Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

probation of the House of Com mons."

This speech was one of the happiest in some respects, perhaps, the happiest of Mr. Canning's efforts; and one of the most truly admirable (though not, in external gloss, the most splendid) specimens of modern deliberative oratory. When we look at the mass of materials with which he had to deal, -the high abstract principles which he had to express simply and clearly and to bring to bear upon the subject-the distinct yet natural arrangement of the whole -the mutual subordination of the parts-the skilful analysis of a complicated series of facts, of which the most important are placed in due relief before the mind, and the outline of the whole is clearly defined the artful yet almost imperceptible combination of the statement of circumstances with such observations and maxims as throw upon them the colour most favourable to the impression which the speaker wishes to make the intermixture of sportive raillery of his opponents, so lively as to make them join in the laugh at themselves, and yet too light and gay to hurt even the most sensitive-the abstinence (a rare prudence in Mr. Canning) from every thing that could offend or mortify his adversaries the ability with which he enlists upon his side the principles and the love of freedom, and puts them boldly forth in the front of his battle-to say nothing of the continuous texture of the whole composition; of the perspicuity, simplicity, and flowing elegance of the language; and of the absence of all conspicuous, or glaring, or extrinsic ornament, of all ornament which does not seem necessarily interwoven with the frame

of the discourse itself as part of its very warp and woof: when we look at all these high excellencies of this speech, we shall not wonder at the persuasive effect which it produced, and the admiration which it excited in the House and in the country at large.

It was the allotted duty of Mr. Brougham to reply to Mr. Canning. For this he had reserved himself during three nights of debate; and the expectation of a splendid effort. of rivalry on his part was in some degree heightened by the circumstance, that only a few nights had elapsed, since language had passed between him and Mr. Canning, so violent, as to have led almost to personal hostility. Never, however, was expectation more completely disappointed. Far from reaching the excellence which Mr. Canning had exhibited, Mr. Brougham, on this occasion, fell infinitely below his own ordinary level. His speech had neither argument, nor happy illustration, nor vigour of expression, nor bitterness of sarcasm: it was a tissue of desultory observations, not leading to any definite conclusion, and ungraced with any felicity of style.

The Opposition saw, that the ministers would triumph by a majority unusually great. To prevent this, the plan, which they adopted, was, to avoid, if possible, a

division, and themselves to substitute the amendment for the original address, upon the pretext, that it was most desirable, that nothing should happen, which might make the people of the continent believe that there was any difference of sentiment in the English House of Commons, with respect to the character of the French

See Chap. IV of this volume.

1

outrage on Spain. Accordingly, Mr. Brougham concluded his speech by requesting Mr. M'Donald to sacrifice his own feelings to the general unanimity, and, for that purpose, to abstain from pressing the House to a division. In the moderate amendment proposed by the member for Yorkshire, he could see no great approbation of the conduct of government. It seemed to be of that neutral character, that gave triumph to neither side of that House. It went at most to a half approval of the conduct of ministers, and had more of war in it than the original address. therefore implored the House not to let the question go to a vote, which might be misconstrued by persons abroad, who did not understand our forms, into an approbation of the conduct of France.

motion.

He

Mr. McDonald then intimated his willingness to withdraw his To the amendment he had no objection, and should vote for it, if it were allowed to stand as the address.

Mr. Secretary Canning said, that after having suffered for three long nights the constant, unceasing, unremitting, and unsparing lectures of the hon. gentlemen opposite, for a too ready concession to the views of foreign powers, it was incumbent upon him and his colleagues to show, that they had profited by the lesson that had been taught them, and that, though satisfied themselves with the amendment, they could not concur in the suggestion of withdrawing the original motion.

The gallery was then cleared for a division. The Opposition members rose in a body to leave the House. Some ministerial members below the bar, having, how ever, called for a division, the

[ocr errors]

doors were in consequence closed, and the Opposition members were compelled to remain in the House. The Speaker then put the question on Mr. M'Donald's original motion, which was negatived without a division. He next put the question on Mr. Stuart Wortley's amendment. The Ministerial members cried Aye" the Opposition members remained silent. The Speaker declared, that the question was carried in the affirmative. Some members on the ministerial side, anxious that a division should take place, called out that the "Noes" had the majority. The Speaker thereupon desired those, who intended to vote for the amendment, to go in to the lobby, and those who meant to vote against it, to remain in the House. The Opposition proceeded into the lobby, together with the ministerial voters ; but a few members on both sides were shut in the House, in conse→ quence of the lobby being too small to contain the united numbers. The numbers were-For the Amendment, 372; Against it, 20: Majority, 352.

The triumph of the ministers ori this occasion deterred their adversaries from bringing the subject again into discussion. Some debate, indeed, arose on a motion, which earl Grev made on the 12th of May, for the production of papers relative to the capture of a Spanish vessel by a French ship of war in the West-Indies, long before the commencement of hostilities in Europe, and to the relations of France with the Provisional Regency of Spain on the one hand, and the allied monarchs on the other hand. But the discussion was languid, turning chiefly on collateral points (more especially on Mr. Canning's alleged abandon

ment of the cause of Roman Catholic Emancipation, a topic, certainly, not very closely connected with the invasion of Spain); and, finally, the motion was negatived without a division.

There can be no doubt, but that the policy of ministers on this great question was generally approved by the country. Some, indeed, wished, that, at Verona, if we were unable to prevent the allied sovereigns from promulgat ing their formal denunciation of the constitutional system of Spain, we might at least have counteracted their proceeding by declaring our opinion with equal boldness on the other side. And so, it is true, we might have done, had the notes of Russia, Austria, and Prussia, proclaimed or recommended war. But they did no such thing; they merely condemned, though with improper officiousness and considerable harshness of language, a system which it was impossible to praise, and of which, considered with reference to its own intrinsic demerits, and the mode of its administration, it was not easy to speak with too much reprobation. It was therefore impossible that we could have met these diplomatic notes by an eulogy of that state of things, which they sought to bring into disrepute. What, then, would have been the nature of our counter-manifesto? Should its object have been to deprecate war, and to express our disapprobation of any armed aggression against Spain? To have done so would have been consistent with our principles, but would not bave been suitable to the occasion; for there was no mention, no threat of war in the notes which were issued from Verona, and therefore for us to have sent forth to the

world a protest against war, which the allies had neither announced nor applauded, would have been altogether out of place, and would have been much more likely to accelerate than to avert the appre→ hended evil.

But the people, though they applauded the moderation and prudence of our ministers, were not the less zealous in their wishes for the success of the Spaniards; and the ardour of these wishes produced a corresponding alacrity of hope. The arrival of the French in Madrid did not excite much surprize; for it was not expected, that any strong resistance would be made to them, till the extended length of their line and the mul tiplication of their communications had weakened them upon particular points. The treachery of D'Abisbal excited serious fears, which acquired new strength, when the invaders were allowed to remain tranquil in Madrid, without any serious attempt to molest them in their rear, or to interrupt their intercourse with the frontier. When they began to move forward from Madrid, it was hoped that they would be enveloped on either side by Morillo and Ballasteros, and that their further progress, at least, would be arrested. These anticipations, likewise, proved empty dreams.

The armies of

Spain disappeared; her patriot chiefs deserted to the foe; and Cadiz was once more beleaguered by a French army. Even, under these circumstances, we were unwilling to despair of the cause of freedom. Cadiz, we knew, had all the physical means of resistance; and we could not suppose, that courage to make these means available, would be wanting. The siege, we flattered ourselves, would

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

CHAP. II.

Bills of Indictment preferred against the Rioters in the Dublin Theatre -Failure of those Bills in consequence of the finding of the Grand Jury-Remarks of the Attorney General on this result-The Grand Jury vindicate their Conduct-Ex-officio Informations filed against the Riolers-Result of their Trial-Remarks on these Proceedings Motions of Mr. Brownlow and Colonel Barry for the Production of Papers-Petition from the Grand Jury-Mr. Brownlow's Motion against Mr. Plunkett: Mr. Plunkett's Defence: course of the Debate -Petition of the Sheriff and Grand Jury of Dublin, calling for Inquiry into their Conduct-Sir F. Burdett's Motion for Inquiry carried Course and Result of the Inquiry-State of Ireland: violence of Party Dissensions: extention of the system of outrageous attacks upon Persons and Property-Insurrection Act renewedProvisions of the Bill authorizing Compositions for Tithes: course of the Bill through the two Houses-Mischiefs of the system of granting Leases to numerous Joint-Tenants: Remedy applied to that EvilDebate on Mr. Brougham's Motion concerning the Administration of Justice in Ireland Mr. Hume's Motion against the Church Establishment of Ireland-His Motion on the Vice-regal Office-Other Motions relative to Ireland-State of Ireland towards the end of the Year.

HE outrage against lord Wellesley, which had been committed in the Dublin theatre on the 14th of December in the preceding year, led to consequences, which excited no small agitation in the feelings of the different political parties in that quarter of the empire. Two of the rioters, Handwich and Graham, were, on the 23rd of December, committed to Newgate on warrants, which stated their offence to be riot and a conspiracy to rigt. Shortly afterwards, however, warrants of detainer were lodged, charging them with a conspiracy to kill and murder" the lordlieutenant; and one James Forbes, a person in a respectable situation of life, was committed on the same VOL. LXV.

[ocr errors]

accusation. When the January sessions arrived, the attorney-general abandoned the charge of murder, and preferred to the grand jury two bills of indictment against ten persons for a riot, and a conspiracy to riot. After two days spent in examining witnesses, the bill, which charged a riot, was found only against two of the accused; and as, in law, two per

*This indictment contained two counts; the first was for a riot and as

sault on the person of the lord-lieutenant, which would have enabled the jury to have found the riot, and negatived the assault, or vice versa; and the second was for a riot generally. In the first count, it was charged, that the defendants, cum mullis aliis, had committed the riot and assault; and in the se

[E]

« ZurückWeiter »