CHAPTER XI.

Death of the Princess Charlotte-Sinecures-Roman Catholic Claims

Parliamentary Reform.

THE death of the presumptive heiress of the British crown after the birth of a dead child, was the great historical event of 1817. Never was a whole nation plunged in such deep and universal grief. From the highest to the lowest, this death was felt as a calamity that demanded the intense sorrow of domestic misfortune. Around every fireside there were suppressed tears and bitter remembrances. The most solemn disclaimer was uttered, through this universal mourning, of the foul calumny against the people, that they were desirous of a vital change in their laws and institutions. Whatever might be their complaints, they showed, on this occasion, that their attachment to a constitutional monarchy was undiminished by factious contests or real grievances; and that they looked with exulting hopes to the days when a patriot queen should diffuse the sunlight of just government through every corner of a prosperous and happy land.

The affection which the people of Great Britain cherished for the Princess Charlotte was ardent, but it was discriminating. It was a tribute to principles and to conduct. It was something much better than that unreflecting gallantry which would have called 'a thousand swords from their scabbards' to have defended personal charms; it was the admiration of private virtue disciplining itself for public service. The Princess Charlotte seemed born to build up for generations the succession to the British crown, by calling around her own person the warmest devotion of a zealous but a reflecting people. A female sovereign can best make duty choice, and obedience happiness. What the birth of this princess promised, her education ripened, and her own love of real glory perfected. Her early years were devoted to an assiduous

Her studies were

preparation for her maturer honours. manly, and such as befitted the probable successor to the glories of an Elizabeth. She was disciplined in the school of religion and of philosophy. While she was habituated to those Christian exercises, in the performance of which the reigning sovereign and his family furnished so excellent an example, she stored up lessons for future practice in her probable destiny, by a ceaseless contemplation of the characters of the truly great of all ages and countries. She knew the fountains of her country's glory, she reverenced the founders of its well-balanced constitution; her heart vowed an early allegiance to her nation's liberty. In the cultivation of the accomplishments of her sex, while she displayed an almost unlimited talent, she never lost sight of their legitimate ends and uses. Her exercises and her amusements were equally associated with her preparation for domestic and public duties. The people exulted in the maturity of her person and her mind. She stood, as was hoped amongst her future subjects, a beautiful, an accomplished, a noble-hearted woman. She seemed equally fitted to command reverence by the strength, and win affection by the graces, of her mind. Her state was not supported by ostentation; her greatness was not asserted by pride; her dignity did not estrange her from the lowly and the poor. Raised above the great portion of society, she deeply felt her alliance with the universal family of the earth; and while her endeavour was to purify herself from the follies and weaknesses of mankind, she delighted to partake their sympathies, to assuage their misfortunes, to merit, by her benevolence, the homage which was paid to her rank.

A princess so gifted was not a being that would permit her affections to be sacrificed at the altar of political calculation. She well knew that domestic happiness is the best foundation for public virtue. She felt that in the tranquillity of connubial enjoyment, the heart has no repining cares to interrupt the search for truth-no restless anticipations or regrets, to turn the thoughts away from active duty or contemplative preparation. She wisely asserted her own right to choose for herself in the most important action of her life. The nation hailed and reverenced her

motives. The prince of her choice brought neither extent of territory, nor continental influence; but he brought an unsophisticated mind-an active, firm, inquiring, and amiable temper-a meek and affectionate heart. Their tastes were alike; their happiness was alike. In dignified retirement they lived calmly and unobtrusively, in that enviable tranquillity which is so congenial to British feeling. Their amusements were elegant and simple; their exercises of duty were habitual and uniform. In the pursuit of health and of knowledge, their days passed away in that serenity which devotion and benevolence stimulated and confirmed. A glorious prospect was open to them of passing the summer of life in the discipline of domestic virtue, and the autumn in a far more extended exercise of the same principles. These hopes perished in an hour!

Thirty years ago, when 'without the slightest warning, without the opportunity of a moment's immediate preparation, in the midst of the deepest tranquillity, at midnight a voice was heard in the palace, not of singing-men and singing-women, not of revelry and mirth, but the cry, Behold the bridegroom cometh'—the nation first wept, and then grew angry. There had been neglect, at any rate. The greatest in the land had been less helped in her need, it was affirmed, than the humblest peasant-wife. Lord Eldon used to relate that, after the labour was over, he 'went into the room where the surgeons were consulting what bulletin of the princess they should send, and they had actually drawn one up, stating that she was going on as favourably as possible, when Baillie came in, and, after reading it, he refused to sign it, for such was not his opinion. We [the cabinet ministers] returned to our homes about two o'clock in the morning, and before six a messenger arrived to let us know the princess was dead.' Sir Richard Croft, against whom the public odium was chiefly directed, became in a few months after his own self-destroyer.

Amongst the fears that accompanied the death of the Princess Charlotte, was the apprehension that a barren sceptre' might pass through the hands of the illustrious family that freed these realms from a despotic sway. That

apprehension was dissipated by the subsequent marriages of the Dukes of Clarence, Kent, Cumberland, and Cambridge. It is a remarkable example of the vanity of human fears, that the people who wept, as a people without hope, for the bereavement of Charlotte Augusta, should have realised, through her premature death, precisely such a female reign, of just and mild government, of domestic virtues, of generous sympathy with popular rights, of bold and liberal encouragement of sound improvement, as they had associated with her career-perhaps more than they had thought, in that season of disquiet, could ever be realised in a few coming years.

In the pleasing record of those years which were years of progress, we shall not have to enumerate the year 1817. It has left not the slightest trace of public good. At the beginning of the session, ministers sanctioned the appointment of a finance committee. In three months the committee brought forward a measure for the gradual abolition of sinecures, which Lord Castlereagh supported, because it would not diminish the influence of the crown; would produce no large reduction of expense; but would convince the people that parliament was doing everything possible to relieve their burdens. It appeared that savings were to be effected by the abolition of sinecures to the amount of £51,000; instead of which the committee recommended the substitution of a pension-list to the amount of £42,000. This bitter mockery of the public expectations was a new source of discontent.

The Roman Catholic.claims were debated at great length during this session. Of the debate on the 9th of May, Mr. Wilberforce 'makes this brief entry in his diary: 'Roman Catholic question decided. I would not speak. Canning poor-Peel excellent-Lord Castlereagh very good.' debate occupies a hundred columns of Hansard's Reports. We reserve for another occasion a general view of the course of this great question. The majority against the Roman Catholics, in 1817, was twenty-four.

The

From this year we may date the retrogression of the cause of parliamentary reform, which continued to go back, or stand still, as long as the middle classes were afraid of its agitation. Writing to a friend in 1817, Mr.

I

Wilberforce says: 'I continue friendly to the moderate, gradual, and almost insensibly operating parliamentary reform, which was last brought forward by Mr. Pitt. am firmly persuaded that at present a prodigious majority of the more intelligent people of this country are adverse to the measure. In my view, so far from being an objection to the discussion, this is rather a recommendation of it. But it is a serious and very strong objection to its present consideration, that the efforts of certain demagogues have had too much success in influencing the minds of the lowest of the people in several of our manufacturing districts, most falsely persuading them that the evils under which we at present labour are owing to the state of our parliamentary representation, and that they 'would be cured by a parliamentary reform.' The rash movements of the operative classes in 1816-their violent declamations, their tumultuous meetings-proceeded in most cases from an ignorant but honest spirit. They had been taught, as some demagogues still continue to teach, that all the evils of civilisation are political evils. A few scoundrels, a few spies, and a few zealots of the operative class, placed the weapon of alarm in the hands of the government of 1817; and, what was more, laid the foundation for those miserable conflicts and mutual suspicions, on the part of the capitalists and the labourers, which are still amongst the most serious obstacles to all large mitigations of the inequalities of society, however we may all be improved in the common wish for Christian brotherhood.