A History of Parliamentary Elections and Electioneering 37

A History of Parliamentary Elections and Electioneering 37

“Satire’s a harmless, quiet thing--

’Tis application makes the sting.”

 

No. 3 is styled a Safe Place; the title is “Moderation, Moderation,

this was Wonderful Moderation, an old song.” The prisoner is

simultaneously attacked by curs, and by one of the historical lions

of the Tower, which cannot do much harm, being chained to the secure

post Magna Charta. Wilkes is threatening his assailants with a whip;

he has on a spear the cap of liberty--this emblem is inscribed “Habeas

Corpus.” A yeoman of the guard is in charge of the hero of the XLV.

_North Briton_.

 

“There’s a scene for an Englishman! Patriots ill-us’d,

Magna Charta despised, and poor Freedom abus’d;

Once the love of our country brought profit and pow’r,

But it now, tho’ with glory, sends WILKES to the Tow’r.”

 

In the version of “Daniel cast into the Den of Lions; or, _True

Blue_ will never stain” (April 29, 1763), Wilkes is shown the centre

of a highly elaborate allegorical combination, which deals with

the incidents of his arrest, associated with the _North Briton_,

and his obnoxious writings. One of the scenes exhibits the king’s

messengers violently breaking into Wilkes’s house, Great George Street,

Westminster, and ransacking his receptacles for papers. On the other

side, the messengers are shown conducting Wilkes to the Tower, the

title “Den of Lions” not being wide of the mark, since it, at that

time, was the abiding place of the royal menagerie. Wilkes is made to

declare: “Corruption I detest, and Persecution I despise,”--sentiments

befitting the patriotic martyr, as he was then believed to be, a

“goodly repute” with which he was only too desirous of parting in

exchange for such bribes as were weighty enough for his acceptance.

In the symbolic view of this new “Daniel,” the goddess Fame hovers

over her whilom favourite, with a wreath to crown his brow; she is

publishing, through her trumpet, “Magnus est Veritas;” the door of the

den which confines the lions is a prominent feature. Below appears

the Lieutenant of the Tower; he has a written “counsel’s opinion” in

his hand, and is replying to a demand for admittance made by Wilkes’s

brother, “Consider, sir, my Lord Temple was not suffered to see him.”

When Wilkes was committed to the Tower, both his brother and Earl

Temple applied to be admitted to see him, and were refused.

 

The “general warrant” on which Wilkes was arrested was proved illegal,

and on a writ of _Habeas Corpus_, he was set at liberty on the ground

of his privilege as a member of Parliament. After his release from

the Tower, Wilkes was involved in a duel, and severely wounded; he

then fled to Paris, January, 1764, and was, in his absence, expelled

from parliament and outlawed for contempt of court. On the issue of

writs for the general election, after the dissolution of parliament,

March 12, 1768, Wilkes, who had made several vain attempts to get

the sentence reversed, suddenly presented himself as a candidate to

represent the city of London, in the interval addressing to the king

a submissive letter imploring pardon and the reversal of the sentence

of outlawry which had been passed upon him. This petition the king

rejected with decision. Although Alderman Sir William Baker was the

only citizen of note or influence who supported him, Wilkes persisted

in his candidature, the lower people embracing his cause with ardour;

but he polled the minimum of votes, and was signally defeated, the

successful members being the Hon. Thomas Harley, lord mayor, with

3,729 votes; Sir R. Ladbroke, 3,678; William Beckford, 3,402; Barlow

Trecothwick, 2,957. The unsuccessful candidates were Sir Richard Glyn,

2,823; John Patterson, 1,769; and Wilkes, at the bottom of the poll,

who contrived to secure 1,247 votes.

 

On Wilkes’s return from the Guildhall at the close of the poll, March

23, 1768, where, as seen, he obtained the lowest number of votes, the

people displayed their fervour for spurious patriotism by removing

the horses from his carriage, and drawing it themselves; other

extravagancies of a like nature showed the spirit of the multitude,

by whom Wilkes was regarded as the tribune of the people, a situation

very much to his taste. Considering his mob-popularity assured, he now

proposed to conciliate his opponents; the first step was to make a

pretence of submission. On the 22nd of March, he wrote to the solicitor

of the treasury: “I take the liberty of acquainting you, that in the

beginning of the ensuing term I shall present myself to the court of

King’s Bench. I pledge my honour as a gentleman, that on the very

first day I will there make my personal appearance.” The letter sent

by Wilkes to the king was certainly a plausible composition, but the

fervid assurances there given being in direct antagonism with the

conduct of the writer at that very time, it may be held that George

III. was justified in treating the applicant with indignant contempt.

 

“SIRE,

 

“I beg thus to throw myself at your Majesty’s feet, and

supplicate the mercy and clemency which shine with such lustre

among your princely virtues. Some former ministers, whom your

Majesty, in condescension to the wishes of your people, thought

proper to remove, employed every wicked and deceitful act to

oppress your subject, and to avenge their own personal cause on

him, whom they imagined to be the principal author of bringing

to public view their ignorance, insufficiency, and treachery to

your Majesty and the nation.

 

“I have been the innocent and unhappy victim of revenge. I was

forced by their injustice and violence into exile, which I have

never ceased to consider, for many years, as the most cruel

oppression; because I could not longer be under the benign

influence of your Majesty in this land of liberty.

 

“With a heart full of zeal for the service of your Majesty and

my country, I implore, Sire, your clemency. My only hopes of

pardon are founded in the great goodness and benevolence of

your Majesty; and every day of freedom you may be graciously

pleased to permit me the enjoyment of, in my dear native land,

shall give proofs of my zeal and attachment to your service.”

 

This letter was judiciously ignored, but meanwhile fresh publicity was

awaiting Wilkes--on the 27th, he was carried by a writ of _capias ut

legatum_ to the King’s Bench.

 

The return of Wilkes from Paris, his failure for the city, and election

for Middlesex are figuratively shadowed forth in “The Flight of

Liberty,” a broadside consisting of two engraved designs, “The Return

of Liberty,” and “Liberty Revived,” with verses in praise of Wilkes and

reflecting adversely upon his antagonists. In the upper compartment

is shown the Court, or administrative faction, destroying the Temple

of Liberty (an allusion to Earl Temple), raised above the statue of

Wilkes, with the cap of liberty, as usual, elevated on the staff of

maintenance. Lord Bute trampling on Magna Charta, is foremost of the

destroyers who are wrecking the whole edifice, the very foundations

of which are being razed; the “Laird of Boot” is exclaiming, “Well

said, guid friends, down with the mighty _Temple_,” in allusion to the

protection and patronage that nobleman had already extended to Wilkes;

the Duke of Bedford, Lord North, and other ministers are aiding. The

second design shows “the Temple of Liberty built by John Wilkes,

A.D. 1762,” reinstated, “never to fall again.”

 

Nothing daunted by his defeat for the city of London, Wilkes at once

offered himself for the county of Middlesex. In his “Memoirs of the

Reign of George III.,” Walpole gives certain glimpses of the election

proceedings, which are as descriptive as a more detailed account:--

 

“On the 23rd of March the Election began at Brentford; and

while the irresolution of the Court and the carelessness of the

Prime Minister, Grafton, caused a neglect of all precautions,

the zeal of the populace had heated itself to a pitch of fury.”

 

The other candidates were Sir W. Beauchamp Proctor and Mr. Cooke, the

former members. Cooke, who had sat from 1750, was confined with the

gout; a relation, who appeared for him, was roughly handled. Amidst the

wrecking of carriages which ensued, that of Proctor did not escape the

attention of the roughs; it “was demolished by the mob.”

 

The coach-glasses of such as did not huzza for “Wilkes” and “Liberty”

were broken, the paint and varnish of chariots and coaches, met and

stopped for miles round, were spoiled by the mob--scratching them

with the favourite “45.” Lord Bute, generally the object of popular

disfavour, was denounced by an attack made on his residence, where the

mob broke his windows, as usual, but failed to effect an entrance; the

same unwelcome attention was paid to Lord Egremont’s, in Pall Mall, as

the chief signatory to the warrant for Wilkes’s committal. The Duke of

Northumberland had the honour of appearing, whether he would or no, of

being forced to supply the mob with liquor, and to drink with them to

Wilkes’s success. The demonstration assumed formidable proportions;

all the windows from West to East were illuminated to please the mob,

otherwise they were broken by the riotous “true loyal Britons and

friends of Liberty,” who performed some curious feats; some of the

regimental drummers, not the Scotch regiments it may be premised,

beating their drums for Wilkes. This astute diplomatist, finding his

election secure, very prudently dismissed his enthusiastic partisans,

such as the weavers, back to town, the polling[50] was ended, and by

the next morning quietude was resumed in the vicinity of Brentford.

Some of the incidents were particularly ludicrous, the mob going out of

the way to perpetuate the number of the _North Briton_ so objectionable

to the Court. The Austrian Ambassador, the Count de Seilern, described

by Horace Walpole in a letter to the Earl of Hertford as the most

stately and ceremonious of men, was obliged to get out of his coach,

and ignominiously held with his legs in the air while the figures “45”

were chalked on the soles of his shoes. This insult formed the grounds

of an official complaint. It was as difficult for the minister to help

laughing at the gravity of his representations as to redress the slight

offered to a friendly power in the person of its representative.

 

Wilkes was now master of the situation; all his expectations were

verified. Elated with success, his audacity enabled him to make the

most of his undeserved triumph, and assuming a tone which heaped

fresh mortifications upon the Court, he printed an address of

acknowledgment to his constituents, in which he invited them to give

him their instructions from time to time, and promised that he would

always d