said Mr. Sheridan, 'but the liberty of the press, and I will give the minister a venal House of Peers,-I will give him a corrupt and servile House of Commons, I will give him the full swing of the patronage of office,-I will give him the whole host of ministerial influence,-I will give him all the power that place can confer upon him to purchase submission, and overawe resistance; and, yet, armed with the liberty of the press, I will go forth to meet him undismayed: I will attack the mighty fabric he has reared, with that mightier engine: I will shakedown from its height corruption, and lay it beneath the ruins of the abuses it was meant to shelter.'1

1 Feb. 6th, 1810.-Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xv. 341.

CHAPTER X.

REPRESSIVE POLICY OF THE REGENCY:-MEASURES OF 1817:-THE MANCHESTER MEETING, 1819:-THE SIX ACTS:-ADVANCING POWER OF PUBLIC OPINION-THE CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION-FREEDOM OF THE PRESS ASSURED:-POLITICAL UNIONS, AND THE REFORM AGITATION-REPEAL AGITATION:- ORANGE LODGES, TRADES' UNIONS: THE CHARTISTS:-THE ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE:-GENERAL REVIEW OF POLITICAL AGITATION.

Lord Sidmouth secretary of state,

1812.

THE regency was a period memorable for the discontents and turbulence of the people, and for the severity with which they were repressed. The working classes were suffering from the grievous burthens of the protracted war, from the high prices of food, from restraints upon trade, and diminished employment. Want engendered discontent; and ignorant and suffering men were misled into disorder, tumult, and violence. In June 1812, Lord Sidmouth was appointed secretary of state. Never was statesman more amiable and humane: but falling upon evil times, and committed to the policy of his generation, his rule was stern and absolute.

The Luddites, 18111814.

The mischievous and criminal outrages of the 'Luddites,' and the measures of repression adopted by the government, must be viewed wholly apart from the history of freedom of opinion. Bands of famished operatives in the manufacturing districts, believing their distresses to be due to the

encroachment of machinery upon their labour, associated for its destruction. Bound together by secret oaths, their designs were carried out with intimidation, outrage, incendiarism, and murder.' Life and property were alike insecure; and it was the plain duty of the government to protect them, and punish the wrong-doers. Attempts, indeed, were made to confound the ignorance and turbulence of a particular class, suffering under a specific grievance, with a general spirit of sedition. It was not enough that the frame-breakers were without work, and starving; that they were blind to the causes of their distress; and that the objects of their fury were near at hand : but they were also accused of disaffection to the state.2 In truth, however, their combinations were devoid of any political aims; and the measures taken to repress them were free from just imputations of interference with the constitutional rights of the subject. They were limited to the particular evil, and provided merely for the discovery of concealed arms in the disturbed districts, the dispersion of tumultuous assemblies, and the enlargement of the jurisdiction of magistrates, so as to prevent the escape of offenders.3

In 1815, the unpopular Corn bill,-expressly designed to raise the price of food,-was Riots, 1815, not passed without riots in the metro

1816.

1 A full account of these lawless excesses will be found in the State Trials, xxxi. 959; Ann. Reg., 1812, 54-66, &c. The Reports of the Secret Committees, 14th July, 1812, are extremely meagre ; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxiii. 951, 1029.

2 Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxiii. 962, 996, &c.; Pellew's Life of Lord Sidmouth, iii. 79–96.

polis. In the following year there were bread riots. and tumultuous assemblages of workmen at Nottingham, Manchester, Birmingham, and Merthyr Tydvil. London itself was the scene of serious disturbances.2 All these were repressed by the executive government, with the ordinary means placed at its disposal.

prince regent, Jan. 28th, 1817.

But in 1817, the excesses of mischievous and misOutrage on guided men led, as on former occasions, to restraints upon the public liberties. On the opening of Parliament some bullets, stones, or other missiles, struck the state-carriage of the prince regent, on his return from the House of Lords. This outrage was followed by a message from the prince regent, communicating to both Houses papers containing evidence of seditious practices. These were referred to secret committees, which reported that dangerous associations had been formed in different parts of the country, and other seditious practices carried on which the existing laws were inadequate to prevent. Attempts had been made to seduce soldiers; arms and banners had been provided, secret oaths taken, insurrection plotted, seditious and blasphemous publications circulated. The gaols were to be broken open, and the prisoners set free: the Bank of England and the Tower were to be stormed: the government subverted: property plundered and divided. Hampden clubs were plot

1 Ann. Reg. 1815, p. 140; Pellew's Life of Lord Sidmouth, iii. 125. 2 Ibid., 143-162; Bamford's Passages in the Life of a Radical, i. 7, &c.; Ann. Reg., 1816, p. 95.

3 Evidence of Lord James Murray; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 34; Ann. Reg. 1817, p. 3.

6

ting revolution: Spenceans were preparing to hunt down the owners of the soil, and the rapacious fundholders.' 1

measures

The natural consequence of these alarming disclosures was a revival of the repressive Repressive policy of the latter years of the last cen- proposed. tury, to which this period affords a singular parallel. The act of 1795, for the protection of the king from treasonable attempts, was now extended to the prince regent; and another act renewed, to restrain the seduction of soldiers and sailors from their allegiance. To such measures none could object: but there were others, directed by the same policy and considerations as those which on former occasions, had imposed restraints upon public liberty. Again, the criminal excesses of a small class were accepted as evidence of wide-spread disaffection. In suffering and social discontent were detected the seeds of revolution; and to remedies for partial evils were added jealous restrictions upon popular rights. It was proposed to extend the acts of 1795 and 1799, against corresponding societies, to other political clubs and associations whether affiliated or not to suppress the Spencean clubs, to regulate meetings of more than fifty persons, to license debating societies; and lastly, to suspend the Habeas. Corpus Act. These measures, especially the latter, were not passed without remonstrance and opposi

1 Reports of Secret Committees, Lords and Commons; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 411, 438.

2 Speeches of Lord Sidmouth in the House of Lords, and Lord Castlereagh in the House of Commons; Hans. Deb., 1st Ser., xxxv. 551, 590; Pellew's Life of Lord Sidmouth, iii. 172; Acts 57 Geo. III. c. 3, 6, 7, 19.