قراءة كتاب Memoirs of the Court of George IV. 1820-1830 (Vol 1) From the Original Family Documents
تنويه: تعرض هنا نبذة من اول ١٠ صفحات فقط من الكتاب الالكتروني، لقراءة الكتاب كاملا اضغط على الزر “اشتر الآن"
Memoirs of the Court of George IV. 1820-1830 (Vol 1) From the Original Family Documents
time in endeavouring to take advantage of the difficulty presented by the apprehended return of the Queen; and the "flirtation" not proceeding favourably, their hostility became more earnest. Public opinion, indeed, was showing itself in many curious ways. "The town here is employed," writes the Lord Chancellor, "in nothing but speculation whether her Majesty will or will not come. Great bets are laid about it. Some people have taken fifty guineas, undertaking in lieu of them to pay a guinea a-day till she comes, so sure are these that she will come within fifty days; others, again, are taking less than fifty guineas, undertaking to pay a guinea a-day till she comes, so sure are they that she will not come; others assert that they know she will come, and that she will find her way into Westminster Abbey and Westminster Hall on the Coronation, in spite of all opposition. I retain my old opinion that she will not come, unless she is insane."[13]
A change of Ministry, Lord Dudley[14] assures us, was talked about more than usual; but, as the Opposition were obliged to confess that they would find great difficulty in establishing a Government, the existing Administration held a tolerably secure tenancy.
An Order in Council was issued for omitting the Queen's name from the Church Service, and other signs appeared, indicating a desire to withhold from her her queenly title. This made a temper, never remarkably tractable, not to be controlled by the dictates of prudence; the old spirit manifested itself in its most spirited form; and she lost no time in letting the world know that she was returning to England to obtain justice for her wrongs. Those who thought they knew her best, considered that vindictive feelings influenced her resolution, and that, with a full knowledge of the inflammable state of public opinion in the British Empire, she had determined on some great work of mischief against the peace of the kingdom and the security of its ruler.
At this period there were many elements of discord in the social community that were acting upon a large and dangerous portion of it, to the prejudice of the Government.[15] Besides the Thistlewood gang, justice was about to dispose of Mr. Orator Hunt and his myrmidons, then awaiting their trial. Sir Charles Wolseley, a baronet, and Joseph Harrison, a preacher, were under prosecution for uttering seditious speeches.[16] Sir Francis Burdett—a more popular tribune—was also at variance with the laws for a scandalous attack on Ministers; in short, every day seemed to bring to light some source of mischief which could not fail to add to the uneasiness of the responsible servants of the Crown. A general election stirred up other noxious ingredients, and during the spring of the year everything seemed to betoken a coming convulsion. At this time the following communication was written:—
LORD GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.
March 29, 1820.
Hunt's conviction is beyond my hope, though it would certainly have been no easy matter for any jury to acquit him, even under the charge such as it is. His motion for a new trial is, I imagine, nothing more than the sort of last resource at which defeated men, whether at elections or trials, always love to catch. It would have been a dreadful thing indeed if it had been established by the result of that trial that the Manchester meeting was, under all its circumstances, a legal assembly.
Alarming as might be considered the aspect of domestic affairs, the Government, so far from betraying apprehension, carried on the business of the country with untiring vigilance and decision. Hunt and five of his associates, after a long trial, were on the 23rd of March, at York, found guilty of unlawfully assembling and inciting to hatred of the Government. On the same day, Sir Francis Burdett was found guilty of uttering a seditious libel. On the 10th of April, Sir Charles Wolseley and Mr. Joseph Harrison were also found guilty of sedition. The most guilty of the Cato Street heroes made their last public appearance at the Old Bailey on the 1st of May; the remainder were expatriated to New South Wales. Thus the supremacy of the law was vindicated; but there still existed in the more populous districts feelings inimical to the authorities, that might be restrained by coercive demonstrations, but which only waited a favourable season for bursting through all control: and as, on the 20th of April, Mr. Denman and Mr. Brougham had been acknowledged by the Lord Chancellor, from his seat in the Court of Chancery, the Queen's Solicitor and Attorney-General, the discontented took heart, and saw in this admission of the Queen's position, a prognostication of the struggle that was to create for them the opportunity for which they were waiting.
The Court of the Monarch did not appear more apprehensive than his Ministers. A day was fixed for the Coronation; and among those who would have to assist in the ceremonial, no one ventured to hint on the possibility of the Queen having any position in it. On the 3rd of May, the King received addresses at Carlton House; and on the 10th, his Majesty held his first Levee since his accession to the throne, at which nearly 1800 persons of distinction were present, who testified their attachment to his person in a manner that must have left him little to desire. It was known that his consort intended to agitate the empire from end to end, and her arrival was looked for in a few weeks; but the families of the great political party that formed and supported the Government, betrayed no uneasiness—indeed, the most influential regarded, or affected to regard, the coming struggle with a quiet disdain, that evinced their confidence in the loyalty and good sense of the nation. "His Majesty's Opposition," however, talked and looked very differently;—the Democratic party were vehement in their denunciations of the Queen's wrongs, and the leading Whigs began to come forward prominently as champions of her rights. This is about the date of the following communications:—
RIGHT HON. THOS. GRENVILLE TO THE MARQUIS OF BUCKINGHAM.
Cleveland Square, May 4, 1820.
My dear Lord B——,
I have but little news to tell you. The general arrangement of the Civil List, by replacing it as it stood in 1816, is so much better a bargain for the public than I had expected, that I for one am well contented with it; and if report be true, it was obtained by nothing but the most determined refusal of the Ministers to do more. Still, however, I understand that the Admiralty Droits are unpopular enough to threaten the Government with a good deal of embarrassment; for undoubtedly, if they have bargained with the King for the statement of 1816, when he had the Admiralty Droits, they cannot in equity deprive him of that part of his bargain. Brougham seems by his speech to have conceived the notion of giving the King compensation for them; but it seems to me to be but a bad bargain for the public, to make them, under the present pressure, purchase out a remote contingent future revenue, which can arise only out of a war that no Power in Europe is rich enough to make, any more than ourselves.
Nobody knows what Brougham's