Part 6 (2/2)
_Face p. 50._]
1816. MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCESS CHARLOTTE.
The Princess Charlotte of Wales, having successfully thrown over her royal Dutch suitor, was married at Carlton House to Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg, afterwards King of the Belgians, on the 2nd of May, 1816.
Prior to the marriage, Parliament had voted a provision for an establishment for the pair of 60,000, while in the event of the princess's death, 50,000 was settled on the prince during his life.
_Leap Year, or John Bull's Establishment_ (S. W. Fores, March, 1816) shows us John Bull with a bit in his mouth, driven by Her Royal Highness, who lashes him unmercifully with a tremendous horse-whip.
Miserable John is saddled with a pair of panniers, one of which carries the prince and his money bags, the other being filled with heavy packages labelled with different impositions or items of expenditure of which John is the victim. ”Plans for thatched cottages,” ”Plan for pulling down and rebuilding,” ”a.s.sessed taxes,” ”Increase of salaries,”
”Army for peace establishment,” and so on. Says Leopold to the princess, ”You drive so fast, I shall be off!!!” ”Never fear,” she replies; ”I'll teach you an English waltz.” The gouty Regent hobbles after them on his crutches, the supports of which are formed of dragons from his famous Brighton Pavilion. ”Push on!” he shouts to his daughter and future son-in-law, ”Push on! Preach economy! and when you have got your money, follow my example.” ”Oh! my back,” groans poor John, crawling with the greatest difficulty under the weight of his heavy burdens. ”I never can bear it! This will finish me.”
POPULAR DISCONTENT.
The two years which succeeded the fall of Bonaparte were remarkable for the distress which prevailed amongst the industrial cla.s.ses in England.
The glory we had reaped in our long struggle with France was forgotten in the consideration of the almost insupportable burdens which it necessarily entailed. The sufferings of the ma.s.ses prompted them to seek relief by bringing their grievances before Parliament; but the reception their pet.i.tions met with, served only to show the little sympathy which existed between the national representatives, as then elected, and the people of England. Pet.i.tions were next presented to the Regent himself, while the popular discontent found expression in large meetings convened in London, Leeds, Manchester, Birmingham, and other industrial centres.
These meetings, it was observed, were convened, attended, and addressed almost exclusively by the working cla.s.ses, the middle and upper ranks taking no share in the proceedings. The speakers pointed out in impressive and forcible language the various evils which they said had brought about their altered condition; the waste of public money in perpetual wars, in unearned pensions, sinecures, and other unjust expenditure. The high price of provisions provoked riots at Brandon, Norwich, Newcastle, Ely, Glasgow, Preston, Leicester, Merthyr, Tredegar, and other places; a large number of the populace a.s.sembled in Spafields in December to receive the Regent's answer to their pet.i.tion. While waiting the arrival of ”orator” Hunt, one of the most popular of the agitators of the day, a band of desperadoes appeared on the scene with a tri-coloured flag, and headed by a man named Watson, who, after delivering a violent harangue from a waggon, led them into the city. The rioters pillaged several gunsmiths' shops, but the prompt action of Lord Mayor Wood, the strong party of constables at his back, who seized several of the rioters, and the appearance on the scene of the military, soon induced the rioters to disperse. In January, 1817, John Cashman, one of the Spafields rioters, was tried for burglariously entering the shop of Mr. Beckworth, a gunsmith, and hanged opposite the scene of his depredations.
1817. REGENT OPENS PARLIAMENT.
The Regent opened Parliament on the 28th of January, 1817. In his address, he said that ”the distress consequent upon the termination of a war of such universal extent and duration, had been felt with greater or less severity throughout all the nations of Europe, and had been considerably aggravated by the unfavourable state of the season.”
Alluding to the proceedings of the popular agitators, he added: ”In considering our internal situation, you will, I doubt not, feel a just indignation at the attempts which have been made to take advantage of the distresses of the country, for the purpose of exciting a spirit of sedition and violence.... I am determined to omit no precautions for preserving the public peace, and for counteracting the designs of the disaffected.” Whether this statement was the cause or not, the Regent had a narrow escape on his return from the House; for, while pa.s.sing at the back of the gardens of Carlton House, the gla.s.s of his window was broken, either by a stone or (as was supposed) by two b.a.l.l.s from an air-gun, which appeared to have been aimed at His Royal Highness.
On the 6th of February, Lord c.o.c.krane presented to the House of Commons the pet.i.tion of the Spafields meeting, signed by 24,000 persons. It prayed for annual parliaments, universal suffrage, and reduction in the public expenditure. He presented at the same time a pet.i.tion from Manchester, signed by 30,000 persons, praying for reform in Parliament and economy in the public expenditure. Sir Francis Burdett also presented a Leeds pet.i.tion for the same objects, containing 7,000 signatures. These were of course only legitimate modes of expressing the wants of the people; but, unhappily, quite independent of the action of the popular leaders, the country in some parts was so disturbed, so closely on the brink of insurrection, that ministers found themselves obliged twice during the course of the year to resort to the almost unprecedented measure of suspending the Habeas Corpus Act, on the first occasion at the end of February, and on the second in June.
At a meeting held at Manchester in March, for the purpose of pet.i.tioning the Regent against the suspension of the Act, it was proposed and agreed that another meeting should be held on the following Monday (the 10th of March), with the professed intention that ten out of every twenty persons who attended it should proceed to London with a pet.i.tion to His Royal Highness. The meeting took place accordingly; many thousands actually attended in full marching order (_i.e._ provided with a bundle and a blanket); and a considerable body appear to have made some advance on their way before their further progress was arrested. Expeditions of a similar character were simultaneously planned, attempted, and frustrated in other parts of the country.
GOVERNMENT SPIES.
Meanwhile, there were trials for high treason at Westminster Hall; trials of rioters at York and Derby; and at the latter town, on the 7th of November, three miserable men were hung. Among the witnesses at these trials appear to have been two men named Castle and Oliver: and it came out that these fellows, with two other Government spies, named Edwards and Franklin, had been among the chief fomenters by speeches and writings of the seditions in the Metropolis and northern counties. The disclosures made by these scoundrels produced of course a great sensation and numerous satires. One of these, ent.i.tled, _More Plots!!!
More Plots!!!_ published by Fores in August, 1817, is ”dedicated to the inventors, Lord S [idmouth] and Lord C [astlereagh].” It is divided into four compartments. In the first we see four foxes (typifying no doubt the four informers) watching the movements of a flock of geese. ”'Tis plain,” says one of the former, ”there is a plot on foot; let's seize them, Brother Oliver.” ”I have no doubt of it: I can smell it plainly,”
answers his companion. In the second, a couple of fierce nondescript beasts are regarding a number of innocent lambs: ”These bloodthirsty wretches,” remarks one of the two, ”mean to destroy man, woman, and child, I know it to a certainty; for they carry sedition, privy conspiracy, and rebellion in their looks.” ”And I'll swear it, Brother Castle,” says his companion; ”let's dash at them.” In the third, a cat watches the movements of some unsuspecting mice: ”There's a pretty collection of rogues gathered together,” observes Grimalkin; ”if there is not a plot among them, burn my tail and whiskers.” In the last, we behold a Kite just about to pounce on some chicken: ”The world's over-run with iniquity,” says the bird of prey; ”and these troublesome miscreants will not let honest hawks sleep in security.” We shall return to the subject of these Government spies and the troubles of 1817 in the graphic satires of George Cruikshank.
EDMUND KEAN AND BOOTH.
In 1817, the rivalry between the two national theatres ran so high, that the Covent Garden management employed agents to scour the provinces in search of a rival to Edmund Kean at Drury Lane. After a time one was found in the person of Lucius Junius Booth, who in stature, _role_ of characters, and (as it was imagined) style of acting, closely resembled, if he did not equal, the great original. He made his _debut_ at Covent Garden, in the character of Richard the Third. Whether it was a success or not seems doubtful; for the manager being out of town, those deputed to act as deputies did not care to undertake the responsibility of engaging the new star. In this dilemma, overtures were made to him by the rival house, which he accepted, and made his appearance as ”Iago” to Kean's ”Oth.e.l.lo” to a densely-packed audience at Drury Lane. So great was the likeness between the two actors, that strangers were puzzled to know which was Kean and which was Booth, until the tragedy reached the third act, when the genius of Kean made itself felt, and no doubt remained in the minds of the audience which was master of his art.
Booth, in fact, discovered that he had made a mistake, and the day after his trial at old Drury, signed articles to return to Covent Garden for three years. Here he proved a great attraction; he must have been in truth an actor of no ordinary merit; his rendering of the character of Lear, in particular, met with universal approbation, and in this tragedy he was supported by actors of the ability of Charles Kemble and William Macready, both of whom he threw into the shade. At the end, however, of his engagement, feeling that he was incapable of meeting Kean on anything like equal terms, he set sail for America.
The appearance of Edmund Kean and Lucius Junius Booth at Drury Lane is referred to in a satire ent.i.tled, _The Rival Richards_, published by S.
W. Fores in 1817. The sketch (evidently the work of an amateur) shows us Folly seated on an a.s.s, holding in one hand a pair of scales, in one of which stands Booth, and in the other Edmund Kean. To the mind of the satirist there appears to be no difference in the abilities of the two performers, as the scales exactly balance. On the right, the portico of Covent Garden is overshadowed by the inelegant but ma.s.sive proportions of Drury Lane; the intervening s.p.a.ce being occupied by various figures and details, among which is a ”patent clapping machine.” An advertis.e.m.e.nt board carried by one of the figures clearly shows that the satire--an elaborate idea badly worked out--has reference to the period when both actors were engaged at ”old Drury.”
<script>