THE LIFE OF
THOMAS, LORD COCHRANE, TENTH EARL OF DUNDONALD, G.C.B.,
ADMIRAL OF THE RED, REAR-ADMIRAL OF THE FLEET, ETC., ETC.,
COMPLETING "THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A SEAMAN."
by THOMAS, ELEVENTH EARL OF DUNDONALD,
AND H.R. FOX BOURNE,
AUTHOR OF "ENGLISH SEAMEN UNDER THE TUDORS," ETC. ETC.
IN TWO VOLUMES. VOL. I.
Published 1869.
TO MISS ANGELA BURDETT COUTTS,
WHOSE HONOURED FATHER
WAS THE FIRMEST AND MOST CONSTANT FRIEND AND SUPPORTER
OF MY FATHER,
DURING A CAREER DEVOTED TO THE WELFARE OF HIS COUNTRY
AND THE HONOUR OF HIS PROFESSION,
AND WHOM IT IS MY HAPPINESS AND PRIVILEGE TO CALL MY FRIEND,
THIS WORK IS DEDICATED,
WITH ALL RESPECT AND REGARD,
BY HER ATTACHED AND FAITHFUL SERVANT,
DUNDONALD.
PREFACE.
In these Volumes is recounted the public life of my late father from the period to which the narrative was brought down by himself in his unfinished "Autobiography of a Seaman." The completion of that work was prevented by his death, which occurred almost immediately after the publication of the Second Volume, eight years and a half ago. I had hoped to supplement it sooner; but in this hope I have been thwarted.
My father's papers were, at the time of his death, in the hands of a gentleman who had assisted him in the preparation of his "Autobiography," and to this gentleman was entrusted the completion of the work. Illness and other occupations, however, interfered, and, after a lapse of about two years, he died, leaving the papers, of which no use had been made by him, to fall into the possession of others. Only after long delay and considerable trouble and expense was I able to recover them and realize my long-cherished purpose.
Further delay in the publication of this book has arisen from my having been compelled, as my father's executor, to make three long and laborious journeys to Brazil, which have engrossed much time.
At length, however, I find myself able to pay the debt which I owe both to my father's memory and to the public, by whom the "Autobiography of a Seaman" was read with so much interest. At the beginning of last year I placed all the necessary documents in the hands of my friend, Mr. H.R. Fox Bourne, asking him to handle them with the same zeal of research and impartiality of judgment which he has shown in his already published works. I have also furnished him with my own reminiscences of so much of my father's life as was personally known to me; and he has availed himself of all the help that could be obtained from other sources of information, both private and public. He has written the book to the best of his ability, and I have done my utmost to help him in making it as complete and accurate as possible. We hope that the late Earl of Dundonald's life and character have been all the better delineated in that the work has grown out of the personal knowledge of his son and the unbiassed judgment of a stranger.
A long time having elapsed since the publication of the "Autobiography of a Seaman," it has been thought well to give a brief recapitulation of its story in an opening chapter.
The four following chapters recount my father's history during the five years following the cruel Stock Exchange trial, the subject last treated of in the "Autobiography." It is not strange that the harsh treatment to which he was subjected should have led him into opposition, in which there was some violence, which he afterwards condemned, against the Government of the day. But, if there were circumstances to be regretted in this portion of his career, it shows almost more plainly than any other with what strength of philanthropy he sought to aid the poor and the oppressed.
His occupations as Chief Admiral, first of Chili and afterwards of Brazil, were described by himself in two volumes, entitled, "A Narrative of Services in Chili, Peru, and Brazil." Therefore, the seven chapters of the present work which describe these episodes have been made as concise as possible. Only the most memorable circumstances have been dwelt upon, and the details introduced have been drawn to some extent from documents not included in the volumes referred to.
There was no reason for abridgment in treating of my father's connection with Greece. In the service of that country he was less able to achieve beneficial results than in Chili and Brazil; but as, on that ground, he has been frequently traduced by critics and historians, it seemed especially important to show how his successes were greater than these critics and historians have represented, and how his failures sprang from the faults of others and from misfortunes by which he was the chief sufferer. The documents left by him, moreover, afford abundant material for illustrating an eventful period in modern history. The chapters referring to Greece and Greek affairs, accordingly, enter with especial fullness into the circumstances of Lord Dundonald's life at this time, and his connection with contemporary politics.
Eight other chapters recount all that was of most public interest in the thirty years of my father's life after his return from Greece. Except during a brief period of active service in his profession, when he had command of the British squadron in North American and West Indian waters, those thirty years were chiefly spent in efforts—by scientific research, by mechanical experiment, and by persevering argument—to increase the naval power of his country, and in efforts no less zealous to secure for himself that full reversal of the wrongful sentence passed upon him in a former generation, which could only be attained by public restitution of the official rank and national honours of which he had been deprived.
This restitution was begun by his Majesty King William IV., and completed by our present most gracious Queen and the Prince Consort. By the kindnesses which he received from these illustrious persons, my father's later years were cheered; and I can never cease to be profoundly grateful to my Sovereign, and her revered husband, for the personal interest with which they listened to my prayer immediately after his death. Through their gracious influence, the same banner of the Bath that had been taken from him nearly fifty years before, was restored to its place in Westminster Abbey, and allowed to float over his remains at their time of burial. Thus the last stain upon my father's memory was wiped out.
DUNDONALD. London, May 24th, 1869.
CONTENTS OF THE FIRST VOLUME.
[1775-1814.]
Introduction.—Lord Cochrane's Ancestry.—His First Occupations in the Navy.—His Cruise in the Speedy and Capture of the Gamo.—His Exploits in the Pallas.—The beginning of his Parliamentary Life.—His two Elections as Member for Honiton.—His Election for Westminster.—Further Seamanship.—The Basque Roads Affair.—The Court-Martial on Lord Gambier, and its injurious effects on Lord Cochrane's Naval Career.—His Parliamentary Occupations.—His Visit to Malta and its Issues.—The Antecedents and Consequences of the Stock Exchange Trial - 1
[1814.]
The Issue of the Stock Exchange Trial.—Lord Cochrane's Committal to the King's Bench Prison.—The Debate upon his Case in the House of Commons, and his Speech on that Occasion.—His Expulsion from the House, and Re-election as Member for Westminster.—The Withdrawal of his Sentence to the Pillory.—The Removal of his Insignia as a Knight of the Bath - 35
[1814-1815.]
Lord Cochrane's Bearing in the King's Bench Prison.—His Street Lamps.—His Escape, and the Motives for it.—His Capture in the House of Commons, and subsequent Treatment.—His Confinement in the Strong Room of the King's Bench Prison.—His Release - 48
[1815-1816.]
Lord Cochrane's Return to the House of Commons.—His Share in the Refusal of the Duke of Cumberland's Marriage Pension.—His Charges against Lord Ellenborough, and their Rejection by the House.—His Popularity.—The Part taken by him in Public Meetings for the Relief of the People.—The London Tavern Meeting.—His further Prosecution, Trial at Guildford, and subsequent Imprisonment.—The Payment of his Fines by a Penny Subscription.—The Congratulations of his Westminster Constituents - 74
[1817-1818.]
The State of Politics in England in 1817 and 1818, and Lord Cochrane's Share in them.—His Work as a Radical in and out of Parliament.—His futile Efforts to obtain the Prize Money due for his Services at Basque Roads.—The Holly Hill Siege.—The Preparations for his Enterprise in South America.—His last Speech in Parliament - 109
[1810-1817.]
The Antecedents of Lord Cochrane's Employments in South America.—The War of Independence in the Spanish Colonies.—Mexico.—Venezuela.—Colombia.—Chili.—The first Chilian Insurrection.—The Carreras and O'Higgins.—The Battle of Rancagua.—O'Higgins's Successes.—The Establishment of the Chilian Republic.—Lord Cochrane invited to enter the Chilian Service - 137
[1818-1820.]
Lord Cochrane's Voyage to Chili.—His Reception at Valparaiso and Santiago.—The Disorganization of the Chilian Fleet.—First Signs of Disaffection.—The Naval Forces of the Chilians and the Spaniards.—Lord Cochrane's first Expedition to Peru.—His Attack on Callao.—"Drake the Dragon" and "Cochrane the Devil."—Lord Cochrane's Successes in Overawing the Spaniards, in Treasure-taking, and in Encouragement of the Peruvians to join in the War of Independence.—His Plan for another Attack on Callao.—His Difficulties in Equipping the Expedition.—The Failure of the Attempt.—His Plan for Storming Valdivia.—Its Successful Accomplishment - 148
[1820-1822.]
Lord Cochrane's Return to Valparaiso.—His Relations with the Chilian Senate.—The third Expedition to Peru.—General San Martin.—The Capture of the Esmeralda, and its Issue.—Lord Cochrane's subsequent Work.—San Martin's Treachery.—His Assumption of the Protectorate of Peru.—His Base Proposals to Lord Cochrane.—Lord Cochrane's Condemnation of them.—The Troubles of the Chilian Squadron.—Lord Cochrane's Seizure of Treasure at Ancon, and Employment of it in Paying his Officers and Men.—His Stay at Guayaquil.—The Advantages of Free Trade.—Lord Cochrane's Cruise along the Mexican Coast in Search of the remaining Spanish Frigates.—Their Annexation by Peru.—Lord Cochrane's last Visit to Callao - 177
[1822-1823.]
Lord Cochrane's Return to Valparaiso,—The Conduct of the Chilian Government towards him.—His Resignation of Chilian Employment, and Acceptance of Employment under the Emperor of Brazil.—His subsequent Correspondence with the Government of Chili.—The Results of his Chilian Service. - 208
[1823.]
The Antecedents of Brazilian Independence.—Pedro I.'s Accession.—The Internal and External Troubles of the New Empire.—Lord Cochrane's Invitation to Brazil.—His Arrival at Rio de Janeiro, and Acceptance of Brazilian Service.—His first Occupations.—The bad condition of the Squadron, and the consequent Failure of his first Attack on the Portuguese off Bahia.—His Plans for Improving the Fleet, and their Success.—His Night Visit to Bahia, and the consequent Flight of the Enemy.—Lord Cochrane's Pursuit of them.—His Visit to Maranham, and Annexation of that Province and of Para.—His Return to Rio de Janeiro.—The Honours conferred upon him. - 223
[1823-1824.]
The Nature of the Rewards bestowed on Lord Cochrane for his first Services to Brazil.—Pedro I. and the Portuguese Faction.—Lord Cochrane's Advice to the Emperor.—The Troubles brought upon him by it.—The Conduct of the Government towards him and the Fleet.—The withholding of Prize-money and Pay.—Personal Indignities to Lord Cochrane.—An Amusing Episode.—Lord Cochrane's Threat of Resignation, and its Effect.—Sir James Mackintosh's Allusion to him in the House of Commons - 246
[1824-1825.]
The Insurrection in Pernambuco.—Lord Cochrane's Expedition to suppress it.—The Success of his Work.—His Stay at Maranham.—The Disorganized State of Affairs in that Province.—Lord Cochrane's efforts to restore Order and good Government.—Their result in further Trouble to himself.—His Cruise in the Piranga, and Return to England.—His Treatment there.—His Retirement from Brazilian Service.—His Letter to the Emperor Pedro I.—The End of his South American Employments - 266
[1820-1825.]
The Greek Revolution and its Antecedents.—The Modern Greeks.—The Friendly Society.—Sultan Mahmud and Ali Pasha's Rebellion.—The Beginning of the Greek Insurrection.—Count John Capodistrias.—Prince Alexander Hypsilantes.—The Revolution in the Morca.—Theodore Kolokotrones.—The Revolution in the Islands.—The Greek Navy and its Character.—The Excesses of the Greeks.—Their bad Government.—Prince Alexander Mavrocordatos.—The Progress of the Revolution.—The Spoliation of Chios.—English Philhellenes; Thomas Gordon, Frank Abney Hastings, Lord Byron.—The first Greek Loan, and the bad uses to which it was put.—Reverses of the Greeks.—Ibrahim and his Successes.—Mavrocordatos's Letter to Lord Cochrane - 286
[1825-1826.]
Lord Cochrane's Dismissal from Brazilian Service, and his Acceptance of Employment as Chief Admiral of the Greeks.—The Greek Committee and the Greek Deputies in London.—The Terms of Lord Cochrane's Agreement, and the consequent Preparations.—His Visit to Scotland.—Sir Walter Scott's Verses on Lady Cochrane.—Lord Cochrane's forced Retirement to Boulogne, and thence to Brussels.—The Delays in fitting out the Greek Armament.—Captain Hastings, Mr. Hobhouse, and Sir Francis Burdett.—Captain Hastings's Memoir on the Greek Leaders and their Characters.—The first Consequences of Lord Cochrane's new Enterprise.—The Duke of Wellington's Message to Lord Cochrane.—The Greek Deputies' Proposal to Lord Cochrane and his Answer.—The Final Arrangements for his Departure.—The Messiah of the Greeks. - 318
[1826-1827.]
Lord Cochrane's Departure for Greece.—His Visit to London and Voyage to the Mediterranean.—His Stay at Messina, and afterwards at Marseilles.—The Delays in Completing the Steamships, and the consequent Injury to the Greek Cause, and serious Embarrassment to Lord Cochrane.—His Correspondence with Messrs. J. and S. Ricardo.—His Letter to the Greek Government.—Chevalíer Eynard, and the Continental Philhellenes.—Lord Cochrane's Final Departure and Arrival in Greece. - 355
[1826-1827.]
The Progress of Affairs in Greece.—The Siege of Missolonghi.—Its Fall.—The Bad Government and Mismanagement of the Greeks.—General Ponsonby's Account of them.—The Effect of Lord Cochrane's Promised Assistance.—The Fears of the Turks, as shown in their Correspondence with Mr. Canning.—The Arrival of Captain Hastings in Greece, with the Karteria.—His Opinion of Greek Captains and Sailors.—The Frigate Hellas,—Letters to Lord Cochrane from Admiral Miaoulis and the Governing Commission of Greece. - 368
I. (Page 22.)—"Resumé of the Services of the late Earl of Dundonald, none of which have been Requited or Officially Recognised," by Thomas, Eleventh Earl of Dundonald. - 389
II. (Page 23.)—Part of a Speech delivered by Lord Cochrane in the House of Commons, on the 11th of May, 1809, on Naval Abuses. - 397
III. (Page 258.)—A Letter written by Lord Cochrane to the Secretary of State of Brazil on the 3rd of May, 1824. - 400
THE LIFE
OF
THOMAS, TENTH EARL OF DUNDONALD.
CHAPTER I.
INTRODUCTION.—LORD COCHRANE'S ANCESTRY.—HIS FIRST OCCUPATIONS IN THE NAVY.—HIS CRUISE IN THE "SPEEDY" AND CAPTURE OF THE "GAMO."—HIS EXPLOITS IN THE "PALLAS."—THE BEGINNING OF HIS PARLIAMENTARY LIFE.—HIS TWO ELECTIONS AS MEMBER FOR HONITON.—HIS ELECTION FOR WESTMINSTER.—FURTHER SEAMANSHIP.—THE BASQUE ROADS AFFAIR.—THE COURT-MARTIAL ON LORD GAMBIER, AND ITS INJURIOUS EFFECTS ON LORD COCHRANE'S NAVAL CAREER.—HIS PARLIAMENTARY OCCUPATIONS.—HIS VISIT TO MALTA AND ITS ISSUES.—THE ANTECEDENTS AND CONSEQUENCES OF THE STOCK EXCHANGE TRIAL.
[1775-1814.]
Thomas, Loud Cochrane, tenth Earl of Dundonald, was born at Annsfield, in Lanark, on the 14th of December, 1775, and died in London on the 31st of October, 1860. Shortly before his death he wrote two volumes, styled "The Autobiography of a Seaman," which set forth his history down to 1814, the fortieth year of his age. To those volumes the present work, recounting his career during the ensuing six-and-forty years, is intended to serve as a sequel. Before entering upon the later narrative, however, it will be necessary briefly to recapitulate the incidents that have been already detailed.
The Earl of Dundonald was descended from a long line of knights and barons, chiefly resident in Renfrew and Ayr, many of whom were men of mark in Scottish history during the thirteenth and following centuries. Robert Cochran was the especial favourite and foremost counsellor of James III., who made him Earl of Mar; but the favours heaped upon him, and perhaps a certain arrogance in the use of those favours, led to so much opposition from his peers and rivals that he was assassinated by them in 1480.[A]
[Footnote A: Pinkerton, the historian, gives some curious details, illustrating not only Robert Cochran's character, but also the condition of government and society in Scotland four centuries ago. "The Scottish army," he says, "amounting to about fifty thousand, had crowded to the royal banner at Burrough Muir, near Edinburgh, whence they marched to Soutray and to Lauder, at which place they encamped between the church and the village. Cochran, Earl of Mar, conducted the artillery. On the morning after their arrival at Lauder, the peers assembled in a secret council, in the church, and deliberated upon their designs of revenge…. Cochran, ignorant of their designs, left the royal presence to proceed to the council. The earl was attended by three hundred men, armed with light battle-axes, and distinguished by his livery of white with black fillets. He was clothed in a riding cloak of black velvet, and wore a large chain of gold around his neck; his horn of the chase, or of battle, was adorned with gold and precious stones, and his helmet, overlaid with the same valuable metal, was borne before him. Approaching the door of the church, he commanded an attendant to knock with authority; and Sir Robert Douglas, of Lochleven, who guarded the passage, inquiring the name, was answered, 'Tis I, the Earl of Mar.' Cochran and some of his friends were admitted. Angus advanced to him, and pulling the gold chain from his neck, said, 'A rope will become thee better,' while Douglas of Lochleven seized his hunting-horn, declaring that he had been too long a hunter of mischief. Rather astonished than alarmed, Cochran said, 'My lords, is it jest or earnest?' To which it was replied, 'It is good earnest, and so thou shalt find it; for thou and thy accomplices have too long abused our prince's favour. But no longer expect such advantage, for thou and thy followers shall now reap the deserved reward.' Having secured Mar, the lords despatched some men-at-arms to the king's pavilion, conducted by two or three moderate leaders, who amused James, while their followers seized the favourites. Sir William Roger and others were instantly hanged over the bridge at Lauder. Cochran was now brought out, his hands bound with a rope, and thus conducted to the bridge, and hanged above his fellows.">[ Later scions of the family prospered, and in 1641, Sir William Cochrane was raised to the peerage, as Lord Cochrane of Cowden, by Charles I. For his adherence to the royal cause this nobleman was fined 5000£ by the Long Parliament in 1654; and, in recompense for his loyalty, he was made first Earl of Dundonald by Charles II. in 1669. His successors were faithful to the Stuarts, and thereby they suffered heavily. Archibald, the ninth Earl, inheriting a patrimony much reduced by the loyalty and zeal of his ancestors, spent it all in the scientific pursuits to which he devoted himself, and in which he was the friendly rival of Watt, Priestley, Cavendish, and other leading chemists and mechanicians of two or three generations ago. His eldest son, heir to little more than a famous name and a chivalrous and enterprising disposition, had to fight his own way in the world.
Lord Cochrane—as the subject of these memoirs was styled in courtesy until his accession to the peerage in 1831—was intended by his father for the army, in which he received a captain's commission. But his own predilections were in favour of a seaman's life, and accordingly, after brief schooling, he joined the Hind, as a midshipman, in June, 1793, when he was nearly eighteen years of age.
During the next seven years he learnt his craft in various ships and seas, being helped in many ways by his uncle, the Hon. Alexander Cochrane, but profiting most by his own ready wit and hearty love of his profession. Having been promoted to the rank of lieutenant in 1794, he was made commander of the Speedy early in 1800. This little sloop, not larger than a coasting brig, but crowded with eighty-four men and six officers, seemed to be intended only for playing at war. Her whole armament consisted of fourteen 4-pounders. When her new commander tried to add to these a couple of 12-pounders, the deck proved too small and the timbers too weak for them, and they had to be returned. So Lilliputian was his cabin, that, to shave himself, Lord Cochrane was obliged to thrust his head out of the skylight and make a dressing-table of the quarter-deck.
Yet the Speedy, ably commanded, was quite large enough to be of good service. Cruising in her along the Spanish coast, Lord Cochrane succeeded in capturing many gunboats and merchantmen, and the enemy soon learnt to regard her with especial dread. On one memorable occasion, the 6th of May, 1801, he fell in with the Gamo, a Spanish frigate furnished with six times as many men as were in the Speedy and with seven times her weight of shot. Lord Cochrane, boldly advancing, locked his little craft in the enemy's rigging. It was, in miniature, a contest as unequal as that by which Sir Francis Drake and his fellows overcame the Great Armada of Spain in 1588, and with like result. The heavy shot of the Gamo riddled the Speedy's sails, but, passing overhead, did no mischief to her hulk or her men. During an hour there was desperate fighting with small arms, and twice the Spaniards tried in vain to board their sturdy little foe. Lord Cochrane then determined to meet them on their own deck, and the daring project was facilitated by one of the smart expedients in which he was never wanting. Before going into action, "knowing," as he said, "that the final struggle would be a desperate one, and calculating on the superstitious wonder which forms an element in the Spanish character," he had ordered his crew to blacken their faces; and, "what with this and the excitement of combat, more ferocious-looking objects could scarcely be imagined." With these men following him he promptly gained the frigate's deck, and then their strong arms and hideous faces soon frightened the Spaniards into submission.
The senior officer of the Gamo asked for a certificate of his bravery, and received one testifying that he had conducted himself "like a true Spaniard." To Spain, of course, this was no sarcasm, and on the strength of the document its holder soon obtained further promotion.
That achievement, which cost only three men's lives, led to consequences greater than could have been expected. Lord Cochrane, after three months' waiting, received the rank of post captain. But his desire that the services of Lieutenant Parker, his second in command, should also be recompensed led to a correspondence with Earl St. Vincent which turned him from a jealous superior into a bitter enemy. In reply to Lord Cochrane's recommendation, Earl St. Vincent alleged that "it was unusual to promote two officers for such a service,—besides which the small number of men killed on board the Speedy did not warrant the application." Lord Cochrane answered, with incautious honesty, that "his lordship's reasons for not promoting Lieutenant Parker, because there were only three men killed on board the Speedy, were in opposition to his lordship's own promotion to an earldom, as well as that of his flag-captain to knighthood, and his other officers to increased rank and honours; for that, in the battle from which his lordship derived his title there was only one man killed on board his own flagship." That was language too plain to be forgiven.
In July, 1801, the Speedy was captured by three French line-of-battle ships, whose senior in command, Captain Pallière, declined to accept the sword of an officer "who had," as he said, "for so many hours struggled against impossibility," and asked Lord Cochrane, though a prisoner, still to wear it. He, however, was refused employment as commander of another ship. Thereupon, with characteristic energy, he devoted his forced leisure from professional pursuits to a year of student life at Edinburgh, where, in 1802, Lord Palmerston was his class-fellow under Professor Dugald Stewart.
This occupation, however, was disturbed by the renewal of war with France in 1803. Lord Cochrane, though with difficulty, then obtained permission to return to active service, the Arab, one of the craziest little ships in the navy, being assigned to him. On his representing that she was too rotten for use off the French coast, he was ordered to employ her in cruising in the North Sea and protecting the fisheries north-east of the Orkneys, "where," as he said, "no vessel fished, and consequently there were no fisheries to protect." This ignominious work lasted for a year. It was brought to a close in December, 1804, soon after the appointment of Lord Melville, in succession to Earl St. Vincent, as First Lord of the Admiralty.
By him Lord Cochrane was transferred from the Arab to the Pallas, a new and smart frigate of thirty-two guns, and allowed to use her in a famous cruise of prize-taking among the Azores and off the coast of Portugal. This was followed in 1806 by farther work in the same frigate, the closing portion of which was especially memorable. Being off the Basque Roads at the end of April he fixed his attention upon a frigate, the Minerve, and three brigs, forming an important part of the French squadron in the Mediterranean. After three weeks' waiting, on the 14th of May, he saw the frigate and the brigs approaching him, and promptly prepared to attack them. He was not deterred by knowing that the Minerve alone, carrying forty guns, was far stronger than the Pallas, which had also to withstand the force of the three brigs, each with sixteen guns, and to be prepared for the fire of the batteries on the Isle d'Aix. "This morning, when close to Isle d'Aix, reconnoitring the French squadron," he wrote concisely to his admiral, "it gave me great joy to find our late opponent, the black frigate, and her companions, the three brigs, getting under sail. We formed high expectations that the long wished-for opportunity was at last arrived. The Pallas remained under topsails by the wind to await them. At half-past eleven a smart point-blank firing commenced on both sides, which was severely felt by the enemy. The main topsail-yard of one of the brigs was cut through, and the frigate lost her after-sails. The batteries on I'lsle d'Aix opened on the Pallas, and a cannonade continued, interrupted on our part only by the necessity we were under to make various tacks to avoid the shoals, till one o'clock, when our endeavour to gain the wind of the enemy and get between him and the batteries proved successful. An effectual distance was now chosen. A few broadsides were poured in. The enemy's fire slackened. I ordered ours to cease, and directed Mr. Sutherland, the master, to run the frigate on board, with intention effectually to prevent her retreat. The enemy's side thrust our guns back into the ports. The whole were then discharged. The effect and crash were dreadful. Their decks were deserted. Three pistol-shots were the unequal return. With confidence I say that the frigate would have been lost to France, had not the unequal collision torn away our fore-topmast, jib-boom, fore and maintop-sails, spritsail-yards, bumpkin, cathead, chainplates, fore-rigging, foresail, and bower anchor, with which last I intended to hook on; but all proved insufficient. She would yet have been lost to France, had not the French admiral, seeing his frigate's foreyard gone, her rigging ruined, and the danger she was in, sent two others to her assistance. The Pallas being a wreck, we came out with what sail could be set, and his Majesty's sloop the Kingfisher afterwards took us in tow." The exploit was none the less valiant in that it was partly a failure.
The waiting-times before and after that cruise were occupied by Lord Cochrane with brief commencement of parliamentary life. Long before this time Lord Cochrane had resolved on entering the House of Commons, in order to expose the naval abuses which were then rife, and which he had never been deterred, by consideration of his own interests, from boldly denouncing. He stood for Honiton in 1805, and was defeated through his refusal to vie with his opponent in the art of bribery. He contrived, however, to profit by corruption while he punished it. As soon as the election was over, he gave ten guineas to each of the constituents who had freely voted for him. The consequence of this was his triumphant return at the new election, which took place in July, 1806. When his supporters asked for like payment to that made in the previous instance, it was bluntly refused. "The former gift," said Lord Cochrane, "was for your disinterested conduct in not taking the bribe of five pounds from the agents of my opponent. For me now to pay you would be a violation of my principles."
A short cruise in the Basque Roads prevented Lord Cochrane from occupying in the House of Commons the seat thus won, and in April, 1807, very soon after his return, Parliament was again dissolved. He then resolved to stand for Westminster, with Sir Francis Burdett for his associate. Both were returned, and Lord Cochrane held his seat for eleven years. In 1807, however, he had only time to bring forward two motions respecting sinecures and naval abuses, which issued in violent but unproductive discussion, when he received orders to join the fleet in the Mediterranean as captain of the Imperiéuse. Naval employment was grudgingly accorded to him; but it was thought wiser to give him work abroad than to suffer under his free speech at home.
This employment was marked by many brilliant deeds, which procured for him, on his surrendering his command of the Imperiéuse after eighteen months' duration, the reproach of having spent more sails, stores, gunpowder, and shot than had been used by any other captain in the service.
The most brilliant deed of all, one of the most brilliant deeds in the whole naval history of England, was his well-known exploit in the Basque Roads on the 11th, 12th, and 13th of April, 1809. Much against his will, he was persuaded by Lord Mulgrave, at that time First Lord of the Admiralty, to bear the responsibility of attacking and attempting to destroy the French squadron by means of fireships and explosion-vessels. The project was opposed by Lord Gambier, the Admiral of the Fleet, as being at once "hazardous, if not desperate," and "a horrible and anti-Christian mode of warfare;" and consequently he gave no hearty co-operation. On Lord Cochrane devolved the whole duty of preparing for and executing the project. His own words will best tell the story.
"On the 11th of April," he said, "it blew hard, with a high sea. As all preparations were complete, I did not consider the state of the weather a justifiable impediment to the attack; so that, after nightfall, the officers who volunteered to command the fireships were assembled on board the Caledonia, and supplied with instructions according to the plan previously laid down by myself. The Impérieuse had proceeded to the edge of the Boyart Shoal, close to which she anchored with an explosion-vessel made fast to her stern, it being my intention, after firing the one of which I was about to take charge, to return to her for the other, to be employed as circumstances might require. At a short distance from the Impérieuse were anchored the frigates Aigle, Unicorn, and Pallas, for the purpose of receiving the crews of the fireships on their return, as well as to support the boats of the fleet assembled alongside the Cæsar, to assist the fireships. The boats of the fleet were not, however, for some reason or other made use of at all.
"Having myself embarked on board the largest explosion-vessel, accompanied by Lieut. Bissel and a volunteer crew of four men only, we led the way to the attack. The night was dark, and, as the wind was fair, though blowing hard, we soon neared the estimated position of the advanced French ships, for it was too dark to discern them. Judging our distance, therefore, as well as we could, with regard to the time the fuse was calculated to burn, the crew of four men entered the gig, under the direction of Lieut. Bissel, whilst I kindled the portfires, and then, descending into the boat, urged the men to pull for their lives, which they did with a will, though, as wind and sea were strong against us, without making the expected progress.
"To our consternation, the fuses, which had been constructed to burn fifteen minutes, lasted little more than half that time, when the vessel blew up, filling the air with shells, grenades, and rockets; whilst the downward and lateral force of the explosion raised a solitary mountain of water, from the breaking of which in all directions our little boat narrowly escaped being swamped. The explosion-vessel did her work well, the effect constituting one of the grandest artificial spectacles imaginable. For a moment, the sky was red with the lurid glare arising from the simultaneous ignition of fifteen hundred barrels of powder. On this gigantic flash subsiding, the air seemed alive with shells, grenades, rockets, and masses of timber, the wreck of the shattered vessel. The sea was convulsed as by an earthquake, rising, as has been said, in a huge wave, on whose crest our boat was lifted like a cork, and as suddenly dropped into a vast trough, out of which as it closed upon us with the rush of a whirlpool, none expected to emerge. In a few minutes nothing but a heavy rolling sea had to be encountered, all having again become silence and darkness."
In spite of its bursting too soon, the explosion-vessel did excellent work. The strong boom, composed of large spars bound by heavy chains, and firmly anchored at various points in its length of more than a mile, which was supposed to constitute an impassable barrier between the English ships that were outside and the French ships locked behind it, was broken in several parts. The enemy's ships were thoroughly disorganised by the sudden and appalling occurrence of the explosion. In their alarm and confusion, many of them fired into one another, and all might have been easily destroyed had the first success of the explosion-vessel been properly followed up. Unfortunately, however, on returning to the Impérieuse, Lord Cochrane found that there had been gross mismanagement of the fireships, which, according to his plans, were to have been despatched against various sections of the French fleet while it was too confused to protect itself. One of them, fired at the wrong time and sent in a wrong direction, nearly destroyed the Impérieuse and caused the wasting of a second explosion-vessel, which was meant to be held in reserve. The others, if not as mischievous in their effects, were almost as useless. "Of all the fire-ships, upwards of twenty in number," said Lord Cochrane, "only four reached the enemy's position, and not one did any damage. The Impérieuse lay three miles from the enemy, so that the one which was near setting fire to her became useless at the outset; whilst several others were kindled a mile and a half to the windward of this, or four miles and a half from the enemy. Of the remainder, many were at once rendered harmless from being brought to on the wrong tack. Six passed a mile to windward of the French fleet, and one grounded on Oleron."
Though the full success of Lord Cochrane's scheme was thus prevented, however, the work done by it was considerable. "As the fireships began to light up the roads," he said, "we could observe the enemy's fleet in great confusion. Without doubt, taking every fireship for an explosion-vessel, and being deceived as to their distance, not only did the French make no effort to divert them from their course, but some of their ships cut their cables and were seen drifting away broadside on to the wind and tide, whilst others made sail, as the only alternative to escape from what they evidently considered certain destruction. At daylight on the morning of the 12th, not a spar of the boom was anywhere visible, and, with the exception of the Foudroyant and Cassard, the whole of the enemy's vessels were helplessly aground. The flag-ship, L'Océan, a three-decker, drawing the most water, lay outermost on the north-west edge of the Palles Shoal, nearest the deep water, where she was most exposed to attack; whilst all, by the fall of the tide, were lying on their bilge, with their bottoms completely exposed to shot, and therefore beyond the possibility of resistance."
The French fleet had not been destroyed; yet it was so paralysed by the shock that its utter defeat seemed easy to Lord Cochrane. To the mast of the Impérieuse, between six o'clock in the morning of the 12th and one in the afternoon, he hoisted signal after signal, urging Lord Gambier, who was with the main body of the fleet about fourteen miles off, to make an attack. Failing in all these, and growing desperate in his zeal, especially as every hour of delay was enabling the French to recover themselves and rendering success less sure, he suffered his single frigate to drift towards the enemy. "I did not venture to make sail," wrote Lord Cochrane, in his very modest account of this daring exploit, "lest the movement might be seen from the flag-ship, and a signal of recall should defeat my purpose of making an attack with the Impérieuse ; my object being to compel the Commander-in-Chief to send vessels to our assistance. We drifted by the wind and tide slowly past the fortifications on Isle d'Aix; but, though they fired at us with every gun that could be brought to bear, the distance was too great to inflict damage. Proceeding thus till 1.30 p.m., we then suddenly made sail after the nearest of the enemy's vessels escaping. In order to divert our attention from the vessels we were pursuing, these having thrown their guns overboard, the Calcutta, a store-ship carrying fifty-six guns, which was still aground, broadside on, began firing at us. Before proceeding further, it became therefore necessary to attack her, and at 1.50 we shortened sail and returned the fire. At 2.0 the Impérieuse came to an anchor in five fathoms, and, veering to half a cable, kept fast the spring, firing upon the Calcutta with our broadside, and at the same time upon the Aquillon and Ville de Varsovie, two line-of-battle ships, each of seventy-four guns, with our forecastle and bow guns, both these ships being aground stern on, in an opposite direction. After some time we had the satisfaction of observing several ships sent to our assistance, namely, the Emerald, the Unicorn, the Indefatigable, the Valiant, the Revenge, the Pallas, and the Aigle. On seeing this, the captain and the crew of the Calcutta abandoned their vessel, of which the boats of the Impérieuse took possession before the vessels sent to our assistance came down." Soon after the arrival of the new ships, the two other vessels were also forced to surrender.
Most of the ships sent to his assistance returned to Lord Grambier on the 13th. Lord Cochrane, seeing that it would be easy for him to do much further mischief, made ready for the work on the morrow. But from this he was prevented by the inexcusable conduct of Lord Gambier, who, having discountenanced the attempt with the fireships, now not only refused to take part in the victory which his comrade had made possible, but also hindered its achievement by him.
Lord Cochrane had already overstepped the strict duty of a subordinate, though acting only as became an English sailor. The fireships with which he had been ordered to ruin the enemy's fleet had partly failed through the error of others. "It was then," he said, "a question with me whether I should disappoint the expectations of my country, be set down as a charlatan by the Admiralty, whose hopes had been raised by my plan, and have my future prospects destroyed, or force on an action which some had induced an easy Commander-in-Chief to believe impracticable." He did force on some fighting, which was altogether disastrous to the enemy, and rich in tokens of his unflinching heroism; but it was in violation of repeated orders, dubiously worded, from Lord Grambier, and, when at last an order was issued in terms too distinct to allow of any further evasion, he had no alternative but to abandon the enterprise. He was at once sent back to England, to be rewarded with much popular favour, and with a knighthood of the Order of the Bath, conferred by George III., but to become the victim of an official persecution, which, embittering his whole life, lasted almost to its close.
It must be admitted that this persecution was in great measure provoked by Lord Cochrane's own fearless conduct. He was reasonably aggrieved at the effort made by the Admiralty authorities to attribute to Lord Gambier, who had taken no part at all in the achievements in Basque Roads, all the merit of their success. To use his own caustic but accurate words, "The only victory gained by Lord Gambier in Basque Roads was that of bringing his ships to anchor there, whilst the enemy's ships were quietly heaving off from the banks on which they had been driven nine miles distant from the fleet." When for this proceeding it was determined to honour Lord Gambier with the thanks of Parliament, Lord Cochrane, as member for Westminster, announced his intention of opposing the motion. As a bribe to silence he was offered an important command by Lord Mulgrave, and it was proposed that his name should be included in the vote of thanks. The bribe being refused and the opposition persisted in, Lord Gambier demanded a court-martial, in which, as he alleged, to controvert the insinuations thrown out against him by Lord Cochrane.
The history of this court-martial, its antecedents and its consequences, furnishes an episode almost unique in the annals of official injustice. As a preparation for it, Lord Gambier, in obedience to orders from the Admiralty, supplemented his first account of the victory by another of entirely different tenour. In the first, written on the spot, he had avowed that he could not speak highly enough of Lord Cochrane's vigour and gallantry in approaching the enemy,—conduct, he said, "which could not be exceeded by any feat of valour hitherto achieved by the British Navy." In the record, written four weeks later and in London, he altogether ignored Lord Cochrane's services, and transferred the entire merit to himself.
The whole conduct of the court-martial was in keeping with that prelude. No effort was spared in stifling all the evidence on Lord Cochrane's side, and in adducing false testimony against him. Logbooks and witnesses alike were tampered with. In support of his scheme for annihilating the whole French fleet, Lord Cochrane produced in court a chart showing the relative position of the various points in Aix Roads, and of the overhanging fort which was to protect the French ships. This chart, left lying upon the table, was tacitly accepted by the authorities of the Admiralty as a trustworthy document, and duly preserved among the official records. But at the time the court refused to receive it in evidence, and adopted instead two falsified charts, in which, by the introduction of imaginary shoals and the narrowing of the channel to Aix Roads from two miles to one, the success of the scheme appeared impossible. Although this gross deception was more than suspected, both then and afterwards, by Lord Cochrane, his repeated applications to the Admiralty for permission to inspect the documents were steadily refused. It was not till more than fifty years after the period of the court-martial that he was able to prove the scandalous fraud.[A]
[Footnote A: Readers of "The Autobiography of a Seaman" need not be reminded of the copious and convincing evidence of the way in which he was treated by this court-martial that was adduced by Lord Dundonald in that work.]
The result of the court-martial was, of course, such as from the first had been intended. Lord Grambier was acquitted, and unlimited blame was, by inference, thrown upon Lord Cochrane. The coveted vote of thanks was promptly obtained from the House of Commons; Lord Cochrane's proposal that the minutes of the court-martial be first investigated being, through ministerial influence, summarily rejected.
These proceedings determined the course which men in power were to adopt, and fixed Lord Cochrane's future. It was a future to be made up of cruel disregard and of revengeful persecution.[A]
[Footnote A: See Appendix (I.).]
Soon after the close of the trial, the brave seaman applied to the Admiralty for permission to rejoin his old frigate, the Impérieuse, and accompanied his application with a bold plan for attacking the French fleet in the Scheldt. He received an insulting answer to the effect that, if he would be ready to quit the country in a week, and then to occupy a position subordinate to that which he had formerly held, his services would be accepted. On his replying that his great desire to be employed in his profession made him willing to do anything, and that all he wished for was a little longer time for preparation, no further communication was vouchsafed to him. He was quietly superseded in the command of the Impérieuse, and received no other ship.
Out of this ill-treatment, however, resulted some benefit to the nation. Lord Cochrane employed much of his forced leisure, during the next few years, in exposing abuses that were then over-abundant, and in strenuously advocating reform. In Parliament, voting always with his friend Sir Francis Burdett and the Radical party, he limited his exertions to naval matters, and such as were within his own experience. Herein there was plenty to occupy him, and much that it is now amusing to look back upon.[A]
[Footnote A: See Appendix (II.).]
One scandalous grievance led to a memorable episode in his life. The many prizes taken by him in the Mediterranean, which, according to rule, had been sent to the Maltese Admiralty Court for condemnation, had been encumbered with such preposterous charges that, instead of realizing anything by his captures, he was made out to be largely in debt to the Court. The principal agent of this Court was a Mr. Jackson, who illegally held office as at the same time marshal and proctor. "The consequence was," said Lord Cochrane, "that every prize placed in his hands as proctor had to pass through his hands as marshal; whilst as proctor it was further in his power to consult himself as marshal as often as he pleased, and to any extent he pleased. The amount of self-consultation may be imagined." As proctor he charged for visiting himself, and as marshal he charged for receiving visits from himself. As marshal he was paid for instructing himself, and as proctor he was paid for listening to his own instructions. Ten shillings and twopence three farthings was the customary charge for an oath to the effect that he had served a monition on himself. Of the sheets composing the bill for services of these sorts presented to him, Lord Cochrane formed a roll which, when unfolded and exhibited in Parliament, stretched from the Speaker's table to the bar of the House.
Not content, however, with laughing at the official robberies committed upon him, he determined, early in 1811, to proceed to Malta and personally investigate the matter. Reaching Valetta long before he was expected, he immediately presented himself at the court-house, and asked for a copy of the table of fees authorized by the Crown, and which, according to directions, ought to have been placed conspicuously in the public room. The existence of such a document being denied, he proceeded to hunt for it himself, and, after long and careful search, found it concealed in an out-of-the-way corner of the building. Having taken possession of it, he was carrying off the prize, which he intended to exhibit in the House of Commons, in token of the extent to which he and others had been defrauded, when he was arrested for contempt of court. He protested that the arrest was illegal, seeing that, as the court had not been sitting, no insult could have been offered to it. The plea was not accepted, and he was sent to gaol. No ground for punishment, however, could be found against him; and, after refusing to help the authorities out of their embarrassment by going at large on bail, and insisting on a proper exculpation or nothing at all, he let himself out of window by means of a rope. A gig was waiting for him, by which he was enabled to overtake the packet-boat that had quitted Malta shortly before, to return to London, and to present the document seized by him to Parliament a month before the official report of his escapade reached home.[A]
[Footnote A: This letter from the Duke of Kent to Lord Cochrane will help to show that, even after the time of his Admiralty persecution, he was not without friends and admirers in high quarters:—"Kensington Palace, 7th July, 1812. My dear Lord,—I trust the acquaintance I have the satisfaction to possess with your lordship, and the long and intimate friendship subsisting between myself and your brother, Lieut.-Colonel Basil Cochrane, will warrant my intruding upon you for the purpose of seconding the wishes expressed by a young naval protégé of mine, and I cannot help adding my earnest request that when your distinguished zeal and talents in your profession are again called into action by Government, you will kindly oblige me by taking Lieutenant Edgar under your wing and protection; he is a fine young man, and I think would not disgrace the wardroom of your lordship's ship. I remain, with my sincere regard, my dear lord, yours faithfully, EDWARD.
" The Right Honourable Lord Cochrane.">[
An imprisonment of very different character occurred after an interval of nearly three years. This was in consequence of the famous Stock Exchange trial, the episode last treated of by the Earl of Dundonald in his Autobiography, and not quite recounted to the end before death stayed his hand.
From 1809 to 1813, Lord Cochrane was allowed to take no active part in the work of his profession. But at the close of the latter year, his uncle, Sir Alexander Cochrane, having been selected for the command of the fleet on the North American station, appointed him his flag-captain—an appointment resting only with the Commander-in-Chief, and one with which the Government could not interfere. It was always Lord Cochrane's belief that the implacable enmity of his foes in the Admiralty Office—determined to prevent by irregular means, since no regular course was open to them, his return to naval work—helped to bring about the cruel persecution by which his whole life was embittered. But it must be admitted that the dishonesty of one of his own kinsmen—about which a chivalrous sense of honour caused him to be reticent during nearly fifty years—conduced to this result.
The chief agent of the fraud practised upon him was a foreigner, named De Berenger. This man, clever and unscrupulous, had been associated with Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, an uncle of Lord Cochrane's, in certain stock-jobbing transactions. In that or in some other way he became known to Lord Cochrane and to his other uncle, Sir Alexander Cochrane; and, being a smart chemist and pyrotechnist, it was proposed that he should accompany Lord Cochrane to North America, and assist him in the trial of his recently-discovered method of attacking forts and fleets in a secret and irresistible manner. With that object—of course clandestine—Sir Alexander Cochrane sought the permission of the Admiralty to employ De Berenger as a teacher of sharp-shooting, in which he was a well-known adept. This was not granted, and near the end of 1813, Sir Alexander set sail for Halifax, leaving Lord Cochrane to follow in the Tonnant, in charge of a convoy, and in getting the Tonnant ready for sea his lordship was busy during January and February, 1814. In the former month De Berenger sought him out and earnestly requested that, his official appointment being refused, he might be taken on board in a private capacity and allowed to rely upon the success of his work for recompense. Lord Cochrane declined to employ him without some sort of sanction from the Admiralty, and De Berenger left him with the avowed intention of doing his utmost to procure this sanction.
He was otherwise occupied. Being in urgent need of money, with which to evade the grasp of his numerous creditors, he returned to his stock-jobbing pursuits—if indeed he had not been engaging in them all along; using his proposal for employment under Lord Cochrane as a blind or as a secondary resource. Instead of furthering his efforts to obtain this employment, he contrived a plan for causing a sudden rise in the funds, and thereby securing a large profit to himself and his accomplices. On the 20th of February he presented himself at the Ship Hotel at Dover, disguised as a foreigner and calling himself Colonel De Bourg, professing that he brought intelligence from France to the effect that Buonaparte had been killed by the Cossacks, that the allied armies were in full march towards Paris, and that a speedy cessation of the war was certain. Thence he hurried up to London and was traced to have gone, on the following morning, to Lord Cochrane's house. The ostensible object of that visit was to renew his application for employment on board the Tonnant. The real object was, by means of a trick, to get possession of a hat and cloak, with which to disguise himself afresh, and thus try to elude the pursuit of agents of the Stock Exchange, who would soon seek to punish him for his fraud. The disguise was given to him in all innocence, and might have been successful, had not Lord Cochrane, on finding how grossly he had been deceived, volunteered to assist in punishing the culprit. Leaving the Tonnant, in which he was about to start from Chatham, he returned to London, and gave full information as to his share in the transaction, with the view of furthering the cause of justice and clearing himself from all blame.
That was prevented by as wanton a prosecution and as malicious a perverting of the forms of justice and the principles of equity as the annals of English law, not often abused even in a much less degree, can show. The straightforward evidence furnished by him was made the handle to an elaborate machinery of falsehood and perjury for effecting his own ruin. The solicitor who had managed the cause of the Admiralty at the court-martial on Lord Gambier, and therein proved his skill, was entrusted with the ugly work. By him an elaborate case for prosecution was trumped up, and Lord Cochrane, hindered from sailing to North America in the Tonnant, and hindered from obtaining any other employment in his country's service during four-and-thirty years, was, on the 8th of June, placed in the prisoner's dock at the Court of King's Bench on a charge of conspiring with his uncle, Mr. Cochrane Johnstone, with De Berenger, and with some other persons, to defraud the Stock Exchange. Lord Ellenborough, who presided at the trial, delivered a charge which was even more virulent and more marked by political spite than was his wont, and the too compliant jury brought in a verdict of "guilty." Lord Cochrane vainly sought for a new trial, and vainly adduced abundant proof of his innocence. The chance of justice that is every Englishman's right was denied to him. He was sentenced to an hour's detention in the pillory at the entrance of the Royal Exchange, to a year's imprisonment in the King's Bench Prison, and to a fine of a thousand pounds.
The first part of the sentence was not insisted upon, as Sir Francis Burdett, Lord Cochrane's noble-hearted colleague as member for Westminster, avowed his intention of standing also in the pillory, if his friend was subjected to that indignity, and of thus encouraging the storm of popular indignation, that, without any such encouragement, would probably have led to consequences which the Government, already hated by all Englishmen who loved their birthright, dared not brook. But the unworthy vengeance of his persecutors was amply satisfied in other ways. He had already suffered more than most men. "Neglect," he said, "I was accustomed to. But when an alleged offence was laid to my charge, in which, on the honour of a man now on the brink of the grave, I had not the slightest participation, and from which I never benefited, nor thought to benefit one farthing, and when this allegation was, by political rancour and legal chicanery, consummated in an unmerited conviction and an outrageous sentence, my heart for the first time sank within me, as conscious of a blow, the effect of which it has required all my energies to sustain."
It is needless now to say anything in proof of Lord Cochrane's innocence of the charge brought against him. The world has long since reversed the verdict passed at Lord Ellenborough's dictation. That an officer and a gentleman of Lord Cochrane's reputation should have demeaned himself by becoming a party to the fraud of which he was accused, is, to say the least, improbable. That, if he had been guilty of that fraud, he should not have availed himself of the only benefit that could be derived from it by investing in the stocks when they were low and selling out during the brief time of their artificial value, is far more improbable. That, when the fraud was perpetrated, and its chief instrument was undiscovered, he should have left the Tonnant in order to expose him, instead of taking him away from England, and so almost ensuring the preservation of the secret, is utterly impossible.
His only faults were too great faith in his own innocence and a too chivalrous desire to protect, or rather to abstain from injuring, his unworthy kinsman. "I must be here distinctly understood," it was said by Lord Brougham, in his "Historic Sketches of British Statesmen," "to deny the accuracy of the opinion which Lord Ellenborough appears to have formed in this case, and deeply to lament the verdict of 'guilty' which the jury returned after three hours' consultation and hesitation. If Lord Cochrane was at all aware of his uncle Mr. Cochrane Johnstone's proceedings, it was the whole extent of his privity to the fact. Having been one of the counsel engaged in the cause, I can speak with some confidence respecting it, and I take upon me to assert that Lord Cochrane's conviction was mainly owing to the extreme repugnance which he felt to giving up his uncle, or taking those precautions for his own safety which would have operated against that near relation. Even when he, the real criminal, had confessed his guilt by taking to flight, and the other defendants were brought up for judgment, we, the counsel, could not persuade Lord Cochrane to shake himself loose from the contamination by abandoning him."
Part of a letter addressed to the Earl of Dundonald in 1859, on the anniversary of his eighty-fourth birthday, and shortly after the publication of the first volume of his "Autobiography of a Seaman," by the daughter of the man whose wrong-doing had conduced so terribly to his misfortunes, may here be fitly quoted:—"You are still active, still in health," says the writer, "and you have just given to the world a striking proof of the vigour of your mind and intellect. Many years I cannot wish for you; but may you live to finish your book, and, if it please God, may you and I have a peaceful death-bed. We have both suffered much mental anguish, though in various degrees; for yours was indeed the hardest lot that an honourable man can be called on to bear. Oh, my dear cousin, let me say once more, whilst we are still here, how, ever since that miserable time, I have felt that you suffered for my poor father's fault—how agonizing that conviction was—how thankful I am that tardy justice was done you. May God return you fourfold for your generous though misplaced confidence in him, and for all your subsequent forbearance!"
Another extract from a letter, from one out of a multitude of tributes to the Earl of Dundonald's honourable bearing, which were tendered after his death, shall close this introductory chapter. "Five years after the trial of Lord Cochrane," wrote Sir Fitzroy Kelly, now Lord Chief Baron, on the 17th of December, 1860, "I began to study for the bar, and very soon became acquainted with and interested in his case, and I have thought of it much and long during more than forty years; and I am profoundly convinced that, had he been defended singly and separately from the others accused, or had he at the last moment, before judgment was pronounced, applied, with competent legal advice and assistance, for a new trial, he would have been unhesitatingly and honourably acquitted. We cannot blot out this dark page from our legal and judicial history."
CHAPTER II.
THE ISSUE OF THE STOCK EXCHANGE TRIAL.—LORD COCHRANE'S COMMITTAL TO THE KING'S BENCH PRISON.—THE DEBATE UPON HIS CASE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, AND HIS SPEECH ON THAT OCCASION.—HIS EXPULSION FROM THE HOUSE, AND RE-ELECTION AS MEMBER FOR WESTMINSTER.—THE WITHDRAWAL OF HIS SENTENCE TO THE PILLORY.—THE REMOVAL OF HIS INSIGNIA AS A KNIGHT OF THE BATH.
[1814.]
The famous and infamous Stock Exchange trial occupied the 8th and 9th of June, 1814; but the sentence was deferred until the 21st of the same month, in consequence of Lord Cochrane's demand for a new trial. That demand was not complied with, in spite of the production of overwhelming evidence to justify it; and the victim of Lord Ellenborough and the tyrannical Government of the day was at once conveyed to the King's Bench Prison. No time was lost in heaping upon him all the indignities which, in accordance with precedent and in excess of all precedent, might supplement his degradation.
The first was a notice of motion which would result in his expulsion from the House of Commons. Lord Cochrane promptly availed himself of the opening thus afforded for a public avowal of his innocence. To the Hon. Charles Abbot, then Speaker of the House, he wrote from his prison on the 23rd of June. "Sir," runs the letter, "I respectfully entreat you to communicate to the Honourable House of Commons my earnest desire and prayer that no question arising out of the late convictions in the Court of King's Bench may be agitated without affording me timely notice and full opportunity of attending in my place for the justification of my character. From the House of Commons I hope to obtain that justice of which too implicit reliance on the consciousness of my innocence, and circumstances over which I had no control, have hitherto deprived me. The painful situation in which I am placed is known to the House, and I trust that I shall be enabled to demonstrate that a more injured man has never sought redress from those to whose justice I now appeal for the preservation of my character and existence."
In compliance with that request, and with parliamentary rules, Lord Cochrane was conveyed from the King's Bench Prison to the House of Commons, and allowed to read a carefully-prepared statement of his case, on the 5th of July, the day fixed for investigation of the subject. From this statement it is not necessary to cite the clear and conclusive recapitulation of the evidence adduced at the trial, or refused admission therein because it was too convincing, in proof of Lord Cochrane's innocence; but room must be found for some passages illustrating the independent temper of the speaker and the perversions of justice to which he fell a victim.
"I am not here, sir," he said, "to bespeak compassion or to pave the way to pardon. Both ideas are alike repugnant to my feelings. That the public in general have felt indignation at the sentence that has been passed upon me does honour to their hearts, and tends still to make my country dear to me, in spite of what I have suffered from the malignity of persons in power. But, sir, I am not here to complain of the hardship of my case or about the cruelty of judges, who, for an act which was never till now ever known or thought to be a legal offence, have laid upon me a sentence more heavy than they have ever yet laid upon persons clearly convicted of the most horrid of crimes—crimes of which nature herself cries aloud against the commission. If, therefore, it was my object to complain of the cruelty of my judges, I should bid the public look into the calendar, and see if they could find a punishment like that inflicted on me; inflicted by these same judges on any one of these unnatural wretches. It is not, however, my business to complain of the cruelty of this sentence. I am here to assert, for the third time, my innocence in the most unqualified and solemn manner; I am here to expose the unfairness of the proceedings against me previous to the trial, at the trial, and subsequent to it; I am here to expose the long train of artful villainies which have been practised against me hitherto with so much success.
"I am persuaded, sir, that the House will easily perceive, and every honourable man, I am sure, participate in my feelings, that the fine, the imprisonment, the pillory—even that pillory to which I am condemned—are nothing, that they weigh not as a feather, when put in the balance against my desire to show that I have been unjustly condemned. Therefore, sir, I trust that the House will give a fair and impartial hearing to what I have to say respecting the conduct of my enemies, to expose which conduct is a duty which I owe to my constituents, and to my country, not less than to myself.
"In the first place, sir, I here, in the presence of this House, and with the eyes of the country fixed upon me, most solemnly declare that I am wholly innocent of the crime which has been laid to my charge, and for which I have been condemned to the most infamous of punishments. Having repeated this assertion of my innocence, I next proceed to complain of the means that have been made use of to effect my destruction. And first, sir, was it ever before known in this or in any other country, that the prosecutor should form a sort of court of his own erection, call witnesses before it of his own choosing, and, under offers of great rewards, take minutes of the evidence of such witnesses, and publish those minutes to the world under the forms and appearances of a judicial proceeding? Was it ever before known, that steps like these were taken previous to an indictment,—previous to the bringing of an intended victim into a court of justice? Was there ever before known so regular, so systematic a scheme for exciting suspicion against a man, and for implanting an immovable prejudice against him in the minds of a whole nation, previous to the preferring a Bill of Indictment, in order that the grand jury, be it composed of whomsoever it might, should be predisposed to find the bill? I ask you, sir, and I ask the House, whether it was ever before known, that means like these were resorted to, previous to a man's being legally accused? But, sir, what must the world think, when they see some of those to whom the welfare and the honour of the nation are committed covertly co-operating with a Committee of the Stock Exchange, and becoming their associates in so nefarious a scheme? Nevertheless, sir, this fact is now notorious to the whole world. I must confess I was not prepared to believe the thing possible."
Thereupon followed a detailed examination of the charges brought against Lord Cochrane, and of the way in which those charges were handled, special complaint being made concerning the malicious bearing of Lord Ellenborough. "It must be in the recollection of the House," said Lord Cochrane, "as it is in that of the public, that he urged, that he compelled, the counsel to enter upon my defence after midnight, at the end of fifteen hours from the commencement of the trial, when that counsel declared himself quite exhausted, and when the jury, who were to decide, were in a state of such weariness as to render attention to what was said totally impossible. The speeches of the counsel being ended, the judge, at half-past three in the morning, adjourned the court till ten; thus separating the evidence from the argument, and reserving his own strength, and the strength of my adversaries' advocates, for the close; giving to both the great advantage of time to consider the reply, and to insert and arrange arguments to meet those which had been urged in my defence."
All his treatment by Lord Ellenborough, as Lord Cochrane urged, was of that sort, or worse. "Of all tyrannies, sir," he said, "the worst is that which exercises its vengeance under the guise of judicial proceedings, and especially if a jury make part of the means by which its base purposes are effected. The man who is flung into prison, or sent to the scaffold, at the nod of an avowed despotism, has at least the consolation to know that his sufferings bring down upon that despotism the execration of mankind; but he who is entrapped and entangled in the meshes of a crafty and corrupt system of jurisprudence; who is pursued imperceptibly by a law with leaden feet and iron jaws; who is not put upon his trial till the ear of the public has been poisoned, and its heart steeled against him,—falls, at last, without being cheered with a hope of seeing his tyrants execrated even by the warmest of his friends. In their principle, the ancient and settled laws of England are excellent; but of late years, so many injurious and fatal alterations in the law have taken place, that any man who ventures to meddle with public affairs, and to oppose persons in power, is sure and certain, sooner or later, to suffer in some way or other.
"Sir, the punishment which the malice of my enemies has procured to be inflicted on me is not, in my mind, worth a moment's reflection. The judge supposed, apparently, that the sentence of the pillory would disgrace and mortify me. I can assure him, and I now solemnly assure this House, my constituents, and my country, that I would rather stand in my own name, in the pillory, every day of my life, under such a sentence, than I would sit upon the bench in the name and with the real character of Lord Ellenborough for one single hour.
"Something has been said, sir, in this House, as I have heard, about an application for a mitigation of my sentence, in a certain quarter, where, it is observed, that mercy never failed to flow; but I can assure the House that an application for pardon, extorted from me, is one of the things which even a partial judge and a packed jury have not the power to accomplish. No, sir; I will seek for, and I look for, pardon nowhere, for I have committed no crime. I have sought for, I still seek for, and I confidently expect JUSTICE; not, however, at the hands of those by whose machinations I have been brought to what they regard as my ruin, but at the hands of my enlightened and virtuous constituents, to whose exertions the nation owes that there is still a voice to cry out against that haughty and inexorable tyranny which commands silence to all but parasites and hypocrites."
Thus ended Lord Cochrane's written argument. It was followed by, a few words spoken on the spur of the moment: "Having so long occupied its time, I will not trouble the House longer than to implore it to investigate the circumstances of my case. I think I have stated enough to induce it to call for the minutes of the trial. All I wish is an inquiry. Many important facts yet remain to be considered, and I trust that the House will not come to a decision with its eyes shut. I entreat, I implore investigation. It is true that a sentence of a court of law has been pronounced against me; but that punishment is nothing, and will to me seem nothing, in comparison with what it is in the power of the House to inflict. I have already suffered much; but if after a deliberate and a fair investigation the House shall determine that I am guilty, then let me be deserted and abandoned by the world. I shall submit without repining to any the most dreadful penalty that the House can assign. I solemnly declare before Almighty God that I am ignorant of the whole transaction. Into the hearts of men we cannot penetrate; we cannot dive into their inmost thoughts; but my heart I lay open, and my most secret thoughts I disclose to the House. I entreat the strictest scrutiny and a patient hearing. I implore it at your hands, as an act of justice, and once more I call upon my Maker, upon Almighty God, to bear witness that I am innocent. He knows my heart, He knows all its secrets, and He knows that I am innocent."
An animated debate followed upon that eloquent address. Viscount Castlereagh complained that Lord Cochrane, instead of defending himself, had only libelled Lord Ellenborough and the noblest institutions of the land. Other speakers expressed similar opinions; but others testified to the consistent character of Lord Cochrane, rendering it impossible that he should be guilty of the offence with which he was charged; and others again confessed that, having previously had doubts in the matter, those doubts had been removed by the high-minded tone and the powerful arguments of his defence. But in the end the House adopted the view set forth by Lord Castlereagh; that its duty was simply to accept the verdict of the Court of the King's Bench, and, according to precedent, to expel the member declared guilty by that court, without daring to revive the question of his guilt or innocence; and that it would be better for an innocent man thus to suffer, than for the House to assail "the bulwarks of English liberty," by turning itself into a Star Chamber, or an Inquisition, and attempting to interfere with "the regular administration of justice." The proposal that Lord Cochrane's case should be referred to a Select Committee was rejected without a division. The motion that he should be expelled from the House was carried by a hundred and forty members, against forty-four dissentients.
That new act of injustice, however, though it added much to Lord Cochrane's suffering, brought him no fresh disgrace. It only led to his triumphant re-election as member for Westminster, under circumstances that were reasonably consoling to him. His seat having been taken from him on the 5th of July, a great meeting of the electors, attended by five thousand people, was held on the 11th. It was there unanimously resolved that Lord Cochrane was perfectly innocent of the Stock Exchange fraud, that he was a fit and proper person to represent the City of Westminster in Parliament, and that his re-election should be secured without any expense to him. Richard Brinsley Sheridan, his stout opponent at the previous election, who was now urged to oppose him again, honourably refused to do so; and therefore the election passed without a contest. But contest would only have added to its glory; unless, indeed, the people, over-zealous in their expression of sympathy for their representative, had been provoked thereby to violent exhibition of their temper. Even without such provocation the turmoil of the re-election day, the 16th of July, was great; angry crowds assembled in the streets, and menacing words against the Government and its myrmidons were loudly uttered. The wisdom of Sir Francis Burdett and other leaders of the popular party, however, prevented anything worse than angry speech.
"Amongst all the occurrences of my life," said Lord Cochrane, writing from the King's Bench Prison to thank the electors for their confidence in him, "I can call to memory no one which has produced so great a degree of exultation in my breast as this, that, after all the machinations of corruption have been able to effect against me, the citizens of Westminster have, with unanimous voice, pronounced me worthy of continuing to be one of their representatives in Parliament. With regard to the case, the agitation of which has been the cause of this most gratifying result, I am in no apprehension as to the opinions and feelings of the world, and especially of the people of England, who, though they may be occasionally misled, are never deliberately cruel or unjust. Only let it be said of me: 'The Stock Exchange has accused; Lord Ellenborough has charged for guilty; the special jury have found that guilt; the Court have sentenced to the pillory; the House of Commons have expelled; and the Citizens of Westminster have re-elected,'—only let this be the record placed against my name, and I shall be proud to stand in the calendar of criminals all the days of my life."
The worst part of the sentence passed upon Lord Cochrane, as has been already said, was not carried out. The 10th of August had been fixed as the day on which he was to stand in the pillory for an hour in front of the Royal Exchange. But the danger of a disturbance among the people, and of fierce opposition in the House of Commons hindered the perpetration of this indignity. Some sentences of a letter addressed to Lord Ebrington, deprecating his motion in Parliament for a remission of this part of the sentence, are too characteristic, however, to be left unquoted. "I did not expect," said Lord Cochrane, "to be treated by your lordship as an object of mercy, on the grounds of past services, or severity of sentence. I cannot allow myself to be indebted to that tenderness of disposition which has led your lordship to form an erroneous estimate of the amount of punishment due to the crimes of which I have been accused; nor can I for a moment consent that any past services of mine should be prostituted to the purpose of protecting me from any part of the vengeance of the laws against which I, if at all, have grossly offended. If I am guilty, I richly merit the whole of the sentence that has been passed upon me. If innocent, one penalty cannot be inflicted with more justice than another."
If the degradation of the pillory was remitted, another degradation quite as painful to Lord Cochrane was substituted for it. His name having, on the 25th of June, been struck off the list of naval officers in the Admiralty, the Knights Companions of the Bath promptly held a chapter to consider the propriety of expelling him from their ranks. That was soon done, and no time was lost in making the insult as thorough as possible. At one o'clock in the morning of the 11th of August, the Bath King at Arms repaired to King Henry the Seventh's Chapel in Westminster Abbey, and there, under a warrant signed by Lord Sidmouth, the Secretary of State, removed the banner of Lord Cochrane, which was suspended between those of Lord Beresford and Sir Brent Spencer. His arms were next unscrewed, and his helmet, sword, and other insignia were taken down from the stall. The banner was then kicked out of the chapel and down the steps by the official, eager to omit no possible indignity. It was an indignity unparalleled since the establishment of the order in 1725.
CHAPTER III.
LORD COCHRANE'S BEARING IN THE KING'S BENCH PRISON—HIS STREET LAMPS.—HIS ESCAPE, AND THE MOTIVES FOR IT.—HIS CAPTURE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, AND SUBSEQUENT TREATMENT.—HIS CONFINEMENT IN THE STRONG ROOM OF THE KING'S BENCH PRISON.—HIS RELEASE.
[1814-1815.]
During the first period of his imprisonment Lord Cochrane was not treated with more than usual severity. Two rooms in the King's Bench State House were provided for him, in which, of course, all the expenses of his maintenance devolved upon himself. He was led to understand that, if he chose to ask for it, he might have the privilege of "the rules," which would have allowed him, on certain conditions, a range of about half-a-mile round the prison. But he did not choose to ask. Rather, he said, than seek any favour from the Government, he would lie in a dungeon all through the term of his unjust imprisonment. Throughout that period he resolutely avowed his perfect innocence, to friends and foes alike; and the consciousness of his innocence helped him to bear up under a degradation that, to a nature as sensitive and chivalrous as his, was doubly bitter. Good friends, like Sir Francis Burdett, came to cheer him in his solitude, and over-zealous, yet honest, friends, like William Cobbett, came to take counsel with him as to ways of keeping alive and quickening the popular indignation which, without any stimulants from headstrong demagogues, was strong enough on his behalf.
The tedium of his captivity was further relieved by his devotion to those scientific and mechanical pursuits which, all through life, yielded employment very solacing to himself, and very profitable to the world. While in the King's Bench Prison he was especially occupied in completing a plan for lighting the public streets by means of a lamp invented by him, in which the main principle was the introduction of a steady current of fresh air into the globes, whereby all the oil was fairly burnt, and a brilliant light was always maintained. In this way lamps much cheaper than those previously in use were found to have a far greater illuminating power. Early in October, 1814, the lamps in St. Ann's parish, Westminster, numbering eight hundred in all, were taken down and replaced by four hundred constructed on Lord Cochrane's plan; and even political opponents spoke in acknowledgment of the excellent result of the change. Had it not been for the introduction of gas, the superiority of these new lamps must soon have compelled their adoption all over London. It is curious that the discovery of the illuminating power of gas—undoubtedly due to his father—should have superseded one of Lord Cochrane's most promising inventions as soon as it had been brought to recognized perfection.
In such pursuits nine months of the unjust imprisonment were passed. "Lord Cochrane has hitherto borne all his hardships with great fortitude," wrote one of his most intimate friends on the 10th of November, "and, if there are any more in store for him, I hope he will continue to be cheerful and courageous." "His lordship always hopes for the best, and is never afraid of the worst," said the same authority on the 9th of December, "and therefore he is in good spirits."
This fearless disposition led, in March, 1815, to a bold step, which some of Lord Cochrane's best friends deprecated. Knowing that he was unjustly imprisoned, he conceived that, since his re-election as member for Westminster, the imprisonment was illegal as well as unjust, in that it was contrary to the privilege of Parliament. The law provides that "no Member of Parliament can be imprisoned either for non-payment of a fine to the King, or for any other cause than treason, felony, or refusing to give security for the peace." It may be questioned whether, in the presence of this law, his first imprisonment, even under the sentence of the Court of King's Bench, was legal. But having been imprisoned, and having been expelled from the House of Commons, it is clear that his subsequent re-election could not interfere with the fulfilment, of the sentence passed against him, especially as he had not been able to make good his title to membership by taking the prescribed oaths and claiming a seat in the House. He, however—acting as it would seem under the advice of William Cobbett and other unsafe counsellors—thought otherwise, and considered that he was only vindicating a high constitutional principle, against the exercise of despotic power by the Government, in making his escape from the King's Bench Prison. "I did not quit these walls," he said in a letter addressed to the electors of Westminster, on the 12th of April, "to escape from personal oppression, but, at the hazard of my life, to assert that right to liberty which, as a member of the community, I have never forfeited, and that right, which I received from you, to attack in its very den the corruption which threatens to annihilate the liberties of us all. I did not quit them to fly from the justice of my country, but to expose the wickedness, fraud, and hypocrisy of those who elude that justice by committing their enormities under the colour of its name. I did not quit them from the childish motive of impatience under suffering. I stayed long enough to evince that I could endure restraint as a pain, but not as a penalty. I stayed long enough to be certain that my persecutors were conscious of their injustice, and to feel that my submission to their unmerited inflictions was losing the dignity of resignation, and sinking into the ignominious endurance of an insult."
The escape was effected on the 6th of March, and by the same means which had proved successful in Lord Cochrane's retreat from the gaol at Malta, just four years before. His rooms in the King's Bench Prison, being on the upper storey of the building known as the State House, were nearly as high as the wall which formed the prison boundary, and the windows were only a few feet distant from it. The possibility of escape by this way, however, had never been contemplated, and therefore the windows were unprotected by bars. Accordingly Lord Cochrane, having been supplied, from time to time, by the same servant who had aided him at Malta, with a quantity of small strong rope, managed, soon after midnight, and while the watchman going his rounds was in a distant part of the prison, to get out of window and climb on to the roof of the building. Thence he threw a running noose over the iron spikes placed on the wall, and, exercising the agility that he had acquired during his seaman's occupations, easily gained the summit—to be somewhat discomfited by having to sit upon the iron spikes while he fastened his rope to one of them and prepared, with its help, to slip down to the pavement on the outer side of the wall. The rope was not strong enough, however, to bear his weight; it snapped when he was some twenty-five feet from the ground, and caused him to fall with his back upon the stone pavement. There he lay, in an almost unconscious state, for a considerable time. But no passer-by observed him; and before daylight he was able to crawl to the house of an old nurse of his eldest son's, who gladly afforded him concealment.
Long concealment was not intended by him. "If it had not been," he said, "for the commotion excited by that obnoxious, injurious, and arbitrary measure, the Corn Bill, which began to evince itself on the day of my departure from prison, I should have lost no time in proceeding to the House of Commons; but, conjecturing that the spirit of disturbance might derive some encouragement from my unexpected appearance at that time, and having no inclination to promote tumult, I resolved to defer my appearance at the House, and, if possible, to conceal my departure from the prison, until the order of the metropolis should be restored."
To the same effect was a letter addressed by Lord Cochrane to the Speaker of the House of Commons on the 9th of March. "I respectfully request," he said therein, "that you will state to the honourable the House of Commons, that I should immediately and personally have communicated to them my departure from the custody of Lord Ellenborough, by whom I have been long most unjustly detained; but I judged it better to endeavour to conceal my absence, and to defer my appearance in the House until the public agitation excited by the Corn Bill should subside. And I have further to request that you will also communicate to the House that it is my intention, on an early day, to present myself for the purpose of taking my seat and moving an inquiry into the conduct of Lord Ellenborough."
On the day of that letter's delivery, the 10th of March—also famous as the day on which Buonaparte's escape from Elba was published in England—Lord Cochrane's gaolers discovered that he was no longer in his prison. Immediately a hue and cry was raised. This notice was issued: "Escaped from the King's Bench Prison, on Monday the 6th day of March, instant, Lord Cochrane. He is about five feet eleven inches in height,[A] thin and narrow-chested, with sandy hair and full eyes, red whiskers and eyebrows. Whoever will apprehend and secure Lord Cochrane in any of His Majesty's gaols in the kingdom shall have a reward of three hundred guineas from William Jones, Marshal of the King's Bench."
[Footnote A: He was really about six feet two inches in height, and broad in proportion.]
Great search was made in consequence of that notice, and Lord Cochrane's disappearance was an eleven days' wonder. Every newspaper had each day a new statement as to his whereabouts. Some declared that he had gone mad, and, as a madman's freak, was hiding himself in some corner of the prison; others that he was lodging at an apothecary's shop in London. According to one report, he had been seen at Hastings, according to another, at Farnham, and according to another, in Jersey; while others declared that he had been discovered in France and elsewhere on the Continent.
None of the thousands whom political spite or the hope of reward set in search of him thought of looking for him in his real resting-place. "As soon as I had written to the Speaker," he said, "I went into Hampshire, where I remained eleven days, and till within one day of my appearance in the House of Commons. During that period I was occupied in regulating my affairs in that county, and in riding about the county, as was well known to the people of the neighbourhood, none of whom were base enough to be seduced by a bribe to deliver an injured man into the hands of his oppressors."
At his own house, known as Holly Hill, in the south of Hampshire, Lord Cochrane remained quietly, though with no attempt to hide himself, until the 20th of March. He then, in fulfilment of his original purpose, returned to London, and on the following day entered the House of Commons at about two o'clock in the afternoon. Very great was the astonishment among the officials in attendance caused by his appearance, "dressed," according to one of the newspaper reports, "in his usual costume, grey pantaloons, frogged great-coat, &c.;" and by some of them the intelligence of his arrival was promptly communicated to the Marshal of the King's Bench. In the meanwhile, considering himself safe within the precincts of the House at any rate, he proceeded to occupy his customary seat. To that it was objected that, until he had taken the oaths and complied with the prescribed forms consequent on his re-election, he had no right within the building. He answered that he was willing to do this, and, to see that all was according to rule, went at once to the clerks' office. There it was pretended that the writ of his re-election had not yet been received, and that it must first be procured from the Crown Office, in Chancery Lane. Awaiting the return of the messenger, ostensibly despatched for this purpose, he again entered the House, and there he was found, at a few minutes before four, by Mr. Jones, the marshal, who, on receiving the information sent to him, had hurried up, with a Bow Street runner and some tipstaves. The runner, walking up to Lord Cochrane and touching him on the shoulder, bluntly claimed him as his prisoner. Lord Cochrane asked by what authority he dared to arrest a Member of Parliament in the House of Commons. "My lord," answered the man, "my authority is the public proclamation of the Marshal of the King's Bench Prison, offering a reward for your apprehension." Lord Cochrane declared that he neither acknowledged, nor would yield to, any such authority, that he was there to resume his seat as one of the representatives of the City of Westminster, and that any who dared to touch him would do so at their peril. Two tipstaves thereupon rudely seized him by the arms. He again cautioned them that the Marshal of the King's Bench had no authority within those walls, and that their conduct was altogether illegal. The answer was that he had better go quietly; his reply that he would not go at all. Other officers, however, came up. After a short struggle, he was overpowered, and, on his refusing to walk, he was carried out of the House on the shoulders of the tipstaves and constables.
There was a halt, however, in this disgraceful march. The Bow Street runner expressed a fear that Lord Cochrane had firearms concealed under his clothes, and he was accordingly taken into one of the committee-rooms to be searched. Nothing more dangerous was found about him than a packet of snuff. "If I had thought of that before," said Lord Cochrane, not quite wisely, "you should have had it in your eyes!" On this incident was founded a foolish story, to be told next day, amid a score of exaggerations and falsehoods, in the Government newspapers. "Being asked why he had provided himself with such a quantity of snuff," we there read, "he said he had bought a canister for the purpose of throwing it in the eyes of those who might attempt to secure him, unless the opposing force should be too strong for resistance, observing that he had found the use of a similar weapon when he was in the Bay of Rosas, as he had thrown a mixture of lime, sand, &c., upon the Frenchmen who attempted to board his ship, and found it effectual." Another zealous organ of the Government added that he had also provided himself with a bottle of vitriol, to be used in the same way.
Had a penknife been found in his pocket, perhaps the Marshal of the King's Bench, the Bow Street runner, the tipstaves, and the constables would all have fled, deeming that the possession of so deadly an instrument made the retention of their captive too dangerous a thing to be attempted. The snuff having been seized, however, he was again lodged on the officers' shoulders and so conveyed into the courtyard. He then said that, being now beyond the privilege of the House, he was willing to proceed quietly. A coach was called, and he was taken back to the King's Bench Prison.
The indignity thus offered to him was small indeed in comparison with the indignity offered to the Parliament of England. In former times the slightest encroachment by the Crown, by the Government, or by any humbler part of the executive, was fiercely resented; and to this resentment some of the greatest and most memorable crises in the long fight for English liberty are due. But rarely had there been a more flagrant, never a more wanton, infringement of the hardly-won privileges of the House of Commons. Had Lord Cochrane been detected and seized violently in some out-of-the-way hiding-place, the over-zealous servants of the Crown would have had some excuse for their conduct. But in appearing publicly in the House, he showed to all the world that he was no runaway from justice, that he was willing to submit to its honest administration by honest hands, that all he sought was a fair hearing and a fair judgment upon his case, and that, believing it impossible to obtain that through the elaborate machinery of oppression which then went by the name of administration of justice, he now only asserted his right, the right of every Englishman, and especially the right of a Member of Parliament, to appeal from the agents of the law to the makers of the law, to call upon the legislators of his country to see whether he had not been wrongfully used by the men who, though practically too much their masters, were in theory only their servants.
"I did not go to the House of Commons," he said, "to complain about losses or sufferings, about fine or imprisonment; or of property, to the amount of ten times the fine, of which I had been cheated by this malicious prosecution. I did not go to the House to complain of the mockery of having been heard in my defence, and answered by a reference to the decision from which that defence was an appeal. I did not go there to complain of those who expelled me from my profession. I did not go to the House to complain generally of the advisers of the Crown. But I went there to complain of the conduct of him who has indeed the right of recommending to mercy, but whose privilege, as a Privy Councillor, of advising the confirmation of his own condemnations, and of interposing between the victims of legal vengeance and the justice of the throne, is spurious and unconstitutional. When it is considered that my intention of going to the House of Commons was announced on the day on which my absence from the prison was discovered; I say, when it is considered that, as soon as it was known that I had left the prison, it was also known that I had left it for the express purpose of going to the House of Commons to move for an inquiry into the conduct of Lord Ellenborough; when it is considered that every engine was set to work to tempt or intimidate me from that purpose, to frighten me out of the country or allure me back to the custody of the marshal, that assurances were given that the doors should be kept open for my admission at any hour of the night, and that I should be received with secresy, courtesy, and indemnity; and when it is considered that I was afterwards seized in the House of Commons, in defiance of the privileges of the House—can there be a doubt that the object of that apprehension was less the accomplishment of the sentence of the court than the prevention of the exposure which I was prepared to make of the injustice of that sentence? That recourse should have been had to violence to stifle the accusations which I was prepared to bring forward, that terror of the truth should have so superseded a wonted reverence for parliamentary privileges as to have admitted the intrusion of tipstaves and thief-takers into the House of Commons, to seize the person of an individual elected to serve as a member of that House, and avowedly attendant for that purpose, is extraordinary, though not unnatural."
It must be admitted that the question of breach of privilege was somewhat more complicated than Lord Cochrane considered. His opponents did not think with him that he was still a member of the House of Commons. That membership had been taken from him, formally, though wrongfully, by his expulsion on the 5th of July, and he had himself recognized the expulsion by accepting re-election from the constituents of Westminster on the 16th of the same month. According to precedent, however, that re-election could not be perfected until the customary oaths had been taken; and, through a trick contrived in the clerks' office, he was hindered from taking them before the arrival of the marshal and his consequent arrest. Yet there can be no doubt that, in the special circumstances of the case, this arrest was especially indecorous, and, in the method of effecting it, altogether illegal. If he had no right in the House of Commons, he was a common trespasser, and ought to have been at once removed by the servants of the House, who alone could have power to touch him within the walls. To allow him a seat therein, without molestation, until the arrival of the servants of the King's Bench Prison, and then to allow those servants to enter the House and act upon an authority that could there be no authority, was wholly unwarrantable, a gross insult to Lord Cochrane, and, to the customs of the House of Commons, an insult yet more gross. But to the hardship and the insult alike the House of Commons, servile in its devotion to the Government of the day, was blind.
A miserable farce ensued. While the House was sitting, a few hours after Lord Cochrane's capture, a letter from the Marshal of the King's Bench was read by the Speaker, in which his bold act was formally reported and apologized for. "I humbly hope," he there said, "that I have not committed any breach of privilege by the steps I have taken; and that, if I have done wrong, it will be attributed to error in judgment, and not to any intention of doing anything that might give offence."
The short debate that followed the reading of that letter is very noteworthy. Lord Castlereagh spoke first, and dictated the view to be taken by all loyal members of the House. "From the nature of the arrest and the circumstances attending it, I do not think, sir," he said, "that the House is called upon to interfere. I am not aware, as the House was not actually sitting, with the mace on the table and the Speaker in the chair, when the arrest took place, that any breach of privilege has been committed. It must be quite obvious to every man that the marshal has not acted wilfully in violation of the privileges of the House. No blame can attach to him, since he has submitted himself to the judgment of the House of Commons after having done that which he considered his duty as a civil officer. Having had Lord Cochrane in his custody, from which he escaped, the marshal was bound not to pass over any justifiable means of putting him under arrest whenever a fair opportunity occurred."
Most of the members thought, with Lord Castlereagh, that this was a "fair opportunity." Only one, Mr. Tierney—and he very feebly—ventured to express an opposite opinion. "I consider this," he said, "to be the case of a member regularly elected to serve in Parliament, and coming down to take his seat. Now, sir, the House is regularly adjourned until ten o'clock in the morning; and I recollect occasions when the Speaker did take the chair at that hour. Suppose, then, a member, about to take his seat, came down here at an early hour, with the proper documents in his hand, and desired to be instructed in the mode of proceeding, and, while waiting, an officer entered, arrested him, and took his person away, would not this be a case to call for the interference of the House?" Mr. Tierney admitted that he approved of Lord Cochrane's arrest, but feared it might become a precedent and be put to the "improper purpose" of sanctioning the arrest of members more deserving of consideration.
To please him, and to satisfy the formalities, therefore, the question was referred to a committee of privileges. This committee reported, on the 23rd of March, "that, under the particular circumstances, it did not appear that the privileges of Parliament had been violated, so as to call for the interposition of the House;" and the House of Commons being satisfied with that opinion, no further attention was paid to the subject.
In the meanwhile Lord Cochrane was being punished, with inexcusable severity, for his contempt of the authority of Lord Ellenborough and Mr. Jones. A member of the House, during the discussion of the 21st of March, had said that he had just come from the King's Bench Prison. "I found Lord Cochrane," he had averred, "confined there in a strong room, fourteen feet square, without windows, fireplace, table, or bed. I do not think it can be necessary for the purpose of security to confine him in this manner. According to my own feelings, it is a place unfit for the noble lord, or for any other person whatsoever."
In this Strong Room, however, Lord Cochrane was detained for more than three weeks. It was partly underground, devoid of ventilation or necessary warmth, and, according to the testimony of Dr. Buchan, one of the physicians who visited him in it, "rendered extremely damp and unpleasant by the exudations coming through the wall."
On being taken to this den immediately after his capture, Lord Cochrane was informed by Mr. Jones that he would be detained in it for a short time only, until the apartments over the lobby of the prison were prepared for his reception. That was done in a few days; but no intimation of a change was made until the 1st of April, when a message to that effect was sent to the prisoner. On the following day he received a letter from Mr. Jones informing him that, if he would anticipate the payment of the fine of 1000£ levied against him, and would also pledge himself, and give security for the keeping of the promise, to make no further effort to escape, he might be allowed to occupy the more comfortable quarters. "It is no new thing," said Lord Cochrane, "for a prisoner to escape or to be retaken; but to require of any prisoner a bond and securities not to repeat such escape was, I think, a proposition without precedent, and such as the marshal knew could not be complied with by me without humiliation, and therefore could not be proposed by him without insult. Besides, he had my assurance that if I were again to quit his custody (which I gave him no reason to believe I should attempt, and which, as I observed and believe, it was as easy for me to effect from that room as from any other part of the prison), I should proceed no further than to the House of Commons, and that where he found me before he might find me again; I having had no other object in view than that of expressing, by some peculiar act, the keen sense which I entertained of peculiar injustice, and of endeavouring to bring such additional proofs of that injustice before the House as were not in my possession when I was heard in my defence." Mr. Jones, however, resolved to keep his captive in the Strong Room, unless he would promise to resign himself to captivity in a less obnoxious part of the prison.
Even for that negative favour the marshal took great credit to himself in a document which he issued at the time. "If a humane and kind concern for this unfortunate nobleman," he there averred, "had not softened the solicitude which I naturally felt for my own security, I could have committed him, on my own warrant for the escape, to the new gaol in Horsemonger Lane, for the space of a month; and that power is still within my jurisdiction. Had I thought proper to exercise it, Lord Cochrane would then have been confined in a solitary cell with a stone floor, with windows impenetrably barred and without glass; nor would it have proved half the size of the Strong Room in the King's Bench, which has a boarded floor and glazed lights." That statement reasonably stirred the anger of Lord Cochrane. "Though the solitary cell in Horsemonger Lane," he answered, "may be half the size of the Strong Room, it could not, I apprehend, have been more gloomy, damp, filthy, or injurious to health than the last-mentioned dungeon. And since Mr. Jones could only have confined me in the former place for a month, and did confine me in the latter for twenty-six days, I can scarcely see that degree of difference which should entitle him to those 'grateful sentiments for his mode of acting on the occasion' which, he submits to the public, it is my duty to entertain. The 'glazed lights' mentioned by Mr. Jones were not put up till I had been thirty hours in the place, and I have always understood that I was indebted for them to the good offices of Mr. Bennet and Mr. Lambton, who happened [as part of a Parliamentary Committee] to be prosecuting their inquiry into the state of the prison at the time of my return. For these and all other mercies of the said marshal, my gratitude is due to their friendship and sense of duty, and to his dread of their discoveries and proceedings."
It is clear that nothing but fear of the consequences induced Mr. Jones to remove Lord Cochrane from the Strong Room, after twenty-six days of confinement therein. On the 12th of April the prisoner issued an address to the electors of Westminster, detailing some of the hardships to which he was being subjected; and its publication immediately roused so much popular interest that the authorities of King's Bench Prison deemed it necessary to make at any rate a show of amelioration in his treatment. On the 13th, his physician, Dr. Buchan, was allowed to visit him, and his report was such that another medical man of eminence, Mr. Saumarez, was sent to examine into the state of the prisoner's health. Part of Dr. Buchan's certificate has already been quoted. The rest was as follows: "This is to certify that I have this day visited Lord Cochrane, who is affected with severe pain of the breast. His pulse is low, his hands cold, and he has many symptoms of a person about to have typhus or putrid fever. These symptoms are, in my opinion, produced by the stagnant air of the Strong Room in which he is now confined." "I hereby certify," wrote Mr. Saumarez, "that I have visited Lord Cochrane, and am of opinion, from the state of his health at this time, that it is essentially necessary that he should be removed from the room which he now inhabits to one which is better ventilated, and in which there is a fireplace. His lordship complains of pain in the chest, with difficulty of respiration, accompanied with great coldness of the hands; and, from the general state of his health, there is great reason to fear that a low typhus may come on."
The only result of those medical opinions was a renewal of the offer to remove Lord Cochrane to the rooms prepared for him, on the conditions previously specified by Mr. Jones. Lord Cochrane answered that he would rather die than submit to such an insulting arrangement. He published the doctors' certificates, however, on the 15th of April, and their effect upon the public was so great that the authorities were forced on the following day to take him out of his dungeon. Mr. Jones's account of this step is worth quoting. "I again tried," he reported, "to induce Lord Cochrane's friends and relations to give me any kind of undertaking against another escape. On their refusal, I determined myself to become his friend, and, at my own risk, to remove him to the rooms which have been already mentioned, and where, I am confident, he can have no cause of complaint. These rooms not being altogether safe against such a person as Lord Cochrane, should he determine to risk another escape, I must look to the laws of my country as a safeguard, in the hope that the terrors of them will discourage him from attempting a repetition of his offence, and prevent him from incurring the penalties of another indictment."
Lord Cochrane never really intended to attempt a second escape. Had it been otherwise, the illness induced by his confinement in the Strong Room would have restrained him. Being placed in healthier apartments on the 16th of April, he quietly remained there for the remainder of his term of imprisonment. On the 20th of June he was informed that, the term being now at an end, he was at liberty to depart on payment of the fine of 1000£ levied against him. This he at first refused to do, and accordingly he was detained in prison for a fortnight more; but at length the entreaties of his friends prevailed. On the 3rd of July he tendered to the Marshal of the King's Bench a 1000£ note, with this memorable endorsement: "My health having suffered by long and close confinement, and my oppressors being resolved to deprive me of property or life, I submit to robbery to protect myself from murder, in the hope that I shall live to bring the delinquents to justice." Upon that the prison doors were opened for him, and he was able once more to fight for the justice so cruelly withheld from him, and to make his innocence entirely clear to all whose selfish interests did not force them to be blind to the truth.
CHAPTER IV.
LORD COCHRANE'S RETURN TO THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.—HIS SHARE IN THE REFUSAL OF THE DUKE OF CUMBERLAND'S MARRIAGE PENSION.—HIS CHARGES AGAINST LORD ELLENBOROUGH, AND THEIR REJECTION BY THE HOUSE.—HIS POPULARITY.—THE PART TAKEN BY HIM IN PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR THE RELIEF OF THE PEOPLE.—THE LONDON TAVERN MEETING.—HIS FURTHER PROSECUTION, TRIAL AT GUILDFORD, AND SUBSEQUENT IMPRISONMENT.—THE PAYMENT OF HIS FINES BY A PENNY SUBSCRIPTION.—THE CONGRATULATIONS OF HIS WESTMINSTER CONSTITUENTS.
[1815-1816.]
Released from imprisonment on Monday, the 3rd of July, Lord Cochrane resumed his seat in the House of Commons on the evening of the same day, just in time to secure the defeat of a measure which was especially obnoxious to his Radical friends. The Duke of Cumberland having lately married a daughter of the Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, it was proposed to augment his income of about 20,000£ a year by a further pension of 6000£ A bill to that effect was brought in by Lord Castlereagh, and, after much sullen opposition from independent members, allowed a first reading by a majority of seventeen. On the second division the majority was reduced to twelve. The bill was brought on for the third reading on the 3rd of July, and would have been passed through the House of Commons by the Speaker's casting vote but for Lord Cochrane's sudden appearance. His vote secured a majority against it, and thereby it was finally overthrown. Great, on the morrow, were the rejoicings of his supporters. "What a triumph," it was said in a friendly newspaper, "is this to innocence! After being sentenced to the scandalous and disgraceful punishment of the pillory, after being confined in a loathsome dungeon, fined 1000£ in money to the king, disgracefully removed from that service in which he had attained such high honours and rendered to his country such essential service, his escutcheon kicked out of Westminster Abbey, his order of knighthood taken from him; in short, after having every possible indignity which the most malignant imagination could invent heaped upon him in every way, his single vote, on the very first day of his returning to his parliamentary duties, has been the means of obtaining a signal victory over those under whose persecution he had been so long suffering."
The one victory upon which Lord Cochrane set his heart, however—the reversal of the unjust sentence passed upon him, and the consequent restoration of the honours and offices that were now doubly dear to him—he was not able to obtain. On the 6th of July, just before the prorogation of Parliament, he gave notice that, early in the next session, he should move for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the conduct of Lord Ellenborough and others towards him during the Stock Exchange trial. In arranging for this new effort at self-justification, he was partly occupied during the ensuing autumn and winter, and the question was brought prominently before the House of Commons in the spring of 1816; only to issue, however, in further injustice and disappointment.
His purpose from the first was, of course, virtually the impeachment of Lord Ellenborough; and that object was yet more apparent from the altered shape which the question assumed when introduced in the new session. During the recess, Lord Cochrane, with the help of advisers, some of whom were more zealous than wise, William Cobbett being the chief, had prepared an elaborate series of "charges of partiality, misrepresentation, injustice, and oppression against the Lord Chief Justice;" and these were formally introduced to the House of Commons on the 5th of March. "When I recollect," said Lord Cochrane on that occasion, "the imputations cast upon my character, and circulated industriously previous to any legal proceedings, the conduct pursued at my trial, the verdict obtained, the ineffectual endeavours; to procure a revision of my case in the Court of King's Bench, and the infamous sentence there pronounced, together with my expulsion from this House without being suffered to expose its injustice—when I call to mind my dismissal from a service in which I have spent the fairest portion of my life, at least without reproach, and my illegal and unmerited deprivation of the order of the Bath—it is impossible to speak without emotion. I have but one course now left to pursue, namely, to show that the charge of the Lord Chief Justice, on which he directed the jury to decide, was not only unsupported by, but was in direct contradiction to, the evidence on which it professed to be founded. This is the best course to pursue both in justice to the learned judge and to myself. Either I am unfit to sit in this House, or the judge has no right to his place on the bench. I have courted investigation in every shape; and I trust that the learned lord will not shrink from it or suffer his friends on the opposite side to evade the consideration of these charges by 'the previous question.'"
Lord Cochrane thereupon tendered to the House thirteen charges against Lord Ellenborough, in which every point of importance in the Stock Exchange trial was minutely detailed and discussed; and these charges being read, therein occupying nearly three hours, were ordered to be printed. A fourteenth charge, bearing upon Lord Ellenborough's conduct subsequent to the trial, was introduced on the 29th of March; but this, as it included aspersions upon the character of another judge, Sir Simon Le Blanc, was objected to and withdrawn. There was further discussion on the subject on the 1st and the 29th of April; but not much was done until the 30th of April.
On that evening, Lord Cochrane formally moved that his charges against Lord Ellenborough should be referred to a Committee of the whole House, and that evidence in support of them should be heard at the bar. A lengthy discussion then ensued, the most notable speeches being made by the Solicitor-General, Sir Francis Burdett, and the Attorney-General.
The Solicitor-General of course opposed the motion. "As the House, on the one hand," he said, "should jealously watch over the conduct of judges, so, on the other, it should protect them when deserving of protection, not only as a debt of justice due to the judges, but as a debt due to justice herself, in order that the public confidence in the purity of the administration of our laws may not be disappointed, and that the course of that administration may continue the admiration of the world; for, unless the judges are protected in the exercise of their functions, the public opinion of the excellence of our laws will be inevitably weakened,—and to weaken public opinion is to weaken justice herself."
That sort of argument, too frivolous and faulty, it might be supposed, to influence any one, had weight with the House of Commons to which it was addressed; and the Solicitor-General adduced much more of it. To him the spotless character of Lord Ellenborough appeared to be an ample defence against Lord Cochrane's charges. "Never," he said, with a truthfulness that posterity can appreciate, "never was there an individual at the bar or on the bench less liable to the imputation of corrupt motives; never was there one more remarkable for independence—I will say, sturdy independence—of character, than the noble and learned lord. For twelve years he has presided on the bench with unsullied honour, displaying a perfect knowledge of the law; evincing as much legal knowledge as was ever amassed by any individual; and now, in the latter part of his life, when he has arrived at the highest dignity to which a man can arrive, by a promotion well-earned at the bar, and doubly well-earned at the bench, we are told that he has sacrificed all his honours by acting from corrupt motives!"
Sir Francis Burdett replied effectively to the speeches of the Solicitor-General and others who sided with him, and nobly defended his friend. He showed that the proposal to refuse investigation of this case because it might weaken the cause of justice, by making the conduct of the administrators of justice contemptible, was worse than frivolous. "Such language," he averred, "would operate against the investigation of any charges whatever against any judge; would indeed form a barrier against the exercise of the best privilege of this House—the privilege of inquiring into the conduct of courts of justice. It would serve equally well to shelter even those judges who have been dragged from the bench for their misconduct." He then reviewed the incidents of the Stock Exchange trial, and urged that Lord Cochrane had good reason for bringing forward his charges. "The question for the House to consider is, 'Do these charges, if admitted, contain criminal matter for the consideration of the House?' I conceive that they do. No doubt the judges who condemned Russell and Sidney were, at the time, spoken of as men of high character, who could not be supposed to suffer any base motives to influence their conduct. Such arguments as those ought to be banished from this House. It is our duty to look, with constitutional suspicion on jealousy, on the proceedings of the judges; and, when a grave charge is solemnly brought forward, justice to the country, as well as to the judge, demands an inquiry into it."
That, however, was refused. After a long speech from the Attorney-General, and an eloquent reply by Lord Cochrane, the House divided on the motion. Eighty-nine members voted against it. Its only supporters were Sir Francis Burdett and Lord Cochrane himself. Not only did the House refuse to listen to the allegations against Lord Ellenborough; in the excess of its devotion to such law and such order as the Government of the day appointed, it even resolved that all the entries in its record of proceedings which referred to this subject should be expunged from the journals. Lord Cochrane made no resistance to this further insult thrown upon him. "It gives me great satisfaction," he said, in the brief and dignified speech with which he closed the discussion, "to think that the vote which has been come to has been come to without any of my charges having been disproved. Whatever may be done with them now, they will find their way to posterity, and posterity will form a different judgment concerning them than that which has been adopted by this House. So long as I have a seat in this House, however, I will continue to bring them forward, year by year and time after time, until I am allowed the opportunity of establishing the truth of my allegations."
Other occupations prevented the full realization of that purpose. But to the end of his life Lord Cochrane used every occasion of asserting his innocence and courting a full investigation of all the incidents on which his assertion was based. Posterity, as he truly prophesied, has learnt to endorse his judgment; and therefore, in the ensuing pages, it will not be necessary to adduce from his letters and actions more than occasional illustrations of the temper which animated him throughout with reference to this heaviest of all his heavy troubles.
By these troubles, however, even in the time of their greatest pressure, he was not overcome; and in the midst of them he found time and heart for active labour in the good work of various sorts that was always dear to him. He used the advantages of his liberty in striving to perfect the invention of improved street lamps and lighting material that had occupied him while in prison, and to procure their general adoption. His place in Parliament, moreover, all through the session of 1816, was employed not only in seeking justice for himself, but also in furthering every project advanced for benefiting the community and checking the pernicious action of the Government. A zealous, honest Whig before, he was now as zealous and as honest as ever in all his political conduct. And his devotion to the best interests of the people was yet more apparent in his unflagging labours, out of Parliament, for the public good. His great abilities, rendered all the more prominent by the cruel persecution to which he had been and still was subjected, made him a leading champion of the people during the turmoil to which misgovernment at home, and the distracted state of foreign politics, gave a special stimulus in 1816.
A long list might be made of the great meetings which he attended, and took part in, both among his own constituents of Westminster and elsewhere, for the consideration of popular grievances and their remedies. One such meeting, attended by Henry Brougham and Sir Francis Burdett among others, was held in Palace Yard, Westminster, on the 1st of March, for the purpose of petitioning Parliament against the renewal of the property-tax and the maintenance of a standing army in time of peace. Lord Cochrane, the hero of the day, on account of "the spirit of opposition which he had shown to the infringement of the constitution and the grievances of the people," won for himself new favour by the boldness with which he denounced the policy of the Government, which, boasting that it was ruining the French nation, was at the same time bringing misery also upon Englishmen by the excessive taxation and the reckless extravagance to which it resorted.
A smaller, but much more momentous meeting assembled at the City of London Tavern on the 29th of July, under the auspices of the Association for the Relief of the Manufacturing and Labouring Poor. Instigated in a spirit of praiseworthy charity by many of the most influential persons of the day, it was used by Lord Cochrane for the enforcement of the views as to public right and public duty, and the mutual relations of the rich and the poor, which were forced upon him by his recent troubles, and the relations in which he was at this time placed with some over-zealous champions of popular reform, and some unreasonable exponents of popular grievances. That his conduct on this occasion was extravagant and even factious, he afterwards heartily regretted. Yet as a memorable illustration of the power and earnestness with which he fought for what seemed to him to be right, as well with word as with sword, its details, as reported at the time, may be here set forth at length.
About half-past one o'clock the Duke of York entered and took the chair, supported on his right by the Duke of Kent, and on his left by the Duke of Cambridge. He was accompanied on his entrance by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, the Duke of Rutland, Lord Manvers, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Wilberforce, and other distinguished individuals.
His Royal Highness the Duke of York immediately proceeded to open the business of the day, by observing that the present meeting had been called to consider and, as far as possible, to alleviate the present distress and sufferings of the labouring classes of the community. These distresses were, he feared, too well known to all who heard him to require any description; and all he had to add to the bare statement of them was the expression of his confidence that the liberality which had been so signally manifested in the course of foreign distress would not be found wanting when the direction of it was to be towards the comfort and relief of our own countrymen at home.
THE DUKE OF KENT, after alluding to the exertions of the Committee of 1812, observed that the immediate object was to raise a fund, in the subsequent accumulation and management of which many ulterior arrangements might be projected, and from which charity might soon emanate in a thousand directions. He doubted not that every county and every town would be quick to imitate the example of the metropolis. The association of 1812 had at least the merit of producing this effect, and had spread through the whole land that spirit of active benevolence which he was feebly invoking on this occasion. He trusted that it was necessary for him to say but little more to insure the adoption of the resolution which he should have the honour to propose. He confessed he felt gratified when he saw so great a concourse of his countrymen assembled together for such a purpose, and additional gratification at seeing by whom they were supported. He was sure, then, that he should not plead in vain to the national liberality; but that the remedy would be promptly afforded to an evil which he trusted would be found but temporary. If they should be so happy as but to succeed in discovering new sources of employment to supply the place of those channels which had been suddenly shut up, he should indeed despond if we did not soon restore the country to that same flourishing condition which had long made her the envy of the world. The royal Duke then moved the first resolution, as follows:—"That the transition from a state of extensive warfare to a system of peace has occasioned a stagnation of employment and a revulsion of trade, deeply affecting the situation of many parts of the community, and producing many instances of great local distress."
The resolution was seconded by Mr. Harman.
Lord Cochrane offered himself to the attention of the meeting, but was for some time unable to proceed, his voice being lost in the huzzas and hisses which his presence called forth. Silence being at length in some measure obtained, his lordship said he would not have addressed the meeting but that, having received a circular letter from the committee, and feeling the importance of the subject, he would have thought it a dereliction of his duty if he refrained from attending. He rose thus early because the observations he had to submit would not be suitable if made when the other resolutions were put. The first resolution was, in his opinion, founded on a gross fallacy; and this was his reason for saying so. The existing distresses could not be truly ascribed to any sudden transition from war to peace. Could it be pretended that it was peace which had occasioned the fall in the value of all agricultural produce? Or could any man venture to assert that the difficulties and sufferings of the manufacturing classes had any other cause than a prodigious and enormous burthen of taxation? He was much gratified at seeing the royal Dukes so active in promoting a generous and laudable undertaking, and he hoped he should not be understood as treating them with disrespect when he repeated that the resolution was founded on an entire fallacy. But, not to content himself with a mere assertion of his own belief, he had brought official documents to prove the correctness of his statements; and if he should be wrong, he saw the Chancellor of the Exchequer near him, who would have the opportunity of correcting his misrepresentation. This brief statement, he believed, would be quite sufficient to show that the financial situation of the country was such as to render any attempts of that meeting for the purpose of extending general relief utterly ineffectual. The whole revenue of the kingdom was 62,267,450£, deducting the property-tax, and the revenue was thus expended. The interest of the national debt, including the interest of unfunded exchequer bills, was upwards of 40,300,000£, leaving to support the expenses of Government only about 22,000,000£ It was this enormous sum which now hung round our necks—it was this, which unnecessary extravagance had caused to increase from year to year to its present terrible amount, which was the cause of all the evils of the country at this moment. This taxation, and extravagance, for which the country was now suffering, was supported and sanctioned by those who had derived and still derived large emoluments from them. These were truths that the people ought to know; for they were the source of their burthens, and the origin of all the mischief. It was this profuse expenditure of the public money, to say no worse of it, that occasioned the present calamities. It was the lavish expenditure to meet a compliant list of placemen that brought the country to its present state. The deficiency in the revenue occasioned by the enormous interest of the national debt, which ministers would have to supply, would, according to the present disbursements and receipts, amount to 11,578,000£ unless that expenditure were reduced, every such attempt as they were at present making would, he was convinced, prove abortive: it was a mere topical application while a mortal distemper was raging within. He had taken no notice in his estimate of the charges for sinecures or the bounties on exports and imports: and yet the returns upon which he went, exclusive of these charges, showed a deficit for the ensuing year of 3,500,000£ Were those who heard him prepared to make this good? It was, he believed, undeniable that nothing could equalize our revenue with our expenditure, but the putting down entirely the army and navy, or the extinction of one half of the national debt; but when he looked to the actual receipt of the last quarter and found a falling off of 2,400,000£, which, with a corresponding decrease in the three succeeding quarters, must create a new deficit of 10,000,000£, and, added to the 3,500,000£ to which he had alluded, would form a sum equal to the whole amount of the boasted sinking-fund, he felt that it was worse than trifling to suppose we could go on upon the present system. Were they prepared to make up this enormous deficiency? [A voice from the crowd cried "Yes.">[ He was happy to hear it: he supposed it was some fund-holder who answered, and if any class could do so, it was the fund-holders. They alone had the ability, they alone now derived any returns from their property; but even if they should be both able and willing, still it would only remain a positive deficit made good, and no new facility would be derived for alleviating the existing burthens. The burthens and distresses must still remain what they were before. He spoke not now upon conjecture, or loose calculation, he had brought his authority with him. These were the records from which he derived his statements—the official returns of the Treasury; and if false, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was present to contradict them. He was glad, he confessed, to see him, for those who heard him were, no doubt, aware that it was not always in the House of Commons that a minister could discover the genuine sentiments of the people. If, therefore, no other person should move an amendment, he should feel it his duty to propose an omission of that part of the resolution which ascribed the distressed state of the country to the transition from a state of war to a state of peace, and to state the cause to be an enormous debt, and a lavish expenditure. He had come there with the expectation of seeing the Duke of Rutland in the chair; and with some hopes, as he took the lead upon this occasion, that it was his intention to surrender that sinecure of 9,000£ a-year which he was now in the habit of putting in his pocket. He still trusted that all who were present and were also holders of sinecures had it in their intention to sacrifice them to their liberality and their justice; and that they did not come there to aid the distresses of their country by paying half-a-crown per cent, out of the hundreds which they took from it. If they did not, all he could say was, that to him their pretended charity was little better than a fraud. Without, however, taking up more of their time, he should move his amendment, with this one additional observation, that it would be a disgrace to an enlightened meeting, and particularly to a meeting which might be considered as comprising an aggregate mass of the property and intellect of the country, to place a fallacy upon the record of their proceedings, and to build all their following resolutions upon an assertion which had no foundation in truth. He concluded by moving the following amendment to the first resolution:—"That the enormous load of the national debt, together with the large military establishment and the profuse expenditure of public money, was the real cause of the present public distress."
Mr. Wilberforce said he was himself too much of an Englishman, and had been too long engaged in political discussions to feel any surprise that those who felt warmly on such a subject as the present should be anxious to give expression to their sentiments: but he could not help thinking that, upon cool reflection, the noble lord would be of opinion that his own object would be better attained if he confined himself, on this occasion, to the distinct question under consideration. The noble lord said the country was in a crisis, and would they apply a mere topical remedy? but he might ask the noble lord if he would refuse to assuage the pain of a temporary distemper because he had it not in his power at once to cure it radically? To him the existing distress appeared to be a distemper which rather called for immediate alleviation, than for the speculative discussion of its cause. He thought the most charitable and manly course to be pursued—and that which must be most congenial to what he knew to be the noble lord's own charitable and manly disposition—was not to call upon the meeting to give any opinion upon a political question not under consideration, so as to divert them from pursuing it with diligence and confidence, but to postpone to a better opportunity a discussion of this nature, and to unite cordially in the general cause of finding employment and encouragement for our suffering fellow-citizens. If the noble lord would reflect upon the best mode of relieving the distresses of the people, he would find his amendment not likely to have that tendency. Let him reserve all discussion on the question it involved until he could do it without interrupting the stream of charity, and until he could enter upon it under fair and proper circumstances. He (Mr. Wilberforce), in a proper place, would not shrink from meeting the noble lord on that inquiry; he was twice as old in public life as the noble lord could pretend to be, and fully as independent; yet he would not have easily supposed any man, however young in politics, could have started such topics there. For his part, he should be sorry to take advantage of any credit which might be to supposed to belong to him upon such an occasion as this to cast reproaches upon those who were concurring with him in a benevolent design. The meeting must on the present occasion feel how much indebted it stood to the royal personages for their attendance. They had come to listen to a discussion which had for its avowed and direct object the relief of the people, and they were in the room suddenly called upon to lay aside the practical part of their inquiry and to enter upon a distinct pursuit. Was such a course fair towards those illustrious individuals? Was it that which was likely to induce them to listen to proposals for their personal co-operation on occasions of benevolence, if they had no security against the occupation of their time for discussions of a different character? In conclusion, he entreated the noble lord, of whose real disposition to relieve the people of England he had no doubt, and whose motives he could justly appreciate, to withdraw his amendment.
Lord Cochrane thanked the honourable gentleman for his personal civilities towards him, and said that he would feel no hesitation in withdrawing his amendment if the honourable gentleman would state to the meeting, on his own personal veracity and honour, that he believed that the original resolution contained the true cause of the public distress, and the amendment the false one. If the honourable gentleman would say that—if any respectable man present would say it—he would be satisfied.
Mr. Cotes said he was entirely unconnected with the noble lord, and had never even had the honour of speaking, to him. He agreed, however, with him in thinking that this was a moment when the eyes of the public ought to be open to their real situation. The amendment harmonized entirely with all the opinions which he had been able to form upon subject. Mr. Wilberforce, to whose humane and benevolent Mr. character he was happy to pay his acknowledgments, had attempted to get rid of the noble lord's amendment by a sort of side-wind; but to his judgment there was no incompatibility between the object of the meeting and the amendment. There was nothing irrelevant in it; it naturally grew out of the course adopted by the chair, and in which a cause of the prevailing distress was distinctly specified. The question was, then, ought their resolutions to go forth to the public with a falsehood upon the face of them? Ought they not to state the true cause, since His Royal Highness by mistake had assigned a fallacious one? Mr. Wilberforce, with his usual ability, but in a manner that still marked its duplicity—he meant the word in no offensive sense—had asked, would he enter into a political discussion when we were called upon to extend relief? He begged to state this was not the true question: it was whether they would found all the future proceedings upon error and misstatement, or upon incontrovertible facts. Another question was, would they be satisfied to patch up the wounds of the country for a short period or seek to remedy the disease in its spring and in its sources before it became still more alarming and incurable? The Duke of Kent said he had offered the resolution as it had been put into his hand; and if he had conceived there had been any mention of a course upon which difference of opinion could exist, he hoped they knew him sufficiently to believe that he should have been incapable of requiring their assent to it. He now, therefore, proposed an omission of all that part of the resolution which had any reference whatever to the cause of the present distress. He knew the noble lord well enough—and he had known him in early life—to be assured that he would agree with him, at least in a declaration as to the fact. Their common object, he believed, was to afford relief and to admit its necessity without assigning either one cause or another. For his own part, it had not been his intention to attend a political discussion. He would never enter the arena of politics with the noble lord; but he begged leave to say, he considered himself as competent to plead the cause of humanity, to advocate the interests of the weather-beaten sufferer, as the noble lord could be. There were, however, other times and other places for men to engage in discussion of party politics, and he therefore implored the noble lord not to distract the attention of the meeting by the introduction of these; and to keep solely in view that they had met as the friends of benevolence, not as the advocates of a party. His Royal Highness then proposed to alter the motion as follows:—
"Resolved that there do at this moment exist a stagnation of employment and a revulsion of trade, deeply affecting the situation of many parts of the community, and producing many instances of great local distress."
Lord Cochrane, in reply, stated that he had no wish to excite a difference of opinion on such an occasion, and that, after the alteration in the resolution, nothing gave him more pleasure than the opportunity of withdrawing his amendment; but, in justification of what he had done, it became necessary for him to say that he never would have thought of his amendment if it had not been for the assertion as to the cause of existing distress—he had no doubt in his mind as to the nature of that cause, and he held it but just and honourable that if a cause must be assigned, it should be the true one. After returning thanks to Mr. Wilberforce and the Duke of Kent for their expressions of personal civility, the noble lord consented to withdraw his motion so far as he was personally concerned in it.
Considerable opposition, however, from various parts of the hall was manifested to this mode of withdrawing the amendment, and a great deal of disturbance took place. At last the resolution, as altered by the Duke of Kent, was put and carried.
The Duke of Cambridge, in his speech, which followed, returned his warm thanks to the noble lord for the handsome manner in which he had withdrawn his amendment. He moved the following resolution, which was unanimously agreed to:—
"From the experienced generosity of the British nation it may be confidently expected that those who are able to afford the means of relief to their fellow-subjects will contribute their utmost endeavours to remedy or alleviate the sufferings of those who are particularly distressed."
The Archbishop of Canterbury moved the following resolution, which was seconded and carried unanimously: "That although it is obviously impossible for any association of individuals to attempt a general relief of difficulties affecting so large a proportion of the public, yet that it has been proved by the experience of this association that most important and extensive benefits may be derived from the co-operation and correspondence of a society in the metropolis encouraging the efforts of those benevolent individuals who may be disposed to associate themselves in the different districts for the relief of their several neighbourhoods."
The Duke of Rutland afterwards addressed the meeting, and moved that a subscription be immediately opened, and contributions generally solicited for carrying into effect the objects of this association; which was seconded, and agreed to.
The Earl of Manvers, after stating that he had opposed the amendment of the noble lord (Lord Cochrane) solely from his anxiety to preserve the unanimity of the meeting, as it was only by becoming unanimous they could gain their object, moved: "That subscribers of 100£ and upwards be added to the committee of the Association for the Relief of the Manufacturing and Labouring Poor; that the committee have full power to dispose of the funds to be collected, and to name sub-committees for correspondence."
The motion was seconded by Sir T. Bell, and unanimously carried.
The Bishop of London proposed a vote of thanks to the Duke of York, which Mr. C. Barclay was about to second, but—
Lord Cochrane again stepped forward and gained the attention of the meeting. He repeated the explanation of the motives for withdrawing his proposed amendment, adding, that he had no wish again to press that amendment upon the consideration of the meeting. But he could not forbear from observing what would have been the fate of such a proposition, if brought forward in another place, which he need not name. For there, instead of being requested to withdraw the proposition, it would have been met by a direct negative or by 'the previous question,' in support of which, no doubt, a majority of that assembly, miscalled the representatives of the people, would have voted. Yet the manner in which this, a meeting of the people, would have decided, was pretty obvious; and hence it might be inferred how far the people concurred in sentiment and feeling with the House of Commons. That the proposed, or any charitable subscription, must be inadequate to relieve the actual distress of the country was a proposition which could not be disputed, but yet he did not intend to oppose that subscription; on the contrary, he should give it every possible support in his power; and it was, he felt, a consolation to them that there were still some persons in this country who could afford something to relieve the poor; but he was afraid that neither the landowner nor the mercantile interest had the means of doing so; for the former could obtain no rent, and the latter no trade—the only persons, in fact, who were able to assist the poor under present circumstances were the placemen, the sinecurists, and the fund-holders, who must give up at least half of their ill-gotten gains in order to effect the object. With this impression fixed upon his mind, he felt it his duty to propose an additional resolution, that the ministers of the crown, that the Government of the country, who wielded the power of Parliament, were alone competent to remove and to alleviate the national distress. This, indeed, was evident from the statement of our financial situation which he had already made. He had called upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who was present, to contradict that statement if he could; but the right honourable gentleman had felt it expedient not to utter one word, as the meeting had witnessed. Yet from that statement it must be obvious, as he had already observed, that the military and naval situation of the country must be abandoned, or at least half the national debt must be extinguished, for the resources of the empire could not endure such burthens. The noble lord concluded with expressing his intention when the present resolutions were got over, to move another, stating the real cause of the present distress, and that the Chancellor of the Exchequer and his majesty's ministers were alone capable of affording serious relief to the present distress.
Mr. Barclay seconded the motion of the Right Reverend the Bishop of London, to which Lord Cochrane assured the meeting he entertained no objection.
Great confusion prevailed in the meeting, some crying out for Lord Cochrane's motion, while others were equally loud in testifying their anxiety for the vote of thanks.
The Duke of Kent then put the motion.
Lord Cochrane said that his sole object was to have an opportunity of moving his resolution after the present was disposed of.
A person from a distant part of the room exclaimed: "That resolution shall not be put, for it is a libel on the Parliament." Several other remarks were made, but they were generally unintelligible from the violent uproar and confusion that prevailed. Loud cries of "Put Lord Cochrane's motion first" were mixed with the cry of "Chair, chair."
The Duke of Kent said that he had attended this meeting with a view to assist in promoting an object of charity, and he had no doubt that such was the intention of the noble lord (Cochrane). Of this he was sure from the noble lord's own declaration, as well as from his knowledge of the noble lord's feelings. The noble lord had, indeed, himself stated that he had no wish to introduce any political, or to press any, measure likely to interfere with the object of the meeting. Therefore, he called upon the noble lord, in consistency, in politeness and urbanity, not to urge any political principle; and the noble lord must be aware that his proposition had a strong political tendency. The proposition was indeed such, that the noble lord must be aware that it was calculated to injure the subscription, for those who were not of the noble lord's opinion in politics were but too likely to leave the room if that proposition were pressed to a vote, and thus a material object of charity would suffer through a desire to urge a declaration of a mere political opinion.
Lord Cochrane disclaimed any wish to provoke political discussion. He expressed his desire merely to declare a truth which no man could venture to dispute in any popular assembly, in order that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and others present, might have an opportunity of reporting to Government the decided sentiment and real feeling of the people.
The Archbishop of Canterbury begged leave to call back the attention of the meeting to the motion before it, and which, he had no doubt, would be unanimously adopted. This motion, the most reverend prelate added, was not intended in any degree to interfere with the motion of the noble lord.
Amid loud cries of "Put Lord Cochrane's motion first, for if the motion of thanks be disposed of, the Duke of York will leave the chair, and the noble lord's motion will not be put at all," the Duke of Kent declared that there could be no intention to get rid of the noble lord's motion by any side-wind.
The motion of thanks was then passed while Lord Cochrane was engaged in writing his motion, and the Duke of York, having bowed to the meeting, immediately withdrew, amidst loud hissings, and cries of "Shame! shame! a trick! a trick!"
The Duke of Kent, whose head was turned towards Lord Cochrane, was much surprised and disappointed at discovering the absence of the chairman.
The general cry was then raised: "The Duke of Kent to the chair."
His Royal Highness addressed the meeting. Having, he said, pledged himself on proposing the last resolution that there was no intention of getting rid of Lord Cochrane's motion by any side-wind, he felt himself in a very awkward predicament. "But," he added, "I hope that, as liberal Englishmen, you will consider my situation and who I am; and that after my illustrious relatives have retired from the meeting, you will not insist upon my taking the chair for the purpose of pressing the declaration of a political opinion; but that you will commend my motives, and do justice to those feelings which determine the propriety of my immediate departure." His Royal Highness accordingly withdrew.
The majority of the meeting still remained, calling for the nomination of another chairman, and pressing the adoption of Lord Cochrane's motion; but the noble lord also withdrew, and the meeting separated.
That meeting was memorable. If Lord Cochrane's bearing at it was factious, it must be remembered how greatly he had suffered and how earnestly he desired to save the people at large from the sufferings entailed upon them by the Government which he and they had learnt to regard with a common dislike. By exposing what appeared to him and many others to be the hypocrisy of seeming philanthropists, and showing what he deemed the only real cause and the only real remedy of the national distress, he only acted as a brave and honest man, and his work was appreciated by the masses in whose interest it was done. A thrill of satisfaction ran through the land. During the ensuing weeks and months congratulations were heaped upon him from all quarters, and from nearly every class of society. If he had lessened the resources of the Association for the Belief of the Manufacturing and Labouring Poor, he was thanked even for this, since it was believed to be a good thing for shallow charity to be stayed, in order that the cause of real justice might be promoted.
The thanks were all the heartier because of the fresh persecution to which Lord Cochrane was subjected on account of his patriotism. This persecution was in the shape of legal proceedings instituted against him by the Marshal of the King's Bench Prison for his escape therefrom on the 10th of March, 1815. The action had been formally commenced almost immediately after the alleged offence, but on technical grounds, and perhaps from the consciousness that he was already punished enough, it was delayed for more than a year. As the previous punishment, however, had not been enough to silence him, the Government determined to revive the old charge as a further act of vengeance. At the special instigation of Lord Ellenborough, as it was averred, the prosecution had been renewed in May, 1816, almost immediately after the rejection by the House of Commons of Lord Cochrane's charges against the vindictive and unprincipled judge; but the time was too far gone for trial to take place during the summer term. It was again renewed, and at length successfully, directly after Lord Cochrane's fresh exhibition of his hostility to the Government at the London Tavern meeting.
The trial was at Guildford, on the 17th of August. Its history and issue may best be told in the words of an autobiographical fragment, written by Lord Dundonald shortly before his death. "I was accompanied to Guildford," he said, "by Sir Francis Burdett and several other leading inhabitants of Westminster, whose names are forgotten by me. I took neither counsel nor witnesses, having determined to rest my case on the point of law that 'no Member of Parliament can be imprisoned, either for non-payment of a fine to the king, or for any other cause than treason or felony, or refusing to give security to keep the peace,' my inference being that as I was illegally imprisoned, I had committed no illegality in escaping. I read to the jury a general statement, on which they unequivocally expressed their conviction that the trial had better not have been instituted, for that the punishment already sustained was more than adequate to the offence alleged to have been committed. The judge, however, interfered, and told the jury that, as I had admitted the escape in my statement, they had no alternative but to bring in a verdict of guilty, which was reluctantly done, and judgment was deferred.
"After the trial I returned to my house in Hampshire, and not hearing anything more of the affair, naturally concluded that, in the face of the opinion expressed by the jury, the Government would be ashamed to prosecute the matter further. Not liking, however, to trust to their mercy, whilst their malevolence might be exercised at an inconvenient season, or made to depend upon my political conduct, I directed my attorney to inquire whether it was intended to put in execution the sentence at Guildford. The reply was that no steps had been taken, and the impression was, that Government would be against further proceedings, lest they should tend to increase my popularity. Considering that this might be a feint to put me off my guard, I went to London for the purpose of attending a large political meeting, in the conduct of which I participated. Shortly afterwards I received a summons to appear at Westminster Hall and receive judgment on the verdict; the judgment being that I was condemned to pay a fine of 100£ to the Crown.
"On my refusal to pay the fine, on the 21st of November, I was again taken into custody, I alleging that the sentence would amount to perpetual imprisonment, for that I would never pay a fine imposed for escaping from an illegal detention.
"On my being taken back to prison, however, a meeting of the electors of Westminster was held, at which it was determined that the amount of the fine should be paid by a penny subscription, no person being allowed to subscribe more. This plan was adopted in order that the public throughout the kingdom might have an opportunity of manifesting their disapprobation of the oppressive way in which I was being treated. Though I knew nothing of the intentions of the committee at the time, it was expected that the subscription would amount to a much larger sum than the fine, and resolved that the surplus should be devoted to the re-imbursement of the former fine of 1000£ and of the expenses to which I had been put at the trial. Receiving-houses were accordingly opened in the metropolis and in various other large towns, and the amount of the fine of 100£ was speedily collected in London alone.
"Meanwhile meetings were constantly being held to petition Parliament for reform, and at these my name and sufferings formed a prominent topic, so that the Government would have been glad to be rid of me. After one of these meetings in Spafields, for the purpose of requesting Sir Francis Burdett and myself to present a petition to Parliament, a serious riot took place in the city of London, in which a gentleman was shot by the military. The Government, in alarm lest the people should proceed to the King's Bench and liberate me, did me the honour to send a company of infantry to guard me, the officers of the prison being ordered to admit no strangers whatever. The troops were further ordered to continue their attendance till I was released from custody.
"The subscription having been completed in pence, sent from all parts of the kingdom, my secretary, Mr. Jackson, applied to the Master of the Crown Office to receive the amount of the fine in coppers. This was refused, as not being a legal tender. The Master, however, in token of the suffering to which I had so unworthily been subjected, said that, as payment of the fine in such a manner marked the sense of the people on my case, he would not oppose himself to the expression of public sentiment, but would take 10£ of the sum in coppers. This was accordingly paid, and the remainder in notes and silver, which were given by various tradesmen in exchange for the coppers of the people, whose money was thus literally appropriated to the payment of the fine.
"Finding, on my liberation, whole chests filled with penny pieces, I wrote to the committee, stating that sufficient had been collected. The reply was that the subscription should go on till the amount of the fine of 1000£ was paid in addition. The whole of the amount of the fine was thus realized, with something beyond—I do not recollect how much—towards my law expenses, which had necessarily been excessive. Taking, however, the 1100£ paid in pence, this alone showed that two million six hundred and forty thousand persons—composing a very large portion of the adult population of the kingdom—sympathised with me. Not one of my persecutors could have elicited such an expression of public sympathy."
The fine being thus paid, Lord Cochrane was released from the King's Bench Prison on the 7th of December, after a confinement of sixteen days, which was attended by all the wanton severity shown to him during his previous incarceration. Having been apprehended on a Thursday, he was, on his arrival at the King's Bench, placed in an unhealthy room protected by an iron grating. In the evening, having complained of such unusual treatment, he was informed that it was under the express directions of the Marshal. Next day, being seriously unwell, a physician was sent to him, who reported that he was suffering from palpitation of the heart and other symptoms of dangerous excitement, which made it necessary that he should be removed to better quarters. Accordingly, worse quarters were found for him, in a damp, dark, and very imperfectly-ventilated room, entirely devoid of furniture, in the middle of the building. Stedfastly refusing to go there, he was allowed to remain for that night in the room, first assigned to him. On Saturday morning, just as he was sitting down to breakfast, he was ordered to proceed to his new dungeon. Again refusing, his untasted breakfast was forcibly taken from him until he consented to eat it in the appointed place. Thither he accordingly went, and there he was detained for the fortnight that passed before his liberation.
On the 17th of December an enthusiastic meeting of the citizens of Westminster was held to congratulate Lord Cochrane upon his release. "We, your lordship's constituents," it was stated in an address adopted by that meeting, "beg leave, on the present occasion, to declare that, after having had long and ample means for inquiry and reflection, we remain in the full and entire conviction of the perfect innocence of your lordship of every part of the offence laid to your charge at the outset of that series of persecutions by which, during the last three years of your life, you have been incessantly harassed. But, indeed, those persons must have very little knowledge of public affairs, and particularly of your distinguished naval and political career, who do not clearly perceive that all those persecutions have arisen from your public virtues, and who are not well convinced that, if you had not served the people by your exposure of the abuses in the prize courts, by your endeavours to restore to the right owners the immense sums unjustly alienated under the names of Droits of Admiralty, by your honest explanation of the causes which prevented the naval renown of your country being complete at Basque Roads, and by having caused to be produced in Parliament, and published to the nation, that memorable account of sinecures, pensions, and grants which so usefully enlightened the public, you never would have been prosecuted for a pretended fraud on the funds. Your lordship's constituents, being thus fully sensible that you have suffered and are still suffering solely for their and their country's sake, would deem themselves amongst the most ungrateful of mankind were they to neglect this occasion to tender you the most solemn assurances of their unabated attachment and their most resolute support, and, whilst they are endeavouring to discharge their duty towards your lordship, they entertain the consoling reflection that the day is not distant when you will mainly assist in carrying forward that measure of radical parliamentary reform which alone can be a safeguard against all sorts of oppressions, and especially oppressions under which your lordship has so long and so severely suffered."
To that honourable address an honourable reply was penned by Lord Cochrane on the 24th of December, and presented to the electors of Westminster at another meeting assembled for the purpose on the 1st of January ensuing.
The direct persecution which began with the Stock Exchange trial and its antecedents was now at an end, after three years of gross and untiring vindictiveness. Indirect persecution was to continue for more than thirty years.
CHAPTER V.
THE STATE OF POLITICS IN ENGLAND IN 1817 AND 1818, AND LORD COCHRANE's SHARE IN THEM.—HIS WORK AS A RADICAL IN AND OUT OF PARLIAMENT.—HIS FUTILE ATTEMPTS TO OBTAIN THE PRIZE MONEY DUE FOR HIS SERVICES AT BASQUE ROADS.—THE HOLLY HILL BATTLE.—THE PREPARATIONS FOR HIS ENTERPRISE IN SOUTH AMERICA.—HIS LAST SPEECH IN PARLIAMENT.
[1817-1818.]
The years 1817 and 1818 were years of great political turmoil. The English people, weary of the European wars, which in two-and-twenty years had raised the national debt from 230,000,000£ to 860,000,000£, thus causing a taxation which amounted, in the average, to 25£ a year upon every family of five persons, were in no mood to be made happy even by the restitution of peace. Partly by necessity, partly by the bad management of the Government and its officials, the war-burdens were continued, and to the starving multitudes they were more burdensome than ever. Angry complaints were uttered openly, and repeated again and again with steadily-increasing vehemence, in all parts of the country. That the ministers and agents of the Crown were grievously at fault was patent to all; and it is not strange that, in the excitement and the misery that prevailed, they should be blamed even more than was their due. But the men in power did not choose to be blamed at all; they denied that any fault attached to them, and fiercely reprobated every complaint as sedition, every opponent as a lawless and unpatriotic demagogue. Hence the Government and the people came to be at deadly feud. Most right was with the people, and their bold assertion of that right, albeit sometimes in wrong ways, has secured memorable benefits in later times; but power was still with the Government, and it was used even more roughly than in former years.
That Lord Cochrane, having suffered so much from the vindictive persecution of the Tories, should have thrown in his lot with its most extreme opponents, is not to be wondered at. During 1817 he was intimately associated with the popular party in all its efforts for the redress of grievances and in all the assertions of its real and fancied rights. In and out of Parliament he was alike active and outspoken. The history of his public conduct at this time forms no small section of the history of the Radical movement during the period. It resulted naturally from the circumstances in which he had lately been placed. Energetic in thought and action, a ready writer and an able speaker, his recent sufferings helped to place him in the foremost rank of patriots, as they were called by friends—demagogues, as they were called by enemies. With the exception of Sir Francis Burdett, than whom he even went further, the people had, outside their own ranks, no sturdier champion.
If there had been any doubt before as to his line of action, there could be no doubt after the re-assembling of Parliament in January, 1817. During the recess, monster meetings had been held in all parts of the country to consider the popular troubles and to insist upon popular reforms. Lord Cochrane agreed to present to the House of Commons many of the petitions that resulted from these meetings, and this he did on the 29th of January, the very day of the re-opening of Parliament.
In anticipation of this measure, there was a great assembling of reform delegates from all parts of England, and of others favourable to their purpose, in front of Lord Cochrane's residence at No. 7, Palace Yard, Westminster. Shortly before two o'clock Lord Cochrane showed himself at the window, and announced that he was now on his way to the House, there to watch over the rights and liberties of the people, and that he would shortly return and let them know what was passing. This he did at four o'clock, part of the interval being occupied with a fervid address from Henry Hunt. On his reappearance, Lord Cochrane stated that the speech with which the Prince Regent had opened Parliament had not disappointed his expectations, for it was wholly disappointing to the people. The Regent had complained of the disaffection pervading the country, and had announced his intention of using all the power given him by the Constitution for its suppression. Lord Cochrane expressed his confident hope that the people, having the right on their side, would so demean themselves as to give their enemies no ground of charge against them; for those enemies desired nothing so much as riot and disorder.
Thereupon an immense bundle of petitions was handed him, and he himself was placed in a chair, and so conveyed on men's shoulders to the door of Westminster Hall, where the crowd dispersed in an orderly way.
In the House, before the motion for an address in answer to the Prince Regent's speech, Lord Cochrane rose to present a petition, signed by more than twenty thousand inhabitants of Bristol, setting forth the present distress of the country, the increase of paupers and beggars, the grievous lack of employment for industrious persons, and the misery that resulted from this state of things. In these circumstances, the petitioners urged, it was in vain to pretend to relieve the sufferers by giving them soup, while, for the support of sinecure placemen, pensioners without number, and an insatiable civil list, half their earnings were taken from them by the enormous taxation under which the country groaned. After considerable opposition, the petition was allowed to lie on the table.
Lord Cochrane then presented a smaller but much more outspoken petition from the inhabitants of Quirk, in Yorkshire. "The petitioners," it was there urged, "have a full and immovable conviction—a conviction which they believe to be universal throughout the kingdom—that the House does not, in any constitutional or rational sense, represent the nation; that, when the people have ceased to be represented, the Constitution is subverted; that taxation without representation is a state of slavery; that the scourge of taxation without representation has now reached a severity too harassing and vexatious, too intolerable and degrading, to be longer endured without resistance by all possible means warranted by the Constitution; that such a condition of affairs has now been reached that contending factions are alike guilty of their country's wrongs, alike forgetful of her rights, mocking the public patience with repeated, protracted, and disgusting debates on questions of refinement in the complicated and abstruse science of taxation, as if in such refinement, and not in a reformed representation, as if in a consolidated corruption, and not in a renovated Constitution, relief were to be found; that thus there are left no human means of redressing the people's wrongs or composing their distracted minds, or of preventing the subversion of liberty and the establishment of despotism, unless by calling the collected wisdom and virtue of the community into counsel by the election of a free Parliament; and therefore, considering that, through the usurpation of borough factions and other causes, the people have been put even out of a condition to consent to taxes; and considering also that, until their sacred right of election shall be restored, no free Parliament can have existence, it is necessary that the House shall, without delay, pass a law for putting the aggrieved and much-aroused people in possession of their undoubted right to representation co-extensive with taxation, to an equal distribution of such representation throughout the community, and to Parliaments of a continuance according to the Constitution, namely, not exceeding one year."
A long discussion ensued as to whether this petition should be accepted by the House or rejected as an insulting libel. Several members of the House denounced it. Other members, while objecting to its terms, urged its acceptance. Among them the most notable was Mr. Brougham. The petition, he said, was rudely worded, and its recommendations were such as no wise lover of the English Constitution could wholly subscribe to; but it pointed to real grievances and recommended improvements which were necessary to the well-being of the State, and therefore it ought to be admitted. Mr. Canning was one of those who insisted upon its rejection, and this was ultimately done by a majority of 87, 48 being in favour of the petition, and 135 against it.
Four other petitions presented by Lord Cochrane, being to the same effect, were also rejected; and two, more moderate in their language, were accepted. Lord Cochrane thus succeeded, at any rate, in forcing the House during several hours to take into consideration the troubled state of the country, and the pressing need, as it seemed to great masses of the people, of thorough parliamentary reform.
"You will see by the 'Debates,'" he wrote next day to a friend, "that I presented a number of petitions last night, and had a hard battle to fight. Today I am quite indisposed, by reason of the corruption of the Honourable House. It is impossible to support a bad cause by honest means. God knows where all these base projects will end." That his own cause was a good one, and that the means used by him were honest, he had no doubt. In the same letter he referred to the opposition offered to him, even by some of his own relatives, on account of his conduct. "Mr. Cochrane has thought proper to disavow, through the public papers, any connection with my politics. The consciousness that I am acting as I ought makes that light which I should otherwise feel as a heavy clog in following that course which I think honour and justice require."
Therefore he persevered in his Herculean task. Having presented and spoken upon others in the interval, he presented another monster petition to the House on the 5th of February. It was signed, he said, by twenty-four thousand inhabitants of London and the neighbourhood. It complained of the unbearable weight of taxation and the distresses of the country, and of the squandering of the money extracted from the pockets of an oppressed and impoverished people to support sinecure placemen and pensioners. "It appears to me," he said, "surprising that there should be any set of men so cruel and unjust as to wallow in wealth at the public expense while poor wretches are starving at every corner of the streets." He represented that the petition was drawn up in temperate, respectful language,—more temperate, indeed, than he should have employed had he dictated its phrases. He urged that the people had good cause for complaint as to the way in which Parliament neglected their interests, and good ground for asserting that the system of parliamentary representation then afforded them was no real representation at all. Members entered the House only in pursuit of their own selfish ends, and the Government encouraged this state of things by fostering a system of wholesale bribery and corruption, degrading in itself and fraught with terrible mischief to the community. What wonder, then, that the people should pray, as they did in this petition, for a thorough reform, and should point to annual Parliaments and universal suffrage as the only efficient remedies?
It is needless to recapitulate all the arguments offered again and again by Lord Cochrane, with ever fresh-force and cogency, in presenting massive petitions to the House, and in introducing into the occasional debates on reform with which the House amused itself a vigour and practicalness in which few other members cared to sympathize. Nor need we enumerate all the meetings, in London and the provinces, in which he took prominent part. It is enough to say that in Parliament he always spoke with exceeding boldness, and that upon the people, notwithstanding the contrary assertions of his detractors, he always enjoined, if not conciliation and forbearance, at any rate such action as was within the strict letter of the law, and most likely, in the end, to obtain the realization of their wishes. On all occasions he defended them from the charges of sedition and conspiracy brought against them by their opponents, and proved, to all who were open to proof, that their objects were patriotic, and were being sought in patriotic ways.
Of this, however, the Government did not choose to be convinced. Taking advantage of some intemperate speeches of demagogues, making much of some violent handbills circulated by police-officers under secret instructions, mightily exaggerating a few lawless acts,—as when a drunken old sailor summoned the keepers of the Tower of London to surrender,—they procured, on the 26th of February, the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act. Therefrom resulted, at any rate, some good. The Whigs, who had hitherto mainly supported the Tory Government, were now turned against it, and with them the wiser Radicals, like Lord Cochrane, sought to effect a coalition. "You will perceive by the papers," he said in a letter dated February the 28th, "that I have resolved to steer another political course, seeing that the only means of averting military despotism from the country is to unite the people and the Whigs, so far as they can be induced to co-operate, which they must do if they wish to preserve the remainder of the Constitution. The 'Times' of yesterday contains the fullest account of the late debates on the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, and by that report you will perceive that the Whigs really made a good stand."
In that temper, Lord Cochrane spoke at a Westminster meeting, held on the 11th of March, "to take into consideration the propriety of agreeing to an address to His Royal Highness the Prince Regent, beseeching that he will, in his well-known solicitude for the freedom and happiness of His Majesty's subjects, remove from his royal councils those ministers who appear resolved to adopt no effectual measures of economy and retrenchment, but, on the contrary, to persevere in measures calculated to drive a suffering people to despair."
There was some flattery or some mockery, or something of both, in that announcement; and both, with much earnest enunciation of popular grievances, were in Lord Cochrane's speech on the subject. He said that the Regent had as much cause as the people to complain of his present ministers, seeing how shamelessly they sought to hide from him the real state of the country. It was to be expected, from the early habits and character of the Regent, that he would anxiously pursue the interests of the nation, if, instead of being in the hands of an odious oligarchy, he could act for himself. This, at any rate, Lord Cochrane maintained should be urged upon him, for if something were not quickly done for the relief of the nation, trade and commerce would soon be utterly ruined, and the whole community would share the misery that had so long oppressed the lower orders. He again dwelt forcibly on the causes of this misery, and again denounced the conduct of the ministers and placemen who, while squandering the hardly-earned pounds of the people, claimed respect for their exemplary charity in doling out a few farthings for "the relief of the poor." In the previous year, he showed, Lord Castlereagh, "the bell-wether of the House of Commons," and thirteen other persons, had drawn from the revenues of the country 309,861£, and out of that amount had given back, in "sinecure soup," only 1505£
On a hundred other occasions, both outside of the House of Commons and within its walls, Lord Cochrane continued fearlessly to set forth the troubles of the people and the wrong-doing of its governors. In Parliament petitions without number were presented, and, amid all sorts of contumely, defended by him; and he took a no less active part in various important discussions, of which it will suffice, by way of illustration, to name the debates of the 3rd, 14th, and 28th of March, on the famous Seditious Meetings Bill, and that of the 13th of March on the depressed condition of English trade and its causes—a subject which was recurred to by Mr. Brougham in his memorable motion of the 11th of July on the state of the nation.
Six weeks before that, on the 20th of May, Lord Cochrane spoke on another famous motion—that made by his friend Sir Francis Burdett in favour of parliamentary reform. Once more, he complained that the existing House of Commons in no way represented the people, and was entirely regardless of its interests. Nothing better, he alleged, could be hoped for, without a radical change in the system of representation. "But," he continued, "reform we must have, whether we will or no. The state of the country is such that things cannot much longer be conducted as they now are. There is a general call for reform. If the call is not obeyed, thank God the evil will produce its own remedy, the mass of corruption will destroy itself, for the maggots it engenders will eat it up. The members of this House are the maggots of the Constitution. They are the locusts that devour it and cause all the evils that are complained of. There is nothing wicked which does not emanate from this House. In it originate all knavery, perjury, and fraud. You well know all this. You also know that the means by which the great majority of the House is returned is one great cause of the corruption of the whole people. It has been said, 'Let the people reform themselves;' but if sums of money are offered for seats within these walls, there will always be found men ready to receive them. It is impossible to imagine that the profuse expenditure of the late war would have taken place, had it not been for a corrupt majority devoted to their selfish interests. At least it would have had a shorter duration, from being carried on in a more effective manner, had it not been conducive to the views of many to prevent its speedy termination. Much has been said about the glorious result of the war; but has not lavish expenditure loaded us with taxation which is impoverishing the people and annihilating commerce? Are not vessels seen everywhere with brooms at their mastheads? Are not sailors starving? Is not agriculture languishing? Are not our manufactures in the most distressed state?"
Lord Cochrane asserted that the real revolutionists of England were the ministers and their followers. "I am persuaded that no man without doors wishes the subversion of the Constitution; but within it, bribery and corruption stand for the Constitution. Mr. Pitt himself confessed that no honest man could hold the situation of minister for any length of time. There can be no honest minister until measures have been taken to purge and purify the House. If this be not done, it is in vain to hope for a renewal of successful enterprise in this country: the sun of the country is set for ever. It may indeed exist as a petty military German despotism, with horsemen parading up and down, with large whiskers, with sabres ringing by their horses' sides, with fantastically-shaped caps of fantastical colours on their heads; but this country cannot thus be made a great military power. A previous speaker has instanced juries as one of the benefits of the Constitution; but I will affirm, with respect to the manner in which juries are chosen under the present system, that justice is much better administered, in a more summary manner, with less expense, and no chicanery, by the Dey of Algiers. If this country were erected at once into a downright, honest, open despotism, the people would be gainers. If a judge or despot then proved a rogue, he would at once appear in his true character; but now villany can be artfully concealed under the verdict of a packed jury. I am satisfied that the present system of corruption is more detrimental to the country than a despotism."
No other speaker spoke so boldly as Lord Cochrane; but his eloquent words were substantially endorsed by many; by Sir Samuel Romilly and Mr. Brougham in especial; and on a division, though 265 voted against Sir Francis Burdett's motion, it was supported by a minority—unusually large for the time—of 77.
Slowly but surely the better principles of government for which Lord Cochrane fought so persistently were gaining ground, destined ultimately to produce the changes in national temper which made plain the duty and expediency of adopting the changes in political systems in which the years 1832 and 1867 are epochs. In after years, Lord Cochrane himself clearly saw that he had been rash in his advocacy of the sweeping reforms which the excited people deemed necessary for their welfare in the years of trouble and misgovernment consequent on the tedious war-time ending with the battle of Waterloo. But he never had cause to regret the honest zeal and the generous sympathy with which he strove, though in violent ways, to lessen the weight of the popular distresses.
Distresses were not wanting to himself during this period. The weight of his former troubles still hung heavily upon him. He could not forget the terrible disgrace—none the less terrible because it was unmerited—that had befallen him. And in pecuniary ways he was a grievous sufferer by them. In losing his naval employment he lost the income on which he had counted. His resources were thus seriously crippled; and the scientific pursuits, in which he still persevered, failed to bring to him the profit that he anticipated.
In one characteristic way—only one among many—the Government persecution still clung to him. In the distribution of prize-money for the achievement at Basque Roads all the officers and crews of Lord Grambier's fleet had been considered entitled to share. To this arrangement Lord Cochrane objected. He urged that as the whole triumph was due to the Impérieuse and the few ships actually engaged with her, the reward ought to be limited to them. "I am preparing to proceed in the Court of Admiralty on the question of head-money for Basque Roads," he wrote on the 5th of November, 1816; "my affidavit has reluctantly been admitted, though strenuously opposed, on the ground that I was not to be believed on my oath!"
Lord Cochrane's council in this case was Dr. Lushington, afterwards the eminent judge of the Admiralty Court. Dr. Lushington showed plainly that the greater part of the fleet, having taken no share in the action, had no right to head-money, and that therefore all ought to be divided among those who actually shared with Lord Cochrane the danger and the success of the enterprise. But Sir William Scott (afterwards Lord Stowell), the judge at that time, was not disposed to sanction this view. Therefore he thwarted it by delays. The case having been postponed from November, 1816, was brought up again in the first term of 1817. "The judge has again delayed his decision," wrote Lord Cochrane on the 28th of February, the day of the announcement, "and I believe has done so until next session. He gave a curious reason for this, namely, that I took part at the Westminster meeting against the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act!"
At the next session it was again postponed, all the time available for its consideration being taken up with a frivolous discussion as to Lord Cochrane's right to give evidence. "They have gone the length," wrote his secretary, Mr. Jackson, on the 3rd of May, "of denying Lord Cochrane's credibility in a court of justice. They had no other way of answering his affidavit, which would have gained his cause in the Court of Admiralty, as it proved that the French ships in Basque Roads were destroyed by his own exertions in fighting without orders from the Admiral. The denial-of Lord Cochrane's competency to give evidence has excited a great deal of interest, and the Court of Admiralty was quite crowded on Tuesday, when the question came on to be discussed. I thought that our counsel had much the best of the argument, and I believe the judge, Sir William Scott, thought so too, as he put off his sentence to a future day." On the future day the judge admitted as much. "We have gained a bit of a victory in the Admiralty Court," said the same writer in a letter dated the 9th of June, "the judge having been compelled to pronounce in favour of his lordship's right to be believed on his oath." The time taken by him to arrive at this decision, however, was so long that the case had to be adjourned to November term, and thereby Lord Cochrane's enemies so far attained their object, that it was impossible for him, in November term, to renew the suit.
In the interval he had gone to France, preparatory to a much longer and more momentous journey to South America, in anticipation of which he was winding up his affairs and realizing his property during and after the summer of 1817.
In this settlement of accounts there was at any rate one amusing incident. It will be remembered that, on the occasion of his being elected Member of Parliament for Honiton in 1806, Lord Cochrane had refused to follow the almost universal fashion of bribery, but, after the election was over, had thoughtlessly yielded to the proposal of his agent that he should entertain his constituents at a public supper.[A] This entertainment, either through spite or through wanton extravagance, was turned by those to whom the management of it was assigned into a great occasion of feasting for all the inhabitants of the town; and for defrayment of the expenses thus incurred a claim for more than 1200£ was afterwards made upon Lord Cochrane. Through eleven years he bluntly refused to pay the preposterous demand; but his creditors had the law upon their side, and in the spring of 1817 an order was granted for putting an execution into his house at Holly Hill.
[Footnote A: 'The Autobiography of a Seaman,' vol. i. pp. 203, 204.]
Lord Cochrane, however, having resisted the demand thus far, determined to resist to the end. For more than six weeks he prevented the agents of the law from entering the house. "I still hold out," he said in a letter to his secretary, "though the castle has several times been threatened in great force. The trumpeter is now blowing for a parley, but no one appears on the ramparts. Explosion-bags are set in the lower embrasures, and all the garrison is under arms." In the explosion-bags there was nothing more dangerous than powdered charcoal; but, supposing they contained gunpowder or some other combustible, the sheriff of Hampshire and twenty-five officers were held at bay by them, until at length one official, more daring than the rest, jumped in at an open window, to find Lord Cochrane sitting at breakfast and to be complimented by him upon the wonderful bravery which he had shown in coming up to a building defended by charcoal dust.
That battle with the sheriff and bailiffs of Hampshire occupied nearly the whole of April and May, 1817. In the latter month, if not before, Lord Cochrane began to think seriously of proceeding to join in battles of a more serious sort in South America, under inducements and with issues that will presently be detailed. "His lordship has made up his mind to go to South America," wrote his secretary on the 31st of May. "Numbers of gentlemen of great respectability are desirous of accompanying him, and even Sir Francis Burdett has declared that he feels a great temptation to do so; but Lord Cochrane discourages all. They think he is going to immolate the Spaniards by his secret plans; but he is not going to do anything of the kind, having promised the Prince Regent not to divulge or use them otherwise than in the service of his country."
With this expedition in view, and purposing to start upon it nearly a year sooner than he found himself able to do, Lord Cochrane sold Holly Hill and his other property in Hampshire, in July. In August he went for a few months to France, partly for the benefit of Lady Cochrane's health, partly, as it would seem, in the hope of introducing into that country the lamps which he had lately invented, and from which he hoped to derive considerable profit.
To this matter, and to his efforts to obtain some share, at any rate, of his rights from the English Government, the letters written by him from France chiefly refer. But there are in them some notes and illustrations of more general interest. "I am quite astonished at the state of Boulogne," he wrote thence on the 14th of August. "Neither the town nor the heights are fortified; so great was Napoleon's confidence in the terror of his name and the knowledge he possessed of the stupidity and ignorance of our Government." In a letter from Paris, dated the 23rd of August, we read: "Everything is looking much more settled than when I was formerly here, and I do really think that the Government, from the conciliatory measures wisely adopted, will stand their ground against the adherents of Buonaparte. We are to have a great rejoicing to-morrow. All Paris will be dancing, fiddling, and singing. They are a light-hearted people. I wish I could join in their fun. I was hopeful that I should; but the cursed recollection of the injustice that has been done to me is never out of my mind; so that all my pleasures are blasted, from whatever source they might be expected to arise."
That last sentence fairly indicates the state of Lord Cochrane's mind during these painful years. Weighed down by troubles heavy enough to break the heart of an ordinary man, he fought nobly for the thorough justification of his character and for the protection of others from such persecution as had befallen him. In both objects, altogether praise-worthy in themselves, he may have sometimes been intemperate; but ample excuse for far greater intemperance would be found in the troubles that oppressed him. "The cursed recollection of the injustice that has been done to me is never out of my mind; all my pleasures are blasted!"
In the same temper, after a lapse of nine months, about which it is only necessary to say that, like their forerunners, they were employed in private cares, and, especially after the reassembling of Parliament, in zealous action for the public good, he made his last speech in the House of Commons on the 2nd of June, 1818. The occasion was a debate upon a second motion by Sir Francis Burdett in favour of parliamentary reform, more cogent and effective than that of the 20th of May, 1817, to Lord Cochrane's share in which we have already referred. The former speech was wholly of public interest. This has a personal significance, very painful and very memorable. It brings to a pathetic close the saddest epoch in Lord Cochrane's life—so very full of sadness.
"I rise, sir," he said, "to second the motion of my honourable friend. In what I have to say, I do not presume to think that I can add to the able arguments that have just been uttered; but it is my duty distinctly to declare my opinions on the subject. When I recollect all the proceedings of this House, I confess that I do not entertain much hope of a favourable result to the present motion. To me it seems chiefly serviceable as an exhibition of sound principles, and as showing the people for what they ought to petition. I shall perhaps be told that it is unparliamentary to say there are any representatives of the people in this House who have sold themselves to the purposes and views of any set of men in power; but the history of the degenerate senate of that once free people, the Romans, will serve to show how far corruption may make inroads upon public virtue or patriotism. The tyranny inflicted on the Roman people, and on mankind in general, under the form of acts passed by the Roman senate, will ever prove a useful memento to nations which have any freedom to lose. It is not for me to prophesy when our case will be like theirs; but this I will say, that those who are the slaves of a despotic monarch are far less reprehensible for their actions than those who voluntarily sell themselves when they have the means of remaining free.
"And here," he continued, in sentences broken by his emotions, "as it is probably the last time I shall ever have the honour of addressing the House on any subject, I am anxious to tell its members what I think of their conduct. It is now nearly eleven years since I have had the honour of a seat in this House, and since then there have been very few measures in which I could agree with the opinions of the majority. To say that these measures were contrary to justice would not be parliamentary. I will not even go into the inquiry whether they tend to the national good or not; but I will merely appeal to the feelings of the landholders present, I will appeal to the knowledge of those members who are engaged in commerce, and ask them whether the acts of the legislative body have not been of a description, during the late war, that would, if not for the timely intervention of the use of machinery, have sent this nation to total ruin? The country is burthened to a degree which, but for this intervention, it would have been impossible for the people to bear. The cause of these measures having such an effect upon the country has been examined and gone into by my honourable colleague (Sir Francis Burdett); they are to be traced to that patronage and influence which, a number of powerful individuals possess over the nomination of a great proportion of the members of this House; a power which, devolving on a few, becomes thereby the more liable to be affected by the influence of the Crown; and which has in fact been rendered almost entirely subservient to that influence. To reform the abuses which arise out of this system is the object of my honourable friend's motion. I will not, cannot, anticipate the success of the motion; but I will say, as has been said before by the great Chatham, the father of Mr. Pitt, that, if the House does not reform itself from within, it will be reformed with a vengeance from without. The people will take up the subject, and a reform will take place which will make many members regret their apathy in now refusing that reform which might be rendered efficient and permanent. But, unfortunately, in the present formation of the House, it appears to me that from within no reform can be expected, and for the truth of this I appeal to the experience of the few members, less than a hundred, who are now present, nearly six hundred being absent; I appeal to their experience to say whether they have ever known of any one instance in which a petition of the people for reform has been taken into consideration, or any redress afforded in consequence of such a petition? This I regret, because I foresee the consequence which must necessarily result from it. I do trust and hope that before it is too late some measures shall be adopted for redressing the grievances of the people; for certain I am that unless some measures are taken to stop the feelings which the people entertain towards this House and to restore their confidence in it, you will one day have ample cause to repent the line of conduct you have pursued. The gentlemen who now sit on the benches opposite with such triumphant feelings will one day repent their conduct. The commotions to which that conduct will inevitably give rise will shake, not only this House, but the whole framework of Government and society to its foundations. I have been actuated by the wish to prevent this, and I have had no other intention.
"I shall not trespass longer on your time," he continued, in a few broken sentences, uttered painfully and with agitation that aroused much sympathy in the House. "The situation I have held for eleven years in this House I owe to the favour of the electors of Westminster. The feelings of my heart are gratified by the manner in which they have acted towards me. They have rescued me from a desperate and wicked conspiracy which has nearly involved me in total ruin. I forgive those who have so done; and I hope when they depart to their graves they will be equally able to forgive themselves. All this is foreign to the subject before the House, but I trust you will forgive me. I shall not trespass on your time longer now—perhaps never again on any subject. I hope his Majesty's ministers will take into their serious consideration what I now say. I do not utter it with any feelings of hostility—such feelings have now left me—but I trust they will take my warning, and save the country by abandoning the present system before it is too late."
CHAPTER VI.
THE ANTECEDENTS OF LORD COCHRANE'S EMPLOYMENTS IN AMERICA.—THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE IN THE SPANISH COLONIES.—MEXICO.—VENEZUELA. —COLOMBIA.—CHILI.—THE FIRST CHILIAN INSURRECTION.—THE CARRERAS AND O'HIGGINS.—THE BATTLE OF BANCAGUA.—O'HIGGINS'S SUCCESSES.—THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHILIAN REPUBLIC.—LORD COCHRANE INVITED TO ENTER THE CHILIAN SERVICE.
(1810—1817.)
To an understanding of Lord Cochrane's share in the South American wars of independence a brief recapitulation of their antecedents, and of the state of affairs at the time of his first connection with them, is necessary.
The Spanish possessions in both North and South America, which had reached nearly their full dimensions before the close of the sixteenth century, had been retained, with little opposition from without, and with still less from within, down to the close of the eighteenth century. These possessions, including Mexico and Central America, New Granada, Venezuela, Peru, La Plata, and Chili, covered an area larger than that of Europe, more than twice as large as that of the present United States. Through half a dozen generations they had been governed with all the short-sighted tyranny for which the Spanish Government is famous; the resources of the countries had been crippled in order that each day's greed might be satisfied; and the inhabitants, who, for the most part, were the mixed offspring of Spanish and native parents, had been kept in abject dependence and in ignorant ferocity. There was plenty of internal hatred and strife; but no serious thought of winning their liberty and working out their own regeneration seems to have existed among the people of the several provinces, until it was suggested by the triumphant success of the United States in throwing off the stronger but much less oppressive thraldom of Great Britain. That success having been achieved, however, it was soon emulated by the colonial subjects of Spain.
The first leader of agitation was Francisco Miranda, a Venezuelan Creole. He visited England in 1790, and received some encouragement in his revolutionary projects from Pitt. He went to France in 1792, and there, while waiting some years for fit occasion of prosecuting the work on which his heart was set, he helped to fight the battle of the revolution against the Bourbons and the worn-out feudalism of which they were representatives. During his absence, in 1794, conspiracies against Spain arose in Mexico and New Granada, and, these continuing, he went in 1794, armed by secret promises of assistance from Pitt, to help in fomenting them. They prospered for several years; and in 1806 Miranda obtained substantial aid from Sir Alexander Cochrane, Lord Cochrane's uncle, then the admiral in command of the West India station. But in 1806 Pitt died. The Whigs came into power, and with their coming occurred a change in the English policy. In 1807, General Crawfurd was ordered to throw obstacles in the way of Miranda, then heading a formidable insurrection. The result was a temporary check to the work of revolution. In 1810 Miranda renewed his enterprise in Venezuela, still with poor success; and in the same year a fresh revolt was stirred up in Mexico by Miguel Hidalgo, of Costilla, a priest of Dolores. Hidalgo's insurrection was foolish in design and bloodthirsty in execution. It was continued, in better spirit, but with poor success, by Morelos and Rayon, who, sustaining a serious defeat in 1815, left the strife to degenerate into a coarse bandit struggle, very disastrous to Spain, but hardly beneficial to the cause of Mexican independence.
In the meanwhile a more prosperous and worthier contest was being waged in South America. Besides the efforts of Miranda in Venezuela, which were renewed between 1810 and 1812, when he was taken prisoner and sent to Spain, there to die in a dungeon, a separate standard of revolt was raised in Quito by Narinno and his friends in 1809. After fighting desperately, in guerilla fashion, for five years, Narinno was captured and forced to share Miranda's lot. A greater man, the greatest hero of South American independence, Simon Bolivar, succeeded them.
Bolivar, a native of Caraccas, had passed many years in Europe, when in 1810, at the age of twenty-seven, he went to serve under Miranda in Venezuela. Miranda's defeat in 1812 compelled him to retire to New Granada, but there he did good service. He improved the fighting ways and extended the fighting area, and in December, 1814, was appointed captain-general of Venezuela and New Granada, soon, however, to be driven back and forced to take shelter in Jamaica by the superior strength of Morillo, the Spanish general, who arrived with a formidable army in 1815. In 1816 Bolivar again showed himself in the field at the head of his famous liberating army, which, crossing over from Trinidad, and gaining reinforcements at every step, planted freedom, such as it was, all along the northern parts of South America, in which the new republic of Colombia was founded under his presidency, in the neighbouring district of New Granada, and down to the La Plata province, where he established the republic of Bolivia, so named in his honour. With these patriotic labours he was busied upon land, while Lord Cochrane was securing the independence of the Spanish colonies by his brave warfare on the sea.
As the cause of liberty progressed in South America, it became apparent that it had poor chance of permanence, while the revolutionists were unable to cope with the Spaniards in naval strife or to wrest from Spain her strongholds on the coast. This was especially the case with the maritime provinces of Chili and Peru. Peru, held firmly by the army garrisoned in Lima, to which Callao served as an almost impregnable port, had been unable to share in the contest waged on the other side of the Andes; and Chili, though strong enough to declare its independence, was too weak to maintain it without foreign aid.
The Chilian struggle began in 1810, when the Spanish captain-general, Carrasco, was deposed, and a native government set up under Count de la Conquista. By this government the sovereignty of Spain was still recognised, although various reforms were adopted which Spain could not be expected to endorse. Accordingly, in April, 1811, an attempt was made by the Spanish soldiers to overturn the new order of things. The result was that, after brief fighting, the revolutionists triumphed, and the yoke of Spain was thrown off.
But the independence of Chili, thus easily begun, was not easily continued. Three brothers, Jose Miguel, Juan Jose, and Luis Carreras, and their sister, styled the Anne Boleyn of Chili, determined to pervert the public weal to their own aggrandisement. Winning their way into popularity, they overturned the national congress that had been established in June, and in December set up a new junta, with Jose Miguel Carrera at its head. A dismal period of misrule ensued, which encouraged the Spanish generals, Pareja and Sanchez, to attempt the reconquest of Chili in 1813. Pareja and Sanchez were successfully resisted, and a better man, General Bernardo O'Higgins, the republican son of an Irishman who had been Viceroy of Peru, was put at the head of affairs. He succeeded to the command of the Chilian army in November, 1813, when a fresh attack from the Spaniards was expected. At first his good soldiership was successful. The enemy, having come almost to the gates of Santiago, was forced to retire in May, 1814; and the Chilian cause might have continued to prosper under O'Higgins, had not the Carreras contrived, in hopes of reinstating themselves in power, to divide the republican interests, and so, while encouraging renewed invasion by the Spaniards from Lima, make their resistance more difficult. Wisely deeming it right to set aside every other consideration than the necessity of saving Chili from the danger pressing upon it from without, O'Higgins effected a junction with the Carreras, hoping thus to bring the whole force of the republic against the royalist army, larger than its predecessors, which was marching towards Santiago and Valparaiso. Had his magnanimous proposals been properly acted upon, the issue might have been very different. But the Carreras, even in the most urgent hour of danger, could not forget their private ambitions. Holding aloof with their part of the army, they allowed O'Higgins and his force of nine hundred to be defeated by four thousand royalists under General Osorio, in the preliminary fight which took place at the end of September. They were guilty of like treachery during the great battle of the 1st of October. On that day the royalists entered Rancagua, the town in which O'Higgins and his little band had taken shelter. They were fiercely resisted, and the fighting lasted through thirty-six hours. So brave was the conduct of the patriots that the Spanish general was, after some hours' contest, on the point of retreating. He saw that he would have no chance of success, had the Carreras brought up their troops, as was expected by both sides of the combatants. But the Carreras, short-sighted in their selfishness, and nothing loth that O'Higgins should be defeated, still held aloof. Thereupon the Spaniards took heart, and made one more desperate effort. With hatchets and swords they forced their way, inch by inch and hour by hour, into the centre of the town. There, in an open square, O'Higgins, with two hundred men—all the remnant of his little army—made a last resistance. When only a few dozen of his soldiers were left alive, and when he himself was seriously wounded, he determined, not to surrender, but to end the battle. The residue of the patriots dashed through the town, cutting a road through the astonished crowd of their opponents, and effected a retreat in which those opponents, though more than twenty times as numerous, durst not pursue them.
That memorable battle of Rancagua caused throughout the American continent, and, across the Atlantic, through Europe, a thrill of sympathy for the Chilian war of independence. But its immediate effects were most disastrous. The Carreras, too selfish to fight before, were now too cowardly. They and their followers fled. O'Higgins had barely soldiers enough left to serve as a weak escort to the fourteen hundred old men, women, and children who crossed the Andes with him on foot, to pass two years and a half in voluntary exile at Mendoza.
During those two years and a half the Spaniards were masters in Santiago, and Chili was once more a Spanish province, in which the inhabitants were punished terribly in confiscations, imprisonments, and executions for their recent defection. Deliverance, however, was at hand. General San Martin, through whom chiefly La Plata had achieved its freedom, gave assistance to O'Higgins and the Chilian patriots. The main body of the Spanish army, numbering about five thousand, had been stationed on the heights of Chacabuco, whence Santiago, Valparaiso, and the other leading towns of Chili were overawed. On the 12th of February, 1817, San Martin and O'Higgins, with a force nearly as large, surprised this garrison, and, with excellent strategy and very little loss of life, to the patriots at any rate, it was entirely subdued. Santiago was entered in triumph on the 14th of February, and a few weeks served for the entire dispersion of the royalist forces. The supreme directorship of the renovated republic was offered to San Martin. On his declining the honour, it was assigned, to the satisfaction of all parties, to O'Higgins.
The new dictator and the wisest of his counsellors, however, were not satisfied with the temporary advantage that they had achieved. They knew that armies would continue to come down from Peru, the defeat of which, even if that could be relied upon, would waste all the resources of the republic. They knew, too, that the Spanish war-ships which supplied Peru with troops and ammunition from home, passing the Chilian coast on their way, would seriously hinder the commerce on which the young state had to depend for its development, even if they did not destroy that commerce at its starting-point by seizing Valparaiso and the other ports. Therefore they resolved to seek for efficient help from Europe. With that end Don Jose Alvarez, a high-minded patriot, who had done much good service to Chili in previous years, was immediately sent to Europe, commissioned to borrow money, to build or buy warships, and in all the ways in his power to enlist the sympathies of the English people in the republican cause. In the last of these projects, at any rate, he succeeded beyond all reasonable expectation.
Beaching London in April, 1817, Alvarez was welcomed by many friends of South American freedom—Sir Francis Burdett, Sir James Mackintosh, Mr. Henry Brougham, and Mr. Edward Ellice among the number. Lord Cochrane was just then out of London, fighting his amusing battle with the sheriffs and bailiffs of Hampshire; but as soon as that business was over he took foremost place among the friends of Don Alvarez and the Chilian cause which he represented. With a message to him, indeed, Alvarez was specially commissioned. He was invited by the Chilian Government to undertake the organization and command of an improved naval force, and so, by exercise of the prowess which he had displayed in the Mediterranean and elsewhere, to render invaluable service to the young republic.
He promptly accepted the invitation, being induced thereto by many sufficient reasons. Sick at heart, as we have seen, under the cruel treatment to which for so many years he had been subjected by his enemies in power, he saw here an opportunity of, at the same time, escaping from his persecutors, returning to active work in a profession very dear to him, and giving efficient aid to a noble enterprise.
CHAPTER VII.
LORD COCHRANE'S VOYAGE TO CHILI.—HIS RECEPTION AT VALPARAISO AND SANTIAGO.—THE DISORGANIZATION OF THE CHILIAN FLEET.—FIRST SIGNS OF DISAFFECTION.—THE NAVAL FORCES OF THE CHILIANS AND THE SPANIARDS.—LORD COCHRANE'S FIRST EXPEDITION TO PERU.—HIS ATTACK ON CALLAO.—"DRAKE THE DRAGON" AND "COCHRANE THE DEVIL."—LORD COCHRANE'S SUCCESSES IN OVERAWING THE SPANIARDS, IN TREASURE-TAKING, AND IN ENCOURAGEMENT OF THE PERUVIANS TO JOIN IN THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.—HIS PLAN FOE ANOTHER ATTACK ON CALLAO.—HIS DIFFICULTIES IN EQUIPPING THE EXPEDITION.—THE FAILURE OF THE ATTEMPT.—HIS PLAN FOR STORMING VALDIVIA.—ITS SUCCESSFUL ACCOMPLISHMENT.
[1818-1820.]
Having accepted, in May, 1817, the offer conveyed to him by the Chilian Government through Don Jose Alvarez, Lord Cochrane's departure from England was delayed for more than a year. This was chiefly on account of the war-steamer, the Rising Star, which it was arranged to build and equip in London under his superintendence. But the work proceeded so slowly, in consequence of the difficulty experienced by Alvarez in raising the requisite funds, that, at last, Lord Cochrane, being urgently needed in South America, where the Spaniards were steadily gaining ground, was requested to leave the superintendence of the Rising Star in other hands, and to cross the Atlantic without her.
Accompanied by Lady Cochrane and his two children, he went first from Rye to Boulogne, and there, on the 15th of August, 1818, embarked in the Rose, a merchantman which had formerly been a warsloop. The long voyage was uninteresting until Cape Horn was reached. There, and in passing along the rugged coast-line of Tierra del Fuego, Lord Cochrane was struck by its wild scenery. He watched the lazy penguins that crowded on the rocks, among evergreens that showed brightly amid the imposing mass of snow, and caught with hooks the lazier sea-pigeons that skimmed the heavy waves and hovered round the bulwarks and got entangled among the rigging of the Rose. He shot several of the huge albatrosses that floated fearlessly over the deck, but was not successful in his efforts to catch the fish that were seen coming to the surface of the troubled sea. The sea was made so boisterous by rain and snow, and such a stiff wind blew from the west, that for two or three days the Rose could not double the Cape. She was forced to tack towards the south until a favourable gale set in, which carried her safely to Valparaiso.
Valparaiso was reached on the 28th of November, after ten weeks passed on shipboard. There and at Santiago, the seat of government, to which he proceeded as soon as the congratulations of his new friends would allow him, Lord Cochrane was heartily welcomed. So profuse and prolonged were the entertainments in his favour—splendid dinners, at which zealous patriots tendered their hearty compliments, being followed by yet more splendid balls, at which handsome women showed their gratitude in smiles, and eagerly sought the honour of being led by him through the dances which were their chief delight—that he had to remind his guests that he had come to Chili not to feast but to fight.