This heart-rending tragedy was generally thought to have been produced by government spies; indeed, several newspapers stated as much at the time. We, however, KNOW such to have been the case, and

[[339]]that the characters of "blood-hounds" were but too well performed. Our bosoms swell with indignation at the recollection of such monstrous plots against the lives and liberties of our countrymen, and we regret that the plotters did not fall into their own snares.

On the morning after this lamentable occurrence, a "Gazette Extraordinary" was issued, signed "Sidmouth," offering one thousand pounds for the detection of Arthur Thistlewood, who stood charged with the crime of high treason. The reward had the desired effect, as he was soon apprehended. Three of his companions were afterwards taken, and FIVE MARTYRS, in all, suffered as traitors on the 1st of May.

Let us not, in common with hirelings, talk of the "wisdom of ministers," and the "bravery of the guards," combined with the several loathsome execrations on artificers and agriculturists; but let us inquire, is there no resemblance to be observed between this conspiracy and the Manchester massacre? The intelligent reader will not find the similarity difficult to trace.

The queen's return to England being now expected, Mr. Canning resigned his place in the cabinet as president of the Board of Controul, and retired to the Continent. One of his biographers says, "His conduct on this occasion, according to universal consent, was marked by the most perfect correctness and delicacy of feeling." Perhaps it might be so considered by some people; but to us it does appear that a man of sound public principles, of high and

[[340]]honourable private feelings, had no middle course to take at this juncture. Either the Queen of England was GUILTY, or she was the MOST PERSECUTED AND AGGRIEVED OF WOMEN. Will any one say that, in the first instance, it was the duty of a minister of high station to desert the painful, but responsible, situation in which he stood, from any feeling of esteem or attachment to an individual so unworthy? In the other case, if Queen Caroline, as almost every body believed, and as Mr. Brougham solemnly swore he believed, was INNOCENT, was there any circumstance or consideration upon earth,—the wreck of ambition, the loss of fortune, or the fear of even death itself,—which should have induced an English gentleman, a man of honour, a man who had the feelings of a man, to leave a FEMALE, whom he called "FRIEND," beneath the weight of so awful an oppression? To us, we must confess, Mr. Canning's conduct on this occasion appears one of the greatest blots we are acquainted with upon his public and private character, the almost unequivocal proof of a mind unused to the habit of taking sound and elevated views of the human action. Mr. Canning had, during a long career,—a career continued through nearly thirty years,—been the forward and unflinching opponent of popular principles and concessions. He had never once shrunk from abridging the liberties of the subject; he had never once shown trepidation at any extraordinary powers demanded by the crown. With his arms folded, and his looks erect, he had sanctioned, without scruple,

[[341]]the severest laws against the press; he had advocated the arbitrary imprisonment of the free citizen; he had eulogized the forcible repression of public meetings; and he had constantly declared himself the determined enemy of parliamentary reform. The only subject on which he professed liberal opinions (the Catholic question) was precisely that subject to which the great bulk of the community was indisposed. Such had been the career, such was the character, of Mr. Canning up to the time of his cowardly desertion of the injured Caroline, Queen of England!

Her majesty was now daily expected to land upon our shores; and powerful as was the arm of tyranny, her arrival was much feared by her husband and his ministers.

We have before mentioned that the queen desired several times, most particularly, to see Mr. Brougham. It is true that various places for meeting had been appointed; but some apology or other was invariably made by the learned gentleman. Her majesty finally wrote that she should be at St. Omers on a certain day, on her way to England, in the metropolis of which she was resolved to arrive as soon as possible. Her majesty had previously appointed Mr. Brougham her attorney-general, desiring he would choose a solicitor to act with him, and he named Mr. Denman. One excuse for not attending to his appointment with the queen, Mr. Brougham ascribed to his electioneering business in Westmoreland; and another was, Mrs. Brougham's being in a

[[342]]situation too delicate for him to leave her. Such excuses ought not to have prevented Mr. Brougham's giving his attention to the important business of the queen; indeed, he was once within four leagues of her majesty's abode, with a CERTAIN LETTER in his pocket from the highest authorities; but Mr. Brougham did not venture to lay it before the queen, nor did he seek for an interview. The commission thus entrusted to this learned gentleman was the same which Lord Hutchinson undertook some time afterwards.