menu_book Chapter 8

CHAPTER XIX. KING WILLIAM IV. William IV., as the Duke of Clarence had now become, was nearing the completion of his sixty-fifth year, when the death of his brother raised him to the throne. He had surely had full time in which to prepare himself for the business of a monarch, for

during a long period it was well known that nothing was likely to stand between him and the succession except the life of his elder brother the Duke of York. But William's tastes did not allure him to any study of the duties which belonged to a throne. The navy was assigned to him as a profession, and he actually saw some service in America

and in the West Indies, but he obtained his promotion, as a matter of course, until he reached the position of Lord High Admiral, which may be described as the main top of his naval career. The story is told of him and will probably, whether it be accurate or not, be told as long as his history comes under public recollection.

Did he had something to do with the promotion of the great naval battle of Navarino, which led to the emancipation of Greece? The combined fleets of England, France and Russia, under the command of Admiral Sir Edward Codrington, were watching the Turkish and Egyptian fleets in order to protect Greece against them.

But the actual course to be taken by the Allies was supposed to depend upon many serious political considerations. The British Admiralty issued a solemn official dispatch to Sir Edward Codrington in joining on him the necessity of great care and caution in any action he might take. This document was forwarded in due course by the Lord High Admiral, and the story goes

that the Duke of Clarence scribbled at the end of it in his own hand the encouraging words, Go it, Ned! Whether it was fought under this inspiration or not, it is certain that the battle was fought, that the Turkish and Egyptian fleets were destroyed, and that the independence of Greece was won.

The English public generally would have been nonetheless inclined to welcome the accession of the Duke of Clarence as William IV, even although it had been part of authentic history that the new king had lately borne an important, if an underhand, part in the rescue of Greece from Ottoman oppression. But there was little else in the career of the Duke of Clarence to command popular respect

or affection. He had lived openly, or almost openly, for many years with the celebrated actress Mrs. Jordan, who had borne him ten children, and this connection had been made the subject of free and frank allusion in some of the verses of Robert Burns. The British public, however, were inclined, as Robert Burns was, to look forgivingly

on the doings of the prince, for he was still a young man when his acquaintance with Mrs. Jordan began. The British public liked him because he was a sailor, if for nothing else, and men's eyes turned hopefully to him when it became apparent that not much good was any longer to be looked for from George IV.

In 1818 William married the eldest daughter of the Duke of Saxe-Meiningen and had two daughters, both of whom died in their infancy. The Duke of Clarence had been noted during the greater part of his career for his roughness and many anecdotes of him were spread about that might have suited well the fun of some historian belonging to the school of Brantôme or some compiler of memoirs after the fashion

of Saint-Simon. Still, he was the sailor king and England had always and naturally loved sailors and go to then, as might have been said in the days of Shakespeare. What further explanation could be needed of the fact that William IV opened his career of royalty under favoring auspices?

It might seem to the mind of some philosophical observer rather hard to get into transports of enthusiasm about a new monarch aged 65 who during all his previous career had done of which to be particularly proud and had done many things of which a respectable person in private life would have felt heartily ashamed. Still, the Duke of Clarence had become William IV and was on the throne and great things

might possibly be expected from him even yet, although he was pretty well stricken in years. At all events he was not George IV, so the public of these countries was in the mood to make the best of him and give him a loyal welcome and wait for events with the comfortable faith that even at 65 a man may begin a new life and find time and heart and intellect to do things of which no promise whatever had been given during all his earlier years.

William had been supposed up to the time of his accession to lean toward the Whig or what we should now call the Liberal Party. His manners were frank, familiar and even rough. He cared little for court ceremonial of any kind and was in the habit of walking about the streets with his umbrella tucked under his arm like any ordinary Londoner.

All this told rather in his favor so far as the outer public were concerned. There was supposed to be something rather English, something rather typical of John Bull in the easy-going manners of the new sovereign which gave people an additional reason for welcoming him. The new sovereign, however, had come in for times of popular excitement and even of trouble.

There came a new revolution in France, only a dynastic revolution to be sure and not a national upheaval, but still it was a change which dethroned the newly restored legitimate line of sovereigns. The elder branch of the Bourbon was torn away and flung aside. There were to be no more kings of France but only kings of the French.

Charles X was deposed and Louis-Philippe, son of Philippe Egalité, was placed on the throne. Charles X was the last of the legitimate kings of France so far and there does not seem much chance in the immediate future for any restoration of the fallen dynasty. The overthrow of legitimacy in France had a strong effect on popular opinion in England.

It was plain that Charles X and his system had come to ruin because the sovereign and his ministers would not move with the common movement of the times over the greater part of the European continent. And popular reformers in England took care that the lesson should not be thrown away over here.

Great changes had been accomplished by popular movements even during the enfeebling and disheartening reign of George IV. Great progress had been made toward the establishment of religious equality or, at all events, toward the removal of religious disqualifications among the dissenters and the Roman Catholics. There was a loud cry almost everywhere for some measure of political reform.

The conditions of the country had been gradually undergoing a great change. England had been becoming less and less dependent for her prosperity on her mere agricultural resources and had been growing more and more into a great manufacturing community. Huge towns like Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham and Sheffield were rising in the northern and midland regions.

Liverpool was superseding Bristol as the great seaport of commercial traffic. Yet in most cases, the old-fashioned principle still prevailed, which in practice confined the parliamentary representation of the country to the members who sat for the counties and for what were called the pocket boroughs. The theory of the Constitution, as it was understood, held that the sovereign summoned

at his own discretion and pleasure the persons whom he thought best qualified to form a House of Commons to consult with him as to the government of the Empire. The sovereign for this purpose conferred the right of representation on this or that town or district or county according as he thought fit, and this arrangement had gone on from generation to generation.

Now it sometimes happened that a place that had been comparatively popular and prosperous at the period when it obtained the right of representation had seen its prosperity and population gradually ebb away from it and leave it little better than a bare hillside, and yet the bare hillside retained the right of representation and its owner could send anyone he pleased into the House of Commons.

There were numberless illustrations of this curious anomaly all over the country. The great families of landed proprietors naturally monopolized among them the representation of the counties and many of them enjoyed also the ownership of the small decaying or totally decayed boroughs which still retained the right of returning members to Parliament. On the other hand, the development of manufacturing energy had caused the growth of great and

populous towns and cities and most of these towns and cities were actually without representation or the right of representation in the House of Commons. Thus a condition of things had arisen which was certain to prove itself incompatible with the spread of education and the growth of public interest in all great questions of domestic reform.

We have already seen in this history how the Whig party in Parliament and the popular agitators out of Parliament had long been rousing the national intelligence and the national conscience to a sense of the growing necessity for some complete change in all that concerned the representation of the people. The Duke of Wellington was at the head of the administration when George IV died and

William came to the throne. The new king, as has been said, was supposed to have liberal inclinations as regarded political questions and there was a common expectation that he might begin his reign by summoning a new set of ministers. The king, however, did nothing of the kind.

He sent messages to the Duke of Wellington telling him in his usual familiar and uncouth way that he had always liked the Duke uncommonly well and did not see any reason why he should not keep him as his prime minister. This was to begin with a disappointment to the majority of the public. The first royal speech from the throne contained other matter of disappointment.

There was great distress all over the country. The enormous expense of the long wars was still making itself felt in huge taxation. The condition of agriculture was low and many districts were threatened with something like famine. The state was suffering from the reaction which always follows a long and exhausting

war. It was confidently expected that the royal speech would take some account of the widespread national distress and would foreshadow some measures to deal with it. The speech, however, said nothing on the subject. Then there was another omission, which created much dissatisfaction and even some alarm.

This speech made no mention of any measures to be taken for the establishment of a regency in the event of the king's death. The king was 65 years old and had led a life which even the most loyal and hopeful of his subjects could not regard with confidence as likely to give promise of a long reign. Now the heir presumptive to the throne was the Princess Alexandrina Victoria, a child

only 11 years old. The Princess Victoria, as she was commonly called, was the daughter of the Duke of Kent, the fourth son of George III. Any attack of illness, any serious accident, might bring the life of King William to a sudden close and then, if no previous arrangement had been made for a regency, parliament and

the country might be involved in some confusion. There was one very grave and even ominous condition which had to be taken into account. If the king were to die suddenly and with no provision made for a regency, the girl, perhaps the child, who succeeded him, would, in the ordinary course of things, be left under the guardianship of her eldest uncle, the Duke of Cumberland.

Now it is only stating a simple fact to say that the Duke of Cumberland was then the most unpopular man in England. He was not merely unpopular, he was an object of common dread and detestation. He was regarded as a reckless profligate and an unprincipled schemer. There must have been much exaggeration about some of the tales that were told and accepted

concerning him, for it is hard to believe that at a time so near to our own a prince of the royal house of England could have lived a life the story of which might seem to have belonged to the worst days of the lower empire. But would ever allowance be made for exaggeration, it is certain that the Duke of Cumberland was almost universally hated and that many people seriously considered him quite capable

of any plot or any crime which might secure his own advancement to the throne. Sanguine persons indeed saw a gleam of hope in the fact that the Duke of Cumberland was in any case the heir to the crown of Hanover. In the house of Hanover the succession is confined to the Mayo line and the Princess Victoria had nothing to do with it.

The hope therefore was that the Duke of Cumberland would be content with the prospect of his succession to the throne of Hanover and that when the time arrived for him to become King of Hanover he would betake himself to his new kingdom and trouble England no more. Will the fact remain that just as yet he was not King of Hanover and that if no proper provisions were made against a contingency he might become the guardian of the girl or

the child who was to succeed William IV on the English throne. King William however did not trouble himself much about all these considerations. He did not see any reason why people should expect him to die all of a sudden and he could hardly be got to give any serious attention to the question of a regency. It was then part of the constitutional practice of the monarchy that a dissolution of parliament

should take place when a new sovereign had come to the throne. The practice has since ceased to be a part of our constitutional usages but in the days when William IV came to the throne it was a matter of course. The King for some reason or other was anxious that a dissolution should take place as soon as possible.

It may be that he was merely desirous to find out how far the existing ministry had the support of the country although it does not seem quite likely that William's intelligence could have carried him so near to the level of statesmanship as to make this elementary question a matter of consideration in his mind. The King's principal ministers were the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel.

The most powerful among the leaders of the opposition were Charles Earl Grey in the House of Lords and Henry Bruam and Lord John Russell in the House of Commons. There was some doubt as to the position which might be taken up by the Canningites and Huskieson and their friends. Some of the Tories believed that they might be won over to the support of the Duke of

Wellington in order to assist him in counteracting the efforts of the more ardent and liberal reformers like Grey and Bruam and Russell. Fate soon settled the question so far at least as Huskieson was concerned. The opening of the line of railway from Liverpool to Manchester, the first line of any considerable length completed in England took place on September 15, 1830.

The Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel and Huskieson were among the distinguished visitors at the opening of the railway. The friends alike of the Prime Minister and of the great expert in finance were anxious that the two should come together on this occasion and make a personal, if not a political reconciliation.

The train stopped at a station, the Duke and Huskieson both got out and were approaching to meet each other, the Duke holding out his hand when an alarm was raised about the approach of a locomotive. A rush was made for the carriages and in the confusion Huskieson was struck down by an open door in the moving train and suffered such injuries that his death almost immediately

followed. Huskieson was beyond doubt one of the most enlightened statesmen of his time in all that concerned the financial arrangements of the country. He might have been called a liberal, just as we might call canning a liberal when we think of the general direction taken by the policy of either man.

The dissatisfaction with which the speech from the throne was received found its expression in no severe form so far at least as Parliament was concerned, then a motion by Lord Gray in the one house and Lord Altrop in the other for a short delay to enable both houses to consider the address in reply to the royal speech. It was made evident that the delay sought for had to do with the question of a regency

concerning which, as has been said, the King had not troubled himself to make any announcement. Now the constitutional system of England had taken no account except through the provision of a regency of the fact that a child might become sovereign of the realm. Therefore if Parliament did not establish a regency during the lifetime of King William and if the King were soon to die through any accident or malady, the child princess would

come to the throne under no further constitutional restraints than those which belonged to the position of a full-grown sovereign. There was another trouble, however, and one of still graver political importance awaiting the ministry of the Duke of Wellington. Henry Bruham gave notice in the House of Commons that on an early day he would bring forward

a motion to raise the whole question of reform in the representative system of the country. Bruham at this time was regarded as the most strenuous and powerful champion of reform in the House of Commons. Lord John Russell had not yet had an opportunity of proving how steadfast were his principles as a reformer and how great were the parliamentary gifts which he had brought to the main purpose

of his life. Moreover, Lord John Russell never had any of the kind of eloquence which made Bruham so powerful in and out of Parliament. Bruham on a popular platform could outdo the most stormy mob orator of the time. He was impassioned, boisterous, overwhelming, to a degree of which we can find no adequate

illustration even in the most tumultuous Trafalgar Square demonstrations of our later days. Even in the House of Commons and afterwards in what might be regarded as the deadening atmosphere of the House of Lords, Bruham was accustomed to shout and storm and gesticulate, to shake his fist and stamp after a fashion which was startling even in those days and of which now we have no living illustration.

Bruham was at this time almost at the very zenith of his popularity among the reformers all over the country and more especially in the north of England. When therefore Bruham announced that he was determined at the earliest opportunity to raise the whole question of reform in the House of Commons, it became evident that the new reign was destined to open with a momentous and long constitutional struggle, a struggle

that might be counted upon to mark an epoch in the history of England. The news that the French legitimate monarchy had fallen and that Louis Philippe reigned as King of the French, King of the barricades, he was commonly called, came in time to quicken men's hopes and animate their passions for the approaching trial of strength between the old forms and the new spirit.

The government refused to agree to the one day's delay which was asked for by the leaders of opposition. On a division being taken there was a majority for ministers in both houses and the Duke of Wellington had scored thus far. He had shown that he was personally determined not to concede any point to the opposition and he had secured a victory. Parliament was dissolved within a few days and the country was plunged into a general election.

At that time it should be remembered an election was a very different sort of event from that which bears the same name at the present day. An election contest could then, according to the extent and nature of the constituency, run on for a time not exceeding 15 days and it was accompanied by a practice of bribery, lavish, open, shameless and profligate, such as is totally unknown to our more modern times and such as our habits and feelings no more

than our laws would tolerate. Intimidation and violence were also parts of every fiercely contested election and those whom the law excluded from any part in the struggle as electors were apt to find in that very exclusion only another reason for taking part in it by the use of physical force. Just at the time which we are now describing there are many conditions which made a general election likely to be especially stormy and turbulent.

The distress which prevailed throughout the country had in many districts called up a spirit of something like desperation which exhibited itself in a crime of almost entire novelty, the burning of hayricks on farms. This offense became so widespread throughout large parts of the country that it gave rise to theories about an organized conspiracy against property which was supposed to be in some vague sort of way an outcome of the

socialistic excesses which had taken place during the French Revolution and had been revived by the more recent commotions in France. The probability is that the Rick burning offenses were in the first instance the outcome of sheer despair seeking vengeance anywhere and anyhow for its own sufferings and then of the mere passion for imitation and crime which finds some manner of illustration here and there at all periods of history. However that

may be it is certain that the offenses became very common and that they were punished with merciless severity and that the gallows were kept in constant operation. Now it may be taken almost as a political axiom that whenever there is great distress at the time of a general election, it is certain to give rise to some feeling of hostility against a ministry especially if the ministry had been for any length of time in power. A considerable portion of the

Tories had been turned against the Duke of Wellington because under the advice of Sir Robert Peel he had yielded at last to the demand for Catholic emancipation even although as Peel and the Duke declared the concession had been made merely as a choice between Catholic emancipation and civil war. Some influential Tories all over the country were asking whether Ireland had been pacified or had shown herself to the least degree grateful because an installment of religious

freedom had been granted to the Roman Catholics and they insisted that the Duke had surrendered the supremacy of the established church to no purpose. It was certain indeed that O'Connell had not in the slightest degree slackened the energy of his political movement because the emancipating Among the opponents of reform at all times there are some who seem to hold that the granting of one reform ought to be enough to put a stop to all demands for any other in that it is mere in

gratitude on the part of a man who has just obtained permission to follow his own form of worship if he wants also to put on an equality with his neighbors as regards the assertion of his political opinions therefore the ministry found as the elections went on that they had not merely all the reformers against them but that a certain proportion of those who in the ordinary condition of things would have been their supporters were estranged from them merely because they had

under whatever pressure consented to introduce any manner of reform. When the elections were over it seemed to reasonable observers very doubtful indeed whether King William however well-inclined would be able to retain for any length of time the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel as the leading advisors of the Crown. The country just then may be described as in a state of transition from one constitutional system to another. It was growing more clear day by day

that the time had gone by when the sovereign could hold to any one particular minister or set of ministers in defiance of the majority in the representative chamber and the strength of public opinion out of doors. On the other hand the time had not yet arrived when the system introduced and established by the present reign could be relied upon as part of the Constitution and the to accept without demur the judgment of the House of Commons as to the choice of his ministers.

The new Parliament was opened on November 5th and the royal speech gave but little satisfaction to reformers of any class. It contained no recommendation of constitutional reform and indeed congratulated the whole population on having the advantage of living under so faultless a political system. It concerned itself in no wise about the distress that existed in the country except that it expressed much satisfaction at the manner in which the criminal laws had been called into severe

action for the repression of offenses against property. The King conceded so much to public opinion as to recommend the appointment of a regency in order to make provision for the possibility of his life being cut short. But even this was only done in a fashion that seemed to say if you really will have it that I am likely to die soon you may humor yourselves by taking any course that seems to satisfy your scruples it is not worth my while to interfere with your

whims. The reformers therefore had clearly nothing to expect so far as the royal speech could deal with expectations but they found that they had still less to expect from the intentions of the ministry. In the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne Lord Gray took occasion to ask for some exposition of ministerial policy with regard to reform of the representative system. Then the Duke of Wellington delivered a speech which may be described as unique in its way.

It would be impossible to put into words any statement more frankly opposed to all parliamentary reform. The greatest orator that ever lived the profoundest judge who ever laid down the law to a jury could not have prepared a statement more comprehensive and more exact as a condemnation of all reform than that which the victor of Waterloo was able to enunciate with all confidence and satisfaction. He laid it down that it would be utterly beyond the power of the wisest political

philosopher to devise a constitution so near to absolute perfection as that with which Englishmen living in the reign of his present majesty William the fourth had been endowed by the wisdom of their ancestors. He affirmed that he had never heard any suggestion which contained the slightest promise of an improvement on that constitution. He repeated in various forms of repetition that Englishmen already possessed all the freedom that it was good for men to have, that the rights of all

classes were equally maintained, that the happiness of everyone was secured so far as law could secure it, and that the only thing for reasonable Englishmen to do was to open their eyes and recognize the advantages conferred upon them by the constitution under which they were happy enough to live. The Duke of Wellington probably knew nothing of Voltaire's philosopher who maintained that everything was for the best in this best of all possible worlds, but he seemed to be pervaded by

the same sentiment of complete satisfaction when he contemplated the British constitution. Finally, he declared that so far from having any intention to touch with a reverent hand that sacred political structure for the vain purpose of improvement, he was determined to resist to the uttermost of his power every effort to interfere with the constitutional arrangements which had done so much for the prosperity and the glory of the empire. We do not quote the exact

words of the Duke of Wellington's speech, but we feel sure we are giving a faithful version of the meaning which he intended to convey and succeeded very clearly in conveying. The Duke of Wellington was undoubtedly one of the greatest soldiers the world has ever seen. As a soldier of conquest, he was not indeed to be compared with an Alexander, a Caesar, or a Napoleon, but as a soldier of defense, he has probably never had a superior. As an administrator, too,

he had shown immense capacity both in India and in Europe and had more than once brought what seemed absolute chaos into order and shape. But he had no gift for the understanding of politics and it was happy for him, at more than one crisis of his career, that he was quite aware of his own political incapacity and was ready to defer to the judgment of other men who understood such things better than he did. We have already seen how he accepted the guidance of Peel when it

became necessary to yield the claim for Catholic emancipation and he was commonly in the habit of saying that Peel understood all such matters better than he could pretend to. He was not, therefore, the minister who would ruin a state or bring a state into revolution by obstinate adhesion to his own views in despite of every advice and every warning. And no doubt when he was delivering his harangue against all possible schemes of reform, he felt still convinced that he was merely

expressing the unalterable opinion of Peel and every other loyal subject whose judgment ought to prevail with a law-abiding people. In the House of Commons, Bruham gave notice that on an early day he would bring forward a motion on the subject of political reform. Thus, therefore, the trumpet of battle was sounded on both sides. The struggle must now be fought out to the end. Nothing, however, could be done until the ministry had been driven from office and it

was not by any means certain that in the House of Commons, as it was then constituted, a direct vote on the question of reform would end in a defeat of the Duke of Wellington's government. Something that seemed almost like an accident brought about a crisis sooner than had been anticipated. Sir Henry Parnell brought forward a motion for the appointment of a select committee to inquire into and report upon the estimates and amounts submitted by His Majesty with regard to the civil service.

This motion had the support of the Liberal leaders and was strongly opposed by the government. No one could have been surprised at the opposition offered by the government for Sir Henry Parnell's was just the sort of motion which every ministry is sure to oppose. A government prepares its own estimates and is not apt to be in favor of the appointment of an outside committee to inquire into their amount and their appropriation. Still, the whole question was not one to be regarded as

of capital importance in ordinary times. And therefore, although the debate was one of great interest, both inside and outside the House of Commons, it did not seem likely to lead to any momentous and immediate consequences. Sir Henry Parnell was a man of ability and character and was regarded in the House as an authority on financial questions. He belonged to the family of Parnell the poet, the friend of Swift and Pope, and he afterwards became the first Lord Congleton,

taking his title from that part of Cheshire where the poet and his ancestors had lived. In years, much later years, that belonged to our own times, another member of the Parnell family made for himself a conspicuous place in the House of Commons and in imperial politics, the late Charles Stuart Parnell, the famous leader of the Irish National Party. Sir Henry Parnell carried his motion by a majority of 29 in the House of Commons. Now in the ordinary course

of things, there was nothing in such an event to compel the resignation of a ministry. It would have been quite reasonable for any government to express a willingness to meet the wishes of the House on such a subject, to agree to the appointment of a committee, and then go on as if nothing particular had occurred. But it sometimes happens that a government is willing or even anxious to accept defeat on a side issue, although of minor importance, in order to escape from or at all

events to postpone a decision on some question of vital import. Sometimes, too, there are reasons well known to all members of a government but not yet in the knowledge of the public, which incline a ministry to find a reason for resigning office in the result of some casual division which cannot be said to amount to a vote of want of confidence. Not many years have passed since a liberal government, which might have seemed to ordinary observers to be secure in its position, thought it

well to accept a vote on the supply of cordite in the army stores as a vote of want of confidence, and accordingly, went out of office. The Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel appeared to have conclusion that the success of Sir Henry Parnell's motion would furnish them with a plausible excuse for withdrawing at a convenient moment from an unpromising position. Henry Bruham, as we have already said, had given formal notice in the House of Commons that he would bring forward a motion

for leave to introduce a definite scheme of parliamentary reform. Now everybody knew that Bruham was at that time thoroughly earnest on the subject of reform, and that he had, during the recent general election, the best possible reasons for knowing that the great majority in the North of England at all events was behind him. On the other hand, ministers themselves had had ample opportunities to finding out during the elections that a large number of those whom at other times

they might have regarded as their own supporters were estranged from them or had actually turned against them. The Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel probably thought that their wisest course would be to let Lord Grey and Bruham and their friends try what they could do with the monstrous specter of reform which they had conjured up and wait till the country had recovered its senses before again undertaking to act as ministers of the Crown. An odd and rather absurd incident which

created much scandal and alarm at the time and soon passed out of public recollection had helped no doubt to bring the Duke of Wellington and Peel to their decision. The King and Queen had been invited to dine with the Lord Mayor and the Corporation at the Guildhall on November 9th and had accepted the invitation. The Duke of Wellington and the other ministers were to be among the guests. Shortly before the appointed day, the Duke of Wellington got a letter from the

Lord Mayor-elect telling him that he had received private information about some mysterious organized attempt to be made against the Duke himself on the occasion of his visit to the city and urging the Duke to have the streets well guarded with soldiers in order to prevent the success of any such lawless and atrocious enterprise. Now the Duke was not a man to care much personally about an alarm of this kind but he thought it would be rather an unseemly spectacle if the streets of the city had to be

guarded by troops when the new Sovereign went to be the guest of the Lord Mayor at the Guildhall. The attempt to be sure was said to be directed against the Duke himself and not against the King but still it would hardly do. It would scarcely have a happy effect on public opinion at home and abroad if the first visit of the sailor king, the popular William, to the city were to be made the occasion of a murderous attack on the King's Prime Minister. It might get into the public mind

that what had happened in Paris was likely to happen in London and the effect on Europe might be most damaging to the credit of the country. So the banquet was put off, the Sovereign and his Prime Minister did not visit the city, a vague panic raged everywhere and the funds went alarmingly down. The story which had impressed the Lord Mayor-elect was in all likelihood only a mere scare but it had no doubt some effect in deciding the action of the ministry. At all events,

the Duke of Wellington and his colleagues determined to try what strength the reformers had behind them. They tendered their resignation, the King was prevailed upon to accept it and it was announced to Parliament and the public that the Duke of Wellington and Sir Robert Peel were no longer in office. End of section 8.