Page:History of the Radical Party in Parliament.djvu/286

 272 History of the Radical Party in Parliament. [1834- In the course of this year death removed two men who had long been associated with outside agitation, but had neither of them made any mark in Parliament. Hunt died on the 1 5th of February, and Cobbett on the 1 8th of June. Cobbett's place could not be filled by another, for, in fact, his work was done. There was no longer an uninstructed public dependent upon the exertions of one man for the food of political and social discussion ; the periodical press was being increasingly recognized as a means of political education, and efforts were being made to free it from the trammels by which its action was limited. The work of Hunt was of a much more ordinary character ; he was what the genteel politicians have generally agreed to call a demagogue that is, he spoke to the class whom those politicians neglected and despised, and spoke to them in very strong language about rights and privileges which might be discussed in philosophical disquisition, but could not without impropriety be mentioned to the people whose interests were directly affected. Many of the things he said were true, but he spoke to the wrong class, and in terms not sufficiently polite. As, however, so long as injustice remains, some one will be found to talk about it, Hunt's special place was taken by Feargus O'Connor and his Chartist colleagues, who came in their turn under the same reproach which reached those who sought to give irregular expression to the views of the bulk of the people to whom constitutional representation was denied. These deaths could not be said to cause any distinct loss to Parliamentary Radicalism, whilst the election of Mr. C. P. Villiers for Wolverhampton, which took place this year, was a great gain. The session of 1836 was one of almost unmixed misfortune and dishonour for the Whig Government. Their determi- nation to keep office on any terms, and their readiness to desert their Radical supporters, were recognized by the Tories, and the want of popular sympathy which such a policy in- volved was deliberately traded upon by the opposition in the House of Peers. The " Annual Register," then a vehemently