Изображения страниц

expenditure be revised and further reduced. Six millions had been added to the expenditure of the country in four years, quite apart from the war-a fact which suggested most serious reflections. The chancellor of the exchequer had taken the expenditure of 1853-54 as that of 1858-59, which Mr. Gladstone treated as a pure delusion, calculating that the expenditure of the latter year would exceed that of 1857-58, and that the real wants of the public service were likely to increase.

Mr. Gladstone urgently denounced the increase of duties on tea and sugar, and said, "In Sir Robert Peel's time you were called upon to remit £1,400,000 of indirect taxes, now you are called on to impose indirect taxes to that amount; then you were called on to fill up a deficiency at your own cost, now you are called on to create a deficiency at the cost of others; you were then called upon to take a burden on yourselves to relieve the great mass of your fellow-countrymen, now you are called upon to take a burden off the shoulders of the wealthier classes in order that you may impose indirect taxes upon the tea and sugar which are consumed by every labouring family in the country. I can only say that, for my own part, I entertain on this subject a most decided opinion, and nothing shall induce me to refrain from giving every constitutional opposition in my power to such a proposition." Mr. Disraeli's resolution was lost, and it is a significant indication of the confusion of parties at that time, that Messrs. Milner Gibson, Cobden, and Sidney Herbert supported the ministry, Sir James Graham voting with Mr. Gladstone.

discontent which had been as usual the reaction after the war-fever. Mr. Disraeli, who spoke of Mr. Gladstone's "wise" proposals for the abolition of the income-tax, moved that it would be expedient, before sanctioning the financial arrangements for the ensuing year, to adjust the estimated income and expenditure in a manner best calculated to secure the country against a deficiency in the years 1858-59 and 1859-60, and to provide for such a balance of revenue and charge respectively, in the year 1860 as might place it in the power of parliament at that period, without embarrassment to the finances, altogether to remit the incometax. This motion was energetically supported by Mr. Gladstone, who declared that no man could be more deeply interested in the budget scheme than himself, for it concerned a plan in every part contradictory to that which he had proposed, and which had been adopted by the present House of Commons. Successive administrations had aimed at the consolidation and simplification of the financial laws, but the chancellor of the exchequer had condemned the labours of parliament for the last fifteen years. The income-tax, though grievous and inquisitorial, had been introduced to purchase blessings to be wrought out for the mass of the people through its instrumentality. But with what beneficial changes was it proposed now to associate this tax? There was an idea that this year there would be a remission of taxation to the extent of £11,970,000; but omitting war taxes to the amount of £4,470,000-with the cessation of which the government could not be credited-the remission of the income-tax in 1857-58 would be only £4,600,000. Against this sum was to be set £1,400,000 to be laid upon tea and sugar; so that the real amount of taxes remitted in 1857-58 would be only a little over £3,000,000; | effected; and though Mr. Gladstone, on the nor was he satisfied that the supposed surplus of £891,000 would be bona fide applicable. Mr. Gladstone insisted upon the obligation of parliament to adhere to the stipulation entered into with the country respecting the incometax. The first grave and main defect in the proposed budget was that it was based upon an excessive expenditure, and at the proper time he should move that the estimates of

Subsequently the subject of the duty on tea and sugar was again brought forward, and some modification of the proposed tax was

debate on the estimates, brought forward a resolution in favour of the reduction of expenditure, he did not carry it to a division.

That the country was in a condition of commercial depression soon became evident. In the month of November, 1857, the pressure became so severe that there was a crisis in which failures of banking companies and large private undertakings followed each other with


alarming rapidity. Among these were the
Liverpool Borough Bank, with liabilities of
£5,000,000. The Northumberland and Dur-
ham £3,000,000, and the Wolverhampton
£1,000,000; while two of the largest private
failures were: Sanderson, Sandeman, and Co.
for £5,298,997, and Dennistoun and Co. for
£2,143,701. From the statement of affairs
made by 146 firms and five banks, the total
liabilities were something like 41 millions,
and the deficiency at 7 millions. On the 8th
of October the bank rate of discount had stood
at 5 per cent and was then raised to 6, on
the 12th it rose again to 7 and the funds fell
1 per cent, on the 19th, discount was 8 per
cent, and on the 4th of November had ad-
vanced to the unprecedented figure of 9 per
cent. On the 11th the bullion in the Bank
had diminished to £7,171,000; while the notes
in circulation, and the liabilities of the Bank
on private deposits and securities, amounted
to £60,000,000, the applications for discount
being greater than at any former period, and
the demand for gold for county banks large
and continuous. On November the 18th, when
the accounts were made up, there were in the
Bank, notes and gold to the value of £1,462,153;
while the deposits that might at any time be
drawn out amounted to £18,248,003. On the
following day the liabilities of the Bank were
upwards of £4,000,000 more than they had
been in the preceding July, while its available
resources were above £4,000,000 less than they
had been at that time. This state of affairs,
combined with the failures of private banks
and large firms principally connected with the
American trade, made some immediate measure
necessary, and it was determined to suspend
the Bank Charter Act of 1844 by which the
issue of notes was restricted. It was overriding
an act of the legislature, and the government
called a short extra session of parliament that
they might be indemnified for their action,
but it was a necessary exercise of illegality,
and achieved the desired result. The issue
department of the Bank issued to the banking
department £2,000,000 in excess of the amount
permitted by the statute, and the latter depart-
ment issued to the public only £928,000 in ex-
cess, that being found sufficient. On the 1st


of December the over-issue was entirely returned, and public confidence was greatly restored by the relief granted, and by the announcement that parliament would meet at an early date to consider the financial condition of the country.

The commercial condition of the country was disturbed, and had become alarming. Industrial prospects had not for some time been such as to reassure those who were engaged in them. There had been much distress among the labouring population, and as we have seen there were some attempts on the part of a few lawless fellows, who themselves did not belong to the industrious class, to instigate riots, which were quickly suppressed. There were few political disturbances, however. Chartism, and much that belonged to it, appeared to have been merged in more constitutional and legal endeavours to obtain reforms in parliament, and in the laws affecting the social condition of the people. Political meetings were held, and they were sometimes turbulent, but they were no longer attended with public disturbances of a political character. Two years earlier, many changes had taken place in regard to those demonstrations to which reference has been made in a previous page. These changes had been signalized by the confession of Charles Kingsley, who, in a letter to his friend Mr. Ludlow, spoke in his frank, earnest, characteristic way of his own unfitness for a reforming leader at the time that he was so prominent,but we may venture to think not practically and permanently influential-in that Christian socialist movement of which the theories are somewhat vaguely indicated in Alton Locke, Yeast, and Parson Lot.

"For myself," he says, "on looking back, I see clearly with shame and sorrow that the obloquy which I have brought often on myself and on the good cause has been almost all of it my own fault-that I have given the devil and bad men a handle, not by caring what people would say, but by not caring; by fancying that I was a very grand fellow, who was going to speak what I knew to be true, in spite of all fools (and really did and do intend so to do), while all the while I was deceiving myself, and unaware of a canker at

the heart the very opposite to the one against | reform is social reform, or that men's hearts which you warn me--I mean the proud, selfwilled, self-conceited spirit which made no allowance for other men's weakness or ignorance; nor, again, for their superior experience and wisdom on points which I had never considered-which took a pride in shocking, and startling, and defying, and hitting as hard as I could, and fancied, blasphemously, as I think, that the Word of God had come to me only, and went out from me only. God forgive me for these sins, as well as for my sins in the opposite direction; but for these sins especially, because I see them to be darker and more dangerous than the others."

This was in 1855, and he was perhaps harder upon himself than he need have been, in consequence of seeing how little he had directly effected in relation to the result, to which he had at one time looked forward with some eagerness. But he appears not to have estimated the indirect effect which his books and speaking, as well as the utterances of some others of the school of Mr. Maurice, had produced upon the general "view" of those outside political Chartism and Socialism, but well within the influences which tend to foster the recognition of a common brotherhood among men, to promote principles calculated to increase manly independence among the labouring classes, and to lead them into a higher and purer atmosphere of thought and brotherhood. Kingsley's Christian socialism had some resemblance to its precursor, the Young Englandism of which Mr. Disraeli was an exponent in earlier days, but it had this essential difference that instead of its being founded on the union of the agricultural population and a condescending aristocracy, it was to rest on the union of the working-classes with the church, and this made all the world of difference when we remember that by the church, Kingsley meant "the Christian ideal of the church," which, whatever may have been his conception of it in some minor respects, undoubtedly meant infinitely more than the Church of England merely "as by law established." Even in the hot political period Kingsley could not refrain from declaring that the Charter was founded on "the mistake of fancying that legislative

can be changed by act of parliament." In fact Kingsley's books and many of his sermons had an immediate and also a lasting influence, but that influence appears not to have been in the direction which he at the time expected. They set men thinking of truths related to the social questions which they professed to discuss, but did not lead to the political solutions of the social puzzles of the day. His deep and noble moral and spiritual convictions were uttered to the hearts of his readers, and were weighty enough to overbear and make comparatively harmless the errors of his political judgment, as many people may experience who open Alton Locke and read it, now that the tumult and the conflict of the period to which it refers have passed away and are almost forgotten.

There had been, it is true, a semi-political demonstration in 1855, which was known as the Hyde Park Riot, but this was a rough protest against a bill proposed by Lord R. Grosvenor for the purpose of suppressing Sunday trading, a measure containing clauses which would altogether have prohibited the poorer portion of the community from obtaining articles of necessary consumption during Sunday, while it of course did nothing to put an end to every kind of indulgence by the more wealthy class. The introduction of a bill which would at once prevent the costermonger, the tobacconist, the publican, and the itinerant vendor of fish or fruit from selling their wares during any part of the Sunday, would in itself have met with strenuous opposition, for it was customary for the lower section of the people to purchase much of the provision for the day on the morning of the day itself; and this was too often made necessary because of the late hour at which wages were usually paid on the Saturday, before the establishment of the Saturday halfholiday. But in addition to this, the clauses of the bill were particularly irritating, as they inevitably provoked comparison between the condition of those who, though they possessed ample larders and well-stocked cellars, were not prohibited on Sundays from attending their clubs, where they could obtain all



ride, but went home by another route. A great number of the members of the legislature were present looking on. The crowd remained until nearly eight o'clock, but afterwards joined other mobs in some of the fashionable squares, where, as well as in the roads leading to these quarters, they did some mischief.

kinds of refreshment, and summon attendants | carriages did not venture to return down the at their will; and that of the labouring population, who, after a week's hard work, were to be precluded from indulging in their small Sunday luxuries, unless they had purchased them on the previous day. The bill, as it was proposed, provoked wide-spread and bitter opposition, and in London "the masses," -as it had some time past become the fashion to call the labouring population,-took a remarkable method of showing their displeasure. The demonstration took place on Sunday, the 24th of June, 1855.

A few days previously, placards had been displayed throughout the metropolis, inviting the working-classes and others to attend in Hyde Park on Sunday afternoon to see "how the aristocracy observed the Sabbath." In obedience to this call several thousand persons had assembled in the park between two and three o'clock on Sunday. A great number of policemen were distributed throughout the park, but did not interfere with the free movement of the persons assembled, a large majority of whom appeared to be of the better class of artisans, accompanied, in numberless instances, by their wives and families. The equestrian ride in Rotten Row was totally deserted, but soon after three o'clock a variety of carriages began to make their appearance in the drive running along the right bank of the Serpentine. The vast crowd at once took up a position on each side of the road, extending from the Achilles statue to the Serpentine Bridge; and as each carriage passed along, indulged in loud hissing and groaning, accompanied by deafening cries of "Go to church!" "Why do you allow your servants to work on Sunday?" "Shame on you!" "Down with the Sabbatarians!" "Away with the Sunday Bill." In one carriage a lady stood up and held in her hand a prayer-book, but the only effect it had on the crowd was to make them shout out, "Walk, walk, and let your horses rest and your coachman go to church!" Lord and Lady Wilton, Lady Granville, and several others of the nobility and gentry, were obliged to leave their carriages at the demand of the multitude. In the majority of instances the occupants of the

The opposition to the bill was upheld by the Times, in which a correspondent wrote: -"After all, one cannot wonder at such popular ebullitions and demonstrations--nor can we prevent this ratiocinative process of the million'-hasty, harsh, and presumptuous though it may be-when we witness, on one hand, the perpetual attempts of the legislature to torture the poor into an observance of the Sabbath, and notice, on the other hand, the unfettered enjoyment by the rich, of comforts and liberties, on the very same day. Thus, for instance, after leaving the park I called at my club, and, at a time when not a poor wretch in the metropolis might purchase a drop of beer, I obtained for myself whatever liquid refreshment I fancied, and found other gentlemen similarly engaged and similarly privileged. Two minutes afterwards a bishop's carriage, drawn by a pair of well-groomed horses, driven and guarded by coachman and footmen in elegant liveries, and conveying two reverend gentlemen (who might, for aught I know, have this very day preached from the text "Thou shalt keep holy the Sabbath-day'), dashed by the door of the club, and I really could not help feeling that, after all, the park demonstration was neither unaccountable nor unnatural, seeing that both Sunday trading and Sunday labour are practised with impunity by the bishops themselves, and that Lord Robert Grosvenor's bill does not contain a clause which will, in the remotest degree, interfere with the Sabbath enjoyments of the rich."

On the following Sunday the police mustered in force, but were distributed, and, to a great extent, were concealed from the immense crowd which again assembled. It had been decided to endeavour to quell the demonstrations by force, and there was ample oppor

tunity. Those who were responsible for the attempt appeared either not to perceive, or not to care, that they were thus emphasizing the injustice of class legislation contemplated by the bill. Again to quote from the Times:"Carriages were admitted to the drive; and when the hooting began the police rushed out from their ambuscades, and made unsparing use of their truncheons on every person within their reach. So vigorous was their onset that the people were driven about in all directions, the constables pursuing and hitting away right and left. By a very clever manœuvre, for which the very highest credit is due to the gallant constable in command at that particular point, a portion of the crowd was driven into the Serpentine. To avoid the truncheons, some of the baffled foe, as is reported to us, absolutely took to the water, and endeavoured by swimming to gain the opposite bank. But no resource is unknown to British valour. The police had boats at their service, and the fierce creatures were brought back in triumph to the shore. Need we say that the police were victorious in this hotly-contested affair?" Of course the conduct of the mob cannot be defended, but the whole proceedings showed that a grave error had been committed, and the conduct of the police on the side of aristocracy, as well as on that of "law and order," was seriously condemned, and led to a hot discussion in parliament. But the mover and supporter of the bill, alarmed at the storm they had raised, or tardily convinced of the just unpopularity of the measure, hurriedly withdrew it, though not in time to prevent a repetition of the riots on the following Sunday. It was well that the bill had been withdrawn before defiance was provoked still further by some words which were used during the debate by Mr. Dundas, who declared that he had never seen greater forbearance or moderation exercised on any occasion than that exercised by the police. This was in face of a demand for a committee of inquiry into the alleged outrages on the people. Petitions for this inquiry were presented to the House by Mr. Duncombe, who was still a popular “tribune." He said he had been requested to present those petitions, and to make those

statements, all of which could be proved before a select committee, for which he would move, for the sake of the peace and tranquillity of the town on the following Sunday. If the statements he had made were incorrect, the home secretary could refute them; but he was prepared to prove them. Having read some letters from parties describing the violence of the police, the hon. gentleman repeated that something must be done before Sunday if the government wished the peace to be preserved. The people would be satisfied with a committee of inquiry, but they certainly would not remain content if the matter were to be hushed up. The bill had been withdrawn; but who was compromised by that proceeding? Why, the House of Commons. He was told that the people were determined to go to Hyde Park on the following Sunday, unless inquiry were granted, in great numbers, and to go armed. If they had been armed on the previous Sunday there would certainly have been loss of life. In conclusion, he asserted that either inquiry must be granted or the park must be closed on Sunday.

The action of the authorities had in fact aroused a riotous temper, which it would be exceedingly difficult to quell; but on the other hand inflammatory speeches and articles levelled against the Sunday Bill, and defending the position assumed by the populace, had the effect of promoting further acts of hostility.

A dense crowd of persons assembled before the police court, Marlborough Street, at an early hour on the Monday morning, to learn the result of the complaints against about seventy persons taken into custody on the Sunday. When Mr. Hardwick, the sitting magistrate, made his appearance in the street, for the purpose of taking his seat on the bench, the mob began some to cheer and some to hoot. Several persons cried out, "Act with justice!" and one person flung a stone, which, however, missed the magistrate, and struck a person near him. Mr. Hardwick having entered the court was in the act of passing one of the windows, when a stone was flung from the street which broke a pane of glass, but did no further damage. The magistrate, who bore

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »