the Turks, but they agreed to indemnify Russian merchants for losses by the war, to grant them extraordinary trading privileges, and to compensate the Czar in money for the cost of the war. There was, of course, no longer any obstacle to the settlement of the Greek question; and, after some opposition from Count Capo D'Istria, the Greek President, and his National Assembly at Argos, the representatives of the three powers agreed at London upon the boundaries of Greece, and its erection into a kingdom. Nothing was done at the time in the choice of a king, beyond resolving that no prince connected with the Courts of England, France, or Russia, should be elevated to the dignity. In February of this year Pope Leo the Twelfth died, and was succeeded by Cardinal Castiglione, under the title of Pius the Eighth; one of whose first acts was to excommunicate the town of Imola, and to exclude from the amnesty usual on an accession all political offenders.

The year 1830 opened amidst such decided distress, both in the agricultural and manufacturing districts, that Ministers were obliged to make it a prominent topic in the Royal speech at the opening of the session. In the discussions that ensued, the Opposition maintained that the distress was universal—Ministers, that it was but partial. Among the remedies proposed were, a return to paper currency, and the substitution of silver for gold as a legal tender. Sir James Graham brought forward a motion for a reduction of official salaries, on the ground that the value of money had been raised by the bill of 1819, and Mr. Hume for a committee of economical inquiry; but both were withdrawn in favour of a Ministerial resolution declaring the necessity of retrenchment. The reductions carried out, by lowering the salaries of some offices and abolishing others, amounted to £1,300,000. The duties on beer, cider, and leather were removed, affording direct relief to the sum of £3,400,000; but the duties on ardent spirits were increased.

In accordance with a promise given in the preceding session, a committee was appointed to inquire into the charter of the East India Company, and the condition of the ninety millions of people under their jurisdiction.— Towards the close of the session, Mr. Brougham delivered a great speech on the condition of the slaves in the West Indies. A legal functionary, called the Protector, had been appointed in several islands for their benefit. In 1827, the first claim of a slave to purchase liberation was made by a negro woman, in Berbice, and by the efforts of the Protector, it was successful. Mr. Brougham showed that nevertheless the negroes were still exposed to much cruelty and illegal treatment; and he carried a resolution, pledging the House to consider the subject of abolition in the next session.

Another step was made in the amelioration of the criminal code, by a bill introduced by Mr. Peel for abolishing the punishment of death for forgery, except in the case of official seals, of wills, on the public funds, and of

bank or promissory notes. Sir James Mackintosh argued from the continual increase in the number of executions* for forgery, that the punishment had little effect in deterring from the crime, and carried a clause limiting the capital penalty to the case of will forgeries; but the Lords threw out that amendment, and the bill passed in its original form.

The cause of Parliamentary Reform, now without a competitor, received a great impulse. The Marquis of Blandford renewed, in an exaggerated form, his extraordinary resolution of the previous session, by proposing, as an amendment to the Address, what he called "a wholesome admonition to the Throne." This amendment proposed to inform the King, that besides the deep and universal distress of the nation, there was danger impending over all our venerable institutions; that both the distress and danger arose from the presence in that House of men who had purchased their seats, and used their power only to heap ruinous taxation upon the people; and that the remedy was to be found in a thorough reform of the representation. Several of the Radical members voted for this amendment, but others urged the noble Marquis to make a full development of his plan. Accordingly, on the 18th of February, the Marquis proposed that a Committee of the House should be chosen by ballot to inquire into the condition of all the city and borough constituencies, and report to the Home Secretary such as had forfeited their right to representation. The franchise was then to be transferred to certain large towns hitherto excluded, without compensation to the proprietors of the disfranchised boroughs. The suffrage was to be extended to copyholders, and certain other lessees; and all members were to be paid for their services, the members for counties £4, and the members for cities or boroughs £2 per day. This proposition was debated at some length, and was negatived without a division, the House having previously rejected, by a majority of 113, an amendment by Lord Althorp, "That in the opinion of this House a reform in the representation of the people is necessary." A few weeks later Lord John Russell again moved for the enfranchisement of Birmingham, in the place of East Retford. Mr. Huskisson voted as before; and in his speech we find, for the first time, a reference to the Birmingham Political Union, but evidently under the false impression that that association would be satisfied with the

* In the single year 1827, there had been 73 executions, of which only 11 were for murder; while the total number who had been convicted of capital crimes, and had had sentence of death passed upon or recorded against them, was 1,529! The proportion for several years of the executed to the condemned was about one in twenty. A great sensation was made towards the close of 1829 by the execution of a Quaker, named Hunton, for forgery. Every endeavour was made to obtain a mitigation of his punishment, but unsuccessfully; and the public feeling excited, stimulated the legislature to prevent the repetition of such barbarous inflictions and unwholesome excitements.

enfranchisement of its native place. The motion was rejected by 126 to 99. Another resolution, by the same noble lord, was for leave to introduce a bill enabling Birmingham, Manchester, and Leeds, to return members. In this debate, Mr. Huskisson spoke again, and, unconsciously, for the last time. He supported the motion, cordially, but protesting against any more extensive change in the representative system. The motion was lost by a majority of 48. Again was the subject revived, and this time by the hero of Catholic emancipation, Mr. O'Connell, who moved for leave to introduce a bill evacting universal suffrage, triennial Parliaments, and vote by ballot. But neither Tory, Whig, nor Radical reformer did so much to stimulate the popular mind, as one who deemed all reform revolutionary—namely, the Duke of Newcastle. A petition had been presented from 587 independent electors of Newark, complaining that the constituency was under the dictation of the Duke of Newcastle, as proprietor of the surrounding estates. Those estates were chiefly Crown lands, held by the Duke on lease, which lease Ministers, admitting the improper use of the influence it gave, declared they would not renew. The Duke, amazed at any interference with what he deemed his undoubted right, expressed his amazement to the House of Lords in the memorable exclamation, "May I not do what I will with mine own?" The words were instantly caught up, and incessantly repeated, as an innocent confession of the feeling entertained by the anti-reform aristocracy of their relation even to the legally enfranchised among the people of England.

We must mention one more feature of the former half of the year 1830-namely, the prosecutions of the press, undertaken by the Duke of Wellington. Early in the year he directed his new AttorneyGeneral, Mr. Scarlett, to prosecute the Morning Journal for libels against the King, the Government, and himself. The articles complained of were exceedingly vague, imputing only such indefinite offences as treachery, cowardice, and artifice," to the Minister, and insinuating that he was in disfavour with the King; yet, for this, the editor and one of the proprietors were visited with fine and imprisonment. The printer and publisher of another paper were prosecuted for libels of which the private chaplain of the Duke of Cumberland avowed himself the author. A good deal was made of the circumstance that a similar course was being pursued, with as much more rigour as the different position of the two countries would permit, by the government of the Duke's friend, Prince Polignac, who, since the preceding August, had been Foreign Minister and virtual Premier of France. Mr. Scarlett never recovered the popularity which he lost by these prosecutions, and the Duke revived the popular antipathy to his person which was so frequently manifested in the days of Queen Caroline's persecution.

That unhappy Queen was probably avenged of her wrongs by the sufferings of her husband during these last few years of his reign. Never appearing in public, and admitting scarcely any but his Ministers to his "Cottage" at Windsor, he seems to have given himself up to the petulance of sickness, as he had, through his previous lifetime, abandoned himself to the indulgence of sensual appetites and a barbaric taste. It is the fitting retribution of such a life that it leaves no solace for the loss of enjoyments which must, in their nature, come to an end, and no fortitude to sustain the smarting of the sting they leave behind. The hated wife and the loved child had alike been taken from him; his hearth was empty, and his throne barren. Successive groups of companions had fallen off from the once roystering comrade, and left him to chide in solitude over faithlessness and desertion. And now vague fears of revolution, the feeling that he had a master in his chief servant, and that if he had not, he would be helpless and perhaps an outcast, came to culminate his wretchedness. Alike unprincipled and ill-tempered, he led his ministers nearly as wretched a life as himself, for, as we have seen, they could never rely upon his word, and were never safe from his spite. His people cared nearly as little about him as he about them; and would have received at any moment the intelligence of his death with a feeling of indifference, if not of relief. Nothing was known concerning him, except that he was very unwell; and when the physicians began to utter bulletins, they did not speak the truth, but reported continually that he was getting better. But on the 24th of May, a message was conveyed from the King to both Houses of Parliament to the effect that he was so ill as to be unable, without pain, to sign the documents to which the sign manual was indispensable. Provision was instantly made for relieving him of this trouble, every precaution being used to prevent abuse of so important a trust. But the necessity for it was very brief. On the 26th of June, at three o'clock in the morning, he felt a sudden pang-the rupture of a bloodvessel in the stomach-exclaimed to a page in attendance, "Is not this death ?" and died without a struggle.

Death had taken some noble spoil within these last few years. Erskine, the orator, and Earl St. Vincent, the old naval hero, fell quietly out of the world's sight, leaving each a great name and inspiring remembrances to his profession. David Ricardo died in the same year, while yet in the flower of his life, when his influence as a political philosopher was just becoming manifest in legislation, and was about to be sorely needed by the public. Sir Stamford Raffles followed in 1826; leaving in Java and Sumatra a monument of his great talents for governing, and his benevolent desire to benefit, his fellow-creatures. The Duke of York had something to set off against his dissoluteness, bigotry, and unpaid debts; he had done the State

good service in the administration of its military affairs, and earned the gratitude of the humblest soldier by caring for his comfort. How far Canning deserved well of his country may be differently judged from what we have seen of his career; but it is undeniable that his failing health was watched by the nation as though he belonged to every family, and his death excited a profound sensation of grief and dismay. Liverpool lingered between life and death till December, 1828, and had then a long train of mourners; for he had made many personal friends, and political opponents remembered with respect his confession, that, through twenty-five years of official life, he had never opened his morning's packet of letters without a painful apprehension of bad tidings. Lastly, in January, 1830, Tierney, the veteran Whig leader, was found dead in his chair; and even the many whom incompetence or delinquency kept in dread of his merciless, ever-ready sarcasms, could but regret him. Of all we have enumerated, their sovereign alone had none to admire or deplore him.

It seems to be the lesson of this reign, that the personal qualities of our kings have little to do with the tenor of the national progress. Whether this be a conclusion complimentary or otherwise to our theory of government, we do not stop to inquire. George the Fourth was neither statesman nor warrior, neither a patron of scholarship nor a pattern of domestic virtue. He seems to have had no single quality to fit him for the headship of a nation. Yet the nation prospered and progressed in his time. A succession of able statesmen ruled in his name, and wrought out, with or without his consent, some of the most memorable changes which our history records. The reputation of England rose higher than it had ever done among foreign peoples, and the condition of her own children improved, or seemed to do so, in nearly every respect.-But to this last particular—the condition of the people of England, in their several relations, during this second period of our narrative-we must devote another and concluding chapter.

P