Part 22 (1/2)
Another member of the royal family who frequently figures in the ”sketches” is the Duke of Suss.e.x. He was a man of large frame, and as remarkable for the blackness of his whiskers as the Duke of c.u.mberland was conspicuous for the bleached appearance of these hirsute adornments.
At a meeting of the council of the London University, he is reported to have said that for the promotion of anatomical science he should have no personal objection to dedicate his own body after death to the College of Surgeons for the purposes of dissection. This hint was enough of course for HB, and his royal highness accordingly figures in a contemporary satire as _A great Subject_ ”_Dedicated to the Royal College of Surgeons_.”
SIR FRANCIS BURDETT.
Another prominent personage of HB's time, and a singular instance of the change which frequently takes place in the political convictions of public men, was Sir Francis Burdett. Commencing his career as an ardent radical and reformer intolerant of abuses, he finished it and astonished his former supporters by being returned for Westminster in the Conservative interest. The political conduct of this once celebrated man is of so unusual a character that a short recapitulation of his career seems necessary, in order that the reader may understand the satires we are about to describe. Notwithstanding his expressed views in support of absolute purity of election, his own election for Middles.e.x in 1802-4, is said--what with the expenses and subsequent litigation--to have cost him upwards of one hundred thousand pounds. On the 5th of May, 1807, he was challenged by and fought a duel with Mr. James Paull, on Wimbledon Common, the cause of quarrel being Sir Francis's refusal to act as chairman at a gathering of Paull's supporters at the Crown and Anchor Tavern, Westminster, in April. The duel terminated in both the princ.i.p.als being seriously wounded. The same year he was returned to Parliament to serve as member for Westminster, which const.i.tuency he continued to represent for nearly thirty years. Perhaps the greatest event of his life was his committal to the Tower under the Speaker's warrant for a libellous letter published in _Cobbett's Political Register_, of 24th March, 1810, in which he questioned the power of the House to imprison delinquents. He at first resisted the execution of the warrant, and being a favourite with the mob, a street contest ensued between the military and the people, in which some lives were lost. In 1818, we find him moving for annual parliaments and universal suffrage, when the House divided with the result of 100 to 2, the minority being composed of the mover and seconder--that is to say, himself and Lord Cochrane. In 1820, he was found guilty at Leicester of a libel on Government in a letter to his const.i.tuents reflecting on the Manchester outrage of the preceding year; a new trial was moved for by himself, but this was refused, and he was sentenced the following February to three months' imprisonment, and to pay a fine of 2,000. In March, 1825, his resolutions for the relief of the Irish Catholics were carried by a majority of 247 to 234; but in later life his restless spirit gradually calmed down, and after the appointment of the Melbourne Ministry in 1835, he surprised and disgusted his party by going into opposition, princ.i.p.ally (as he alleged) on account of the court which they paid to O'Connell and his followers in their agitation against the Irish Established Church. For some time previous to the sketch we are about to describe he had absented himself from the House, and otherwise shown his distaste for the persons and principles of the leading men of the party to which he had formerly belonged. The busy-bodies who professed to be the exponents of public opinion in Westminster, pressed him for an explicit statement of his views, and eventually called upon him to resign, and he took them directly at their word. The person brought forward to oppose him was John Temple Leader, then member for Bridgwater, a name which suggested to the artist the pictorial pun of _Following the Leader_, the ”followers” being Lord Melbourne, Lord John Russell, Lord Palmerston, Mr. O'Connell, Sir J. Hobhouse, Mr. Hume, and Sir William Molesworth. Notwithstanding the exertions of the ministers and their friends to secure the election of Mr. Leader, that gentleman was not only beaten by a very considerable majority, but lost as a natural consequence his seat for Bridgwater, a fact which suggested to the artist another able sketch, _The Dog and the Shadow_. The election itself forms the subject of _A Race for the Westminster Stakes_, in which the aged thoroughbred (Sir Francis), ridden by Lord Castlereagh, beats the young horse Leader, jockey Mr. Roebuck. Among the backers of the losing horse, Daniel O'Connell and Joseph Hume may be easily detected by the lugubrious expression of their faces. The sketch of _A Fine Old English Gentleman_ was suggested by a remark made by the _Times_ during the progress of the contest, in which it described Sir Francis as ”a fine specimen of the old English gentleman.” In the left-hand corner of this sketch the artist has placed a picture of the Tower of London, by way of reminder of the days when the baronet was regarded not so much in the light of ”a fine old English Gentleman” as a radical of the most advanced type, and as a martyr in the cause of public liberty.
CHANGES IN POLITICAL OPINION.
A change of opinion however is obviously a necessary incident of political life, and we have ourselves witnessed some remarkable instances of such versatility in our own days. In some cases these changes are only temporary or partial, in others they are radical and complete; sometimes they are dictated by conviction, at others by necessity; occasionally they seem to be the result of absolute caprice; while in not a few instances, I fear, we should not be very far wrong in a.s.signing them to feelings of disappointment or personal or political pique. This tergiversation in public men forms the subject of one of HB's happiest inspirations. In 1837 there appeared at the Adelphi Theatre an American comedian named Rice, the forerunner of the Christies and other ”original” minstrels of our day, who sang in his character of a n.i.g.g.e.r a comic (?) song, which, being wholly dest.i.tute of melody, and even more idiotic than compositions of that kind usually are, forthwith became exceedingly popular, being groaned by every organ, and whistled by all the street urchins of the day. This peculiar production, which was known as ”Jim Crow,” was accompanied by a characteristic double shuffle, while every verse concluded with this intellectual chorus:--
”Turn about, and wheel about, And do just _so_; And every time I turn about, I jump Jim Crow.”
In _Jim Crow Dance and Chorus_ (the t.i.tle of the sketch referred to), we find the leading men of all parties a.s.sembled at a ball, engaged in the new saltatory performance initiated by Mr. Rice. In the left-hand corner we notice Lord Abinger, formerly Sir James Scarlett, a Whig, who growing tired of waiting for the advent of his own party to power, changed his political opinions--that is to say ”jumped Jim Crow,”--and was made Attorney General by the Duke of Wellington. Next him is Lord Stanley, who commenced life as a Whig and was a member of Lord Grey's Reform administration, but unprepared to go the lengths which his party seemed disposed to take, he too ”jumped Jim Crow,” deserted them, and joined the ranks of the Opposition. Lord Stanley's _vis-a-vis_ is Sir James Graham; in his early days he had distinguished himself by the strength of his radical opinions, but as a member of Lord Grey's cabinet, he suppressed these sentiments, and ”jumped Jim Crow” by confining himself more strictly within Whig limits. Conspicuous amongst the performers is Lord Melbourne! When in office under Mr. Canning he had made several anti-Reform speeches, but afterwards became a member of the Government of Lord Grey by which Reform was carried;--as Prime Minister he went far nearer to the principles of absolute democracy than either Lord Grey or Lord Althorp. Lord Melbourne's face, however, shows unmistakable repugnance at finding that his numerous ”wheels about” have brought him face to face with O'Connell, and he turns in disgust from the famous agitator, who, with his thumb to his nose and his left arm stuck in his side, shows that he has no intention of permitting him to enjoy a _pas_ all to himself. O'Connell of course shows himself complete master of the figure which he had danced so frequently; one of the most s.h.i.+fty, unstable men of his day, he can scarcely be called a politician, for like all agitators, the person he really sought to serve was himself alone. He chopped and changed just as it suited his purpose, and is properly introduced by the artist amongst the most adroit and vigorous of the political double shufflers.
The Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel find themselves _vis-a-vis_, in allusion to their conduct with reference to Catholic Emanc.i.p.ation.
Both had originally been consistent opposers of the measure, which was at last carried by the influence of the very men who before had been its most persistent adversaries.
But, if any one had ”turned about and wheeled about,” it was Sir Francis Burdett, and accordingly the artist introduces him as indulging in a very flouris.h.i.+ng _pas seul_; he wears a self-satisfied smirk, and carries his thumbs in his waistcoat, in allusion to his own contention that he had been always consistent. Yet this self-satisfied aristocratic-looking personage not many years before had distinguished himself as the most prominent of radical malcontents, and had been drawn by his enthusiastic dupes through the city of Westminster in a triumphal car, decorated with the symbols of liberty, and preceded by a banner bearing the inscription, ”Westminster's Pride and England's Glory.”
The queer figure in the c.o.c.ked hat is Sir de Lacy Evans, who figures as one of the dancers in allusion to his practice as compared with his professions. In 1833 he obtained a seat for Westminster, triumphing over his opponent Sir J. C. Hobhouse, who for fifteen years had represented that const.i.tuency, both candidates professing to be zealous advocates for the abolition of flogging in the army. Sir de Lacy nevertheless, when commanding the British Legion at St. Sebastian, ”jumped Jim Crow”
by flogging his soldiers without mercy. Lord John Russell once sneered at every project of Reform, but his Lords.h.i.+p, as we have seen, ”jumped Jim Crow” by repeatedly introducing the Reform Bill into the House of Commons, which was mainly pa.s.sed by his persistent exertions; very properly, therefore, Lord John figures in HB's clever sketch among the most prominent of ”Jim Crow” double shufflers.
FOOTNOTES:
[108] These political changes, as we shall presently see, are by no means uncommon. William Cobbett, for instance, in 1801 supported the principles of Pitt, but in 1805, from a ”Church and King” man, he became and continued an ardent liberal.
[109] ”English Graphic Satire,” by R. W. Buss.
[110] _Westminster Review_, June, 1840.
[111] Greville's ”Memoirs,” ii. p. 303.
[112] This was the idea of all Tories of the day. The terrible effects of the Reform Bill were amusingly predicted by John Wilson Croker to the king himself; they have not of course been fulfilled. See ”Journal of Julian Charles Young” (Memoir of Charles Mayne Young, vol. i. p. 231).
CHAPTER XII.
_THE POLITICAL SKETCHES OF_ HB (_Continued_).
LORD JOHN RUSSELL.
Sydney Smith said of little Lord John Russell, that he was ”ready to undertake _any_thing and _every_thing--to build St. Paul's,--cut for the stone,--or command the Channel fleet,” and this satire of the wit was true. He tried politics and he tried literature, and few people will say that he was entirely successful at either. As a politician, for instance, his general capacity for getting himself and his party into a mess, earned from the most intellectually powerful of his political opponents the enduring t.i.tle of ”Lord Meddle and Muddle.” He has not been dead very long, yet what reputation has he left behind him as a dramatist--novelist--historian--biographer--editor--pamphleteer, all of which _roles_ he essayed at some time or other of his long and eventful career? His _Nun of Arronca_ (1822) fetches it is true an exceedingly high price, because having been rigidly suppressed by its author it is now exceedingly rare. The best that can be said of Lord John--and that is saying a great deal--is, that he was a consistent Liberal according to his lights, and that to him belongs the honour and glory of bringing about the great measure of Reform, which, as we have seen, was, mainly through his instrumentality, accomplished in 1832.
Lord John, as might have been expected, frequently appears in the ”political sketches” of HB. He cuts an amusing figure in one where _Jonah_ (Lord Minto) is about to be thrown overboard by Lords Lansdowne, Palmerston, and Duncannon, by order of the captain (Lord Melbourne), to appease the storm raised by Lords Brougham and Lyndhurst in reference to a rumour that Lord Minto (First Lord of the Admiralty), had instructed British cruisers to stop all Sardinian vessels carrying warlike stores for Don Carlos. Lord John, while clinging to the mast behind, and viewing with terror the impending fate of his colleague, evidently solaces himself with the conviction that his own weight is too insignificant to have any material effect upon the safety of the s.h.i.+p.
Minto owed his safety to the Duke of Wellington, who therefore figures in the sketch as the whale; for, although convinced that his lords.h.i.+p had been imprudent, he successfully resisted Brougham's motion for a copy of the instructions, and thereby succeeded in lodging poor Jonah on dry land.
STAMP DUTY ON NEWSPAPERS.