Man has contrived, not only, by sanguinary wars, but by the poison of commercial duties and vexatious prohibitions in time of peace, to bar the intercourse between nations. It belongs to benevolent humanity and friendly policy to find a remedy for these evils, to make the commandment, to fill the world,' the source of new blessings, and forge a chain of love which shall unite all the races of mankind.

CHAPTER IV.

DEFEAT OF THE PHILOSOPHICAL RADICALS.-SUPPRESSION OF THE CHARTIST RIOTS, 1848.

QUESTIONS still more urgent, if not more important, than those debated in 1846 were agitated in 1848. A strong attack was made by the Economists, headed by Mr. Hume, and by the Philosophers, led by Sir William Molesworth, upon the expenditure of the State. The motion made by Mr. Hume on the 25th of February was exceedingly vague; it was to this effect:

That it is expedient that the expenditure of the country should be reduced, not only to render an increase of taxation in this Session unnecessary, but that the expenditure should be further reduced as speedily as possible, to admit of a reduction of the present large amount of taxation.'

The circumstances in which this motion was brought forward were somewhat critical for me. During the winter I had been afflicted with an illness, which, although not alarming, was a warning to me to be cautious in regard to my health. My medical

adviser insisted on my having rest and change of air. I went to St. Leonards, and after a few days' repose there returned much restored to London with Charles Buller.

I spoke in the debate on Hume's motion, and said that among the opponents of the Government were some who wished to see the prevalence of low establishments, low estimates, and low views.' On a division the majority who supported the Government were one hundred and fifty-seven, the Noes in the minority, fifty-nine; giving a majority of ninety-eight in favour of the Government. In the majority were Mr. Gladstone, Sir James Graham, and Sir Robert Peel; in the minority were Sir William Molesworth, Mr. Bright, and Mr. Cobden. Most people felt that the majority of ninety-eight showed the adherence of the House of Commons to the cause of constitutional freedom, hereditary monarchy, and national independence. The Opposition received the support of members who were not really their allies, but the undisguised abetters of violence, anarchy, and disorder. This question requires further elucidation.

The events on the Continent, in the early part of this year, were striking and calamitous. In Paris, King Louis Philippe, who had reigned for eighteen years, was compelled to abdicate, and a Republic was by popular violence installed at the Hotel de Ville. At Vienna the Imperial Government was overthrown,

and the leaders of the mob, whom Prince Windischgrätz styled 'la canaille,' were substituted for the regular authorities. In Prussia, the garrison of Berlin was ordered by the King to withdraw from the capital; and the King's brother, the present Emperor of Germany, sought in Buckingham Palace a place of refuge.

In London threats of disorder and announcements of an impending revolution were not wanting. It was reported that Count Metternich, whose mind was intent upon all the movements of the machine he had so long directed, said at his whist- table, that of all the revolutions threatening Europe, the most violent and destructive would be that of England, giving as his reason that Jacobinism had already done its worst to a great extent in France, Austria, Prussia, and Italy, but that in England the Church and the aristocracy had immense revenues still untouched, and ready to be the spoil of the ravenous democracy which was working its will over the European monarchies. It was proclaimed that a petition containing three millions of signatures would be presented to the House of Commons, and that a numerous assemblage, followed by multitudes of the people of London, would accompany the bearers of this petition to the House of Commons.

My first notion was, that the bearers of the petition, with their sympathisers, might be allowed to cross

Westminster Bridge, and after delivering their petition. at the doors of Parliament, might be turned off by the police to Charing Cross and the Strand. But a friend of mine, of great experience and acknowledged sagacity, deemed that there was some danger in this course, and that a better measure of precaution would be to prevent the expected crowd from crossing the bridges. Perceiving the wisdom of this advice, I requested the Commissioners of Police, Sir Charles Rowan and Sir Richard Mayne, to prepare a programme of proceedings for the appointed day, the 10th of April, and to attend a Cabinet fixed for a previous day. I requested the Duke of Wellington also to do me the favour to attend the Cabinet.

When the Cabinet met, Sir George Grey, the Home Secretary, being fully prepared for the duties incumbent upon him, I asked Sir Charles Rowan to read the programme proposed by the Commissioners of Police. When he had done reading I asked the Duke of Wellington if the arrangement appeared to him to be judicious, and I had the good fortune to obtain the approbation of that great man. It was understood that the troops to be brought to London were to be kept out of sight, and that no military force was to appear unless action on their part should be absolutely necessary. On the evening of April 9 I received two anonymous letters which convinced me that the leaders of the movement, either hopeless of