the Alabama claims, the president is requested to withdraw the American minister from England, and issue a proclamation of national non-intercourse.' It is true that the

resolution was rejected by a majority of more than two to one; but that such a motion should have been seriously entertained was a circumstance calculated to awaken fears that the question at issue would not receive in America that calm and dispassionate consideration by which alone it could be hoped that a satisfactory settlement of the differences between the two nations could be effected.

While the two governments were involved in the discussion of this unhappy difference, a noble-minded American was showing to both countries a more excellent way. Mr. Peabody, a native of the United States, who had long resided in England, where he had realised a vast fortune, determined to devote a large portion of it to the benefit of the country in which he had thus prospered. In the month of March 1862 he placed in the hands of trustees in whom he had confidence the sum of 150,0007. for the benefit of the poor of the metropolis. In his letter, conveying to them an intimation of his purpose, he stated that there were some fundamental principles from which it was his solemn injunction that they should never under any circumstances depart. First and foremost, there was the limitation of its uses absolutely and exclusively to such purposes as might be calculated directly to ameliorate the condition or augment the comforts of the poor who, either by birth or established residence, formed a recognised portion of the population of London. Secondly, that there should be a rigid exclusion from the management of this fund of any influences calculated to impart to it a character either sectarian as regarded religion, or exclusive in relation to local or party politics. In addition to these essential conditions, he conveyed recommendations which he submitted to the judgment of the trustees, without absolutely limiting their discretion. He suggested that at least a portion of the fund might be applied to the construction of such improved dwellings for the poor as would combine the utmost possible degree of the essentials of healthfulness, comfort, social enjoyment, and economy. In the beginning of the year he added to what he had previously given a second donation of 100,000l.; thus raising the

1966.]

MR. PEABODY.

273

amount of his gifts to the poor of this country to no less a sum than a quarter of a million. The trustees to whose management this immense fund was committed were recommended to erect school-houses where they were required, and to take care that they should be well supplied with books, periodicals, and newspapers, so that the inhabitants of the localities in which they were erected might enjoy opportunities of availing themselves of these advantages; lectures were to be organised, and the tenants encouraged to establish coöperative stores for supplying themselves with coals and other necessary articles; and he farther desired his trustees to publish annually in the London newspapers, during the month of February reports of the progress of the buildings which might be erected, of the receipts and expenditure connected with them, as well as with the general management of the funds intrusted to them.

A moderate rent was to be paid by the tenants of the buildings, by which a large and progressively increasing income would be furnished, which Mr. Peabody wished to be applied to the improvement of the dwellings of the working classes of the metropolis and its immediate vicinity. At the end of the year 1868 Mr. Peabody added another 100,000l.; thus raising the amount of his donations to the poor of this country to 350,000l., besides gifts amounting in all to two million dollars, which were made by him to form an education-fund for the people of America. The discrimination which guided him in the application of his bounty was little less remarkable than the liberality he showed in bestowing it. Certainly nothing was more needed, or more likely to conduce to the welfare of the people of the metropolis, than the improvement of those human styes in which a large portion of the class he desired to elevate were lodged; and which, notwithstanding the reports in which Dr. Letheby and others had shown their poisonous impurity, continued to exist in a very slightly improved condition until the noble-minded American inaugurated his well-considered measures for improving the moral and physical atmosphere breathed by the poor of London. His enlightened benevolence was recognised by all classes, from the Queen on the throne to the humblest of her subjects; and when he died England and

VOL. III.

T

America vied with one another in doing honour to his memory.

At the commencement of the year the London Gazette announced that a treaty based on free-trade principles and somewhat similar in its provisions to that which had been entered into with France, had been concluded with the Austrian government. Thus the principles of Cobden and Bright were steadily gaining ground; the commerce of England was being greatly extended, and that not only without injury to other nations, but greatly to their advantage; increasing their wealth, and imparting to them those civilising influences which free commercial intercourse exercises on the countries between which it is carried on, and binding them every day more strongly together by cords of peace, which it would soon become difficult, if not impossible, to sever.

The formal opening of the new parliament took place on the 1st of February. The Houses, as usual on such occasions, were occupied with the swearing-in of their members, and other preliminary formalities until Tuesday the 6th of that month; when the Queen, for the first time since the death of her husband, opened the session in person. There was therefore a more than usual interest excited by the event, and a very great multitude congregated to witness the procession. There was some deviations made on this occasion from the ordinary ceremonial. The old gilded state carriage was replaced by one equally handsome and of more modern build. But the eight cream-coloured horses, according to time-honoured custom, drew the Queen from her own palace to that of the legislature. The weather was propitious, and the reception of her majesty by the people as cordial and hearty as it had ever been. The royal robes were laid on the chair of state, but the Queen did not wear them, and the speech was read for her by the lord chancellor. It was stated at the time that this procedure was in accordance with precedents afforded by Queen Elizabeth, whose custom it is said to have been to address her parliaments through her lord chancellor. As the royal lady stood by the throne, sad and motionless, with downcast eyes, it was evident to the spectators that the long interval that had elapsed since the death of her consort had not sufficed to assuage the

1 866.]

PARLIAMENT OPENED BY THE QUEEN. 275

heavy sorrow which weighed on her heart. The speech delivered on this occasion promised measures on the subject of capital punishment, of the amendment and consolidation of the bankruptcy and other laws, of the system of the public audit of branches of receipt and expenditure, for the amendment of the law relating to certain classes of legal pensions, and for the alteration of the oaths taken by members of parliament with a view to getting rid of unnecessary declarations and of invidious distinctions between members of different religious communities. It also contained the following reference to the question of parliamentary reform :

'I have directed that information should be procured in reference to the rights of voting in the election of members to serve in parliament for counties, cities, and boroughs. When that information is complete, the attention of parlia ment will be called to the result thus obtained, with a view to such an improvement in the laws which regulate the rights of voting in the election of members of the House of Commons, as may tend to strengthen our free institutions, and conduce to the public welfare.'

This paragraph showed that the change of the head of the cabinet had produced the change in its public policy which had been anticipated. However, the subjects which chiefly occupied the attention of parliament at its first meeting were the cattle-plague, the conduct of Governor Eyre of Jamaica, and the efforts that had been made to obtain the liberation of Consul Cameron and other Europeans who had for some time been kept in captivity by the king of Abyssinia, and who, it was feared, would not be released by that barbarian unless some very strong measures were adopted by the British government. Of all these questions, that relating to the cattle-plague was the most pressing; for all the efforts that had hitherto been made to repress it had proved ineffectual, and it was necessary that parliament should be appealed to, to grant the powers that were required in order to put an end to its ravages. Accordingly, on Monday the 12th of February Sir George Grey moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the laws relating to contagious or infectious diseases in cattle or other animals. After enumerating the measures which the government had adopted, he stated

that they had been led to the conclusion that the only effectual way to check the progress of the disease was to slaughter the infected animals, to regulate the movement of live cattle by railway and road, and to kill and dispose of the hides of all cattle coming to this country at the point of their debarkation. He then stated in detail the means by which he intended that these objects should be effected, the amount of compensation that it was proposed to give to the owners of the slaughtered cattle, and the rules under which they were to be killed. He meant to limit the bill till July 1867, and some special restrictions it contained till April 15th, with power to the queen in council to extend their duration. Penalties were also imposed by the bill on those who should violate its provisions. He proposed that the cost of carrying the act out should be defrayed by a rate of five shillings a head on all cattle above one year old. He stated that it would be open to the House to divide the bill into two parts, in order that those portions of it about which there was no difference of opinion might be passed at once. Mr. G. W. Hunt, an experienced practical agriculturist, was listened to with much attention on this question. He admitted that the bill was stringent, but contended that it was not stringent enough for the emergency that had arisen. He recommended that from the 1st to the 25th of March there should be no movement of cattle on road or railway, and that infected animals should be killed in local slaughterhouses provided for the purpose. He recommended relaxations of the rules at certain periods of the year, in order to meet the necessity of stocking the land. The urgency of the matter led all parties to coincide in the expediency of carrying the measure forward as speedily as possible. Accordingly the bill brought in on Monday was read a second time on Wednesday; a bill brought forward by Mr. Hunt being also, by agreement, read on the same day. On Thursday the House went into committee. Several amendments were moved, and all withdrawn or negatived, except one brought forward by Mr. Hunt, and embodying his recommendations, which was carried by a majority of 264 to 181. Of course this was decisive in favour of his proposal; still the House went on discussing the provisions of the measure with great prolixity, and