Part 21

It will be remembered, that much doubt prevailed upon the reality of the king's existence, and numerous bets were entered into upon the subject by persons in the higher circles. Notwithstanding this, on the 25th of January, the Earl of Liverpool introduced a motion to the House of Lords for the purpose of nominating the Duke of York to the office of "guardian to the king," as, in consequence of the demise of her majesty, that trust had become vacant. Much altercation ensued. The duke's former delinquencies had not been forgotten, and the country was tired with the subjection they then endured from the IMPOSING privileges of royalty. But, in despite of all opposition and remonstrance, the care of the king's person was committed to the Duke of York, for which his royal highness had the unblushing effrontery to receive TEN THOUSAND POUNDS A YEAR FOR VISITING HIS DYING FATHER TWICE A WEEK!!! What an unprecedented example of avarice and undutifulness was here manifested by a son to his parent, who would have travelled the same distance any time to have gratified his passions! Oh, Shame! where is thy blush? Oh, Infamy, art thou not now detected? A few weeks after this motion had received the approbation of the agents of corruption, the long-afflicted and disappointed GEORGE THE THIRD DIED! but the event was carefully concealed from the public. PRAYERS WERE STILL READ IN CHURCHES FOR HIS RECOVERY, though the bishops knew they were _mocking heaven_, by praying for the life of one who was _already dead_! Ye sticklers for upholding the present impious system of church government, what say ye to this? Could Infamy and Blasphemy go any farther? And yet those at the head of this system are still allowed to insult the country by proposing general fasts to people already starving, as well as impiously accusing the Almighty with spreading distress and pestilence over the land which they themselves have laid waste by their rapacity and worldly-mindedness! While the clergy were praying for the life of the _deceased_ king to be preserved, the apartments formerly in the occupation of his majesty were kept in the same state as when the monarch was alive, and the royal body, after being embalmed, was placed in a leaden coffin of needful substance. Our royal informant went on to state, that these impositions were practised upon the public to give time for selecting proper persons to be despatched to Milan, or elsewhere, to gain intelligence what the Princess of Wales intended upon the demise of the king, as, in that event occurring, her royal highness would become queen consort.

Notwithstanding all this cunning and trickery, her royal highness was informed of the death of her father-in-law many months before it became publicly known. A junior branch of the royal family wrote to her, "The king is now dead, but this event will not be made known to the nation till certain arrangements are made, on behalf of the prince regent, _to degrade you_; and either keep you abroad for the remainder of your life, void of your title as Queen of England, and with other restrictions, or to obtain witnesses, and, giving you the _form_ of a trial, insult and destroy you!" Her royal highness, however, was precluded from _acting_ upon this information by her correspondent, who enjoined her to the strictest secrecy till the event should be made known to her by the ministers of the crown.

In the mean time, every opportunity to suppress unpleasant inquiries or investigations upon subjects connected with royalty and the time-serving ministry were carefully embraced. That unparalleled junto, Liverpool, Castlereagh, Sidmouth, and others of the same profession, not forgetting our dear venerable Lord Eldon and the _pious_ bishops, were well aware of George the Third's death, at the time it happened. They had, indeed, been expecting it for some time; yet these were the persons who assisted to deceive the public mind, and prevent the straightforward acknowledgment of TRUTH! The evidence we have adduced of this fact is so palpable and strong, that he who can resist its force must be strangely void of perception, or else have made a previous resolve not to suffer himself to be the subject of conviction.

In the early part of May, several persons were introduced at court, and received the royal smile, on being appointed to investigate the private conduct of the Princess of Wales. Their _purses_ were also amply supplied by the royal command, and if further sums were found needful, they received letters of credit upon the principal banking houses named in the route they had to take. If any person in the common ranks of life gives away that which is not his to give, he renders himself liable to transportation; but it is said, a "king can do no wrong!" The most disreputable of society were solicited to give information against the Princess of Wales, either with regard to any public or private intelligence they might have received; the most liberal offers were also made to remunerate the persons so inquired of. After an immense expense, information, though of a doubtful character, against the princess was obtained, ONLY BY PURCHASE; and various were the despatches sent over to this country, and answered by the ministerial plotters, who exerted all their energies to bring the business to a consummation.

During such disreputable transactions, the princess knew the _real_ cause of all the attempts to insult and degrade her character; and she, therefore, without delay, advised with her legal friends what steps were most proper to take. Alas! the princess was doomed only to receive fresh insults; delay followed delay; excuses of the most palliative description were used, instead of sound advice and positive opinion, and it appeared as if every hand were raised against her! Indeed, the perplexed and mortifying situation of the princess was attended with such dangerous consequences, that, had she not been a most _courageous_ woman, and supported by her _innocence_, she must have sank under her fears. Driven into exile, abandoned by the ministry, deserted by her friends, through the bribery of her enemies, attacked by her _nearest relations_, the only resource she had left was in committing her person, her sceptre, her crown, and her honour, to the care of the representatives of the British people. For our own parts, we cannot forget that when she was accused before parliament on a former occasion, the whole nation was melted into tears, or inflamed with rage; and, except those princes and their minions, who should have felt for her the most, there was found but one heart, one will, and one voice, on the subject throughout the kingdoms! Nor can it have escaped the observation of our countrymen, that all those persons, originally employed in bringing to trial this illustrious and virtuous woman, have been munificently rewarded; while those who advocated her cause, and stood between her and the axe uplifted for her destruction, have experienced nothing but the blackest calumny and detraction.

Lord Moira, the author of the first investigation, was made Marquis of Hastings, and Governor-General of India. This individual, however, desired his _right hand might be amputated immediately after his decease, as an expiatory judgment against himself, in having signed dishonourable deeds to injure the happiness of the princess_. Conant, the poor Marlborough-street magistrate, who procured the attested evidence for impeachment, was created Sir Nathaniel, with an increase of a _thousand pounds_ a year, as chief of all the police offices. The Douglases were all either elevated to wealth, office, or rank. The Jerseys stood in the sunshine of the court; and the Rev. Mr. Bates, then editor of the "Herald," and her bitterest enemy, was created a baronet, and promoted high in the church! Such was the fortune of her accusers; but how different was that of her supporters!

In June, the Chancellor of the Exchequer submitted his plan of finance. It proved that the revenue was reduced eighteen millions, to meet which, extra loans were proposed to be raised and new taxes enforced. In doing this, the Speaker of the House of Commons, in the address to the regent, said, "In adopting this course, his majesty's faithful Commons do not conceal from themselves that they are calling upon the nation for a _great exertion_; but, well knowing that honour, character, and independence have at all times been the first and dearest objects of the hearts of Englishmen, we feel assured that there is no difficulty that the country would not encounter, and no pressure to which it would not _cheerfully_ submit, to enable us to maintain pure and unimpaired that which has never yet been shaken or sullied,--our public credit, and our national good faith." Now let us ask the reason why an extra immense burden of taxation was to be levied upon the people. The queen was _acknowledged_ to be dead, and certainly could not be chargeable to the nation by her personal expenditure or allowance. The king was also _dead_, though _his income was received as usual_! as well as the Duke of York's _ten thousand pounds for attending him_!!! Royal and ministerial extravagance likewise caused the useless outlay of twenty thousand, five hundred pounds, for SNUFF-BOXES, besides twelve hundred guineas as presents to three GERMAN BARONS. The gift of _an axe_ or _a halter_ would have better accorded with the financial state of the empire!

The prince regent closed the session in person on the 13th of July; and, at the conclusion of his speech, adverted to the _seditious spirit_ (what sensible man could feel surprised at it?) which was evident in the manufacturing districts, and avowed a firm determination to employ the powers provided by law for its suppression, instead of promising the people redress of grievances!

In Glasgow, Leeds, Manchester, and Stockport, the meetings of the inhabitants now became very numerous, while all means were taken by the local authorities to provoke general confusion.

On the 16th of August, the MEMORABLE MEETING at Manchester took place, for the purpose of petitioning for a reform in the representation. The assembly consisted of from sixty to one hundred thousand persons, who conducted themselves in the most peaceable manner. The assembled multitude, however, were suddenly surprised by the arrival of the Manchester yeomanry cavalry; to which were afterwards added a regiment of the Cheshire yeomanry, and a regiment of huzzars,--the outlets being occupied by other military detachments. The _unarmed_ thousands were now driven one upon another, and many were killed and wounded, while others were ridden over by the horses. The number ascertained to have been killed were eight men, two women, and one child; but the wounded were about six hundred! How well the words of a celebrated author apply to this diabolical proceeding: "A kingdom for a stage, princes to act, and to behold the grand effect; but at their heels, leashed in like hounds, may not sword, famine, fire, crouch for employment?" Numerous imprisonments followed, and many poor families were consequently deprived of support.

Historians are at issue whether or not the riot act was read before the scene of carnage commenced, as it is unconstitutional to send a military force _to act_ before so doing. We, however, confidently assert IT WAS NOT READ in the hearing of any of the populace, neither was it at all likely that the soldiers could have come so suddenly and unexpectedly upon the multitudes, unless by previous order and arrangement. Further than this, an hour ought to have transpired after such reading before a soldier or civil officer could be authorised to interfere in dispersing the meeting. As a proof of the corresponding features of this unexampled and murderous business, a letter was written by the _pious_ Lord Sidmouth, _in the name of the regent_, to the Earl of Derby, presenting thanks for the vigorous and able conduct of the magistracy and military of Manchester on the 16th. Thus were the lives and liberties of the open-hearted population of these kingdoms allowed to be at the controul of an impotent and heartless statesman; for it appeared that the regent was not at hand to have given his assent to this unparalleled piece of barefaced audacity. Lord Sidmouth should have been more careful of dates, as the "royal dandy" was at that time taking a little pleasure near the Isle of Wight. But the following particulars will explain the _systematic_ plan of this cold-blooded massacre:

Mr. H. N. Bell, before this period, was confidentially employed at the office of the secretary of state, in the capacity of genealogist, under the immediate controul of Lord Sidmouth. Some considerable period before the melancholy butchery, he was engaged to proceed to Manchester, in company with two other persons, for the avowed purpose of inflaming the public mind against the ministry. He went, and the result was as his patron and employer, Lord Sidmouth, desired it. Mr. Bell and his associates expressed to the people of Manchester, that they need not remain in their then starving condition, if, in an orderly and peaceable manner, they were to assemble on some convenient spot, and unanimously resolve to petition for a reform, so much needed, in the representation. These tools of the secretary of state told the famishing multitudes, that if they pleased to enjoy happiness and plenty, together with civil liberty, they had now an opportunity of accomplishing their most earnest wishes. Under their influence, clubs and unions were soon formed, and public notices were ultimately given, that a general meeting would take place on the 16th of August.

These preliminary arrangements being completed, the _soldiery_ had instructions to be ready. The result was as before stated; and Mr. Bell and his accomplices returned to London as soon as their object was attained. The Duke of York acted a prominent part in this plot, from his military facilities; but the besotted prince was persuaded to get out of the way until the affair should be concluded.

Mr. Bell proved very useful in the office of the secretary, and as he had once forfeited his own good opinion, by lending himself to the diabolical plot just mentioned, he made no further scruple, but became a passive engine, directed in his actions by the command of ministers and state empirics. Lord Sidmouth was dissatisfied with the Manchester business; he had hoped that many more might have been brought to suffer the extreme penalty of the law, thereby affording an awful example to deter others from daring to question the excellency of the government under which they lived, and the generous disposition of the governors. We are aware that some people attributed this affair to the magistracy; but they would not have dared to interfere in such a manner as they did, unless sanctioned and supported by the higher powers. The cause of a selfish, cruel, and despotic ministry, required the assistance of corresponding heartless servants, and they obtained it. Lord Castlereagh, however, threw out many insinuations that the Manchester plot was a very bold and desperate undertaking; but the _pious doctor_ "laid the flattering unction to his soul of its _expediency_," believing some such infamous procedure needful to rivet the iron sceptre of despotism. How well does the repentant language of a certain wicked king apply here!

"My fault is past. But, O, what form of prayer Can serve my turn? Forgive me my foul murder!-- That cannot be, since I am still possess'd Of those effects for which I did the murder!

* * * * *

In the corrupted currents of this world, Offence's gilded hand may shove by justice; And oft 'tis seen, the wicked prize itself Buys out the law!"

This has proved but too true, as well in the Manchester affair as in many other diabolical state proceedings. The little value, indeed, which the ministers of this period entertained for human life ought never to be pardoned. Property, if seized or lost, may be restored; or if not, man may enjoy a thousand delightful pleasures of existence without riches. The sun shines as warmly on the poor as on the rich; the gale of health breathes its balsam into the cottage casement on the heath no less sweetly and salubriously than in the portals of the palace. But can the lords of this world, who think so little of the lives of their inferiors in wealth, with all their boasted power, relume the light of the eye once dimmed by the shades of death? "Accursed despots!" as a talented author well observes, "shew the world your authority for taking away that which ye never gave, and cannot give; for undoing the work of God, and extinguishing the lamp of life which was illuminated with a ray from heaven! Where is your CHARTER TO PRIVILEGE MURDER?" All the gold of Ophir, all the gems of Golconda, cannot buy a single life, nor pay for its loss,--it is above all price. Yet when we take a view of the proceedings of Lord Sidmouth's junto, we are led to believe any thing of more value than human life. Crimes which had very little moral evil, if any, and which, therefore, could not incur the vengeance of a just and merciful God, were unceremoniously punished with death by this minister. Men, for instance, were liable to be shot for meeting peaceably together and making speeches, though proceeding from the purest and most virtuous principles, from the most enlarged benevolence, from wisdom and unaffected patriotism; or for such speeches as might proceed from mere warmth of temper, neither intending nor accomplishing any mischief. Was not such the case in that horrible affair which we have just related? But despots are ever frightened at their own shadows; they tremble and become offended at the least alarm, and nothing but the blood of the accused can expiate the offence. It is, however, from such savage acts of barbarity that the Goddess of Liberty is aroused; it is from the tyranny of her jailors that she eventually makes a progress irresistible, and carries with her fires destined to consume the throne of every despot that cannot bear the light! Various motions have been made since that accursed day to bring the _surviving_ actors in the Manchester tragedy to condign punishment. Amongst the foremost in this laudable endeavour stands Mr. Hunt; but his efforts have hitherto proved unavailing. Although we disapprove of the general conduct of the member for Preston, the meed of praise ought not to be withheld from him for the admirable speech he delivered, relative to this subject, in March, 1832, as follows: