[Footnote 1:  A quarter of a gross ton.]

In the poverty which enormous taxes and low wages together produced, there were not only degradation and squalid misery in England at this time, but violence and crime.  And there was also great injustice in the laws which punished crime.  There were two hundred and twenty-three offences punishable with death.  If a starving peasant killed a hare, he was summarily hanged.  Catholics were persecuted for their opinions; Jews were disqualified from holding office.  Only men of comfortable means were allowed to vote.  The universities were closed against Dissenters.  No man stood any chance of political preferment unless he was rich or was allied with the aristocracy, who controlled the House of Commons.  The nobles and squires not merely owned most of the landed property of the realm, but by their “rotten boroughs” could send whom they pleased to Parliament.  In consequence the House of Commons did not represent the nation, but only the privileged classes.  It was as aristocratic as the House of Lords.

In the period of repose which succeeded the excitements of war the people began to see their own political insignificance, and to agitate for reforms.  A few noble-minded and able statesmen of the more liberal party, if any political party could be called liberal, lifted up their voices in Parliament for a redress of scandalous evils; but the eloquence which distinguished them was a mere protest.  They were in a hopeless minority; nothing could be done to remove or ameliorate public evils so long as the majority of the House of Commons were opposed to reform.  It is obvious that the only thing the reformers could do, whether in or out of Parliament, was to agitate, to discuss, to hold public meetings, to write political tracts, to change public opinion, to bring such a pressure to bear on political aspirants as to insure an election of members to the House of Commons who were favorable to reform.  For seven years this agitation had been going on during the later years of the reign of George IV.  It was seen and felt by everybody that glaring public evils could not be removed until there should be a reform in Parliament itself,—­which meant an extension of the electoral suffrage, by which more liberal and popular members might be elected.

On the accession of the new king, there was of course a new election of members to the House of Commons.  In consequence of the agitations of reformers, public opinion had been changed, and a set of men were returned to Parliament pledged to reform.  The old Tory chieftains no longer controlled the House of Commons, but Whig leaders like Brougham, Macaulay, Althorp, and Lord John Russell,—­men elected on the issue of reform, and identified with the agitations in its favor.