Elba 1814: Napoleon meets a man from Bungay.

John Barber Scott (1792-1862)

John Barber Scott was the much travelled son of a wealthy merchant from Bungay in Suffolk. His diaries, provide a fascinating glimpse of life in the Waveney valley in the first half of the nineteenth century from the perspective of the mercantile-gentry class. (1)

His early diary provides several accounts of his being in the presence of the great people of his day: Byron speaking in the House of Lords in support of the Luddites and again at the opening of the Drury Lane New Theatre; the exiled Louis XVIII speaking at Cambridge; a Bible Society meeting in Dover at which Lord Liverpool and Wilberforce were present; Madame de Staël at her booksellers in Bond Street; and accompanying 150 Cambride graduates with a petition to the Prince Regent congratulating him on the victories of 2013 in the presence of too many Dukes and Lords to mention.

Waveney House, Bungay

He was also outside the doors of Westminster Abbey on the day of George IV's coronation, and "saw the doings of the Queen Caroline." (2) He noted the coronation celebrations in Bungay, at which his father gave a feast to 300 of the poorer citizens of the town in front of Waveney House. He also noted

A Queen riot in the evening, when all the flags and laurels in the town were pulled down and destroyed, except those of my father, which were not touched.(3)

Probably the most memorable day of Scott's life occurred in 1814 when like a number of his countrymen, including future Prime Minister Lord John Russell, Scott made his way to a small island off the Italian coast, in the hope of seeing the legendary Napoleon Bonaparte, now for a short time Emperor of Elba.

Souvenir that Scott brought back from Elba

Initially Scott was unimpressed with Napoleon, "the figure that has awed emperors and kings, has gained victory on victory, and the sight of whom has been equivalent to ten thousand men on the field of battle ", now appeared a "graceless figure so clumsy and awkward" whose countenance seemed to "indicate stupidity", and who had " a very large corporation, and his thighs are large - out of all proportion." Scott did however, correctly estimate Napoleon's height,which was rather greater than British caricature and propaganda suggested "about five feet seven inches", about average height for his day. (4)

Like many who were to meet him on St Helena, Scott was soon charmed by Napoleon. He noted his constant half-smile, "which gives one a feeling of confidence and ease. His eyes are remarkably expressive and quick, his voice is deep, his entire manner indicates great talent and he certainly inspires respect" (5)

Napoleon spent 22 minutes talking to Scott and his companions, and betrayed his usual curiosity, peppering them with questions. To a Scottish artillery officer he said, "They say you don't have any trousers " and being told that Scottish soldiers did indeed wear "skirts" asked if the officer had them with him, and was disappointed that the answer was no:"Je voudrais bien les voir." (6) When it came to Scott's turn to be questioned he declared that as yet he had no profession but was a member of the University of Cambridge, which Napoleon had trouble pronouncing, "Quoi? Camerige" Camerige? " Napoleon then decided that one day Scott would become Lord Chancellor, and asked if "Skine - kini- Erskine" still held that position, to which the polite young Scott addressing Napoleon as "Sire " informed him that Lord Eldon was the Lord Chancellor, to which Napoleon characteristically replied, "ah yes, I remember."(7)

At the end of the conversation Napoleon took off his hat and bowed to them, which people who knew him claimed he had never done before. Scott and his companions, all army officers,

were so delighted with the reception he gave us that I must confess we drank "Napoleon" unanimously, in a bumper, on our return - a part of the afternoon on which, upon reflection I feel rather ashamed (8)

Apparently Napoleon invited them to meet him again the next day, but because of the slowness of one of their party, Major Maxwell at his toilette they were too late. Scott was convinced that had they arrived sooner they would have been invited to accompany Napoleon and his party on a three day trip to the island of Pianosa. From his boat Napoleon again took off his hat and bowed to them two or three times.

we have been so fortunate that we ought not to lament anything; yet we cannot help abusing Maxwell. .. We remained a long time on the shore looking at the boat which bore this wonderful man away. (9)

Scott speculated that Napoleon might escape from Elba, but "where to go?", perhaps to Italy to "erect her into an independent kingdom." On the return journey he conversed with a Frenchman who had told General Bertrand that he thought Napoleon would not remain long in Elba. Bertrand, who within a year was to faithfully follow Napoleon to St Helena, told him that Napoleon was content, and that he would always remain on Elba! (10)

Scott came from a Tory background, and had accompanied his father in campaigning against Coke of Holkham, the Foxite Whig and famous agricultural reformer, and would himself have gone into politics but for his father's loss of much of his wealth. Unsurprisingly then, for all his admiration of Napoleon, Scott's reaction to Waterloo and Napoleon's death was fairly conventional. On hearing of the Waterloo victory he recorded with characteristic Loyalist hyperbole, "the days of Agincourt and Cressy are come again." In his diary he wrote at some length on the news of Napoleon's death.

This extraordinary man is no more! He has closed his mortal career, leaving behind him but the name of one on whom the gaze of mankind was more intensely fixed than on any that has found a place in the pages of history. His end, however questionable the justice of his treatment in his latter days, is a fine lesson of the vanity of what has too often been called greatness.

He concluded with the hope that Napoleon's death

may do more to strip of their tinsel the Alexanders and Caesars of the world than any event that ever occurred.(11)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1. An Englishman at Home and Abroad 1792-1828 (London 1930) and An Englishman at Home and Abroad 1829-1862 (Bungay 1996)
2. Caroline, the estranged Queen of George IV was denied admittance to the coronation. There was much popular support for her in England, particularly among the radicals.
3. Diary 1792-1828 p. 190. Perhaps the generous feast given to the poor was the reason why Scott's decorations were spared.
4. Diary 1792-1828 pp 96-98.
5. Diary p. 102
6. "I would very much like to see them". Diary 1792-1828 p. 99
7. ibid
8. Diary 1792-1828 p. 102.
9. Diary 1792-1828 p.103 ,br> 10. Diary 1792-1828 p 107
11. Diary p 188-189

Pride of Place at Chartwell - Kent Bylines

The full article can be found on Kent Bylines

*****************************

The Pen is Mightier than the Sword: St Helena, March 1820

Front cover, "The political house that Jack built", 1819

In March 1820 a naval surgeon named McKenzie arrived on St Helena with a copy of the The political house that Jack built. (1) This pamphlet which was published by William Hone in the wake of the August 1819 Peterloo Massacre in Manchester, was to run to several editions and sell 100,000 or so copies.

McKenzie had, so he claimed, intended to show the pamphlet to Sir Thomas Reade, before giving it to an English resident on the island. Unfortunately he left it in a shop, and two British army officers found it and reported him to Sir Hudson Lowe.

Lowe immediately sent McKenzie aboard his ship and held him prisoner for 7 days, threatening to send him back to England and force him out of the Navy. Luckily for him there was no ship leaving for England, and so at the end of his confinement he was able to beg Lowe for forgiveness and secure his release. (2)

Hone was a fierce defender of the freedom of the press who had faced three separate trials on three days in December 1817, one of which was for libelling the Prince Regent.(3) He was acquitted in each trial, to great popular acclaim. Henceforth he was regarded as almost immune from prosecution whilst other radical journalists frequently found themselves in prison, and William Cobbett exiled himself in North America to avoid the same treatment.

Ruffians are abroad

William Hone was a friend of Hazlitt, and like him and many others did not subscribe to the Loyalist narrative about Napoleon. One of his earlier pamphlets had been Buonaparte-phobia (1815), which satirized the exaggerated anti-Napoleonic language of The Times , whose editor was henceforth referred to as Dr Slop.

The frontispiece of The "Political House that Jack Built" (top) carried a cartoon of Wellington, putting his sword on the scales of justice. The Waterloo man, as Hone described him, had been recruited into the Cabinet in late 1818, and his appointment was seen as a sign that the Government was prepared to use military force to put down those calling for reform. The Manchester massacre seemed to confirm this, and it almost immediately became known as "Peterloo".

These are THE PEOPLE all tatter'd and torn,
Who curse the day wherein they were born,
On account of Taxation too great to be borne,
And pray for relief, from night to morn;
Who, in vain, Petition in every form,
Who, peacably Meeting to ask for Reform,
Were sabred by Yeomanry Cavalry, who,
Were thank'd by THE MAN, all shaven and shorn,
All cover'd with Orders--and all forlorn;

The Man of course was the Prince Regent, a Whig in his youth, who had turned against his former political friends and had publicly thanked the troops who broke up the reform meeting in Manchester.

George Cruikshank's caricature of the Prince Regent

 
THE DANDY OF SIXTY, who bows with a grace,
And has taste in wigs, collars, cuirasses and lace;
Who, to tricksters, and fools, leaves the State 
and its treasure,
And, when Britain's in tears, sails about 
at his pleasure:
Who spurn'd from his presence the Friends of his youth,
And now has not one who will tell him the truth;
Who took to his counsels, in evil hour,
The Friends of the Reasons of lawless Power; 

In the poem Hone looked to leading Whigs to save Reform from Wellington and the repressive Tory Government:

This WORD is the Watchword--the talisman word,
That the WATERLOO-MAN's to crush with his sword;
But, if shielded by NORFOLK and BEDFORD's alliance,
It will set both his sword, and him, at defiance;
If FITZWILLIAM, and GROSVENOR, and ALBEMARLE aid it,
And assist its best Champions, who then dare invade it?

It is no wonder that a pamphlet such as this was not welcomed on St Helena at this time. Lowe and Reade were fierce Loyalists, determined to keep opposition newspapers off the island and especially from Longwood House, and naturally suspected anyone who showed any Whig or worse still Radical sympathies. On St Helena where the Governor's word was supreme, there was no recourse to the law to protect press freedom or individual liberties.
-------------------------------------------------
1. Jack was a synonym for John Bull. "This is the house that Jack Built" is a traditional English nursery rhyme.
2. The Morning Chronicle, May 20, 1820.
3. See also this post on Hone.

Napoleon's Tomb St Helena, May 5th 2020.

Aujourd’hui, en hommage à l’Empereur… à Sainte Hélène.

Posted by Domaines nationaux français à l'île de Sainte Hélène, Atlantique Sud on Monday, May 4, 2020

Napoelon's Tomb, St Helena, May 5th 2020

St Helena has been hit hard by the coronavirus pandemic. So far no cases have been detected on the island, but there are no longer regular flights bringing in the tourists on which all the island's hopes had been pinned.

Normally a large crowd gathers in the Valley of the Tomb on May 5th to commemorate the death of the Emperor Napoleon, but this year because of social distancing no such event could be held. The Rev Graeme Beckett, St Helena's Baptist Minister wanted to play his bugle, and so he stood alone beside the tomb. Brightly edging the tomb were hundreds of Everlastings, the Australian daisies that now cover the island, and were originally sent to Longwood by a friend of Lady Holland, Napoleon's most prominent supporter in England.

View of the Ceremony from above

The rather moving ceremony was videoed on a mobile phone by Michel Dancoisne Martineau and posted on Facebook on the same day. Remember how many weeks it took for news of Napoleon's death to arrive in Europe!

On reflection the presence of a nonconformist Minister at this ceremony seems very appropriate. Two hundred years ago, and much later, Anglicanism was emblematic of Loyalism, whereas radicals and Liberals, who were always much more sympathetic to Napoleon, were drawn from the ranks of nonconformity.

Next year elaborate plans are being made for a huge ceremony to commemorate the bicentenary of Napoleon's death. It will be very important for the tourist industry on the island. Let us hope that we are back to some semblance of normality before then.

Prince of Wales at Napoleon's Tomb, 1925

Visit of Prince of Wales to Napoleon's Tomb, 1925 (1)

Over the years there have been only a handful of Royal visits to St Helena. One of the earliest, perhaps even the first, was that of the Prince of Wales in 1925.

A willow tree being planted to commemorate the visit

The opening passage in the speech he had made on arrival on the island began with a glowing reference to Napoleon, although he was not mentioned by name.

I need not assure you of the deep interest with which I set foot on an Island whose name is so well known to all students of History, not only because it was here that were written the closing pages of a great and romantic life story – the story of the Emperor whose mortal remains now lie on the banks of the Seine, where many soldiers of France have found a resting place ... (2)

Delivered in the shadow of the horrific loss of life in the Great War, the speech evokes memories of a time when France was Britain's closest ally, and when Napoleon was looked on far more favourably in the United Kingdom than a half century later.

Commemoration of Centenary of Napoleon's death

Four years earlier there had been a joint Anglo-French commemoration of the centenary of Napoleon's death, with the Union Jack proudly displayed over Napoleon's tomb alongside the French tricolour.

Recent commemoration of Napoleon's death

In recent years the commemoration of Napoleon's death on St Helena has been revived. The emphasis is now far less imperial and euro-centric, and more focus is placed on involving local people in what is an important part of their heritage.

Plans are I understand already well underway for the commemoration of the bicentenary. Not everybody who wants to attend can find seats on the scheduled flights nor be accommodated on the island, so I believe two cruise ships are being hired.
------------------------------------------------------------
1. I acknowledge the Source gallica.bnf.fr / Bibliothèque nationale de France for use of the two photos of the Prince at Napoleon's tomb. The photo of the 1921 commemoration I found on Saint Helena Island Info which is a very useful source.
2. A copy of the speech was, or at least used to be on display at the castle in Jamestown. A friend faithfully transcribed it for me. As far as I am aware it is not available anywhere else on the internet, so I will include it here.

I am very grateful to the people of St. Helena for the welcome offered to me on landing at Jamestown this morning, and I much appreciate the good wishes contained in their address.

I need not assure you of the deep interest with which I set foot on an Island whose name is so well known to all students of History, not only because it was here that were written the closing pages of a great and romantic life story – the story of the Emperor whose mortal remains now lie on the banks of the Seine, where many soldiers of France have found a resting place – but for the fact that during the period of maritime development of our Empire, St. Helena formed one of the most important links in Britain’s chain of communications as an invaluable supply depot and an outpost of the East Indies.

To-day trade routes have changes with the times, and though the Island, finding that circumstances have deflected the main arteries of traffic, may at times feel somewhat remote from the outer busier world, I know full well that St. Helena still prides herself on her place in the Empire, and that the loyalty of her people to the Crown and to Britain ideals remain undiminished.

I am hoping in the time at my disposal to meet as many as possible of the people of the Island and to learn something of your interests and your activities.

This morning before leaving the Castle, I am to see an exhibit of your local domestic industry, that of lace-making, samples of which I know attracted the attention of the general public at Wembley and won commendation from the experts. And tomorrow I look forward to the opportunity of inspecting some of the flax mills and shall be interested to gain some first hand knowledge of this Industry which has been established in your midst and on which much of your material prosperity depends. You have my best wishes for your progress and welfare in the years to come.

In conclusion I will not fail to convey to the King your assurance of loyalty and devotion, and will at the same time tell His Majesty of the cordiality of the welcome which the people of St. Helena have given to me to-day.

Edward

The Duke of Sussex and Napoleon: "Peace to the remains of that Great Man."

Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex (1773-1843)

On the death of Napoleon:

"the close of a most disgraceful transaction in which the Ministers have made this country to participate. To be the persecutor of fallen glory and the gaoler for the European sovereigns is not the situation in which England ought to have been placed. Peace to the remains of that great man, whom History will treat hereafter with greater justice than his contemporaries have hitherto done, while our disgrace will I fear be handled with all due severity." - The Duke of Sussex(1)

Wearing Knight of the Garter Robes

The Duke of Sussex was the sixth son and the ninth child of George III. His Foxite Whig politics set him apart from most of the Royal Family, except for his much loved brother the Duke of Kent, a fellow Whig and father to the future Queen Victoria. The Duke of Sussex gave Victoria away at her wedding, and he became a godfather to her eldest daughter, but according to his biographer and contrary to conventional opinion, their relationship was far from tranquil.(2)

The Duke (tall figure on right), at Queen Victoria's Wedding

Like his brothers his private life was unconventional, and neither of his marriages received Royal assent. The first, secretly to a Catholic in Rome in 1793 was in 1794 annulled under the Royal Marriages Act, and his second, to Lady Cecilia Letitia Gore, in contravention of the same act, was never recognised at Court.(3)

Probably the poorest of the sons of George III and perpetually in debt, he spent much of his income on building up a large library. When the Whigs finally got into power they refused to increase his allowance because it would be seen as corrupt to reward one of their own! He died leaving little or nothing to his heirs. His wishes that his body be used for dissection by scientists was ignored, but he was buried as he instructed in Kensal Green Cemetery rather than Windsor Chapel, to ensure that his beloved, unrecognised second wife could rest beside him.

Augustus Frederick's Grave, Kensal Green Cemetery

At 6ft 4" tall, with a far from slender frame, the Duke cut a striking easily recognisable figure, and was reportedly very popular with the public at a time when the Monarchy was not held in the highest esteem.

The Duke of Sussex ironically portrayed as a Protestant champion, circa 1825

From 1805 when he took his seat in the House of Lords until late in his life he supported all the liberal causes of the day. His support of the 1832 Reform Bill was unequivocal. Whilst he had "every respect for the nobility of the country" he argued that

education ennobles more than anything else, and when I find the people increasing in knowledge and wealth, I should be glad to know why they ought not, also, to rise in the ranks of society. (4)

He was a particularly strong supporter of Catholic Emancipation and of the rights of Jews, both highly controversial issues for a Royal Family whose coronation oath included a vow to maintain the established Protestant Church and to preserve the rights and privileges of its Bishops and clergy.

Anti-Irish cartoon used to attack supporters of Catholic Emancipation

In the bitterly divisive period after Waterloo the Duke lined up solidly against the repressive measures of the Lord Liverpool Government. He described the laws of England as vindictive and barbarous, and their application as often capricious, he opposed the Alien Bills of 1816 and 1817 which gave the Government the right to deport aliens without trial, he opposed the suspension of Habeas Corpus in 1817, and he opposed the Blasphemous Libel Bill of 1817, warning against the erosion of the liberty of the press. He also gave support to Queen Caroline, arguably the most popular of all the Royal Family, during her divorce trial in 1820.(5)

It should be no surprise then that the Duke was brave enough to make a public stand with Lord Holland against Napoleon's exile to St. Helena. As a Whig he did not subscribe to the Loyalist caricature of Napoleon as the "Corsican Ogre." The Whigs saw much in Napoleon's record that compared favourably with the status quo in Britain: the Code Napoléon, the career open to talents, religious liberty. To their Tory opponents, Napoleon was an illegitimate ruler, but to the Foxite Whigs, sovereignty ultimately resided in the people, and Napoleon clearly had a great deal of support in France. The Duke voted against the resumption of war in 1815 after Napoleon's return from Elba, and pointed out that if a foreign government had intervened on the side of Legitimacy in 1688, then his own family would not be on the throne. (6)
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. Quoted in Mollie Gillen, Royal Duke, Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex (1773-1843) (London 1976) p.186.
2. Gillen pp 210-214.
3. Although in 1840 Victoria did give her a title, the 1st Duchess of Inverness.
4. Gillen p. 188. 5. Gillen pp 184-192
6. Quoted by Sir Robert Wilson at Southwark election in June 1818. Morning Chronicle , 19th June 1818. Similar sentiments were expressed by his close friend, another Foxite Whig, Coke of Holkham, 1st Earl of Leicester, the famous agricultural reformer, who publicly described Louis XVIII as a "usurper", placed on the French throne against the wishes of the French people. Norfolk Chronicle 6 April 1816.

Sir Robert Wilson and Napoleon - the man who changed his mind

Sir Robert Wilson was one of the most extraordinary men of his times or any times. A tall striking looking man, very well connected, a distinguished soldier and diplomat, he was on friendly terms with the rulers of Russia, Austria and Prussia, and was present in a semi-official capacity at a number of their most important battles against Napoleon.

A man of liberal sensibilities, and a Whig in politics, Wilson was opposed to the slave trade, slavery and the impressment of sailors. (1) In 1804 he published a pamphlet critical of the public flogging that was customary in the British army in the nineteenth century and sometimes even led to the death of soldiers. His cause was supported in susequent years by leading reformers Francis Burdett, William Cobbett and Lord Cochrane. (2) Wilson's pamphlet was not appreciated by the authorities, and he was ordered to India, but he somehow got the King to intercede and he did not go.(3)

Wilson's view of Napoleon was far more satisfactory to the Tory Government, and on this he was out of step with his Foxite Whig associates. (4) In 1802 he published The History of the British expedition to Egypt which accused Napoleon of the mass execution of Turkish prisoners and of the murder of sick French soldiers. Wilson sent copies to the King of England, the Emperors of Austria and Russia, the Queen of Prussia and Nelson. It earned Wilson the nickname "Jaffa". The book was also translated into French. Napoleon was outraged and made representations to the British Government about what he regarded as a calumny. He still remembered the accusations on St. Helena. (5)

Wilson at this time regarded Napoleon as "a usurper" and a "demi-barbarian". (6) Observing him with the leaders of Prussia and Russia in 1807, Wilson described him as "grossly corpulent" and "his countenance presented no commanding talent". He had a "discontented mien" and "his face was very pale and unhealthily full." By contrast,the "Emperor of Russia was majesty itself". (7) At Tilsit he "looked as usual: hard, blank and designing: in short, like himself." (8) After talking to the King and Queen of Prussia Wilson spoke in even more derogatory terms: "the tyrannic insolence of the usurper", "his ungovernable temper", "expressing benignity in his countenance when he chose." (9)

At this time then there was no doubt where Wilson's sympathies lay, and he even sought out the exiled King of France in Sweden, and dined with him and the Duc de Berry and the Duc d'Angoulême. That arch-Loyalist Hudson Lowe clearly counted Wilson among his own. "I know Wilson well, and he has proved a strong friend of the Bourbons" Lowe told Las Cases on St Helena.(10)

But after the first resignation of Napoleon in 1814 Wilson began to change his mind. Along with many Whigs and Radicals he opposed the resumption of war in 1815, and was speaking at Brooks alongside Earl Grey, about the inevitability of Napoleon's victory when news of Waterloo arrived in London!

In the post war years he was to beome perhaps the leading Bonapartist in England and one of Napoleon's strongest supporters in the House of Commons.

Like a number of other prominent opposition figures in the hostile political climate after Waterloo, Wilson for a time lived abroad. In his case he chose Paris, where his sister, an enthusiastic supporter of Napoleon was living. (11) He campaigned with Earl Grey and Lord Holland against the execution of Marshall Ney in December 1815, and in January 1816 he became involved in the escape of the comte de Lavalette, Napoleon's Postmaster, whose wife, Emilie de Beauharnais, was the niece of the Empress Josephine. (12)

The Escape of Lavalette

Lavalette was sentenced to death in December 1815 for his role in Napoleon's return to France in 1815. On the eve of his execution he was visited in prison by his wife, his daughter and her governess. His wife who was apparently ill, was wrapped in several layers of clothes, and was permitted to visit prison in a sedan chair which was taken into the room next to her husband's. In an unlikely plot the couple then exchanged clothes and the comte left prison in the sedan chair, with his young daughter and the governess walking alongside. His escape was soon discovered, and amidst wide publicity and a thorough search by the authorities it became virtually impossible for him to get out of Paris.

Wilson and two other Britons, Michael Bruce and Captain John Hely Hutchinson then came to his aid. (13) Lavalette was dressed in an English officer's uniform, and Wilson, making use of his diplomatic and military connections, obtained a false passport for him and accompanied him out of Paris and then out of France. He wrote a letter to Earl Grey detailing his part in the scheme which much to Grey's embarrassment was intercepted. Wilson, Hutchinson and Bruce, were arrested, tried and sentenced to three months in prison in Paris.

Hutchinson, Wilson and Bruce

On St Helena one of Napoleon's associates could not believe that this was the same Wilson who had written the account of the Egyptian campaign. According to Las Cases Napoleon was not at all surprised:

You know but little of men and the passions that actuate them. What leads you to suppose that Sir Robert Wilson is not a man of enthusiasm and violent passions who wrote what he then believed to be true? And while we were enemies we contended with each other; but in our present adversity he knows better: he may have been abused, and deceived, and may be sorry for it; and he is perhaps as sincere in wishing us well, as he formerly was in seeking to injure us. (14)

The Radical Years

After his return from France Wilson represented Southwark in the House of Commons as a Whig. Although a friend of the moderate Whig leader Earl Grey, he moved closer to the Radicals. He was suspected of being involved in a plot with Lord Cochrane to rescue Napoleon from St Helena. He helped Santini draft his pamphlet "An Appeal to the English Nation", and he later met O'Meara and Gourgaud. O'Meara attended a dinner to celebrate the first year of Wilson's time in Parliament, and a band played La Marseillaise! (15) Wilson's sailor son who had been on the Northumberland when it transported Napoleon to St Helena in 1815, returned on the "Conqueror" in 1817 with Admiral Plampin. Apparently Napoleon was prepared to meet him but the young Wilson failed to get permission but did meet Mme. Bertrand.(16)

Wilson also became identified with the cause of domestic reform. He was very critical of the action of the authorities over the Peterloo massacre and the treatment of the radical leader Henry Hunt. In 1821 he lost his military commission because of his too public support for the cause of George IV's estranged wife, Caroline of Brunswick.

In March 1821 Wilson addressed the House of Commons about the detention of Napoleon, to the amusement apparently of some members of the House:

Gentlemen may laugh, but I express the sentiment of every just, humane, and generous man in Europe. In the detention of that illustrious Man, I can see nothing but dishonour - the violation of national faith - and the stain of national character. He threw himself upon the protection of England - his appeal to English generosity was met by placing him on a rock, where he has been subject to cruel insult. Separated from his family, even from his infant child, he has been deprived of every domestic enjoyment. It is ...well documented that Napoleon might have escaped, but he preferred throwing himself upon the generosity of Great Britain. He has had bitter cause to regret that fateful confidence; years of suffering and humiliation have passed over him .." (17)

----------------------------------------------------------
1. Ian Samuel, AN ASTONISHING FELLOW, The Life of General Sir Robert Wilson K.M.T., M.P. Great Britain, 1985. pp 54-59 He had Murat in his sights in Moscow, but couldn't bring himself to pull the trigger. They later met in Italy and seemed to have a high regard for each other. Murat apparently regarded Wilson as one of the greatest cavalry leaders of all time. Emilio O'Campo, The Emperor's Last Campaign , University of Alabama Press, 2009 p 10.
2. Flogging remained an important part of military discipline until well into the second half of the C20. Marx and Engels ascribed its endurance because it was "the instrument by which the aristocratic character of the British army is preserved".
3.Samuel p. 48
4. Samuel p. 118
5. Samuel p 43-47.
6. Life of General Sir Robert Wilson, Vol II, London 1862 p. 285.
7. Life Vol II pp 294-302.
8. Life vol II pp 307
9. Life vol II p. 317
10. Life vol II pp 372-373.Emanuel comte de Las Cases, The Life, Exile, and Conversations of the Emperor Napoleon Vol I p. 194.
11. Wilson's sister had met Napoleon in 1802 at the Tuileries. She had fallen unconscious after being hit, and Napoleon himself came to check on her condition and express his sorrow. Ocambo p 49.
12. Wilson was a member of the little known Association Fraternelle Europeene, designed to help victims of political persecution, as were Bruce, Lord Kinnaird, (Radical Jack) John Lambton and other Britons living in Paris. Its members believed that Waterloo had dealt a fateful blow to the cause of freedom. Ocampo pp 24-25
13. Bruce was the first approached, and he brought Wilson and Hutchinson into the plot. All three were reform minded Whigs. One Loyalist C19 history of the events said that Bruce's views "chimed in with the most violent of the opposition party in England and .. in common with a good many of his countrymen residing in the same place, had made himself conspicuous by violent censures of the proceedings of the allies and the Bourbon government, and by an exceedingly warm sympathy for the Bonapartists whom they now represented as unfortunate champions for liberty!" The Pictorial History During the Reign of George the Third by G.L. Craig and Charles MacFarlane (1844), Book III p. 654. Bruce was an associate of Byron and John Cam Hobhouse, and like them had seen Waterloo as a defeat for liberty. See The Peter Cochran Files.
14. Las CasesVol I p 194 Apparently Napoleon's party were well aware of the presence of Wilson's son on the Northumberland, and as the sailors warmed to Napoleon and ceased to see him as an ogre, so the young Wilson was taunted for his father's portrayal of Napoleon. Las Cases pp 192-193. In his defense in the Paris trial Wilson being asked about his accusations against Napoleon in Egypt replied "I said that which I believed to be truth". I wonder whether Las Cases read this before writing his account? A Full Report of the Trial of Sir Robert Thomas Wilson, Michael Bruce Esq. and Capt. John Hely Hutchinson, 22nd April 1816 London 1816 p. 36.
15. Ocambo pp 123, 267, 316.
16. Ocampo p. 159. Curiously Wilson wrote to Earl Gray apprising him of his son's trip some timer earlier, "I presume you have no commissions to execute in that part of the world as yet, but I hope and believe before three months that you will." Ocambo p. 103
17. Morning Chronicle, March 30, 1821

Napoleon and British Song 1797-1822 - by Oskar Cox Jensen

Napoleon and British Song 1797-1822

This is an important and fascinating book which is packed with new insights into popular culture during the wars against France after 1797.

Early in the book Jensen makes a striking claim that is worth reproducing

The historical reality is that across the British Isles, both during and especially after the Napoleonic Wars, the eponymous Bonaparte was better loved and respected by the general populace than Wellington, Pitt or the Prince Regent

Castlereagh and Sidmouth might have been added to this pantheon of anti-heroes, and some might wonder at the inclusion of Wellington. His creation as a national rather than a partisan hero was in fact some decades away. In the years after Waterloo he was rarely represented in song as "purely good", and he remained a target of many of the populace through the Reform bill period and even into the times of the Chartists. The New Hunting song in praise of Fergus O'Connor singled out Wellington for attack but praised "brave Bonaparte ", "a man of sense". Napoleon was seen as representing social mobility, whereas Wellington was seen as the ungrateful persecutor of his own soldiers.

The book supports the view that despite its place in the western and especially the British imagination, because of the scale of the casualties Waterloo received muted celebration in 1815 amongst all classes. Napoleon's escape from Elba, his proclamations of peace and his association with liberal politics had tempered radical doubts about him and reinforced a negative view of the battle. Despite the triumphalist Loyalist propaganda, Waterloo was often represented as a tragedy, a slaughter, and even a crime.

The endurance of British songs about Napoleon has been well known for some time, and Jensen confirms that not a single song collected from either a broadside or an oral source after 1815 speaks ill of Napoleon. This suggests the ultimate failure of all the Loyalist propaganda in demonising Napoleon in the popular imagination, and a failure in inculcating a sense of identity with the state and against the French.

In this respect Jensen is clearly at odds with the work of Linda Colley and others who have portrayed the wars as uniting the British people against the Corsican Ogre and Catholic France. Jensen reminds us of the reality of the relationship of the mass of the people to the British state: the press gang, enclosure, transportation and Pitt's "terror".

The book also stresses the importance of localism, which has been a neglected aspect of our national story. Britain in 1815 as for many decades later, consisted of a myriad of highly localised cultures. In conservative areas in Ireland, Napoleon was "the latest incarnation of the saviour across the water", in many areas there was great hostility to the militia, in some areas, especially the North East, the press gang was a major source of disaffection, in other areas Luddism was strong, in some areas there was an identification with smugglers, in Newcastle and perhaps elsewhere there was an anti authoritarian, pre-enlightenment popular song culture into which songs about Napoleon were readily incorporated, and everywhere there was little enthusiasm for volunteering for the wars.

The book analyses the changing dialectic between Loyalist propaganda and oppositional songs, and suggests that propaganda helped to build Napoleon up as a fabulous, folkloric figure. The Napoleon of the "black legend" though was never assimilated into popular culture, and his exile and separation from his wife and child made him a figure with which people could readily sympathise and identify. In the nineteenth century attention was focussed not on Josephine but on Marie Louise. So Napoleon on St. Helena became the victim of the British state, a flawed but attractive figure.

My only very minor quibble with the book concerns its opening sentence - "It is no coincidence that they named the Wars after him". This might give the impression that people at the time used the term, "Napoleonic Wars", but in fact that term did not come into use until the middle of the nineteenth century, and was certainly not a product of popular culture. The author redeems himself in the final sentence of the book, describing them as, "the Wars that took his name."

Forthcoming Talk: Napoleon and the British opposition, 1815-1821

Opening theme for my planned talk

In 2015 I gave a talk in London to the Friends of St Helena on Napoleon and the British Opposition. I am now preparing for a talk in Stockport, and intend to incorporate some of the local material that has appeared on recent blogs.

After my London talk I sent a summary for publication on the FOSH website, which I have reproduced below.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Britain during the period that Napoleon was exiled on St. Helena was a divided and repressive country. It was a period of dissent and disorder: machine breaking, mass movements, public meetings and petitions against taxes, against corruption, against placemen and against a standing army.

The Foxite Whigs, the opposition in Parliament, often critical of the wars against both France and the United States, never subscribed to the Tory caricature of Napoleon. Whilst not uncritical of him, they recognized that he had created order out of the anarchy of the Revolution, had safeguarded property rights, and furthermore had instituted a number of reforms they would have welcomed in England. They admired his sponsorship of the arts and sciences, the Code Napoléon, considered far superior to the repressive legal system in England, and the religious freedom he had brought to France.

Many great names voted against the resumption of war in the House of Lords in 1815, including the Prince Regent’s brother, the Duke of Sussex, a future Whig Prime Minister, Earl Grey, and Marquis Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington’s brother. Opposition in the House of Commons was led by Lord John Russell, another future Prime Minister, younger son of the Duke of Bedford, who was among a number of Whigs who had travelled to Elba to meet Napoleon in 1814.

Lords voting against war in 1815, including Lord Byron. Lord Holland and the Duke of Bedford were still on their way home from Italy

On the day that news of the victory arrived in London, Earl Grey was telling all who would listen that the world needed the genius of Napoleon. The unexpected victory, so pumped up by Government propagandists that even Wellington became a little embarrassed, totally wrong footed the Whigs. Lord Byron said that there was nothing to do but to follow the example of Samuel Whitbread, one of Napoleon’s greatest admirers in Parliament who for whatever reason committed suicide on 6th July.

Throughout the period of the captivity only the most “reform minded” Whigs were prepared to become associated publicly with Napoleon’s cause. Holland House in London, the home of Charles James Fox’s nephew, Lord Holland, became Napoleon’s centre of support. Lady Holland sent Napoleon some 1000 books donated by Whig families. The Everlasting, Xerochrysum bracteatum , an Australian plant that now grows across St Helena, is the permanent legacy of Lady Holland, who sent the original seeds to Longwood.

In Holland House garden a Canova bust of Napoleon was installed, inscribed at its base:

The hero is not dead, but breathes the air
In lands beyond the deep:
Some island sea-begirded, where
Harsh men the prisoner keep.

Whilst most of the Whigs were quiescent, the Radicals became more vocal in Napoleon’s support. As supporters of the French Revolution, they had found Napoleon’s imperial crown and marriage to an Austrian princess hard to swallow. However, in the post-Waterloo world many came to see Napoleon and to some extent his son, confined by his grandfather the Austrian Emperor, as the symbols of an international liberty that had begun with the French Revolution and was now under threat.

The Radicals developed a narrative about Waterloo diametrically opposed to that pushed by Tory propagandists. The following extracts from the press give an insight into their discourse:

The Rights of Kings triumphed over the Rights of the People at Waterloo. 

Had the country a reformed House of Commons, a war of 
such injustice had never been commenced.

The fall of Napoleon .. was effected by immense German armies, subsidized by us.

That perjury and fraud to which England lent herself, 
in enslaving the Nations of Europe ..

That war sent the brave and generous Napoleon into 
captivity; that war restored the Bourbons in France, 
Spain and Naples; 
it restored the Pope and the Inquisition, all of which Bonaparte had put down.

You see the scaffolds in France streaming with the 
blood of people who cry out for Napoleon’s return .. 
religious liberty was, under Napoleon, made as perfect as in America

So far from it being true that the whole nation 
approved of this measure [exile of Napoleon], 
the fact is that a very great part of the 
sound and enlightened  part of the nation decidedly disapproved of it;

Napoleon towers like the Andes above them all. He 
stands a beacon and a sign unto the Nations; 
and although his thunders sleep, 
perhaps for ever, there is not a-King, or Kingling – a base legitimate – or a plundering Minister, 
that does not tremble at the very name of NAPOLEON.

At the close of poll in the Westminster Election in 1818 the cries of “Napoleon – Napoleon” were heard. On July 22nd 1819 a reform meeting at Smithfield, attended by 40,000-50,000 passed the following resolution:

That this meeting unequivocally disclaims any share or participation in the disgraceful and cowardly acts of the boroughmongers, in placing the brave Napoleon a prisoner, to perish upon a desert island, shut out from human society, and torn from his only son, whilst he is exposed to the brutal insolence of a hired keeper.

Soon followed the mass meeting in Manchester, almost immediately known as the Peterloo Massacre, an ironic reference to the “killing fields of Waterloo.”

When news of Napoleon’s death arrived, placards appeared in London inviting people to go into mourning. The Radical leader Henry Hunt whose attempted arrest led to the Peterloo Massacre, described Napoleon as “the most illustrious and eminent man of the present age, both as a profound statesman and a brave and matchless general.” Whilst aware of Napoleon’s failings,

“yet, when I reflect upon the period in which his energetic mind was allowed to have its full scope of action, and when I recollect the powerful armies and fleets that he had to contend with, and the phalanx of tyrants who were at various times leagued together against him, I am disposed not to examine too nicely and with too critical an eye the means that he used to defend himself against their unceasing endeavours to destroy him, and to restore the old tyranny of the Bourbons.”

Lord Holland considered Napoleon’s death “a legal or political murder, a species of crime which tho’ not uncommon in our age is one of the most blackest dye most odious nature.” Appropriately for a Whig, he drew up a balance sheet:

pro: freedom of worship, financial probity in public life, magnificence of public works, openness to office based on merit alone.

con: “enormous evil” of conscription, persecution of critics and curtailment of personal liberties.

Both Whigs and Radicals had views of Napoleon that differed totally from that of the “Corsican Ogre” created by Government propagandists. Evidence of Whig admiration for Napoleon is to be found in the collections that remain in some of the large stately homes, particularly Chatsworth and Blenheim; the folk memories of the lower orders, reflected in this song

They sent him to St Helena! Oh! Aye, oh!  
They sent him to St. Helena,
John France Wa! (Francois)
Boney was ill-treated! Oh! Aye, Oh! 
Boney was ill-treated,
John France Wa!
Oh Boney's heart was broken! Oh! Aye, Oh!  
Boney's heart was broken
John France Wa!
But Boney was an Emperor! Oh! Aye, Oh! 
But Boney was an Emperor!
John France Wa!

have largely disappeared.

English Honour and the Captivity of Napoleon

An English Gentleman

England in the Regency period was a highly ordered society. Gentlemanly conduct was the ideal to which all in power aspired. Half a century earlier Dr Johnson had defined being a gentleman in terms of "nobility of soul, magnanimity, and a scorn of meanness." Gentlemanly conduct also encompassed ideas of never taking unfair advantage and of conducting oneself towards your enemy as if he might one day become your friend. (1)

The treatment of Napoleon after his surrender was clearly an infringement of this gentlemanly code: detaining a defeated ruler after the end of hostilities was neither customary nor honourable. Napoleon in his letter to the Prince Regent had claimed " the protection of the laws", and had thrown himself on "the most powerful, the most constant, and the most generous" of his enemies. Whilst Captain Maitland gave no assurances as to the outcome of his surrender, Napoleon certainly got the impression that he would be treated with the respect normally afforded a defeated enemy. Lord Holland made exactly this criticism when opposing the bill to legalise Napoleon's detention:

To consign to distant exile and imprisonment a foreign and captive Chief, who, after the abdication of his authority, relying on British generosity, had surrendered himself to us, in preference to his other enemies, is unworthy the magnanimity of a great country;

Napoleon Preparing to Board the Bellerophon

The question of “honour” was important in governing circles, and impugnment of a man's honour fairly regularly led to duels.(2) Hudson Lowe mentioned it in one of his long letters to Bathurst early in the captivity.(3) Lord Castlereagh sought to dispel the concern by a rather tortuous logic: Napoleon and his fellow exiles had held a council of war in France prior to surrender and had decided there was no chance of escape; if Napoleon had had a chance of escape and had surrendered then the Government action would have been dishonourable, but since he had had no choice then Britain acted honourably.

The fact that Lord Bathurst and many members of the Government derived amusement from Napoleon's plight was also unworthy of an English gentleman. In a debate in the House of Lords in 1817 Lord Holland wondered how Bathurst could “allow himself to laugh and sneer at a man because he was in his power.“ Commenting on the affair, the Examiner criticized Bathurst for taking advantage of a man’s adversity by cracking jokes about him, and concluded that “it is the object of Ministers to humiliate their fallen Superior” hence their insistence on the title “General.”

Samuel Bamford, the simple weaver who could not aspire to gentlemanly status, clearly judged his country by that moral code, and condemned Napoleon's exile on St. Helena: "Of England's honour 'tis the grave."

It is no wonder that a later gentlemanly Prime Minister would write that an Englishman

"must regret that his Government ever undertook the custody of Napoleon, and he must regret still more that the duty should have been discharged in a spirit so ignoble and through agents so unfortunate."

Rosebery was presumably referring to two knights of the realm, Sir Hudson Lowe and Sir Thomas Reade, neither of whom he considered gentlemen.(4) For Loyalists such as Lowe and Reade of course, and for Bathurst also, Napoleon was an illegitimate ruler, a rebel and a usurper, which undoutedly affected the way he was treated.

It might be fair to point out that for the French at this time and later there was a certain hypocrisy about an Englishman's invocation of "honour", L'Angleterre, ah, la perfide Angleterre .
--------------------------------------------------------------------
1.See "In a Gewntleman-Like-Manner"
1. Canning and Castlereagh duelled in 1809; the Duke of Wellington fought a duel in 1829 when he was Prime Minister.
3. See also Gorrequer's comment, June 10, 1818.
4.Lord Rosebery, Napoleon The Last Phase London 1900, p 57.

Stockport 1819: Sandy Brow will be More Famous than Waterloo

Cartoon depicting a chained Rev. Harrison of Stockport holding the red Cap of Liberty

In the years leading up to Peterloo, Stockport became a major centre of radicalism. The main area of of popular protest was Sandy Brow, a large open space in the centre of Stockport of which there is now no trace on the map. The best known leader was Rev. Joseph Harrison a dissenting minister whose Sunday School was at one point reportedly attended by some 2000 pupils.

On September 1st 1818 a meeting at Sandy Brow led to the arrest of three of the speakers, John Bagguley, Samuel Drummond and John Johnston. It was pointed out at their trial in 1819 that one of them had eulogised Tom Paine and Napoleon Bonaparte and had reprobated those who abused Napoleon. (1)

In February 1819 at another mass meeting at Sandy Brow the Cap of Liberty was hoisted along with a flag inscribed "Paine & the Rights of Man." Outraged local Loyalists tried to seize the cap and the ensuing struggle was recorded in poems by Samuel Bamford and Henry Ross O'Bryan. (2)

Bamford's poem, in Lancashire dialogue, was redolent of his poem "Touch Him" with its suggestions of the cowardice of the Loyalist yeomanry "dandies".

Ha! Ha'en they taken our cap and flag;
 Wo han the Dandies taken 'em?
  ...
O! Wot could stan afore the might
 O' yeomanry so Loyal?
Who came to drive the 'herd aright,
 An would ha' no denial;
Until the stones began to fly,
 An heads began o' crackin',
An' then our Gallant Yeomanry 
 Were fain to find a backin'.
...
Then amblin' up the 'gemmen' came,
 Towards the front o' th' Hustin;
But soon their folly did they blame
 The rabblement for trustin';
For sticks were up, and stones they flew,
 Their gentle bodies bruisin',
An in a hurry they withdrew
 Fro' such unmannered usin'.

Then proudly let our banner wave,
 Wi' freedom's emblem o'er it,
And toasted be the Stockport lads
 The lads who bravely bore it,
An let the 'war torn' Yeomanry
  Go curse their sad disasters,
An count in rueful agony,
  Their bruises and their plasters.

O'Bryan's poem, subtitled "We fought and conquered," was dedicated to Harrison.

Those who raised the Cap of Liberty on Sandy Brow, "The stage where Britons play'd a Briton's part" were true patriots. "Dire oppression" had "usurp'd" Britain, and the poem harked back to a time "ere tyrant's reign began, When ev'ry Briton lived a free born man ." It questioned the purposes of the "manly Britons" who had fought overseas,"When bleeding thousands fell at Waterloo.", and were now "Curs'd by the despots they themselves preserved." There was then no ambiguity about the author's view of Waterloo:

We're mine Herculean strength, my arm should hew
Those scarlet dogs that bark'd at Waterloo;
Or, Sampson like, I would such asses slay,
And all their guilty fame in ruins lay.
.......
And teach them, England is not Waterloo.
.......
On SANDY BROW we yet shall meet to praise
The God of freedom, just in all his ways.
........
Then truth shall triumph, while the tyrants fell,
Shall fly for refuge to their native hell;
Th' astonish'd world with joy the change shall scan,
And all creation shout, the RIGHTS OF MAN.

A few months later, in June 1819, a few weeks before Smithfield and Peterloo, another meeting at Sandy Brow passed a resolution affirming that Lord Sidmouth was guilty of high treason, and three hisses were given for the prosecutors of Bagguley, Drummond and Johnston. The meeting was addressed by Sir Charles Wolseley the head of an old Staffordshire family who hoped that "Sandy Brow would be more famed in history than the field of Waterloo." He told the crowd that his political career had begun at the storming of the bastille in France, and he would never hesitate in doing the same in England.

Sir Charles and the Rev. Harrison were in July 1819 indicted for sedition, conspiracy and high treason. At their trial in Chester in 1820 each was sentenced to one and a half years' imprisonment. At later trials Harrison got an additional two years for a speech and a sermon delivered after the June meeting.

A Note on Sir Charles Wolseley

Wolseley was the only aristocrat among the radical leaders in the years around Peterloo. Relatively little is known about him, and no major biography has ever been written. (3)

As well as being in France during the storming of the Bastille he apparently returned to live there for a time after 1801. Along with his father, Sir William, he became involved in reform politics in London in 1811, and he was present at the founding of both the Hampden Club and the Union for Parliamentary Reform in 1812.(4) There is tentative evidence that he offered some kind of service to Napoleon during the 100 days.(5)

Sir Charles Wolseley (1769-1846)

Wolseley met Hunt for the first time in 1818, and from that time appears to have severed ties with the more cautious reformers such as Sir Francis Burdett. In August 1819, on his way to the fateful meeting at St Peter's Field, Hunt was invited to Wolseley Hall, and the two then proceeded to Manchester together, although Wolseley did not stay to attend the meeting which was postponed for seven days.(6) Nevertheless as soon as he heard the news he rushed back to Manchester to provide bail for Hunt and the others. He attended Bamford's trial at York, and supplied Bamford and his wife with money, and he intended to erect a memorial for the victims of Peterloo at Wolseley Hall.

Ancestral home of the Wolseley family in Staffordshire, destroyed in 1966

For a time in the 1820's he lived in Brussels, but he remained in contact with Hunt until they fell out when Hunt was elected to Parliament in 1830. Sir Charles supported the anti poor law radicals in the 1830's and unsuccessfully stood for Parliament in Stafford and Manchester in 1835.

In 1837 he was accepted into the Roman Catholic faith, and wrote a pamphlet "Catholic Clergymen versus Protestant Parsons " which was very critical of Anglican clergy, too frequently a "titled blockhead " and the "booby of the family", sentiments which would have undoubtedly resonated with many nonconformists. He reminded his readers that it was Catholics who built British Cathedrals, founded the Universities and "framed our envied Constitution."

Sir Charles seems to have been a generous and thoroughly decent man, he remained a philanthropist to the end, but he departed from his radical past in the last year of his life by speaking against repeal of the Corn Laws.
----------------------------------------------
1. John Bagguley, Samuel Drummond and John Johnston had tried to escape to America but were captured before they could embark from Liverpool. At the Stockport meeting Napoleon was described by one of them as "that suffering magnanimous character", a view of Napoleon as a victim of the boroughmongers that seems to have been widely held among radicals by this time, and certainly by Henry Hunt.
2. The events at Sandy Brow were eclipsed by the Peterloo Massacre, but for that Sandy Brow would have had a bigger part in radical folklore. Robert Walmsley Peterloo The Case Reopened (Manchester University Press, 1969)p. 58
3. Anne Bayliss, Sir Charles Wolseley (1769-1846) The radical baronet (Staffordshire County Library 1983) provides a short fragmentary account of his life.
4. Bayliss p. 3
5. Bayliss says in her introduction that in the Staffordshire Record office there was a list of letters, one of which dated in 1819 indicated that Sir charles had offered to "do an important service for Napoleon during the 100 days". The letter itself apparently could not be found!
6. Dr Robert Poole has informed me that Wolseley toured Manchester in Hunt’s carriage amid vast crowds. In his view Wolseley would probably have spoken at the St Peter's Field meeting had it not been postponed. The Times of August 10th 1819 in an article dated 7th August listed Wolseley as among those who had been expected to attend the postponed meeting. On August 11 it carried a long report of Hunt and the "crazy Staffordshire Baronet" processing through Manchester and being greeted by very large crowds.

Samuel Bamford: Lancashire Radical and Poet

Samuel Bamford (1788-1872)

Samuel Bamford was one of the leading Manchester radicals who was arrested and gaoled after Peterloo. After his release Bamford retreated from radical politics, and in 1848 at the height of the Chartist movement he even enrolled as a special constable, as did many establishment figures including William Gladstone and Prince Louis Napoleon, the future Napoleon III.

Bamford's highly regarded Passages in the Life of a Radical, provides an important source for study of the post-Waterloo radical movement, but inevitably it lacks immediacy and provides a carefully constructed view of Bamford's part in the struggles. Bamford had been inside eight prisons, and in the years of the Chartist movement to some extent disavowed his more militant past. (1)

Anthony Burgess's claim of Manchester working class support for Napoleon might be disputed by modern loyalist historians. Nevertheless, amongst all the loyalist displays, including the burnings of Thomas Paine in effigy, very few radicals could be labeled as 'patriots' during the latter years of the Napoleonic Wars.(2) Samuel Bamford, despite, to the horror of his aunt, joining the milita as a young man during the invasion scare, was certainly not among them. At the heart of loyalism was Anglicanism, which was very weak in Manchester, and Bamford came from a dissenting family.

A Collection of Bamford's early poems, published in 1821

The best insight into the world view and the passion of the younger Bamford is to be found in his Miscellaneous Poetry published in 1821. The most political of the poems, "Waterloo", "St Helena", "Touch Him", "The Arrest", "God Save the Queen", "The Queen's Triumph", "The Patriot's Hymn" and "The Union Hymn" were all omitted from the 1843 edition of his poems.(3)

The victory at Waterloo was the cornerstone of Loyalist propaganda. For radicals it was an unnecessary and unjust war fought to impose an unpopular King on the French people, and represented the triumph of tyranny at home as well as on the continent (4) On hearing the news of Waterloo Bamford wrote the ironic Patriot's Hymn, sung by radicals to the tune of God Save the King. This poem reflected beliefs widely held by the radical opponents of the war.

Emperors, and lords, and kings,
Gaudy and glittering things,
Unlov'd by thee.
If they but nod the head,
Armies are mustered,
Thousands to slaughter led,
For tyranny.

Gory is Europe's plain,
Whelmed beneath her slain,
Dreadful to see.
Bleeding promiscuously,
Victors and vanquish'd lie,
Mingled in butchery,
Let man be free.

In 1817 Bamford wrote about Napoleon's exile. St Helena was "the prison of the brave" and "Of England's honour 'tis the grave."

There Napoleon truly great,
High above the stormy wave,
Stands sublime in silent state;
Like a comet's blaze unfurl'd,
Hanging o'er a wondering world." (5)

Bamford's poem about Waterloo echoed the well worn radical themes of "butchery" and of "shame" that "freedom fell by Englishmen". Nowhere was to be found any reference to the Tory hero Wellington nor to the divine intervention sometimes invoked by the Loyalist press. For Bamford and the radicals it had been an unequal fight, of Britain and the tyrants of the continent ganging up against freedom and the "brave" Napoleon.

Nobly strives the gallant Gaul
  Th' unequal combat to maintain;
For country, honour, Emperor, all,
  He freely bleeds, but bleeds in vain.
Oh! arm of strength, and heart so brave,
From rout, from ruin, could not save!"

O, my country, that my tears
  Could wash this foul reproach away;
Could purchase from succeeding years
  Oblivion for that direful day;
Could whelm in Lethe's darksome tide
  Thy lasting shame, thy greatest pride!"

In January 1819 Orator Hunt made his first visit to Manchester. In the course of that visit he went to the theatre and in a pre-planned assault was ejected from his box by a group of red-coated officers. This inspired Bamford to write "Touch Him", perhaps the most explicitly combative of his poems, with the almost obligatory reference to Waterloo. In Miscellaneous Poetry the incident was described as an

"Outrage, committed upon Mr. Hunt, and his Friends, at the Theatre .. by Lord Uxbridge, Captain Frazer, George Torr, and twenty or thirty other "gemmen' of the same stamp."

Touch him, aye! touch him, if you dare;
Pluck from his head one single hair -
        Ye sneaking, coward crew:

Touch him - and blasted be the hand
That graspeth not a vengeful brand,
To rid our long oppressed land
    Of reptiles such as you.

The poem also evokes a sense of class hatred and class warfare and mocks the officers for their cowardice in not standing and fighting

Our purse-proud tyrants vanity
    Shall to the earth be cast"
 
A tougher game they'll have to play
    Than that of WATERLOO.

Why did the sparks, on Monday night,
With fallen crests decline the fight,
    And silent sneak away?


But, true to Dandy stile and trim,
They risked neither life nor limb;
      O! it had cheered me,
To see our gallant gang so stout,
At clog and cudgel have a bout;
So fast so firm, amid the rout,
    For HUNT AND LIBERTY.

But come, my lads, some other day
We'll pin them, ere they sneak away,
And they shall either play or pay
  When Hunt returns again." (6)

Ten days after Peterloo Samuel and his wife were awoken about 2 o'clock in the morning by the hated deputy-constable of Manchester, Mr Nadin, accompanied by police, a company of foot and a troop of Hussars. Nadin told Bamford that he was being arrested for high treason, and on the way to gaol said that he expected him to be hung. Bamford later wrote "The Arrest" which mocked the large presence of soldiers to arrest an unarmed man in the middle of the night. One of the verses refers with irony to the redcoats, and again to Waterloo.

But in they came - a mighty rout
   Of thief-catchers and soldiers brave,
(Our British red-coats ever ought
  A gallant character to have -
  You know they did the country save,
And our religion, and our right;)
  The very dogs of war, who gave
The troops of France so keen a bite,
When they at Waterloo did fight."

Bamford was an avid reader of "Cobbett's Register" which was widely circulated amongst radicals, and his world view does not appear to have been significantly different to that of the London dominated radical leadership: the long war against France was unjust, unnecessary and against the interests of working people; it was the product of a corrupt and unrepresentative Parliament. In the radical constellation Queen Caroline and the Emperor Napoleon were the brave victims, the anti-heroes were the Prince Regent, Sidmouth, Castlereagh, and for Lancastrians, Parson Hay.

In 1820 in London before his imprisonment Bamford visited the Waterloo Museum in Pall Mall, and "doffed my hat before that of Napoleon, and I reverently touched the sword of Ney and the truncheon of Murat." (7) In his cottage in Moston where he spent his declining years "amongst many shining brasses of various kinds there hung a plaster-cast from the death-mask of Napoleon. A possession on which the owner laid great store." (8)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1.John Gardner, "The Suppression of Samuel Bamford’s Peterloo Poems" http://www.euppublishing.com/doi/pdfplus/10.3366/rom.2007.13.2.145
2. Frank O'Gorman, "Manchester Loyalism in the 1790's", Katrina Navickas, "Lancashire Britishness:Patriotism in the Manchester Region during the Napoleonic Wars" in Robert Poole ed., Return to Peterloo (Manchester Centre for Regional History, 2014). Navickas describes Walker and Cowdroy as "among few radical 'patriots' during the Napoleonic Wars."
3. I understand that the first edition was in fact published in 1819. Most of the "political" poems were published in the quieter times of the 1864 edition, but not those on Waterloo, St Helena, nor "Touch Him" on the attack on Henry Hunt at the theatre.
4.The term "Peterloo" was an ironic reference to the "killing fields" of Waterloo. It acquired the name within days of the event: The Hussars were wearing their Waterloo medals, and apparently a special constable had entered the house of someone helping the wounded, and shouted ‘This is Waterloo for you – this is Waterloo!’
5. "St Helena" and "Waterloo" were published in the Black Dwarf as a single poem, "Napoleon" on December 7, 1817. It was dated Middleton, Nov 9, 1817, under the pseudonym "Jefferey ". The last stanza was different to that published in 1821. It ended with "Thy chief, thy pride, away is torn, O! hapless gallic ever mourn ". The 1821 version ended with references to the victor "proud and vain", and "I envy not the gaudy thing, The friendship of a priest or king." The same edition of Black Dwarf in 1817 carried a paragraph linking the Government spies, "the ruthless persecutors of Napoleon" and the "Careless spectators of the murders of Ney and Lzabedoyere." "There is at least a consistency that does them honour. All their actions are alike."
6. Two stanzas of this poem were read by Rev Harrison at a reform Meeting in Ashton under Lyne in June 1819. 7.Samuel Bamford, Passages in the Life of a Radical and Early Days, Vol II (London MCMV) p 299.
8. BEN A. REDFERN. Some Personal Recollections http://www.newmillshistory.org.uk/sbook/sbook5.html

Henry Hunt and Napoleon: "the first of men, the most wonderful man that ever existed!".

Henry Hunt, radical leader (1773-1835)

Henry Hunt, or "Orator" Hunt as he was known, was the most famous and the most feared of the radical campaigners for universal suffrage in the years after Waterloo. A gentleman farmer from the South of England, he was an unlikely leader of the unrepresented working class. Hunt had been a Loyalist in the early years of the revolutionary wars, and had joined the local yeomanry, but like his fellow reformer William Cobett had become radicalised by the long war, which he saw as being exploited by a corrupt class of placemen, contractors, sycophants and stock-jobbers. (1)

In 1812 Hunt campaigned for Parliament in Bristol with the slogan "Hunt and peace", and asserted that "we have been at War against liberty for the last 20 years." (2) Troops were called in to restore order, which Hunt saw as a sign that the country was nearing military despotism. Hunt's campaign was supported by Cobbett who argued in a letter to the electors that the Government should accept the offers of peace proposed by the Emperor of France. (3)

Like Hazlitt and a number of Whigs and Radicals, Hunt welcomed the return of Napoleon from Elba in 1815 and was totally opposed to the resumption of war : "the most unjust repression." (4) Hunt believed that the power of choosing a sovereign in France as in England ultimately lay with the people, and that it was totally wrong for foreign powers to try to restore the unpopular Bourbons.

Seeing it as a war against liberty, Hunt was like many radicals and some Whigs, not disposed to celebrate Waterloo as a great British victory.

The mind quite sickens at the recital of such a horrid slaughter of human beings, for the sole purpose of gratifying the malignant passions of a few tyrants, who had sworn to annihilate the very spirit as well as the substance of liberty. (5)

In his memoirs he emphasised that Napoleon's forces were greatly outnumbered, and that his defeat was due solely to the late arrival of Prussian troops under Bulow and Blucher.

Not surprisingly Hunt was among the many critics of the decision to exile Napoleon on St. Helena, and was scathing about the failure of the more reform-minded Whigs to speak out against this. He later described the bill legalising Napoleon's imprisonment as "a hateful and foul blot upon the statute book of England".(6)

Hunt's pre-eminent position among the radical leaders after the war was cemented by his acceptance of the invitation to chair mass meetings organised by the Spencereans at Spa Fields in November and again in December 1816. The Spencereans had revolutionary roots and aspirations far removed from those of Hunt, and like Thomas Paine had hoped that Napoleon would invade and promote a revolution in England.

In January 1819 Hunt was invited by radical leaders to Manchester. In the course of his stay he attended the theatre, and a number of red coated officers temporarily ejected him from his box during the singing of the national anthem, amidst a cacophony of "Hunt and Liberty" from the gallery, and patriotic calls from the more expensive seats. (7) This visit marked the beginning of a long association with the radicals in the north of England which lasted until his death.

The Spencereans also invited Hunt to chair the meeting at Smithfield in July 1819, originally planned to be on the anniversary of the French Revolution. At this meeting the resolutions were seconded by a northern radical leader, Rev Harrison, a dissenting minister from Stockport.(8)

The following month Hunt was in Manchester again for the meeting at St Peter's Fields, almost immediately known as the Peterloo Massacre. Accused of participating in a conspiracy to overthrow the Government, Hunt and four others were in 1820 convicted on a lesser charge of "seditious intent", for which he was imprisoned for 30 months, a year longer than any of the others convicted with him. This harsh sentence and the abnormally severe conditions under which he was held in Ilchester gaol was a reflection of the fear he instilled in the ruling classes.

Hunt was in prison when he heard of the death of Napoleon, to which he responded forcefully in a letter to his supporters.

Memorial to Henry Hunt that used to stand in Ancoats, Manchester

In later years Hunt served as the M.P. for Preston (1830-33), and opposed the 1832 Reform Bill, which fell far short of the universal suffrage for which he and the post-war radicals had campaigned. After his death a memorial was erected in the grounds of Rev. Scholefield's chapel in Ancoats. The Chartist leader Fergus O'Connor was present at the laying of the foundation stone, which significantly took place on August 16th 1842, the anniversary of Peterloo. (9) The monument fell into disrepair and was demolished in 1888, but in 1908 a bronze portrait medallion of him was unveiled in Manchester's Reform Club, the home of the Liberal elite in the city. On the demise of this club in the 1980's the plaque was apparently moved to the local Museum of Science and Industry, where it is no longer on display.

________________________________________
1. Belchem 'Orator'Hunt, Henry Hunt and English Working Class Radicalism, Oxford 1985. p. 3
2. Belchem p. 42
3. "The terms offered by the Emperor of France are fair; they are, indeed, such as I never expected to see obtained at the close of a negociation; they would, if accepted of, leave us in possession of all our conquests, of all the Islands in the West Indies; of the exclusive fishery of Newfoundland; of the Cape of Good Hope and the French Settlements in Senegal; of the French and Dutch Settlements in the East Indies; of the Isles of France and Bourbon; in short, they would leave us in possession of about 40 millions of conquered people, while France herself would not possess above 17 or 18 millions of conquered people. And, which is never to be forgotten, they would leave in our hands, the island of Malta itself, which, as you well know, was the avowed object of the war. - Cobbett 3rd Letter to the Independent Electors of Bristol, 11 August 1812 , reproduced in Hunt vol 3.
4. Belchem p. 46
5. Hunt Memoirs Vol 3.
6. Belchem p. 47
7. Belchem p. 109.
8. There were 19 resolutions in all. The final resolution condemned the British Government's treatment of Napoleon, another resolution supported the removal of disabilities on Roman Catholics. The Rev. Harrison said he thought that the resolutions should be adopted by every county, town, village and hamlet in the country. Each resolution was apparently greeted with great applause, although there were a few dissents to the resolution on removing disabilities on Roman Catholics. The Rev. Harrison was arrested at the end of the meeting for remarks he had made at a previous meeting in Stockport, for which he was later convicted and imprisoned, along with another radical leader Sir Charles Wolseley. Manchester Observer , July 31, 1819.
9. Katrina Navickas Protest and the Politics of Space and Place, 1789-1848 , (Manchester University Press, 2016), p.192