The duties on wool, which came next into consideration, were of newer creation. In 1803 it had been subjected to a tax of a halfpenny a pound, raised by Mr. Vansittart in 1819 to sixpence. The same variety of interests was here at work as in the silk trade. The agriculturists and wool-growers wished for the retention of duties to secure a monopoly of the supply of wool, the manufacturers, to whom foreign wool for certain purposes is an absolute necessity, wished for free importation, but for the retention of an export duty to keep the price of English wool low. With perfect justice Mr. Huskisson determined to relieve both classes. Foreign wool was admitted, according to its excellence, at a penny or a halfpenny a pound; English wool might be exported at a similar rate. Again the effect justified his view. The fear of a large exportation of English wool proved so completely groundless that by 1826 only 100,000 pounds weight had been exported, while 40,000,000 pounds of foreign wool had been introduced. The low price of wool of which the growers had complained had been caused by the increase of the article in England and the general slackness of the trade; the large introduction of foreign wool had enabled the British producers to sell all their stock at remunerative prices to be worked up with it.

As befitted the dawning liberality of the English legislation, the question of the slave trade now again came prominently forward. It was indeed the late changes in commercial legislation which again brought it into notice. Since the opening of the Indian trade in April 1814 a complete alteration had taken place in the character of our commerce with that country. Originally restricted to Indian produce paid for in bullion, it had lately become much extended; India received from England woollen goods to the value of a million and a half, and strangely enough even cotton goods, originally an Indian production, to the value of upwards of a million. But as the duties on East India sugar were higher than those charged on West India sugar, India was practically unable to pay for the goods thus imported with its sugar. It was urged in Parliament, that as the power of India to receive English goods was limited only by what it could give in exchange, one great source of purchasing power was thus denied it, and that an equality of duties should be established. Of course the West India interests were violent in opposition, but while objecting to the change at present, Huskisson allowed that the production of slave labour was more costly than that of free labour, and that slavery was not only a crime but a commercial mistake. This confession called the abolitionists again into activity. They had already succeeded in getting the trade condemned by most civilized nations, and the slave who touched English ground was free; but the institution continued in all its severity in our own colonies. Sir Fowell Buxton, who now became the prominent supporter of abolition, brought in a resolution (May 15, 1823) declaring that slavery should be gradually abolished throughout the British colonies. Gradual abolition presents great difficulties. It is not logical, as slavery is either right or wrong; it is difficult to carry out, because slaves still left unenfranchized, while others are freed, are naturally discontented. Canning therefore distinctly objected to the motion; he declared that no half measures were possible, and that as for immediate abolition the Constitution of England was against it. At the same time he proposed resolutions declaring the expediency of improving the condition of the Effect of Canning's circular in Jamaica. slaves preparatory to freedom. This was followed up in a circular issued on the 24th of May 1823, ordering the cessation of the use of the whip in the field and of the flogging of women. The circular excited great anger among the planters, the House of Assembly in Jamaica began to talk of independence and of addressing the King to remove Lord Bathurst, the Colonial Secretary. In Barbadoes the mean whites, that is, those who possessed no slaves and who were the outcasts of society, rose in riot, and razed to the ground the chapel of a missionary who had spoken of them as an ignorant and depraved class. In Demerara the purport of the circular and the way in which it was spoken of by the planters came to the ears of the negroes, and caused a rising (Aug. 18), which was only kept from becoming a dangerous insurrection by the influence of an Independent missionary of the name of Smith. In two days the riot was quelled, with considerable bloodshed and nearly fifty executions of negroes. But the importance of the affair lies chiefly in the conduct of the whites and the Government of the island towards Mr. Smith. There had already been some efforts made to injure the influence of the dissenting missionaries, who had been most active in instructing the negroes, and Persecution of Mr. Smith. although a clergyman of the Episcopalian Church who was in Demerara gave full testimony of Mr. Smith's excellence, he was apprehended, kept in a disgraceful prison for two months, and then died of his hardships (Feb. 6, 1824). Before he died he had been sentenced to death, as having been aware of the intended rising. The sentence of the court-martial was quashed in England, but before the news arrived he was dead. The treatment of Smith in his imprisonment, and of his widow, who was not even allowed to be present at his funeral, was marked by great cruelty, and his death was followed by a meeting of slave-owners, who petitioned that all missionaries should be expelled from the colony, and prohibited from coming there for the future. In fact, they declared that any attempt to improve the moral or intellectual condition of the slaves was undesirable and a crime against the planters. The shock given by this violent action to the public feeling in England virtually secured the predominance of abolitionist views.

The years 1823 and 1824 were thus marked by a distinct advance in liberality on the part of the English Government. But the beneficent action of Huskisson's legislation was postponed during the following year by a period of unexampled distress. During the past year there had been much hope of increased prosperity. The opening of Misery caused by wild speculation. 1825. new markets in South America had excited the hope of speedy profits, and introduced a spirit of rash speculation which has more than once disastrously affected British commerce. The consequence was the very rapid formation of a vast number of joint-stock companies, with their attendant symptoms of unprincipled stock-jobbing and dishonesty on the part of financial agents and promoters of companies. It is impossible not to be reminded of the similar excitement in the time of the South Sea Bubble,—again acts of fabulous folly were performed; it is said that in their eagerness to get a sale for British goods both warming-pans and skates were exported in considerable numbers to the Tropics; while a company of Scotch milk-maids was formed and transferred to Buenos Ayres, where, after conquering the preliminary difficulty of milking wild cattle, it was found that the inhabitants would not eat butter, and preferred the oil of their own country. Though many schemes to be carried on in foreign parts did not even take the trouble to secure charters, 286 private Bills were passed in the session of 1825. The speculation was assisted by a great apparent profusion of money, and by the careless action of both the Bank of England and the private provincial banks. In spite of signs that gold and silver were leaving the country, the Bank of England continued to increase its issue of notes, and the provincial banks followed its example; there was far too much paper money in the country; between June 1824 and October 1825 ten millions of coin and bullion were exported. At the same time the Bank of England lowered its rate of interest. Money was thus exceedingly easily obtained, and prices rose suddenly and very rapidly. The readiness of all the banks to discount bills even at long dates enabled speculators to buy up and hold back goods, thus still further raising the prices. There was naturally soon an end of this fictitious state of things. As the goods which had been bought up were brought into the market their prices necessarily fell; foreign speculations could not produce very rapid returns; the insecure bills, or those which had been discounted at very long dates, could not be realized, consequently the banks found it difficult to meet the demands upon them; the Bank of England then took alarm, raised the rate at which it discounted bills, and contracted the issue of bank notes. In all ways therefore money began to get exceedingly scarce; firms and companies began to break, credit was shaken, a run on the banks was the consequence. At length even the London houses were affected, and on the 5th of December the great banking-house of Pole & Company, on which as many as forty-four country banks depended, broke. In six weeks between sixty to seventy banks had stopped payment, of which six or seven were London houses.

The misery attendant on these disasters was so great that the Government thought it necessary to interfere. The bank and the mint set hard to work to supply notes and coin; 150,000 sovereigns a day were turned out, but even thus, the story is told that the credit of the Bank was only saved by the accidental discovery of a forgotten chest with 700,000 one-pound notes. By the end of the year the worst of the panic was over, but during 1826 bankruptcies continued with fearful rapidity. In the opinion of the Government some part of the late misfortune was to be attributed to bad legislation, and might be altered, but the greater part arose from a spirit of over-speculation, over which no legislative enactments could have any power. The healing measures proposed were the prohibition of the issue of one and two pound notes; for it began to be generally acknowledged that unrestricted paper currency could not exist with coin, that in times of prosperity the paper would be preferred, gold and silver would seek other markets, and in times of necessity would be unprocurable. Many of the banks had paid for the privilege of issuing notes, but the Government risked the infringement on their rights, acknowledging it, and confessing that an Act of indemnity would be necessary. Secondly, they induced the Bank directors to give up one of their privileges, by which private banking-houses were restricted to six partners. Beyond a radius of sixty-five miles from London, the number of partners was henceforward unlimited, and much greater security was thus obtained. At the same time, for the instant relief of commerce, the ministers, unwilling to issue Exchequer bills, because they thought that commerce had better on the whole be left to right itself, succeeded in persuading the Bank to advance £3,000,000 to merchants upon the security of their goods. The effect of these measures was a restoration of credit and the gradual subsidence of the alarm.

But the misfortunes of the preceding years had of necessity been attended by extreme suffering among the poorer classes, and although they had on the whole borne their privations remarkably well, it was Riots and machine breaking. April 1826. impossible, considering the excited temper of the times, to avoid riots. These were as usual directed principally against machinery, which was still ignorantly regarded by the artisans as the chief cause of their misery. The riots were very widely spread, every power-loom in Blackburn was smashed, the operatives in Manchester held stormy meetings, and in Carlisle, Staffordshire, and Norfolk uproars took place. To the miseries caused by depression of trade were added those of an unfavourable season; the summer of 1826 was marked by a very severe drought. On all grounds, therefore, the ministers thought it Temporary change in the corn laws. May 26, 1826. their duty to introduce some measures which should tend to the lowering of the price of corn; it was ordered that corn in bond in the warehouses, waiting till prices should rise to the level which allowed importation, should be released at once and sent into the market, and that Government should be authorized to import, within a space of two months, 500,000 quarters more. Bills to this effect were passed through the House, having been earnestly pressed forward because the Parliament was on the point of dissolution, and had the ministers been obliged to open the ports without leave, their conduct would have been unconstitutional and would have required an Act of indemnity. But, after all, their efforts were unavailing; prices rose, so that on the 1st of September the legal price was reached; but as it was only when the average price was above a certain point that corn was admitted, and a month must elapse before that average could be taken, it was thought desirable to forestall the time and open them at once. The new Parliament assembled in November, and remained a short time in session for the purpose of giving the required indemnity.

The attention of Parliament was called to one other important topic, which may be regarded as the finishing stroke to Canning's foreign policy. It will be remembered that he had always declared that any attack on Portugal would be regarded as a sufficient cause for the entrance of England into the war. The French troops still occupied Spain, and in the civil war which was continued in that country the royalists had been joined by several regiments of the Portuguese army. In spite of urgent demands and repeated promises that these deserting troops should be disbanded, they were allowed, if not encouraged, by the Spanish royalists to make inroads into constitutional Portugal. The Princess Regent applied to England for assistance; Canning at once acted vigorously according to his principles. At first the information given was not accurate, but on Friday the 8th of December precise information arrived, and Canning could triumphantly assert in the House—"On Saturday his Majesty's confidential servants came to a decision, on Sunday that decision received the sanction of his Majesty, on Monday it was submitted to both Houses of Parliament, and this day (Tuesday) on which I have the honour of addressing you the troops are on their march for embarkation." It was plain to all men that the honour of England was safe in such hands, and proof was afforded to all Europe that England had distinctly broken from her old connections; and that her sympathies were on the side of political freedom and national independence.

It is not to be supposed that the changes worked by Canning and by Huskisson, and the decided preponderance of the more liberal-minded members of the Cabinet, were regarded with favour by all their colleagues. Personally distasteful to many of them because of their want of aristocratic connection, the innovating character of their policy, and their views, which were closely assimilated on most points to those of the Whigs separated them entirely from the representatives of the old Tory party. They seem to have had but one point in common—their opposition to parliamentary reform. Lord Liverpool's Government had from the first been one of compromise. One of the greatest questions of the day, which had already caused the fall of more than one ministry, had been allowed to fall from the list of Cabinet questions, and it had been agreed that Catholic emancipation should stand entirely upon its own merits. But this was a point on which men felt very keenly, and there had thus arisen a complete division in the ministry; on the one side were ranked the followers of Canning, including such men as Huskisson, Wellesley; Robinson, Sturges-Bourne, and Lord Palmerston; and on the other the high Tory or Protestant party, at the head of which was Liverpool himself, Lord Eldon, and the Duke of Wellington, and, although he was regarded as less bigoted, Peel. How great the split between the parties was is made plain not only by the strong if decorous language to be found in Lord Eldon's correspondence, but by the more outspoken expressions of Palmerston in his private letters. In the election of 1826, though himself a member of the ministry, Palmerston had been opposed at Cambridge by Goulbourn (also one of the administration), and all the influence of the Tory section had been used against him. In a letter describing the effects of that election, he says, "As to the commonplace balance between Opposition and Government, the election will have little effect upon it. The Government are as strong as any government can wish to be, as far as regards those who sit facing them; but in truth the real Opposition of the present day sit behind the Treasury bench. It is by the stupid old Tory party, who bawl out the memory and praises of Pitt, while they are opposing all the measures and principles which he held most important, it is by these that the progress of the Government in every improvement which they are attempting is thwarted and opposed. On the Catholic question, on the principles of commerce, on the corn laws, on the settlement of the currency, on the laws regulating the trade in money, on colonial slavery, on the game laws, which are intimately connected with the moral habits of the people; on all these questions, and everything like them, the Government find support from the Whigs and resistance from their self-denominated friends." While again, speaking of the foolish obstruction to the Catholic claims, he writes of his colleagues in most unmeasured terms: "I can forgive old women like the Chancellor, spoonies like Liverpool, ignoramuses like Westmoreland, old stumped-up Tories like Bathurst, but how such a man as Peel, liberal, enlightened, and fresh-minded, should find himself running in such a pack is hardly intelligible." It is plain that a Government thinking so differently on the most important topics of the day must have been near its dissolution. It was held together in fact only by the Illness of Lord Liverpool. Feb. 1827. tact and personal influence of Lord Liverpool; and when, on the 17th February, the Premier was found struck with an apoplectic fit it was certain that a ministerial crisis must arise.

The difficulty in the formation of a new permanent Government was likely to be increased by the two great questions which were expected to occupy the session. One of these was a change in the corn laws, and an attempt to bring them more into harmony with the new commercial views of Huskisson and his friends; the other the Catholic emancipation, on which already the existing Cabinet was so much divided. The constant repetition of temporary measures required by the existing state of the law, Necessity of a change in the corn laws. the fluctuation of prices, and the consequent suffering of the poor, proved to those who were not pledged to the interests of the landowning and agricultural party that some alteration in the arrangements with regard to corn was necessary. With much care Canning and Huskisson, although both were too ill to allow of personal communication, had arranged a joint measure, by which foreign corn might be imported free of duty, to be warehoused and admitted to the market for home consumption, regardless of the price of corn, on the payment of duties varying in accordance with a certain scale; when wheat was at seventy shillings the duty was to be one shilling, and to increase two shillings with every decrease of one shilling in price. The Bill was passed on the 12th of April, during the interval it was thought decent to allow for the possible restoration of Lord Liverpool's health. It did not come on in the Upper House till after the new Government was formed, but it was there thrown out in favour of an amendment produced by the Duke of Wellington, declaring that foreign corn should not be taken out of bond till corn had reached sixty-six shillings. The object of the Bill, which was to supply foreign corn whenever the sale of it was remunerative, was thus entirely frustrated and the Bill abandoned.

It was during the same period, while the Government was in abeyance, that the Roman Catholic question was brought on. The settlement of this question in one way or other had become almost a necessity. It has been seen how Pitt was compelled, by fear of the old King's health, to give up a cause which he undoubtedly regarded as just, and how the obstinacy of George III. upon the same point had ruined Lord Grenville's ministry. During Mr. Perceval's ministry, which was formed on the avowed principle of withstanding the claims of the Catholics, the dangers attendant upon the war afforded sufficient excuse for alleging that the time was inconvenient to move so critical a question; but during the whole of that period they had, by means of an organization and the establishment of a central Catholic committee, kept their claims before the world, waiting till a favourable time should come. Lord Liverpool had found it impossible, as already stated, to form a ministry unanimous on the point, and year after year, as Bills in favour of the Catholics were introduced in the House, Castlereagh and Canning had been seen supporting them in opposition to most of their colleagues.

In Ireland, meanwhile, the question had naturally become the watchword of parties, and, like every other political question in that country, had assumed a national form and was leading to a division of races. Both the Protestant Orange Lodges and the Catholic Associations of White Boys had again sprung into existence, and so great was the disorder that in 1822 the Habeas Corpus Act had been suspended. At the same time, in agreement with the uncertain and half-hearted policy of Lord Liverpool's Government, Lord Wellesley, a favourer of the Catholic claims, was made Lord-Lieutenant, and Plunkett (in whose hands the chief management of Catholic parliamentary affairs was) Attorney-General, but yoked to Mr Goulbourn, who was a strong anti-Catholic, as Chief Secretary. The hopes of the Irish, not unreasonably raised by Failure of Wellesley's administration. 1822. these appointments, were disappointed. Received upon his arrival with every sign of admiration and attachment, before long Wellesley was publicly assaulted and pelted in the theatres. He had attempted, in the midst of the wild excitement of the passionate Irishmen of both parties, to follow a cool and impartial policy. His chief object was to suppress secret societies and to compel all parties to submit quietly to the law. By the use of very stringent measures, by the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and by the Insurrection Act, which allowed him to establish where necessary something nearly equivalent to martial law, he had succeeded in weakening the secret societies and in lessening the amount of crime; he thus earned for himself the hearty dislike of the extreme Catholics. At the same time the restraint which he put upon the Orange societies and Protestant demonstrations roused the extreme Protestants to fury, so that riots took place in Dublin which could only be checked by the military. He thus laid himself open to the charges brought against him by the ultra-Protestants of England, who urged, with a show of truth, that he had proved himself inefficient, and that it was plain that lenity and conciliatory measures would not produce the expected effect. And now, seeing that their hopes in their Lord-Lieutenant were Formation of the Catholic Association. 1823. not realized, and wishing to gain favour with classes to whom secret societies were abhorrent, the Catholic party of Ireland, under the leadership of O'Connell, set on foot the great organization known as the Catholic Association, which, while it held aloof from secret societies, and kept itself as far as possible within the limits of the law, was inspired as completely with fanaticism as any of its predecessors had been. Its avowed object was the preparation of petitions to Parliament; but it held regular sessions, had its committee of grievances, ordered a census of the population, and exacted a tax known as the Catholic rent. The effect of this Association was for a time to alienate the Catholics of England, and to make the question a more distinctly national one, and by 1825 the Association had become so formidable that, by a large majority, a Bill was passed rendering it illegal and attempting to dissolve it. The Bill declared that political associations were incapable of adjournment for more than fourteen days, incapable of having corresponding societies, of levying contributions, or of requiring oaths. The dissolution of the Association was only nominal, a new Association was immediately formed, and the Catholic body were advised to proceed by all political and legal means.

The Catholics had in fact gained a very important step in compelling Parliament to recognize the existence of the Association. It was no longer possible to postpone the consideration of their claims, and in March 1826, Sir Francis Burdett brought in what was called a Relief Bill, of which O'Connell, entirely falsely, claimed to be the chief author. Besides the Bill for the relief of disabilities there were two subsidiary Bills, the one raising the Catholic franchise to £10 instead of £2, which was thought to be a sop to the Protestants, the other to supply a State provision for the Catholic clergy, by which it was thought the other party might be pleased. Freed from the dread of the Association, the English partisans of the Catholic claims used all their influence and eloquence in favour of the Bill, and it passed the Commons by a considerable majority. Its fate in the House of Lords was different. It there encountered an opposition verging upon the unconstitutional; the Duke of York, the heir to the crown, adopting all his father's old scruples, declared, in distinct allusion to his probable succession to the throne, that under no circumstances and in no position would he assent to such a Bill. He succeeded in obtaining its rejection by a majority of forty-eight. The Duke's action was highly popular; it seems pretty certain that the feeling of the majority of Englishmen was against the Catholics. The plea that the Coronation Oath stood in the way of the royal assent to such a Bill no longer found defenders except with the extremest Tories, but the feeling of race which had been excited, the fear, not wholly ungrounded, that a measure so anxiously desired by the priests must hide some considerable advantage to the Roman Church, and the occasional rash declaration of some furious partisan that obedience to the Papal See was superior to any earthly obedience, made the majority of those who were not guided by reason and principle desire to retain the disabilities which still existed. The effect of their defeat in the House of Lords was not to dishearten the Catholics, on the contrary, they took courage at their success in the Commons, and were only eager if possible to complete their triumph before the accession of the bigoted Duke of York should Rejection of Burdett's resolution. March 5, 1827. throw a fresh obstacle in their way. A Catholic petition was therefore prepared, which Sir Francis Burdett presented during the illness of Lord Liverpool, proposing at the same time a resolution that the affairs of Ireland required immediate and earnest attention. But an election had taken place since the last Bill had been introduced, and the anti-Catholic feeling had apparently gained ground in the new Parliament; in spite of all the support which Canning could give it, the resolution was rejected. It was the last defeat the champions of emancipation were destined to meet.

While Canning was thus defeated on the two questions he had most at heart,—the improvement of the corn laws and the Catholic emancipation,—he found himself called upon to undertake the duties of Prime Minister. There was indeed no one in the existing ministry who could well compete with him, and the popular voice at once nominated him as Lord Liverpool's successor. Yet from the first it was clear that his appointment implied a complete change of ministry. It was not to be expected that his opponents in the Cabinet, whether on aristocratic and personal or on political grounds, would consent to serve under him. The King, who had lately been drawing more towards the anti-Catholic party, himself hesitated, but when a cabal of Tory Lords threatened him with the loss of their support should he appoint Canning, his mind was at once made up to resent the affront, and Canning was sent for. His appointment was followed by the resignation of all the most important members of the ministry; Wellington, Melville, Eldon, Bathurst, Westmoreland, Bexley, and Peel, chiefly on account of the obligations under which he felt as member for the Protestant University of Oxford, with several less important ministers, withdrew. As Canning was willing to consent that the Catholic question should still remain open, this great defection seems to show how clearly defined his general liberal tendencies had become. From among his own friends, Canning's new ministry. 1827. and such of the Tories as would still serve with him, by the 27th of April a new Government was formed. The Duke of Clarence, since the death of the Duke of York (Jan. 5, 1827) heir-presumptive, was made Lord High Admiral, Copley, made Lord Lyndhurst, became Chancellor, Lord Dudley, a very able though eccentric man, went to the Foreign Office, Mr. Robinson became Lord Goderich, and led the party in the Upper House as Secretary for the Colonies, Sturges-Bourne went to the Home Office, Mr. Huskisson remaining at the Board of Trade. These first appointments were however provisional; so also was Canning's own acceptance of the place of Chancellor of the Exchequer. The new Prime Minister, after the secession of his colleagues, was received with such marked approbation by the Whigs, that it was not difficult to see that his coalition with them would be only a matter of time; and as they would require their fair share in the administration, it was necessary to keep some of the high places in hand, or only provisionally filled. As far as the support of parties in the House went, the union between the Canningites and the Whigs was accomplished; Brougham, Burdett, and Tierney sat on the Government side of the house; but, although Lord Lansdowne had already a seat in the Cabinet, Canning did not live long enough to complete the fusion of parties in the ministry. After the Easter holidays, during which the ministry were got together, little business of public importance was transacted, and the session was spent in a series of vehement attacks and personalities directed against Canning by his old friends. The only fact of importance was the failure of the Corn Bill in the Upper House, which has been already mentioned. In July, to the relief of all parties—for the bitter feelings lately excited had rendered the session an unusually disagreeable one—Parliament Death of Canning. Aug. 8, 1827. was prorogued. On the 8th of the next month Canning died of an illness caught at the funeral of the Duke of York, and rendered worse by the effects of the constant attacks to which he had been subjected acting upon his sensitive nature. Thus was prematurely terminated a change in the position of parties which, by uniting the moderate Tories and the Whigs, and placing the united forces under the command of so able a leader as Canning, seemed full of promise for the constitutional advance of England.

The death of Canning was felt to be a national loss. In spite of every effort to render his funeral private, vast crowds attended, and Whigs and Tories joined in doing him honour. It was only the exclusive clique which, like Chatham, he had broken through which retained its enmity and regarded him to the end as a renegade adventurer. His title to greatness can scarcely be questioned. Adorned with the richest gifts of body and mind, a noble and attractive presence, overflowing wit, and a majestic eloquence, he showed himself an essentially practical statesman. On most subjects his views were large and liberal; by his assistance his friend Huskisson was enabled to launch England upon a fresh course of commercial prosperity, and by so doing to alleviate the miseries under which the people were groaning. As a foreign minister he enabled the country to assume a great place among nations. Two principles formed the bases of his policy—peace, and the greatness of his native country, which he regarded as indissolubly connected with its national individuality. He thus broke from the trammels of the Holy Alliance, and set on foot the policy of non-intervention, which, though its misuse has much destroyed its credit, is, when the dignity of the country is properly supported, the true policy to be pursued by a people at once desirous to secure peace and to allow to other nations the opportunity of working out their own development, and of securing that national freedom of action which it claims for itself. There were undoubtedly inconsistencies in his political views. Like his successor, Peel, he belonged to a transition time, and had a mind capable of growth. Several remnants of his early political creed hung about him to the last. He was always a firm opponent to parliamentary reform; while supporting continually the claims of the Catholics, he would listen to no arguments in favour of the relaxation of the Test and Corporation Acts; and he always upheld the repressive measures of Lord Sidmouth. It is to be remembered that his youth had been passed in the midst of the French Revolution, against which all the weapons of his wit had been directed, and that he was the favourite disciple of Pitt at the time when that minister's energies were chiefly directed to the suppression of revolutionary and Jacobinical tendencies; while, in his prime, temperate reform had become so connected with the exaggerated views of the radical reformers, that it is not to be wondered at that a statesman trained as Canning had been should object to measures which might open a door to the admission of so violent a flood of change.

Though its chief was gone, it was determined to continue the ministry which Canning had formed on the same principle of compromise on the subject of Catholic reform. The King could not make up his mind to take any decided step one way or the other, and fixed upon Goderich's ministry. Lord Goderich, a colourless man, as best fitted to carry on the system. The changes necessary were few, but some of them important for the future. Lord Goderich's own place was taken by Huskisson; Lord Lansdowne accepted, at the King's personal request, the Home Office; the Chancellorship of the Exchequer, which Canning had held, was, with some want of wisdom, considering the connection of the Canningites and Whigs, given to Mr. Herries, a Tory, an appointment which at once shook the administration. Another important nomination was that of the Duke of Wellington, who, immediately upon Canning's death, was without difficulty persuaded to resume the command of the army, showing how far personal enmity had been the cause of his previous resignation. The accession of these two Tories was at the time regarded as a sure augury for the early break up of the Cabinet. "Before six months are over," said Lord Anglesey, who had been the agent in securing Wellington's adhesion, "he will trip up all your heels." These forebodings were speedily fulfilled. A quarrel broke out about the appointment of a chairman to a Finance Committee which was to be formed at the opening of the session. The position naturally belonged to Mr. Herries, but Tierney and Huskisson appear to have secured the appointment of Lord Althorp without Mr. Herries' knowledge (Nov. 29). Both Huskisson and Herries sent in their resignation; it seemed impossible to keep them both, and Lord Goderich, unable to take a firm course in the matter, sent in his own resignation, which, after he had once weakly withdrawn it, was finally accepted (Jan. 8, 1828). After seven months of useless life the abortive ministry expired.

There was great difficulty in finding a successor for Goderich. Lord Harrowby declined the position. Huskisson, who was thought of, was supposed unable to lead the Commons, and the King, weary of compromise, determined to have recourse to the Tories, and, at the Wellington made Prime Minister. Jan. 1828. advice of Lord Lyndhurst, applied to the Duke of Wellington, whose supposed firmness of character inspired him with confidence. But even yet George attempted to postpone the final settlement of the Catholic question; the conditions he laid on Wellington were only to avoid a union with Lord Grey and to establish a lasting Government. The Duke therefore, in spite of his late conduct, asked and received the adhesion of Dudley, Palmerston, Huskisson, and some others. The Whigs of the late Government naturally retired, and in their place the Tories of Lord Liverpool's Government resumed office. In fact the attempt was made to reconstitute the Liverpool Cabinet. Mr. Huskisson declared to his constituents at Liverpool that the presence of so many Canningites was a guarantee that that minister's policy would be continued, but it was generally understood that the accession of Wellington to the premiership was in fact a Tory triumph, and such it speedily proved. In a very few months an opportunity, arising from a slight difference of opinion, enabled the Duke to insist upon the resignation of Mr. Huskisson; with him the rest of Canning's party left the ministry, and the Government was constituted entirely on a Tory basis (May).

The continuation of Canning's policy in some way or other was indeed almost a necessity, but the way in which his plans were completed by Wellington would hardly have satisfied Canning. He had died, leaving unfinished in the hands of his successors one of the most difficult diplomatic questions which he had undertaken. For six years a war, marked by extreme barbarity, had been carried on between the Turks and their Greek subjects. It will be remembered that on this point the Czar, who regarded himself as the natural protector of the Greeks, and who nourished the traditional desire of conquest on the side of Turkey, had found himself at variance with his own principles. His mind was divided between a wish to seize the opportunity offered of extending his influence over Turkey, and his love of legitimacy, which, as chief of the Holy Alliance, he constantly upheld, and which seemed to forbid him to take the part of insurgents against their legitimate sovereign. Lengthened conferences between the representatives of the sovereigns of Europe had been held at St. Petersburg, where France and Austria, bitterly opposed to the English policy, both with regard to the constitutionalists of Spain, and the acknowledgment of the independence of the South American colonies, had shown themselves eager upon the side of legitimacy, and where Austria especially had expressed a constant wish that the Greeks should be treated merely as insurgents. Supported therefore by the advice of Austria, and trusting to the well-known feeling in favour of the Mahomedan rule in Turkey which existed among the Tories in England, the Porte had refused to listen to any offers of mediation. Nor did it seem possible that the English ministry, anxious at once to prevent Russia from attacking Turkey and yet to save the Canning's diplomacy on the subject. Greeks, could intervene with any hope of honourable success. At last, in 1824, an opening occurred, and the hope was raised in Canning's mind that these two apparently contrary objects might be obtained. The provisional government in Greece in its despair made a formal appeal to the English, and showed itself quite as fearful of the warlike views of Russia as Turkey itself, in the belief that the outbreak of a war with Turkey would ensure its own immediate destruction. The English minister now thought it possible to bring the conferences, from which he had hitherto held quite aloof, under his own hand in London. The course of events tended to assist his plan. In 1825 the conferences at St. Petersburg broke up without action, the other powers having refused to join Russia in mediation. It was the conduct of Metternich, who dreaded before all things any tampering with the principles of legitimate sovereignty, and constantly abetted the obstinacy of the Porte, which had rendered the mediation futile. Thus thwarted in his plans, and feeling that his failure was due to Metternich, the Czar found a point of union with Canning in their dislike to the Austrian minister. England was represented at Constantinople by Sir Stratford Canning, and by his skilful management the ambassadors of the two courts there began to draw together; and at last, in November 1825, Canning had a triumphant proof of the success of his policy and of the importance of England, when all the ministers of the great powers in London confessed that they saw no way out of their difficulty but by English intervention. This favourable state of things was for the moment crossed by the death of Alexander (Dec. 1, 1825). The view which his successor Nicholas would take became in the last degree important; Canning, with great wisdom, chose Wellington—opposed indeed to his policy, but personally acceptable to the Russian Czar—as his special ambassador to take the royal congratulations upon the new Emperor's accession, and to continue the negotiations if possible. The appointment met with universal approbation; even Metternich believed that in the hands of Wellington the question must be settled in accordance with his views. It was with much surprise and anger that the Turks and Austrians heard that, on the 4th of April, an arrangement had been Protocol between England and Russia. April 1826. arrived at between the Courts of England and Russia. Taking advantage of the very moderate claims of the Greeks, who demanded no more than to be placed on the same footing as the Danubian Principalities, remaining as self-governing but dependent vassals of the Turkish Government, the English minister had succeeded in procuring the signature of a protocol embodying a plan for peaceful intervention.

The cause of Greek independence had already excited enthusiasm in England, many volunteers had joined the armies, and money had been subscribed for them. In this enthusiasm Canning in his heart fully joined; from early youth one of his favourite dreams had been the independence of that race to which as an ardent lover of the classics he felt he owed so much. But, true to his principles, and determined to maintain the strict neutrality of England, he had done his best to check any active assistance to the insurgents. According to his view it was necessary that England should intervene with clean hands, and as the friend of both parties. He was also in constant dread of the watchfulness of his Tory enemies, fearing lest any sign of too great favour to Russia should enable them entirely to thwart his plans. Nevertheless the knowledge of the approaching intervention gave a great impetus to the feeling in favour of Greece in England, and men and money were poured in considerable quantities into the peninsula. Lord Cochrane, the most dashing and adventurous of English sailors, had joined the insurgents with an American frigate, General Churchill took command of their armies, yet their destruction seemed imminent. The Egyptians, under Ibrahim Pasha, had come to the assistance of their enemies; their fleet, which was little better than a body of pirates, was swept from the sea; Missalonghi was for the third time taken, and in spite of General Churchill's efforts, Athens and the Acropolis had fallen. If the protocol was to be of any use the time for acting upon it had arrived. The allies received a great accession of strength when, after a visit of Canning to Paris in the spring of 1826, the French Government and the King himself entered heartily into their plans. It was plain that for the second time Canning had struck a severe blow at the principles of the Holy Alliance. In April 1827 the three powers proceeded to act with renewed strength. They demanded an immediate armistice, pointed out that the war did Turkey refuses the armistice demanded by the allies. April 1827. not seem to be approaching its conclusion, that it caused interference with the traffic of the world, and that in the interests of Europe it must cease. Almost of course the Turks, still trusting to Austria, and still unable to believe in the changed posture of England, rejected this demand. Therefore, in accordance with the expressed wish of the French, which no doubt agreed with Canning's own wishes, the protocol was changed The Treaty of London consequently signed. into a treaty known as the Treaty of London, signed on the 6th of July by Lord Dudley, Count Lieven, and the Prince of Polignac. In strict accordance with the terms of the protocol, it set forth the necessity of European action, it stated the terms which must be given to Greece, and which went no further than establishing its self-government under Turkish supremacy and saddled with a tribute to the Porte, and declared that none of the parties to the treaty sought territorial increase or commercial advantages. Fear of Russian aggrandizement was thus withdrawn, the intervention was at first to be purely friendly; but secret articles went on to say that, if the intervention were rejected, more stringent means must be used to oblige its acceptance both by one party and by the other, and that it would be necessary to show countenance to Greece, by acknowledging her as a belligerent power, and establishing consuls at her ports. It was not expressly stated what the further means of coercion were to be. A month was given to the Porte for consideration of the terms offered. If no answer, or an unfavourable answer came, the secret articles were to be put into execution. If the armistice was refused by the Turks, the allied squadrons then in the Mediterranean were to unite, to enter into friendly relations with the Greeks, and to intercept all ships freighted with men and arms destined to act against the Greeks, whether from Turkey or from Egypt. At the same time they were carefully to avoid hostilities. It is doubtful whether Canning could have succeeded in carrying out this his last measure of peace policy and non-intervention without having recourse to war. When the affair had reached this point he died, and the completion of his work fell into weaker and less competent hands.