Two prose writers of the same epoch, Southey and Bentham, claim special notice, though Southey may also be numbered among the poets. Having established himself close to Keswick in 1804, he prosecuted a literary career with the most untiring industry until his mental faculties at last failed him some thirty-six years later. During this period he produced above a hundred volumes in poetry and prose, besides numerous scattered articles and other papers. Most of these were of merely ephemeral interest, but the Life of Nelson, published in 1813, may be said to have set a standard of simplicity, purity, and dignity in English prose which has been of permanent value. Bentham's style, on the contrary, was so wanting in beauty and perspicuity that one at least of his chief works is best known to English readers in the admirable French paraphrase of his friend Dumont. This is his famous Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, in which the doctrines of the utilitarian philosophy are rigorously applied to jurisprudence and the regulation of human conduct. Several of his numerous treatises had been planned, and others actually composed, before the end of the eighteenth century, but his practical influence, ultimately so great, first made itself felt in the early part of the nineteenth century. This influence may be compared within the sphere of social reform to that of Adam Smith within the sphere of economy. Many amendments of the law, an improved system of prison discipline, and even the reform of the poor law, may be directly traced to his counsels, and it was he who inspired the leading radicals when radicalism was not so much a destructive creed as a protest against real and gross abuses.

[Pageheading: MALTHUS.]

Perhaps, next to Bentham, no writer of this period influenced educated opinion so powerfully as Malthus, whose Essay on Population, first published anonymously in 1798, attracted comparatively little attention until 1803, when it was republished in a maturer form. No work has ever been more persistently misrepresented. While he shows that population, if unchecked, will surely increase in a ratio far outstripping any possible increase in the means of subsistence, he also shows, by elaborate proofs, that it will inevitably be checked by vice and misery, whether or not they are aided by moral restraint. Later experience has done little to weaken his reasoning, but it has proved that "moral restraint" (in the most general sense) operates more widely than he ventured to expect, and that larger tracts of the earth's surface than he recognised could be brought under profitable cultivation. With these modifications, his theory holds the field, and the people of Great Britain only escape starvation by ever-growing importations of grain from countries whose production—for the present—exceeds their consumption.

Several other writers of eminence, such as Sheridan and Paley, who lived in the latter days of George III. are more properly to be regarded as survivors of eighteenth century literature. Horne Tooke was returned for Old Sarum in 1801, and enjoyed a reputation in society until his death in 1812, but his old-fashioned radicalism had long since been superseded by a newer creed. Dugald Stewart continued to lecture on moral philosophy until 1809, and was fortunate in numbering among his pupils Palmerston, Lansdowne, and Russell. A younger student of philosophy was Richard Whately, who was born in 1787, and elected to a fellowship at Oriel College, Oxford, in 1811. He soon began to play an active part in university life, and, after being principal of St. Alban Hall, was removed to the archbishopric of Dublin in 1831. Though not a great philosopher, he was an acute logician, and his Logic, published in 1826, entitled him to a high place among the thinkers of his generation. But it was not merely as a teacher and writer that Whately promoted the cause of philosophy in Oxford. He was one of the leaders in that organisation of studies which made philosophy one of the principal studies, if not the principal study, of the abler students in that university, and gave elementary logic a place in the ordinary "pass-man's" curriculum.

The best work of Maria Edgeworth and Jane Austen appeared in the early part of the nineteenth century. Maria Edgeworth's novel, Castle Rackrent, was published in 1800, and rapidly followed by other tales descriptive of Irish life; four of Jane Austen's novels, Sense and Sensibility, Pride and Prejudice, Mansfield Park, and Emma, were published between 1811 and 1816, while Northanger Abbey and Persuasion appeared after her death in 1817. All her work displays a power of minute analysis of character shared by few, if any, of our other novelists. Both authors deserve gratitude not only for having inspired Scott with a new idea of novel-writing, but for having exercised a purifying influence on the moral tone of English romance.

The most typical feature of English literature in the earlier years of the nineteenth century was the extraordinary development of the periodical and newspaper press. The eighteenth century was the golden age of pamphlets. When the "governing classes" represented but a fraction of the population, mostly concentrated in London, the practical effect of such political appeals as those issued by Swift or Burke was incredibly great, and not to be measured by their limited circulation. The rise of journalism as a power in politics may be roughly dated from the notoriety of Wilkes' North Briton, and of the letters of "Junius" in the Public Advertiser. Thenceforward, newspapers, at first mere chronicles of passing events, inevitably grew to be organs of political opinion, and had now almost superseded pamphlets, as addressed to a far larger circle of readers. Notwithstanding the heavy stamp duties, as well as duties on paper and advertisements, six daily journals were published in London, of which the Times was already the greatest. Cobbett's Weekly Political Register, commenced in 1802, was diffusing new ideas among the middle classes, but it was not yet committed to radicalism, and did not win its way into cottages until its price was greatly reduced in 1816. After Cobbett's death in 1835, it ceased to appear. Still the ice was broken, and, as the educated public recovered from the panic caused by the French revolution, the newspaper press became a potent and independent rival of parliament and the platform.

[Pageheading: EDINBURGH AND QUARTERLY REVIEWS.]

But the influence of the Edinburgh and Quarterly Reviews was perhaps even greater among readers of the highest intelligence. The first of these was founded in 1802 by Jeffrey, Brougham, Horner, and Sydney Smith, but was supported at first by Scott and other able contributors. So remarkable a body of writers must have commanded attention in any age, but at a time when the only periodicals were annuals and miscellanies, the literary vigour and range of knowledge displayed by the new review carried all before it. For several years it had an unique success, but, as it identified itself more and more with the whig party, Canning, with the aid of Scott, determined to challenge its supremacy by establishing a new review to be called the Quarterly. Scott was finally estranged from the Edinburgh by an article against the war of independence in Spain, and the first number of the Quarterly appeared in February, 1809, with three articles by him. It was published by John Murray, and edited by Gifford, on much the same lines as the Edinburgh, but with a strong tory bias, and with somewhat less of literary brilliancy. Blackwood's Magazine followed a few years later, and the almost classical dualism of the Quarterly and Edinburgh has long since been invaded by a multitude of younger serials.

After the loss of its early monopoly of talent, the Edinburgh Review still retained Jeffrey and Sydney Smith, and it was abundantly compensated for the loss of Scott by the acquisition in 1825 of the fluent pen of Macaulay. Born in 1800, the son of Zachary Macaulay, who like many other philanthropists was on the tory side, he was early converted to the whig party. He was well fitted to be a popular writer. His thought, never deep, is always clear and vivid. None knew better how to seize a dramatic incident or a picturesque simile, or to strike the weak points in his adversary's armour. It has been said of him that he always chose to storm a position by a cavalry charge, certainly the most imposing if not the most effective method. Many of his contributions to the Edinburgh Review were afterwards republished as Essays, and already in those earlier essays which appeared before 1837, we can see him assuming the role of the historical champion of the whigs. Widely read and with a marvellous memory, he was generally accurate in his facts, but his criticism of Gladstone applies with even greater force to himself: "There is no want of light, but a great want of what Bacon would have called dry light. Whatever Mr. Gladstone sees is refracted and distorted by a false medium of passions and prejudices." The critic is sunk in the advocate, and even a good cause is spoiled by a too obvious reluctance to admit anything that comes from the other side. Perhaps his happiest, though far from his greatest, work is to be found in the stirring ballads of Ivry and the Armada, the precursors of the Lays of Ancient Rome. Deservedly popular and full of patriotic fire, the class of literature to which they belong renders questions of fairness or unfairness beside the point.

Another contributor to the Edinburgh Review, also famous as a historian, was Thomas Carlyle. He was born in 1795 at Ecclefechan in Dumfriesshire, and wrote for Brewster's Encyclopaedia and the London Magazine as well as the Edinburgh. In 1826 he married Jane Welsh, and in 1828 he retired from journalism to live humbly on her means. It was now that he began to produce his best work. Sartor Resartus appeared in 1833-34, and the History of the French Revolution in 1837. Even in the latter of these works he is as much a preacher as a historian. Perhaps no other writer of the age exercised a greater direct influence, and in his own country, which seems specially amenable to the preacher's powers, his message has been as effective in favour of broader views as the disruption of the Church of Scotland in 1843 was in favour of the old orthodoxy. His teaching has its roots in a German soil, but it bears the mark of his own strong personality. His style, with a wilful ruggedness, displays the German taste for the humour of an incongruous homeliness, where the subject seems to call for a more dignified treatment. Perhaps this obvious falseness of expression only relieves the weight of his stern earnestness of purpose and makes us the more ready to join in his constant denunciation of everything hollow and pretentious.

[Pageheading: LAMB.]

Two new magazines appeared in or about 1817, Blackwood's and the London. Brilliant as the leading contributors to the former were, none of them perhaps can claim a place in the front rank of English literature. Of the contributors to the London Lamb is doubtless entitled to the first place. Born in 1775, he was employed as a clerk in the East India House from 1792 to 1825. He was a schoolfellow of Coleridge and contributed to his earlier volume of poems It is, however, to the Essays of Elia that he owes his fame. These appeared in the London Magazine and were published in a collected form after his death in 1834. Few authors that have been so much admired have exercised so little influence. The reason for this is not far to seek. His style defies imitation, and he would have been the last man to endeavour to win disciples to his opinions. Another essayist who belongs to the same group of writers as Coleridge and Lamb is Thomas de Quincey. He wrote both for Blackwood's and for the London Magazine, in the latter of which appeared in 1821 his best known work, the Confessions of an English Opium Eater. He excelled in what was the dominant characteristic of English prose of this period, in imagery, a quality which is conspicuous in the light fancy of Coleridge's most famous poems, and which gives life to an author so uniformly in dead earnest as Macaulay. Viewed historically, this taste for imagery is the English side of the romantic movement, which in Germany reacted against the conventional, not only in works of the imagination, but in the heavier form of new philosophical systems. But these systems, in spite of Coleridge, never became native in England. The growth of the scientific spirit has made such thought and such language seem unreal in serious literature, and prevents a later generation from imitating, though not from admiring, the brilliance of the early essayists.

Hazlitt's genius was of a heavier type. As an essayist his work breathes the spirit of an earlier age; but as a literary critic he is a leader, and displays an inwardness in his appreciation that makes him in a sense the model of the new age in which criticism has so largely supplanted creation. It may be doubted, however, whether the abnormal growth of criticism, as a distinct branch of English letters, has been a benefit on the whole to our literature. Certainly it has tended to substitute the elaborate study of other men's thoughts for original production, and, after all, the greatest critics have been those who, being more than critics, have shown themselves capable of constructive efforts.

Two statesmen-novelists, Bulwer and Disraeli, are among the most interesting literary characters of the end of this period. The former of these, like his French contemporary Victor Hugo, had a remarkable gift for expressing each successive phase of popular taste. He resembled Disraeli in acquiring a pre-eminent position in letters in early youth, which was followed by political success at a later age. Though neither rose to cabinet rank before a time of life which must with literary men rank as "middle age," Bulwer had, in the midst of an active parliamentary career, been an active novelist, in fact the most popular novelist of his day. Disraeli, on the other hand, only entered parliament after the close of the period dealt with in this volume, and it is to this period, while he was still unknown to politics, that the greater part of his literary work belongs. One other resemblance between these writers is perhaps not less interesting to the historian than to the critic. Both made use of literature to establish for themselves a reputation as "men of the world," an ambition which Bulwer's social position might easily justify, and without which it would be impossible to understand the career of Disraeli. Born in 1803 and 1804 respectively, both made their mark with their first novels in 1827, Bulwer with Falkland, Disraeli with a work in which his own career has been supposed to be foreshadowed—Vivian Grey. One other great novelist had appeared before the close of the reign of William IV. In 1836 Charles Dickens produced Sketches by Boz and began the Pickwick Papers, but he belongs properly to the next reign.

Among the historians of this period the first place undoubtedly belongs to Henry Hallam. Born in 1788, he produced his View of the State of Europe during the Middle Ages in 1818, and his Constitutional History of England in 1827, while his Introduction to the Literature of Europe began to appear in 1837. Like Macaulay he represents the whig attitude towards politics, but does so less consciously and less emphatically than his younger contemporary. There is a sense in which no constitutional historian has adopted so strictly legal an attitude. It is not merely that his interest centres on the legal side of the constitution, but, lawyer-like, he judges every constitutional issue of the past in the light of the legal system which the law of his own day presupposes for the date in question. No one can deny the validity of this principle in a court of justice, but no one gifted either with historical imagination or with historical sympathy could wish to introduce it into a historical work. Yet the very narrowness of his outlook made it easier for him to adopt the impartiality of a judge; his criterion of justice is too definite to allow him to indulge in special pleading or to twist facts to suit his theories; and the student still turns to Hallam with a sense of security which he does not feel in reading Macaulay or Carlyle.

[Pageheading: FINE ART.]

The fine arts cannot be said to have flourished in England during the period of the great war, and architecture was certainly at a low ebb, but several eminent names belong to this period. Sir Thomas Lawrence was by far the foremost English portrait painter, and fitly represents the elegance of the regency, while Raeburn enjoyed an equal reputation in Scotland. Turner, however, was painting in his earlier manner and showing originality even in his imitations of old masters. Constable, too, was producing some of those quiet English landscapes which, though little appreciated at the time, have since made him famous. Two other English landscape painters, Callcott and the elder Crome, were also in their prime, and Wilkie executed several of his best known masterpieces at this time. David Cox and Prout did not earn celebrity till a little later. The Water-Colour Society was founded in 1804. Soon afterwards Flaxman was in the zenith of his fame, being elected professor of sculpture by the Royal Academy in 1810, and Chantrey was beginning to desert portrait painting for statuary.

Science, especially in its practical applications, made greater strides than art in the early years of the nineteenth century. It was now that Jenner's memorable discovery of vaccination, dating from 1796, was generally adopted by the medical profession. In 1802 his claim to priority was recognised by a parliamentary committee, with the result that L10,000 were then voted to him, and a further grant of L20,000 was made in 1807, when vaccination was established at the Small-pox Hospital. In 1814, George Stephenson, after many preliminary experiments, made a successful trial of his first locomotive engine. In 1812, Bell's steamboat, the Comet made its first voyage on the Clyde, and the development of steam navigation proceeded more rapidly than that of steam locomotion by land. Sir Humphry Davy began his researches in 1800, and took part in that year, with Count Rumford and Sir Joseph Banks, in founding the Royal Institution. His invention of the safety lamp was not matured until 1815.

But if the principal contributions of England to physical science in the early years of the century were mainly in the direction of practical application, her contributions to pure theory under the regency and in the reign of William IV. were no less distinguished. Sir John Herschel, following in the footsteps of his father, began in 1824 his observations on double stars and his researches upon the parallax of fixed stars, while Sir George Airy published in 1826 his mathematical treatises on lunar and planetary theory. In Michael Faraday England possessed at once an eminent chemist and the greatest electrician of the age. The discovery of benzine and the liquefaction of numerous gases were followed by an investigation of electric currents, and in 1831 by the crowning discovery of induction. Not less valuable perhaps than these discoveries of his own were the fertile suggestions which he left to others. William Smith, sometimes called the father of modern English geology, vigorously followed up the work of James Hutton by publishing in 1815 his great map of English strata as identified by fossils. Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology marks a great advance in geological science. In this book, which appeared in 1833, the author advanced the view, now universally accepted, that the great geological changes of the past are not to be explained as catastrophes, followed by successive creations, but as the product of the continuous play of forces still at work. This theory contained all that was vital in the doctrine of evolution; but it was only at a later date, when the doctrine had become the property of zoologists as well as geologists and had been popularised by Darwin, that it came to exercise an influence over non-scientific thought.

[Pageheading: UNIVERSITY REFORM.]

A review of the literary and scientific progress of this period would be incomplete without some notice of progress in higher education. The universities of Oxford and Cambridge with their numerous colleges had in the eighteenth century lapsed into that lethargic condition which seemed to be the common fate of all corporations. They had to a certain extent ceased to be seats of learning. At Oxford the limitations imposed upon colleges by statute or custom in elections to fellowships and scholarships ensured the mediocrity of the teachers and gave the preference to mediocrities among the students. Where emoluments were not so restricted they were generally awarded by interest rather than by merit; and it was even the case that a scholarship at Winchester, carrying with it the right to a fellowship at New College, was often promised to an infant only a few days old. The Oxford examination system had not been reformed since the time of Laud, and the degree examinations had degenerated into mere formalities until the university in 1800 adopted a new examination statute, mainly under the influence of Dr. Eveleigh, provost of Oriel. The new statute, which came into operation in 1802, granted honours to the better students of each year. The number of candidates to whom honours were granted, at first very small, rapidly increased till in 1837 about 130 received honours in a single year. The attention which the examination system received from the hebdomadal board, so often accused of sluggishness, is proved by the frequent changes in the regulations, which among other things differentiated between honours in "Literae Humaniores" and in mathematics in 1807, and separated the honours and pass examinations in 1830. The same desire to encourage meritorious students showed itself in the institution of competitive examinations for fellowships, in which Oriel led the way. It was followed in 1817 by Balliol, which in 1827 threw open its scholarships as well. It was not, however, till the reign of Queen Victoria that the college statutes as a whole were so modified as to make open competition possible in more than a very few instances.

Cambridge suffered less than Oxford from restrictions as to the choice of fellows. In fact the majority of the fellowships, more especially of those which carried with them a vote in the government of the colleges, were, so far as the statutes went, open to all comers. Though the course of study was still nominally regulated by statutes dating from the Tudor period, which it would often have been ludicrous to enforce, an effective stimulus was given to mathematical studies by the mathematical tripos, which had existed from the middle of the eighteenth century, and to which in 1824 a classical tripos was added. The ground covered by these honour examinations was certainly narrower than that which lay within the scope of the corresponding examinations at Oxford, but at both places the studies of most undergraduates were still directed more by the judgment of their tutors than by the regulations of the university.

These two universities were, however, subject to two limitations, which prevented them from providing a higher education for all aspiring students. The expense of living at Oxford and Cambridge, and the close connexion of both universities with the Church of England, rendered them difficult of access to many. These limitations were emphasised by the fact that Scotland possessed five universities which were the opposite of the English in both respects, and not a few English students could always be found at the Scottish seats of learning. The reform ministry made a serious effort to remove or alleviate the grievances of dissenters. Among other reforms mooted was the abolition of theological tests for matriculation and graduation. In 1834 a bill, which proposed to effect this change, but which left intact such tests as existed for fellowships and professorships, passed its second reading in the commons by a majority of 321 against 174, and its third reading by 164 against 75. It was, however, thrown out on the second reading in the lords by 187 votes against 85. Though in this particular case the demands of the dissenters were moderate, they were themselves opposed to other measures introduced for their benefit, and the question of tests at Oxford and Cambridge was not unnaturally allowed to rest for another twenty years.

[Pageheading: UNIVERSITY OF LONDON.]

It was only in the reign of George IV. that anything was done to provide a university education for those who were unable to proceed to the ancient seats of learning. But the movement, once started, progressed rapidly. The oldest of the university colleges, as they are now called, is St. David's College, Lampeter, which was founded in 1822, mainly through the exertions of Dr. Thomas Burgess, Bishop of St. David's, who was supported by many others among the Welsh clergy. The college was opened in 1827, but at first it had no power of conferring degrees, and contented itself with the education of candidates for holy orders. A more important movement was initiated in 1825. In a public letter written by the poet Campbell to Brougham, the project of founding a university of London, which should be free from denominational restrictions, was advocated. The scheme was warmly embraced by many whose names are found associated with other movements of the times. Among them were Hume, Grote, Zachary Macaulay, Dudley, and Russell. A large proportion of the promoters of the new university had been educated at Scottish universities, and had therefore a clear idea of the type of university which they might establish, and the movement, although started primarily in the interests of dissenters, received the support of many who still valued the connexion of the universities with the Church. The "London University," as it was called, was opened in 1828, when classes were formed in arts, law, and medicine, but not in divinity. It was technically a joint-stock company, and the attempt of the shareholders to obtain a charter of incorporation was successfully resisted by the universities of Oxford and Cambridge.

Meanwhile some of the original supporters of the movement, regarding the non-religious character of the new university with suspicion, had decided to transfer their support to a new college, where the doctrine and worship of the Church of England should be recognised. The Duke of Wellington took a lively interest in this movement, and King George IV.'s patronage gave the new institution the name of "King's College". There seemed every reason to expect that the foundation would be on a munificent scale, when Wellington's acceptance of catholic emancipation offended many of the subscribers so deeply that they immediately withdrew from the undertaking, and the college was in consequence left almost entirely without endowment. State recognition, however, was given it from the first. It was incorporated in 1829, and opened in 1831. In 1835 the demand of "London University" for a charter received the support of the house of commons, and Lord Melbourne's government decided to propose a compromise, by which the so-called "London University" was to be converted into University College, and an examining body was to be created under the title of the University of London, while the work of teaching was to be performed by University College, King's College, and other colleges, which might from time to time be named by the crown. These terms were accepted by the existing "university," and charters were given to the new university and to University College, London, in 1836. It was thus left open to students or their parents to select either a denominational or an undenominational college, according to their preference.

Meanwhile another university had been founded in the north of England. The dean and chapter of Durham had determined to set aside a part of their emoluments for the foundation of a university, and the bishop had undertaken to assist them by attaching prebendal stalls in the cathedral to some of the professorships. An act of parliament was obtained in 1832, authorising the establishment of the new university, which was opened in October, 1833, and was incorporated by a royal charter on June 1, 1837. As an ecclesiastical foundation, the university of Durham was of course in the closest connexion with the established Church.

None of these new foundations could compare in respect of endowments with the old universities of Oxford and Cambridge, yet it was not altogether without reason that the founders of University College, London, hoped to give as good an education at a greatly reduced cost. It must be remembered that only a small fraction of the endowments of the old universities and their colleges was at this time applied to strictly educational purposes, and, until they should either be reformed or become more sensible of their opportunities, there was a fair field for an energetic rival.

The beginning of the nineteenth century witnessed a marvellous expansion of manufacturing industry, not so much caused by new discoveries as by the energetic application of those made at the end of the last century, by the growth of the factory-system, and, above all, by the monopoly of English-made goods during the great war. The innovation of machine-spinning and weaving by power-looms had an instant effect in stimulating and cheapening the production of cottons, but that of woollens, cramped by heavy duties on the raw material, languished for some time longer under traditional methods of handspinning. When stocking-frames and other forms of machinery penetrated at last into its strongholds in the West Riding of Yorkshire and in the midland counties, the demand for "hands" was inevitably reduced, and "frame-breaking" riots ensued, which lasted for several years. From this period dates the industrial revolution which gradually abolished domestic industries, separated mill-owners and mill-hands into almost hostile classes, undermined the system of apprenticeship, and brought about a large migration of manufactures from centres with abundant water-power to centres in close proximity to coal-fields.

[Pageheading: PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURE.]

The progress of British agriculture during the period under review was almost as marked as that of British manufactures. Under the impulse of war prices, and of the improvements adopted at the end of the eighteenth century, the home-production of corn almost kept pace with the growing consumption, and between 1801 and 1815 little more than 500,000 quarters of imported corn were required annually to feed the population. No doubt, when the price of bread might rise to famine-point, the consumption of it fell to a minimum per head; still, the rural population continued to multiply, though not so rapidly as the urban population, and neither could have been maintained without a constant increase in the production of the soil. This result was due to a progressive extension of enclosure and drainage, as well as to wise innovations in the practice of agriculture. Not the least important of such innovations was the destruction of useless fences and straggling hedge-rows, the multitude and irregular outlines of which had long been a picturesque but wasteful feature of old-fashioned English farming. This was the age, too, in which many a small farm vanished by consolidation, and many an ancient pasture was recklessly broken up, some of which, though once more covered with green sward, have never recovered their original fertility. Happily, the use of crushed bones for manure was introduced in 1800, and the efforts of the national board of agriculture, aided by the discoveries of Sir Humphry Davy, brought about a far more general application of chemical science to agriculture, partly compensating for the exhaustion of the soil under successive wheat crops. Not less remarkable was the effect of mechanical science in the development of new agricultural implements, which, however, retained a comparatively rude form of construction. The Highland Society of Scotland took a leading part in encouraging these gradual experiments in tillage, as well as in the breeding of sheep and cattle, with a special regard to early maturity. Had the farmers of Great Britain during the great war possessed no more skill than their grandfathers, it would have been impossible for the soil of this island to have so nearly supported its inhabitants before the ports were freely thrown open.

The great triumphs of engineering in the fifteen years before the battle of Waterloo were mainly achieved in facilitating locomotion, and are specially associated with the name of Telford. It was he who, following in the footsteps of Brindley and Smeaton, constructed the Ellesmere and Caledonian Canals; he far eclipsed the fame of General Wade by opening out roads and bridges in the highlands, and first adopted sound principles of road-making both in England and Wales, afterwards to be applied with marvellous success by Macadam. It is some proof of the impulse given to land-travelling by such improvements that 1,355 public stage-coaches were assessed in 1812, and that a rate of speed little short of ten miles an hour was attained by the lighter vehicles. But Telford's labours were not confined to roads or bridges; they extended also to harbours and to canals, which continued to be the great arteries of heavy traffic until the development of railways. The new power destined to supersede both coaches and barges was first recognised practically when Bell's little steam vessel the Comet was navigated down the Clyde in 1812, to be followed not many years later by a steamship capable of crossing the Atlantic Ocean. In a few years steam packets were numerous, but it was not till well into the reign of Victoria that steam navigation was used in the royal navy.

[Pageheading: RAILWAYS.]

The most conspicuous improvement in the social and economic condition of the country between 1815 and 1837 is undoubtedly the invention of the steam locomotive engine. A few steam locomotives had been invented before the former date, but they had met with little success and were as yet more costly than horse traction. It was only in or about the year 1815 that George Stephenson, enginewright in Killingworth colliery, succeeded in inventing a locomotive engine which was cheaper than horse-power. The value of railways was by this time better understood. Short railways worked by horses were common in the neighbourhood of collieries, and a few existed elsewhere. In 1821 Edward Pease obtained parliamentary powers to construct a railway between Stockton and Darlington. A visit to Killingworth persuaded him to make use of steam-power. In 1823 an act authorising the use of steam on the proposed railway was carried, and in 1825 the railway was opened. In 1826 an act was passed for the construction of a railway between Liverpool and Manchester. Stephenson was employed as engineer to make the line, and his success as a road-making engineer proved equal to his brilliance as a mechanical inventor.

In 1829 the line was completed. The directors were at first strongly opposed to the use of steam-locomotion, but were induced by Stephenson, before finally rejecting the idea, to offer a reward of L500 for the best locomotive that could be made. Of four engines which were entered for the competition, Stephenson's Rocket was the only one that would move, and it proved able to travel at the rate of thirty-five miles an hour. The opening of the railway in 1830, and the fatal accident to Mr. Huskisson which attended it, have been noticed already. The accident did more to attract attention to the power of the locomotive than to discredit it. The opposition to railways was not, however, at an end. A proposal for a railway between London and Birmingham was carried through parliament, only after a struggle of some years' duration, but the construction of the line was at length authorised in 1833. The English railway system now developed with great rapidity, and by the end of the reign of William IV. lines had been authorised which would when complete form a system, joining London with Dover, Southampton, and Bristol, and both London and Bristol with Birmingham, whence lines were to run to the most important places in Yorkshire and Lancashire, and on to Darlington. Numerous small lines served other portions of the country, partly in connexion with these, but more often independently.

Among the more conspicuous metropolitan improvements of this age may be mentioned the introduction of gas and the incipient construction of new bridges over the Thames, in which the engineer Rennie took a leading part. Before the end of the eighteenth century the workshops of Boulton and Watt had been lit by gas, and Soho was illuminated by it to celebrate the peace of Amiens. By 1807 it was used in Golden Lane, and by 1809, if not earlier, it had reached Pall Mall, but it scarcely became general in London until somewhat later. At the beginning of the century the metropolis possessed but three bridges, old London bridge and the old bridges at Blackfriars and Westminster. The first stone of the Strand Bridge (afterwards to be called Waterloo Bridge) was laid on October 11, 1811, and Southwark Bridge was commenced in 1814, but these bridges were not completed till 1817 and 1819 respectively. The existing London Bridge, designed by Rennie, but built after his death, was completed in 1831. In 1812, the architect Nash was employed in laying out the Regent's Park, and in 1813 an act was passed for the construction of Regent Street, as a grand line of communication between it and Carlton House, the residence of the regent.

The work of geographical discovery had been well commenced before the end of the eighteenth century, and was inevitably checked during the great war. The wonderful voyages of Cook had revealed Australia and New Zealand; Flinders had carried on the survey of the Australian coast; Vancouver had explored the great island which bears his name with the adjacent shores; Rennell had produced his great map of India; Bruce had published his celebrated travels in Abyssinia; and an association had been formed to dispel the darkness that hung over the whole interior of Africa. Among its first emissaries was Mungo Park, who afterwards was employed by the British government, and died in the course of his second expedition in 1805-6. The idea of Arctic discovery was revived early in the nineteenth century, and was no longer confined to commercial aims, such as the opening of a north-east or north-west passage, but was rather directed to scientific objects, not without the hope of reaching the North Pole itself. Meanwhile, the ordnance survey of Great Britain itself was in full progress, and that of British India was commenced in 1802, while the hydrographical department of the admiralty, established in 1795, was organising the system of marine-surveying which has since yielded such valuable fruits.

The progress of philanthropy, based on religious sentiment was very marked during the later years of the war. The institution of Sunday schools between 1780 and 1790 had awakened a new sense of duty towards children in the community, and the growing use of child-labour, keeping pace with the constant increase of machinery, forced upon the public the necessity of legislative restrictions, which have been noticed in an earlier chapter. Banks of savings, the forerunners of savings banks under parliamentary regulation, had been suggested by Jeremy Bentham, and one at least was instituted in 1802. The idea of penitentiaries, for the reformation as well as for the punishment of criminals, had originated with the great philanthropist, John Howard. It was adopted and popularised by Jeremy Bentham, and might have been further developed but for the introduction of transportation, which promised the well-conducted convict the prospect of a new life in a new country. Meanwhile, prison reform became a favourite study of benevolent theorists in an age when the criminal law was still a relic of barbarism, when highway robbery was rife in the neighbourhood of London, when sanitation was hardly in its infancy, when pauperism was fostered by the poor law, and when the working classes in towns were huddled together, without legal check or moral scruple, in undrained courts and underground cellars. So capricious and shortsighted is the public conscience in its treatment of social evils.

[Pageheading: CANADA.]

At the opening of the nineteenth century the colonial empire of Great Britain was in a transitional state. The secession of thirteen American colonies had not only robbed the mother country of its proudest inheritance, but had also shattered the old colonial system of commercial monopoly for the supposed benefit of British interests. Its immediate effect was to annul the navigation act as affecting American trade, which became free to all the world, and by which Great Britain itself profited largely. Canada at once gained a new importance, and a new sense of nationality, which Pitt recognised by dividing it into two provinces, and giving each a considerable measure of independence, both political and commercial. It was troubled by the presence of a conquered race of white colonists side by side with new colonists of English blood, who were, however, united in their resistance to the revolted colonies in the war of 1812-14. After the war a steady stream of immigration poured into Canada. In 1816 the population was estimated at 450,000; between 1819 and 1829 Canada received 126,000 immigrants from England, and during the next ten years 320,000. The result was that the French element ceased to be preponderant, except in Lower Canada. The French Canadians felt that they did not enjoy their share of the confidence of government; the home government, ready enough to grant any favour that home opinion would permit, was trammelled by a public opinion, which suspected all who were of a French origin of a desire to restore the supremacy of the Roman Catholic religion and to assert political independence. A vacillating policy was the result, which only increased suspicions, and led in the first year of the reign of Victoria to a civil war.

In the Mauritius and the West Indies the one event of importance in this period is the abolition of slavery. It was found impossible to obtain from free negroes as much work as had been obtained from slaves, and their place had to be supplied by Indian coolies in the Mauritius, and by Chinese in Jamaica. At the same time the West Indies had begun to suffer from the competition of the United States.

The colony of the Cape of Good Hope was still peopled almost entirely by blacks or by the descendants of Dutch settlers, known as boers, or peasants. Four thousand British colonists went out in 1820 to Algoa Bay, but these were a mere handful compared with the Dutch. Unfortunately the government adopted a line of policy which produced great irritation in the Dutch population. They were granted no self-government, and in 1826 English judicial forms were introduced, and English was declared the sole official language. The reform administration made matters worse by defending the blacks against the boers. In 1834 it set free the slaves, offering L1,200,000, payable in London, very little of which ever reached the boers, as compensation for slaves valued at L3,000,000. A Kaffir war in 1834 had led to the conquest of Kaffraria, but in 1835 the home government restored the independence of the Kaffirs, and appointed a lieutenant-governor to defend their rights. After this the boers considered their position intolerable, and in 1835 began their first "trek" into the country now known as Natal.

[Pageheading: AUSTRALIA.]

Meanwhile, the great discoveries of Captain Cook, and the first settlement of New South Wales, brought within view a possible extension of our colonial dominion, which might go far to compensate for its losses on the North American continent. Governor Phillip had been sent out by Pitt to Botany Bay in 1787-88, but it was many years before the earliest of Australian colonies outgrew the character of a penal refuge for English convicts. The first convict establishments were at Sydney and Norfolk Island, but another settlement was founded on Van Diemen's Land in 1805, and in 1807, after this island had been circumnavigated by Flinders and Bass, it became the headquarters of that convict system, whose horrors are not yet forgotten. Between 1810 and 1822 the resources of New South Wales were vastly developed by the energetic policy of Governor Macquarie. While his efforts to utilise convict labour, and to educate convicts into free men, may have retarded the influx of genuine colonists, he prepared the way for settlement by constructing roads, promoting exploration, and raising public buildings, so that when he returned home the population of New South Wales had increased fourfold, and its settled territory in a much greater proportion. This territory comprised all English settlements on the east coast, and included large tracts of what is now known as Queensland, which did not become a separate colony until 1859.

The early history of Australia, it has been said, is chiefly a tale of convict settlements, bush-ranging, and expeditions of discovery. There is much truth in this saying, but the real basis of Australian prosperity was the introduction of sheep-farming on a large scale, after the merino-breed had been imported and acclimatised by Macarthur at the beginning of the century. Long before the region stretching northward from the later Port Phillip grew into the colony of Victoria, sheep-owners were spreading over the vast pastures of the interior, though many years elapsed before the explorer Sturt opened out the great provinces further westward.

The development of Australia made rapid progress during the generation following the great war. Though Australia itself and Van Diemen's Land, now called Tasmania, were still in the main convict settlements, free settlers had been arriving at Sydney for some time, and in 1817 they began to arrive in moderate numbers in Van Diemen's Land. In 1825 that island had sufficiently progressed to be recognised as a separate colony. The attempt to found a colony in western Australia in 1829 was, on the other hand, an almost complete failure. But in 1824 a new centre of colonisation in New South Wales had been established at Port Phillip. Meanwhile a sharp cleavage of parties had arisen. The convicts and poorer colonists were opposed to the large sheep-owners, who were endeavouring to form an aristocracy. Governor Macquarie favoured the convicts, and Governor Darling (1825-31) the sheep-owners. In 1823 a legislative council, consisting of seven officials, had been instituted; in 1828 it was developed into one of fifteen members, chosen entirely from among the wealthiest colonists.

Gibbon Wakefield's Letter from Sydney, published in 1829, marks an epoch in the history of Australian colonisation. In this work he proposed that the land should be sold in small lots at a fairly high price to settlers, and that the proceeds of the sales should be used to pay the passage of emigrants going out as labourers. This idea had hardly been published when it was adopted by the home government, and five shillings an acre was fixed as the minimum price of land. The number of emigrants increased rapidly, but the new system threatened ruin to the owners of sheep-runs. Unable to pay the stipulated price, they only moved further into the interior and occupied fresh land without seeking government permission, an unlicensed occupation which has left its mark upon the language in the word "squatter". At last in 1837 a compromise was arranged, by which the squatters were to pay a small rent for their runs, the crown retaining the freehold with the right to sell it to others at some future date. In 1834 the British government sanctioned the formation of a new colony, that of South Australia. It was to be settled from the outset on the Wakefield system, and no convicts were ever sent to it. The first lots were sold as high as twelve shillings an acre, and in 1836 a company of emigrants went out and founded Adelaide.



APPENDICES.

I. ON AUTHORITIES.

II. ADMINISTRATIONS, 1801-1837.



APPENDIX I.

ON AUTHORITIES.[141]

(1) General histories of England for the period 1801-1837: MASSEY, History of England during the Reign of George the Third (4 vols., 2nd ed., 1865), closes with the treaty of Amiens in 1802, and therefore barely touches this period. There is still room for a general history of England on an adequate scale between 1802 and 1815. After that date we have HARRIET MARTINEAU, History of England during the Thirty Years' Peace (1816-1846, 2 vols., 1849, 1850). This was begun by Charles Knight, the publisher, who brought it down to 1819. From 1820 onwards it is Miss Martineau's own work. It is too nearly contemporary to depend on any authorities except such as were published at the time, and it represents in the main the popular view of public events and public men held by liberals at the time. Sir SPENCER WALPOLE'S History of England from the Conclusion of the Great War in 1815 (6 vols., revised ed., 1890), a work of high quality and thoroughly trustworthy, full of references to the best published authorities, sympathises with the whigs and more liberal tories. Reference is sometimes made in this volume to GOLDWIN SMITH, The United Kingdom, a Political History (2 vols., 1899), but the work is too slight to be regarded as an authority. Sir T. E. MAY'S (Lord Farnborough) Constitutional History of England from 1760 to 1860 (3 vols., 10th ed., 1891) is also useful.

(2) The Annual Register is probably the most useful authority for this period. In addition to more general information, it contains a very full report of the more important parliamentary debates and the text of the principal public treaties and of numerous other state papers. The narrative is not often coloured by the political partisanship of the writer, but allowance must be made for the strong tory bias of the volumes dealing with the reign of William IV. The Parliamentary History closes in 1803, at which date Cobbett's Parliamentary Debates had begun to appear. After 1812 Cobbett ceased to superintend the work and his name was dropped, and in 1813 and afterwards the title-page acknowledged that the work was "published under the superintendence of T. C. Hansard," who had also been the publisher of Cobbett's series and of the Parliamentary History.

[Pageheading: MEMOIRS AND CORRESPONDENCE.]

(3) Political and other memoirs and printed correspondence. The following have been noticed among the authorities for volume x.: PELLEW, Life and Correspondence of H. Addington, Viscount Sidmouth (3 vols., 1847), very full wherever Sidmouth was directly concerned, written with a strong bias in favour of the subject of the biography. Lord STANHOPE, Life of Pitt (4 vols., 3rd ed., 1867). The appendix to the last volume contains Pitt's correspondence with the king in the years 1804-1806. Lord ROSEBERY, Pitt (Twelve English Statesmen Series, 1891), brilliant but not always sound. Lord JOHN (Earl) RUSSELL, Memorials and Correspondence of C. J. Fox (4 vols., 1853-1854), and Life and Times of C. J. Fox, 1859-1866. Memoirs of the Courts and Cabinets of George III. (4 vols., 1853-1855; 1801 falls in vol. iii.), continued in Memoirs of the Court of England during the Regency (2 vols., 1856), Memoirs of the Court of George IV. (2 vols., 1859), and Memoirs of the Courts and Cabinets of William IV. and Victoria (2 vols., 1861; 1837 is reached in vol. i.); these volumes, edited by the Duke of Buckingham, contain the correspondence of the Grenville family. The first series alone, which contains many important letters of Lord Grenville, is of first-rate importance. The editing is often inaccurate. Diaries and Correspondence of the First Earl of Malmesbury (4 vols., 1844), edited by the third earl (vol. iv. extends from February, 1801, to July, 1809), authoritative and useful, especially for the crisis of 1807. Correspondence of Marquis Cornwallis (3 vols., 1859), edited by C. Ross, valuable for the negotiations at Amiens and for Cornwallis's brief second governor-generalship of India. The notes are full of useful biographical material concerning the persons mentioned in the correspondence. Diaries and Correspondence of George Rose (2 vols., 1860), edited by L. V. Harcourt. The Diary and Correspondence of Charles Abbot, Lord Colchester, edited by his son (3 vols., 1861, extending from 1795 to 1829), with interesting notices of Perceval, and generally useful from 1802-1817, when Abbot was Speaker. Lord HOLLAND, Memoirs of the Whig Party (2 vols., 1852), edited by his son, Lord Holland. These memoirs do not extend beyond the year 1807. Volume ii., which covers the period during which Holland was a member of the Grenville cabinet, is of special importance. His memory is not always accurate, and he writes with a whig bias which makes him a harsh judge of George III. Holland's Further Memoirs of the Whig Party, 1807-1821, edited by Lord Stavordale, the present Lord Ilchester (1905), interesting, and, like the earlier volumes, full of personal detail, but of less value, since Holland was not in office again till 1830.

Similar in character to the above, but only of importance after 1801 are the following: Life of Perceval (2 vols., 1874), by his grandson, Sir Spencer Walpole, written largely from the Perceval papers, especially valuable for the ministerial crisis of 1809. The Memoirs and Correspondence of Viscount Castlereagh (12 vols., 1850-1853), edited by his brother the third Marquis of Londonderry, consisting mainly of military and diplomatic correspondence. Sir ARCHIBALD ALISON, Lives of Lord Castlereagh and Sir Charles Stewart, the Second and Third Marquesses of Londonderry (3 vols., 1861), much more political than biographical; valuable and appreciative, but not rich in documents. The Dispatches of the Duke of Wellington during his various Campaigns in India, Denmark [etc.], from 1799 to 1818 (12 vols., 1834-1838), compiled by Lieut.-Colonel GURWOOD (really extending to 1815 only); Supplementary Despatches and Memoranda of the Duke of Wellington (15 vols., 1858-1872), edited by his son, the second Duke of Wellington, extending from 1797 to 1818; Despatches, Correspondence, and Memoranda of the Duke of Wellington (8 vols., 1867-1880), by the same editor, extending from 1819 to 1832. The second and third of these series contain not only the duke's despatches, but the vast mass of political correspondence which passed through his hands. In spite of the great size of the collection, very little that can be considered trivial is included. It is our most important authority for all foreign relations between 1815 and 1827, and between 1828 and 1830. Sir HERBERT MAXWELL, The Life of Wellington (2 vols., 1899). HORACE TWISS, Life of Eldon (3 vols., 1844). C. PHIPPS, Memoir of R. Plumer Ward (2 vols., 1850), containing important political correspondence from 1801 onward, and Ward's diary from 1809 to 1820. Ward held numerous minor offices in the government and was on terms of intimacy with Perceval and Mulgrave. MOORE, Life of Sheridan (2 vols., 1826), valuable for the crisis of 1811. The Greville Memoirs; a Journal of the Reigns of King George IV. and King William IV. (3 vols.), edited by Henry Reeve. References are to the first edition, 1874. New edition, also including 1837-1860 in 8 vols. (1888). Greville was clerk to the privy council from 1821 to 1859, and as such possessed exceptional opportunities for making himself acquainted with secret political transactions and with the personal qualities of successive statesmen. The Creevey Papers (2 vols., 1903), edited by Sir Herbert Maxwell, not of first-rate historical importance, full of gossip and scandal. Creevey was a whig member of parliament, 1802-1818, 1820-1828 and 1831-1832, and treasurer of the ordnance, 1830-1834. STAPLETON, The Political Life of George Canning (from September 1822 to August 1827) (3 vols., 1831), very full and valuable, especially for foreign relations; strikingly deficient in documents and dates. George Canning and His Times (1859), by the same author, largely written from memory and therefore untrustworthy. YONGE, Life and Administration of Lord Liverpool (3 vols., 1868). Memoirs of Sir Robert Peel (2 vols., 1856-1857), prepared by Peel himself, and dealing with the Roman Catholic question, the administration of 1834-1835, and the repeal of the corn laws. The memoirs, which are of the highest importance, consist mainly of correspondence and are studiously fair. PARKER, Sir Robert Peel (3 vols., 1891-1899), a large collection of Peel's correspondence with a brief connecting narrative by the editor, of great value even for the periods covered by the Memoirs. The Correspondence of King William IV. and Earl Grey, from November 1830 to June 1832 (2 vols., 1867), edited by Henry, Earl Grey, valuable for the history of the reform. The Melbourne Papers (1889), edited by Sanders, throw light on Melbourne's relations with William IV. and with Brougham. TORRENS, Memoirs of Melbourne (2 vols., 1878), polemical, and sadly deficient in documents. Lord HATHERTON, Memoir and Correspondence relating to June and July, 1834 (published 1872), edited by H. Reeve, on events connected with the fall of Grey's ministry. The Croker Papers (3 vols., 1884), edited by L. J. Jennings. Croker was secretary to the admiralty from 1809 to 1830. The papers, which are very full from 1809 onwards, consist of correspondence and selections from Croker's journals and correspondence. L. HORNER, Memoir of Francis Horner (1843). E. HERRIES, Public Life of J. C. Herries (1880), a defence of Herries against the sneers of whig writers. Lord DUDLEY, Letters to the Bishop of Llandaff (Copleston), (1840), and Letters to Ivy (1905, edited by Romilly), interesting and often vivacious, but not of first-rate importance. Sir HENRY BULWER (Lord Dalling), Life of Palmerston (2 vols., 1870), extending to 1840. The first chapter of a third volume, edited by Evelyn Ashley (1874) makes good a few omissions belonging to this period. The work consists mainly of correspondence and extracts from Palmerston's journal. Memoirs of Baron Stockmar (2 vols., 1872-1873), by his son Baron E. von Stockmar, edited by F. Max Mueller. Stockmar was a confidential agent of Leopold, King of the Belgians. The memoirs contain a narrative by William IV. of the political history of his reign to 1835, including the circumstances of Melbourne's resignation in 1834. CAMPBELL, Lives of the Chancellors (8 vols., 1848-1869). The last volume contains excellent sketches of Lyndhurst and Brougham, based largely on personal knowledge. Correspondence of Princess Lieven and Earl Grey, 1824-1834, edited by G. le Strange (1890). Letters of Dorothea, Princess Lieven during Her Residence in London, 1812-1834, edited by L. G. Robinson (1902). Letters of Harriet, Countess Granville, 1810-1845 (2 vols., 1894).

(4) Miscellaneous books. Sir G. C. LEWIS, Administrations of Great Britain (1783-1830), edited by Sir E. Head, 1864, has been mentioned among the authorities for volume x. It is a valuable history of the inner political life of England, but suffers from a strong whig bias. LECKY, History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century (5 vols., 1892), though nominally closing at the union, throws light on Irish history at the beginning of the nineteenth century. A. V. DICEY, Lectures on the Relation between Law and Public Opinion in England during the Nineteenth Century (1905), is very suggestive. HALEVY, La formation du radicalisme philosophique (3 vols., 1901-1904), and Sir L. STEPHEN, The English Utilitarians, vols. i., ii. (1900), are valuable for the history of the radical party. C. CREIGHTON, History of Epidemics in Britain (2 vols., 1894), contains an excellent account of the cholera epidemic.

[Pageheading: ON THE GREAT WAR.]

(5) Books dealing with the great war are numerous. The following have been already noticed among the authorities for volume x.: Dr. HOLLAND ROSE, Life of Napoleon I. (2 vols., 1904), our most trustworthy guide for the career of the French emperor. The book has gained not a little from its author's independent researches at the British Foreign Office. Captain MAHAN, Influence of Sea Power upon the French Revolution and Empire (2 vols., 1893), and Life of Nelson (2 vols., 1897), valuable for their general view of the naval warfare and commercial policy of the period. JAMES, Naval History of Great Britain, 1793-1820 (6 vols., ed. 1826; vols. iii.-vi. extend from 1801-1820), very full and accurate, largely used in this volume for the American war. Sir JOHN LAUGHTON, Nelson (English Men of Action Series, 1895), and articles in the Dictionary of National Biography.

To these must be added ALISON'S History of Europe from the Commencement of the French Revolution in 1789 to the Restoration of the Bourbons in 1815 (20 vols., 1847, 1848), an uncritical but still a standard work. The reaction against Alison is probably due in large measure to political causes. In addition to the European history which gives its title to the book, it contains a narrative of the American war of 1812-1814. The classical though far from trustworthy narrative on the French side is THIERS, Histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire (21 vols., 1845-1869), translated into English by Campbell and Stebbing (12 vols., 1893-1894). See also LANFREY'S incomplete History of Napoleon I., English translation (4 vols., 1871-1879), bitterly anti-Napoleonic. The negotiations precedent to the outbreak of war in 1803 are to be found in Mr. O. BROWNING'S England and Napoleon in 1803, containing despatches of Whitworth and others, published in 1887, and in P. COQUELLE, Napoleon and England, 1803-1813, translated by G. D. KNOX (1904), based on the reports of Andreossy, the French ambassador at London. Sir H. BUNBURY'S Narrative of Certain Passages, etc. (1853) is of the highest value for the war in the Mediterranean. The Times of September 16, 19, 22, 26, 28, 30, and October 19, 1905, contains an excellent series of articles on Nelson's tactics at Trafalgar. For the Moscow campaign, the Marquis DE CHAMBRAY'S Histoire de l'Expedition de Russie (3 vols., 1839) is perhaps the most reliable of contemporary narratives. There is a good account of the campaign in the Rev. H. B. GEORGE'S Napoleon's Invasion of Russia (1899). For the Peninsular war, W. NAPIER'S History of the War in the Peninsula and in the South of France (6 vols.; vols. i.-iii., ed. 1835-1840; iv.-vi., 1834-1840) is of the highest literary as well as historical value. C. OMAN'S History of the Peninsular War (in progress, vols. i., ii., 1902-1903, extending at present to September, 1809) makes good use of Spanish sources of information. The Wellington Dispatches have been noticed already in section 3. The Diary of Sir John Moore, edited by Sir J. F. Maurice (2 vols., 1904), is of value for the campaign of 1808-1809. For Waterloo, in addition to Maxwell's Life of Wellington, and Rose's Life of Napoleon I., Chesney's Waterloo Lectures, 1868; W. O'CONNOR MORRIS, The Campaign of 1815 (1900), and J. C. ROPES, The Campaign of Waterloo, may be studied with profit. Morris's work must, however, be discounted for his extravagant admiration of Napoleon's genius and his faith in the Grouchy legend. For the disputes with the United States and war of 1812-1814, see chapters in the Cambridge Modern History (vol. vii., 1903); BOURINOT, Canada (Story of the Nations), (1897); J. SCHOULER, History of the United States of America under the Constitution (6 vols., 1880-1889); and MAHAN, Sea Power in Its Relations to the War of 1812 (2 vols., 1905).

[Pageheading: ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS.]

(6) For European politics and foreign relations generally, in addition to some of the books mentioned in the last section, we have C. A. FYFFE'S History of Modern Europe, 1792-1878 (ed. 1895), a very readable book, which includes the results of some original study, and SEIGNOBOS, Political History of Contemporary Europe, English translation (2 vols., 1901), an useful but not always accurate book. The great French work, Histoire generale du IVe Siecle a nos jours (vols. ix., x., 1897-1898), by numerous authors, edited by MM. Lavisse and Rambaud, is naturally of varying merit; the chapters on France and Russia are the best, and there is a very full bibliography at the close of each chapter. The Cambridge Modern History, vol. ix., Napoleon (1906), is a similar compilation by English writers. ALFRED STERN'S Geschichte Europas seit den Vertraegen von 1815 (3 vols., 1894-1901, to be continued to 1871) is perhaps the best general history of the period following the great war. The Memoirs of Prince Metternich (5 vols., English translation, 1881-1882, edited by Prince Richard Metternich, extending to 1835) contain much that is valuable for diplomatic history. For French history see DUVERGIER DE HAURANNE, Histoire du gouvernement parlementaire en France (1814-1848, 10 vols., 1857-1872), which, in spite of the title, does not extend beyond 1830. For the Greek revolt, vols. vi. and vii. of G. FINLAY'S History of Greece (7 vols., ed. 1877) are important. American policy is treated by J. W. FOSTER, A Century of American Diplomacy (1901). Sir EDWARD HERTSLET'S Map of Europe by Treaty (4 vols., 1875-1891), while professedly confined to the treaties dealing with boundaries, contains the majority of those of general historical interest. It covers the period 1815-1891. LE COMTE DE GARDEN, Histoire generale des traites de paix (14 vols., 1848-1888, vols. vi.-xv., extending to 1814), and F. DE MARTENS, Recueil des traites et conventions, conclus par la Russie (tomes xi., xii. (Angleterre), 1895-1898), contain the principal treaties belonging to the period. The Castlereagh and Wellington Despatches have been noticed under section 3.

(7) For Indian history: JAMES MILL and WILSON, History of British India (10 vols., 1858), vols. vi.-ix., noticed as an authority for volume x., ends in 1835; Sir ALFRED C. LYALL'S Rise and Expansion of the British Dominion in India (1894) contains a brief and masterly sketch of the subject. See also A Selection from the Despatches, Treaties and Other Papers of the Marquess Wellesley (1877), well edited by S. J. Owen; the first two series of the Wellington Dispatches, noticed under section 3; and the vast mass of information collected in Sir W. W. HUNTER'S Imperial Gazetteer of India (14 vols., 1885-1887).

(8) For social and economic history: Dr. W. CUNNINGHAM'S The Growth of English Industry and Commerce in Modern Times, vol. iii., Laissez Faire (1903), extending from 1776 to 1850, is now the standard work. Reference has also been made to G. R. PORTER, Progress of the Nation (1847), a work abounding more in statistics than in narrative, and to Sir GEORGE NICHOLLS, History of the English Poor Law (2 vols., 1854). Nicholls took an active interest in social and economic questions from 1816 till his death in 1857. He probably understood the working of the poor-law better than any other man of that date, and the poor-law legislation of 1834 and 1838 was largely founded on his suggestions. He was one of the poor-law commissioners of 1834, and was permanent secretary to the poor-law board from 1847 to 1851. Sir G. C. LEWIS, The Government of Dependencies (1891), edited by C. P. Lucas, and LUCAS, Historical Geography of the British Colonies, vols. i.-v. (1888-1901), are of value. For literary history, SAINTSBURY'S History of Nineteenth Century Literature, 1780-1895, (1896), is an excellent guide. For educational progress at Oxford University reference may be made to the Report of H.M.'s Commissioners appointed to inquire into the State, etc., of the University and Colleges of Oxford (1852), which contains a good historical summary. The report of the similar commission appointed for Cambridge hardly touches the progress of studies, and is therefore of less value to the historical student.

FOOTNOTES:

[141] The dates given are, as far as possible, those of the editions used by the authors of this volume.



APPENDIX II.

ADMINISTRATIONS, 1801-1837.

1. ADDINGTON, MARCH, 1801.

First lord of treasury } H. Addington. and chanc. exchequer } { home Duke of Portland. { Lord Pelham, succeeded July, 1801. Secretaries of { C. P. Yorke, succeeded Aug., 1803. state { foreign Lord Hawkesbury. { war and } Lord Hobart. { colonies } Lord president Earl of Chatham. Duke of Portland, succeeded July, 1801. Lord chancellor Lord Eldon. Lord privy seal Earl of Westmorland. Admiralty Earl St. Vincent. Ordnance Earl of Chatham, appointed June, 1801. Board of trade Lord Auckland. Board of control Viscount Lewisham (July, 1801, Earl of Dartmouth), in cabinet. Viscount Castlereagh, succeeded July, 1802, admitted to cabinet Oct., 1802. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Earl of Hardwicke, not in cabinet. Secretary at war C. P. Yorke, not in cabinet. C. Bragge, succeeded Aug., 1803, not in cabinet.

2. PITT, MAY, 1804.

First lord of treasury } W. Pitt and chanc. exchequer } { home Lord Hawkesbury. Secretaries of { foreign Lord Harrowby. state { Lord Mulgrave, succeeded Jan., 1805. { war and } Earl Camden. { colonies } Viscount Castlereagh, succeeded July, 1805. Lord president Duke of Portland (after Jan., 1805, without office in cabinet). Viscount Sidmouth (before H. Addington), succeeded Jan., 1805. Earl Camden, succeeded July, 1805. Lord chancellor Lord Eldon. Lord privy seal Earl of Westmorland. Admiralty Viscount Melville (before H. Dundas). Lord Barham, succeeded May, 1805. Ordnance Earl of Chatham. Board of trade Duke of Montrose. Board of control Viscount Castlereagh. Duchy of Lancaster Lord Mulgrave, in cabinet. Earl of Buckinghamshire (before Lord Hobart), succeeded Jan., 1805, in cabinet. Lord Harrowby, succeeded July, 1805, in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Earl of Hardwicke, not in cabinet. Earl Powis, succeeded Nov., 1805, not in cabinet. Secretary at war W. Dundas, not in cabinet.

3. GRENVILLE, FEBRUARY, 1806.

First lord of treasury Lord Grenville. { home Earl Spencer. Secretaries of { foreign C. J. Fox. state { Viscount Howick, succeeded Sept. { war and } W. Windham { colonies } Lord president Earl Fitzwilliam (after Oct., without office in cabinet). Viscount Sidmouth, succeeded Oct. Lord chancellor Lord Erskine. Lord privy seal Viscount Sidmouth. Lord Holland, succeeded Oct. Chancellor of exchequer Lord H. Petty. Admiralty C. Grey (April, Viscount Howick). T. Grenville, succeeded Sept. Ordnance Earl of Moira. Chief justice, King's bench Lord Ellenborough, in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Duke of Bedford, not in cabinet. Secretary at war R. Fitzpatrick, not in cabinet.

4. PORTLAND, MARCH, 1807.

First lord of treasury Duke of Portland. { home Lord Hawkesbury (1808 Earl of Liverpool). Secretaries of { foreign G. Canning. state { war and } Viscount Castlereagh. { colonies } Lord president Earl Camden. Lord chancellor Lord Eldon. Lord privy seal Earl of Westmorland. Chanc. exchequer and } S. Perceval. duchy of Lancaster } Admiralty Lord Mulgrave. Ordnance Earl of Chatham. Board of trade Earl Bathurst, in cabinet. Board of control R. S. Dundas, not in cabinet. Earl of (before Lord) Harrowby, succeeded July, 1809, in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Duke of Richmond, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Sir J. Pulteney, not in cabinet. Lord G. Leveson Gower, succeeded June, 1809, in cabinet.

5. PERCEVAL, OCTOBER, 1809.

First lord of treasury, } chanc. exchequer and } S. Perceval. duchy of Lancaster[142] } { home R. Ryder. { foreign Earl Bathurst. Secretaries of { Marquis Wellesley, succeeded Dec., 1809. state { Viscount Castlereagh, succeeded March, { 1812. { war and } Earl of Liverpool. { colonies } Lord president Earl Camden (after April, 1812, without office in cabinet). Viscount Sidmouth, succeeded April, 1812. Lord chancellor Lord Eldon. Lord privy seal Earl of Westmorland. Admiralty Lord Mulgrave. C. P. Yorke, succeeded May, 1810. Ordnance Earl of Chatham. Lord Mulgrave, succeeded May, 1810. Board of trade Earl Bathurst. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Duke of Richmond, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Viscount Palmerston, not in cabinet.

6. LIVERPOOL, JUNE, 1812

First lord of treasury Earl of Liverpool. { home Viscount Sidmouth (after Jan., 1822, { without office in cabinet). { R. Peel, succeeded Jan., 1822. Secretaries of { foreign Viscount Castlereagh (1821 Marquis of. state { Londonderry). { G. Canning, succeeded Sept., 1822. { war and } Earl Bathurst. { colonies } Lord president Earl of Harrowby. Lord chancellor Lord Eldon (1821 Earl of Eldon). Lord privy seal Earl of Westmorland. Chancellor of exchequer N. Vansittart. F. J. Robinson, succeeded Jan., 1823. Admiralty Viscount Melville (before R. S. Dundas). Ordnance Lord Mulgrave (Sept., 1812, Earl of Mulgrave), (from 1818-May, 1820, without office in cabinet). Duke of Wellington, succeeded Jan., 1819. Board of trade Earl of Clancarty, not in cabinet. F. J. Robinson,[143] succeeded Jan., 1818, in cabinet. W. Huskisson,[143] succeeded Jan., 1823, in cabinet. Board of control Earl of Buckinghamshire, in cabinet. G. Canning, succeeded June, 1816, in cabinet. C. B. Bathurst, succeeded Jan., 1821, in cabinet. C. W. Wynn, succeeded Feb., 1822, in cabinet. Master of the mint Earl of Clancarty, not in cabinet. W. W. Pole (1821 Lord Maryborough), succeeded Sept., 1814, in cabinet. T. Wallace, succeeded Oct., 1823, not in cabinet. Duchy of Lancaster C. B. Bathurst (before C. Bragge). N. Vansittart (March, 1823, Lord Bexley), succeeded Feb., 1823. Without office Earl Camden (Sept., 1812, Marquis Camden), in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Duke of Richmond, not in cabinet. Viscount Whitworth (1815 Earl Whitworth), succeeded Aug., 1813, not in cabinet. Earl Talbot, succeeded Oct., 1817, not in cabinet. Marquis Wellesley, succeeded Dec., 1821, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Viscount Palmerston, not in cabinet.

7. CANNING, APRIL, 1827.

First lord of treasury } G. Canning. and chanc. exchequer } { home W. S. Bourne. { Marquis of Lansdowne (before Lord H. Secretaries of { Petty), succeeded July. state { foreign Viscount Dudley. { war and } Viscount Goderich (before F. J. { colonies } Robinson). Lord president Earl of Harrowby. Lord chancellor Lord Lyndhurst. Lord privy seal Duke of Portland (after July, without office in cabinet). Earl of Carlisle, succeeded July. Lord high admiral Duke of Clarence, not in cabinet. Board of trade and } W. Huskisson. treasurer of navy } Board of control C. W. Wynn. Master of the mint T. Wallace, not in cabinet. G. Tierney, succeeded May, in cabinet. { C. Arbuthnot, not in cabinet. First commissioner of { Earl of Carlisle succeeded May, in woods and forests { cabinet. { W. S. Bourne, succeeded July, in { cabinet. Duchy of Lancaster Lord Bexley. Without office Marquis of Lansdowne, May-July, in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Marquis Wellesley, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Viscount Palmerston, in cabinet.

8. GODERICH, SEPTEMBER, 1827.

First lord of treasury Viscount Goderich. { home Marquis of Lansdowne. Secretaries of { foreign Earl (before Viscount) Dudley. state { war and } W. Huskisson. { colonies } Lord president Duke of Portland. Lord chancellor Lord Lyndhurst. Lord privy seal Earl of Carlisle. Chancellor of exchequer J. C. Herries. Lord high admiral Duke of Clarence, not in cabinet. Ordnance Marquis of Anglesey, in cabinet. Board of trade and } C. Grant. treasurer of navy } Board of control C. W. Wynn. Master of the mint G. Tierney. First commissioner of } W. S. Bourne. woods and forests } Duchy of Lancaster Lord Bexley. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Marquis Wellesley, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Viscount Palmerston.

9. WELLINGTON, JANUARY, 1828.

First lord of treasury Duke of Wellington. { home R. (May, 1830, Sir R.) Peel. Secretaries of { foreign Earl Dudley. state { Earl of Aberdeen, succeeded June, 1828. { war and } W. Huskisson. { colonies } Sir G. Murray, succeeded May, 1828. Lord president Earl Bathurst. Lord chancellor Lord Lyndhurst. Lord privy seal Lord Ellenborough. Earl of Rosslyn, succeeded June, 1829. Chancellor of exchequer H. Goulburn. Admiralty Duke of Clarence (lord high admiral), not in cabinet. Viscount Melville, succeeded Sept., 1828, in cabinet. Board of trade and } C. Grant. treasurer of navy } W. V. Fitzgerald, succeeded June, 1828. Board of control Viscount Melville. Lord Ellenborough, succeeded Sept., 1828. Master of the mint J. C. Herries. Duchy of Lancaster Earl of Aberdeen, in cabinet. C. Arbuthnot, succeeded June, 1828, not in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Marquis of Anglesey, Feb., 1828, not in cabinet. Duke of Northumberland, succeeded Feb., 1829, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Viscount Palmerston, in cabinet. Sir H. Hardinge, succeeded May, 1828, not in cabinet.

10. GREY, NOVEMBER, 1830.

First lord of treasury Earl Grey (before Viscount Howick). { home Viscount Melbourne. Secretaries of { foreign Viscount Palmerston. state { war and { Viscount Goderich. { colonies { E. G. Stanley, succeeded March, 1833. { { T. S. Rice, succeeded June, 1834. Lord president Marquis of Lansdowne. Lord chancellor Lord Brougham. Lord privy seal Lord Durham. Earl of Ripon (before Viscount Goderich) succeeded April, 1833. Earl of Carlisle, succeeded June, 1834. Chancellor of exchequer Viscount Althorp. Admiralty Sir J. R. Graham. Lord Auckland, succeeded June, 1834. Board of trade Lord Auckland, not in cabinet. C. P. Thomson, succeeded June, 1834. Board of control C. Grant. Master of mint Lord Auckland, not in cabinet. J. Abercromby, succeeded June, 1834, in cabinet. Duchy of Lancaster Lord Holland, in cabinet. Postmaster-general Duke of Richmond, in cabinet. Marquis of Conyngham, succeeded June, 1834, not in cabinet. Paymaster of forces Lord J. Russell, admitted to cabinet June, 1831. Without office Earl of Carlisle (to June, 1834). Lord-lieutenant Ireland Marquis of Anglesey, not in cabinet. Marquis Wellesley, succeeded Sept., 1833, not in cabinet. Chief secretary for Ireland E. G. Stanley, admitted to cabinet June, 1831. Sir J. C. Hobhouse, succeeded March, 1833, not in cabinet. E. J. Littleton, succeeded May, 1833, not in cabinet. Secretary at war C. W. Wynn, not in cabinet. Sir H. Parnell, succeeded April, 1831, not in cabinet. Sir J. Hobhouse, succeeded Feb., 1832, not in cabinet. E. Ellice, succeeded April, 1833, admitted to cabinet June, 1834.

11. MELBOURNE, JULY, 1834.

First lord of treasury Viscount Melbourne. { home Viscount Duncannon. Secretaries of { foreign Viscount Palmerston. state { war and } T. S. Rice. { colonies } Lord president Marquis of Lansdowne. Lord chancellor Lord Brougham. Lord privy seal Earl of Mulgrave. Chancellor of exchequer Viscount Althorp. Admiralty Lord Auckland. Board of trade and } C. P. Thompson. treasurer of navy } Board of control C. Grant. Master of mint J. Abercromby. First commissioner of } Sir J. C. Hobhouse, in cabinet. woods and forests } Duchy of Lancaster Lord Holland. Paymaster of forces Lord J. Russell. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Marquis Wellesley, not in cabinet. Secretary at war E. Ellice.

PROVISIONAL ADMINISTRATION, NOVEMBER, 1834.

First lord of treasury Duke of Wellington. { home Duke of Wellington. Secretaries of { foreign Duke of Wellington. state { war and } Duke of Wellington. { colonies } Lord chancellor Lord Lyndhurst. Chancellor of exchequer Lord Denman.

12. PEEL, DECEMBER, 1834.

First lord of treasury } Sir R. Peel. and chanc. exchequer } { home H. Goulburn. Secretaries of { foreign Duke of Wellington. state { war and } Earl of Aberdeen. { colonies } Lord president Earl of Rosslyn. Lord chancellor Lord Lyndhurst. Lord privy seal Lord Wharncliffe. Admiralty Earl de Grey. Ordnance Sir G. Murray, in cabinet. Board of trade and } A. Baring. master of the mint } Board of control Lord Ellenborough. Paymaster of forces Sir E. Knatchbull. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Earl of Haddington, not in cabinet. Secretary at war J. C. Herries.

13. MELBOURNE, APRIL, 1835.

First lord of treasury Viscount Melbourne. { home Lord J. Russell. Secretaries of { foreign Viscount Palmerston. state { war and } C. Grant (May, 1835, Lord Glenelg). { colonies } Lord president Marquis of Lansdowne. Lord chancellor Great seal in commission. Lord Cottenham, appointed Jan., 1836. Lord privy seal Viscount Duncannon. Chancellor of exchequer T. S. Rice. Admiralty Lord Auckland. Earl of Minto, succeeded Sept., 1835. Board of trade C. P. Thompson. Board of control Sir J. C. Hobhouse. Duchy of Lancaster Lord Holland, in cabinet. Lord-lieutenant Ireland Earl of Mulgrave, not in cabinet. Secretary at war Viscount Howick.

FOOTNOTES:

[142] On May 23, 1812, after Perceval's death, the Earl of Buckinghamshire was appointed chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster.

[143] Also treasurer of the navy.



INDEX.

Abbot, Charles (afterwards Lord Colchester), speaker, 36, 61, 72, 85, 238.

Abdallah, Pasha of Acre, 393.

Abercromby, James (afterwards Lord Dunfermline), master of the mint, 346; speaker, 354.

Abercromby, Sir Ralph, general, 6, 346.

Aberdeen, 306, 348.

Aberdeen, Earl of (Gordon), 138; chancellor of the duchy, 231; foreign secretary, 236, 263, 264, 268, 352, 376, 380; secretary for war and colonies, 352.

Abo, treaty of, 123.

Abolition of slavery, acts for the, 46-48, 325-327, 438.

Abolition of slave trade, 48, 143, 151, 152, 167, 188, 274, 279, 358, 438.

Abrantes, 98.

Abyssinia, 436.

Academy, Royal. See London.

Acarnania, 266.

Acre, 393, 394.

Acte Additionnel, the, 155.

Adams, John Quincy, 128.

Addington, Henry (afterwards Viscount Sidmouth), 25, 39, 50, 54, 68, 200, 202, 346; first lord of treasury and chancellor of exchequer, 1, 2, 11, 15, 16, 27, 34; relations with Pitt, 2, 24-29; attacked by Pitt, 30, 31; resignation, 31, 32; his adherents, 34, 36, 68, 81; becomes Viscount Sidmouth and lord president of the council, 35; resignation, 37; lord privy seal, 45; lord president of the council, 49; resignation, 49; lord president of the council, 76, 82; home secretary, 81, 83, 172, 177, 179, 180, 183; in cabinet without office, 199; retirement, 227.

Addington, John Hiley, M.P., 28, 36.

Adelaide, 440.

Adelaide, Princess of Saxe-Meiningen (afterwards queen of William IV.), 184, 273, 277, 351, 375.

Adige, river, 138.

Adour, river, 115, 117.

Adrianople, peace of, 267, 268.

AEgean islands, the, 263; sea, 224, 394.

AEtolia, 266.

Afghanistan, 397, 402, 403, 412-414; treaty with East India Company, 403; first Afghan war, 403, 414.

Africa, interior of, 436.

Agra, 399, 409.

Agriculture, condition of, 84, 433, 434.

Ahmadnagar, 398.

Airy, Sir George, 428.

Aix, island, 69.

Aix-la-Chapelle, conference of, 189-191, 377.

Akkerman, treaty of, 260.

Alava, Spanish admiral, 40.

Albuera, battle, 103, 104.

Albuquerque, Duke of, 100.

Alcantara, 99.

Alemtejo, province, 255.

Alessandria, 213.

Alexander the Great, 401, 413.

Alexander I., Tsar of Russia, 5, 7, 23, 37, 52, 59, 66, 78, 80, 81, 92, 104, 105, 124, 144-148, 151-153, 168, 189-191, 210-212, 214, 216-218, 224, 225, 232.

Alexandria, 261, 264, 265, 393, 413; battle and capitulation of, 6; retention by England, 19; expeditions to, 52, 57, 264; convention of, 264, 265.

Algarve, province, 389.

Algeciras, 8.

Algiers, Dey of, 187, 188; bombardment of, 188; conquest of, 269.

Algoa bay, 438.

Alliance, La Belle, 164.

"All the Talents" ministry. See ministries, Grenville's.

Almaraz, 106.

Almeida, 100, 102, 103.

Almora, treaty of, 405.

Alps, the, 138.

Alsace, 143, 168.

Alten, Count, 162.

Althorp, Viscount (afterwards third Earl Spencer), 230, 234; chancellor of the exchequer, 279, 280, 283, 286, 291, 297, 321-323, 328, 330, 334, 335, 343-345; resignation, 346; chancellor of the exchequer, 347, 349, 350, 373.

Amager, island, 4.

Amascoas, battle, 390.

Ambigu, L', newspaper, 12.

Amelia, Princess (daughter of George III.), 74.

America, British North, 85, 225. See also Canada.

America, South, 205, 226. See also Spain and Portugal.

Amherst, Earl, governor-general of Bengal, 408, 409.

Amherstburg, 141.

Amiens, 10; treaty of, 16, 17, 19, 20, 208, 398; negotiations, 7-12; preliminary treaty, 9, 13, 14; definitive treaty, 12, 13, 435.

Amir Khan, Pindari leader, 407.

Andalusia, 94, 100, 102, 106, 107.

Anglesey, Marquis of. See Paget, Lord.

Angouleme, Duke of. See Louis Antoine, dauphin.

Ansbach, 43.

Anti-Duelling Association, 251.

Antioch, 393.

Antwerp, 43, 64, 65, 200, 378, 380, 382, 386.

Apsley House. See London.

Aragon, 100.

Arakan, 408, 409.

Aranjuez, 87, 92, 93; treaty of, 6.

Arapiles hills, the, 107.

Archangel, 310.

Archipelago, the, 261.

Arcis-sur-Aube, battle, 145.

Arcot, 400.

Arden, Lord (Perceval), 50.

Argaum, battle, 399.

Argentine, the (La Plata), 190.

Argus, the, American ship, 141.

Arkwright, Sir Richard, 83.

Arta, gulf of, 266, 392.

Artois, Count of. See Charles X. of France.

Ascot races, 148.

Ashley, Lord (Ashley-Cooper), afterwards Earl of Shaftesbury, 327, 328.

Asia Minor, 394, 413.

Aspern, 63.

Aspropotamo, river, 268.

Assam, 408, 409.

Assaye, battle, 399.

Astorga, 93-95.

Attwood, Thomas, M.P., 335.

Auchmuty, Sir Samuel, 56, 81.

Auckland, first Lord (Eden), president of the board of trade, 34, 346.

Auckland, second Lord (Eden), afterwards Earl of, first lord of the admiralty, 346, 357; governor-general of India, 363, 412.

Auerstaedt, battle, 47.

Augusta, Princess of Hesse, 184.

Augusta, Princess (daughter of George III.), 184 n.

Austen, Jane, 422.

Austerlitz, battle, 42, 43, 51, 60.

Australia, 436, 438-440; New South Wales, 438, 439; Queensland, 439; South Australia, 440; Victoria, 439; West Australia, 439.

Austria, 17, 54, 58, 59, 62, 78, 80, 124, 214, 215, 220, 264, 267, 391; guarantees independence of Malta, 13; treaty with France, 14; third coalition, 37, 38, 41; Ulm and peace of Pressburg, 42; struggle with France, 61-64; treaty with England, 63; war with Bavaria, 63; piece of Vienna, 64, 66; national bankruptcy, 81; treaty with France, 122; attacks North Italy, 133; diplomacy, 132, 134-137, 144, 187-189, 217; truce with Russia, 135; treaty of Ried, 137; treaty of Teplitz, 137; war with France, 137, 142; alliance with Murat, 143; campaign of 1814, 118, 143-145; treaty of Chaumont, 144, 145, 168, 186, 191, 377; treaty of Fontainebleau, 145, 146; first treaty of Paris, 147, 149, 151, 156, 167, 378; congress of Vienna, 149, 151-153, 166, 167, 186, 188-190, 376, 379, 381, 388; secret treaty of Vienna, 153; acquires Venetia and Lombardy, 166; second treaty of Paris, 167, 168, 376; holy alliance, 168; treaties with the Two Sicilies, Tuscany, Modena and Parma, 187; conference of Aix-la-Chapelle, 189-191; congress of Troppau, 211-214, 395, 396; congress of Laibach, 212, 223; army in Italy, 212, 213, 216; congress of Verona, 216-219, 222, 223, 392; conference at London, 222; conference at St. Petersburg, 224; joins conference of London, 379-386, 392; secret convention at Muenchengraetz, 395, 396; convention at Berlin, 396.

Ava. See Burma.

Azores, islands, 259, 388.

Azzara, Chevalier, 21.

Bacon, Lord, 424.

Badajoz, 99, 102-106, 108, 113, 147; treaty of, 6.

Baden, 34, 189.

Baghdad, 413.

Bailey, Old. See London.

Baird, David (afterwards Sir David), general, 6, 47, 93-95.

Balkans, the, 263, 266, 267.

Baltic, the, 52, 78, 90, 199, 310.

Baltic, battle of the, 4, 5, 420.

Baltimore, 146.

Banda Oriental. See Uruguay.

Bank charter acts, 325, 326, 330, 331.

Bank of England, 183, 205, 206, 303; notes made legal tender, 182.

Bank restriction act, 16.

Bankes, Henry, M.P., 157.

Banks, Sir Joseph, 428.

Barcelona, 88, 110, 220.

Barclay, Commander, 139.

Barham, Lord (Sir Charles Middleton), first lord of the admiralty, 36.

Baring, Alexander (afterwards Lord Ashburton), 304; president of board of trade and master of the mint, 352.

Baring, Francis (afterwards Lord Northbrook), 346.

Barlow, Sir George, governor-general of Bengal, 401.

Barnstaple, 193.

Baroda, Gaekwar of, 405, 406.

Barrosa, 102.

Basque provinces, 390, 391.

Basque roads, 69.

Bass, George, 439.

Bassein, treaty of, 398, 399, 405.

Batavian republic. See Holland.

Bath, 43, 362.

Bath (Holland), 65.

Bathurst, Charles Bragge-. See Bragge, Charles.

Bathurst, Earl, president of the board of trade, 50, 68; secretary for war and colonies, 82, 109, 112; resignation, 227; lord president of the council, 231.

Battersea Fields. See London.

Bautzen, battle, 135.

Bavaria, 41, 42, 66, 136, 152, 153, 166, 189, 392; war with Austria, 63; treaty of Ried, 137.

Baylen, 58, 88, 89, 92.

Bayonne, 88, 89, 92, 112, 115-117, 119; road to, 111.

Beachy Head, 8.

Beauharnais, Auguste, Duke of Leuchtenberg, 382.

Beauharnais, Eugene, viceroy of Italy, 138.

Bedford, Duke of (Russell), lord lieutenant of Ireland, 49.

Beilan, pass, 393.

Beira, province, 255, 257.

Belgium, 143, 144, 150, 158, 159, 161, 162, 200, 377; Prince of Orange proclaimed, 138; troops, 156; Waterloo campaign, 157-164; united to Holland, 166; revolution, 276, 376-382; elects Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg king, 383; war with Holland, 384-386, 393; convention with Holland, 387.

Belgrade, 80.

Bell, Henry, 427, 434.

Belleisle, 388.

Bellerophon, the, British ship, 165, 168, 169.

Belliard, French general, 383, 384.

Bellingham, John, 76.

Benevente, 94, 95.

Bengal, 310, 330, 400, 404, 408, 410.

Bentham, Jeremy, 338, 341, 420, 421, 437.

Bentinck, Lord William, 114, 143; governor-general of India, 410-412.

Berar, 399. See Nagpur.

Berbice, 9.

Beresford, Lord George, 242.

Beresford, William (afterwards Lord and later Viscount), 47, 96, 103, 109, 118, 119, 211, 222.

Berezina, river, 125.

Berkeley, Vice-admiral, 127.

Berkshire, 281, 341.

Berlin, 53, 81, 134, 310; convention at, 396.

Berlin decree, the, 55, 403.

Bernadotte, Marshal (afterwards Charles XIV. of Sweden), 54, 80, 136, 137, 143, 150.

Berry, Duke of, 210.

Bessarabia, 123.

Bessborough, Earl of (Ponsonby), 287.

Bessieres, Marshal, 88, 92.

Betanzos, 95.

Bexley, Lord. See Vansittart, Nicholas.

Bhartpur, 399, 403, 408, 409.

Bickersteth, Henry (afterwards Lord Langdale), 363.

Bidassoa, river, 112, 114, 115.

Bilbao, 111, 391.

Birmingham, 178, 236, 272, 285, 295, 297, 304, 335, 435.

Biscay, province, 109, 389, 391.

Bishopp, British officer, 130.

Blackburn, Francis, attorney-general for Ireland, 313, 314.

Blackfriars. See London.

Blackheath. See London.

Blackwood's Magazine, 423-425.

Bladensburg, battle, 146.

Blake, Spanish general, 88.

Blandford, Marquis of (Churchill), afterwards Duke of Marlborough, 271, 284.

Blanketeers, the, 176.

Blomfield, bishop of London, 324, 341, 373.

Bluecher, Marshal, 138, 143-145, 148; Waterloo campaign, 156-161, 163-164.

Bohemia, 64, 137.

Bombay, 310, 398.

Bona, 188.

Bonaparte, Joseph, 10-12, 21; King of Naples, 47, 53; King of Spain, 59, 88, 89, 92, 98, 104, 106, 107, 109-111, 122, 123, 190.

Bonaparte, Josephine (wife of Napoleon), 382.

Bonaparte, Louis, King of Holland, 46, 53, 78.

Bonaparte, Napoleon, 6, 19, 39, 41, 42, 51, 53-56, 58, 62, 64-66, 78, 80-82, 87-89, 91, 92, 95, 96, 99-102, 104, 105, 109-112, 114, 115, 117, 119, 120-126, 128, 143, 145, 148, 150, 168, 171, 186, 199, 382; concordat with the pope, 7; refuses overtures of peace, 8; meets Cornwallis, 10; elected president of the Italian republic, 12, 17; plans for the invasion of England, 8, 35, 38, 41, 71; attacked by French exiles in London, 12, 17; consul for life, 15, 17; Fox presented to him, 15, 16; annexes Piedmont, 17; mediates in Switzerland and Germany, 17; schemes of colonial expansion, 18; Whitworth, 20-22; declared emperor, 33, 34; plots against his life, 33, 34; coronations, 35, 37, 38; Ulm and Austerlitz, 42, 64; Jena and Auerstaedt, 47, 55, 64; Eylau, 51, 56; Friedland, 52, 122, 401; meets Alexander, 52; "continental system," 53, 55-58, 78-80, 83, 87, 105, 171, 403; manifesto, 57; at Erfurt, 59; Eckmuehl and Wagram, 60, 63; Borodino, 63, 124; Leipzig, 63, 114, 118, 133, 137, 138; marriage with Maria Louisa, 78; fiscal policy, 79; first abdication, 82, 118, 145; in Spain, 92, 94; war with Russia, 121-126, 402; campaign of 1813, 132-138; Luetzen and Bautzen, 135; Dresden, 137; campaign of 1814, 143-145; La Rothiere, 144; Arcis-sur-Aube, 145; treaty of Fontainebleau, 145, 146; Elba, 145, 146, 153, 201; "The Hundred Days," 151, 153-165; Ligny, 158, 159; Quatre Bras, 159; Waterloo, 160-165; second abdication, 165; St. Helena, 166, 167, 169, 170, 402; designs on India, 401-403.

Bond, Nathaniel, M.P., 36.

Bonnymuir, 193.

Bordeaux, 118, 154; road to, 117.

Bordeaux, Henry, Duke of. See Chambord, Count of.

Borisov, battle, 125.

Borodino, battle, 63, 124, 164.

Bosphorus, the, 267, 394.

Boston (United States), 142.

Botany Bay, 438.

Boulogne, 8, 35, 38.

Boulton, Matthew, 435.

Bourbon, island, 69, 403.

Bourbon, Duke of, 154.

Bourne, W. Sturges, 341; home secretary, 227; first commissioner of woods and forests, 228, 229.

Braga, 258.

Bragge, Charles (afterwards Bragge-Bathurst), 28, 68, 202; chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, 81, 82, 174; president of the board of control, 199.

Brahmaputra, the, 408, 409.

Braine l'Alleud, Belgian village, 162.

Brand, M.P., 284.

Brazil, 89, 190, 211, 221, 222, 253, 254, 259, 388; commercial treaty with England, 222.

Brereton, Colonel, 298.

Breslau, 134, 135.

Brest, 39, 55.

Brewster's Encyclopaedia, 424.

Bridgwater Treatises, the, 338.

Brienne, 143.

Brighton, 350.

Brindley, James, 434.

Bristol, 175, 297, 298, 302, 309, 435.

British Association, the, 338.

Brittany, 154.

Brock, Major-general, 129, 130.

Broke, Captain, 142.

Brooks's club. See London.

Brougham, Henry (afterwards Lord Brougham and Vaux), 48, 172, 173, 182, 193-196, 207, 228, 234, 241, 242, 274, 277, 278, 280, 357-359, 363, 423, 431; lord chancellor, 281, 282, 287, 295, 325, 338, 343, 345, 346, 348, 351; legal reforms, 332, 333, 358, 359, 361.