Timeline of World History TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 
 

TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 

Loading
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
     
     
 
1800 - 1899
 
 
1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890
1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891
1802 1812 1822 1832 1842 1852 1862 1872 1882 1892
1803 1813 1823 1833 1843 1853 1863 1873 1883 1893
1804 1814 1824 1834 1844 1854 1864 1874 1884 1894
1805 1815 1825 1835 1845 1855 1865 1875 1885 1895
1806 1816 1826 1836 1846 1856 1866 1876 1886 1896
1807 1817 1827 1837 1847 1857 1867 1877 1887 1897
1808 1818 1828 1838 1848 1858 1868 1878 1888 1898
1809 1819 1829 1839 1849 1859 1869 1879 1889 1899
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1833 Part IV NEXT-1834 Part II    
 
 
     
1830 - 1839
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830-1839
History at a Glance
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part I
Webster Daniel
Hayne Robert Young
Webster–Hayne debate
Blaine James
Gascoyne-Cecil Robert Arthur Talbot
French conquest of Algeria
French Revolution of 1830
Charles X
Louis-Philippe
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part II
Francis Joseph I
Elisabeth of Austria
Diaz Porfirio
Gran Colombia
Wartenburg Johann David Ludwig
Petar II Petrovic-Njegos
Grey Charles
November Uprising (1830–31)
Milos Obrenovic I
Mysore
Red Jacket
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part III
William Cobbett: "Rural Rides"
Coulanges Numa Denis
Smith Joseph
Mormon
Honore de Balzac: La Comedie humaine
Dickinson Emily
Emily Dickinson
"Poems"
Genlis Comtesse
Goncourt Jules
Hayne Paul Hamilton
Heyse Paul
Victor Hugo: "Hernani"
Mistral Frederic
Rossetti Christina
Smith Seba
Stendhal: "Le Rouge et le Noir"
Tennyson: "Poems, Chiefly Lyrical"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part IV
Bierstadt Albert
Albert Bierstadt
Corot: "Chartres Cathedral"
Delacroix: "Liberty Guiding the People"
Leighton Frederic
Frederic Leighton
Pissarro Camille
Camille Pissarro
Impressionism Timeline
Ward John Quincy Adams
Waterhouse Alfred
Auber: "Fra Diavolo"
Bellini: "The Capulets and the Montagues"
Bulow Hans
Donizetti: "Anna Bolena"
Goldmark Karl
Karl Goldmark - Violin Concerto No 1
Karl Goldmark
Leschetizky Teodor
Remenyi Eduard
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part V
Reclus Jean Jacques Elisee
Markham Clements Robert
Brown Robert
Hessel Johann Friedrich Christian
Liverpool and Manchester Railway
Lyell Charles
Raoult Francois Marie
Reichenbach Karl
Royal Geographical Society
Thimonnier Barthelemy
Thomson Wyville
Lander Richard Lemon
Charting the Coastline
John Biscoe
Lockwood Belva Ann
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part I
Battle of Ostroleka
Caprivi Leo
Charles Albert
Leopold I of Belgium
Belgian Revolution (1830-1831)
Goschen George Joachim
Turner Nat
Gneisenau August Wilhelm Antonius
Labouchere Henry
Clausewitz Carl
Garfield James Abram
Egyptian–Ottoman War (1831–33)
Russell John
Pedro II of Brazil
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part II
Blavatsky Helena
Gregory XVI
Farrar Frederic William
Gilman Daniel Coit
Harrison Frederic
Miller William
Adventist
White Helen Gould Harmon
Roscoe William
Thomas Isaiah
Winsor Justin
Wright William Aldis
Rutherford Mark
Darby John Nelson
Plymouth Brethren
Balzac: "La Peau de chagrin"
Calverley Charles Stuart
Donnelly Ignatius
Victor Hugo: "Notre Dame de Paris"
Jackson Helen Hunt
Leskov Nikolai
Raabe Wilhelm
Sardou Victorien
Trumbull John
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part III
Begas Reinhold
Reinhold Begas
Meunier Constantin
Constantin Meunier
Bellini: "La Sonnambula"
Bellini: "Norma"
Joachim Joseph
Joseph Joachim - Violin Concerto, Op 11
Joseph Joachim
Meyerbeer: "Robert le Diable"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part IV
Barry Heinrich Anton
Guthrie Samuel
Liebig Justus
Chloroform
Colomb Philip Howard
Darwin and the Beagle
Maxwell James Clerk
North Pole
Routh Edward John
Sauria Marc Charles
Great cholera pandemic
Garrison William Lloyd
Godkin Edwin Lawrence
Hirsch Moritz
Hood John Bell
French Foreign Legion
London Bridge
Pullman George Mortimer
Schofield John
Smith Samuel Francis
Stephan Heinrich
Whiteley William
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part I
Reform Bill
Gentz Friedrich
Roberts Frederick Sleigh
Democratic Party
Clay Henry
Calhoun Caldwell John
"Italian Youth"
Falkland Islands
Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Europe, 1815-1832
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part II
Bancroft Hubert Howe
Fowler Thomas
Krause Karl Christian Friedrich
Rask Rasmus
Stephen Leslie
Vaughan Herbert Alfred
White Andrew Dickson
Alcott Louisa May
Alger Horatio
Arnold Edwin
Balzac: "Le Colonel Chabert"
Bjornson Bjornstjerne Martinius
Busch Heinrich
Carroll Lewis
Lewis Carroll
Lewis Carroll - photographer

"Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" 
"
Through the Looking-Glass" 
Delavigne Casimir
Echegaray Jose
Washington Irving: "Tales of the Alhambra"
Kennedy John Pendleton
Pellico Silvio
Aleksandr Pushkin: "Eugene Onegin"
Tennyson: "Lady of Shalott"
Watts-Dunton Theodore
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part III
Constable: "Waterloo Bridge from Whitehall Stairs"
Dore Gustave
Gustave Dore
Manet Edouard
Edouard Manet
Orchardson William
William Orchardson
Hughes Arthur
Arthur Hughes
Berlioz: "Symphonie Fantastique"
Damrosch Leopold
Donizetti: "L'Elisir d'Amore"
Garcia Manuel Vicente Rodriguez
Malibran Maria
Viardot Pauline
Garcia Manuel
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part IV
Wundt Wilhelm
Crookes William
Hayes Isaac Israel
Bolyai Janos
Koenig Rodolph
Nordenskiold Nils Adolf Erik
Reaching for the Pole
Nares George Strong
Scarpa Antonio
Vambery Armin
Conway Moncure Daniel
Declaration of Independence, 1776
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part I
Gordon Charles George
Otto of Greece
Amalia of Oldenburg
Randolph John
Harrison Benjamin
Isabella II
Santa Anna Antonio Lopez
Whig Party
Muhammad Ali dynasty
Zollverein
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part II
Bopp Franz
Bradlaugh Charles
Dilthey Wilhelm
Fawcett Henry
Furness Horace Howard
Ingersoll Robert Green
Pusey Edward Bouverie
Alarcon Pedro Antonio
Balzac: "Eugenie Grandet"
Booth Edwin
Charles Dickens: "Sketches by Boz"
George Cruikshank. From Charles Dickens, Sketches by Boz, 1836.
Gordon Adam Lindsay
Lamb: "Last Essays of Elia"
Longfellow: "Outre-Mer"
Morris Lewis
George Sand: "Lelia"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part III
Burne-Jones Edward
Edward Burne-Jones
Rops Felicien
Felicien Rops
Guerin Pierre-Narcisse
Pierre-Narcisse Guerin
Herold Ferdinand
Ferdinand Herold - Piano Concerto No.2
Ferdinand Herold
Brahms Johannes
Brahms - Hungarian Dances
Johannes Brahms
Chopin: Etudes Op.10 & 25
Heinrich Marschner: "Hans Heiling"
Mendelssohn: "Italian Symphony"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part IV
Weber Wilhelm Eduard
Muller Johannes Peter
Roscoe Henry Enfield
Wheatstone bridge
Back George
Factory Acts
Burnes Alexander
Home Daniel Dunglas
Nobel Alfred
SS "Royal William"
Slavery Abolition Act 1833
General Trades Union in New York
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part I
Grenville William Wyndham
Grand National Consolidated Trades Union
Quadruple Alliance
Peel Robert
South Australia Colonisation Act 1834
Xhosa Wars
Cape Colony
Carlism
First Carlist War
Battle of Alsasua
Battle of Alegria de Alava
Battle of Venta de Echavarri
Battle of Mendaza
First Battle of Arquijas
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part II
Acton John Emerich
Eliot Charles William
Gibbons James
Seeley John Robert
Spurgeon Charles
Treitschke Heinrich
Maurier George
Balzac: "Le Pere Goriot"
Bancroft George
Blackwood William
Edward Bulwer-Lytton: "The Last Days of Pompeii"
Dahn Felix
Frederick Marryat: "Peter Simple"
Alfred de Musset: "Lorenzaccio"
Pushkin: "The Queen of Spades"
Shorthouse Joseph Henry
Stockton Frank Richard
Browne Charles Farrar
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part III
Perov Vasily
Vasily Perov
Bartholdi Frederic Auguste
Degas Edgar
Edgar Degas
Ingres: "Martyrdom of Saint Symphorian"
Whistler James McNeill
James McNeill Whistler
Morris William
William Morris
Adolphe Adam: "Le Chalet"
Barnett John
John Barnett: "The Mountain Sylph"
John Barnett
Berlioz: "Harold en Italie"
Borodin Aleksandr
Alexander Borodin: Prince Igor
Aleksandr Borodin
Elssler Fanny
Kreutzer Conradin
Kreutzer - Das Nachtlager in Granada
Konradin Kreutzer
Santley Charles
Ponchielli Amilcare
 Amilcare Ponchielli - Dance of the Hours
Amilcare Ponchielli
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part IV
Haeckel Ernst
Arago Francois
Buch Leopold
Faraday: "Law of Electrolysis"
Langley Samuel Pierpont
McCormick Cyrus Hall
Mendeleyev Dmitry
Runge Friedlieb Ferdinand
Phenol
Steiner Jakob
Depew Chauncey Mitchell
Burning of Parliament
Gabelsberger Franz Xaver
Hansom Joseph Aloysius
Hunt Walter
Lloyd's Register
Poor Law Amendment Act 1834
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part I
Ferdinand I of Austria
Bernstorff Christian Gunther
Brisson Henri
Masayoshi Matsukata
Olney Richard
Lee Fitzhugh
Municipal Corporations Act 1835
Palma Tomas Estrada
Riyad Pasha
White George Stuart
Second Seminole War
Texas Revolution (1835 – 1836)
Battle of Gonzales
Siege of Bexar
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part II
Leake William Martin
Abbott Lyman
Brooks Phillips
Caird Edward
Dahlmann Friedrich
Finney Charles Grandison
Harris William Torrey
Hensen Viktor
Jevons William Stanley
Skeat Walter William
Cousin Victor
Strauss David Friedrich
Giacomo Leopardi: "Canti"
Austin Alfred
Butler Samuel
Gaboriau Emile
Hemans Felicia Dorothea
Hogg James
Ireland William Henry
Mathews Charles
Menken Adah Isaacs
Simms William Gilmore
Mark Twain
Carducci Giosue
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part III
Constable: "The Valley Farm"
Corot: "Hagar in the Desert"
Defregger Franz
Kunichika Toyohara
Toyohara Kunichika
Cui Cesar
Cesar Cui "Orientale"
Cesar Cui
Donizetti: "Lucia di Lammermoor"
Halevy Fromental
Halevy: "La Juive"
Placido Domingo - Rachel, quand du Seigneur
Fromental Halevy
Saint-Saens Camille
Camille Saint-Saens - Danse Macabre
Camille Saint-Saens
Thomas Theodore
Wieniawski Henri
Wieniawski - Polonaise de Concert in D major No. 1, Op. 4
Henri Wieniawski
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part IV
Newcomb Simon
Schiaparelli Giovanni Virginio
Geikie Archibald
Chaillu Paul
Locomotive: Electric traction
Talbot Wiliam Henry Fox
Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society
Sacher-Masoch Leopold Ritter
Masochism
Heth Joice
Bennett James Gordon
Carnegie Andrew
Chubb Charles
Colt Samuel
Field Marshall
Green Henrietta Howland
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part I
Crockett Davy
Houston Sam
Battle of the Alamo
Battle of San Jacinto
BATTLE OF SAN JACINTO
Cannon Joseph Gurney
Chartism
Arkansas
Chamberlain Joseph
Campbell-Bannerman Henry
Great Trek
Voortrekker
Xhosa
Inoue Kaoru
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part II
Ralph Waldo Emerson: "Nature"
Ramakrishna
Aldrich Thomas Bailey
Besant Walter
Frederick Marryat: "Mr. Midshipman Easy"
Burnand Francis Cowley
Carlyle: "Sartor Resartus"
Dickens: "Pickwick Papers"
Eckermann Johann Peter
Gilbert William Schwenk
Gogol: "The Government Inspector"
Harte Bret
Newell Robert Henry
Reuter Fritz
Pusckin: "The Captain's Daughter"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part III
Alma-Tadema Lawrence
Lawrence Alma-Tadema
Corot: "Diana Surprised by Actaeon"
Fantin-Latour Henri
Henri Fantin-Latour
Homer Winslow
Winslow Homer
Lefebvre Jules Joseph
Jules Joseph Lefebvre
Lenbach Franz
Franz von Lenbach
Poynter Edward
Edward Poynter
Tissot James
James Tissot
Carle Vernet
Carle Vernet
Adolphe Adam: "Le Postilion de long jumeau"
Delibes Leo
Delibes - Lakme - Flower duet
Leo Delibes
Reicha Antoine
Glinka: "A Life for the Tzar"
Mendelssohn: "St. Paul"
Meyerbeer: "Les Huguenots"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part IV
Bergmann Ernst
Daniell John Frederic
Davy Edmund
Ericsson John
Gray Asa
Lockyer Norman
Colt's Manufacturing Company
Crushed stone
Schwann Theodor
Pepsin
Schimper Karl Friedrich
Gould Jay
"The Lancers"
Ross Betsy
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part I
William IV, King of Great Britain
Michigan
Van Buren Martin
Cleveland Grover
Itagaki Taisuke
Holstein Friedrich
Boulanger Georges
Carnot Sadi
Caroline affair
Ernest Augustus I of Hanover
Rebellions of 1837
Lafontaine Louis-Hippolyte
Baldwin Robert
Sitting Bull
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part II
Thomas Carlyle: "The French Revolution"
Green John Richard
Lyon Mary
Mount Holyoke College
Mann Horace
Moody Dwight
Murray James
Oxford English Dictionary
Old School–New School Controversy
Balzac: "Illusions perdues"
Nathaniel Hawthorne: "Twice-told Tales"
Braddon Mary Elizabeth
Eggleston Edward
Ebers Georg
Howells William Dean
Swinburne Algernon Charles
Wyndham Charles
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part III
Carolus-Duran
Carolus-Duran
Legros Alphonse
Alphonse Legros
Marees Hans
Hans von Marees
Auber: "Le Domino  noir"
Balakirev Mily
Balakirev - Symphony No.1
Mily Balakirev
Berlioz: "Requiem"
Dubois Theodore
Theodore Dubois - Piano Concerto No. 2
Theodore Dubois
Lesueur Jean-Francois
Lesueur: Coronation music for Napoleon I
Jean-François Lesueur
Lortzing: "Zar und Zimmermann"
Cosima Wagner
Waldteufel Emile
Emile Waldteufel - waltzes
Emile Waldteufel
Zingarelli Niccolo
Nicola Antonio Zingarelli - Tre ore dell'Agonia
Nicola Zingarelli
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part IV
Analytical Engine
Borsig August
Burroughs John
Cooke William
Telegraph
d'Urville Jules Dumont
Kuhne Wilhelm
Van der Waals Johannes Diderik
Fitzherbert Maria Anne
Hanna Mark
Lovejoy Elijah
Morgan John Pierpont
Pitman Isaac
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part I
Osceola
Gambetta Leon
Weenen Massacre
Battle of Blood River
Anti-Corn Law League
Cobden Richard
Bright John
Rodgers John
Weyler Valeriano
Wood Henry Evelyn
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part II
Adams Henry
Bowditch Nathaniel
Bryce Viscount
Montagu Corry, 1st Baron Rowton
Lecky William Edward Hartpole
Lounsbury Thomas Raynesford
Mach Ernst
Mohler Johann Adam
Sacy Antoine Isaac Silvestre
Sidgwick Henry
Trevelyan George Otto
Lytton: "The Lady of Lyons"
Daly Augustin
Dickens: "Oliver Twist"
Victor Hugo: "Ruy Blas"
Irving Henry
Villiers de l'Isle-Adam
Rachel Felix
Roe Edward Payson
Schwab Gustav Benjamin
Scudder Horace Elisha
Creevey Thomas
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part III
Dalou Jules
Jules Dalou
Mauve Anton
Anton Mauve
Richardson Hobson Henry
Henry Hobson Richardson
Fortuny Maria
Maria Fortuny
Berlioz: "Benvenuto Cellini"
Bizet Georges
Bizet - Carmen - Habanera
Georges Bizet
Bruch Max
Max Bruch - Violinkonzert Nr. 1
Max Bruch
Lind Johanna Maria
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part IV
Abbe Cleveland
Cournot Antoine-Augustin
Daguerre-Niepce method of photography
Dulong Pierre-Louis
Hyatt Alpheus
Muir John
Perkin William Henry
Stevens John
Zeppelin Ferdinand
Belleny John
United States Exploring Expedition
Wilkes Charles
Hill Octavia
Wanamaker John
Woodhull Victoria
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part I
Uruguayan Civil War (1839-1851)
Rudini Antonio Starabba
Treaty of London
First Opium War (1839-1842)
Richter Eugen
Frederick VI of Denmark
Christian VIII of Denmark
Natalia Republic
Abdulmecid I
Ranjit Singh
Van Rensselaer Stephen
Cervera Pascual
First Anglo-Afghan War
Anglo-Afghan Wars
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part II
Fesch Joseph
Paris Gaston
Peirce Charles Sanders
Reed Thomas
Anzengruber Ludwig
Sparks Jared
Galt John
Herne James
Longfellow: "Hyperion"
De Morgan William
Ouida
Dickens:  "Nicholas Nickleby"
Pater Walter
Рое: "The Fall of the House of Usher"
Praed Winthrop Mackworth
Smith James
Sully-Prudhomme Armand
Stendhal: "La Chartreuse de Parme"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part III
Beechey William
William Beechey
Cezanne Paul
Paul Cezanne
Sisley Alfred
Alfred Sisley
Thoma Hans
Hans Thoma
Yoshitoshi Tsukioka
Tsukioka Yoshitoshi
Gomes Antonio Carlos
Antonio Carlos Gomes - Il Guarany - Ouverture
Antonio Carlos Gomes
Moussorgsky Modest
Moussorgsky - Boris Godunov
Modest Mussorgsky
Paine John Knowles
John Knowles Paine - Symphony No.1
John Knowles Paine
Randall James Rider
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part IV
Crozier Francis Rawdon Moira
Grey George
Into the Interior
Garnier Frangois
Goodyear Charles
Vulcanization
Jacobi Moritz
Mosander Carl Gustaf
Przhevalsky Nikolay
Smith William
Mond Ludwig
Stephens John Lloyd
Catherwood Frederick
George Henry
Kundt August
Schonbein Christian Friedrich
Steinheil Carl August
Doubleday Abner
Macmillan Kirkpatrick
Cadbury George
Cunard Samuel
Cunard Line
Grand National
Lowell John
Lowell Institute
Rockefeller John
Stanhope Hester Lucy
Weston Edward Payson
Willard Frances
 
 
 

Mort du general Lafayette - Gondelfinger - 1834 - Gravure sur bois coloriee
 
 
 
 
 HISTORY, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY, ART, LITERATURE, MUSIC, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, DAILY LIFE
 
 
 
 
YEAR BY YEAR:  1800 - 1899
 
 
 
1834 Part I
 
 
 
1834
 
 
The German Zollverein (customs union) begins to operate
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Grenville William Wyndham
 

William Wyndham Grenville, Baron Grenville, (born Oct. 25, 1759—died Jan. 12, 1834, Dropmore Lodge, Buckinghamshire, Eng.), British politician, son of prime minister George Grenville; he was himself head of the coalition “Ministry of all the Talents,” Feb. 11, 1806–March 25, 1807. His greatest achievement was the abolition of the British overseas slave trade by a bill that became law the day he left office.

 

William Wyndham Grenville, Baron Grenville
  Entering the House of Commons in 1782, Grenville became its speaker in January 1789, home secretary in June of that year, and president of the Board of Control in March 1790. Created Baron Grenville on Nov. 25, 1790, he then became leader of the House of Lords. From June 8, 1791, to Feb. 10, 1801, he served under his cousin William Pitt the Younger as secretary of state for foreign affairs. To crush English radicalism encouraged by the French Revolution, Grenville introduced the Habeas Corpus Suspension Act (1794) and other measures. He and Pitt resigned (1801) when King George III refused to consider granting political rights to Roman Catholics.

When Pitt resumed the premiership in May 1804, Grenville declined to join the government because his greatest political ally, Charles James Fox, was excluded from office at the king’s insistence. After Pitt’s death (Jan. 23, 1806) Grenville formed a coalition of the former prime minister Henry Addington’s followers, Foxites, and his own friends. His government failed to make peace with Napoleonic France and otherwise accomplished little apart from outlawing the slave trade in 1807. Its advocacy of a Catholic Relief Bill caused George III to dismiss Grenville in March 1807 after the latter refused to pledge himself never again to trouble the king on the subject. Grenville’s refusal kept him out of office in 1809 and again in 1812.

 
 

Until 1817, when he supported the government’s measures to suppress radicalism, he generally voted with the Whigs in opposition. A paralytic stroke ended his active political career in 1823. Grenville was chancellor of Oxford University from 1810 to 1834. He died without male issue, and his title became extinct.

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Grand National Consolidated Trades Union
 
The Grand National Consolidated Trades Union of 1834 was an early attempt to form a national union confederation in the United Kingdom.
 
There had been several attempts to form national general unions in the 1820s, culminating with the National Association for the Protection of Labour, established in 1830. However, this had soon failed, and by 1830 the most influential labour organisation was the Builders' Union.

In 1833, Owen Robert returned from the United States, and declared the need for a guild-based system of co-operative production. He was able to gain the support of the Builders' Union, which called for a Grand National Guild to take over the entire building trade. In February 1834, a conference was held in London which founded the Grand National Consolidated Trades Union.

The new body, unlike other organisations founded by Owen, was open only to trade unionists and, as a result, initially Owen did not join it. Its foundation coincided with a period of industrial unrest, and strikes broke out in Derby, Leeds and Oldham. These were discouraged by the new union, which unsuccessfully tried to persuade workers to adopt co-operative solutions. Six labourers in Tolpuddle, Dorset, attempted to found a friendly society and to seek to affiliate with the Grand National. This was discovered, they were convicted of swearing unlawful oaths, and they were sentenced to transportation for seven years. They became known as the Tolpuddle Martyrs and there was a large and successful campaign led by William Lovett to reduce their sentence. They were issued with a free pardon in March 1836.

The organisation was riven by disagreement over the approach to take, given that many strikes had been lost, the Tolpuddle case had discouraged workers from joining unions, and several new unions had collapsed.

  The initial reaction was to rename itself the British and Foreign Consolidated Association of Industry, Humanity and Knowledge, focus increasingly on common interests of workers and employers, and attempt to regain prestige by appointing Owen as Grand Master. The organisation began to break up in the summer of 1834 and by November, it had ceased to function: Owen called a congress in London which reconstituted it as the Friendly Association of the Unionists of All Classes of All Nations with himself as Grand Master, but it was defunct by the end of 1834. Meanwhile, the Builders' Union broke up into smaller trade-based unions.

Owen persevered, holding a congress in 1 May 1835 to constitute a new Association of All Classes of All Nations, with himself as Preliminary Father. This was essentially a propaganda organisation, with little popular support, which attempted to gain the ear of influential individuals to propose a more rational society. In 1837, it registered as a friendly society, but was initially overshadowed by Owen's similar National Community Friendly Society. In 1838, it was able to expand significantly by sending out "social missionaries", setting up fifty branches, most in Cheshire, Lancashire and Yorkshire. In 1839, the National Community and the Association of All Classes merged to form the Universal Community Society of Rational Religionists.

Despite its name, the Grand National was never able to gain significant support outside London[ and, as a result, Lovett's London Working Men's Association was its most important successor. The next attempt to form a national union confederation was the National Association of United Trades for the Protection of Labour.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Lord Palmerston, Brit. Foreign Secretary, contrives Quadruple Alliance with France, Spain, and Portugal
 
 
Quadruple Alliance
 

Quadruple Alliance, alliance formed on April 22, 1834, between Britain, France, and the more liberal claimants to the thrones of Spain and Portugal against the conservative claimants to those thrones.

 
The alliance successfully supported Maria Cristiana, who was acting as regent for Isabella II in Spain and had allied herself with the liberals against the pretender Don Carlos in the First Carlist War (1833–39). In Portugal the alliance successfully supported Maria da Glória by intervening in the Miguelite Wars (1828–34) and expelling the reactionary Dom Miguel from Portugal. The cooperation between France and Britain in the affairs of the Iberian Peninsula broke down in 1846, when Isabella and her sister, Luisa, married French princes.

Encyclopædia Britannica
 
 
 
1834
 
 
General Lafayette, Fr. soldier and statesman, hero of the Amer. Revolution, d. (b. 1757)
 
 

Mort du general Lafayette - Gondelfinger - 1834 - Gravure sur bois coloriee
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Spanish Inquisition, begun during 13th century, finally suppressed
 
 
     
 
Inquisition

By this term is usually meant a special ecclesiastical institution for combating or suppressing heresy. Its characteristic mark seems to be the bestowal on special judges of judicial powers in matters of faith, and this by supreme ecclesiastical authority, not temporal or for individual cases, but as a universal and permanent office.
     
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey (Grey Charles) becomes Prime Minister of Great Britain in July; followed in Dec. by Sir Robert Peel
 
 

Lord Grey, Prime Minister 1830–1834
 
 
 
Peel Robert
 

Sir Robert Peel, 2nd Baronet, (born February 5, 1788, Bury, Lancashire, England—died July 2, 1850, London), British prime minister (1834–35, 1841–46) and founder of the Conservative Party. Peel was responsible for the repeal (1846) of the Corn Laws that had restricted imports.

 


Sir Robert Peel, 2nd Baronet

  Early political career
He was the eldest son of a wealthy cotton manufacturer, Robert Peel (1750–1830), who was made a baronet by William Pitt the Younger. The younger Robert was educated at Harrow and at Oxford, and, with his father’s money, a parliamentary seat was found for him as soon as he came of age, in 1809.

As an able government supporter, Peel received appointment as undersecretary for war and colonies in 1810. Two years later he accepted the difficult post of chief secretary for Ireland. There he made his reputation as a skilled and incorruptible administrator, and, at the end of his Irish secretaryship, he was marked out for early promotion. He had also distinguished himself as the ablest of the “Protestant” party that resisted the admittance of Roman Catholics to Parliament, and in 1817 he gained the coveted honour of election as member of Parliament for the University of Oxford. Though declining immediate office after his return from Ireland, he was made chairman, in 1819, of the important currency commission that brought about a return to the gold standard.

 
 
In the 1822 ministerial reconstruction pursued by Robert Banks Jenkinson, 2nd earl of Liverpool, Peel accepted the post of secretary of state for the home department and a seat in the cabinet. His first task was to meet the long-standing demands in Parliament for a radical reform of the criminal laws. He then proceeded to a comprehensive reorganization of the criminal code. Between 1825 and 1830 he effected its fundamental consolidation and reform, covering three-quarters of all criminal offenses. Rising crime statistics convinced him that legal reform should be accompanied by improved methods of crime prevention. In 1829 he carried through the Metropolitan Police Act, which set up the first disciplined police force for the Greater London area. As a result of Peel’s efforts, the London police force became known as Bobby’s boys and later simply as bobbies.

When George Canning succeeded Liverpool as prime minister in 1827, Peel resigned on the issue of Roman Catholic emancipation. He returned to office under Arthur Wellesley, 1st duke of Wellington, early in 1828 as home secretary and leader of the House of Commons. Differences with Wellington led to the resignation of several followers of Canning after only four months in office, which thus considerably weakened the government. This was followed by the Catholic crisis of 1828–29 that grew out of the renewal of the Irish movement for emancipation in 1823 with the formation of the Catholic Association. Its growing strength culminated in the victory of Daniel O’Connell, the Irish “Liberator,” at a by-election for County Clare in 1828. Convinced that further resistance was useless, Peel proffered his resignation and urged the prime minister to make a final settlement of the Catholic question. Faced with severe opposition from the king and the Anglican church, Wellington persuaded Peel in 1829 to remain in office and assist in carrying through the policy of concession to the Catholics on which they now both agreed. Peel was bitterly attacked for his sudden change of heart and lost his seat for Oxford. Wellington’s declaration against parliamentary reform in November 1830 finally brought about the fall of his weak and unpopular government.

 
 

Sir Robert Peel, 2nd Baronet
  Prime minister and Conservative leader
In the reform crisis following Wellington’s fall, Peel’s position was difficult and ambiguous. Though not opposed to moderate parliamentary reform, he was shocked by the sweeping measure introduced by the ministry of Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey, in March 1831. But, on the other hand, he made no effort to conciliate the ultra-Tories, and his refusal to form a new ministry with Wellington and pass a Tory reform bill in 1832 further weakened his standing with his former followers. Yet he was already looking to the growth of conservative opinion in the country, and his moderation in the first reformed Parliament (1833–34) did much to restore his political stature. The premature dismissal of the ministry of William Lamb, 2nd Viscount Melbourne, in November 1834 and Peel’s appointment as prime minister gave him an impossible task because he did not possess, and the Conservative Party lacked the organization and men necessary to procure, a majority in the House of Commons (even though the general election of 1835 added considerably to their numbers). Nevertheless, his Tamworth Manifesto was an epoch-making statement of the new Conservative reform principles, and for the first time the party came under his acknowledged leadership. In April 1835, defeated by a combination of Whigs, radicals, and Irish nationalists, he resigned his office. During the next six years, aided by his astute and cautious tactics, the Conservative Party steadily increased in numbers and confidence. Following the general election of 1841, in which he gained a majority of more than 70 in the House of Commons, Peel formed an administration that was one of the most memorable of the century.
 
 
Peel was faced with war in China and Afghanistan, strained relations with France and the United States, severe commercial distress at home, agitation by the workingmen’s reform movement of the Chartists and the Anti-Corn Law League, O’Connell’s campaign for the repeal of the union of Ireland and Great Britain, and a five-year accumulation of budgetary deficits. His policy aimed at peace and security abroad, a reduction in the cost of living for the working classes, and encouragement to trade and industry.
 
 
On the controversial issue of the Corn Laws, to which the landed interest in his party was very sensitive, he brought forward as one of his first measures a new bill drastically reducing the scale of protective duties. In the same year, the bold reintroduction of the income tax (originally instituted during the Napoleonic Wars) established internal revenue on a sound footing and enabled him to make sweeping reductions of duties on food and raw materials entering the country.

The Bank Charter Act of 1844, establishing a tight connection between note issue and gold reserves, completed the foundations of the Victorian banking and currency system. The success of these measures encouraged Peel to launch a second great free-trade budget in 1845. The income tax was renewed, and there was another, even more massive round of tariff reductions.

With the return of prosperity, Chartism died down, and the Anti-Corn Law League turned to more constitutional methods of agitation. Abroad, a firm but conciliatory policy led to better relations with France. The boundary disputes with the United States were settled by the mission of Alexander Baring, 1st Baron Ashburton, in 1842 and the Oregon treaty of 1846. The same combination of firmness and conciliation was followed in Ireland. Once the threatening campaign for repeal of the union had been brought to a halt in 1843 with O’Connell’s trial for conspiracy, Peel turned to more constructive measures.
  A commission was set up to inquire into the relations between landlord and tenant, and a wide scheme for Irish university education was passed into law in 1845.

The liberality of Peel’s Irish policy, especially the greatly increased grant to the Catholic seminary of Maynooth, aroused strong Protestant feeling in England, severely straining relations with his own party. The potato disease in 1845, bringing with it the certainty of widespread famine in Ireland, completed the breach. Peel had already come to the conviction that the Corn Laws would have to be abolished sooner or later. His decision in the autumn of 1845 that a relief program for Ireland had to be accompanied by the repeal of the Corn Laws split his Cabinet and led to his resignation. But, when Lord John Russell failed to form a free-trade ministry in December 1845, Peel returned to office. After savage parliamentary debates the repeal of the Corn Laws was finally carried through in June 1846. Peel believed that the attempt to preserve the Corn Laws in the changed social and political conditions of Britain would imperil the rule of the aristocracy. Nevertheless, a majority of his party voted against him, and a smaller number joined the opposition to bring about his defeat and resignation later the same month. For the rest of his career he dedicated himself to the support of free-trade principles and the maintenance of Russell’s Whig ministry as the only safeguard against a protectionist government. He died in 1850 as a result of a riding accident.

 
 
Assessment
A proud, shy person, Peel was by nature quick-tempered, courageous, stubborn, and often autocratic. With a first-class intellect, an exact memory, and great capacity for work, he was a superb administrator and an outstanding parliamentary debater. Though he has an unchallenged place as founder of the modern Conservative Party, his political outlook was formed in the pre-reform era. He regarded ministers of the crown as servants of the state rather than as mouthpieces for sectional or party views. By insisting on fundamental changes in the national interest, he did much to preserve the continuity of aristocratic parliamentary government in an age of rapid industrial change, social distress, and class conflict. More than any other, he was the architect of the mid-Victorian age of stability and prosperity that he did not live to see. Though he founded the Conservative Party, Peel took the lead in developing a whole series of liberal measures in government, measures that characterized Liberal as well as Conservative politics in the 19th century. He thus served to develop a governmental liberalism that unified much of the outlook of party politicians, who were otherwise divided on political lines.

Norman Gash, Jr.


Encyclopædia Britannica
 
 
 
1834
 
 
South Australia Colonisation Act 1834
 

The South Australia Colonisation Act 1834 (4 & 5 Will. IV c. 95) is the short title of an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom with the long title

An Act to empower His Majesty to erect South Australia into a British Province or Provinces and to provide for the Colonisation and Government thereof.

It provided for the settlement of a province or multiple provinces on the lands between 132 degrees east and 141 degrees of east longitude, and between the Southern Ocean, and 26 degrees south latitude, including the islands adjacent to the coastline. It was put into effect on 15 August 1834.

The Act largely reflected the views of Edward Gibbon Wakefield, who saw control of land sales as a way to finance the development of a colony and encourage the emergence of a class structure similar to that of England.

 
Overview
The Act recognized that these lands were inhabitable, and made provision for colonization, government, and the funding of the new settlement on these lands. The Act states that the land specified by the Act is 'waste' and 'uninhabited' (this statement was subsequently modified by the Letters Patent establishing the Province of South Australia in 1836).

The Act specifically provided for a limited independence of Government, whereby all laws made by the government in South Australia were to be presented to the King-in-Council in the United Kingdom. The Act stated that 802,511 square kilometres (309,851 sq mi) would be allotted to the colony and to be convict-free. The plan was for the colony to be the ideal embodiment of the best qualities of British society, that is, no religious discrimination or unemployment.

The Act allowed for three or more appointed commissioners, called The Colonization Commissioners for South Australia, to oversee the sale and leasing of land in South Australia to British subjects. The province and its capital were named prior to settlement. The Act further specified that it was to be self-sufficient; £20,000 surety had to be created and £35,000 worth of land had to be sold in the new colony before any settlement was permitted. These conditions were fulfilled by the close of 1835.

The Act specifies the minimum price of land at twelve shillings sterling per English acre, and for the selling price of land to be an equal price per acre, irrespective of the quality of the land. The money raised by the sale and leasing of land constituted what was called an Emigration Fund which was to be applied to the cost conveying further immigrants from Great Britain and Ireland.

These commissioners were empowered by the Act in a number of areas. They were able to appoint officers, delegate responsibilities, and make payment for the services provided. They were empowered to seek financing for the costs of starting the settlement.
One method specifically prescribed in the Act was for the issuing of bonds under the Seal of the commissioners in two separate and distinct areas. Firstly, they were able to issue what was named South Australia public lands securities up to a sum of fifty thousand pounds.

  This financing was to pay for the cost of transporting immigrants, until the time when the funds from land sales was sufficient to cover the cost of transportation. Secondly, they were able to issue what was named South Australian Colonial Revenue Securities, up to a sum of two hundred thousand pounds. This funding was a public debt on the colonial governance, which was to provide money for the operation of the settlement. It was to be repaid by the rates and taxes imposed on the colonists. The commissioners were required to submit to Parliament once a year a full and detailed report of the proceedings in South Australia.

The Act authorized the appointment of trustees, who would oversee a guarantee against the expense of settling South Australia, purchased out of the funds raised as South Australian Colonial Revenue Securities. This guarantee could be either Exchequer bills or other government securities in England. The amount was specified as twenty thousand pounds.

The Act specified that those immigrating to South Australia, under the Emigration Fund, should be a married couple under the age of thirty, and that they both, along with any children they had, must immigrate to South Australia. The Act also specifically forbade the transportation of convicts to South Australia.

The Act provided for the establishment of local government, specifying that the local population should exceed fifty thousand.

The Act allowed for the liquidation of public land, if at the end of a ten-year period, the population of the province or provinces had not reached twenty thousand "natural born Subjects of His Majesty". This was to also repay any remaining debts of the South Australian Public Lands Securities.

The Act finally placed a proviso on any establishment of settlements in South Australia. The Act specifically forbade the commencement of settlements until twenty thousand pounds had been raised and invested in the government securities or Exchequer bills. In addition no settlement could proceed until public lands to the value of thirty-five thousand pounds had been sold.

This Act was repealed by the South Australia Act 1842

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Maria II, Queen of Portugal ascends throne of Portugal
 
 

Maria II around age 14, c.1833
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Sixth Kaffir War (1834—1835); severe clashes between Bantu people and White settlers on eastern frontier of Cape Colony
 
 
Xhosa Wars
 

The Xhosa Wars (also known as the Cape Frontier Wars or "Africa's 100 Years War"), were a series of nine wars or flare-ups (from 1779 to 1879) between the Xhosa tribes and European settlers, in what is now the Eastern Cape in South Africa. These events were the longest-running military action in African colonialism history.

 
The reality of the conflicts between the Europeans and Xhosa involves a balance of tension. At times, tensions existed between the various Europeans in the Cape region, tensions between Empire administration and colonial governments, and tensions and alliances of the Xhosa tribes. Alliances with Europeans introduced to the Xhosa tribes the use of firearms; even so, the Xhosa lost most of their territory and were incorporated into the British Empire. The Xhosa include some groups that have adopted the Xhosa language and several groups that are now classed as being Xhosa, such as the Mfengu nation, that had an alliance with the Cape Colony.
 
 
Background
The first Cape European settlers were the Dutch (1652), who established a small supply station at present day Cape Town for their trading ships to stop for supplies en route to and from India, South East Asia, and China. European settlement in and around Cape Town later spread into the valleys. By the second half of the 18th century, Europeans (predominantly Boers), moved eastward up the coast and they encountered the Xhosa in the region of the Fish River. The Xhosa were already established in the area and herded cattle. And particularly after British colonization in 1820, competition for land ensued.

First war (1779-1781)
The first war started when Boer frontiersmen sparked a confrontation with the Xhosa.

Second war (1789–1793)
The second war involved a larger territory. It started when some frontiersmen, under Barend Lindeque, allied themselves with Ndlambe (regent of the Western Xhosas) in his war against the Gqunukhwebe clans that had penetrated into the Zuurveld, a district between the Great Fish and the Sundays Rivers. Panic ensued and farms were abandoned.

  Third war (1799–1803)
The third war started in January 1799 with a Xhosa rebellion that General T.P. Vandeleur crushed. Discontented Khoikhoi then revolted, joined with the Xhosa in the Zuurveld, and started attacking white farms. In February 1803 a peace was arranged.

Fourth war (1811–1812)

The fourth war (1811–1812) was the first experienced under British rule. The Zuurveld acted as a buffer zone, empty of the Boers and British to the West and the Xhosa to the East. In 1811, the Xhosa occupied the area and flashpoint conflicts with the settlers followed.

A mixed force under Colonel John Graham that included British soldiers drove the Xhosa back beyond the Fish River in an effort that the first Governor of the Cape Colony, Lt-General John Cradock, characterized as involving no more bloodshed "than was necessary to impress on the minds of these savages a proper degree of terror and respect".

About four thousand British immigrants subsequently settled on the Fish River. "Graham's Town" arose on the site of Colonel Graham's headquarters; in time this became Grahamstown.

 
 
Fifth war (1818–1819)
The fifth frontier war, also known as the "War of Nxele", initially developed from a 1817 judgment by the Cape Colony government about stolen cattle and their restitution by the Xhosa. An issue of overcrowding brought on a civil war between the Ngqika (royal clan of the Rharhabe Xhosa) and the Gcaleka Xhosa (those that remained in their homeland). A Cape Colony-Ngqika defence treaty legally required military assistance to the Ngqika request (1818).
The Xhosa prophet-chief Maqana Nxele (or Makana) emerged at this time and promised “to turn bullets into water.” Maqana led a 10,000 Xhosa force attack (22 April 1819) on Grahamstown, which was held by 350 troops. A Khoikhoi group led by Jan Boesak enabled the garrison to repulse Maqana, who suffered the loss of 1,000 Xhosa. Maqana was eventually captured and imprisoned on Robben Island.
 
Insurgents defend a stronghold in the forested Water Kloof during the 8th Xhosa war of 1851. Xhosa, Kat River Khoi-khoi and some army deserters are depicted.
 
 
The British pushed the Xhosa further east beyond the Fish River to the Keiskamma River. The resulting empty territory was designated as a buffer zone for loyal Africans' settlements, but was declared to be off limits for either side's military occupation. It came to be known as the "Ceded Territories".

The Albany district was established in 1820, on the Cape's side of the Fish River, and was populated with some 5,000 Britons. The Grahamstown battle site continues to be called "Egazini" ("Place of Blood"), and a monument was erected there for the fallen Xhosa.

 
 

The Eastern Frontier, ca 1835
 
 
Sixth war (1834–1836)
The Sixth Frontier War is known by the Xhosa as "Hintsa's War" because of the role of the British murder of Hintsa during the war. Hintsa did not instigate the war but he did support it; Chief Maqoma was the primary leader of the Xhosa forces.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Dutch farmers of the Cape Colony begin to settle in the country north of Orange River
 
 
Cape Colony
 
The Cape Colony (Dutch: Kaapkolonie) was a British colony in present-day South Africa and Namibia, named for the Cape of Good Hope. The British colony was preceded by an earlier Dutch colony of the same name, established in 1652 by the Dutch East India Company. The Dutch lost the colony to Britain following the 1795 Battle of Muizenberg, but had it returned following the 1802 Peace of Amiens. It was re-occupied by the British following the Battle of Blaauwberg in 1806, and British possession affirmed with the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814.
 
The Cape Colony then remained in the British Empire, becoming self-governing in 1872, and uniting with three other colonies to form the Union of South Africa in 1910. It then was renamed the Cape of Good Hope Province. South Africa became fully independent in 1931 by the Statute of Westminster. Following the 1994 creation of the present-day South African provinces, Cape Province was partitioned between Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, and Western Cape, with smaller parts in North West province.

The Cape Colony was coextensive with the later Cape Province, stretching from the Atlantic coast inland and eastward along the southern coast, constituting about half of modern South Africa: the final eastern boundary, after several wars against the Xhosa, stood at the Fish River. In the north, the Orange River, also known as the Gariep River, served as the boundary for some time, although some land between the river and the southern boundary of Botswana was later added to it. From 1878, the colony also included the enclave of Walvis Bay and the Penguin Islands, both in what is now Namibia.

 
 

Map of the Cape Colony in 1809
 
 
History
Dutch Colonisation

Dutch East India Company (VOC) traders, under the command of Jan van Riebeeck, were the first people to establish a European colony in South Africa. The Cape settlement was built by them in 1652 as a re-supply point and way-station for Dutch East India Company vessels on their way back and forth between the Netherlands and Batavia (Jakarta) in the Dutch East Indies. The support station gradually became a settler community, the forebears of the Afrikaners, a European ethnic group in South Africa.

The local Khoikhoi had neither a strong political organisation nor an economic base beyond their herds. They bartered livestock freely to Dutch ships but as Company employees established farms the Khoikhoi became displaced in the ship-related commerce. Conflicts led to the consolidation of European landholdings and a greater degree of Khoikhoi society breakdown. Military success led to even greater Dutch East India Company control of the Khoikhoi by the 1670s and the Khoikhoi became the chief source of colonial wage labour.

The area around the Company station in-filled and nomadic European livestock farmers, or Trekboeren, moved more widely afield, leaving the richer, but limited, farming lands of the coast for the drier interior tableland where they competed with the Khoikhoi cattle herders for the best grazing lands. By 1700, the traditional Khoikhoi lifestyle of pastoralism had disappeared and following British rule in 1795 say the establishment of the Cape's socio-political foundations were firmly laid.

  The British Conquest
In 1795, France occupied the Seven Provinces of the Netherlands, the mother country of the Dutch East India Company. This prompted Great Britain to occupy the territory in 1795 as a way to better control the seas in order stop any potential French attempt to reach India. The British sent a fleet of nine warships which anchored at Simon's Town and, following the defeat of the Dutch militia at the Battle of Muizenberg, took control of the territory. The Dutch East India Company transferred its territories and claims to the Batavian Republic (the Revolutionary period Dutch state) in 1798, and ceased to exist in 1799.

Improving relations between Britain and Napoleonic France, and its vassal state the Batavian Republic, led the British to hand the Cape Colony over to the Batavian Republic in 1803 (under the terms of the Treaty of Amiens).

In 1806, the Cape, now nominally controlled by the Batavian Republic, was occupied again by the British after their victory in the Battle of Blaauwberg. The temporary peace between Britain and Napoleonic France had crumbled into open hostilities, whilst Napoleon had been strengthening his influence on the Batavian Republic (which Napoleon would subsequently abolish later the same year).

The British, who set up a colony on 8 January 1806, hoped to keep Napoleon out of the Cape, and to control the Far East trade routes. In 1814 the Dutch government formally ceded sovereignty over the Cape to the British, under the terms of the Convention of London.
 
 

Map of the Cape Colony in 1885 (blue)
 
 
British Colonisation
The British started to settle the eastern border of the colony, with the arrival in Port Elizabeth of the 1820 Settlers. They also began to introduce the first rudimentary rights for the Cape's Black African population and, in 1833, abolished slavery. The resentment that the Dutch farmers felt against this social change, as well as the imposition of English language and culture, caused them to trek inland en masse. This was known as the Great Trek, and the migrating Afrikaners settled inland, forming the "Boer republics" of Transvaal and the Orange Free State.

British immigration continued in the Cape, even as many of the Afrikaners continued to trek inland, and the ending of the British East India Company's monopoly on trade led to economic growth. At the same time, the long series of border wars fought against the Xhosa people of the Cape's eastern frontier finally died down when the Xhosa partook in a mass destruction of their own crops and cattle, in the belief that this would cause their spirits to appear and defeat the whites. The resulting famine crippled Xhosa resistance and ushered in a long period of stability on the border.

Peace and prosperity led to a desire for political independence. In 1854, the Cape Colony elected its first parliament, on the basis of the multi-racial Cape Qualified Franchise. Cape residents qualified as voters based on a universal minimum level of property ownership, regardless of race.

Executive power remaining completely in the authority of the British governor did not relieve tensions in the colony between its eastern and western sections.

  Responsible Government
In 1872, after a long political battle, the Cape Colony achieved "Responsible Government" under its first Prime Minister, John Molteno. Henceforth, an elected Prime Minister and his cabinet had total responsibility for the affairs of the country. A period of strong economic growth and social development ensued, and the eastern-western division was largely laid to rest. The system of multi-racial franchise also began a slow and fragile growth in political inclusiveness, and ethnic tensions subsided. In 1877, the state expanded by annexing Griqualand West and Griqualand East.

However, the discovery of diamonds around Kimberley and gold in the Transvaal led to a return to instability, particularly because they fuelled the rise to power of the ambitious colonialist Cecil Rhodes. On becoming the Cape's Prime Minister, he instigated a rapid expansion of British influence into the hinterland.

In particular, he sought to engineer the conquest of the Transvaal, and although his ill-fated Jameson Raid failed and brought down his government, it led to the Second Boer War and British conquest at the turn of the century. The politics of the colony consequently came to be increasingly dominated by tensions between the British colonists and the Afrikaners. Rhodes also brought in the first formal restrictions on the political rights of the Cape Colony's Black African citizens.

The Cape Colony remained nominally under British rule until the formation of the Union of South Africa in 1910, when it became the Cape of Good Hope Province, better known as the Cape Province.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Daniel O'Connell's (O’Connell Daniel ) motion to repeal Union with Great Britain defeated 523 to 38
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Carlist Wars begin in Spain
 
 
Carlism
 

Carlism, Spanish Carlismo , a Spanish political movement of traditionalist character, originating in the 1820s in the apostólico or extreme clerical party and mobilized in 1827 in the form of paramilitary Royalist Volunteers. This opposition to liberalism crystallized in the 1830s around the person of Carlos María Isidro de Borbón (Don Carlos), younger brother of King Ferdinand VII, and afterward conde de Molina. In claiming the right to succeed his brother, Don Carlos denied the validity of Charles IV’s pragmatic sanction of 1789, then being used by Ferdinand to ensure the succession of his infant daughter Isabella, who was born in 1830.

 
Instead, the Carlists invoked the Salic Law of Succession, introduced into Spain by Philip V in 1713, which excluded females from the royal succession.

The disputed succession and its ideological overtones provoked the Carlist War of 1833–39. Although the Carlists were defeated, thereafter they upheld their cause in the face of the constitutional regime of Isabella and unsuccessful attempts to effect a dynastic reconciliation through a marriage between Isabella II and Don Carlos’s heir, Don Carlos, conde de Montemolín. The Carlist claim passed to the latter upon the “abdication” of “King Charles V” in 1845.

On the death of “King Charles VI” (Montemolín) in 1861, the leadership of the cause was assumed by his brother Don Juan; his alleged liberalism brought about his “abdication” in 1868 in favour of his son, Don Carlos, duque de Madrid, “King Charles VII,” who then led the movement until his death in 1909.

During the 19th century the Carlists frequently resorted to armed rebellion: a second Carlist War was unsuccessfully waged in the late 1840s, an abortive attempt made at a military coup d’état in 1860, and full-scale war resumed between 1872 and 1876 during the political upheavals following the deposition (1868) of Isabella II. Yet another defeat, and the restoration in 1874 of Isabella’s son Alfonso XII, brought decline to Carlism until Spain’s humiliation in the Spanish-American War stimulated new growth and a brief return to insurgency in 1900–02.
  From the 1880s the party’s history was characterized by a series of conflicts between those who argued for understandings with other Catholic parties that accepted the framework of parliamentary liberalism (or with parties that resisted the encroachment of centralized state power) and those for whom the tactical alliance implied a watering down of principle. The latter point of view found expression in the creation (1918) by Juan Vázquez de Mella of the Traditionalist Party, which subsequently became the principal exponent of Carlism. In 1937 General Francisco Franco merged it with the Falange, a party with which it had little in common.

The third Don Carlos, duque de Madrid, was succeeded as pretender in 1909 by his only son, Don Jaime, duque de Madrid, on whose death without issue in 1931 the succession passed to his uncle Don Alfonso Carlos, duque de San Jaime. With Alfonso’s death in Vienna on September 29, 1936, the Carlist line became extinct, although Alfonso had nominated his successor, Francis Xavier of Bourbon-Parma (styled Charles IX by his adherents in Spain). By 1960, however, most Carlists had accepted the recognition given in 1958 by prominent members of their party to the son of King Alfonso XIII, Don Juan, conde de Barcelona, an outspoken critic of Franco, as rightful pretender to the throne. In July 1969 Franco named Juan Carlos, prince of Asturias and son of Don Juan, his legal heir. Upon Franco’s death in 1975 Juan Carlos became king.

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 

Satire was used in attempts to discredit the opposition, whether Liberal or Royalist (Carlist)
 
 
 
First Carlist War
 

The First Carlist War was a civil war in Spain from 1833 to 1839, fought between factions over the succession to the throne and the nature of the Spanish monarchy. It was fought between supporters of the regent, Maria Christina, acting for Isabella II of Spain, and those of the late king's brother, Carlos de Borbón (or Carlos V). The Carlists supported return to an absolute monarchy.

 
Historical background
At the beginning of the 18th century, Philip V, the first Bourbon king of Spain, promulgated the Salic Law, which declared illegal the inheritance of the Spanish crown by women. His purpose was to thwart the Habsburgs' regaining the throne by way of the female dynastic line.

A century later, Ferdinand VII of Spain had no male descendant, but two daughters, Isabella (later known as Isabella II of Spain) and Luisa Fernanda. So he promulgated the Pragmatic Sanction, to allow Isabella to become Queen after his death, returning to traditional rules of Spanish succession.

Without the Pragmática Sanción, Carlos de Borbón, the king's brother, would have normally become king. He and his followers, such as Secretary of Justice Francisco Tadeo Calomarde, pressed Ferdinand to change his mind. But the ill Ferdinand kept his decision and when he died on 29 September 1833, Isabella became the legitimate queen. As she was only a child, a regent was needed: her mother, Queen Consort Maria Christina was appointed.

At the beginning of the 19th century, the political situation in Spain was extremely problematic. During the Peninsula War, the Cortes met in Cádiz and elaborated the Spanish Constitution of 1812, at that point possibly the most modern and most liberal in the world. After the war, when Ferdinand VII returned to Spain, he annulled the constitution in the Manifest of Valencia, and became an absolute king, governing by decrees and restoring the Spanish Inquisition, abolished by Joseph I, brother of Napoleon I.

  Towards the end of his life, Ferdinand made some concessions to the liberals, giving them hopes of a liberal rule. But there was a strong absolutist party which did not want to lose its position. Its members knew that regent Maria Christina and Isabella would make liberal reforms, so they looked for another candidate for the throne; and their natural choice, with the background of the Salic Law, was Ferdinand's brother Carlos. One historian has written:

the first Carlist war was fought not so much on the basis of the legal claim of Don Carlos, but because a passionate, dedicated section of the Spanish people favored a return to a kind of absolute monarchy that they felt would protect their individual freedoms (fueros), their regional individuality and their religious conservatism.

A vivid summary of the war describes it as follows:

The Christinos and Carlists thirsted for each other's blood, with all the fierce ardour of civil strife, animated by the memory of years of mutual insult, cruelty, and wrong. Brother against brother – father against son – best friend turned to bitterest foe – priests against their flocks – kindred against kindred.

The autonomy of Aragon, Valencia and Catalonia had been abolished in the 18th century by the Nueva Planta Decrees that created a centralised Spanish state. In the Basque Country, the kingdom status of Navarre and the separate status of Álava, Biscay, and Gipuzkoa were challenged in 1833 during the central government's one-sided territorial division of Spain. The resentment against the loss of autonomy was considerably strong.

 
 

Zones under Carlist military control (dark orange) and areas where they found popular support (light orange)
 
 
Basque reasons for Carlist uprising
Meanwhile, the Spanish courtiers wanted to suppress the Basque fueros and to move the customs borders to the Pyrenees. Since the 18th century, a new emergent class had an interest in weakening the powerful Basque nobles and their influence in commerce, including that extending throughout the world with the help of the Jesuit order.

The newly appointed Spanish courtiers supported some of the great powers against the Basques at least since the abolition of the Jesuit order and the Godoy regime. First they sided with the French Bourbons to suppress the Jesuits, following the formidable changes in North America after the victory of the United States in the American Revolutionary War and the subsequent loss of Spanish influence. Then Godoy sided with the English against the Basques in the War of the Pyrenees of 1793, and immediately afterwards with the French of Napoleon, also against the Basques. The English interest was to destroy, for as long as possible, Spanish commercial routes and power, which was mainly sustained by the Basque ports, commercial navy.

King Ferdinand VII found an important support base in the Basque Country. The 1812 Constitution of Cádiz suppressed the Basque home rule, speaking of a unified Spanish nation and rejecting the existence of the Basque nation, so the new Spanish king garnered the endorsement of the Basques as long as he respected the Basque institutional and legal framework.

Charles F. Henningsen, Michael B. Honan, or Edward B. Stephens, English writers and first-hand witnesses of the First Carlist War, spent time in the Basque districts during the Carlist engagement. They did not hide their sympathies for Carlos V's cause, one they regarded as representing the cause of the Basque home rule. Just the opposite, John Francis Bacon, an English diplomat based in the Liberal Bilbao during the Carlist investment of the city (1835), while also praising Basque governance, could no hide his hostility towards the Carlists, whom he regarded as "savages." He went on to contest his compatriots' approach, denying any connections of the Carlist cause to the defense of the Basque liberties, and considering that Carlos V the pretender would be quick to erode or suppress them as soon as he rose to the Spanish throne. He also deems a Liberal government like the one led by Isabella II of Spain as more inclined to respect the Basque liberties.

The privileges of the Basque provinces are odious to the Spanish nation, of which Charles is so well aware, that if he was king of Spain next year, he would quickly find excuses for infringing them, if not their total abolition. A representative government will endeavour to raise Spain to a level with the Basque provinces, – a despot, to whom the very name of freedom is odious, would strive to reduce the provinces to the same low level with the rest.

  Similar to what John Adams had pointed 60 years before, John F. Bacon (Six years in Biscay..., 1838) considers the Basques living to the north of the Ebro river as free citizens, as compared to the Spanish whom he sees as "a mere flock" liable to be mistreated by their masters. For Edward B. Stephens, the Basques were fighting at once for their own sources of legitimacy, their practical freedom, for the rights of their sovereign, and their own constitutional foundations. The excellence of the Basque home rule and its republican character is also highlighted by other authors, such as Wentworth Webster. A deeper insight into the Basques and their relation to the Spanish during this period is offered by Sidney Crocker and Bligh Barker (1839), stating that:

the Vasques, or as they term themselves, the Escaldunes, do not consider themselves Spaniards, and differ widely from them, in character and language.

The interests of the Basque liberals were divided. On the one side, fluent cross-Pyrenean trade with other Basque districts and France was highly valued, as well as unrestricted overseas transactions. The former had been strong up to the French Revolution, especially in Navarre, but the new French national arrangement (1790) had abolished the separate legal and fiscal status of the French Basque districts.

Despite difficulties, on-off trade continued during the period of uncertainty prevailing under the French Convention, the War of the Pyrenees (1793-1795), Manuel Godoy's tenure in office, and the Peninsular War. Eventually, Napoleonic defeat left cross-border commercial activity struggling to take off after 1813.

Overseas commerce was badly affected by the end of the Guipuzcoan Company of Caracas (1785), the French-Spanish defeat at the Battle of Trafalgar (1805), independence movements in Latin America, the destruction of San Sebastián (1813), and the eventual breakup of the Royal Philippine Company (1814). By 1826 all the grand Spanish (including the Basque) fleet of the late 18th century with its renowned Basque navigators was gone for the benefit of the British Empire, and with it, the Atlantic vocation of the Enlightened Spain.

Notwithstanding the ideology of Basque liberals, overall supportive of home rule, the Basques were getting choked by the above circumstances and customs on the Ebro, on account of the high levies enforced on them by the successive Spanish governments after 1776. Many Basque liberals advocated in turn for the relocation of the Ebro customs to the Pyrenees, and the encouragement of a Spanish market.

On Ferdinand VII's death in 1833, the minor Isabella II was proclaimed queen, with Maria Christina acting as regent. In November, a new Spanish institutional arrangement was designed by the incoming government in Madrid, homogenising Spanish administration according to provinces and conspicuously overruling Basque institutions. Anger and disbelief spread in the Basque districts.

 
 

Theater of operations of the Liberal Army of the North, May 1836
 
 
The contenders
The people of the western Basque provinces (ambiguously called "Biscay" up to that point) and Navarre sided with Carlos because ideologically Carlos was close to them and more importantly because he was willing to uphold Basque institutions and laws. Some historians claim that the Carlist cause in the Basque Country was a pro-fueros cause, but others (Stanley G. Payne) contend that no connection to the emergence of Basque nationalism can be postulated. Many supporters of the Carlists cause believed a traditionalist rule would better respect the ancient region specific institutions and laws established under historical rights. Navarre and the rest of the Basque provinces held their customs on the Ebro river. Trade had been strong with France (especially in Navarre) and overseas up to the Peninsular War (up to 1813), but getting sluggish thereafter.

Another important reason for the massive mobilisation of the western Basque provinces and Navarre for the Carlist cause was the tremendous influence of the Basque clergy in the society, one that still addressed to them in their own language, Basque, unlike school and administration, institutions where Spanish had been imposed by then. The Basque pro-fueros liberal class under the influence of the Enlightenment and ready for independence from Spain (and initially at least allegiance to France) was put down by the Spanish authorities at the end of the War of the Pyrenees (San Sebastián, Pamplona, etc.). As of then, the strongest partisans of the region specific laws were the rural based clergy, nobility and lower class—opposing new liberal ideas largely imported from France. Salvador de Madariaga, in his book Memories of a Federalist (Buenos Aires, 1967), accused the Basque clergy of being "the heart, the brain and the root of the intolerance and the hard line" of the Spanish Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, in Catalonia and Aragón, the people saw the chance of recovering their foral rights, which were lost after the Spanish Succession War when Philip V defeated the armies that fought for Archduke Karl of Austria, the other candidate to the throne after the death of Charles II of Spain. Carlos never addressed the issue of the foral rights.

On the other side, the liberals and moderates united to defend the new order represented by María Cristina and her three-year-old daughter, Isabella. They controlled the institutions, almost the whole army, and the cities; the Carlist movement was stronger in rural areas. The liberals had the crucial support of United Kingdom, France and Portugal, support that was shown in the important credits to Cristina's treasury and the military help from the British (British Legion or Westminster Legion under General de Lacy Evans), the French (the French Foreign Legion), and the Portuguese (a Regular Army Division, under General Barão das Antas).

The Liberals were strong enough to win the war in two months. But, an inefficient government and the dispersion of the Carlist forces gave Carlos time to consolidate his forces and hold out for almost seven years in the northern and eastern provinces.

As Paul Johnson has written, "both royalists and liberals began to develop strong local followings, which were to perpetuate and transmute themselves, through many open commotions and deceptively tranquil intervals, until they exploded in the merciless civil war of 1936-39."

  The combatants
Both sides raised special troops during the war. The Liberal side formed the volunteer Basque units known as the Chapelgorris, while Tomás de Zumalacárregui created the special units known as aduaneros. Zumalacárregui also formed the unit known as Guías de Navarra from Liberal troops from La Mancha, Valencia, Andalusia and other places who had been taken prisoner at the Battle of Alsasua (1834). After this battle, they had been faced with the choice of joining the Carlist troops or being executed.

The term Requetés was at first applied to just the Tercer Batallón de Navarra (Third Battalion of Navarre) and subsequently to all Carlist combatants.

The war attracted independent adventurers, such as the Briton C. F. Henningsen, who served as Zumalacárregui's chief bodyguard (and later was his biographer), and Martín Zurbano, a contrabandista or smuggler, who:

soon after the commencement of the war sought and obtained permission to raise a body of men to act in conjunction with the queen's troops against the Carlists. His standard, once displayed, was resorted to by smugglers, robbers, and outcasts of all descriptions, attracted by the prospect of plunder and adventure. These were increased by deserters...

About 250 foreign volunteers fought for the Carlists; the majority were French monarchists, but they were joined by men from Portugal, Britain, Belgium, Piedmont, and the German states. Friedrich, Prince of Schwarzenberg fought for the Carlists, and had taken part in the French conquest of Algeria and the Swiss civil war of the Sonderbund. The Carlists' ranks included such men as Prince Felix Lichnowsky, Adolfo Loning, Baron Wilhelm Von Radhen and August Karl von Goeben, all of whom later wrote memoirs concerning the war.

The Liberal generals, such as Vicente Genaro de Quesada and Marcelino de Oraá Lecumberri, were often veterans of the Peninsular War, or of the wars resulting from independence movements in South America. For instance, Jerónimo Valdés participated in the battle of Ayacucho (1824).
Both sides executed prisoners of war by firing squad; the most notorious incident occurred at Heredia, when 118 Liberal prisoners were executed by order of Zumalacárregui. The British attempted to intervene, and through Lord Eliot, the Lord Eliot Convention was signed on April 27–28, 1835.

The treatment of prisoners of the First Carlist War became regulated and had positive effects. A soldier of the British Legion wrote:

The British and Chapelgorris who fell into their hands [the Carlists], were mercilessly put to death, sometimes by means of tortures worthy of the North American Indians; but the Spanish troops of the line were saved by virtue, I believe, of the Eliot treaty, and after being kept for some time in prison, where they were treated with sufficient harshness, were frequently exchanged for an equal number of prisoners made by the Christinos.

However, Henry Bill, another contemporary, wrote that, although "it was mutually agreed upon to treat the prisoners taken on either side according to the ordinary rules of war, a few months only elapsed before similar barbarities were practiced with all their former remorselessness."

 
 
The war in the Northern Front
The war was long and hard, and the Carlist forces (labeled "the Basque army" by John F. Bacon) achieved important victories in the north under the direction of the brilliant general Tomás de Zumalacárregui. The Basque commander swore an oath to uphold home rule in Navarre (fueros), subsequently being proclaimed commander in chief of Navarre. The Basque regional governments of Biscay, Álava, and Gipuzkoa followed suit by pledging obedience to Zumalacárregui. He took to the bush in the Amescoas (to become the Carlist headquarters, next to Estella-Lizarra), there making himself strong and avoiding the harassment of the Spanish forces loyal to Maria Christina (Isabella II). 3,000 volunteers with no resources came to swell his forces.

In summer 1834, Liberal (Isabeline) forces set fire to the Sanctuary of Arantzazu and a convent of Bera, while Zumalacárregui showed his toughest side when he had volunteers refusing to advance over Etxarri-Aranatz executed. The Carlist cavalry engaged and defeated in Viana an army sent from Madrid (14 September 1834), while Zumalacárregui's forces descended from the Basque Mountains over the Álavan Plains (Vitoria), and prevailed over general Manuel O'Doyle. The veteran general Espoz y Mina, a Liberal Navarrese commander, attempted to drive a wedge between the Carlist northern and southern forces, but Zumalacárregui's army managed to hold them back (late 1834).

In January 1835, the Carlists took over Baztan in an operation where the general Espoz y Mina narrowly escaped a severe defeat and capture, while the local Liberal Gaspar de Jauregi Artzaia ('the Shepherd') and his chapelgorris were neutralized in Zumarraga and Urretxu. By May 1835, virtually all Gipuzkoa and seigneury of Biscay were in Carlist hands. Opposing his advisers and Zumalacárregui's plan, Carlos V decided to conquer Bilbao, defended by the British navy. With such an important city in his power, the Prussian or Russian Tsarist banks would give him credit to win the war; one of the most important problems for Carlos was a lack of funds.

In the siege of Bilbao, Zumalacárregui was wounded in the leg by a stray bullet. The wound was not serious, he was treated by a number of doctors, famously by Petrikillo (nowadays meaning in Basque 'quack' or 'dodgy healer'). The relationship of the pretender to the throne and the commander in chief was at least distant; not only had they differed in operative strategy, but Zumalacárregui's popularity could undermine Carlos' own authority, as in the early stages of war, the Basque general was offered the crown of Navarre and the lordship of Biscay as king of the Basques. The injury did not heal properly, and finally General Zumalacárregui died on June 25, 1835. Many historians believe the circumstances of his death were suspicious, and have noted that the general had many enemies in the Carlist court; however, to date no further light has been shed on this point.

In the European theatre all the great powers backed the Isabeline army, as many British observers wrote in their reports. Meanwhile, in the east, Carlist general Ramón Cabrera held the initiative in the war, but his forces were too few to achieve a decisive victory over the Liberal forces loyal to Madrid. In 1837 the Carlist effort culminated in the Royal Expedition, which reached the walls of Madrid, but subsequently retreated after the Battle of Aranzueque.

  The war in the Southern Front
In the south, the Carlist general Miguel Gómez Damas attempted to establish a strong position there for the Carlists, and he left Ronda on November 18, 1836, entering Algeciras on November 22. But, after Gómez Damas departed from Algeciras, he was defeated by Ramón María Narváez y Campos at the Battle of Majaceite. An English commentator wrote that "it was at Majaciete that [Narváez] rescued Andalucía from the Carlist invasion by a brilliant coup de main, in a rapid but destruction action, which will not readily be effaced from the memory of the southern provinces."

At Arcos de la Frontera, the Liberal Diego de Leon managed to detain a Carlist column by his squadron of 70 cavalry until Liberal reinforcements arrived.

Ramon Cabrera had collaborated with Gómez Damas in the expedition of Andalusia where, after defeating the Liberals, he occupied Córdoba and Extremadura. He was pushed out after his defeat at Villarrobledo in 1836.

The end of war
After the death of Zumalacárregui in 1835, the Liberals slowly regained the initiative but were not able to win the war in the Basque districts until 1839. They failed to recover the Carlist fortress of Morella and suffered a defeat at the Battle of Maella (1838).

The war effort had taken a heavy toll on Basque economy and regional public finances with a population shaken by a myriad of war related plights—human losses, poverty, disease—and tired with Carlos' own absolutist ambitions and disregard for their self-government.
The moderate Jose Antonio Muñagorri negotiated as of 1838 a treaty in Madrid to put an end to war ("Peace and Fueros") leading to the Embrace of Bergara (also Vergara), ratified by Basque moderate liberals and disaffected Carlists across all the main cities and countryside.

The war in the Basque Country ended with the Convenio de Bergara, also known as the Abrazo de Bergara ("the Embrace of Bergara", Bergara in Basque) on 31 August 1839, between the Liberal general Baldomero Espartero, Count of Luchana and the Carlist General Rafael Maroto. Some authors have written that General Maroto was a traitor who forced Carlos to accept the peace with little focus as to the precise context in the Basque Country.

In the east, General Cabrera continued fighting, but when Espartero conquered Morella and Cabrera in Catalonia (30 May 1840), the fate of the Carlists was sealed. Espartero progressed to Berga, and by mid-July 1840 the Carlist troops had to flee to France. Considered a hero, Cabrera returned to Portugal in 1848 for the Second Carlist War.

Consequences
The Embrace of Bergara (1839) put an end to war in the Basque districts. The Basques managed to keep a reduced version of their previous home rule (taxation, military draft) in exchange for their unequivocal incorporation into Spain, now centralized, and divided into provinces.

The Embrace of Bergara was ratified in Pamplona, but in 1841 a separate treaty was signed by officials of the Government of Navarre (the Diputación), such as the Liberal Yanguas y Miranda, without the mandatory approval of the parliament of the kingdom (the Cortes).

 
 
That compromise (called later the Ley Paccionada, the Compromise Act) accepted further curtailments to self-government, and more importantly officially turned the Kingdom of Navarre into a province of Spain. The end of the First Carlist War brought definitely the Ebro customs over to the Pyrenees and the coast, with the region being gripped by a wave of famine, and many taking to overseas emigration at either side of the Basque Pyrenees, to America.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Battle of Alsasua
 

The Battle of Alsasua, also known as the Battle of Altsasu or la Acción de la Venta, was a battle that occurred on April 22, 1834 during the First Carlist War.

 
Carlist general Tomás de Zumalacárregui destroyed a convoy led by the Liberal general Vicente Genaro de Quesada traveling from Vitoria-Gasteiz to Pamplona at the town of Alsasua.[1] The Liberals suffered many casualties and Zumalacárregui took many prisoners.

Zumalacárregui formed the unit known as Guías de Navarra from Liberal troops from La Mancha, Valencia, Andalusia and other places who had been made prisoners at this battle. After this battle, they had been faced with the choice of joining the Carlist troops or being executed.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Battle of Alegria de Alava
 

The Battle of Alegría de Álava (Acción de Alegría de Álava or Batalla de Alegría), a battle of the First Carlist War, occurred on October 27, 1834 at a field in Chinchetru, next to Alegría de Álava (Alegría-Dulantzi), Álava, Spain. It was a Carlist victory.

Carlist forces were led by Tomás de Zumalacárregui, who ambushed Isabeline (Liberal) troops under Manuel O'Doyle.

 
Background
The Isabeline (Liberal) army under José Ramón Rodil, after a disastrous campaign during the summer of 1834, had attempted to destroy Zumalacárregui’s army and arrest Infante Carlos, Count of Molina. However, Rodil’s forces had been reduced by the Carlists by September 1834. Rodil was forced to give up command to Manuel Lorenzo. Rodil marched towards Madrid, taking with him as escort, as he approached Vitoria-Gasteiz, a division led by O'Doyle, which had belonged to the Liberal Army of Navarre. Rodil, without authorization, placed O'Doyle’s troops under the command of Joaquín de Osma, commander-general of the Basque Provinces and who was based at Vitoria.

The Isabeline troops of Navarre, thus reduced, were unable to keep up with the rapid movements of Zumalacárregui’s army. Zumalacárregui approached the Ebro with the intention of attacking the Riojan place known as Ezcaray, 40 km south of the river. Ezcaray was the site of important factories producing cotton cloths; Zumalacárregui wanted this cloth in order to create winter uniforms for his troops. Zumalacárregui’s scouts explored this area to carry out this plan. Zumalacárregui meanwhile received information on October 20, 1834 that a convoy of arms was traveling from Burgos to Logroño and that it would use the nearby royal road (camino real) as it neared the Ebro.

Zumalacárregui attempted to pursue the convoy on October 21 with four battalions and three squadrons, and he crossed the Ebro at Tronconegro. However, the convoy by now had passed. Zumalacárregui rapidly marched in pursuit of the convoy, but he was stopped at Cenicero by the urban militia there, which supported the Liberals and who were stationed at the church of Cenicero. Zumalacárregui was forced to go around the town and his cavalry managed to reach the convoy, which was in sight of Logroño. Zumalacárregui captured this rich booty, burned down the church of Cenicero, crossed the Ebro on October 22 at Tronconegro, and marched towards Navarre. His troops were then stationed in towns in the valley of Berrueza.

On October 21, at the last minute, the Liberals at Vitoria received news of Zumalacárregui’s incursion, and Osma ordered O'Doyle to march on the Ebro with his division, composed of the Queen's First and Second Regiments, the First African Regiment, the First and Second Regiments of Carabiniers, and the battalion of Bujalance. O'Doyle was ordered to march on the Ebro at Peñacerrada to cut Zumalacárregui off.

  O'Doyle reached Peñacerrada on October 22, during the afternoon, and learned that the Carlists were north of the Ebro. O'Doyle marched the next day through the valley of the Ega River, and his troops rested for the night at Lagrán. On the 24th, the Liberals reached Maeztu. The Liberal troops, exhausted and short on supplies, rested for a full day, the 25th. On the 26th of October, the troops left Maetzu, crossed the ridge of Andia, and after marching for 22 km, reached Alegría de Álava.

Osma then ordered O’Doyle to disperse the Liberal divisions; the only troops that should remain at Alegría de Álava would be the Queen’s First Regiment, First African Regiment, some of the cavalry, and two pieces of artillery, with the rest of the troops cantoned at Guevara (Gebara), Arroyabe, and Ullíbarri-Gamboa (Uribarri-Ganboa), locations that were 6, 12, and 13 km north of Alegría de Álava, respectively.

O'Doyle disagreed with this order, and consulted his regimental captains, who also thought it was a bad idea. But they carried out the order, abandoning Alegría de Álava and occupying the aforementioned villages. O'Doyle wrote a letter to Osma, expressing his concern with the order.
Zumalacárregui, meanwhile, was in the valley of La Berrueza, 48 km south of Alegría de Álava, and had in his sights, the Liberal troops at Los Arcos of General Lorenzo, who was waiting for reinforcements coming from Cirauqui led by Marcelino de Oraá Lecumberri. Zumalacárregui’s aduaneros (customs officers) were watching the movements of the Liberal troops, and thus Zumalacárregui was well informed. The aduaneros were also watching O'Doyle's movements, and when O'Doyle's troops left Alegría de Álava, the aduaneros notified Zumalacárregui, who received this news in the afternoon.

However, Zumalacárregui did not have sufficient forces to face an entire Liberal division –but he did have enough to face a few battalions. He thus decided to head for Álava and engage with Liberal troops who were headed for the various aforementioned villages.

At nighttime, Zumalacárregui left a few men behind to keep the campfires going and took his troops to Campezo, Zúñiga and Orbiso—a village in the Maeztu area)—where they spent the night. Now Zumalacárregui was 35 km from Alegría de Álava. The Liberal general Lorenzo, seeing the campfires that had been left going at Berrueza, believed that Zumalacárregui's troops had remained there.

 
 
The battle
On October 27, Osma arrived at an early hour at Alegría de Álava, explaining to O'Doyle his reasoning behind his order for the dispersal of the Liberal troops: Osma had received news that the pretender to the throne, Carlos, was at Oñate. O'Doyle’s divisions, now arranged as 4 columns, would depart from the town that same afternoon towards the north, marching at night, to reach Oñate by various routes and apprehend the pretender.

The Carlist army meanwhile, fired by a ration of aguardiente given to them by Zumalacárregui (as was his custom before going into battle), was divided into 2 columns. One of the columns was under the command of Manuel Iturralde, and consisted of the Third, Fourth, Sixth Battalions of Navarre and the Second Battalion of Guipúzcoa, and had orders to climb the mountains from Saseta. The other column, commanded by Zumalacárregui, consisted of the Guías de Navarra, the First Battalion of Navarre, the Third Battalion of Álava, and the lancers of Navarre, and would advance from Ullíbarri-Gamboa (Uribarri-Ganboa).

As they traveled, the Carlists apprehended anybody they came across, such as people working in the fields, and placed them in an enclosure guarded by two soldiers; this they did to avoid anyone from alerting the Liberals of the presence of the Carlist troops. The Carlists soon came across no one around or in the fields, which they intuited signified the nearness of the Liberal army.

 
 
Zumalacárregui received news that Lorenzo was still not aware of the Carlist advance; Lorenzo remained at Los Arcos. Zumalacárregui would send a small number of troops to attack Salvatierra (Agurain), 10 km east of Alegría de Álava. Zumalacárregui would remain hidden with his troops, meanwhile, in the forest of Chinchetru (Txintxetru), where they would wait for O'Doyle, who presumably would leave his HQ to defend Salvatierra. Iturralde meanwhile would descend from Saseta, hide in the woody mountain slopes south of Alegría de Álava, and, once O'Doyle departed towards Salvatierra, Iturralde would march in parallel. Once Zumalacárregui began the attack at Chinchetru, Iturralde would attack from the right against the Isabelines.

As it happened, circumstances favored Zumalacárregui. When the Carlist general marched towards Chinchetru, he came across the governor of Salvatierra who was headed towards Vitoria with some prisoners. At 4:00 PM, O'Doyle's troops began to leave Alegría de Álava, heading towards the north, when the sound of gunfire erupted at Chinchetru.

Zumalacárregui increased the overall sounds of gunfire by having his soldiers also fire into the air. Then, he hid in the forest north of the town of Alegría de Álava.

O'Doyle stopped heading north and headed towards the east instead, through the hills, a shorter route towards Chinchetru. The terrain was difficult; these foothills towards the range of Andía were woody and not suited for the passage of regular troops. Furthermore, the setting sun caused the weapons of the Liberals to glint brightly; this allowed Zumalacárregui to spot the Liberals easily from Chinchetru.

Zumalacárregui ordered the Guías de Navarra to leave the forest and ordered them to the plan between Chinchetru and these hills.

  The Isabeline vanguard, led by O'Doyle on horseback, was composed of mountain troops (cazadores) and thus marched much faster than the main body of Liberal troops. The Liberal troops soon came across the Guías de Navarra, who were wearing their signature red berets, and were surprised to see the Carlists there. O'Doyle ordered an attack but the Liberal cazadores were quickly pushed back by the Guías de Navarra.

When the rest of the Liberal troops arrived, Zumalacárregui ordered the rest of his troops into battle and fierce combat ensued.

One source writes that:

Zumalacarregui, though inferior in numbers, and without a single piece of cannon, yet perceiving from the impatient countenances of his men that they were eager to attack, at once gave his customary word of command, A ellos, muchachos! (At'em, my boys!) and with enthusiastic shouts of Aurrera mutillac! ["At’em, my boys" in Basque] the whole line moved on like a torrent.

Meanwhile, the Carlist Iturralde also appeared, attacking the Liberal rearguard and its right flank. The Liberal troops, suffering from confusion, were unable to organize themselves in such a small space, and after having fired an initial volley, were unable to defend themselves from a fierce Carlist bayonet attack. The Liberal troops began to surrender.

Meanwhile, the din of battle reached the local villages Guevara, Arroyabe, and Ullíbarri-Gamboa, where the remaining Liberal troops had been stationed. These Liberal troops began to march towards Chinchetru. But soon they encountered Liberal troops who had fled from what was amounting to a massacre, who informed them of what was happening. Thus, the retreating Liberal troops and the troops that had been stationed at these three villages fled to Vitoria, which they reached by nighttime.

 
 
Aftermath
During the night, the Carlists searched the forests between Chinchetru and Alegría de Álava for Liberal troops who had survived the battle and were now hiding. Liberals who were discovered were bayoneted or shot on sight.[2]

The Carlists captured the two pieces of artillery that had belonged to the Liberal army, along with corresponding munitions, supplies, and the regimental banner of the Liberal Regiment of Africa. O'Doyle, O'Doyle's brother, and other officers surrendered, and were executed by firing squad the next day. 400 Liberal troops were taken prisoner.[1]

However, 250 Liberal troops and their officers maintained order and reached Arrieta by forced march, 3 km away from the field of battle, and they fortified themselves in the church at Arrieta. There they fought against the Carlists who pursued them all during the night.

News of this action at Arrieta led Osma to the decision to send soldiers to the rescue of the troops at Arrieta, which would lead to the Battle of Venta de Echávarri (October 28, 1834).

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Battle of Venta de Echavarri
 

The Battle of Venta de Echavarri (Spanish: Acción de la Venta de Echavarri or Batalla de la Venta de Echavarri, literally the Battle of the Inn of Echavarri[3]), a battle of the First Carlist War, occurred on October 28, 1834. It was an immediate follow-up to the Battle of Alegría de Álava, which had occurred the day before. It was a Carlist victory.

 
Background
In the aftermath of the Battle of Alegría de Álava on October 27, the Carlists searched the forests between Chinchetru and Alegría de Álava for Liberal troops who had survived the battle and were now hiding. Liberals who were discovered were executed on the spot.

The Carlists captured the two pieces of artillery that had belonged to the Liberal army, along with corresponding munitions and the regimental banner of the Liberal Regiment of Africa. Manuel O'Doyle and other Liberal officers surrendered, and were executed by firing squad the next day.

However, 250 Liberal troops and their officers maintained order and reached Arrieta by forced march, 3 km away from the field of battle, and they fortified themselves in the church at Arrieta. There they fought against the Carlists who pursued them all during the night.

News of this action at Arrieta led Osma to the decision to send soldiers to the rescue of the troops at Arrieta the next morning, which would lead to the Battle of Venta de Echavarri.

  The terrain
Zumalacárregui took advantage of his knowledge of the terrain to trick his enemy, luring the Liberals to places more suited to the guerrilla tactics of the Carlists than the maneuvers of the Isabeline regulars.

The terrain of the battle was laid out as such: leaving Vitoria for the old royal road towards the East, one crosses a plain for 12 kilometers, flanked on the right or South by the foothills of the range of Andia and on the left or North by the range of San Adrián. The Zadorra River, coming from the East, runs close to the range of San Adrián. The plain slopes gently from the south to the north, and rises, almost imperceptibly, towards the east.

At the end of this distance of 12 kilometers rises the height of Quilchano, to which reach from the East the hills of Dallo, thus cutting the plan in two. The left of the plain slopes towards the Zadorra while the right sinks into a 60 meter deep depression. The northern slopes of the hills of Dallo slope gently towards the Dallo while its southern slopes, rocky and devoid of any vegetation, fall precipitously towards the depression. This southern slope is where the royal road runs.

 
 
At the bottom of the slope there is a breech towards the north in the hills of Dallo, there is a creek into which the Zadorra drains. There is a bridge over this creek, and on the other side (in the direction of Vitoria) can be found the place known as la venta de Echavarri –in other words, the Inn of Echavarri, where waggoners and travelers, either on their way up or down the hills, would stop for repairs, food, and gossip. Near the inn, about a kilometer and a half away, can be found the place known as Echavarri-Urtupiña, and more towards the east 2 and half kilometers away, is the place known as Arrieta.
 
 
The battle
Osma's troops reached the heights of Quilchano and spotted the Carlists in oblique formation in the depression near Arrieta. It was two o’clock in the afternoon. Zumalacarregui knew that Osma wished to release the Liberal troops trapped in Arrieta, and therefore masked the place, formed his men, and addressed his men –to which they responded with A ellos! A ellos! ("At'em! At'em!")

Osma moved his troops. Two battalions of carabineers with their squadron of cavalry and a company of the Battalion of Bujalance descended into the valley. Once they crossed the bridge, the First Battalion of Carabineers under Martín Iriarte, and a company of mountain troops from the Battalion of Bujalance ascended to the nearest hills of Dallo, creating the Isabeline left flank. The Second Battalion of Carabineers and a squadron of cavalry remained at the bottom of the valley, forming the Isabeline right flank.

On the peak that rose above the inn, on the west to the opening that empties into the Zadorra were stationed half of the Queen’s Second Battalion and at the entrance to this opening were stationed a 50 members of the cavalry company of the Bujalance. On the slope, as a reserve there remained the other half of the Queen’s Second Battalion with 50 cavalrymen, the Battalion of Salamanca, and the rest of the Bujalance Battalion. The Battalion of San Fernando remained near the height of the depression, to the right. Two eight-pounders were placed on the slope near the bridge.

The Isabeline formation was defensively arranged, without a center, contrary to its goal of advancing towards Arrieta. Osma believed that Zumalacárregui, victorious after the Battle of Alegría de Alava, would attack the Liberals, advancing through the depression. The Liberal plan was to allow the Carlists to attack and then bombard them with artillery, and the Liberals in the valley would then pursue the Carlists until Arrieta.
Zumalacárregui, understanding the intentions of the Liberal troops, and knowledgeable of the terrain, advanced his troops across the valley but before they were in reach of the Liberal artillery, he sent the majority of his troops rapidly towards the north and up the hills of Dallo.

  Once at the top, the Carlists were able to advance rapidly since the slopes of the Dallo on the north sloped gently, and approached the Isabeline troops on the hilltop. Osma had stationed few troops there, and seems to have been lacking in knowledge of the terrain, believing that the north face of the hills had the same formation as those of the south, and that the Isabeline troops would be able to defend themselves easily there against a numerically superior foe, as if behind an actual wall. But the Isabelines on the hilltops were not able to withstand the attack of the Carlist First and Third Battalions of Navarre, and abandoned their positions, descending towards the bridge.

The Carlists, occupying the crests, continued to advance by the northern slopes, and reached the opening and advanced towards the bridge. Osma, on the hilltop, did not have a clear view of what was happening on his left flank, but on seeing his troops descend from the hilltops, sent as reinforcements to the bridge his reserve the rest of the Bujalance Battalion and half of the Queen's Battalion. But the Carlists troops were also arriving by the royal road to the same spot. With a battalion of Guías de Navarra at the Carlist vanguard, the Carlists crossed the bridge and assaulted the hilltop above the Inn of Echavarri, defended by half of the Queen’s Second Battalion.

Once the Isabeline troops of the right flank formed at the depression had joined combat, the left flank was surrounded by the Carlists and had begun to scatter. "Disregarding the enemy’s fire, the Carlists advanced, and the guides [Guías de Navarra] having passed a bridge at the distance of half a musket-shot, the Liberals' left was turned."

The right flank also began to break formation and scatter, escaping out of the depression, and suffering casualties inflicted by the Carlists. It seemed that a massacre like the one that had occurred at Alegría de Álava would occur, but Zumalacárregui ordered his troops to give quarter to those who surrendered. The battle had lasted barely an hour.

The Carlists cleared the hill, and when the battle was over, a pursuit began, and along the royal road, the Liberals fled in complete disorder and were pursued to the very gates of Vitoria-Gasteiz. The Carlists captured 3,000 muskets as spoils of war.

 
 
Aftermath
Osma, in his account of the battle to Isabel II, placed all of the blame on his troops, stating that "...all of the spots were abandoned [by the troops] without resistance, not heeding my own example to hold these spots nor stop from fleeing in a most humiliating fashion, and confirming what I have said to Your Majesty that everything is now lost, for all honor is lost...” Iriarte, however, who was one of Osma's officers, and who had participated in the battle, would criticize Osma for his actions during the battle, and it was concluded that Osma should have occupied the town of Echavarri-Urtupiña, converting it into a miniature stronghold with the two Liberal cannons. This would have allowed the Liberal troops at Arrieta to escape safely.

The Liberal troops trapped at Arrieta meanwhile had seen the whole battle from the churchtower. Fog descended upon the town and at midnight, with bayonets fixed, killed the few Carlists who had attempted to stop their escape. They reached Maetzu, where there was an Isabeline force. On November 1, 1834, they reached Vitoria without incident.

The Liberal Army was in disarray, and the Liberal troops at Pamplona barely had firewood with which to cook their meals. The two Liberal divisions of Navarre retired to the Puentelarreina–Pamplona Line, giving Zumalacárregui a golden opportunity to launch an attack on the rich zones of Navarre. The Carlist general would advance through Los Arcos, Sesma, Miranda de Arga, Peralta, Villafranca, crossing the Arga and Aragón Rivers and near the monastery of La Oliva and Sanguesa returned to the Pyrenees, crossing the Arga again north of Pamplona, finally stationing himself at La Berrueza. He would return with a number of supplies, clothes, money, and new troops. The morale of the Carlists was very high, and they decided to fight the Liberal troops in a formal battle (rather than with guerrilla tactics). This would happen on December 14, 1834, at the Battle of Mendaza –which would be a Carlist defeat.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
Battle of Mendaza
 

The Battle of Mendaza was an early battle of the First Carlist War, occurring on December 12, 1834 at Mendaza, Navarre.

 
The Carlists had enjoyed a victory in the Battle of Venta de Echavarri in October and also the fruits of a raid on Navarre, in which Tomás de Zumalacárregui would station himself at La Berrueza with a number of supplies, clothes, money, and new troops. The morale of the Carlists was very high, and they decided to fight the Liberal troops in a formal battle (rather than with guerrilla tactics). This would happen on December 14, 1834, at the Battle of Mendaza.

Tomás de Zumalacárregui concentrated his forces at the bottom of the valley of La Berrueza between Mendaza and Asarta.

Luis Fernández de Córdova’s forces were stationed outside of this valley, at Los Arcos.

Zumalacárregui attempted to follow a plan of battle similar to that enacted by Hannibal at Cannae: he would allow enemy forces to drive themselves into a large arc — whereupon the Carlist infantry, positioned on the flanks in the forests of Holm oaks on the mountain of Dos Hermanas, would encircle the main body of Liberal infantry and destroy it.

However, the Liberal leader of the vanguard, Marcelino Oráa, himself a Navarrese and familiar with the terrain, recognized the potential trap and instead marched towards Mendaza rather than through the valley itself. The Carlists, surprised by this maneuver and inexperienced on the field of battle, were thrown back and retreated, taking refuge in the mountains.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
First Battle of Arquijas
 

The First Battle of Arquijas (December 15, 1834) was a battle of the First Carlist War.

 
Opening shots
The battle began when Liberal forces found Carlist general Tomás de Zumalacárregui waiting at the bridge of Arquijas over the Ega River in Navarre; about the middle of the day, some gunshots were exchanged between the several advanced posts.

Battle at the bridge
The Liberals under Luis Fernández de Córdova attempted to force this bridge. The division of Cordova formed itself in order of battle near the hermitage of Arquijas (Ermita de Nuestra Señora de Arquijas), which commanded the rapids near the bridge.

Artillery was stationed by the Liberals near this spot to protect the passage of the Liberal forces. A column of picked men, composed of carabiniers and peseteros, attempted to cross the bridge.

The Carlist Fourth Battalion of Navarre, reinforced by the tercios of Guipuzcoa, protecting the bridge, threw the Liberals back.

"A few of the most adventurous [Liberal soldiers] succeeded, with great trouble, in gaining the opposite bank; but soon the bridge was covered with carcasses, and, despite all their efforts, they could not advance a step further."

  Oraá's Feign
Córdova decided to attempt passage at another point, and gave orders to Marcelino de Oraá Lecumberri to get, by a concealed march, into the rear of the Carlists, and to General Lopez, to feign a similar movement, thereby distracting the Carlists. There were about 2,000 troops under Liberal general Oraá that had been detached by Córdova and sent to attack the Carlist rear.
The Liberals' leading column, led by Oraá, advanced against the Carlist center, leaving another division to oppose the Carlist right wing.

Sources disagree on what happened next. One source states that Zumalacárregui sent Ituralde's advanced guard, which had not yet seen action, to counter this rearguard action. Another states that Ituralde, "urged by an inconsiderate ardour which overcame his judgment, brought forward into sight his four battalions." These battalions, forming the left wing, had been concealed from view by the hill beneath which they were stationed.

Oraá instantly saw the snare into which he was about to fall, and changed his line of advance from north to west, moving directly upon Ituralde’s division, throwing out at the same time two battalions so as to outflank him. The Carlist left wing, thus enveloped and outnumbered, was driven back in confusion.

 
 
Zumalacárregui's intervention
Zumalacárregui then supported Ituralde, leaving only 2 or 3 battalions in observation; Zumalacárregui hastily marched to support his left wing under Ituralde. The Liberals had already compelled Ituralde to retreat. However, Zumalacárregui’s unexpected reinforcement threw the Liberals into disorder. The Liberals gave way, falling back on their second line.
 
 
One source states that "it is said that, at this juncture, Cordova, believing the day to be lost, gave Oraa orders to retreat; the latter, however, more experienced in such affairs, took upon himself the responsibility of disregarding the order." Córdova did in fact retreat in disorder, abandoning the division.

The division, under Oraá, found itself opposed to Ituralde in the valley of Lana.

A 5-hour long combat followed.

The sources again disagree on what happened next. One source states that Oraá attacked but his detachment of over 2,000 men was dispersed in the Lana valley and fled, the nighttime covering their retreat. However, another source states that “the superiority of position and numbers had given the [Liberals] an advantage against which the Carlists found it impossible to contend.”

  "One has to recognize that in the battle at Arquijas," Vicente Blasco Ibáñez has written, "the victory would have been the Carlists' had it not been for the skill and daring of Oráa, who knew how to extricate himself from a dire situation, as General Córdova had shown lamentable irresolution retreating from the battlefield before hostilities had ceased."

 

Aftermath
Córdova was replaced by Manuel Lorenzo as a result of this defeat. Córdova had withdrawn to Los Arcos, where he got orders from Espoz y Mina to quit his command and go to Madrid.

On February 5, 1835, the Liberals attacked the same spot at the Second Battle of Arquijas but were repulsed.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1834
 
 
President Jackson (Jackson Andrew) censured by Senate for removing deposits from the Bank of the U.S.
 
 
 
1834
 
 
Lincoln Abraham  (at 25) enters politics as assemblyman in the Illinois legislature
 
 
 

 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1833 Part IV NEXT-1834 Part II