In Victoria Street the offices of the various Colonies were alive with colour, and even the south side of the river, where loyalty is more abundant than money, was gay with its decorations, in the form of golden eagles with outstretched wings, and lines of real flowers stretched across the thoroughfares on invisible wires.
THE DECORATIONS IN THE WEST STRAND.
Showing on the right a portion of the Grand Stand at Charing Cross Station.
From a Photograph] [By York & Son.
THE DECORATIONS AT THE BANK OF ENGLAND.
But the generous efforts of Civic and Parish authorities were not a whit more remarkable than those of private individuals. Many of the houses along the route of the procession were covered with decorations from cellar to attic. The colour generally chosen was red, but in some instances costly materials of delicate shades were used. Draperies of brilliant hues were hung from almost every window, so that some of the streets resembled theatres rather than the busy thoroughfares of a busy city.
THE RT. HON. SIR WILFRID LAURIER,
Premier of Canada.
Born at St. Lin, Quebec, 1841. Educated for the Law, and called to the Bar at Montreal in 1861. In 1871 he entered the Legislature of Quebec, and, three years later, the Dominion Parliament. Up to this time his speeches had been delivered in French; he now spoke in English with equal eloquence. He became Minister of Inland Revenue in 1877, and Premier in July 1896. He is of French descent, a Roman Catholic, and a strong supporter of Imperial unity.
Nor were the decorations confined to the streets. Every errand boy wore his Jubilee favour days196 before the event. From every whip fluttered a little pennant of the national colour. Scarcely a bicycle passed that had not on its handle-bar gay streamers of red, white, and blue, and even the practical top-hatted city man sported in his button-hole the colours which rule the world.
Long before these preparations were completed, the invasion of London by visitors from the country, from America, and from the Continent had commenced. |Influx of Visitors.| The streets, always pretty-well congested with the great press of traffic, were now almost impassable. Vast good-humoured crowds surged up and down the principal thoroughfares, and travelling from one part of the town to another became a matter of increasing difficulty. Where all the people were accommodated it would be difficult to say. Certain it is, that all the rooms in the better-known hotels were taken weeks beforehand, and the landladies of Bloomsbury reaped a rich harvest.
In addition to the vast amount of accommodation afforded by the houses lying along the route, every available coign of vantage was seized upon for the erection of a stand. Churches were lost to view beneath vast tiers of red upholstered seats reaching half way up their towers, and what had been known as Charing Cross Station was buried from sight under a mammoth thousand-seated stand. |Grand Stands.| “Can our City Princes not have noticed,” asks a writer in the Daily Mail with quaint humour, “that somebody has stuck a lot of carpentry on the very pediment of the Royal Exchange? Somebody else has boarded up the Law Courts, and barristers and solicitors stoop and dive in as if they were going to clean out their chicken houses. The Houses of Parliament are all scaffolding too, and at first, seeing no reports in the papers, I thought they had been abolished while I was away.... Even to take a penny boat at Westminster you have to go under a sort of triumphal arch of joinery.... They are actually changing all London from building into furniture.”
THE RT. HON. G. H. REID,
Premier of New South Wales.
Was born at Johnstone, Renfrewshire, in 1845, and is the son of a Presbyterian Minister. He began life in Sydney in the Civil Service, but studied law and entered the New South Wales Legislature in 1880. He became Minister of Education, 1883; Leader of the Opposition, 1891; Premier, 1894. He is a strong advocate of Australian Federation.
THE RT. HON. SIR G. TURNER,
Premier of Victoria.
Born in Melbourne; he is by profession a solicitor. Entered the Victorian Parliament in 1889, and became Prime Minister and Treasurer in 1894. He is between forty and fifty years of age.
THE RT. HON. R. J. SEDDON,
Premier of New Zealand.
Born at St. Helens, Lancashire, in 1844; went to Victoria in 1863. He has been for twenty-five years in the New Zealand Parliament, and has been Premier since 1893. He is also Colonial Treasurer, Commissioner of Customs, Postmaster-General, Minister of Labour, and Minister of Native Affairs.
197 One of the largest stands was in Whitehall opposite the Horse Guards.I A large number of carpenters were employed for more than six weeks in its erection; £7,000 was paid to the Woods and Forests Department for the rent of the site, and its construction cost another £6,000. It contained some 4,000 seats, which were advertised at from four to twenty guineas. It was built into foundations of solid concrete from three feet to six feet thick, and contained 150 tons of timber and fifteen tons of forty-five feet steel girders; 5,000 chairs were specially purchased for its equipment and, besides the seats, it contained promenades, reception rooms, a luncheon room for the accommodation of 400 people, ladies’ rooms, telephones, and a smoking gallery.
Another huge stand was that erected in the churchyard of St. Martin’s Church, Charing Cross. This also contained 4,000 seats, ranging in price from one to fifteen guineas. Its erection engaged the labour of 120 men for some five weeks. It contained 175,000 cubic feet of timber and twenty tons of ironwork. The rent of the site was £4,000.
THE PROCESSION OF IMPERIAL AND COLONIAL TROOPS, June 19.
What was in effect a dress rehearsal of the Jubilee procession took place on the Saturday preceding that event, when the Life Guards, the Dragoon Guards, Horse and Field Artillery, and Colonial Mounted Troops assembled at Victoria Park, and marched by Grove Road, Mile End Road, and Whitechapel, to the Mansion House. The picture represents the South Australian Lancers leaving the Park. The troops, and particularly the Colonials, were received with the greatest enthusiasm by the immense crowds which lined the route. It was a happy idea to give the East End this opportunity of welcoming the Colonists.
There were many other stands of colossal size, but that which represented the most enterprising speculation of the celebration was undoubtedly the colossal stand on the north side of St. Paul’s Churchyard.J For the purpose of its erection one of the most valuable city properties was purchased and pulled down. The seats in these various stands were offered at fabulous prices, but the public refused to purchase, and the venture resulted in a heavy loss to its promoters, as indeed did most of the speculations in seats. However, very large sums indeed were paid to witness the procession, £2,000 being offered and accepted for the use of a building in St. Paul’s Churchyard for the day. In some cases the vendors offered prizes ranging from £50 downwards to purchasers of their seats.
On June 11 the official programme was published, and henceforth the sole topic in men’s minds was Jubilee Day and its doings. Previous to this, however, the most elaborate precautions had been taken to ensure the safety of the multitude of sightseers, and to guard against any hitch occurring in the actual procession.
Meanwhile the guests of the Nation began to arrive from every part of the World. The Prime Ministers of our great dependencies in Australasia, in South Africa, and Canada, were lodged in the palatial Hotel Cecil; the foreign princes and their suites were accommodated in the Royal Palaces and in private mansions rented or lent for the occasion, while the detachments of troops from the various self-governing and Crown Colonies were billeted at Chelsea Hospital, at Hounslow, and at Woolwich. The Indian officers composing the deputation from the Imperial Service Troops, and the British officers in charge, were lodged at the “Star and Garter” Hotel at Richmond. It is impossible to convey any impression of the hospitality that was now lavished on our honoured guests. While the troopers of the Colonial forces were being fêted by Tommy Atkins and the Volunteers of London, the Colonial Premiers were the lions of the great houses of the Metropolis. “He died from the198 effects of British hospitality” is the humorous epitaph composed for himself, in the event of that casualty, by the Right Honourable G. H. Reid, Premier of New South Wales. Royal carriages and Royal servants were placed at the disposal of visitors of high rank; but it is certain that the genuine enthusiasm of their reception among the millions of London was even more highly valued by our distinguished visitors than these marks of Royal favour.
While the good citizens of London were entertaining the guests of the Nation and getting their houses in order for the culminating function of June 22, there was ever present in their minds a fear lest the great festival would be marred by a catastrophe such as that which threw a black shadow over the Coronation of the Czar. It was vaguely felt that the vast multitudes that would throng the streets on that day might become unmanageable—that some of the temporary stands would collapse, or that the great pressure of the massed crowds at certain points would result in disaster. |Precautions against Accidents.| It is due entirely to the sagacity and foresight of the authorities that the streets were never more safe than they were on June 22, and that not a single life was lost in consequence of the Jubilee arrangements. Temporary stands were examined—and where faulty condemned—again and again by the officials of the London County Council and of the Corporation, and the most scrupulous care was taken that there should not be gathered at any one point a larger number of persons than could be easily controlled.
The smaller picture shows the break-van and kitchen, with the gas stove at which refreshments are prepared for Her Majesty’s use while travelling. The larger illustration represents the interior of the Queen’s saloon; in the picture at the top of this page it is the third carriage from the engine. This saloon is lined, and its furniture covered, with blue silk; it communicates by an enclosed gangway with that of Her Majesty’s personal attendants.
At an early stage in the proceedings the police decided to close the great bridges connecting the north of London with the south. London Bridge was closed at midnight on Jubilee Eve, the other bridges were closed a few hours later, the idea being to prevent a possible great and199 dangerous rush from north to south of the Thames to view the procession both on the Middlesex and Surrey sides.
THE SPECIAL THANKSGIVING SERVICE AT WESTMINSTER ABBEY, June 20. PROCESSION OF THE LORD CHANCELLOR AND PEERS.
To make assurance doubly sure several rehearsals of the great Service at St. Paul’s, and the business of taking up and setting down at Buckingham Palace were held; and so complete were these rehearsals, that every item of the procession was fully represented, mounted grooms taking the places of the princes and equerries who were to ride on horseback in the procession. In the final rehearsals many of those who were destined to high places in the procession were present, and there was a large demand for seats to view in St. Paul’s Churchyard.
So that the day might be one of universal rejoicing all over the country, it had been declared, on March 18, a public holiday by Her Majesty in the following proclamation:—“Victoria, R.—We, considering that it is desirable that Tuesday, the twenty-second day of June next, should be observed as a Bank Holiday throughout the United Kingdom, do hereby, by and with the advice of Our Privy Council, and in pursuance of the provisions of ‘The Bank Holidays Act, 1871,’ appoint Tuesday, the twenty-second day of June next, as a special day to be observed as a Bank Holiday throughout the United Kingdom, and every part thereof, and we do by this Our Royal Proclamation command the said day to be so observed, and all Our loving subjects to order themselves accordingly.”
The actual celebrations may be said to have commenced on Sunday, June 20. |Thanksgiving Services.| This, being Accession Day, was marked by a universal service of thanksgiving throughout the Empire, in addition to the four Special Services, which must ever be memorable in British history: the Royal Service at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor, the great National Service at St. Paul’s, and the Services at Westminster Abbey and St. Margaret’s, Westminster, at which the Peers and Commons were present.
The Service at Windsor was of the simplest description. The Queen drove from the Victoria Tower at 11 o’clock to the entrance to the Dean’s Cloister. Thence she was taken in a wheel-chair to the north-east door of the Chapel. She entered the north door of the Choir leaning on the arm of an Indian attendant. The Queen’s chair was placed on the broad step at the foot of the beautiful altar, which she faced throughout the impressive Service. Besides members of the Royal family and suites, there were but few privileged visitors. The Service was arranged and conducted by Dean Eliot, and it began with the hymn, “Now thank we all our God.” The Te Deum was sung according to a very striking setting composed by the late Prince Consort, one which is not often used, but which was given on this occasion by special command of Her Majesty. The Service concluded with “God Save the Queen,” sung by the choir and congregation. The very simplicity of the scene was its200 impressiveness. It required a great effort of the imagination to fully comprehend it all—that the little old lady sitting there in quiet black before the altar was she who, sixty years ago, was awakened from her sleep in Kensington Palace to wear the crown of a world-wide Empire.
On Monday, June 21, the Queen travelled up to London from Windsor. |The Queen arrives.| At half-past twelve the Royal train glided gently into Paddington Station with the Royal Standard proudly waving at the front of the engine, and the Royal coat of arms on either side.
Extraordinary arrangements had been made to secure Her Majesty’s comfort and safety, and had there been an accident it would not have been due to the absence of competent officers, for besides the Royal party the train contained the head and front of the Great Western Railway, from the Chairman, Viscount Emlyn, and the Directors downward.
TRIUMPHAL ARCH AT PADDINGTON
(between Oxford and Cambridge Terraces),
Through which Her Majesty passed immediately after quitting Paddington Station. It may be mentioned that it was by Her Majesty’s express desire that no arches were built on the route of the Jubilee procession.
HER MAJESTY PASSING THROUGH THE TRIUMPHAL ARCH IN EDGWARE ROAD ON HER ARRIVAL FROM WINDSOR.
The Queen was dressed in black except for the white egret plumes in her bonnet, and it was noticeable that, notwithstanding her great age, she seemed in the best of health and spirits, and fully equal to the strain of the morrow.
A halt was made while Marylebone’s loyal address was presented, and then the Queen moved on to Buckingham Palace amid the delighted shouts of her subjects who lined the whole route. It was a brilliant morning and a brilliant reception—a foretaste of the morrow. While the crowds of sightseers spent the rest of the day in wandering through the gaily-bedecked streets, Buckingham Palace was the scene of receptions, banqueting, and rejoicing.
During the day the Queen graciously accepted a sunshade which was presented to her by Mr. Villiers, the doyen of the House of Commons. It was entirely covered with costly flounces of the finest black Chantilly lace; it was mounted upon an ebony stick, with gold top, and a knob handle of gun-metal set with Her Majesty’s cypher and V.R.I, in diamonds, and had a suitable inscription in gold letters inlaid round the handle, thus:—“Presented to Her Majesty on the occasion of her Diamond Jubilee, by her oldest Parliamentary member, C. Villiers.”
HOW THE QUEEN LOOKED: A SNAP-SHOT OF HER MAJESTY AND THE PRINCESS CHRISTIAN, TAKEN IN EDGWARE ROAD, June 21.
At nightfall, an inhabitant of London who had known it in more prosaic times might well have been pardoned for thinking the whole Nation were mad and had turned the Metropolis into Bedlam. Vast armies of excited people invaded the streets and, in spite of the fatigues that must have been endured, comported themselves most admirably. There was little prospect of their getting home. But no one cared. Why should they? They had come to see the Jubilee, some of them from the uttermost ends of the earth, and see the Jubilee they would, though they spent the night in the streets—and thousands of them did so spend the night. |Night in the Streets.| Some possibly had been unable to secure sleeping accommodation, others evidently thought it scarcely worth while to return to distant suburbs when it would be necessary for them to be up and doing early the next morning. As the short night broke into day clusters of people were seen grouped round the base of the Arch, on Constitution Hill, at Hyde Park Corner, and in Trafalgar Square. Hundreds took their stand on the kerb all along the route, and waited patiently. If they had but known it these loyal souls might have saved themselves so much trouble—for if there was one thing about Jubilee Day more remarkable than another, it was the complete absence of undue crowding in the streets. Those who strolled down to Piccadilly, St. James’s Street, Fleet Street, or the Strand two or three hours before the Procession started, were as well able to witness the most impressive pageant that London has ever seen as those whose eagerness led them to take up their positions four or five hours earlier. The route was long, and the spectators, except at points of convergence like Hyde Park Corner and Ludgate Circus, well distributed throughout its entire length, while many hundreds of thousands were accommodated in the houses; but this only partially explains the complete immunity from uncomfortable crushing enjoyed by those who lined the streets. The fact is, that a very large number of Londoners fearing the crowd, and apprehensive perhaps of extreme fatigue and even of actual danger, migrated from the Metropolis and spent the day in the country or at the seaside. It is beyond doubt, moreover, that London crowds grow more orderly and manageable year by year.
These two illustrations are copies of actual photographs taken for this volume in the early morning of the great day. The upper one represents the steps beneath the Duke of York’s Column in Waterloo Place, and was taken at half-past five. The other is the fountain near St. Mary-le-Strand Church at six o’clock. A policeman with his horse is already stationed in the roadway beyond the fountain, and many spectators have taken their places for the day.
THE COLONIAL PROCESSION: ARRIVAL OF THE CANADIAN PREMIER (THE HON. WILFRID LAURIER) AT HYDE PARK CORNER.
The Canadian Premier’s carriage was preceded by Canadian troops, and followed by the New South Wales Rifles and Lancers. The Procession is just emerging from Constitution Hill by the great gates of the Arch which are opened only for Royalty. The crowd at this point was, perhaps, the biggest on the route, and stretched away down Grosvenor Place, down Knightsbridge, into Hyde Park (there were thousands of people in the Park who had given up all hope of seeing the Procession), and choked all the streets leading into Piccadilly.
CHAPTER II.
The Weather—A brilliant day for a brilliant pageant—The Queen’s Message to her people—The Colonial Procession—The Royal Procession—Loyal enthusiasm—The Queen’s reception at the City boundary—The Service at the steps of St. Paul’s—The halt at the Mansion House—In the Borough—Return to the Palace—Presents to the Queen—Congratulations from abroad—The Royal Dinner.
THE weather in the week before Jubilee week had been broken and stormy. The most sanguine feared that “Queen’s Weather” was not to be looked for on the most momentous day in the great little lady’s life. As a matter of fact, the sky on the morning of June 22 was dull and overcast; and it was not until the scarlet coats of the soldiers lined each side of the roadway along the seven-mile route with warm colour that the expectant, buzzing multitude gave itself up to an unqualified enjoyment of the day. But the very elements conspired to add splendour to the great festival of the Queen. It is a curious circumstance that at “the very moment when the head of the Queen’s Procession came through the archway into the courtyard of Buckingham Palace the sun, which until then had been waiting its opportunity behind the clouds, tried an experimental shine. At a quarter-past eleven precisely, at the very moment when the first gun of the Royal Salute boomed out in Hyde Park to announce that Her Majesty herself was leaving the Palace, the experiment developed into an achievement. The light haze that had hung in the air seemed instantaneously to melt away, and the sunshine burst out203 bright and clear over the jubilant city. It seemed as though the sunshine was one of the prearranged items of the programme, and had been carried out with the absolute punctuality which marked the carrying out of all the arrangements.”
In the above Map the Route of the Procession is indicated by the thick outline; it lay up Constitution Hill, along Piccadilly, St. James’s Street, Pall Mall, the Strand, and Fleet Street to St. Paul’s; thence by Cheapside, King William Street, London Bridge, the Borough, Westminster Bridge, Parliament Street, Horse Guards’ Parade, and the Mall, back to Buckingham Palace.
Before leaving Buckingham Palace, the Queen gave the signal for the transmission to all parts of the Empire of that gracious message which is now engraven on the hearts of her people. |The Queen’s Message to her people.| A private telegraph wire had been erected between the Palace and the Central Telegraph Office. Her Majesty touched a button attached to a small telegraphic instrument in connection with this wire, thereby giving the signal to the officials at the Telegraph Office; and before the Royal carriage had passed through the Palace gates, the royal message was being flashed along ten thousand thousand miles of wire to the farthest outposts of British civilization. Characteristic alike of the monarch and of her people were the simple words:—
“MAY GOD BLESS THEM.
Several replies from distant Colonies were found awaiting Her Majesty when she returned to her Palace. Thus the witchcraft of science added another touch of splendour to these unique festivities.
THE PIPERS OF THE LONDON SCOTTISH VOLUNTEERS ESCORTING COLONIAL TROOPS.
The stand on the right, in front of the National Gallery, is occupied by Peers and their Ladies and friends. The whole of the north side of Trafalgar Square (from the steps on the left of the picture to the corresponding steps at the other end of the terrace) was occupied by the London County Council Stand, one of the largest on the route. At this spot the roadway was lined by Bluejackets and Marines.
THE COLONIAL PROCESSION: ZAPTIEHS FROM CYPRUS PASSING LUDGATE CIRCUS.
THE HONG KONG POLICE AND OTHER TROOPS FROM THE CROWN COLONIES PASSING DOWN KING WILLIAM STREET.
THE COLONIAL PROCESSION: THE CARRIAGES OF THE PREMIERS CROSSING LONDON BRIDGE.
Soon after nine o’clock the first part of the Procession left Buckingham Palace. It consisted of the Colonial contingent, headed by Field-Marshal Lord Roberts, V.C., supporting a Field-Marshal’s bâton on his right thigh, and mounted on a grey pony. All along the route the gallant soldier was greeted with mighty cheers, and it was universally thought that the choice of so popular a General to command the Colonial troops while they were in this country was a singularly felicitous one. |The Colonial Procession.| Immediately behind the Field-Marshal rode the Canadian Hussars, 2nd Canadian Dragoons, and the Mounted Police—a magnificent group of men, who excited universal admiration—preceding the carriage of the Premier of Canada, the Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier. This gentleman was received with thunders of applause by the spectators, as were the other Colonial Premiers; and if anything were needed to convince our illustrious visitors that the heart of the old country is warm for her children, their welcome on this day of days amply fulfilled the need. Then came the New South Wales Mounted Rifles, the New South Wales Lancers, and the Victorian Mounted Rifles—superb horsemen these, and singularly effective-looking in their slouch hats fastened up at the side and khaki uniforms—and after them the carriage in which rode the Premiers of New South Wales and Victoria. But it is impossible to give an account of each group. The actual spectators of the beautiful Colonial procession could but feast their eyes on each body of splendid warriors as it passed, and cherish a vain wish that the pageant might be repeated again and again until every individual horseman and foot-soldier had received a due meed of admiration. Only too quickly came into view and passed away New Zealand mounted troops—among them a few giant Maoris——Queensland Mounted Rifles, riflemen from the Cape and South Australian Lancers, Natal Carabiniers and Umvoti, Natal and Border Mounted Rifles, and then troops from the Crown Colonies; Trinidad Mounted Rifles, and Zaptiehs from Cyprus; “upstanding Sikhs, tiny little Malays and Dyaks; Chinese with a white basin turned upside down on their heads; grinning Hausas, so dead black that they shone like silver in the sun—white men, yellow men,205 brown men, black men, every colour, every continent, every race, every speech—and all in arms for the British Empire and the British Queen.” After the Cypriotes came a handful of the Rhodesian Horse, headed by the Hon. Maurice Gifford, carrying one pathetic empty sleeve across his breast—a group that evoked almost frantic cheering. “Up they came, more and more,” says Mr. G. W. Steevens, in the Daily Mail of June 23, “new types, new realms at every couple of yards, an anthropological museum—a living gazetteer of the British Empire. With them came their English officers, whom they obey and follow like children. And you began to understand, as never before, what the Empire amounts to. Not only that we possess all these remote outlandish places, and can bring men from every end of the earth to join us in honouring our Queen, but also that all these people are working, not simply under us, but with us that we send out a boy here and a boy there, and the boy takes hold of the savages of the part he comes to, and teaches them to march and shoot as he tells them, to obey him and believe in him, and die for him and the Queen. A plain, stupid, uninspired people, they call us, and yet we are doing this with every kind of savage man there is. And each one of us—you and I, and that man in his shirt-sleeves at the corner—is a working part of this world-shaping force. How small you must feel in face of the stupendous whole, and yet how great to be a unit in it!”
THE COLONIAL PROCESSION: THE RHODESIAN HORSE IN THE MALL, HEADED BY THE HON. MAURICE GIFFORD.
Ten minutes after the last of the Colonial contingent had passed, the advance guard of the Royal Procession proper came into sight. |The Royal Procession.| The first man in that gorgeous company rode the giant Guardsman, Captain Oswald Ames, seeming not so very much taller than the splendid fellows who followed him, in spite of his six feet eight inches. Close following these came a Naval Gun Detachment who passed away through the avenues of enthusiastic civilians amidst a tumult of acclaim. Then, in quick succession, Life Guards, Dragoon Guards, Hussars, Lancers, and Batteries of the Royal Horse Artillery—the finest Artillery in the World. More quickly almost206 than these words are read the various component parts of the resplendent cavalcade came into view and vanished again. The populace waved its handkerchiefs and roared itself hoarse in a chorus of approval that was too whole-hearted to discriminate.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: OFFICERS OF THE HEAD-QUARTERS STAFF LEAVING BUCKINGHAM PALACE.
On the balcony are the three children of the Duke of York; little Prince Edward in the centre. After the return of the Procession, when the people were allowed within the space outside the Palace railings, His Royal Highness frequently acknowledged their cheers by saluting in military style.
CAPTAIN AMES, 2nd LIFE GUARDS.
The tallest officer in the British army, who headed the Royal Procession.
As a grand ceremonial figure the Crown Prince, afterwards the Emperor Frederick of Germany, had attracted more personal notice in the procession of 1887 than was accorded to any visitor in that of 1897, but the personnel of the latter function was, in general, far more distinguished. As regards the procession of carriages, which followed immediately after the glittering deputation of officers of the Imperial Service Troops in India, those containing the Royal children—Her Majesty’s grandchildren and great-grandchildren—were most enthusiastically received by the crowd. The gravity with which the tiny Princes and Princesses acknowledged the greetings of the spectators occasioned great delight among the people, and the military salutes of the young Duke of Albany and Prince Arthur of Connaught, were the signals for fresh outbursts of applause. The Empress Frederick, the Duchesses of York, of Teck, of Connaught, and of Albany, the Princesses Louise and Henry of Battenberg, were each and all cheered and cheered again. The Princes and other illustrious persons representing the States of almost every Kingdom and Republic in the World, who rode in threes close before the Queen’s carriage, made up a group of almost unparalleled interest and importance. In recognition of his exalted rank as Commander-in-Chief of the Army, Lord Wolseley, in the uniform and carrying the bâton of a Field-Marshal, rode immediately in front of the Queen’s carriage.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: AIDES-DE-CAMP PASSING THE UNITED SERVICE CLUB.
Probably every officer had friends on the Club stands; the picture shows all heads turned that way.
To quote again from Mr. G. W. Steevens, who witnessed the Procession from St. Paul’s:—“The eye was filled with splendour, but fresh splendour came crowding in on it. The advancing pageant shifted and loosened and came up in opener order. But as the mass of colour became less massive, it became more wonderfully coloured. Here, riding three and three, came a kaleidoscope of dazzling horsemen—equerries and aides-de-camp and attachés, ambassadors and Princes, all the pomp of all the nations of the earth. Scarlet and gold, azure and gold, purple and gold, emerald and gold, white and gold—always a changing tumult of colours that seemed to list and gleam with a light of their own, and always blinding gold. It was enough. No eye could bear more gorgeousness; no more gorgeousness could be, unless princes are to clothe themselves in rainbows and the very sun. The prelude was played, and now the great moment was at hand. Already the carriages were rolling up full of the Queen’s kindred, full of her children and children’s children. But we hardly looked at them. Down there, through an avenue of eager faces, through a storm of white waving handkerchiefs, through roaring volleys of cheers, there was approaching a carriage drawn by eight cream-coloured horses. The roar surged up the street, keeping pace with the eight horses. The carriage passed the barrier; it entered the churchyard; it wheeled left and then right; it drew up at the very steps of the Cathedral; we all leaped up; cheers broke into screams, and enthusiasm swelled to delirium; the sun, watery till now, shone out suddenly clear and dry, and there—and there—
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE “DEATH-OR-GLORY BOYS” (17th LANCERS) IN PALL MALL.
“And there was a little, quiet, flushed old lady. All in black,K a silver streak under the black bonnet, a simple white sunshade, sitting quite still, with the corners of her mouth drawn tight, as if she were trying not to cry. But that old lady was the Queen, and you knew it. You didn’t want to look at the glittering uniforms now, nor yet at the bright gowns and the young faces in the carriages, nor yet at the stately princes—though by now all these were ranged in a half circle round her. You couldn’t look at anybody but the Queen. So very quiet, so very grave, so very punctual, so unmistakably and every inch a lady and a Queen. Almost pathetic, if you will, that small black figure in the middle of these shining cavaliers, this great army, this roaring multitude; but also very glorious. When the other kings of the world drive abroad, the escort rides close in at the wheels of the carriage; the Queen drove through her people quite plain and open, with just one soldier at the kerbstone between her and them.”
THE CROWD WAITING FOR THE QUEEN AT LUDGATE CIRCUS.
Her Majesty was visibly moved at the sight of the immense concourse of people at this point; little Princess Eva of Battenberg on the contrary waved her hand in delighted acknowledgment of their cheers. In the foreground is the Lord Mayor, who headed the Procession from Temple Bar to the Mansion House.
But we must go back a little. At the Griffin, which marks the spot where Temple Bar once stood, the Lord Mayor (the Right Hon. Sir George Faudel-Phillips) had arrived about 10.15, bearing the City Sword of State. While waiting for the Queen the Lord Mayor was entertained, in accordance with ancient custom, at Childs’ Bank.
“Just before mid-day,” says a writer in the Times of June 23, “a loud roar of cheering announced the approach of the Queen, and soon the State carriages drew up at the Griffin, where the Lord Mayor and his deputation, on foot, bareheaded, were awaiting Her Majesty. |The Queen’s Reception at the City Boundary.| The interesting ceremony of the presentation of the sword did not occupy a minute. This handsome sword, in its pearl-covered scabbard, which has been presented by successive Lord Mayors at this very spot to many Sovereigns, from Queen Elizabeth’s time to the present day, was handed to the Lord Mayor by the City Sword-bearer with a low obeisance. Sir George Faudel-Phillips held the hilt towards Her Majesty, who209 merely touched it, and ordered him to lead the way into the city. The Lord Mayor with considerable alacrity hurried to the spot south of the Griffin where he had left his horse, mounted it, and rode off eastward bareheaded, holding the sword aloft.”
HER MAJESTY’S RECEPTION AT THE CITY BOUNDARY.
Her Majesty, in her carriage, is seen on the right, with the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge (whose head is seen between those of the Scotch attendants) immediately behind. In the background are the officers of the Royal household and others. Just in front of the City Griffin the Lord Mayor is seen preparing to mount his horse, an operation in which the police and some officials exhibit an anxious interest.
So the magnificent cortège passed on up Fleet Street and Ludgate Hill to St. Paul’s. At the steps of the west front of the great Cathedral was to take place that religious ceremony which was to be the central point in the great celebration. On either side of the portico was erected a huge stand, set apart for ambassadors and other officials who had no place in the Procession. The right-hand stand facing Ludgate Hill was occupied by a splendid company of Indian Rajahs and other Oriental notabilities. On the steps themselves were 500 choristers, and bands. Soon after the Queen left Buckingham Palace the Archbishops and other officiating clergy took their stand upon the Cathedral steps. The Archbishops of York and Canterbury wore purple coronation copes, the Bishop of London a splendid new yellow cope, the Dean and Chapter copes of green, gold, and white, while the Bishop of Winchester, as Prelate of the Order of the Garter, wore the dark blue robes of that Order. The Marquis of Salisbury, the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour, and the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain were the most noticeable figures in the great assemblage of distinguished laymen collected at this point.
LORD ROBERTS SUPERINTENDING THE ARRANGEMENTS IN ST. PAUL’S CHURCHYARD.
The two Sheriffs are seen in the immediate foreground, followed by the officers representing the Yeomanry, Militia, and Volunteers, and by Equerries, Gentlemen-in-Waiting, and Attachés. Lord Roberts stands in the centre of the open space. On the right is the pavilion erected on the site of a demolished warehouse.
HER MAJESTY’S ARRIVAL IN ST. PAUL’S CHURCHYARD.
The photograph was taken from the front of the Cathedral, looking down Ludgate Hill, and shows the Princes and Representatives of Foreign Sovereigns in the foreground, some of whom are just taking up their positions within the enclosure. The carriages containing the Princesses are parked in the open space beyond.
THE CEREMONY AT ST. PAUL’S
The photograph was taken immediately after the conclusion of the Service, when Her Majesty (whose face is clearly seen) turned to receive the congratulations of the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Cambridge. The latter is in the act of addressing the Queen; the Prince is close behind him. The Princess of Wales and Princess Christian are the other occupants of the carriage; the latter holds her fan to screen her face from the sun. The Archbishop of Canterbury (Dr. Temple) stands directly above the Queen.
The religious ceremony was short. It commenced with the intonation of the Te Deum by the assembled choristers, and ended with the Benediction, pronounced by the Archbishop of Canterbury.212 The Old Hundredth was then sung, followed by the National Anthem, the strains being taken up by the general public all round the Cathedral, and then the Archbishop, acting on a sudden and most happy impulse, called for three cheers for the Queen. It is not too much to say that Her Majesty has never been greeted with a more enthusiastic salvo from the throats of her people than she received on this occasion.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: EQUERRIES, GENTLEMEN-IN-WAITING, AND MILITARY ATTACHÉS PASSING THE EASTERN END OF CHEAPSIDE.
The boys of Christ’s Hospital (“Blue-Coat School”) occupy the open space between the Mansion House and the opposite corner of Queen Victoria Street.
On the conclusion of this most impressive ceremony the Colonial contingent, who had hitherto led the Procession, and who had been stationed at the north side of the Cathedral meanwhile, fell into position behind the gallant Royal Irish Constabulary men and the squadron of Royal Horse Guards, who had until now formed the rear escort of the Royal Procession.
|At the Mansion House.| At a quarter to one the Queen’s carriage halted outside the Mansion House. The Lady Mayoress presented Her Majesty with an exquisite bouquet of orchids in a beautiful silver basket. “The Queen,” says a writer in the Times, “was graciously pleased to accept the gift, and twice said to her Ladyship, ‘I am too grateful,’ at the same time extending her hand to the Lady Mayoress, who kissed it.”
THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY, K.G.
Lord Robert Cecil, eldest surviving son of the second Marquis, was born at Hatfield in 1830, and educated at Eton and Christchurch, Oxford. M.P. for Stamford, 1853–1868, when he succeeded to the Marquisate. Secretary of State for India, 1866–67, and 1874–78. Minister Plenipotentiary at the Constantinople Conference, 1876; Foreign Secretary, 1878–80. With Lord Beaconsfield he represented England at the Berlin Conference in 1878. Leader of the Conservative Party in the House of Peers since 1881; Premier 1885–86, 1886–1892, and since 1895.
It is needless to trace the progress of the Empress-Queen through the districts inhabited by her poorer, but no less affectionate, people—from the City to London Bridge, in Southwark, in Lambeth, and on over Westminster Bridge. Everywhere her reception was the same—a magnificent outburst of love and devotion.
The stand that had been erected for the Members of Parliament at Westminster occupied almost the whole space between the Clock Tower and the river, and was crowded in every corner. Places had been balloted for and Conservatives and Radicals were found seated together in the utmost harmony, differences of political opinion being entirely forgotten in the universal desire to see the procession, and to do honour to the great lady who was the centre and cynosure of all. When the Queen’s carriage came in sight the Members rose in one body and cheered as they had never cheered even their chosen leaders in the House itself. This assuredly is a testimony to the universal esteem in which Her Majesty is held by the Nation at large. There were about 600 Members, representing every shade of political feeling throughout the three kingdoms, rivalling one another in their eagerness to display their devotion to the hereditary head of the State. It is safe to say that no popularly-elected president of any existing Republic would be greeted in the streets of his capital by all classes of his fellow-citizens with a tithe of the respect, admiration, and affection accorded to our constitutional Monarch on this day of her Jubilee. The Sovereigns of the other European States—some of whom are wont to exact loyalty at the point of the sword—may well have envied the happy lot of a Queen whose chief protection is her people’s love.
|Return to the Palace.|
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE CARRIAGES PASSING DOWN KING WILLIAM STREET.
In the nearest carriage are the Duchess of York, Princess Victoria of Wales, Princess Henry of Prussia, and the Grand Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz.
At a quarter to two the Queen re-entered Buckingham Palace. Right nobly had she borne herself throughout the trying ordeal. Some there were who said they had never seen Her Majesty looking better in her life; others, keener of sight, perhaps, fancied that under that cheerful exterior traces of great emotion were clearly to be detected. Certain it is that on more than one occasion the Queen nearly broke down, “and once, as the tears rolled down her face, the Princess of Wales leant forward, and sympathetically pressed her hand.”
THE NAVAL CONTINGENT CROSSING LONDON BRIDGE INTO SOUTHWARK.
Both Processions on Jubilee day—the Colonial and the Royal—were headed by a few Life Guards and a strong naval detachment. In the case of the Royal Procession the bluejackets dragged after them six naval guns—no light labour, but performed with an ease and smartness which won universal admiration.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE ROYAL HORSE ARTILLERY PASSING ST. GEORGE’S CIRCUS, BOROUGH.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE QUEEN’S COLONIAL ESCORT, CONSISTING OF REPRESENTATIVES OF EACH OF THE COLONIAL CAVALRY DETACHMENTS, PASSING WESTMINSTER BRIDGE.
The photograph is taken from the Clock Tower of the House of Commons. Owing to the winding of the river, the dome of St. Paul’s Cathedral can be seen on the extreme left, over the warehouses on the Surrey side.
More than human must she have been had she been able to pass without emotion through those millions of loving men and women shouting themselves hoarse in the exuberance of their loyalty. Sixty years a Queen, with such a celebration to mark the sixtieth year! Not when Solomon reigned in all his glory—not when the Roman conqueror rode in triumph along the Appian Way to receive the plaudits of Imperial Rome—not when Napoleon the Great snatched the Emperor’s diadem from the Pope and placed it on his own brows—had a single human being been the centre of so much earthly splendour before.
Some mention should be made of the presents given to the Queen by her royal kinsmen and her household. The Princes and Princesses more nearly related to the head of the House of Hanover had prepared a pleasant surprise in the shape of a copy of Mr. Holmes’s authorised “Life of the Queen,” bound in covers of purest gold. |Presents to the Queen.| Two hundred215 ounces of gold were used, and the only ornaments consisted of the Imperial monogram surmounted by a Crown, and having at its base a scroll bearing the legend, “1837: June 20: 1897.” These were composed of 352 diamonds, with rubies and emeralds set in red enamel. On the back cover were engraved facsimiles of the signatures of the various royal subscribers. A magnificent brooch of diamonds and pearls was presented to Her Majesty by the Princess of Wales, her children, the Duchess of York, and the Duke of216 Fife. From her household the Queen received a bracelet of beautiful workmanship composed of round medallions set in brilliants, with large rubies and sapphires at intervals. On the medallions were engraved the rose, shamrock, and thistle, the lotus-flower representing the Colonies. The Queen was highly pleased with this token of the affection of her household, and wore it at all the State dinners. The design was the work of H.R.H. Princess Henry of Battenberg.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE BANDS OF THE 1ST LIFE GUARDS AND DRAGOON GUARDS PASSING THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE ESCORT OF PRINCES AND REPRESENTATIVES OF FOREIGN POWERS.
RETURN OF THE ROYAL PROCESSION: THE ESCORT OF OFFICERS OF IMPERIAL SERVICE TROOPS ENTERING THE PALACE YARD.
In addition to the innumerable addresses which the Queen received from every part of her dominions, an immense number of congratulatory messages was sent from foreign countries.|Congratulations from Abroad.| The quaintest of all was that of the United States. It was delivered to Her Majesty by the Honourable Whitelaw Reid, the Special Ambassador, who was conspicuous in the Jubilee Procession as the only man partaking in it in everyday attire. He wore evening dress and an opera hat. The text of the address was as follows:—
“To Her Majesty Victoria, Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, Empress of India.
“Great and good friend, in the name and on behalf of the people of the United States, I present their sincere felicitations upon the sixtieth anniversary of your Majesty’s accession to the Crown of Great Britain.
“I express the sentiments of my fellow-citizens in wishing for your 217people the prolongation of a reign which has been illustrious and marked by advance in science, arts, and popular well-being. On behalf of my countrymen I wish particularly to recognise your friendship for the United States and your love of peace exemplified upon important occasions.
“It is pleasing to acknowledge the debt of gratitude and respect due to your personal virtues.
“May your life be prolonged, and peace, honour, and prosperity bless the people over whom you have been called to rule. May liberty nourish throughout your Empire under just and equal laws, and your government continue strong in the affections of all who live under it. And I pray that God may have your Majesty in His holy keeping.
“Your good friend,William M’Kinley.“Done at Washington this 28th day of May, A.D. 1897,by the President.John Sherman, Secretary of State.”
THE ROYAL PROCESSION: HER MAJESTY’S CARRIAGE IN WHITEHALL.
On the right is seen a portion of the banqueting hall of the former Royal Palace of Whitehall, and next to it a grand stand seating 4,000 persons. The Queen’s carriage is turning to pass through the Horse Guards’ gate into the Mall.
Presented to the Queen by the members of her household, and worn by Her Majesty on State occasions during the Jubilee. The original is much larger than this engraving; it measures 2-7/8 inches across.
In the evening of the great day the Queen entertained an illustrious company of foreign Princes at dinner in Buckingham Palace. |The Royal Dinner.| Here is the menu:—Potages—Bernoise à l’Impératrice, Parmentier; Poissons—Whitebait, Filets de Saumon à la Norvégienne; Entrées—Timbales à la Monte Carlo, Cailles à la d’Uxelle; Relevés—Poulets à la Demidon, Roast Beef; Roti—Poulardes farcies; Entremets—Pois sautés au beurre, Pouding Cambaceres, Pain d’Oranges à la Cintra, Canapés à la Princesse; Side Table—Hot and cold roast, fowls, Tongue, Cold beef, Salade. A great bouquet of orchids was placed on the dining-table immediately opposite where Her Majesty sat.
THE RIGHT HON. SIR HUGH M. NELSON,
Premier of Queensland.
Born at Kilmarnock in Scotland in 1835, educated at Edinburgh High School and University. Settled in Moreton Bay District in 1853, entered the Legislative Assembly 1883, became Minister for Railways 1888–90, Leader of Opposition 1891, Minister without portfolio 1892, Colonial Treasurer 1893, Premier in November of the same year.
The list of Jubilee honours published in the newspapers of June 22 presented some features of great interest. The most popular elevations were those of the eleven Colonial Prime Ministers218 to the dignity of Privy Councillors. It was felt that the nucleus of the long-dreamed-of Pan-Britannic Council had been formed. The elevation of Mr. W. E. H. Lecky, one of the members for the Dublin University, to the same dignity was recognised as a graceful compliment to the world of learning. |Jubilee Honours.| The baronetcy conferred on the Lord Mayor of London was well-deserved, for no Lord Mayor had done so much in the present century to enhance the reputation of the Mansion House for philanthropic enterprise and lavish hospitality. Two new Lord Mayoralties, those of Sheffield and Leeds, were created; and three towns, Nottingham, Bradford, and Kingston-upon-Hull, were raised to the importance of cities. In late years peerages have generally been bestowed on men who have achieved greatness in the commercial world, and no choice could have been happier than that of Sir John Burns, Bart., the head of the Cunard Steamship Company, while that conferred on the Right Hon. Sir Donald Smith, G.C.M.G., was held to be as much a compliment to the man himself as to the Dominion of Canada, of which he was High Commissioner.
DIAMOND JUBILEE ORCHID TROPHY.
This beautiful bouquet adorned the Royal Dinner Table on June 22. It stood 8 feet 6 inches high and measured 6 feet through, and was arranged in a gilded wicker basket. The upper portion took the form of a royal crown, beneath which were the letters V. R. I., each a foot in length, composed of Epidendrum Vitellinum on a ground of Odontoglossum Citrosmum. Orchids from Australia, South Africa, New Guinea, Burmah, British Guiana, the West Indies, and other parts of Her Majesty’s dominions were among the 50,000 to 60,000 flowers employed in this, the most magnificent bouquet ever constructed.
THE RIGHT HON. SIR J. GORDON SPRIGG,
Premier of Cape Colony.
Son of the late Rev. J. Sprigg, of Ipswich; born in 1830. He worked on the Hansard staff of the House of Commons; went to Africa for his health in 1858 and settled there. Entered the Cape Parliament in 1869. He has been thrice Prime Minister; also Finance Minister under Mr. Rhodes, 1893–96.
Generally speaking, a more ample recognition of the claims of the Colonial Empire, as well as of Art and Science at home, marked the Diamond Jubilee honours list.
It was hoped by many that advantage would have been taken of this unique occasion to extend the sovereign dignity of the Queen, so that it might include not only the United Kingdom and India but also the English-speaking Colonies. The addition of the names of the Colonies to the legend on the coinage would have followed this step as a natural corollary, and there can be no doubt it would have found favour with the great majority of the Queen’s subjects at home and abroad. Reasons of State may have interfered, but they cannot be insuperable, and we may look forward with confidence to the time when Parliament will decorate the Queen with this splendid honour.
THE NAVAL REVIEW, June 26, 1897: THE FLEET SALUTING.
CHAPTER III.
Illuminations in London—Festivities in the Provinces and the Colonies—-Addresses of Congratulation from the Lords and Commons—Gathering of School Children on Constitution Hill—State Performance at the Opera—The Princess of Wales’s Dinners to the Poor—State Reception—Special Performance at the Lyceum—Torchlight Evolutions by Etonians at Windsor—Naval Review at Spithead—The Fleet Illuminated—The Colonial Troops at the Naval Review.
ON the evening of June 22, and for two or three days following, London was ablaze with illuminations. In the city especially these were on a scale of unparalleled magnificence. The Bank of England was fringed and festooned with myriads of many-coloured lamps, while from the parapet of the corner which looks towards Cheapside there glowed and scintillated a dazzling fan-shaped device of huge size. Over the chief entrance appeared the following inscription in letters of living fire: “She Wrought Her People Lasting Good.” |Illuminations in London.| The pillars of the Mansion House and the Royal Exchange were entwined with bands of light, and every detail of their architecture was accentuated by rows of tiny lamps. In this, the very heart of London, it was as light as day. It may be mentioned that 35,000 gas jets were used in decorating the Mansion House alone.
THE MONUMENT ILLUMINATED.
Moving westward with the vast throng of well-behaved sightseers, the next point of great interest was the dome of St. Paul’s. It had been suggested that the Cathedral should be illuminated, as were the other important buildings in the city, but the possibility of danger from fire acted as a deterrent. Instead of this, powerful electric search-lights were focussed on the dome and west front with wonderful effect. The dome stood up clear against the dark sky, and the stonework supporting and crowning it glowed like whitest marble. It is said that the expense of this installation was at the rate of £1,400 a night.
A. Shot Tower. B. Whitehall Court. C. Hotel Metropole. D. Hotel Cecil. E. Savoy Hotel. F. Embankment.
LONDON ILLUMINATED: THE VIEW WESTWARD FROM BLACKFRIARS BRIDGE.
THE MANSION HOUSE ILLUMINATED.
THE BANK OF ENGLAND ILLUMINATED.
On every side of the route down Ludgate Hill, Fleet Street, and the Strand, and more westward still, through Pall Mall, St. James’s, and Mayfair, iridescent stars and crowned monograms glowed like titanic jewels from a thousand buildings.220 Fleet Street and the Strand were garlanded across with festoons of many-coloured globes, and the streets of this part of the town resembled nothing so much as an unending triumphal arch of rainbow-hued fire. Observed from Waterloo Place, Pall Mall seemed literally ablaze with general conflagration, so lavishly were the Clubs illuminated. The beautiful floral arches which crossed St. James’s Street at every few feet were beaded with numberless electric glow-lamps, and these were to have been set alight by the Princess of Wales touching a button in Marlborough House. But on the previous day some unexplained defect in the electric circuit had resulted in the ignition of a portion of the illuminations, and it was considered unsafe to try the experiment again. Marlborough House had over the entrance gates a branch of laurel of various natural tints, interspersed with red berries, forming one main arch over the gateway, and two side arches over the doors. The main laurel arch supported an oval medallion, surmounted by a crown, and bore the monogram “V.R.I.” surrounded by a garter. The side arches carried a Prince of Wales’s plume and badge. The whole of this was in cut crystal. The residence of the Duke of York had a pretty wreath of white rose and pink may (the former the emblem of the Royal House of York, the latter prettily suggestive of the Duchess’s name), with the monogram, “V.R.I.” in the centre. This device was carried out in gas jets. Piccadilly, Regent Street, and Oxford Street were not so generally illuminated as those thoroughfares we have already mentioned, but individual establishments approached very closely to the high level attained elsewhere.
And everywhere through the most richly-decorated streets there moved an enormous throng of admirably-behaved people. Well into the small hours of the night the millions of London strolled leisurely along the principal highways of their great city. Disorder and riot were conspicuous by their absence.
JUBILEE DAY AT SANDRINGHAM: THE CHILDREN’S TEA.
It is safe to say that every town and village in England and Scotland had its own miniature celebration, its own procession, its own feast for the poor, its sports, or its firework display. |Provincial and Colonial Celebrations.| At Sandringham a service was held on the hill outside the church. About 2,000 children from the various parts of the Prince of Wales’ estate had tea in tents in the cricket ground. In Liverpool the principal streets were lavishly decorated, and about midday there was a procession of trades and friendly societies, in which about 8,000 persons took part. On the river there was a grand display of mercantile vessels dressed from stem to stern in flags. The Corporation of Manchester had generously voted £10,000 towards the Jubilee festivities. The streets were gaily decorated, and in the morning 100,000 children were entertained at breakfast and presented with Jubilee medals. In Birmingham there was a great historical procession, and in the evening displays of fireworks in three of the public parks. Many places commemorated the event by building new hospitals or by placing those already existing on a sound financial basis. The generosity of the citizens of Newcastle-on-Tyne was such that a fund of £100,000 was raised for the purpose of establishing a new infirmary. In the city of York the round of gaieties commenced at the Mansion House, where the Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress entertained to breakfast the members of the Corporation and the Jubilee Committee. At noon a thanksgiving service was held in the Minster. To the young people of the city the occasion was made an eventful one, for 14,000 of them, along with 1,300 teachers, assembled at222 1.15 p.m. at their respective schools, where each was presented with a medal commemorative of the occasion. At night various points of the city were illuminated; a powerful search-light lit up the country for miles around, this being fixed on the central tower of the Cathedral, the west front of which was also illuminated with coloured fires. All over the country the occasion was made one of real rejoicing for the poor and needy, public and private enterprise co-operating to entertain them in the most hospitable manner.
OUTDOOR SERVICE AT SANDRINGHAM ON JUBILEE DAY.
THE RIGHT HON. CHAS. C. KINGSTON,
Premier of South Australia.
Son of the late Sir George S. Kingston, Speaker of the South Australian House of Assembly. Born at Adelaide in 1850; studied Law, and is a Q.C. and Attorney-General for the Colony. Entered the Colonial Parliament in 1881, and has represented the same constituency (West Adelaide) ever since. He became Prime Minister in 1893, and is President of the Federal Convention.
THE RIGHT HON. SIR WILLIAM V. WHITEWAY, Q.C.,
Premier of Newfoundland.
Younger son of the late Thomas Whiteway, of Buckyett, Devon; born 1828. He went as a boy to Newfoundland, and, studying law, became a barrister at St. John’s in 1852, and Q.C. in 1862. Appointed Speaker of the House of Assembly in 1864–69; he has since held every ministerial office in the gift of the Newfoundland Government, which he has also represented on numerous delegations and commissions. Attorney General and Premier of the Colony, 1878–84, 1889–94, and since 1895.
There was a great bonfire display in Scotland. For a fortnight ten Highland ponies had been carrying materials up Ben Nevis. The brush-wood came chiefly from the neighbouring deer forest in Glen Nevis, and many loads of peat from the Distillery mosses. A shower of “May” rockets gave the signal to the bonfires on the neighbouring hills to make ready, and a few seconds before 10.30 Mrs. Cameron Campbell of Monzie touched the wire at the foot of the hill, and on the stroke of time the huge beacon burst into a brilliant sheet of flame, and was answered from hill after hill throughout Scotland. At the same time the following telegrams were despatched:—
“To Big Ben, Westminster:—‘Our Highland hills in blazing bonfires join with London’s illuminations in honour of our Queen.’” “To the Lord Mayor, London:—‘O’er loch and glen our bonfires shine to greet with you our Queen.’”
In all two thousand five hundred bonfires that had been erected on as many eminences throughout the United Kingdom were set alight at about half-past ten o’clock at night, and as the fires of these great beacons died down there faded away into history the greatest day of rejoicing the Anglo-Saxon has known since the glad news arrived that the conqueror of Europe had been overthrown at Waterloo.
It is characteristic of our nation and our times that at this, the most northerly outpost of civilized man—the head-quarters of the Jackson-Harmsworth Polar Expedition—the Jubilee was celebrated “with all the ardour of Big Englanders.”
The Colonies were as enthusiastic as the Old Country in their celebrations of the Jubilee. In Ottawa there was a gathering of 7,000 school children on Parliament Hill. Each of the children carried a Union Jack, and when these were waved together, while the National Anthem was being sung, the effect is described as having been very remarkable. At night the Parliament House was ablaze with 10,000 incandescent lamps, an inscription on the right or Senate wing reading “God save the Queen,” while on the left or Commons wing the223 device read “Dieu sauve la Reine.” Quebec, Montreal, Toronto, and Winnipeg had each its own well-arranged festivities. In Melbourne, Sydney, and Adelaide, and in the cities of New Zealand, the day was kept as a general holiday, the decorations and illuminations being splendid in every case. In Cape Town there was a review of troops and a huge procession headed by the Naval Brigade. In Egypt, at Lagos, Sierra Leone, and at Mauritius, in the far east at Singapore, at Hong Kong, and at Shanghai, in the East Indies and the West Indies, in British Honduras and British Guiana—everywhere where the Union Jack flies Her Majesty’s subjects gathered together to do her honour. Save only in her Empire of India, where the hearts of men were hardly in tune with the festive spirit of the day. Yet, in spite of the recent earthquake, which had shaken Calcutta to its foundations; in spite of the plague, now happily only lingering in Bombay, and the devastations of the recent famine, India was not without her joyful celebrations, these appropriately taking the form, for the most part, of acts of charity and mercy.
THE SPEAKER IN HIS STATE COACH BEARING THE COMMONS’ ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY.
On Wednesday, June 23, the Lord Chancellor (Lord Halsbury) carried the address of congratulation of the Upper House to Buckingham Palace, and presented it to the Queen. This address had been moved in the House of Lords by the Marquis of Salisbury on Monday, June 21, in the following terms:—
|Addresses from Lords and Commons.| “That a humble address be presented to Her Majesty on the auspicious completion of the sixtieth year of her happy reign, and to assure Her Majesty that this House proudly shares the great joy with which her people celebrate the longest, the most prosperous, and the most illustrious reign in their history, joining with them in praying earnestly for the continuance during many years of Her Majesty’s life and health.”
Mr. Speaker Gully, arrayed in his handsome Robes of State, went in his great old gilded State coach to the Palace with a similar message from the Commons.
The same day the Queen left town for Windsor. A touching ceremony marked the occasion. At Her Majesty’s special request, the stands on Constitution Hill were filled with 10,000 children from the Board Schools and Voluntary Schools of all denominations. By four o’clock in the afternoon the children were in their places, and were regaled with buns, milk, and sweets. |Gathering of School Children.| At about a quarter to five Her Majesty—with whom were the Empress Frederick, Princess Henry of Battenberg, and the Duke of Connaught—drove up from Buckingham Palace. The children rose in their places and cheered their Queen to the echo, and immediately afterwards they sang the National Anthem, the band of the Grenadier Guards leading. “While the voices filled the air with the grand old melody, Her Majesty turned upon the singers a face radiant with love and happiness. Those who think of Her Majesty as ‘the Queen-mother’ should have looked upon her then to have found a realisation of the ideal.”
HER MAJESTY AND THE SCHOOL CHILDREN: THE ROYAL PROCESSION PASSING UP CONSTITUTION HILL.
The carriage nearest the spectator contains the Duke and Duchess of York, Prince Edward of York, and Prince Henry of Prussia.
A State Performance at the Opera was, however, the principal feature in the Jubilee programme of June 23. With the exception of the Queen herself, almost every Royal personage who had taken part in the Jubilee Procession of the day before was present, and a special box on the right of the Royal Box was reserved for the Colonial Prime Ministers and their wives. The house was decorated from floor to ceiling with roses of every shade—some 60,000 blossoms being used for this purpose. Boxes on the grand tier, which had been sold by the management for £50 for the evening, were sold again at prices ranging up to £150, while the stalls realised £10 at least in every case. Famous as Covent Garden is for splendid “houses,” the brilliant assemblage on this evening quite eclipsed all previous gatherings.
It is not too much to say that the whole social world of the country was there. The handsome uniforms of the men, the beauty, diamonds, and dresses of the ladies, set in a frame of so much floral225 magnificence, made up a scene the splendour of which was never likely to fade from the memory of anyone who witnessed it. In all that gorgeous company none attracted as much admiration as the Princess of Wales. Simply dressed in white satin, with the red sash of some Order across her shoulders, and wearing a crown of diamonds, Her Royal Highness was, by universal consent, the queen of beauty in a house full of the most beautiful women in the three kingdoms.
It was only to have been expected, perhaps, that the most generally-approved Jubilee celebration should have been inaugurated by the same most charming Princess. This was nothing less than the entertaining at dinner of 300,000 of the London poor. The feast took place in different large buildings all over the poorer parts of the Metropolis. The Princess, accompanied by His Royal Highness and the Princesses Victoria of Wales and Charles of Denmark, drove round and was personally present at as many as possible of the dining halls. At the People’s Palace, in the Mile End Road, where 1,600 crippled children feasted, Her Royal Highness went in and out among the children, bestowing here and there a smile, and here and there a few words of kindly encouragement.
THE PRINCESS OF WALES’S DINNERS: THE DINNER TO CRIPPLED CHILDREN AT THE PEOPLE’S PALACE.
The Princess of Wales stands in the centre of the platform with the Prince of Wales on her right. The photograph was taken during the “silence for Grace.”
|State Reception.| A State Reception at Buckingham Palace, where Her Majesty was represented by the Prince and Princess of Wales, brought the festivities of June 24 to a close.
Friday, the 25th, was marked by an afternoon performance of “The Bells” and “The Story of Waterloo” at the Lyceum Theatre, to which the men of the Colonial Contingent had been kindly invited by Sir Henry Irving. |Special Performance at the Lyceum.| Sir Henry was uproariously cheered on his first appearance and at every interval during the afternoon, and after the splendid presentation of “The Bells” he was called again and again before the curtain, and finally compelled to make a speech. He said:—
“Ladies and Gentlemen—I will say my dear comrades—for your greeting to-day proves that we 226are comrades, one and all—I cannot tell you how great a delight and pleasure it has been to us to have the honour, the privilege, and the pride of making you welcome here to-day, and I hope—I can but hope—that centuries hence our children will hold very dear to them the spirit which gives us the opportunity of meeting you; that spirit of love for our Queen and our country—that great nation which you typify—which is the strength and glory and power of it; and of that sweet and gracious lady, that beloved Queen of ours, for whom your swords will flash and our hearts will pray. I thank you with all my heart and soul for your welcome, and I thank you on behalf of one and all behind this curtain, and we send our most cordial greeting to one and all in front.”
Eton College has always enjoyed the favour of royalty, and on the evening of Saturday, June 26, the boys furnished one of the most picturesque celebrations of Jubilee time. In the morning the Queen had entertained, in the Home Park at Windsor, five or six thousand children. |Torchlight Evolutions by Etonians.| After that a grand review of firemen from all parts of the country took place. At ten o’clock in the evening the Queen took up her place in a window in the east corridor, and the Eton boys filed into the Quadrangle (many of them in the uniform of their Volunteer Corps) each boy carrying a torch or a lantern. A beautiful effect was produced when the boys went through a variety of intricate evolutions.
THE STATE RECEPTION AT BUCKINGHAM PALACE: ENTRANCE OF THE PRINCE AND PRINCESS OF WALES.
All this time the Naval Review at Spithead had been a-preparing. Every nation that boasts a Navy had sent a ship, and the streets of Portsmouth were filled with our own bluejackets and those belonging to the foreign ships. |The Naval Review.| All the World had come to see for herself what the British Fleet was like, and we were able to provide such a Naval spectacle as has never been witnessed before. Just as on June 22 we had furnished forth an Imperial pageant demonstrating the scope and strength of our dominion over the land surface of the globe, so now, on Saturday, June 26, we showed that our sovereignty over the seas is as far reaching and even more absolute.227 Without taking one single vessel from the Mediterranean, from the Chinese Seas, from Australia, India, or North America, we displayed at Spithead such a congregation of ships of war as filled with amazement and despair those representatives of alien Powers who knew our sea-going prowess only by repute. In all about 165 ships of our Navy rode at ease, in four long lines and two short ones in the narrow Strait, and they were manned by 40,000 officers and men. The length of the lines of British ships aggregated nearly thirty miles! The Commander-in-Chief, Admiral Sir Nowell Salmon, G.C.B., V.C., flew his flag on the Renown.
THE ROYAL VISIT TO THE PEOPLE’S PALACE.
The photograph shows the Princess of Wales with her two daughters, the Princess Victoria and Princess Charles of Denmark (Princess Maud), who have just entered the carriage after seeing the crippled children at dinner. The Princess’s bouquet is being handed to her. The Prince is approaching the carriage. The Lord Mayor is seen standing by the pillar over the centre of the carriage.
Painful, indeed, must have been the reflections of those strangely-constituted Britons—if any were present—whose interest in public affairs is limited to the squalid area of parochial politics, as their eyes ranged over the water in the direction of this mighty fleet. With what vain regret must such as these have looked back on the days, some ten or a dozen years since, when British Naval supremacy was but a name—when we had few ships, and those out of date, and few men to man them. Alas! for the fond anticipations of those who were looking forward to the time when Britain should throw away her Empire and sink to the prosperous unimportance of a Belgium, the cheerful mediocrity of a Holland. There, at Spithead, was overwhelming proof that such views are not shared by the great bulk of British people, whether Liberals, Radicals, or Conservatives; that power is still sweet to the ruling race; that that Empire which has been bought with the blood of the Anglo-Saxon will be maintained in its integrity at any cost. Here they lay in serried ranks on the moving waters, orderly as soldiers on a parade ground—the steel-clad champions of a nation’s honour—as powerful to compel peace as to put the issue of war out of question if war must come.
TORCHLIGHT EVOLUTIONS BY THE ETON BOYS IN THE QUADRANGLE OF WINDSOR CASTLE.
& Co.
ADMIRAL SIR NOWELL SALMON, V.C.
In command of the Fleet during the Jubilee Review.
Exactly at eight o’clock the combined fleet began to decorate itself with a million flags, taking time from the Commander-in-Chief’s flagship. The unnumbered merchant and pleasure craft of all kinds that dotted the waters and lay still at moorings by the quays were already gay with streaming pennants, nor were the fourteen battleships of the foreign powers behindhand in embellishing themselves for the great review. Some time before two o’clock the business of clearing the lines for the procession commenced, and at two precisely a Royal salute228 of guns on shore announced that the Royal yacht was under way. Not long afterwards the Victoria and Albert, with the Prince of Wales on board, preceded by the Trinity House yacht Irene, approached the head of the lines. Royal salutes and the cheers of bluejackets marked the passage of the Royal yacht along and through the lines. The Victoria and Albert was followed by a train of vessels—the Peninsular and Oriental Company’s liner, the Carthage, carrying those Royal guests for whom there was no accommodation on the Victoria and Albert; then another Royal yacht, the Alberta; then the Enchantress, with the Lords of the Admiralty and their friends; next the Danube, carrying the members of the House of Lords; after her the Wildfire, with the Colonial Prime Ministers and their suites and the Right Hon. Joseph Chamberlain, Secretary of State for the Colonies, on board; then again the superb Cunard liner, the Campania, carrying the House of Commons; and lastly the Eldorado, with the foreign Ambassadors. The procession occupied two hours in traversing the lines. Before the proceedings terminated the Victoria and Albert anchored abreast of the flagship Renown and the Prince of Wales received all flag officers, British and foreign, on board, After this ceremony the Royal yacht weighed anchor and returned to Portsmouth, receiving, as she departed, three cheers from every ship in the fleet. Simultaneously with the arrival of the Prince of Wales in Portsmouth Harbour the following signal was made to the fleet by Admiral Sir Nowell Salmon:—“I am commanded by the Prince of Wales, as representing the Queen, to express his entire satisfaction with the magnificent naval display at Spithead and the perfect manner in which all the arrangements were carried out, and at his request I order the main-brace to be spliced.” Splicing the main-brace, it should be explained, involves the serving out of an extra allowance of grog, and is still a very popular order with our man-o’-war’s men. Almost immediately after this a thunderstorm burst, accompanied by a deluge of rain, and for some hours the “city of ships” was lost in an impenetrable haze.
THE NAVAL REVIEW: THE ROYAL YACHT PASSING BETWEEN THE LINES OF BRITISH AND FOREIGN SHIPS.
The United States cruiser, Brooklyn, painted white, is a conspicuous object in the line of foreign men-of-war. The battleship in the foreground is H.M.S. Victorious.
From a Photograph] [by West, Southsea.
THE NAVAL REVIEW: THE ROYAL YACHT ANCHORED ABREAST OF H.M.S. “RENOWN.”
THE NAVAL REVIEW: BIRD’S-EYE VIEW OF THE FLEET AT ANCHOR IN SPITHEAD, June 26, 1897.
The line E consists of Merchant Vessels, anchored on the south or Isle of Wight side of Spithead. Line A consists of Foreign Men-of-war. The total number of British War Ships occupying stations in Spithead was 165. Of these lines B and C comprised fifty-nine Battleships and Cruisers in the following order, starting from the left or eastward end:—
Line B—1, Magnificent; 2, Royal Sovereign; 3, Repulse; 4, Resolution; 5, Empress of India; 6, Majestic; 7, Prince George; 8, Mars; 9, Jupiter; 10, Victorious; 11, Renown (Commander-in-Chief); 12, Powerful; 13, Blake; 14, Blenheim; 15, Royal Arthur; 16, Theseus; 17, Thetis; 18, Flora; 19, Naiad; 20, Tribune; 21, Terpsichore; 22, Sirius; 23 (station not occupied); 24, Hermione; 25, Andromache; 26, Sappho; 27, Spartan; 28, Latona; 29, Brilliant; 30, Charybdis.
Line C—1, Sans Pareil; 2, Howe; 3, Benbow; 4, Collingwood; 5, Inflexible; 6, Alexandra; 7, Edinburgh; 8, Colossus; 9, Devastation; 10, Thunderer; 11, Warspite; 12, Terrible; 13, Australia; 14, Galatea; 15, Aurora; 16, Edgar; 17, Melampus; 18, Endymion; 19, Diana; 20, Isis; 21, Juno; 22, Doris; 23, Venus; 24, Minerva; 25, Dido; 26, Apollo; 27, Æolus; 28, Phaeton; 29, Leander; 30, Bonaventure.
Line D (thirty-eight Third-class Cruisers, Gun-vessels, and Torpedo Gunboats)—1, Mersey; 2, Pelorus; 3, Magicienne; 4, Medea; 5, Medusa; 6, Barracouta; 7, Curlew; 8, Landrail; 9, Speedy; 10, Alarm; 11, Antelope; 12, Jaseur; 13, Circe; 14, Gossamer; 15, Jason; 16, Hazard; 17, Leda; 18, Niger; 19, Onyx; 20, Rattlesnake; 21, Renard; 22, Sharpshooter; 23, Skipjack; 24, Sheldrake; 25, Spanker; 26, Gleaner; 27, Raven; 28, Cockchafer; 29, Starling; 30, Active; 31, Volage; 32, Calypso; 33, Champion; 34, Cailiope; 35, Curacoa; 36, Northampton; 37, Agincourt; 38, Minotaur.
Line F (forty-eight Destroyers and Gunboats)—1, Halcyon; 2, Lightning; 3, Havock; 4, Daring; 5, Hornet; 6, Hardy; 7, Whiting; 8, Hasty; 9, Hunter; 10, Fame; 11, Foam; 12, Spitfire; 13, Ranger; 14, Research; 15, Triton; 16, Vivid; 17, Firequeen; 18, Albacore; 19, ——; 20, Jackal; 21, ——; 22, Decoy; 23, Quail; 24, Ferret; 25, Rocket; 26, Opossum; 27, Sparrowhawk; 28, Lynx; 29, Thrasher; 30, Skate; 31, Virago; 32, Sunfish; 33, Haughty; 34, Desperate; 35, Contest; 36, Janus; 37, Salmon; 38, Snapper; 39, Sturgeon; 40, Spider; 41, ——; 42, Wanderer; 43, Liberty; 44, Martin; 45, Nautilus; 46, Pilot; 47, Seaflower; 48, Sealark.
Twenty Torpedo Boats were anchored further to the right, near the Spit Fort, and beyond them, in Stokes Bay, as well as on the opposite side, off Osborne, accommodation was found for a very large number of yachts and other vessels.
229 It was not destined, however, that the hundreds of thousands of spectators who were afloat in the pleasure boats and who lined Southsea beach and the shores of the Isle of Wight overlooking Spithead, were to lose the most beautiful spectacle of all. As daylight faded so faded the storm, and at a quarter-past nine o’clock, when the signal for lighting up the ships was given by a single gun, the conditions for viewing the illuminations were as perfect as possible. To quote again a writer, Mr. G. W. Steevens, to whom we are already much indebted:—“The thunderstorm was only an episode. Having done its business, it went dutifully away, and left the field clear for the illuminations. Out on the sea front you could see the lights of the fleet like glow-worms in the dark. Then suddenly there sounded a gun; and as I moved along Southsea Common there appeared in the line a ship of fire. A ship all made of fire—hull and funnels and military masts with fighting tops. And then another, and another, and another. The fleet revealed itself from behind the castle, ship after ship traced in fire against the blackness. From the head of Southsea they still came on—fresh wonders of grace230 and light and splendour, stretching away, still endlessly as in the daytime, till they became a confused glimmer six miles away. It was the fleet and yet not the fleet. You could recognise almost any ship by her lines and rig—just as if it had been in day, only transmuted from steel and paint into living gold. The Admirals still flew their flags as in the day, only to-night the flags were no longer bunting, but pure colour. The heavy hard fleet vanished, and there came out in its stead a picture of it magically painted in pure light.
THE JAPANESE BATTLESHIP “FUJI.”
Japan having so recently had experience of actual naval warfare, her representative at Spithead came in for a considerable amount of attention. Some of her officers had, indeed, taken part in the Battle of the Yalu.
From a Photograph] [by Symonds & Co.
THE UNITED STATES’ CRUISER “BROOKLYN.”
This vessel attracted considerable attention on account of her peculiar shape and up-to-date equipment. She is fitted with non-inflammable wooden decks, and carries eight 8-inch guns in four turrets, forward, aft, and on each beam. She is painted white, a fact which led the irreverent tars to christen her “The Cement Factory.”
“For three hours this miracle of brightness shone wondrously at Spithead. At half-past eleven or so the Prince returned the second time as before, and the golden fleet sent a thunder of salute after him. Then, as I stood on the high roof of the Central Hotel, the clock struck twelve, and before my eyes the golden fleet vanished—vanished clean away in a moment. You could just see it go.
“Here half a ship broken off, there masts and funnels hanging an instant in the air; it all vanished, and nothing at all was left except the rigging lights, trembling faintly once more on the dark sea.”
THE NAVAL REVIEW: THE FLEET, LOOKING WEST.
Photographed from the Flagship of the Commander-in-Chief, the Renown. The nearest vessel is H.M.S. Powerful; the next beyond is the Blake. In the other line are the Galatea, Aurora, Edgar, Melampus, &c.
THE FLEET ILLUMINATED: AS SEEN FROM THE WATER.
The Naval Review of 1897 was over. It had provided a sublime spectacle for our Colonial and foreign visitors, and it had taught a lesson that was meant to be learned by the whole World, and was actually so learned. A great military Power we might not be, but on the seas our dominion was, and must ever be, unquestionable. The chorus of admiration that arose from the Continental and American press showed that the necessity for this pre-eminence was recognised and allowed. If we had not known it long ourselves, our foreign critics, both friendly and hostile, had been aware that a great navy was the paramount condition of our national existence.
A circumstance that concerned the gallant men of the Colonial contingent who had taken part in the Jubilee Procession must here be touched on. |The Colonial Troops at the Naval Review.| Strange as it may seem, there had been originally no provision made for the representation at the Naval Review of the Colonial contingent. This remissness on the part of the authorities occasioned a good deal of surprise, which found its expression in the columns of the London Daily Mail; but it was not until the newspaper in question took the matter up in right good earnest that the authorities bestirred themselves. It was then proposed to charter a vessel and send the Colonials down to Portsmouth some two or three days after the Review—it being somewhat artlessly explained that as the fleet would still be in position and the Review well over, our visitors would enjoy a better opportunity of examining the ships in detail! Needless to say this line of argument found little favour with the Daily Mail, the Globe, and the other newspapers which were now strenuously advocating the claims of our visitors. They raised their voices once more, with the result that at the eleventh hour the responsible officials announced that the difficulties—whatever they were—had been surmounted, and that the Colonial contingent were to see the Imperial fleet on the actual day of Review in all its majesty and splendour. The fleet was again dressed and illuminated on the following Monday—Coronation Day. Mention should be made of a little vessel, first seen at the Review, which marks a new departure in marine engineering. This is the Turbinia torpedo-boat, driven by steam turbines at 2,100 revolutions, accomplishing 32 or 33 knots per hour.
THE FLEET ILLUMINATED: AS SEEN FROM THE SHORE.
Owing to the necessity for a prolonged exposure, fireworks and search-lights do not leave any trace upon the photographic negative.
THE QUEEN’S VISIT TO HER BIRTHPLACE: THE SCENE OUTSIDE ST. MARY’S CHURCH, KENSINGTON.
In the carriage with Her Majesty are the Grand Duke and Grand Duchess Serge of Russia and Princess Henry of Battenberg. On the pavement stands the Princess Louise, Marchioness of Lorne, with a bouquet in her hands; the Marquis stands on her left. Opposite the carriage door is Miss Beatrice Leete, daughter of the Vestry Clerk, from whom the Queen graciously accepted a magnificent basket of carnations.
CHAPTER IV.
The Queen’s Visit to Kensington—Garden Party at Buckingham Palace—Review at Aldershot—Gift of a Battleship—The Prince of Wales’s Hospital Fund—The Jubilee Medals—Conclusion.
ON the Monday after the Review the Queen returned from Windsor to the Metropolis. She was received everywhere with enthusiastic greetings of loyalty and affection. It was no mere conventional reception this. The Nation had realised lately, as never before, the part their Queen had played in the building of the Empire, and one and all flocked out to do her honour. Her Majesty had returned to London to attend the garden party which was to be held in the grounds of Buckingham Palace in the afternoon. On her way from Paddington Station she visited Kensington, the place of her birth.
In front of St. Mary Abbott’s Church, Kensington High Street, the Queen stopped and received a splendid bouquet of roses at the hands of the Princess Louise. |The Queen’s Visit to Kensington.| Then the Marquis of Lorne presented the Chairman of the Vestry, who handed Her Majesty a loyal address, in which Kensington recalled with pride its long and many Royal associations. The Queen’s reply was characteristic and particularly interesting in view of recent events:—
“I thank you for your loyal and kind address. It gives me great pleasure to receive the assurance of devotion and goodwill from the inhabitants of Kensington, and I gladly renew my associations with a place which, as the scene of my birth and of my summons to the throne, has ever had, and will ever have, with me solemn and tender recollections.” The Queen then drove on to the Palace, 10,000 school children singing the National Anthem as she passed through Kensington Gardens.
HER MAJESTY’S GARDEN PARTY: INDIAN VISITORS.
The subsequent garden party in the gardens of Buckingham Palace was one of the most brilliant functions on record. The weather was beautifully fine, and there was a unique attendance of Royal and other guests; the Colonial Premiers were present, and the whole of the special envoys of Foreign Powers and other distinguished Jubilee guests. |Garden Party at Buckingham Palace.| The grounds were opened at four o’clock, and in a very short time the dresses of the ladies and the brilliant uniforms of men transformed them into a moving blaze of colour. Her Majesty’s guests amused themselves in a variety of ways—a favourite form of diversion being a row on the Palace lake, on which were a large number of boats in charge of picturesquely-attired Queen’s watermen.
When Her Majesty had traversed the lawn, and Lord Lathom had pointed many of the people out to her, she moved to the entrance of her own tent, and sat sipping tea and eating strawberries, with a white apron—the strings of which passed over her shoulders—spread on her lap in the homeliest fashion.
A. Fairfax Muckley.] [From a Photo by W. & D. Downey.
HER MAJESTY’S GARDEN PARTY: THE SECRETARY FOR THE COLONIES AND THE CANADIAN PREMIER.
The Naval Review had been an exhibition of our first line of defence, and though there was nothing in the nature of boastfulness or arrogance about it, it was such a demonstration as could have been made by no other Power—perhaps, by no two Foreign Powers in combination. |Review at Aldershot.| The Military Review at Aldershot on July 1 was, of course, a much more modest affair, but the quality of the troops employed imparted a distinction to the function which went far to compensate for their smallness in numbers. Judged by Continental standards our Army is insignificant in size, but it must always command respect. Its traditions are splendid, and its recent achievements completely satisfactory. Some of the foreign Princes who were234 present with the Queen at Aldershot on July 1 had seen ten times as many soldiers in review, but it is safe to say that not one of them had ever seen a finer body, man for man, than the 28,000 British troops gathered together on Laffan’s Plain. The presence among these of detachments from so many British Colonies added a significance to the proceedings that could not have been paralleled at a Military Review anywhere else in the World.
About a quarter-past four o’clock the Queen drove up in a carriage. The troops were arranged in the shape of three sides of a great rectangle, Her Majesty occupying the centre of the vacant side. A Royal Salute was given, and then commenced the march past. The honour of marching in the van had been assigned very properly to the Colonial troops, consisting of 434 cavalry, 184 artillery and engineers, and 423 infantry.
HER MAJESTY PLANTING A TREE IN THE GROUNDS OF BUCKINGHAM PALACE AS A MEMORIAL OF THE JUBILEE, June 28, 1897.
HER MAJESTY’S WATERMEN.
The troops which followed represented almost every branch of the regular army and made a splendid show. But here, as in the Jubilee Procession itself, the Colonial contingent attracted the greatest share of attention. To see gallant horsemen and steady marching infantry in picturesque unfamiliar uniforms from every Continent all following the same flag and serving the same Queen was to receive a new and inspiring impression of the Empire. The red spaces on the map of the earth’s surface we had known from childhood’s day to represent portions of our own Empire—but the impression was a vague one until we saw Canadian, Australian, and South African, actually under arms in defence of their and our Queen, as much as of their own distant homes. It was then brought home to us, with startling effect, how great is the birthright of every Briton, how great the privileges attaching to such citizenship—and how great the responsibilities. These men came to us, not in gratitude for any priceless advantages we have bestowed upon them—for we have done nothing of the kind—but simply because their blood is the same as ours, their traditions the same, and their sympathies. We are still well able to take care of ourselves; but who shall say that the Old Country may not one day need the strong, right arms of her children across the seas?
235 That our Colonial troops are not merely ornamental soldiers their shooting at Bisley, at the meeting which ended on July 10, amply proved, if their splendid horsemanship and marching had not proved it before. Though for the most part entirely unused to the new Lee-Metford rifle, they secured the Kolapore Cup, and, in a year which produced record scores, held their own against the picked marksmen of our Regulars and Volunteer Army.
The Review was brought to an end with the defiling past of the infantry. A splendid effect was produced when the infantry gave the Royal salute, and then burst with one accord into shouts of cheering—bonnets and busbies being thrown up into the air or waved frantically on bayonet points. The Queen returned to Windsor the same evening, and the Jubilee celebrations proper were over.
THE ALDERSHOT REVIEW: MARCH PAST OF THE COLONIAL TROOPS.
On Saturday, July 10, a dinner was given at the St. George’s Club, Hanover Square, in honour of the Colonial Premiers, five of whom were present. A distinguished company assembled; but the occasion would not have merited mention in a history of the Queen’s reign, had it not been for a speech made by the Right Hon. G. J. Goschen, First Lord of the Admiralty. |Gift of a Battleship.| In language, the very simplicity of which riveted attention from the first—coming as it did from the most eloquent member of Lord Salisbury’s Cabinet—Mr. Goschen announced that he had that day received a battleship from Sir J. Gordon Sprigg, representing the Government of Cape Colony! His actual words were:—
“To-day I have had an interesting scene, a simple scene, but one which will come home to all of you. I received the present of an ironclad at the hands of a British Colony. (Loud cheers.) There was no ceremonial, there was no great reception, there was no blare of trumpets; but Sir Gordon Sprigg simply came to the First Lord of the Admiralty and told him that the Cape Colony was prepared to place an ironclad of the first-class at the disposal of the Empire. (Cheers.) I thank him on behalf of the English nation, I thank him on behalf of the Government, and I thank him also on behalf of the Empire at large, of which the Cape Colony is so distinguished a part. That offer of a first-class battleship is accompanied by no conditions; but it is proposed that that ship shall take its place side by side with those sister ships, paid for by the British taxpayer, which many of you have seen at Spithead. (Hear, hear.) No conditions attach to it; it is a free gift intended to add to the power of the British Empire.” (Cheers.)
236 This statement evoked expressions of great enthusiasm from the gentlemen who dined at the St. George’s Club that night; the next morning it thrilled the entire nation. The zenith of the Jubilee celebrations of 1897 was reached; a self-governing Colony had come forward and presented to the Crown the most magnificent gift of which history has any record! Jewels and gold and the richest products of Oriental looms have been showered on our Empress-Queen until her palaces have become museums of priceless offerings; but that of the Government and people of Cape Colony outvalued these as much as they outvalue the treasures of ordinary men. Not so much the gift itself, however, but the spirit of the givers touched the heart of the British people. Not in their most visionary dreams had Imperialists contemplated such a consummation as this. Sentiment, so often and so thoughtlessly derided, had triumphed over the cold calculations of the “practical” politician, and the foundation-stone of a united Anglo-Saxon Empire had been laid.
A. Prince of Wales. B. Duke of Coburg. C. Duke of Connaught. D. Princess of Wales. E. Duke of Cambridge.
PRESENTATION OF JUBILEE MEDALS BY H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES TO THE COLONIAL TROOPS IN THE GROUNDS OF BUCKINGHAM PALACE, July 3; THE NEW SOUTH WALES LANCERS FILING PAST THE ROYAL PARTY.
There are a few other features of the Jubilee celebrations which demand notice before this narrative is brought to a close. Chief among these is the Prince of Wales’s scheme for establishing the London hospitals on a firm financial basis—the greatest charitable project in a year made memorable by many such undertakings. So far back as February 6, when a thousand Jubilee plans were being discussed, a statement of the Prince’s own wishes in the matter had appeared in the newspapers. |The Prince of Wales’s Hospital Fund.| His Royal Highness began by saying that the Queen herself had no wish to express an opinion as to the form any celebrations might take. In the absence of any declaration on the part of Her Majesty, His Royal Highness felt at liberty to lay before the inhabitants of London a scheme very dear to his heart. Briefly explained, they were that such a sum of money should be secured, in the form preferably of annual donations, as should suffice to free the London hospitals of debt for ever. An additional annual income of from £100,000 to £150,000 was necessary.
DEFENDERS OF THE EMPIRE.
The following forces are represented by the above group: Borneo Dyak Police, Sierra Leone Force, Victoria Mounted Rifles, Hausas (Sergeant of).
THE RIGHT HON. SIR JOHN FORREST,
Premier of West Australia.
Born near Bunbury, W.A., 1847, educated at Perth, entered Survey Department 1865, and has commanded several expeditions into the interior besides surveying much of the Colony. Commissioner of Crown Lands, Surveyor-General and Member of Executive and Legislative Councils 1883–1890, Premier and Treasurer of the first Ministry under responsible government 1890.
THE RIGHT HON. SIR EDWARD BRADDON,
Premier of Tasmania,
Is a Cornishman. Born in 1829, and educated at University College. In his eighteenth year he went to Calcutta and made himself famous as a tiger-hunter. In the Mutiny he served with a regiment he had himself raised, and was mentioned in despatches. He held many offices in India, and in 1878 retired on a pension and went to Tasmania, where, twelve months later, he entered the Colonial House of Assembly. He was Leader of the Opposition in 1886–87, and Minister of Lands, Works, and Education, 1887–88. He was for six years Agent-General for Tasmania, and in 1894 became Premier of that Colony. Miss M. E. Braddon, the novelist, is his sister.
At the time of sending these pages to press, it is not known how far His Royal Highness’s wishes have been realised; but it is stated that a sufficient amount has been collected to relieve the hospitals237 permanently of some of their more pressing needs. A device, characteristic of the age, was resorted to to swell the proceeds of the fund. Two Hospital Stamps were issued under authority, and sold at 2s. 6d. and 1s. each, the more expensive one being of a red colour and the less expensive blue. An artistic group representing Charity, after Sir Joshua Reynolds, occupies the centre of each stamp. The legend “1837: The Queen’s Commemoration, 1897” runs along the top, and at the bottom appear the words, “Prince of Wales’s Hospital Fund, Albert Edward, Prince,” the signature being a facsimile of His Royal Highness’s handwriting. The sale of these must have been prodigious, but until the Hospital Fund’s accounts are made up it will be impossible to judge how far philatelists all over the world availed themselves of the opportunity to add these unique specimens to their collections. The dies from which the Hospital Stamps were printed were subsequently destroyed in the presence of the Duke of York at the Bank of England. Another happy idea was the publication of an official programme, authorised by the Prince of Wales, of the Jubilee Procession. The programme, which was sold at a shilling a copy, was admirably illustrated. The entire profits were devoted to the Hospital Fund.
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN THE DRESS WORN BY HER IN THE DIAMOND JUBILEE PROCESSION.
The commemoration medals struck to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee were eagerly bought up by all classes of Her Majesty’s subjects. They were, perhaps, the most artistic things ever issued from the Royal Mint, though the small size of some of them interfered sadly with the effect of the design. |The Jubilee Medals.| The prices were as follows:—Large gold, £13; small gold, £2; large silver, 10s.; small silver, 1s.; and large bronze, 4s. It was a happy idea to give on the reverse of the medals the Queen’s head, by W. Wyon, as it appeared on the coinage for 1837 to 1887. The choice of the motto—“Longitudo dierum in dextera ejus et in sinistra gloria”—could not have been bettered if the whole of literature had been searched through. The head, by Brock, on the obverse, first used in 1892, is undoubtedly the most satisfactory likeness of the Queen that has appeared on the coinage. In the gold medals the metal was unpolished, and the large silver ones were covered with a thin coating of platinum, the burnished appearance of newly-stamped coinage being thus avoided, much to the advantage of the design. In both cases the metal was of the purest quality, and it is interesting to note that there was actually £12 15s. worth of gold in the £13 medal.
Innumerable publications relating to the Jubilee were issued from the Press. The Illustrated London News’ special number was a triumph of colour-printing; the “Golden Number” of the London Daily Mail was, as its name indicates, printed entirely in gold, and found a ready sale at 6d. a copy.
From a Photograph] [by H. N. King.
THE WHITE DRAWING ROOM, BUCKINGHAM PALACE.
THE RIGHT HON. H. ESCOMBE, Q.C.,
Premier of Natal.
Born in London in 1838 and educated at St. Paul’s School. He went to Natal in 1859, and entered the Colonial Parliament in 1872; nominated to Executive Council, 1880. Attorney-General, 1893. Prime Minister, Attorney-General, and Minister of Education, 1897.
A. BLACK, V.C.
Sergeant W. J. Gordon, 1st West India Regiment, obtained the Victoria Cross for interposing his body and receiving a bullet intended for his superior officer.
Reviewing the Jubilee celebrations as a whole it is impossible not to be struck by the leading characteristic of them all—their complete success. The Sovereign Lady in whose honour everything was done, was delighted with all; her subjects throughout the Empire enjoyed themselves hugely; not a single accident dimmed the happiness of Jubilee Day in London; the Procession was the most splendid ever witnessed; the Review at Spithead transcended in magnificence anything of the kind recorded in the annals of our navy; and the Review at Aldershot was a triumph for our brave little army. Almost as remarkable was the exaltation of national sentiment manifested at this time. It seemed as if we had suddenly discovered that we belonged to a very great Empire, and were overjoyed at the thought of it. When we saw the Colonial Premiers and the Colonial soldiers, we realized for the first time that we were co-heirs with them to a hundred Empires, and our imaginations were kindled. Our political views widened out to the furthest horizon and we were Conservatives and Liberals no longer, but Imperialists. We wanted but a sign from the Colonies themselves to declare ourselves Imperialists for ever, and we received a hundred signs. The offer of a battleship from the Cape Colony was the greatest of these signs, but it was only one of many. The Colonial Prime Ministers came to us bearing messages of affection from the239 great new Britains they represented, and in one or two instances their proposals shadowed forth measures of great advantage to us and to them. Canada, in particular, offered a considerable reduction of the tariff in return for the reception of Canadian goods on terms which have hitherto been rendered impossible by the existence of commercial treaties between this country and Germany and Belgium. She asked, in fact, for liberty to trade with this country on terms specially advantageous to both ourselves and Canada; and in promptly giving notice to terminate the treaties referred to, Lord Salisbury’s Government accorded to Canada the honour of taking the first practical step towards solving the fiscal difficulties which stand in the way of Imperial federation. The exhortation of the great bard who represents so strongly the spirit of the Victorian age seemed now for the first time to have come right home to the heart of the nation:
It is well that this first great reunion of the Anglo-Saxon race should have taken place on the occasion of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Commemoration. Let us hope that she may live to see another and even greater Jubilee, another gathering together of the scattered members of her Empire!
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.
(Transcriber’s note: 56mm. in printed book.)
APPOINTED TO BE USED IN ALL CHURCHES AND CHAPELS
ON SUNDAY JUNE 20, 1897.
(Facsimile of the Original MS.)
The Portraits of Author and Composer are from Photographs by Window and Grove, London, and Kilpatrick, Belfast.
INDEX
The asterisk (*) indicates an illustration or a footnote to an illustration.
Aberdeen, Lord, *39, 74, *78, 79.
Abyssinia, War with, 133.
Adelaide, *128.
Adelaide, Queen, *30.
Aden, *20.
Adullam, Cave of, 128.
Afghanistan, affairs of, 31, *98, 147, 154–6, 167.
Africa, British, 71, *133, *134, 156.
Agra, Taj Mahal, *105;
mutiny at, *98.
Akbar Khan, 32.
Alabama Claims, 120.
Albany, Duke of. See Leopold, Prince.
Albert, Prince, portraits of, *26, *37, *40, *49, *61, *79, *107, *120;
betrothal, 26;
character, 26, 120;
landing of, *27;
marriage, *28;
grant to, 27;
prejudice against, 27;
opposition to duelling, 27;
his industry, 55;
projects the Great Exhibition, 55, *60;
on Russo-Turkish War, 76;
efforts for national defence, 78;
official title, 95;
at Aldershot, *116;
in the Highlands, *117;
death, 119;
memorial, *121.
Albert Memorial, *121;
Hall, *121;
Chapel, *178.
Alexandria, bombardment of, 159.
Alfred, Prince, *49, *107, *175;
marriage, *142.
Alice, Princess, *49, *107, *124;
marriage, *122.
Aliwal, Battle of, 44.
Allegiance, Act of, 6.
America. See Canada, United States.
Anæsthetics, introduction of, 54.
Anti-Corn Law League, 35.
Architecture, Victorian, 188.
Army, purchase, 136;
uniforms of, *76, *77.
Arnold, Dr., *92.
Arthur, Prince, portraits, *107, *124, *175;
presentation to, by his god-father, *59;
marriage, *151;
at Tel-el-Kebir, *160.
Ashley, Lord. See Shaftesbury, Earl of.
Atrocities, Turkish, in Bulgaria, 144;
in Armenia, 180, *182.
Auckland, Lord, *32.
Australia, 70, *119, *125, *126, *128.
Awkward Situation, an, *39.
Balaklava, Battle of, 83, *84, *85.
Balfour, Rt. Hon. A. J., 157.
Ballot Bill, the, 17, 137;
effect of, 140.
Bank Charter Act, suspension of, 108, 130.
Barings, failure of, 177.
Beaconsfield, Earl of. See Disraeli.
Beales, Mr., 129.
Beatrice, Princess (Princess Henry of Battenberg), *124, *139, *175;
marriage, *168.
Bedchamber Question, 22.
Belle Alliance, La, *10.
Benares, *102.
Bentinck, Lord G., *48.
Berlin Congress and Treaty, 146.
Bessemer, Sir H., *165.
Bicycle, early, *184.
Bogue Forts, bombardment of, 29.
Bombay, views in, *101.
Bottle-holder, the Judicious, *64, 65.
Bowl, silver gilt, used at christening of Prince of Wales, *36.
Bowring, Sir J., 92.
Boxer, H.M.S., *65.
Boycotting, 157.
Bread, scarcity of, 19.
Bright, John, *35, 110, *112;
included in Cabinet, 134.
Brisbane, *126.
Britannia Bridge, *170.
Britannia, H.M.S., *64.
Britannia Yacht, *184.
Brougham, Lord, *17;
attacks Melbourne’s Government, *14;
motion on the Corn Duties, 21.
Browning, Robert, *111.
Buckingham Palace, *63;
State Dining-Room, *182.
Burnes, Capt., at Cabul, 31.
Butt, Mr., 154.
Cabul, *32;
Burnes at, 31;
retreat from, 33;
massacre at, 147;
evacuation of, 154–6.
Calcutta, Government House, *100.
Caledonia Steamship, *21.
viii
Cambridge, Duke of, *36, *107;
Duchess of, *36, *107.
Canada, Constitution of, 14;
rebellion in, 15;
attempted invasions of, 15, 132;
growth of, 72;
views in, and statistics, *114, *115, *116.
Candahar, march to, *155;
victory at, *156.
Canning, Viscount, *99.
Cardwell, Rt. Hon. E., *112, 136.
Carlyle, Thomas, *58.
Cartridges, greased, in the Indian Mutiny, 97.
Cavendish, Lord Frederick, 161, 162, 173.
Cawnpore, mutiny at, 101–103;
views in, *102.
Ceylon, *109.
Chalmers, Dr. Thos., *42.
Channel Tunnel, 185.
Charge of the Heavy Brigade, *84;
of the Light Brigade, *85.
Charter, the people’s, 20.
Chelmsford, Lord, 149.
Chilianwalla, Battle of, *46.
China, Wars with, 28, *29, *92, 113–116.
Chinese Jugglers, *29.
Chloroform, introduction of, 54.
Church of England, religious movements in, 41.
Church of Scotland, secession from, 42.
Churchill, Lord Randolph, 157, 168, 171.
Chusan, capture of, 29.
Civis Romanus Sum, 54.
Clarence, Duke of, *175;
death of, 177, *178.
Clyde, Lord (Sir Colin Campbell), *103, 104, 105.
Coach, State, *14.
Coaches, Mail, 24.
Coalition Government, 87.
Coats’s, J. and P., carding room, *152.
Cobden, Richard, *35, *36, 94, *112.
Coins, *169.
Colonial Troops, *130.
Colonies, the, expansion of, 70;
views in. See Canada, Australia, &c.
Commerce, British, growth of, *38, *52.
Commons, House of, in Committee, *53;
new building, *66;
pictures of, *112, *179.
Connaught, Duke of. See Arthur, Prince.
Conservatives, origin of name, 12.
Conyngham, Marquis of, *18.
Coomassie, *141.
Cordite, manufacture of, *95.
Cormack, Widow, her cabbage garden, 49.
Corrupt Practices Act, 164.
Cotton Imports, *152.
Council, the Queen’s first, *5.
County Councils Bill, 177.
Crete, insurrection in, 182.
Critics, *139.
Cruisers, armed, *62.
Crystal Palace, the, 56.
Cunard fleet, *39.
Cyclist corps, *97.
Cyprus occupied, 146.
Czar of Russia (Nicholas I.), 73–76, 87;
(Nicholas II.), *181, *191;
marriage of, *190.
Dalhousie, Lord, his policy, 96, 98, 99, 101.
Dardanelles, fleet ordered to, 145.
Darwin, Charles, *143.
Delhi, mutiny at, 99;
siege of, 103;
Cashmere gate of, *103.
Denison, Speaker, 19.
Denmark, popular feeling regarding, 122, 125;
War with Prussia and Austria, 124.
Derby, 14th Earl, *68;
forms a Ministry, 67;
second Administration, 109;
Reform Bill, 110, 130;
last Administration, 128;
“leap in the dark,” 130;
retires, 134;
death, 135.
Derby, 15th Earl, secedes from Beaconsfield’s Cabinet, 145;
joins Liberal Party, 146.
Devonshire, Duke of, 180. See also Hartington, Marquis of.
Dickens, Charles, *46.
Disraeli, Benjamin, portraits, *48, *68, *112, *139, *146;
statue, *158;
maiden speech of, 13;
speaks on Corn Laws, 39;
Chancellor of Exchequer, 67, 69;
on the Chinese War, 94;
on Conspiracy to Murder Bill, 109;
on Palmerston’s Domestic Policy, 109;
Reform Bill, 110, 130;
educates his party, 131;
attacks Gladstone’s Government, 139;
declines office, 139;
third Administration, 141;
purchases Suez Canal shares, 143;
refuses to coerce Turkey, 144;
accepts the Earldom of Beaconsfield, 145;
at Berlin Congress, 146;
appeals to the country, 152;
death of, 158.
Diving Helmet, *47.
Dost Mohamed Khan, 31.
Dublin, *148.
Durban, *134.
Durham, Earl of, 16.
Dynamite Conspiracy, 163.
Dynamos, *188.
Ecclesiastical Titles Bill, 58.
Edinburgh, *148;
Duke of. See Alfred, Prince.
Education, National, 136, 188;
free, 177.
Egypt, proposed annexation of, 74;
condition of, 150, 160;
Arabi’s revolt, 158;
British occupation, 160;
War medals, *162;
annihilation of Col. Hicks’ army, 164.
Elections, General, 13.
Electric Telegraph, 9.
Elephants of the Viceroy, *100.
Ellenborough, Lord, *17, *33, 34.
Emerald Lake, Canada, *115.
Empire, the British, map of, *71.
Employers’ Liability Bill, 178.
Engines, locomotive, *9;
marine, *164.
ix
Exhibition, the Great, *55, *60, 62.
Exports from United Kingdom, 52.
Faraday, Michael, *188.
Ferozeshah, Battle of, 44.
“Floreat Etona,” 157.
Forster, Rt. Hon. W. E., 136, 158, 163.
Forth Bridge, *170.
Fourth Party, the, 157.
France, revolutions in, 51, 66;
threatened rupture with, 53, 66, 111.
Franchise. See Reform Bill.
Franco-German War, 138.
Franklin, Sir John, *46.
Free Trade, 35.
Geneva Arbitration Award, 121.
Germany, unfriendly action of, 183.
Gladstone, Rt. Hon. W. E., portrait, *139;
speech on Canadian Constitutions Bills, 16;
enters Peel’s Cabinet, 39;
on Maynooth Grants, 40;
attacks Disraeli’s Budget, 69;
War Budget, 79;
sympathy with Italy, 110;
on Paper Duty, 111;
unseated for Oxford, 125;
“unmuzzled,” 126;
Leader of House, 127;
Franchise Bill, 127;
first Administration, 134–139;
defeat, 139;
resumes office, 139;
appeals to country, 140;
retires, 141;
first Midlothian campaign, 152;
second ditto, 153;
second Administration, 153;
defeat, 168;
third Midlothian campaign, 169;
third Administration, 169;
accepts Home Rule, 169, 170;
appoints Parnell Commission, 174;
fourth Midlothian campaign, 177;
second Home Rule Bill, 178, *179, 190;
retirement, 179;
on Armenia, 181, 182.
Goojerat, Battle of, 46.
Gordon, General, 164.
Gough, Sir Hugh (Lord), *45;
in China, 29;
in India, 45.
Goulbourne, Mr., *48.
Grant, Sir Hope, *104, 105, 114.
Great Eastern Steamship, *38, 130.
Greece, difficulty with, 53;
War with Turkey, 182.
Greville, Chas., 5, *7;
quotations from, 4, 8, 17, 21, 25, 54.
Grey, Sir George, *112.
Guns, heavy, *74, *75, *78;
machine, *95.
Hanover, King of, 4, *5, 6;
severance of Crown of from that of Great Britain, 6.
Harcourt, Sir W., Home Secretary, 163;
Leader of House, 179;
defeat at Derby, 180.
Hartington, Marquis of, 110, 153. See also Devonshire, Duke of.
Havelock, Sir Henry, 102, 103, *104, *105.
Haynau, General, mobbed, 68.
Head, Sir F., 16.
Helena, Princess, *49, *107, *124, *127;
marriage, *129.
Henry, Prince, of Battenberg, marriage, *168;
death, *178.
Herschel, Sir John F. W., *91.
Hill, Sir Rowland, *23.
Hobart Town, *131.
Holy Land, Turkish position in, 75.
Home Rule movement, 153, 169, 177, 178.
Hongkong, *113.
Hyde Park, riot in, 129.
Hyderabad, attack on, 44.
Imperial Institute, 173, *174.
Imports of United Kingdom, 52.
India, affairs of, 43;
expansion of British dominion in, 71;
Mutiny, 95–106;
government passes to Crown, 106;
population, *100, 144;
views in, *100-*103;
Queen proclaimed Empress, 144, *145.
Indian Cavalry, Types of, *99.
Influenza, 177.
Inkermann, Battle of, 85, *86.
Ireland, Famine in, 36, 47, 131;
Queen’s visit to, 52;
discontent in, 131;
crime in, 158, 162.
See also under Home Rule.
Irish Church, disestablishment of, 134, 135.
Irish Land League, 157.
Irish Land Legislation, 135, 158.
Irish Members, imprisonment of, 161.
Irish Party, split in, 176.
Irish University Bill, 139.
Ironclads. See Navy.
Irving, Sir Henry, *146.
Isandhlana, 149.
Jellalabad, Brydon’s arrival at, *33.
“Jingo,” origin of the term, 146.
Jowett, Benjamin, *152.
Jubilee procession, *172;
service, *173.
Junks, engagements with, *29, *92.
Jupiter, H.M.S., *64.
Justice, Royal Courts of, *147.
Kandy Lake, Ceylon, *109.
Kassassin, Battle of, *159.
Keble, Rev. J., *42.
Kent, Duchess of, *4, 12, *30, *37, *107, *118;
Duke of, 4, 6, *118.
Khartoum, siege of, 164;
expedition to relieve, *166.
Kimberley diamond mine, *134.
Knollys, General, *116.
Kooshab, Battle of, *98.
Landseer, Sir E., *135.
Lantern, Dioptric, *51.
Launceston, Tasmania, *131.
Launch of a Liner, *165.
Leighton, Lord, *176.
Leopold, Prince, Duke of Albany, *107;
marriage, *163, *175.
x
Lewis, Sir G. Cornewall, *112.
Liberals, first mention of, 31.
Lightship, the Spurn, *50.
Lincoln, Abraham, 117, 118, 119.
Lincoln, Lord, *48.
Lister, Sir J., *191.
Literature, Victorian, 189.
Livingstone, David, *135.
Locomotion, modern, 8, 184, *185.
Lords, the House of, disagreement with Commons on Paper Duty, 112;
on Home Rule, 178.
Lorne, Marquis of, *138;
Marchioness. See Louise, Princess.
Louis Philippe visits Windsor, *41;
abdication, 51.
Louise, Princess, Marchioness of Lorne, *107, *127, *138, *175.
Lowe, Robert, Viscount Sherbrooke, 128.
Lucknow, relief of, *104;
ruins of Residency, *105.
Lytton, Sir Edward Bulwer, *112.
Macaulay, Lord, *109;
on his own writings, 25.
Macnaghten, Sir W., 32.
Magdala, capture of, 134.
Maiwand, action at, *154, 155.
Majuba Hill, 157.
Malabar frigate, wreck of, 114.
Manchester Ship Canal, *171;
Town Hall, *189.
Mansfield, Earl of, 17.
Marines, Royal, uniforms of, *81.
Mary, Princess of Cambridge, *107.
Maud of Wales, Princess, marriage of, *182.
May, First of, *59.
May of Teck, Princess, *175, 177, *181.
Meeanee, Battle of, 44.
Meerut, rising at, 97.
Melbourne, Lord, 4, *5, 12, *18;
character of, 18;
attacked by Brougham, 22;
fall of his Ministry, 31.
Melbourne, views in, *125.
Menschikoff, Prince, 75.
Millais, Sir J. Everett, *176.
Monarch, telegraph ship, *31.
Monroe Doctrine, the, 183.
Montgomery, Mr. Robert, action at Meean Meer, 100.
Montreal, *114.
Moodkee, Battle of, 44.
Mooltan, siege of, 46.
Motor Carriages, 185.
Nana Sahib, 101–103.
Nankin, Treaty of, 29.
Napier, Sir Charles, *43, 77, 82.
Napier, Lord, of Magdala, *133.
Napoleon, Louis, coup d’état, 63;
visit to England, *88;
plot against, 108;
seeks British aid for deliverance of Italy, 110.
Napoleon, Prince, death of, 149.
Natal, *134.
Natural History Museum, *143.
Naval Actions, *29, *92, *113.
Navy Island seized by Americans, 16.
Newman, John Henry, Cardinal, *41.
Newport, riot at, 20.
New South Wales, views in, and statistics of, *119.
New Zealand, 70;
views in, and statistics of, *132.
Nightingale, Miss Florence, 86, *87.
Northcote, Sir Stafford, 157, 168.
“North Star” railway engine, *9.Oath on Accession, 4, 7;
at Coronation, *8.
O’Connell, Daniel, 12, *20, *36.
Operating Room at Central Telegraph Office, *31.
Opium War, 28.
Orsini Plot, 108.
Ottawa, Houses of Parliament, *114.
Overend and Gurney, failure of, 130.
Owen, Sir Richard, *143.
Pacifico, the Jew of Athens, 53.
Palmerston, Lord, *5, *39, *112;
on action of Chinese Government, 28;
rises to fame, 53, 54;
indiscretions, 63, 64, 65;
resignation of, 65, 77;
again Prime Minister, 87;
defeat of, on Chinese War, 94;
returns to office, 95;
defeat, 108;
second Administration, 110;
action respecting Schleswig-Holstein, 125;
why supported, 125;
death, 126;
character of, 126.
Papal Titles, 57.
Paper, the duty on, 111.
Parish Councils Bill, 178.
Parliament, Houses of, *66.
Parnell, Charles S., 153, 155, 157, *158, 169;
imprisoned, 161;
fall of, 176;
death, 176.
Party Government, evils arising from, 17.
Pas-de-deux, Beaconsfield and Salisbury, *146.
Peel, Sir Robert, *5, *12, *48;
resigns on the Bedchamber Question, 22;
on grant to Prince Albert, 27;
forms a Cabinet, 31;
accepts Free Trade, 35, *36;
resumes office, 39;
defeat of, 40;
last speech of, 54;
death, 54.
Peel, Capt. Sir W., *104.
Pei-ho Forts, attack on, *113.
Pekin, capitulation of, 115.
P. and O. Steamers, *21.
Perth, West Australia, *128.
Petition, monster, 51.
Phœnix Park murders, 161, 173.
Phonograph, the, 186.
Police, origin of the nickname “Peelers,” 10.
Poll Tarff, fording the, *117.
Poor Law, detestation of, 19.
Post, the Penny, 23.
Post Office, 9, *23, *24, *25, *26, *31, *190.
Postal Vans, *22.
Potato Famine in Ireland, 36, 47.
Press, the, 190.
Primrose Day, *158.
Prince Consort. See Albert, Prince.
Princess Royal, portraits of, *40, *49, *106, *124, *175;
christening of, *30;
marriage, 106, *107.
Probyn, Capt. Dighton, *98.
Proclamation of Queen as Empress of India, 144, *145.
Prussia, King of, *37;
Queen of, *107;
Crown Prince of, 106, *107.
Pusey, Dr. E. B., *41.
Quebec, *114.
Queen, Her Majesty the. See Victoria, Queen.
Queen’s name, story of the, 7;
speech, 7.
Queensland, views in, and statistics of, *126.
Railway Carriage, the Queen’s, *16.
Railways, early, 8, *9, *15, *16, *22.
Ramnuggur, Battle of, 45.
Reform Bills, 12, 129, 167;
League, 129.
Regalia, the, *106.
Remnant of an army, *33.
Rice, Rt. Hon. Spring, 24.
Rifles, examples of, *96;
manufacture, *94.
Roberts, General Lord, 147, 154, *155, 156.
“Rocket,” the, *9.
Röntgen Rays, *192.
Rorke’s Drift, *149.
Rosebery, Lord, premiership of, 179;
resigns office, 180;
resigns leadership of party, 182.
Round Table Conference, 171.
Royal Family, portraits of, *49, *175.
Royal Sovereign, H.M.S., *69.
Runjeet Singh, 31.
Russell, Lord John, *5, *12, 14, *112;
moves grant to Prince Albert, 27;
proposes fixed Duty on Corn, 36;
attempts to form a Ministry, 39;
action respecting Papal Titles, 58;
defeat of, 59;
resumes office, 60;
defeated on Militia Bill, 67;
on Conspiracy to Murder Bill, 109;
on Disraeli’s Reform Bill, 110;
action respecting Schleswig-Holstein, 125;
raised to peerage, *127;
becomes Premier, 127.
Russell, Sir W. H., *83.
Russia, political action of Czar, 73, 74, *75, 76;
invasion of Turkey, 75;
death of Nicholas I., 87;
repudiates Treaty of Berlin, 138;
invades Turkey, 145;
anticipated War with, 167.
Sacrament, Queen receiving, *10.
Sale, General, 34.
Salisbury, Lord, portrait, *146;
in Disraeli’s third Administration, 141;
at Berlin Congress, 146;
on Redistribution Bill, 167;
first Administration, 168;
second, 177;
third, 180.
Saloon, the Queen’s, *16.
Sanitation, 192.
Schleswig-Holstein, War in, 124.
Science, advances in, 190–192.
Seamen, landing party of, *72.
Sebastopol, siege of, 80, 81, *83, 86, 88, 89.
Self-Denying Policy, *159.
Shaftesbury, Earl of, *40.
Shah Soojah-ool-Moolk, 31, 34.
Shears for cutting steel, *165.
Sick Man of Europe, the, 73.
Signal Cabins, *13.
Sikh Wars, 43, 45;
Sikh loyalty, 98.
Smallpox, decline of, 191.
Smith, Mr. W. H., 134, 171;
death, 176.
South Australia, statistics of, *128.
Southey, Robert, *111.
Spencer, Herbert, *161.
State Coach, the, *14.
Steam-hammer, *70.
Steamships, *21, *31, *38, *39, *62, *165, 185. See also Navy.
Stephens, James, 131.
Stephenson, George, *185.
Stewart, General, 147.
Suez Canal Shares, purchase of, 143.
Summer Palace, destruction of, 116.
Surgery, Antiseptic, 191.
Sussex, Duke of, 4, *5, *30, *37.
Sydney, views in, *119.
Tait, Archbishop, *152.
Tasmania, 70;
views in, and statistics of, *131.
Tchernaya, Battle of, 89.
Telegraph Instruments, early, *15.
Telegraph Office, Central, *31.
Telephone, the, 186.
Telescope, Lord Rosse’s, *91.
Tel-el-Kebir, Battle of, 159, *160, *161.
Temple Bar, *147.
Tennyson, Lord, *111.
Terrible, H.M.S., *65.
Teutonic Steamship, *62.
Thackeray, *109;
May-day Ode, 60, 62.
Thames, the, *147.
Thanksgiving Service for recovery of Prince of Wales, *140;
for Jubilee of Her Majesty, 172, *173.
Three generations afloat, *184.
Throne Room, Windsor, *19.
xii
Tien-tsin, Treaty of, *113, 114;
occupation of, 115.
Too Late! *166.
Toronto, *115.
Torpedo boats, *65;
stores, *72.
Tower Bridge, *171.
Tracts for the Times, 42.
Trade Unions, 20.
Trafalgar Square, meetings in, 129.
Transportation Act repealed, 71.
Transvaal, the, War with, 156;
Dr. Jameson invades, 182, *183.
Treason Felony Act, 49.
Trent Affair, the, 118.
Trooping the Colours, *97.
Truro Cathedral, *189.
Tunnel, Channel, 185;
Southwark, *186;
Blackwall, *186.
Turkey, proposed division of, 71;
custody of Holy Places, 75;
invasion by Russia, 75, 145;
destruction of fleet, 76;
atrocities in Bulgaria, 144;
in Armenia, 180;
War with Greece, 182.
United States, friendly action of, 16, 132;
Civil War in, 117, 118;
threatened rupture with, 120, 121, 183.
Vancouver Harbour, *115.
Venezuela, dispute as to Boundary of, 183.
Victoria, Princess, 3, *4, *6, *7.
Victoria, Queen, portraits of, *2, *4, *6, *7, *8, *19, *27, *34, *49, *52, *59, *80, *93, *107, *120, *124, *127, *139, *175, *177, *180, *191, *192;
Accession, 3, 7, *8;
first Council, 4;
youth of, 5;
her name, 7;
prorogues Parliament (1837), 7;
impressions as to her character, 8;
Coronation, 10;
confidence in Lord Melbourne, 18;
sends for Duke of Wellington, 21;
Bedchamber Question, 22;
attends review at Windsor, *25;
betrothal, 26;
opens Parliament (1840), 27;
marriage, *28;
fired at, 28, 52;
receives Louis Philippe, *41;
growing popularity, 52;
visits Ireland, 52;
on Papal Titles, 58;
on opening of Great Exhibition, 62;
on Napoleon’s coup d’état, 63;
invests Napoleon with Garter, *88;
distributes medals, *89;
visits France, *90, *91;
at Aldershot, *116;
in the Highlands, *117;
on Prince Consort’s last writings, 120;
at Osborne, *127;
proclaimed Empress of India, 144, *145;
Jubilee, 172, *173;
opens Imperial Institute, *173;
influence of character, 189, 192.
Victoria, H.M.S., *65.
Victoria Cross pictures, *82, *87, *89, *98.
Victoria, Australia, views in, and statistics of, *125.
Vienna, Conferences of Ambassadors at, 75.
Villiers, Rt. Hon. C. P., *17, 21, 35, *112.
Volunteer movement, 111;
uniforms, *110.
Wales, Prince of, portraits, *48, *79, *107, *124, *144, *175, *191;
christening of, *37;
marriage, 122, *123;
illness, recovery, and thanksgiving, *140;
visits India, 144;
organizes Jubilee Institute, 173;
hand of, *192.
Wales, Princess of, *124, *175;
marriage, 122, *123.
War correspondents, 82.
Warrior, H.M.S., *69.
War-ships. See Navy.
Waterloo Bridge, *147.
Wellington, Duke of, *5, *25;
at the Coronation, 10;
declines Premiership, 21;
moves amendment to address on Queen’s betrothal, 27;
as Cæsar’s Ghost, *36;
on Corn Laws, 38;
advises recall of Lord Russell, 59;
presents casket to Prince Arthur, *59;
death, 67;
funeral, *67, *68.
West Australia, statistics of, *128.
Who? Who? Ministry, 67.
William IV., death of, 3.
William Fawcett Steamship, *21.
Windsor Castle, *3;
Throne Room, *19.
Winnipeg City Hall, *116.
Wolseley, Sir Garnet, afterwards Viscount, portrait, *160;
in Ashanti, 140;
in South Africa, 149;
in Egypt, 160, *161, 165.
Wood, Sir Charles, *112.
Woolwich Arsenal, *70.
Wordsworth, William, *110.
York, Duke of, *175;
marriage of, *181.
York, Prince Edward of, *180.
Zulu War, 148.
***All the illustrations in this Work are copyright.
ERRATA.
The following corrections have been made in a portion of the issue of this Work.
pp. 62, 63, date of closing of Great Exhibition should be “October 11.”
p. 65, fifth line from bottom, date of fire at Houses of Parliament should be “1834.”
p. 71, last line, for “died out” read “almost died out”
p. 77, sixth line from bottom, for “oppressor” read “opposer”
p. 90, first line of note beneath upper illustration should read “first visit of an English Sovereign to Paris since Henry VI. was crowned there,” &c.
p. 119, title to first illustration should read “Sydney Harbour, from Palace Garden.”
FOOTNOTES
A Who had recently taken the place of the old watchmen, and were nicknamed Peelers after Sir Robert Peel.
B The Tory Party had by this time adopted the title of Conservatives, a term first applied to them by Wilson Croker in the Quarterly Review for January 1830, wherein he mentions his attachment to “what is called the Tory, but which might, with more propriety, be called the Conservative Party.” The Charter of Conservatism was never more clearly defined than by Sir Robert Peel, who, speaking at Merchant Taylors’ Hall in 1838, said: “My object for some years past has been to lay the foundations of a great party which, existing in the House of Commons, and deriving its strength from the popular will, should diminish the risk and deaden the shock of collisions between the two branches of the legislature.”
C During eight months of 1839 wheat was upwards of 70s. a quarter. Last year (1896) it was 24s.
D Daniel O’Connell’s parody referring to Colonel Sibthorp, who was Member for Lincoln, and two other Colonels in Parliament, is too witty to be forgotten:—
Colonel Sibthorp was distinguished, in days when shaven chins were all but universal, by an immense beard and moustache.
E This Act was repealed in 1871.
F There were at that time two offices in the Government, that of the Secretary of State for War, who was the Duke of Newcastle, and that of the Secretary at War, Mr. Sidney Herbert.
G Sir Henry Lawrence was brother of Sir John Lawrence, afterwards Lord Lawrence, Governor-General of India.
H Her Royal Highness’s full baptismal names are Alexandra Caroline Maria Charlotte Louisa Julia.
K Dress of black moiré silk with panels of pale grey silk, embroidered in silver; cape of black chiffon, with white lace insertion and silver embroidery. Black bonnet, ornamented with jet and silver, trimmed with white acacia and ostrich feathers, and diamond aigrette.
Transcriber’s Note
Simple typographical errors were corrected.
Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.
Some illustrations have been repositioned and some that originally overlapped each other are presented separately here. Missing corners were missing in the source.
Identifying names in some captions have been replaced by letter keys and corresponding explanations; when the original book used numeric keys, they have been retained.
Sidenotes appear approximately where they occurred in the source. Depending on the display device, they may be shown in boldface, slightly smaller than the main text, with a shaded background; and may appear at the left margin or mid-line.
Footnotes have been moved to the end of this eBook.
The Index only covers pages 1-192. In the original book, it appeared immediately after the Preface, but has been moved to the end of this eBook.
In the original book, the Errata section appeared immediately after the Index, and has been moved, with the Index, to the end of this eBook.
Index entry for “Press, the” refers to non-existent page 910. Changed here to ‘190’.
Table of Contents added by Transcriber.
Page 153, second illustration: plates numbered in original sequence.
Page 175: some numbers in the Key are unclear in the original.
Page 181: in illustration caption, “Victoria Melitia” should be “Victoria Melita,” as it is in the illustration caption on page 175.
Page 213: The number “6” in “about 600 Members” was printed poorly in the source.
Playable music on page 240:
The apparent scratched out notation in measures 2 and 14 have been ignored.
The Plagal Cadence (A-men chord) at the end of the piece has been transcribed as breves instead of semibreves for authenticity.