[Sidenote: Rebellion in Canada.]

By the Const.i.tution 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 a.s.sembly. 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, pushing 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. The Legislative Council, nominees of the Crown, naturally favoured the British section, thereby finding themselves at issue with the Representative a.s.sembly. Discontent had been smouldering for many years, and at last matters came to a crisis. The Representative a.s.sembly 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 Const.i.tution 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, a.s.sembled under a person named Van Rensselaer, and took possession of Navy 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 a.s.sistance 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 a.s.sembled 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 att.i.tude, British rule in Canada might have stood in very great jeopardy.

[Ill.u.s.tration: EARLY TELEGRAPH INSTRUMENT, FROM PADDINGTON STATION.

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-cla.s.s 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-cla.s.s 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.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: COOKE AND WHEATSTONE'S EARLIEST NEEDLE TELEGRAPH, REQUIRING FIVE WIRES (1837).]

[Ill.u.s.tration: _From an old Print_} {_at the South Kensington Museum._

TRAINS ON THE LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY, RUNNING AT THE TIME OF HER MAJESTY'S ACCESSION.

The upper figure represents a first-cla.s.s train, carrying Her Majesty's Mails, and the lower one a second-cla.s.s train with open carriages.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: OLD GREAT WESTERN Pa.s.sENGER CARRIAGE.]

The Imperial Parliament was summoned to meet on January 16, 1838, to consider the Canadian situation. A Bill was introduced suspending the Const.i.tution of Lower Canada, and empowering the Queen to appoint a Governor and Special Council, who should a.s.sume 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.

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE QUEEN'S SALOON CARRIAGE ON THE LONDON AND NORTH-WESTERN RAILWAY.

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.]

[Sidenote: The Earl of Durham.]

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. 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 unconst.i.tutional. Lord Durham had made many enemies in both 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.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Photo by_} {_Elliott & Fry._

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 pa.s.sing of the Ballot Act. He and Mr. Gladstone are the only survivors of those who sat in Queen Victoria's first Parliament.]

[Sidenote: Debate on Vote by Ballot.]

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. 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 enfranchis.e.m.e.nt.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _J. Doyle_ ("_H. B._")} {_Political Sketches_, 1838.

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.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Sir F. Grant, P.R.A._} {_From the Royal Collection._

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 Cla.s.ses--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.

[Sidenote: Lord Melbourne's services and character.]

Lord Melbourne's constant attendance at Court had compelled him to change his demeanour in a very remarkable degree. 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."

[Ill.u.s.tration: THE THRONE ROOM AT WINDSOR CASTLE.]

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 mult.i.tude 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 d.a.m.ned me, and d.a.m.ned the Bill, and d.a.m.ned the paupers." "Well, d.a.m.n 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.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Sir David Wilkie, R.A._} {_By permission of the Corporation of Glasgow._

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN 1839.]

[Sidenote: Prevailing discontent of the Working Cla.s.ses.]

[Sidenote: Its causes.]

There was a great deal of brooding discontent in the country at the opening of Queen Victoria's reign, which soon pa.s.sed into a phase calling for active measures of repression. Some have recognised in the Chartist movement the chagrin of the working cla.s.ses, who having imparted to the mills of State the impetus necessary to grind out political rights for their employers--the merchants, farmers, and middle cla.s.s generally--found themselves no better equipped for political action than they were before. 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. 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 cla.s.ses; to believe that the Queen and a dilettante Prime Minister were insensible to their sufferings so long as their own tables were abundantly supplied; and that Government was no more than a machine for enriching the cla.s.ses at the expense of the ma.s.ses.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _J. Doyle_, "_H. B._"} {_Political 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 princ.i.p.al advocate of Catholic Emanc.i.p.ation, and founder of the "Loyal National Repeal a.s.sociation."

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 cla.s.ses found themselves at a great disadvantage in negotiating with their employers, owing to the stringent laws regulating trades unions. A whole generation was to pa.s.s away before, in 1875, Mr. (now Viscount) Cross should pa.s.s 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.