Chapter XIV

1833.

The overland route to India--The Government and Lieutenant
Waghorn--Police magistrate and the press--Cobbett and the British
Museum--Prevalence of influenza--"National Convention"
riot--Policeman killed--The coroner and the jury--Adulteration of
tea.

We saw how, in 1832, the East India Company refused to accelerate communication with India by means of steam vessels. I have now to record the earliest efforts of Lieutenant Waghorn, in his famed overland route to India, which, however, did not become an accomplished fact until October, 1845. The _Times_, February 6th, thus comments on the conduct of Earl Grey's ministry in this matter--

"It will hardly be credited that Mr. Waghorn, who is on the point
of leaving England, to carry personally into effect one of the
most important enterprises in which any man has ever yet
engaged--namely, the shortening by one half the time of our
communications with India--has been refused, by Sir James Graham,
a commission as Lieutenant in the Navy, a rank to which he is
fairly entitled from his period of service, and which is most
material to his success. The Board of Control, the Admiralty,
nay, the whole of the Government, profess the desire to have this
great project fully brought to bear; they admit Mr. Waghorn's
qualifications, attested by nearly the whole mercantile community
of India, for the undertaking; they are relieved, through his and
their means, of all expense or thought or trouble about the
success of it; the only thing asked is a Lieutenant's
commission, simply because Mr. Waghorn is aware of the far
greater attention which the rank of a British officer will
procure him from the Pacha of Egypt, and would willingly, to
obtain it, relinquish the pay of that rank, and yet it is refused
by those to whom his labours, if successful, must prove of
incalculable benefit!"

Another little instance of prejudice, which broader thinking has rendered impossible, nowadays, is given in the _Times_, March 21st--

"MARYLEBONE OFFICE.

"Yesterday morning, just as the business had commenced, a case of
trivial importance was called on, when at the moment the writer
came into the Justice Room, and was approaching the desk usually
appropriated for reporters, which had been previously occupied by
two policemen, who, knowing the arduous duties which those
connected with the press had to perform, immediately gave way,
when the following colloquy ensued--

"Mr. Rawlinson (to the policeman): Why do you give way to that
man--you have a better right to be here than he has? Then,
extending his voice, he said to the reporter, I wish you would
not come here so often, sir.

"Reporter: 'I believe, sir, that police offices are, or at least
ought to be, open to the public; and, as I am employed by the
_Times_ newspaper to report the proceedings at this office, I
humbly submit that I have as much right to stand here for the
information of the public in general as any policeman who may be
a witness in the case before you.'

"Mr. Rawlinson: The office is too full of reporters; I beg, sir,
that you will give way to the witness.

"Reporter: Most certainly, sir; but, with all due deference, I
beg to submit that in a public office reporters are entitled to
admission.

"Mr. Rawlinson (angrily): Perhaps I may let you know to the
contrary.

"Here the conversation dropped."

Yet one more case of ignorance and prejudice--which occurred in the House of Commons, on March 25th, when the report of the Committee of Supply was brought up. On the question that the House do agree with the Committee in the resolution that a sum not exceeding £16,884 be granted to his Majesty for the expenses of the establishment of the British Museum--

"Mr. Cobbett rose to object to the resolution. He saw no reason
why the sum of £16,000 should be paid out of the general taxes of
the country for the sake of supporting the British Museum. In
former times, when Mr. Bankes superintended the expenditure of
the British Museum, the grant to it did not exceed £10,000. Then
he thought the grant unjust, and now he could not imagine why, in
the present distressed condition of the country, it should be
raised to £16,000: for when was the British Museum of the
slightest use to the country at large? Last year there was £1000
paid for a collection of insects; what use could that collection
be of to the weavers of Lancashire, or to the farmers and
tradesmen of distant parts of the country? The plain fact was
that the British Museum was of no use at all! It was a place to
which curious persons went to entertain themselves, by gratifying
their curiosity, and in which the rich were accustomed to lounge
away their time at the expense of their poorer countrymen. For
his own part, he did not know where the British Museum was (much
laughter), and was not acquainted with its contents. He thought
that this sum of £16,000, granted by the Committee, was just
£16,000 thrown away for the gratification of a set of loungers,
who had first taken care to get enough out of the taxes to enable
them to lounge away the rest of their lives in complete idleness.
He also objected to this grant because there was £10,000 of it,
and more, paid away in salaries, and to whom? If a list of the
parties to whom those salaries were paid were laid upon the table
of the House--and he would undertake to say that it should
shortly be laid there--it would be found that they were paid away
to the aristocracy and their dependents. He would move for a
list of those who received them." (Several voices: "The list is
published already.") "Who, he should like to know, were the maids
who swept out the rooms of the British Museum? Doubtless they
were the daughters of the head officers of the establishment. He
would say that a more scandalous job than this grant never
disgraced this Government, and that was saying a great deal.
(Laughter.) He should conclude by moving that this report be
recommitted."

Of course no one was on his side, and the grant was passed.

From April to July this year influenza was very prevalent, sparing neither rank, age, nor sex. It was not a new disease, for it was known in 1580, when it preceded the plague; in 1658, it was followed by a fatal epidemic fever; in 1743 by the plague; in 1762 by violent dysentery; in 1813, by ophthalmia and dysentery, and in 1831 by the cholera. The _Medical Gazette_, of May 5th, says--

"As to the rest, so far as regards the metropolis, the influenza
has been plague enough, without looking for another. It has been
a hundred-fold more prevalent than cholera was, and we are
inclined to believe has proved fatal, within the last fortnight,
to a greater number of persons than that disease carried off in
London within an equal period. Certainly this holds good with
respect to the upper and middle classes of society, among whom a
large number of aged persons have fallen victims to it. The
increased mortality of the metropolis during the present
epidemic, is strikingly exemplified by the weekly account of
burials. That ending April 16th exhibits an increase over the
preceding of 266; that ending April 23rd, another increase upon
the above of 209; that of May 1st, a further increase of 165;
making the entire increase in the number of funerals last week
equal to 640; and this, too, within the limits of the Bills of
Mortality. The epidemic is now, however, rapidly on the decline,
though a considerable number of relapses have occurred, and many
continue to linger under its effects."

It spread both to Ireland and Scotland, but ceased about July.

On April 30th, an attempt to repeal the House and Window Tax was made, but was not successful. The window tax was especially obnoxious, as it led to keeping out light and fresh air from rooms that sadly needed both, and it lingered on until July 24, 1851, when it was repealed by