Chapter XXI: “the Nation Never Can Be Itself Again Without a Reform.”

There is reason to believe that Mr. Cobbett now began seriously to entertain the idea of getting into Parliament. Beyond, however, an address to the electors of Hampshire, in the autumn of 1812, no active step was yet taken. Mr. George Rose was all-powerful in the county, the constituency being thus practically in ministerial hands. One appearance on the nomination-day was enough to satisfy Mr. Cobbett of the hopelessness of a contest.

His return to Botley revealed one great change in sentiment; the parsons were dead against him. This was undeserved, as Cobbett had always been a good, quiet churchman; had written vigorously in support of tithes, and the prior claim to them of the clergy and the poor, as against the Howards, the Russells, and the Greys; and had had many friends amongst the clergy. This new alienation may, however, be due to a circumstance which occurred just before Cobbett’s release;--it was certainly so in one case.

Mr. Daniel Eaton, a small bookseller, and an old offender against established opinion, had recently stood in the pillory for an hour,--that being part of his punishment for selling Paine’s “Age of Reason.” There was much public sympathy with him, the populace actually trying to serve him with “refreshments.” Cobbett had formed pretty strong opinions concerning this degrading punishment, but very much stronger ones concerning the Attorney-General as a prosecutor; and that learned gentleman having foreboded the “consequences, dreadful in the extreme,” which must follow if Paine’s religious principles were suffered to take root, Mr. Cobbett suggested that there would be no better way of averting these consequences than by an answer to the book. “And have we 20,000 clergymen, and will no one of them attempt to give us this answer?” he said. He would call upon his own spiritual pastor, the Rector of Botley, the Rev. Richard Baker.

Mr. Baker consented to undertake the task, but almost immediately withdrew the offer; upon which, Mr. Cobbett reminded him of his ordination vows, and generally played with him, in his own manner, making the poor parson look rather ridiculous.

So, upon his return home, Mr. Cobbett was not welcomed by his spiritual adviser; who even went so far as to refuse the keys of the belfry to those persons who, just then, were so desirous of adding all they could to the clamour of rejoicing.

The Rev. Mr. Baker is a character, in his way. There are some sad stories of him in Cobbett’s _Register_, which the reader may discover, if his tastes lie in that direction. How he was horsewhipped in the public street,--how he actually professed disbelief in Revelation, while declining to meet the consequences of a public admission of the same,--how he cheated at market, and so on.[1]

There were many such characters in the Church in those deadened days, who, when they entered into the lively election contests of the time, would lead the way of violence. Your political parson could be a famous “rough,” when opportunity served.

So Mr. Cobbett had made another set of enemies--the very set, too, who, if they had given themselves a moment’s opportunity for consideration, would have discovered that he, of all public men, was the one who could serve their cause the best. Instead of that, numbers of the clergy started up as anti-Cobbettites, writing useless tracts on “disaffection,” or meeting him at public gatherings, and trying to shout him down. And this sort of thing lasted as long as Cobbett lived; the clergy never made friends with him again; there were far too many idle shepherds, who thought their interest must suffer if a misguided populace had all that it asked; and who, consequently, resisted Reform with all their might and main.

* * * * *

The country squires were dreading, too, the possible effects of Mr. Cobbett’s vigorous writings.

His influence amongst the middle-classes was increasing; and the artisans and labourers were beginning to club together to buy the _Register_; readers were more numerous than ever.[2] But the landed interest could not, or would not, understand him. The farmer could not see the identity of interest which properly existed between himself and his labourers; and the man who preached this theme was, of course, not to be trusted when dealing with other topics. He told them that ruin was impending; that, immediately upon a cessation of the war, prices would go down, and the consequences would be disastrous. There was no chance of escape, but by immediate Reform, by which means there should be a searching reduction in the public expenditure. The poor-rates were now nearly eight millions. Government annuitants were swelling their numbers with every year of war; dignitaries of state had higher salaries, and courtiers larger pensions; army-contractors and stock-jobbers were swallowing up the wealth of the country, and elbowing out the squires.

So, when the Corn Bill was proposed, Mr. Cobbett was standing alone again, or very nearly alone.[3] In vain did he point out that it would tend to keep up the high price of food, which was already driving the able-bodied out of the country; that the principal reason for keeping up high prices was, that the land might continue to pay the exorbitant taxes, and so continue to support a multitude of idlers. The Corn Bill became law; peace was signed, but plenty came not along with it; and the farmers straightway fell to pieces, dragging all the industry of the country along with them.

During these three or four years (1812-1816), there was more revolution in personal property in England, than there had been seen, in the same space of time, since the Restoration. The terrible load which weighed upon the people may be judged of by the fact that Cobbett was paying, the year after the war, several hundred pounds in direct and indirect taxes. It is not difficult, then, to understand how intolerable would be the burden upon the land, for people whose only resource was the land; and all the more so, that inflated prosperity had engendered improvidence. Tea, coffee, wine, spirits, and other exciseable articles had taken the place of beer on the tables of the farmers; their wives and daughters had found sofas, carpets, and parlour-bells necessary to existence. A generation had grown up which must needs _send_ its butter and eggs to market, instead of carrying them; silk stockings had usurped those of worsted; the fashions were finding their way into the farm-houses. So, in a little while, the poor farmers were breaking stones on the highway by hundreds.

But, if the LAND did not, as yet, understand Mr. Cobbett, the WORKSHOP did. Very soon after he came out of prison, he drew the attention of his readers to the ominous disturbance at Nottingham, on the part of the Luddites. The change which had come over the people--that they should break machinery, disturb the peace, and refuse to sing “God save the King”--was ominous indeed. But how did this come to pass? Not all at once: these things (he pointed out) had been growing up by degrees. Disloyalty and misgovernment ever went hand in hand. The people were beginning to see that the governing classes were occupied, as much as any traders, in looking exclusively after their own interests, and the interests of their adherents.

For an effectual remedy, then, there could only be a reform in the Representation of the people. No innovation: but Reform. No republicanism: but the ancient Constitution. “The nation never can be itself again without a Reform,” was Cobbett’s repeated cry,--echoed, at last, by millions of people.[4]

The brave, the undaunted Lord Cochrane was one of Mr. Cobbett’s coadjutors. They had been near neighbours for many years past; and when the gallant sailor was ashore, many had been the sports which they had seen together. Cochrane’s candidature for Westminster always had the valuable support of the _Register_; and, when the foul charge was got up against him (purely from political motives) which hung like a nightmare over the rest of his long life, there was no support of his cause equal to the pages of that intrepid journal. So the two men kept together--had long and earnest conferences over the miserable and degraded condition of their country; and worked and waited for the day that must surely come after all this suffering. The nation was now entering upon the most disgraceful period of its history: with a disreputable “first gent” in the chief seat; the pretenders to statesmanship divided into two rival factions, concerning which it can only be said that one was in place and had control over the country’s resources, and the other was out of place; and the mass of the people in a condition, comparable only to that presented by the inhabitants of a hive of bees, in autumn, when their winter store passes into the hands of other than the providers.

* * * * *

One day, in September, 1816, after a spring and summer of much trial, during which the country was kept alarmed by acts of violence; mills, frames, and threshing-machines being destroyed, and ricks of corn laid hands on, either by fire or thieves; Cobbett had been talking to his neighbour on these burning topics. They both agreed that, if the people could but be enabled to see the matter in its true light, there would be “an end to all such acts of violence, at once; and of course, to the ignominious deaths of fathers and sons, and the miseries of wives, children, and parents, produced in the end by these acts of violence.” Lord Cochrane’s suggestion was, that it was in the power of Mr. Cobbett to effect this purpose, by writing an essay upon the subject; and, if the price of the _Register_ could for that occasion be reduced to twopence, the desired object would be obtained.

“I said, before we parted, that this should be done. But, as
it was impossible for me to prove to the people what was _not_
the cause of their misery, without proving to them what _was_
the cause … without pointing out the _remedy_: as the remedy,
at last, came to a Reform of Parliament; and, as I still feared
that the best time was not come for urging on this great
question, I delayed, from time to time, the fulfilment of my
promise to my neighbour, who, on his part, never saw me without
pressing me hard upon the subject; and on the 2nd of November,
I wrote the No. 18, being an ‘Address to the Journeymen and
Labourers’ on the aforementioned subjects.”

There were misgivings as to the probable success of this effort: that there would be serious loss in its production, and that it would be premature; irresolution went so far as to countermand the instructions to the printer. Futile misgivings these! Before the end of the month, forty-four thousand copies had been sold of the first cheap _Register_.

And, reader, if you glance at some portions of this splendid essay, you will not wonder at the uproar that ensued; the enthusiastic reception on the part of the “lower orders;” the terror on the part of officialism and prescription; the renewed malignity of the envious press. The effect of this popularizing of the _Political Register_ was prodigious, as we shall see; and as you will understand, if all the numbers were anything like this first one.

“TO THE JOURNEYMEN AND LABOURERS OF ENGLAND, WALES, SCOTLAND,
AND IRELAND, on the cause of their present miseries; on the
measures which have produced that cause; on the remedies which
some foolish and some cruel and insolent men have proposed; and
on the line of conduct which journeymen and labourers ought
to pursue, in order to obtain effectual relief, and to assist
in promoting the tranquillity, and restoring the happiness of
their country.

“Friends and Fellow-Countrymen,--

“Whatever the pride of rank, of riches, or of scholarship, may
have induced some men to believe, or to affect to believe,
the real strength and all the resources of a country ever
have sprung, and ever must spring, from the _labour_ of its
people, and hence it is, that this nation, which is so small
in numbers, and so poor in climate and soil compared with many
others, has, for many ages, been the most powerful nation in
the world: it is the most industrious, the most laborious,
and, therefore, the most powerful. Elegant dresses, superb
furniture, stately buildings, fine roads and canals, fleet
horses and carriages, numerous and stout ships, warehouses
teeming with goods; all these, and many other objects that
fall under our view, are so many works of national wealth
and resources. But all these spring from _labour_. Without
the journeyman and the labourer none of them could exist;
without the assistance of their hands, the country would be a
wilderness, hardly worth the notice of an invader.

“As it is the labour of those who toil which makes a country
abound in resources, so it is the same class of men who must,
by their arms, secure its safety, and uphold its fame. Titles
and immense sums of money have been bestowed upon numerous
naval and military commanders. Without calling the justice
of these in question, we may assert that the victories were
obtained by you and your fathers, and brothers and sons, in
co-operation with those commanders, who, with _your_ aid, have
done great and wonderful things; but who, without that aid,
would have been as impotent as children at the breast.

“With this correct idea of your own worth in your minds, with
what indignation must you hear yourselves called the populace,
the rabble, the mob, the swinish multitude; and with what
greater indignation, if possible, must you hear the projects
of these cool, and cruel, and insolent men, who, now that you
have been, without any fault of yours, brought into a state
of misery, propose to narrow the limits of parish relief, to
prevent you from marrying in the days of your youth, or to
thrust you out to seek your bread in foreign lands, never
more to behold your parents or friends? But, suppress your
indignation, until we return to this topic, after we have
considered the _cause_ of your present misery, and the measures
which have produced that cause.

“The times in which we live are full of peril. The nation,
as described by the very creatures of the Government, is
fast advancing to that period when an important change must
take place. It is the lot of mankind, that some shall labour
with their limbs, and others with their minds; and, on all
occasions, more especially on an occasion like the present,
it is the duty of the latter to come to the assistance of
the former. We are all equally interested in the peace
and happiness of our common country. It is of the utmost
importance, that in the seeking to obtain those objects, our
endeavours should be uniform, and tend all to the same point.
Such an uniformity cannot exist without an uniformity of
sentiment as to public matters, and to produce this uniformity
is the object of this address.

“As to the cause of our present miseries, it is _the enormous
amount of the taxes_, which the Government compels us to pay
for the support of its army, its placemen, its pensioners, &c.,
and for the payment of the interest of its debt. That this is
the real cause has been a thousand times proved; and it is now
so acknowledged by the creatures of the Government themselves.
Two hundred and five of the correspondents of the Board of
Agriculture ascribe the ruin of the country to _taxation_.
Numerous writers, formerly the friends of the Pitt system, now
declare, that taxation has been the cause of our distress.
Indeed, when we compare our present state to the state of
the country previous to the wars against France, we must see
that our present misery is owing to no other cause. The taxes
then annually raised amounted to about fifteen millions: they
amounted last year to seventy millions. The nation was then
happy: it is now miserable.

* * * * *

“It has been attempted to puzzle you with this sort of
question: ‘If taxes be the cause of the people’s misery, how
comes it that they were not so miserable before the taxes were
reduced as they are now?’ Here is a fallacy, which you will be
careful to detect. I know that the taxes have been reduced,
that is to say, _nominally_ reduced, but not so in fact; on the
contrary, they have in reality been greatly augmented. This has
been done by _the sleight of hand_ of paper-money. Suppose,
for instance, that four years ago I had 100 pounds to pay in
taxes, then 130 bushels of wheat would have paid my share. If I
have _now_ seventy-five pounds to pay in taxes, it will require
190 bushels of wheat to pay my share of taxes. Consequently,
though my taxes are nominally reduced, they are, in reality,
greatly augmented. This has been done by the legerdemain of
paper-money. In 1812, the pound note was worth only thirteen
shillings in silver. It is now worth twenty shillings.
Therefore, when we now pay a pound note to the tax-gatherer,
we really pay him twenty shillings, where we before paid him
thirteen shillings; and the fund-holders who lent pound notes
worth thirteen shillings each, are now paid their interest in
pounds worth twenty shillings each. And the thing is come to
what Sir Francis Burdett told the parliament it would come to.
He told them, in 1811, that if they ever attempted to pay the
interest of their debt in gold and silver, or in paper-money
equal in value to gold and silver, the farmers and tradesmen
must be ruined, and the journeymen and labourers reduced to the
last stage of misery.

“Thus, then, it is clear that it is the weight of the taxes,
under which you are sinking, which has already pressed so many
of you down into the state of paupers, and which now threatens
to deprive many of you of your existence. We next come to
consider what have been _the causes_ of this weight of taxes.
Here we must go back a little in our history; and you will soon
see that this intolerable weight has all proceeded from _the
want of a parliamentary Reform_.

“In the year 1764, soon after the present king came to the
throne, the annual interest of the debt amounted to about five
millions, and the whole of the taxes to about nine millions.
But, soon after this, a war was entered on to compel the
Americans to submit to be taxed by the parliament, _without
being represented in that parliament_. The Americans triumphed,
and, after the war was over, the annual interest of the debt
amounted to about nine millions, and the whole of the taxes to
about fifteen millions. This was our situation when the French
people began their Revolution. The French people had so long
been the slaves of a despotic Government, that the friends of
freedom in England rejoiced at their emancipation. The cause
of _reform_, which had never ceased to have supporters in
England for a great many years, now acquired new life, and the
Reformers urged the parliament to _grant reform_, instead of
going to war against the people of France. The Reformers said:
‘Give the nation _reform_, and you need fear no _revolution_.’
The parliament, instead of listening to the Reformers, crushed
them, and went to war against the people of France; and the
consequence of these wars is, that the annual interest of the
debt now amounts to forty-five millions, and the whole of
the taxes, during each of the last several years, to seventy
millions. So that these wars have added thirty-six millions a
year to the interest of the debt, and fifty-five millions a
year to the amount of the whole of the taxes! This is the price
that we have paid for having checked (for it is only _checked_)
the progress of liberty in France; for having forced upon that
people the family of Bourbon, and for having enabled another
branch of that same family to restore the bloody Inquisition
which Napoleon had put down.”

After a graphic sketch of the oppressions and the struggles, which obtained in France, and which produced the great Revolution, the writer proceeds:--

“It seems, at first sight, very strange that the Government
should not have taken warning in time. But it had so long
been in the habit of _despising the people_, that its mind
was incapable of entertaining any notion of danger from the
oppressions heaped upon them. It was surrounded with panders
and parasites, who told it nothing but flattering falsehoods;
and it saw itself supported by 250,000 bayonets, which it
thought irresistible.… And if you ask me how the ministers, and
the noblesse, and the priesthood, who generally know pretty
well how to take care of themselves; if you ask me how it came
to pass that they did not _take warning in time_, I answer,
that they _did_ take warning, but that, seeing that the change
which was coming would deprive them of a great part of their
power and emoluments, they resolved to _resist the change_, and
to destroy the country, if possible, rather than not have all
its wealth and power to themselves.

* * * * *

“You have been represented by the _Times_ newspaper, by the
_Courier_, by the _Morning Post_, by the _Morning Herald_,
and others, as the Scum of Society. They say that you have no
business at public meetings; that you are rabble, and that you
pay no taxes. These insolent hirelings, who wallow in wealth,
would not be able to put their abuse of you in print, were
it not for your labour. You create all that is an object of
taxation; for, even the land itself would be good for nothing
without your labour. But are you _not_ taxed? Do you pay no
taxes? One of the correspondents of the Board of Agriculture
has said that care has been taken to lay as little tax as
possible on the articles used by you. One would wonder how a
man could be found impudent enough to put an assertion like
this upon paper. But the people of this country have so long
been insulted by such men, that the insolence of the latter
knows no bounds.

“The tax-gatherers do not, indeed, come to you and demand
money of you; but there are few articles which you use, in the
purchase of which you do not pay a tax. On your shoes, salt,
beer, malt, hops, tea, sugar, candles, soap, paper, coffee,
spirits, glass of your windows, bricks and tiles, tobacco. On
all these, and many other articles, you pay a tax, and even on
your loaf you pay a tax, because everything is taxed from which
the loaf proceeds. In several cases the tax amounts to more
than one-half of what you pay for the article itself; these
taxes go, in part, to support sinecure placemen and pensioners;
and the ruffians of the hired press call you the Scum of
Society, and deny that you have any right to show your faces at
any public meeting to petition for a Reform, or for the removal
of any abuse whatever! Mr. Preston, whom I quoted before, and
who is a member of parliament, and has a large estate, says
upon this subject, ‘Every family, even of the poorest labourer,
consisting of five persons, may be considered as paying in
indirect taxes, at least ten pounds a year, or more than half
his wages at seven shillings a week!’ And yet the insolent
hirelings call you the _mob_, the _rabble_, the _scum_, the
_swinish multitude_, and say that your voice is nothing; that
you have no business at public meetings; and that you are, and
ought to be, considered as nothing in the body politic! Shall
we never see the day when these men will change their tone?
Will they never cease to look upon you as brutes? I trust they
will change their tone, and that the day of the change is _at
no great distance_!

* * * * *

“With what feelings must you look upon the condition of your
country, where the increase of the people is now looked upon as
a curse! Thus, however, has it always been, in all countries,
where taxes have produced excessive misery. Our countryman, Mr.
Gibbon, in his history of the Decline and Fall of the Roman
Empire, has the following passage:--

“‘The horrid practice of murdering their new-born infants
was become every day more frequent in the provinces. It was
the effect of _distress_, and the distress was principally
occasioned by the intolerable burden of taxes, and by the
vexations as well as cruel prosecutions of the officers of the
Revenue against their insolvent debtors. The less opulent or
less industrious part of mankind, instead of rejoicing at an
increase of family, deemed it an act of paternal tenderness
to release the children from the impending miseries of a life
which they themselves were unable to support.’

“But that which took place under the base Emperor Constantine,
will not take place in England. You will not murder your
new-born infants, nor will you, to please the corrupt and the
insolent, debar yourselves from enjoyments to which you are
invited by the very first of nature’s laws. It is, however,
a disgrace to the country, that men should be found in it,
capable of putting ideas so insolent upon paper. So, then,
a young man arm-in-arm with a rosy-cheeked girl, must be a
spectacle of evil omen! What! and do they imagine that you are
thus to be _extinguished_, because some of you are now (without
any fault of yours) unable to find work? As far as you were
wanted to labour, to fight, or to pay taxes, you were welcome,
and they boasted of your numbers; but now that your country has
been brought into a state of misery, these corrupt and insolent
men are busied with schemes for getting rid of you. Just as if
you had not as good a right to live, and to love, and to marry
as they have! They do not purpose--far from it--to check the
breeding of sinecure placemen and pensioners, who are supported
in part by the taxes which you help to pay. They say not a word
about the _whole families_ who are upon the pension list. In
many cases, there are sums granted in trust for the children of
such a lord or such a lady. And while labourers and journeymen,
who have large families too, are actually paying taxes for the
support of these lords’ and ladies’ children, these cruel and
insolent men propose that they shall have no relief, and their
having children ought to be _checked_! To such a subject no
words can do justice. You will feel as you ought to feel; and
to the effect of your feelings I leave these cruel and insolent
men.”

The following paragraph is against the republicans, of which there were many advocates, born of the troublous times:--

“I know of no enemy of reform, and of the happiness of the
country, so great as that man who would persuade you that we
possess _nothing good_, and that all must be torn to pieces.
There is no principle, no precedent, no regulation (except
as to mere matter of detail), favourable to freedom, which
is not to be found in the laws of England or in the example
of our ancestors. Therefore, I say, we may ask for, and we
want, _nothing new_. We have great constitutional laws and
principles, to which we are immovably attached. We want great
_alteration_, but we want nothing new. Alteration, modification
to suit the times and circumstances; but the great principles
ought to be, and must be, the same, or else confusion will
follow. It was the misfortune of the French people, that they
had no great and settled principles to refer to in their laws
or history. They sallied forth and inflicted vengeance on their
oppressors; but, for want of settled principles to which to
refer, they fell into confusion; they massacred each other;
they next flew to a military chief to protect them even against
themselves; and the result has been what we too well know.
Let us, therefore, congratulate ourselves, that we have great
constitutional principles and laws, to which we can refer, and
to which we are attached.

* * * * *

When journeymen find their wages reduced, they should take
time to _reflect on the real cause_ before they fly upon their
employers, who are, in many cases, in as great, or greater,
distress than themselves. How many of these employers have, of
late, gone to jail for debt, and left helpless families behind
them! The employer’s trade falls off. His goods are reduced in
price. His stock loses the half of its value. He owes money. He
is ruined; and how can he continue to pay high wages? The cause
of his ruin is the _weight of the taxes_, which presses so
heavily on us all, that we lose the power of purchasing goods.
But it is certain that a great many, a very large portion,
of the farmers, tradesmen, and manufacturers, have, by their
supineness and want of public spirit, contributed towards the
bringing of this ruin upon themselves and upon you. They have
_skulked_ from their public duty. They have kept aloof from, or
opposed, all measures for a redress of grievances; and, indeed,
they still skulk, though ruin and destruction stare them in
the face.… Instead of coming forward to apply for a reduction
of those taxes which are pressing them as well as you to the
earth, what are they doing? Why, they are applying to the
Government to add to their receipts by passing _Corn Bills_;
by preventing _foreign wool_ from being imported; and many
other such silly schemes. Instead of asking for a reduction of
taxes, they are asking for the _means of paying taxes_! Instead
of asking for the abolition of sinecure places and pensions,
they pray to be enabled to continue to pay the amount of those
places and pensions! They know very well that the salaries of
the judges and of many other persons were greatly raised, some
years ago, on the ground of the rise in the price of labour and
provisions; why, then, do they not ask to have those salaries
_reduced_ now that _labour_ is reduced? Why do they not apply
to the case of the judges and others, the arguments which they
apply to you? They can talk boldly enough to you; but they are
too great cowards to talk to the Government, even in the way of
petition!

* * * * *

I have no room, nor have I any desire, to appeal to your
passions upon this occasion. I have laid before you, with all
the clearness I am master of, the causes of our misery, the
measures which have led to those causes, and I have pointed out
what appears to me to be the only remedy--namely, a reform of
the Commons’, or people’s, House of Parliament. I exhort you
to proceed in a peaceable and lawful manner; but, at the same
time, to proceed with zeal and resolution in the attainment of
this object. If the skulkers will not join you, if the ‘decent
fire-side’ gentry still keep aloof, proceed by yourselves.
Any man can draw up a petition, and any man can carry it up
to London, with instructions to deliver it into trusty hands,
to be presented whenever the House shall meet. Some further
information as to this matter in a future number. In the
meanwhile, I remain, your friend, WM. COBBETT.”

Such, then, was the clarion, which was to awaken the working-classes of England; to systematize their thoughts, and to give definiteness to their aims.

And such was, also, the stuff which was to terrify, for a little while longer, our dear old friends “Law and Order.” While the hundreds of thousands were welcoming this new gospel, were learning a practicable path for their bewildered feet: the partisans of Government were absolutely dazed, blinded, with terror; and their horror at the growth of liberal opinions (otherwise, “the floodgates of sedition”) completely disabled them from discussing domestic politics with any semblance of calmness. As for the mediocrities in power,--they had succeeded in keeping out the shifty Whigs; but here was a third party coming to the front, with claims as good as their own, and promising to acquire a force which they might withstand in vain. Ministers, in short, were alarmed; and they announced their resolve, in the words of Lord Liverpool, to pursue the “Stern path of Duty!” Lord Sidmouth (now Home Secretary), whose qualities for statesmanship no person, other than his royal patron, had been able to discover since he left the Speaker’s chair in 1802,--was at his wits’ end. And minor lights, as Mr. Wilberforce, sighed and groaned over so much blasphemy as was rife, Cobbett’s being “the most pernicious of all.”

The course of the Stern Path, as regards the subject of these pages, must be described in another chapter. Meanwhile, the immediate consequences of the publication of the first cheap _Register_ remain to be noted.

All sorts of means were taken to hinder the circulation of the now ubiquitous journal. Booksellers who sold the _Register_ were threatened with loss of custom; publicans were threatened with the withdrawal of their licences; hawkers and pedlars were threatened with the police.

Cheap opposition pamphlets were started.[5] The newspapers, which had been pretty quiet concerning Mr. Cobbett’s merits, ever since 1812, now began again:[6] the _New Times_ coming out with a specially grand affair, headed “COBBETT against COBBETT,” which was subsequently issued as a broadside.

And a very serious charge did they bring against this “_convicted libeller_,” this “_firebrand_,” this “_brutal ruffian_,” this “_convicted incendiary_,” this “_hoary miscreant_,” and his “_ferocious journal_.”[7] In what, then, had he manifested this brutality,--this ferocity? By lacerating the naked back of another of his labourers? Running off with another man’s wife? Setting fire to barns and ricks? Defrauding the stock-exchange?

None, none of these things. The criminal was proved, by overwhelming evidence,--“out of his own mouth” indeed--to have formerly denounced Reform!!! Sad fellow!

FOOTNOTES

[1] This reverend gentleman’s memory is still green, down at Botley. T---- (_æt._) 81 will tell you of his being horsewhipped by the parish doctor; and of his being called by Mr. Cobbett an abominable liar, at which the assembled villagers cheered. Baker wanted the parish clerk to thrash his wife for not going to church, and showed him the size of stick with which he might legally do it. He was forthwith told to try it on Mrs. Baker first. H---- (_æt._) 78 will call to mind the doctor and the parson “having sparring-bouts together in the vestry.” This man tells a good story about Cobbett, who wanted his people to work, on some special occasion, on a Sunday, agreeing beforehand to pay them double. The day’s work being done, a grand dinner was provided, during which C. went round the table and put everybody’s money in front of him. This being done, he said, “Now, if you do go to h---- for working on a Sunday, don’t go and say you ben’t paid!”

[2] News from the provinces, in February, 1814:--

“Hampshire.--Mr. Cobbett continues to write his celebrated _Political Register_ from his estate at Botley, in this county, uniting in his own person, in their completest sense, the character of agriculturist, patriot, and man of letters. Some of his late numbers, on the novel positions and pretensions of the belligerent powers, are distinguished above all his former writings for their masculine eloquence, power of reasoning, and courageous delineation of truth.”--_Monthly Magazine_, xxxvii. 93.

[3] Cobbett got up a requisition for a county meeting, but the High Sheriff refused to entertain the plan. Being thus foiled, he actually sent up a petition to the House of Lords, praying them not to pass any law to prohibit or restrain the importation of corn. Earl Stanhope was prepared to present the petition, but received it too late.

[4] “At this time [1816] the writings of William Cobbett suddenly became of great authority; they were read on nearly every cottage hearth in the manufacturing districts of South Lancashire, in those of Leicester, Derby, and Nottingham; also in many of the Scotch manufacturing towns. Their influence was speedily visible; he directed his readers to the true cause of their sufferings--misgovernment; and to its proper corrective--Parliamentary reform. Riots soon became scarce, and from that time they have never obtained their ancient vogue with the labourers of this country.… Instead of riots and destruction of property, Hampden clubs were now established in many of our large towns and the villages and districts around them. Cobbett’s books were printed in a cheap form; the labourers read them, and thenceforward became deliberate and systematic in their proceedings.”--Samuel Bamford: “Passages in the Life of a Radical” (London, 1844).

[5] _E.g._, “The Friend of the People,” price threepence, “occasionally” (Chapple, Pall Mall). Of this there were five “occasions.”

“Anti-Cobbett; or, The Weekly Patriotic Register” (from the _New Times_), which appeared about eight times.

“The Detector; an Occasional Paper” (Hatchard). We cannot “detect” the existence of more than four such papers.

These were all on similar lines: extracts from, and references to, the days of Porcupine, spiced with transparent falsehood.

[6] “We believe it is now some five or six years since the _Times_ journal put down the work entitled _Cobbett’s Weekly Register_, and sunk its author into obscurity and contempt.… Since that time we had thought that his journal had wholly dropped to the ground, some other writers, such as those of the _Independent Whig_ and _Examiner_, who were more virulent and impudent than himself, having sprung up. We learned, however, lately, that Cobbett’s _Register_ was still in existence, having crept on in obscurity for a series of years.”--_Times_, Nov. 14, 1816.

[7] For the context, whence these choice epithets are extracted, _vide_ _Quarterly Review_, 1816-17, _passim_.