FOOTNOTES
[1] Alderman Sir William Curtis, Member for the City of London. He had amassed great wealth as a war contractor, and was now a staunch supporter of the ministry.
[2] The Examiner copied this paragraph, and the proprietors were prosecuted, but the jury acquitted them.
[3] Take, as a specimen, the following proposal:—The Spilsby Poor Bill was a measure brought before Parliament, early in 1811, for the purpose of enabling the directors of the union to compel the poor, whether asking relief or not, to go into the workhouse. They were to be allowed to enter houses at their discretion to search for vagrants. They might commit to solitary imprisonment, without limit, the poor whom they collected, and administer moderate correction for misbehaviour! (Vide Parliamentary Debates, March 26, 1811.) This brutal idea was soon snuffed out, at the instance of Sir Samuel Romilly; but what a picture does it not present, of the combination of imbecility and cruelty which could rule the minds of some of the potential classes of society!
[4] Francis Maseres (1731-1824), Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer, came of a Huguenot family, and was a man of high cultivation, being especially distinguished for his mathematical attainments and his knowledge of English constitutional history. Although his name is now almost forgotten, he produced a number of short essays and treatises on his favourite subjects, many of which, however, are buried away in the newspapers of his time, Cobbett’s Porcupine being one to which he contributed. Maseres was a moderate Reformer, and what opinions he had were rather allowed to filtrate through his own select circle of friends than pushed forward into naked notoriety. He pursued a quiet, intellectual life, and devoted a large portion of his means to charitable and liberal purposes. Cobbett never mentions his name without affectionate reverence.
[5] This work was begun shortly after Cobbett’s arrival in Newgate. His contention was that the Bank could never again pay in specie or in paper at par, unless the interest on the Funds was reduced. The loans having been contracted to a large extent in paper, this seemed reasonable enough; and the idea was generally accepted among the classes who suffered so severely from monetary pressure during subsequent years, although others thought it was “sapping the foundations of public morality,” and so on.
The first letter appeared in the Register of Sept. 1, 1810, under the title of “Paper against Gold; being an Examination of the Report of the Bullion Committee; in a Series of Letters to the Tradesmen and Farmers in and near Salisbury.” It was afterwards reprinted in full, with additions, under the title of “Paper against Gold, and Glory against Prosperity” (retail price, twenty shillings, in paper money).
During the remainder of Cobbett’s life, he was always at battledore and shuttlecock over the Currency question. A passage from one of his American Registers was one that he was especially fond of sending up, in which he declared that it would be impossible to carry Peel’s Bill of 1819 into full effect, and wound up with an offer to Castlereagh to have leave “to lay me on a gridiron and broil me alive, while Sidmouth may stir the coals, and Canning stand by and laugh at my groans.” The Bill did take effect, after a fashion, but with tremendous difficulties in its train; and the feast of the gridiron came off at last, on the 9th of April, 1826, not in the style that was originally proposed, but in the shape of a dinner at the London Tavern. For a full account of it see the Morning Herald of the following day.
Another bit of humour was an attempt in verse:—
“Of paper coin how vast the pow’r!
It breaks or makes us in an hour.
And thus, perhaps, a beggar’s shirt,
When finely ground and clear’d of dirt,
Then recompress’d by hand or hopper,
And printed on by sheet of copper,
May raise ten beggars to renown,
And tumble fifty nobles down!”
When Cobbett took the house at 183, Fleet Street, he prepared a big gridiron as a shop-sign, and also headed his journal with a woodcut of that utensil.
[6] Mr. Wright employed his later years in miscellaneous literary work, and died in the year 1844. For a notice of him, vide Gentleman’s Magazine of that year.
[7] “You will readily imagine that the sentence of our friend was very grievous indeed to me. Everybody that I have seen, even Mr. C.’s enemies, declare it to be too severe. I hope and trust it will not, however, damp his ardour.… I was very glad to see, by the last Register, that Mr. Cobbett’s spirit is by no means cowed.”—J. Swann to J. Wright, July 13 and 20, 1810.
[8] Excepting Mr. Leigh Hunt. The Examiner again took up its tale about Mr. Cobbett’s “dastardly spirit,” which, it was quite clear, still existed, for the latter had not dared to whisper a syllable against the pernicious habits of the Prince of Wales, nor against the reappointment of the Duke of York. Cobbett was at the same time charged, by the same writer, with “almost holding up the murderer of Perceval to applause and imitation”—a statement which was the exact opposite to the truth. A further insinuation, that Lord Cochrane held guineas up to the electors, was of similar malignity and worthlessness. A pamphlet appeared, about this time, upbraiding those who had been latterly seizing upon the opportunity to vilify Cobbett’s character: “An Examination of the Attacks upon the Political Character of Mr. Cobbett,” by George Buckler (London, 1812).
CHAPTER XXI.
“THE NATION NEVER CAN BE ITSELF AGAIN WITHOUT A REFORM.”
There is reason to believe that Mr. Cobbett now began seriously to entertain the idea of getting into Parliament. Beyond, however, an address to the electors of Hampshire, in the autumn of 1812, no active step was yet taken. Mr. George Rose was all-powerful in the county, the constituency being thus practically in ministerial hands. One appearance on the nomination-day was enough to satisfy Mr. Cobbett of the hopelessness of a contest.
His return to Botley revealed one great change in sentiment; the parsons were dead against him. This was undeserved, as Cobbett had always been a good, quiet churchman; had written vigorously in support of tithes, and the prior claim to them of the clergy and the poor, as against the Howards, the Russells, and the Greys; and had had many friends amongst the clergy. This new alienation may, however, be due to a circumstance which occurred just before Cobbett’s release;—it was certainly so in one case.
Mr. Daniel Eaton, a small bookseller, and an old offender against established opinion, had recently stood in the pillory for an hour,—that being part of his punishment for selling Paine’s “Age of Reason.” There was much public sympathy with him, the populace actually trying to serve him with “refreshments.” Cobbett had formed pretty strong opinions concerning this degrading punishment, but very much stronger ones concerning the Attorney-General as a prosecutor; and that learned gentleman having foreboded the “consequences, dreadful in the extreme,” which must follow if Paine’s religious principles were suffered to take root, Mr. Cobbett suggested that there would be no better way of averting these consequences than by an answer to the book. “And have we 20,000 clergymen, and will no one of them attempt to give us this answer?” he said. He would call upon his own spiritual pastor, the Rector of Botley, the Rev. Richard Baker.
Mr. Baker consented to undertake the task, but almost immediately withdrew the offer; upon which, Mr. Cobbett reminded him of his ordination vows, and generally played with him, in his own manner, making the poor parson look rather ridiculous.
So, upon his return home, Mr. Cobbett was not welcomed by his spiritual adviser; who even went so far as to refuse the keys of the belfry to those persons who, just then, were so desirous of adding all they could to the clamour of rejoicing.
The Rev. Mr. Baker is a character, in his way. There are some sad stories of him in Cobbett’s Register, which the reader may discover, if his tastes lie in that direction. How he was horsewhipped in the public street,—how he actually professed disbelief in Revelation, while declining to meet the consequences of a public admission of the same,—how he cheated at market, and so on.[1]
There were many such characters in the Church in those deadened days, who, when they entered into the lively election contests of the time, would lead the way of violence. Your political parson could be a famous “rough,” when opportunity served.
So Mr. Cobbett had made another set of enemies—the very set, too, who, if they had given themselves a moment’s opportunity for consideration, would have discovered that he, of all public men, was the one who could serve their cause the best. Instead of that, numbers of the clergy started up as anti-Cobbettites, writing useless tracts on “disaffection,” or meeting him at public gatherings, and trying to shout him down. And this sort of thing lasted as long as Cobbett lived; the clergy never made friends with him again; there were far too many idle shepherds, who thought their interest must suffer if a misguided populace had all that it asked; and who, consequently, resisted Reform with all their might and main.
The country squires were dreading, too, the possible effects of Mr. Cobbett’s vigorous writings.
His influence amongst the middle-classes was increasing; and the artisans and labourers were beginning to club together to buy the Register; readers were more numerous than ever.[2] But the landed interest could not, or would not, understand him. The farmer could not see the identity of interest which properly existed between himself and his labourers; and the man who preached this theme was, of course, not to be trusted when dealing with other topics. He told them that ruin was impending; that, immediately upon a cessation of the war, prices would go down, and the consequences would be disastrous. There was no chance of escape, but by immediate Reform, by which means there should be a searching reduction in the public expenditure. The poor-rates were now nearly eight millions. Government annuitants were swelling their numbers with every year of war; dignitaries of state had higher salaries, and courtiers larger pensions; army-contractors and stock-jobbers were swallowing up the wealth of the country, and elbowing out the squires.
So, when the Corn Bill was proposed, Mr. Cobbett was standing alone again, or very nearly alone.[3] In vain did he point out that it would tend to keep up the high price of food, which was already driving the able-bodied out of the country; that the principal reason for keeping up high prices was, that the land might continue to pay the exorbitant taxes, and so continue to support a multitude of idlers. The Corn Bill became law; peace was signed, but plenty came not along with it; and the farmers straightway fell to pieces, dragging all the industry of the country along with them.
During these three or four years (1812-1816), there was more revolution in personal property in England, than there had been seen, in the same space of time, since the Restoration. The terrible load which weighed upon the people may be judged of by the fact that Cobbett was paying, the year after the war, several hundred pounds in direct and indirect taxes. It is not difficult, then, to understand how intolerable would be the burden upon the land, for people whose only resource was the land; and all the more so, that inflated prosperity had engendered improvidence. Tea, coffee, wine, spirits, and other exciseable articles had taken the place of beer on the tables of the farmers; their wives and daughters had found sofas, carpets, and parlour-bells necessary to existence. A generation had grown up which must needs send its butter and eggs to market, instead of carrying them; silk stockings had usurped those of worsted; the fashions were finding their way into the farm-houses. So, in a little while, the poor farmers were breaking stones on the highway by hundreds.
But, if the LAND did not, as yet, understand Mr. Cobbett, the Workshop did. Very soon after he came out of prison, he drew the attention of his readers to the ominous disturbance at Nottingham, on the part of the Luddites. The change which had come over the people—that they should break machinery, disturb the peace, and refuse to sing “God save the King”—was ominous indeed. But how did this come to pass? Not all at once: these things (he pointed out) had been growing up by degrees. Disloyalty and misgovernment ever went hand in hand. The people were beginning to see that the governing classes were occupied, as much as any traders, in looking exclusively after their own interests, and the interests of their adherents.
For an effectual remedy, then, there could only be a reform in the Representation of the people. No innovation: but Reform. No republicanism: but the ancient Constitution. “The nation never can be itself again without a Reform,” was Cobbett’s repeated cry,—echoed, at last, by millions of people.[4]
The brave, the undaunted Lord Cochrane was one of Mr. Cobbett’s coadjutors. They had been near neighbours for many years past; and when the gallant sailor was ashore, many had been the sports which they had seen together. Cochrane’s candidature for Westminster always had the valuable support of the Register; and, when the foul charge was got up against him (purely from political motives) which hung like a nightmare over the rest of his long life, there was no support of his cause equal to the pages of that intrepid journal. So the two men kept together—had long and earnest conferences over the miserable and degraded condition of their country; and worked and waited for the day that must surely come after all this suffering. The nation was now entering upon the most disgraceful period of its history: with a disreputable “first gent” in the chief seat; the pretenders to statesmanship divided into two rival factions, concerning which it can only be said that one was in place and had control over the country’s resources, and the other was out of place; and the mass of the people in a condition, comparable only to that presented by the inhabitants of a hive of bees, in autumn, when their winter store passes into the hands of other than the providers.
One day, in September, 1816, after a spring and summer of much trial, during which the country was kept alarmed by acts of violence; mills, frames, and threshing-machines being destroyed, and ricks of corn laid hands on, either by fire or thieves; Cobbett had been talking to his neighbour on these burning topics. They both agreed that, if the people could but be enabled to see the matter in its true light, there would be “an end to all such acts of violence, at once; and of course, to the ignominious deaths of fathers and sons, and the miseries of wives, children, and parents, produced in the end by these acts of violence.” Lord Cochrane’s suggestion was, that it was in the power of Mr. Cobbett to effect this purpose, by writing an essay upon the subject; and, if the price of the Register could for that occasion be reduced to twopence, the desired object would be obtained.
“I said, before we parted, that this should be done. But, as it was impossible for me to prove to the people what was not the cause of their misery, without proving to them what was the cause … without pointing out the remedy: as the remedy, at last, came to a Reform of Parliament; and, as I still feared that the best time was not come for urging on this great question, I delayed, from time to time, the fulfilment of my promise to my neighbour, who, on his part, never saw me without pressing me hard upon the subject; and on the 2nd of November, I wrote the No. 18, being an ‘Address to the Journeymen and Labourers’ on the aforementioned subjects.”
There were misgivings as to the probable success of this effort: that there would be serious loss in its production, and that it would be premature; irresolution went so far as to countermand the instructions to the printer. Futile misgivings these! Before the end of the month, forty-four thousand copies had been sold of the first cheap Register.
And, reader, if you glance at some portions of this splendid essay, you will not wonder at the uproar that ensued; the enthusiastic reception on the part of the “lower orders;” the terror on the part of officialism and prescription; the renewed malignity of the envious press. The effect of this popularizing of the Political Register was prodigious, as we shall see; and as you will understand, if all the numbers were anything like this first one.
“To the Journeymen and Labourers of England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland, on the cause of their present miseries; on the measures which have produced that cause; on the remedies which some foolish and some cruel and insolent men have proposed; and on the line of conduct which journeymen and labourers ought to pursue, in order to obtain effectual relief, and to assist in promoting the tranquillity, and restoring the happiness of their country.
“Friends and Fellow-Countrymen,—
“Whatever the pride of rank, of riches, or of scholarship, may have induced some men to believe, or to affect to believe, the real strength and all the resources of a country ever have sprung, and ever must spring, from the labour of its people, and hence it is, that this nation, which is so small in numbers, and so poor in climate and soil compared with many others, has, for many ages, been the most powerful nation in the world: it is the most industrious, the most laborious, and, therefore, the most powerful. Elegant dresses, superb furniture, stately buildings, fine roads and canals, fleet horses and carriages, numerous and stout ships, warehouses teeming with goods; all these, and many other objects that fall under our view, are so many works of national wealth and resources. But all these spring from labour. Without the journeyman and the labourer none of them could exist; without the assistance of their hands, the country would be a wilderness, hardly worth the notice of an invader.
“As it is the labour of those who toil which makes a country abound in resources, so it is the same class of men who must, by their arms, secure its safety, and uphold its fame. Titles and immense sums of money have been bestowed upon numerous naval and military commanders. Without calling the justice of these in question, we may assert that the victories were obtained by you and your fathers, and brothers and sons, in co-operation with those commanders, who, with your aid, have done great and wonderful things; but who, without that aid, would have been as impotent as children at the breast.
“With this correct idea of your own worth in your minds, with what indignation must you hear yourselves called the populace, the rabble, the mob, the swinish multitude; and with what greater indignation, if possible, must you hear the projects of these cool, and cruel, and insolent men, who, now that you have been, without any fault of yours, brought into a state of misery, propose to narrow the limits of parish relief, to prevent you from marrying in the days of your youth, or to thrust you out to seek your bread in foreign lands, never more to behold your parents or friends? But, suppress your indignation, until we return to this topic, after we have considered the cause of your present misery, and the measures which have produced that cause.
“The times in which we live are full of peril. The nation, as described by the very creatures of the Government, is fast advancing to that period when an important change must take place. It is the lot of mankind, that some shall labour with their limbs, and others with their minds; and, on all occasions, more especially on an occasion like the present, it is the duty of the latter to come to the assistance of the former. We are all equally interested in the peace and happiness of our common country. It is of the utmost importance, that in the seeking to obtain those objects, our endeavours should be uniform, and tend all to the same point. Such an uniformity cannot exist without an uniformity of sentiment as to public matters, and to produce this uniformity is the object of this address.
“As to the cause of our present miseries, it is the enormous amount of the taxes, which the Government compels us to pay for the support of its army, its placemen, its pensioners, &c., and for the payment of the interest of its debt. That this is the real cause has been a thousand times proved; and it is now so acknowledged by the creatures of the Government themselves. Two hundred and five of the correspondents of the Board of Agriculture ascribe the ruin of the country to taxation. Numerous writers, formerly the friends of the Pitt system, now declare, that taxation has been the cause of our distress. Indeed, when we compare our present state to the state of the country previous to the wars against France, we must see that our present misery is owing to no other cause. The taxes then annually raised amounted to about fifteen millions: they amounted last year to seventy millions. The nation was then happy: it is now miserable.
“It has been attempted to puzzle you with this sort of question: ‘If taxes be the cause of the people’s misery, how comes it that they were not so miserable before the taxes were reduced as they are now?’ Here is a fallacy, which you will be careful to detect. I know that the taxes have been reduced, that is to say, nominally reduced, but not so in fact; on the contrary, they have in reality been greatly augmented. This has been done by the sleight of hand of paper-money. Suppose, for instance, that four years ago I had 100 pounds to pay in taxes, then 130 bushels of wheat would have paid my share. If I have now seventy-five pounds to pay in taxes, it will require 190 bushels of wheat to pay my share of taxes. Consequently, though my taxes are nominally reduced, they are, in reality, greatly augmented. This has been done by the legerdemain of paper-money. In 1812, the pound note was worth only thirteen shillings in silver. It is now worth twenty shillings. Therefore, when we now pay a pound note to the tax-gatherer, we really pay him twenty shillings, where we before paid him thirteen shillings; and the fund-holders who lent pound notes worth thirteen shillings each, are now paid their interest in pounds worth twenty shillings each. And the thing is come to what Sir Francis Burdett told the parliament it would come to. He told them, in 1811, that if they ever attempted to pay the interest of their debt in gold and silver, or in paper-money equal in value to gold and silver, the farmers and tradesmen must be ruined, and the journeymen and labourers reduced to the last stage of misery.
“Thus, then, it is clear that it is the weight of the taxes, under which you are sinking, which has already pressed so many of you down into the state of paupers, and which now threatens to deprive many of you of your existence. We next come to consider what have been the causes of this weight of taxes. Here we must go back a little in our history; and you will soon see that this intolerable weight has all proceeded from the want of a parliamentary Reform.
“In the year 1764, soon after the present king came to the throne, the annual interest of the debt amounted to about five millions, and the whole of the taxes to about nine millions. But, soon after this, a war was entered on to compel the Americans to submit to be taxed by the parliament, without being represented in that parliament. The Americans triumphed, and, after the war was over, the annual interest of the debt amounted to about nine millions, and the whole of the taxes to about fifteen millions. This was our situation when the French people began their Revolution. The French people had so long been the slaves of a despotic Government, that the friends of freedom in England rejoiced at their emancipation. The cause of reform, which had never ceased to have supporters in England for a great many years, now acquired new life, and the Reformers urged the parliament to grant reform, instead of going to war against the people of France. The Reformers said: ‘Give the nation reform, and you need fear no revolution.’ The parliament, instead of listening to the Reformers, crushed them, and went to war against the people of France; and the consequence of these wars is, that the annual interest of the debt now amounts to forty-five millions, and the whole of the taxes, during each of the last several years, to seventy millions. So that these wars have added thirty-six millions a year to the interest of the debt, and fifty-five millions a year to the amount of the whole of the taxes! This is the price that we have paid for having checked (for it is only checked) the progress of liberty in France; for having forced upon that people the family of Bourbon, and for having enabled another branch of that same family to restore the bloody Inquisition which Napoleon had put down.”
After a graphic sketch of the oppressions and the struggles, which obtained in France, and which produced the great Revolution, the writer proceeds:—
“It seems, at first sight, very strange that the Government should not have taken warning in time. But it had so long been in the habit of despising the people, that its mind was incapable of entertaining any notion of danger from the oppressions heaped upon them. It was surrounded with panders and parasites, who told it nothing but flattering falsehoods; and it saw itself supported by 250,000 bayonets, which it thought irresistible.… And if you ask me how the ministers, and the noblesse, and the priesthood, who generally know pretty well how to take care of themselves; if you ask me how it came to pass that they did not take warning in time, I answer, that they did take warning, but that, seeing that the change which was coming would deprive them of a great part of their power and emoluments, they resolved to resist the change, and to destroy the country, if possible, rather than not have all its wealth and power to themselves.
“You have been represented by the Times newspaper, by the Courier, by the Morning Post, by the Morning Herald, and others, as the Scum of Society. They say that you have no business at public meetings; that you are rabble, and that you pay no taxes. These insolent hirelings, who wallow in wealth, would not be able to put their abuse of you in print, were it not for your labour. You create all that is an object of taxation; for, even the land itself would be good for nothing without your labour. But are you not taxed? Do you pay no taxes? One of the correspondents of the Board of Agriculture has said that care has been taken to lay as little tax as possible on the articles used by you. One would wonder how a man could be found impudent enough to put an assertion like this upon paper. But the people of this country have so long been insulted by such men, that the insolence of the latter knows no bounds.
“The tax-gatherers do not, indeed, come to you and demand money of you; but there are few articles which you use, in the purchase of which you do not pay a tax. On your shoes, salt, beer, malt, hops, tea, sugar, candles, soap, paper, coffee, spirits, glass of your windows, bricks and tiles, tobacco. On all these, and many other articles, you pay a tax, and even on your loaf you pay a tax, because everything is taxed from which the loaf proceeds. In several cases the tax amounts to more than one-half of what you pay for the article itself; these taxes go, in part, to support sinecure placemen and pensioners; and the ruffians of the hired press call you the Scum of Society, and deny that you have any right to show your faces at any public meeting to petition for a Reform, or for the removal of any abuse whatever! Mr. Preston, whom I quoted before, and who is a member of parliament, and has a large estate, says upon this subject, ‘Every family, even of the poorest labourer, consisting of five persons, may be considered as paying in indirect taxes, at least ten pounds a year, or more than half his wages at seven shillings a week!’ And yet the insolent hirelings call you the mob, the rabble, the scum, the swinish multitude, and say that your voice is nothing; that you have no business at public meetings; and that you are, and ought to be, considered as nothing in the body politic! Shall we never see the day when these men will change their tone? Will they never cease to look upon you as brutes? I trust they will change their tone, and that the day of the change is at no great distance!
“With what feelings must you look upon the condition of your country, where the increase of the people is now looked upon as a curse! Thus, however, has it always been, in all countries, where taxes have produced excessive misery. Our countryman, Mr. Gibbon, in his history of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, has the following passage:—
“‘The horrid practice of murdering their new-born infants was become every day more frequent in the provinces. It was the effect of distress, and the distress was principally occasioned by the intolerable burden of taxes, and by the vexations as well as cruel prosecutions of the officers of the Revenue against their insolvent debtors. The less opulent or less industrious part of mankind, instead of rejoicing at an increase of family, deemed it an act of paternal tenderness to release the children from the impending miseries of a life which they themselves were unable to support.’
“But that which took place under the base Emperor Constantine, will not take place in England. You will not murder your new-born infants, nor will you, to please the corrupt and the insolent, debar yourselves from enjoyments to which you are invited by the very first of nature’s laws. It is, however, a disgrace to the country, that men should be found in it, capable of putting ideas so insolent upon paper. So, then, a young man arm-in-arm with a rosy-cheeked girl, must be a spectacle of evil omen! What! and do they imagine that you are thus to be extinguished, because some of you are now (without any fault of yours) unable to find work? As far as you were wanted to labour, to fight, or to pay taxes, you were welcome, and they boasted of your numbers; but now that your country has been brought into a state of misery, these corrupt and insolent men are busied with schemes for getting rid of you. Just as if you had not as good a right to live, and to love, and to marry as they have! They do not purpose—far from it—to check the breeding of sinecure placemen and pensioners, who are supported in part by the taxes which you help to pay. They say not a word about the whole families who are upon the pension list. In many cases, there are sums granted in trust for the children of such a lord or such a lady. And while labourers and journeymen, who have large families too, are actually paying taxes for the support of these lords’ and ladies’ children, these cruel and insolent men propose that they shall have no relief, and their having children ought to be checked! To such a subject no words can do justice. You will feel as you ought to feel; and to the effect of your feelings I leave these cruel and insolent men.”
The following paragraph is against the republicans, of which there were many advocates, born of the troublous times:—
“I know of no enemy of reform, and of the happiness of the country, so great as that man who would persuade you that we possess nothing good, and that all must be torn to pieces. There is no principle, no precedent, no regulation (except as to mere matter of detail), favourable to freedom, which is not to be found in the laws of England or in the example of our ancestors. Therefore, I say, we may ask for, and we want, nothing new. We have great constitutional laws and principles, to which we are immovably attached. We want great alteration, but we want nothing new. Alteration, modification to suit the times and circumstances; but the great principles ought to be, and must be, the same, or else confusion will follow. It was the misfortune of the French people, that they had no great and settled principles to refer to in their laws or history. They sallied forth and inflicted vengeance on their oppressors; but, for want of settled principles to which to refer, they fell into confusion; they massacred each other; they next flew to a military chief to protect them even against themselves; and the result has been what we too well know. Let us, therefore, congratulate ourselves, that we have great constitutional principles and laws, to which we can refer, and to which we are attached.
When journeymen find their wages reduced, they should take time to reflect on the real cause before they fly upon their employers, who are, in many cases, in as great, or greater, distress than themselves. How many of these employers have, of late, gone to jail for debt, and left helpless families behind them! The employer’s trade falls off. His goods are reduced in price. His stock loses the half of its value. He owes money. He is ruined; and how can he continue to pay high wages? The cause of his ruin is the weight of the taxes, which presses so heavily on us all, that we lose the power of purchasing goods. But it is certain that a great many, a very large portion, of the farmers, tradesmen, and manufacturers, have, by their supineness and want of public spirit, contributed towards the bringing of this ruin upon themselves and upon you. They have skulked from their public duty. They have kept aloof from, or opposed, all measures for a redress of grievances; and, indeed, they still skulk, though ruin and destruction stare them in the face.… Instead of coming forward to apply for a reduction of those taxes which are pressing them as well as you to the earth, what are they doing? Why, they are applying to the Government to add to their receipts by passing Corn Bills; by preventing foreign wool from being imported; and many other such silly schemes. Instead of asking for a reduction of taxes, they are asking for the means of paying taxes! Instead of asking for the abolition of sinecure places and pensions, they pray to be enabled to continue to pay the amount of those places and pensions! They know very well that the salaries of the judges and of many other persons were greatly raised, some years ago, on the ground of the rise in the price of labour and provisions; why, then, do they not ask to have those salaries reduced now that labour is reduced? Why do they not apply to the case of the judges and others, the arguments which they apply to you? They can talk boldly enough to you; but they are too great cowards to talk to the Government, even in the way of petition!
I have no room, nor have I any desire, to appeal to your passions upon this occasion. I have laid before you, with all the clearness I am master of, the causes of our misery, the measures which have led to those causes, and I have pointed out what appears to me to be the only remedy—namely, a reform of the Commons’, or people’s, House of Parliament. I exhort you to proceed in a peaceable and lawful manner; but, at the same time, to proceed with zeal and resolution in the attainment of this object. If the skulkers will not join you, if the ‘decent fire-side’ gentry still keep aloof, proceed by yourselves. Any man can draw up a petition, and any man can carry it up to London, with instructions to deliver it into trusty hands, to be presented whenever the House shall meet. Some further information as to this matter in a future number. In the meanwhile, I remain, your friend, Wm. Cobbett.”
Such, then, was the clarion, which was to awaken the working-classes of England; to systematize their thoughts, and to give definiteness to their aims.
And such was, also, the stuff which was to terrify, for a little while longer, our dear old friends “Law and Order.” While the hundreds of thousands were welcoming this new gospel, were learning a practicable path for their bewildered feet: the partisans of Government were absolutely dazed, blinded, with terror; and their horror at the growth of liberal opinions (otherwise, “the floodgates of sedition”) completely disabled them from discussing domestic politics with any semblance of calmness. As for the mediocrities in power,—they had succeeded in keeping out the shifty Whigs; but here was a third party coming to the front, with claims as good as their own, and promising to acquire a force which they might withstand in vain. Ministers, in short, were alarmed; and they announced their resolve, in the words of Lord Liverpool, to pursue the “Stern path of Duty!” Lord Sidmouth (now Home Secretary), whose qualities for statesmanship no person, other than his royal patron, had been able to discover since he left the Speaker’s chair in 1802,—was at his wits’ end. And minor lights, as Mr. Wilberforce, sighed and groaned over so much blasphemy as was rife, Cobbett’s being “the most pernicious of all.”
The course of the Stern Path, as regards the subject of these pages, must be described in another chapter. Meanwhile, the immediate consequences of the publication of the first cheap Register remain to be noted.
All sorts of means were taken to hinder the circulation of the now ubiquitous journal. Booksellers who sold the Register were threatened with loss of custom; publicans were threatened with the withdrawal of their licences; hawkers and pedlars were threatened with the police.
Cheap opposition pamphlets were started.[5] The newspapers, which had been pretty quiet concerning Mr. Cobbett’s merits, ever since 1812, now began again:[6] the New Times coming out with a specially grand affair, headed “Cobbett against Cobbett,” which was subsequently issued as a broadside.
And a very serious charge did they bring against this “convicted libeller,” this “firebrand,” this “brutal ruffian,” this “convicted incendiary,” this “hoary miscreant,” and his “ferocious journal.”[7] In what, then, had he manifested this brutality,—this ferocity? By lacerating the naked back of another of his labourers? Running off with another man’s wife? Setting fire to barns and ricks? Defrauding the stock-exchange?
None, none of these things. The criminal was proved, by overwhelming evidence,—“out of his own mouth” indeed—to have formerly denounced Reform!!! Sad fellow!