A HISTORY OF ENGLAND

CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY

1689-1837

A HISTORY OF ENGLAND.

By the Rev. J. Franck Bright, M.A., Fellow of University College, and Historical Lecturer in Balliol, New, and University Colleges, Oxford; late Master of the Modern School in Marlborough College.

With numerous Maps and Plans. New Editions. Crown 8vo.

This work is divided into three Periods of convenient and handy size, especially adapted for use in Schools, as well as for Students reading special portions of History for local and other Examinations.

Period I.—Mediæval Monarchy: The Departure of the Romans, to Richard III. From A.D. 449 to A.D. 1485. 4s. 6d.

Period II.—Personal Monarchy: Henry VII. to James II. From A.D. 1485 to A.D. 1688. 5s.

Period III.—Constitutional Monarchy: William and Mary to the Present Time. From A.D. 1689 to A.D. 1837. 7s. 6d.

[All rights reserved.]

A
History of England

BY THE REV.

J. FRANCK BRIGHT, M.A.

FELLOW OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, AND HISTORICAL LECTURER IN BALLIOL, NEW, AND
UNIVERSITY COLLEGES, OXFORD; LATE MASTER OF THE MODERN SCHOOL
IN MARLBOROUGH COLLEGE

PERIOD III.
CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY
William and Mary to William IV.
1689-1837

With Maps and Plans

RIVINGTONS
WATERLOO PLACE, LONDON

Oxford and Cambridge

MDCCCLXXX
[Third Edition]

[5]

A LIST OF SOME USEFUL AUTHORITIES.

General Histories.

Macaulay's History of England, 1600-1702. Macaulay's Essays. Mahon's History of England, 1713-1783. Massey's History of England, 1745-1802. Martineau's History of the Peace, 1800-1848. Erskine May's Constitutional History, 1760-1860. Ralph's History of England, 1689-1727. Pauli's Geschichte Englands, from 1814.

Books of General Reference.

Cobbett's Parliamentary History, to 1803. Hansard's Debates, from 1803. The Monthly Mercury, from 1690. The Annual Register, from 1758. State Tracts. Anderson's History of Commerce. Maculloch's Commercial Dictionary. Eden's State of the Poor. Howell's State Trials. Macpherson's State Papers, 1688-1714. Hardwicke's State Papers, to 1727.

Foreign Histories.

Documens inédits sur l'Histoire de France (for the Spanish succession). Sismondi or Martin's Histoire de France, to 1789. Von Sybel's French Revolution. Lanfrey's Histoire de Napoleon. Ranke's History of Prussia. Bancroft's History of the United States. Mill's History of India. Grant Duff's History of the Mahrattas. The Despatches of Wellesley and Cornwallis. Froude's The English in Ireland, to 1800.

William III.

Burnet's History of his Own Time, 1660-1713. Kennett's History of England, vol. iii. Defoe's Works are instructive as to the state of England at this time.

Anne.

Stanhope's Reign of Queen Anne. Coxe's Life of Marlborough. Marlborough's Letters and Despatches, 1702-1712. Bolingbroke's Correspondence. Life of Sacheverel.

[6]

George I.

Swift's Drapier's Letters, etc. The Stuart Papers, edited by Glover. Coxe's Life of Walpole. Boyer's Political State of Great Britain.

George II.

Hervey's Memoirs of the Reign of George II., 1727-1742. Horace Walpole's Memoirs of the Reign of George II., 1751-1760. Doddington's Diary, 1749-1761. Waldegrave's Memoirs, 1754-1758. Southey's Life of Wesley. Philip's Life and Times of Whitfield. Johnstone's Memoirs of the Rebellion of 1745.

George III.

Horace Walpole's Memoirs of the Reign of George III., 1760-1771. The Letters of Junius. The Grenville Papers. The Bedford Correspondence. Buckingham's Memoirs of the Court and Cabinet of George III. Russell's Life of Fox. Thackeray's Life of Chatham. Stanhope's Life of Pitt. Wilberforce's Life. Malmesbury's Diary and Correspondence. The Cornwallis Correspondence, 1770-1805. Napier's Peninsula War. Life of Bamford the Radical. Lord Dudley's Letters, 1814-1823. Bell and Stapleton's Lives of Canning.

It is not, however, necessary to give a detailed list of authorities, which would be little more than a catalogue of the lives, letters, and memoirs of most of the important men of the time. Of these the number is constantly being augmented, and it is from them and the contemporary tracts, monographs, pamphlets, and fugitive writings that the details of the History must be drawn.

[7]

CONTENTS.

WILLIAM AND MARY. 1689-1702.

ANNE. 1702-1714.

GEORGE I. 1714-1727.

GEORGE II. 1727-1760.

GEORGE III. 1760-1820.

GEORGE IV. 1820-1830.

WILLIAM IV. 1830-1837.

[27]

LIST OF MAPS.

WILLIAM AND MARY.

1689-1702.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

[806]

Secretaries of State.

Before the Crown was absolutely offered to William, the Convention was eager to reform a number of the most prominent abuses of the last reign. It was shown by the wiser leaders among them that such reforms would entail a mass of legislation which, The Declaration of Right. to be done well, must occupy several years. It was therefore determined that, for the present, a solemn declaration of principles only should be drawn up. This is known as the Declaration of Right. In it, after enumerating the evils from which the country had suffered, the Lords and Commons declared that the dispensing power does not exist, that without grant or consent of Parliament no money can be exacted by the sovereign, and no army kept up in time of peace. They also affirmed the right of petition, the right of free choice of representatives, the right of Parliament Crown accepted by William and Mary. to freedom of debate, the right of the nation to a pure administration of justice, and the necessity, in order to secure these things, of frequent Parliaments. This Declaration having been read to William and Mary, the Crown was solemnly offered them by Halifax, and by them accepted. They were immediately proclaimed amid general plaudits.

Thus was consummated, with scarcely any bloodshed, and by what Character of the Revolution. appeared an almost unanimous action on the part of the nation, a complete revolution. It was not the less a revolution because it was held that the whole Constitution of England passed on in its minutest detail unchanged. By it was overthrown for ever the theory which came into existence under the Tudors, and was brought to perfection under the Stuarts; henceforward it was impossible that the King should be regarded either as the proprietor of the country, or as a ruler by divine right, the representative of God upon earth. In the place of this theory was substituted that great Whig theory, which, arising among the Puritans, had enjoyed a brief[807] triumph in the successes of the Great Rebellion, and, violently overthrown at the Restoration, had succeeded in making good its position during the reigns of the two last Stuarts,—the theory which regarded the King as reigning by the will of the people and in virtue of an implied contract with them. As a natural consequence of the position thus taken by the nation as the supreme power in the State, Parliament, its representative, became in its turn supreme, and although the change was not yet fully understood, the representatives of the people were gradually taking to themselves not only the duties of legislation, but also the executive. The ministry, therefore, however much they may have been still regarded as the King's ministers, became by degrees the national ministers, answerable for their conduct in Parliament, and before long became in fact little else than the executive Committee of the majority in Parliament.

The unanimity of parties which had secured the triumph of William Personal unpopularity of William. was of short duration, nor was his personal popularity long-lived. The apparent coldness of his demeanour, his carelessness of the pomps of the Court, his wretched health, which obliged him to withdraw from London and establish his Court at Kensington, speedily rendered him personally unpopular; while, as soon as the general danger which had caused their union was removed, the fundamental differences which divided political parties at once made themselves obvious. Moreover, the tendency to reaction, visible after all political excitements, began to show itself. Two classes were by no means ready to accept kindly the revolution which had been wrought. These were the clergy Discontent of the clergy and the army. The greater part of the clergy had spent their lives in inculcating the duty of passive obedience. Although that theory had broken down in practice when the attacks of the Crown were directed against themselves, they could not bring themselves to submit without difficulty to a complete reversal of their political creed, nor could they help seeing that the success of William implied nothing short of the substitution of the Whig doctrine for that of monarchy by divine right. A very large portion of them were therefore disaffected. The and the army. army, though it had disliked the introduction of Catholics and of Irish among its ranks, and was not prejudiced in favour of any theory of monarchy, felt its professional honour injured by the sorry part it had played in the late events. So deep was the disaffection that one regiment quartered at Ipswich broke out into open mutiny, marched northward in arms, and was only brought to obedience after[808] a skirmish with some Dutch troops under Ginkel, which had been rapidly sent in pursuit. The signs of general disaffection at the same time were so obvious that it was thought necessary to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act.

Before this happened, William had had to form a ministry and to furnish himself with a Parliament. For this latter purpose, in spite of the opposition of many of the old Tories, who regarded a Parliament not summoned by the King's writ as no Parliament at all, the Convention was changed into a Parliament, and proceeded to act in that capacity. It was not indeed reasonable that a freely elected body, whose choice of a king both sides were willing to allow, should still be regarded upon technical grounds as incapable of settling matters of much less importance. The choice of ministers was a matter of more difficulty.

At the present time the choice of ministers is tolerably simple. The House of Commons having obtained the position of both legislature and executive, the administration is placed in the hands of a Committee of that party which is predominant in the Commons; the Crown, in fact, having but little choice in the matter. This theory of government, which is a necessary consequence of the Parliamentary triumph at the Revolution, was in the years immediately succeeding that event not understood. The notion of a king whose duties are rather ornamental than real had scarcely entered men's minds. The King was still expected to have the direction of the executive, to be, in fact, his own Prime Minister, and to nominate as heads of departments such statesmen as he thought Ignorance of the constitutional change. best fitted for the employment, without exact regard to their political views. The effect of this was to make the King responsible for the Government; and though the right of impeachment, as exercised in the case of Danby, rested upon the supposition that ministers were responsible to Parliament, the fact was not yet fully recognized. It was this responsibility of the king which had produced the disasters of the Great Rebellion and the late Revolution. The gradual substitution of Parliamentary ministry, which should serve as an intermediate body between the Commons and the Crown, and save the Crown from direct responsibility, is the great constitutional change which was completed on the accession of the Hanoverian house. Such a change becomes absolutely necessary when Parliament has once secured a complete control of the executive; otherwise it is plain that the acts or proposals of the executive, constantly met by a hostile majority in Parliament,[809] could never be brought to a completion. It also of necessity implies a mutual responsibility among the ministers, who upon essential points must all agree with the Parliamentary majority. These necessary consequences of the triumph of the Whig theory of the sovereignty of the people were little understood even by the best English politicians; and William, able as he was as a foreign statesman, had never a clear insight into the working of the English Constitution. Nor was his character such as to fit him to occupy the place of an ornamental king. Thus he both himself intended and was expected by the nation to exercise a supreme influence in the Government, at the same time that the newly won powers of the Parliament were liable constantly to thwart his schemes. Besides the difficulty which this general ignorance of constitutional principles caused, peculiar difficulties, arising from the manner in which he had obtained the Crown, beset William. He had been brought to the throne by the The Whigs' desire for vengeance. Whigs. By the Whigs he was expected to become a party leader. They looked forward, under his guidance, to a triumphant revenge on the party at whose hands they had suffered so much. On the other hand, William's own wish was to hush the storm of faction, to become King of the whole English nation, not of one party, and to be able to use the resources of England for his great European measures; he therefore had no intention of becoming a mere party leader. Again, his view of the duties and responsibilities of a king was a high one, whereas the Whigs, on whom he might be expected to rely, were pledged to give greater prominence to the influence of Parliament. William's natural tendencies, therefore, when once safeguards for a just Government and personal liberty were secured, inclined him rather to the Tories, whose view of the prerogative was higher.

It was in the midst of these difficulties that William had to select his ministry. He attempted to conciliate all parties, with the exception of the extreme Jacobites, and his ministry was a mixed one. Danby had been mainly instrumental in bringing William to England. He had indeed in the Convention thrown some obstacles in the way of the Parliamentary change of dynasty, but might fairly look for a high reward. He was displeased at being appointed President of the Council, a post of high honour, but not of great political activity. Halifax was appointed Privy Seal. His intellect, which always saw two sides of a question, was not such as to fit him for decided statesmanship. The places of real importance, the Secretaryships, were shared between the[810] Tories and the Whigs; Nottingham, the leader of that class who expressed with perfect honesty their willingness to acknowledge any King de facto, and Shrewsbury, a young man of great ability and as yet a consistent Whig, were appointed to those places. Neither Treasury nor Admiralty were intrusted to any single individual, but were placed in Commission, both Whigs and Tories sitting at the Boards. At the Treasury, though only third on the Commission, Godolphin, by his superior skill and knowledge, soon became pre-eminent. The purity of the judgment-seat was secured by a careful selection of the ablest lawyers from a list supplied by the Privy Council, while the great places of the Household, where personal rather than political influence was wanted, were chiefly given to William's personal friends from Holland, the most prominent being Overkirk, Master of the Horse, and Bentinck, subsequently Earl of Portland.

By the appointment of his ministers, and by the conversion of the Convention into a Parliament, the apparatus of Government was complete. Settlement of the revenue. The Whigs were for a time triumphant. The revenue was settled on a peace footing at £1,200,000 a year; the hereditary taxes being given to William for the support of his Crown (a grant which forms the origin of the Civil List), while the Parliamentary taxes intended for the support of Government were granted only for limited periods. The hearth tax, the most obnoxious and unjust of taxes, as it is at once inquisitorial in its action and presses with undue severity upon the poor in comparison with the rich, was abolished. The settlement of the Settlement of the Church. Church, and of the oaths to be taken by the holders of places, at once rendered obvious the strength of faction which still existed, and the difficulties which must beset all attempt at impartial government. Three Bills were produced, a Toleration Bill, a Comprehension Bill, for the purpose of so changing the construction of the Church and its Liturgy as to admit numerous Protestant Dissenters, and a Bill for the removal of the Test Act, for the purpose of enabling the King to employ, as he was most desirous of doing, all Protestants in his service. Of these three, one only, the Toleration Act, was carried. In fact the Comprehension Bill, which was introduced by Nottingham, was no doubt intended, after admitting a certain number of Dissenters, to render the exclusion of the rest more absolute. Fear of this rendered the Dissenters themselves hostile to it, and William's personal efforts to produce at once comprehension and relaxation of the Test Act were in vain; both Bills were thrown out.

There yet remained the question of the oaths of allegiance and supremacy.[811] It was acknowledged on all hands that all lay place-holders and all Oaths of allegiance and supremacy. newly-appointed holders of ecclesiastical preferments should be obliged to take these oaths, slightly altered to suit existing circumstances. The case of the clergy already holding benefices was not so clear. Many were willing to accept the new Government peaceably, and it seemed hard that they should be required to take oaths which gave the lie to all their former political views. With regard to the Bishops too, the High Church Party advanced the doctrine that the Episcopal ordination was indelible, and that it was impossible for any Act either of King or Parliament to prevent a man who had once been a Bishop from being so always. Against the King's wish the party who were for the most stringent application of the oaths carried the day. All the clergy were required to take them by August 1689; if they had not been taken by February 1690, those clergy and Bishops who refused them were to be deprived. Between 300 and 400 refused the oath, and there thus sprang up that section of the clergy known as Nonjurors. The settlement of the country was completed by the Coronation Oath, which declared that the King would uphold the Protestant religion as settled by law. It was a foolish miscomprehension of these words, which obviously did not prevent a Parliamentary change in the arrangements of religion, which subsequently led George III. into his obstinate opposition to Catholic emancipation. When the oath had been arranged, the coronation took place (April 11), and some new titles were given; thus Danby became Lord Caermarthen, Churchill Earl of Marlborough, Bentinck Earl of Portland, and Mordaunt, First Lord of the Treasury, Earl of Monmouth.

When the Government of the country was fairly settled it was time for William to receive his reward. Parliament gratified him by a strong declaration against the policy of Louis abroad, and assurance of hearty support should he find it necessary to have recourse to arms. On the The European war breaks out. 13th of May war with France was therefore declared. William stated that he had no choice in the matter as France had already begun war upon England. This was an allusion to the action of France in Ireland; for Louis, though unable to trust James and his English and Irish friends in that implicit manner which would have rendered his assistance irresistible, was yet so far convinced that the real key to success against the coalition was the neutralization of England, that he had allowed James some assistance in troops. The other great countries of the coalition had already declared war with France. Louis found himself[812] with one ally only, who did him, if possible, more harm than good,—this was the Porte. He succeeded in inducing that power to continue its attacks upon Hungary, which was a constant source of weakness to Austria; but the unnatural alliance between the most Christian King and the great enemies of Christendom gave an opening for the invective of his enemies, which received still further point from his subsequent behaviour. Unable to sustain the forward position which his armies had assumed in Germany the preceding year, especially when some of his forces were required in Ireland, he ordered a retreat. Devastation of the Palatinate. What he could not keep he determined to destroy, and the Palatinate was laid waste with a reckless, unsparing fury, which enabled each country, as it declared war with him, to point out that his conduct was more cruel than even that of his Turkish ally. It had such an effect on the Continent, that war was declared at intervals of about a month by Austria, the Empire, Spain, Brandenburg and Holland. William's primary object was attained; Europe was combined against France. The resources of England were placed in his hands to support that coalition, but there was yet much to be done before he was free to act.

It has been already related that, on his flight, James stated his intention of finding if possible a new centre of action in Ireland. The view was a natural one, for he had throughout his reign been preparing that island as a refuge in case of danger. He had there acted with more freedom than was possible in England, and gone far to carry out his plans for re-establishing Catholicism. Talbot, Lord Tyrconnel, a perfectly unscrupulous man, was at the head of the Government. Almost all the other important offices were in Romanist hands. Rice, chief Baron of the Exchequer, made the law courts subserve the same policy; he openly asserted his intention of assaulting the Act of Settlement; all who had or thought they had claims against the actual possessors of land, brought their claims into his court, and no proof was held too weak, no witness too untrustworthy, for the purpose of re-establishing the old Catholics in their possession of the soil. From private acts he proceeded to public. Charter after charter was forfeited; municipal corporations re-established, with reckless indifference to all forms of right, on a Roman Catholic basis. While aldermen in the boroughs thus became Roman Catholic, sheriffs of the same religion were appointed, and in their hands lay the choice of juries, so that the whole legal apparatus was directed against Protestantism. The army meanwhile had been similarly reorganized; 6000 Protestant veterans had been disbanded[813] and their places occupied by vehement and disorderly Catholics, who lived, we are told, constantly at free quarters on the Protestant inhabitants.

The arrival of William in England had brought matters to a crisis. The Papists thought their time was at length come. The whole country Panic among the Englishry. was full of panic and rumours of a coming massacre. Many of the English fled. The gentry and yeomen gathered themselves together to the towns and strong houses, to attempt if possible to make good for themselves that security which the Government would not give them. The two most important of these centres were Enniskillen and Londonderry. At the former, early in 1689, the Protestant population refused admittance to two companies of Popish infantry which had been ordered to be quartered on them. The gentry collected, drove the soldiers away, appointed Gustavus Hamilton governor, garrisoned the houses round Lough Erne, and held the district for King William. At Londonderry the same process took place. A regiment of 1200 Papists, under the Earl of Antrim, was sent to the city, and the mayor and sheriffs, who by the new charters were Papists, were proceeding to admit them, when thirteen young apprentices of Scotch birth took upon themselves to close the gates, Londonderry and Enniskillen garrisoned. and the Protestant gentry were summoned from the neighbouring country to defend the city. In two days it was strongly garrisoned, and the troops withdrew. It was in vain that Lord Mountjoy, a Protestant, who still remained faithful to James, attempted a compromise. Some few troops under Lundy were indeed admitted, but the country was still held for the Protestants, and Lundy was obliged, in appearance at all events, to accept the new Government.

Meanwhile William had attempted to enter into negotiations with William's negotiation with Tyrconnel. Tyrconnel. For this purpose he had employed as his agent Richard Hamilton, who had once held a commission in James's army, but who now professed to have changed his allegiance. Hamilton pledged his word that, if he failed in his commission, he would come back in three weeks; but, forfeiting his promise, he returned to his old allegiance, and became a chief leader on the side of James. But the character of the quarrel was already changing, the real object of Tyrconnel, in common with the greater part of the Irish Catholics, was to uphold Tyrconnel's object Irish independence. neither James nor William, but to destroy for ever the English supremacy. For this purpose he was willing to use the name of James, trusting in fact to the assistance of Louis, to whom he opened his real design. He succeeded in ridding himself of Mountjoy,[814] whose loyal influence was likely to thwart his plans, by sending him on a mission to St. Germains, where James now held his Court, and where he was at once apprehended. He then summoned the Irish to arms. An army of 50,000 Papists was collected, and many thousands more took arms on their own behalf, and ravaged the Protestant settlements around them. To complete the Irish supremacy, Tyrconnel ordered the Protestants to His temporary success. be disarmed. The destruction wrought is inconceivable. Property which has been estimated at £5,000,000 was destroyed. Whole herds of cattle were killed and left to rot in the fields; 50,000 are said to have been thus killed in six weeks, while about 400,000 sheep were similarly slain. Unable to withstand this general movement, the Protestants in the south and west were overpowered, or retreated if possible to the strongholds of Londonderry and Enniskillen. In those two places the flower of the English settlers stood at bay, surrounded on all sides by hordes of liberated serfs now in mutiny against their former masters. An army was ordered to march northwards under the traitor Richard Hamilton. The Protestants fled before it; 30,000 of them collected as a last asylum behind the walls of Londonderry.

The country was in this condition when James, in answer to the messages which Tyrconnel had sent him, determined, with the assent of Louis, and with considerable assistance in officers and arms, himself to visit Ireland. He landed at Cork, and soon appeared in the capital, while William, unable to act with energy on account of the difficulties which surrounded him, was assailed by unthinking men with violent abuse for not taking stronger measures to prevent those disasters which he was really watching with the greatest dismay.

On his arrival in Dublin it was gradually brought home to James that it was no feeling of passionate loyalty which was exciting the Irish Character of Irish Jacobites. population. Among those who attended his Court there were two distinct factions. Some Englishmen, with the loyal feelings which animated English Jacobites, were anxious to re-establish James and to retain the English influence in Ireland. Another party, which included Tyrconnel and almost all the Irish Papists, were fighting to destroy the English supremacy, they cared not how, and intriguing to secure the assistance of France. James would naturally have inclined to the former party, but soon learnt that the power of his partisans was entirely gone.

He made a feeble struggle, and, contrary to the wish of the French[815] and Irish, proceeded himself to the siege of Londonderry. On his march he found that the Protestants, as they retired, had destroyed all the crops and houses behind them. He journeyed through a desert, Siege of Londonderry. and when he found that the inhabitants of the city had got rid of their treacherous governor Lundy, had taken matters into their own hands, and appointed Walker, a clergyman, and Major Henry Baker, joint governors, he determined to return instantly to Dublin, there to hold a Parliament. The prosecution of the siege was intrusted to a French general, Maumont, and Richard Hamilton. The defence was so vigorous that the siege was soon turned into a blockade; and while the gallant city was holding out to the last extremity, the Parliament at Dublin met.

As a matter of course, considering the circumstances under which it was collected, it consisted entirely of Catholics. It proceeded to act Wild legislation of the Irish Parliament. with a recklessness which might be expected from an enslaved nation suddenly called to power, and from men who for years had been unused to public life. The great Act of Settlement, that compromise which in Charles II.'s reign had settled the share of land to be held by the Protestant emigrants who had followed Cromwell's victorious arms, was repealed. Many thousands of square miles were at a single blow transferred from English to Celtic landlords. The Act itself may have been unjust, but for years it had been the basis of society, and men had acted as though their titles were secure. Its repeal was therefore a violent act of unjust confiscation. Moreover, as far as James was concerned, nothing could be more disastrous, nothing could more surely destroy any influence he might yet keep in England, where it seemed to foreshadow the justice Protestants might expect from his hands were his reign re-established. Such slight opposition as James offered (for he had the wisdom to see some of the disastrous consequences of the measure) had no effect but to cause profound distrust of himself. Other legislation even more disastrous met with no opposition at his hands. In his want of money he issued false coinage of copper and brass, intrinsically worth perhaps a sixtieth of its nominal value. Thus of course all creditors and mortgagees, who were pretty certain to be Protestants, were ruined. The money was rendered current by threats of punishment against those who refused it. Prices were kept down by law; and to complete this wild legislation, the great Act of Attainder was passed, containing between 2000 or 3000 names. No inquiry was instituted as to the grounds of accusation against those[816] who were attainted, and opportunities were thus afforded for any man who had a personal enemy to introduce his name in the Bill. A limit of time was set within which all those named were bound to surrender themselves to justice or be liable to execution without trial; while, to prevent the King's mercy from interfering with their vengeance, the Commons passed a law that after November the right of pardon should cease.

Such legislation, sanctioned by James, while it failed to give him real popularity in Ireland, checked the reaction which was beginning in England. The feeling there grew constantly stronger against the inaction of the Government. The fate of Londonderry and Enniskillen were watched with absorbing interest. A fleet, with some troops under command of Kirke, was at length despatched, but Kirke refused to risk the passage of the river which led from Lough Foyle, and which was now guarded by forts and a boom, and the starving population of Londonderry had the misery of watching the ships as they lay idly in the Lough. But they still held out with astonishing constancy. Their friends in Enniskillen fared somewhat better. They did not confine themselves to defence; but, issuing from the little island in Lough Erne which surrounded their city, they collected from their enemies a considerable quantity of cattle and ammunition, and lived in comparative comfort and security. At length, in July, the fate of Londonderry seemed sealed. Nearly everything eatable had been devoured,—horse-flesh, rats, salt hides, all that could possibly be converted even into the most objectionable food. It seemed impossible to feed the population in any way for two days longer. At last a peremptory order reached Kirke to Londonderry saved. relieve the city at all hazards. On the 30th of July, three vessels, two transports and a frigate, sailed up the river, and, after a few minutes of difficulty, broke the boom, and in the evening, at ten o'clock, were anchored at the quay. The city was saved after 105 days of siege and blockade.

The Irish army immediately broke up from its camp and retreated. As it reached Strabane, on its backward course, it received the news Battle of Newton Butler. of another disaster. A great effort had been determined on against Enniskillen, but Colonel Wolseley had been sent to take the command by Kirke, and was successful in defeating at Newton Butler the approaching Irish, of whom nearly 2000 were put to the sword or drowned in a neighbouring lough. The news of this defeat hastened the steps of the[817] retreating army as it returned from Londonderry, and it fled in confusion to Charlemont.

The same week which saw the relief of Londonderry and the battle of Newton Butler was remarkable also for the great defeat of William's army at Killiecrankie. In accordance with the character of the Scotch people, and in some proportion to the cruelty which had been exercised upon them, the Revolution in Scotland took a more violent form than it had assumed in England, for in the North James had been able to carry out more completely those plans which had produced his fall in the southern kingdom. A Church repugnant to the majority of the people had been forced upon them by law; in defiance of the opposition of a subservient Parliament, all the high places had been filled with Papists; nonconformity had been punished with an arbitrary severity and a ferocious cruelty of which England showed no counterpart; the electoral laws also, by requiring from all electors abjuration of the Covenant and an assertion of the King's ecclesiastical supremacy, excluded all but Prelatists from the right of election. Before collecting a national Convention, to consider the state of the nation under the present circumstances, it was necessary to dispense with the Act which excluded Presbyterians from the franchise. The Convention consequently consisted almost exclusively of Whigs, and the change of Government was marked by grave disorders in many parts of the country; nor, though William disliked these excesses, was he able to repress them, and the Episcopal clergy were in many instances most Opposition to a union. roughly used. There was at first some talk of a union with England, for the national feeling of the Scotch was beginning to yield to the increasing belief that in most points, especially of a financial and commercial character, such a union was very desirable; while many even of the Whigs in England wished for a union of the Churches and the establishment of Episcopacy on some broad and general basis. But the religious feeling of the country was quite averse to such a course, and William was too tolerant a man to wish to apply any coercion to men's consciences. He therefore wrote a letter, in which he did little else than profess his attachment to Protestantism, and his wish if possible to establish the Union. The arrangements he left in their own hands.

Unable himself to be present in Scotland, he intrusted the business to the two Dalrymples, father and son, and to Lord Melville, a prudent man, who, though he had retired abroad during the storm which succeeded the Rye-House Plot, had never committed himself warmly[818] to either party. James's agents were Graham of Claverhouse, now Earl of Dundee, and Lindsay, Earl of Balcarras. The Castle of Edinburgh, was in the hands of Gordon, a Jacobite; and James's agents hoped that, by their own vigour and by means of the dread inspired by the castle which commanded the town, they might yet obtain a predominant influence in the Convention. The first trial of strength was the election of a President, and before long it became evident that the Whigs would certainly have the upper hand. They elected the Duke of Hamilton, and about the middle of March the regular sittings of the Convention began. Letters from James and William. At the first meeting, letters from both King James and King William were produced; that of James, the production of Melfort, was fitted, like most of the productions of that statesman, to injure his master's cause as much as possible. There was no word of repentance, no word of conciliation; every line breathed an obstinate determination to continue in the old course, and threats of vengeance on his enemies. Dundee and Balcarras felt that all hope of maintaining a majority was lost, and having thus failed in their first object, determined Dundee tries to secede. to pursue, in accordance with a plan they had already arranged, a second line of policy, to secede with their adherents to Stirling, and there establish a rival Convention. The movement was thwarted by the premature retreat of Dundee. Edinburgh was full of fierce Western Cameronians, and feeling that his life was endangered, he hastily withdrew. The news that, with a party of his old troopers, he had set out for Stirling, holding on his way a conference with the Governor of Edinburgh arms. Edinburgh Castle, excited the fears and hatred of the Presbyterians in the Convention. They at once proceeded to rouse the people of Edinburgh to arms, and to place the town in an attitude of defence, and thus thwart the idea of secession. They then went on to consider the state of the nation, and declaring that the late King had forfeited the throne by misconduct, offered the Crown to William and Mary. The offer was accompanied, as in the case of England, with a Declaration of Right,—here in Scotland called the Claim of Right,—in which, without discussing the question, they declared that Episcopacy was abolished. The Crown was then solemnly offered and accepted.

Yet the difficulties of William were still most severe. The bigoted Covenanters held aloof from a tolerant King who had not taken the Covenant; and a number of extreme Whigs, who were attached to a monarchy so limited as to be really a republic, put themselves[819] at the head of a factious opposition, forming among themselves an The Club. organization known by the name of the Club. While this powerful opposition was being formed in the Lowlands, war in behalf of the fugitive King actually broke out in the Highlands. Dundee, on his flight from Edinburgh, had remained for some time peaceably in his own house. But letters passing between him and Melfort, James's minister in Ireland, were intercepted. An order Dundee escapes. was issued to arrest him, with his colleague Balcarras. Balcarras was secured, but Dundee fled towards Inverness, where he found a state of affairs which he was able to turn to the advantage of James.

The politics of the Highland clans bore little relation to the general politics of the nation. The Highlanders were as yet a half savage race, devoted to their patriarchal form of society, and with political attachments which seldom went beyond the head of their tribe. It mattered but little to them whether James or William were upon the Scottish throne. They were equally ready to oppose by violence any Government which interfered with their wild freedom. But among themselves they had bitter tribal jealousies and feuds, and the partial introduction of the feudal system had complicated their relations one with the other. Great chiefs, combining the character of feudal lords and clan patriarchs, had contrived to extend their power, and render other clans besides their own dependent or tributary. The Earl or Marquis of Argyle, Mac Callum More, as the Highlanders called him, head of the great clan of Campbell in Argyleshire, had thus extended his pre-eminence at the expense of his neighbours. The power of this chief was great. He could bring 5000 men into the field, and his jurisdiction was so independent as to be hardly second to that of the Crown; consequently all his neighbours looked upon him with jealousy and hatred. That the politics of the head of the Campbell clan were consistently Whig was enough to make all his rivals and enemies Jacobites. But of late years the power of the Campbells had decayed; during the triumph of the Stuart Kings the Marquis of Argyle had been beheaded, and the Earl, his son, had been driven into exile. As the Campbells sunk, the Macdonalds, the chief rivals of their clan, on whose property they had encroached, had risen. But the Macdonalds had a constant feud with the Mackintoshes in the neighbourhood of Inverness, in pursuance of which Macdonald of Keppoch was at this moment engaged in the siege of Inverness, which had made common cause with the Mackintoshes.

[820]

When therefore Dundee came into that neighbourhood he found the clans already in arms on quarrels of their own. It occurred to him that, by taking advantage of the general enmity against the Campbells, he might form a union of the clans, nominally at all events in favour of King James. His plan met with a partial success. He could not indeed induce the Mackintoshes to join with the Macdonalds, but he secured their neutrality. The eastern clans as a rule followed the same course; but those of the west, more immediate sufferers from the power and encroachments of the Campbells, eagerly leapt at the opportunity of attacking the party of which Argyle was one of the chiefs. Mackay was sent to take the command of the English troops. With his regular soldiers he could do nothing against the rapid Highlanders in the mountains, and urged the plan, subsequently followed, of building a line of forts across the country. The campaign produced no event of importance. A cessation of arms occurred in June, spent by Dundee in obtaining succour from James in Ireland, by Mackay in raising troops with some difficulty among the Western Cameronians.

A fresh dispute among the clans renewed the war. The Murrays, of whom Athol was the chief, had not as yet declared for either side. The Marquis of Athol himself withdrew for safety to England, but his eldest son declared for King William, while his steward, who was believed to be in his confidence, declared for James. The two sections of the clan disputed the possession of the castle of Blair Athol, the seat of the chief. It was felt by both parties that the adhesion of this large clan was of great importance, and Dundee on one side and Mackay on the Battle of Killiecrankie. July 27. other hurried to support their friends at Blair Athol. The castle lies a little beyond the northern end of the pass of Killiecrankie, a ravine through which the river Garry rushes, and which leads from the lowlands of Perthshire to the mountains. The armies were not ill-matched in numbers. Mackay's troops were suffered by the Highlanders to get clear of the difficult pass, and then found themselves in a little valley, with the Highlanders occupying the hills around. As long as it was an affair of musketry, the Lowland troops, many of whom were veterans, held their ground, but when the clans suddenly threw their firelocks from them and rushed with a wild yell on their lines, they broke and fled, with the exception of one regiment, and rushed in helpless flight down the narrow pass. It was the difference in the weapons which caused this strange victory of undisciplined[821] over disciplined troops. When he had fired his volley, the Highlander threw away his firelock, and was ready in an instant to rush forward with his broadsword. The bayonet at that time in use was so constructed that, when fixed, it filled up the mouth of the barrel. It took some minutes to arrange the clumsy contrivance which turned the musket into a pike. While the regulars were still fumbling with their weapons, the Highlanders were upon them.[1] Mackay brought off such troops as were left with rare coolness, and the death of Dundee neutralized the effects of the defeat. The Highland army passed under the command of General Cannon, who had brought over the Irish auxiliaries, a man of no particular ability. Mackay succeeded in Mackay concludes the war. rapidly re-establishing his army. He destroyed the prestige of the Highlanders by defeating a detachment at St. Johnstone's, near Perth; and when a newly raised regiment of Cameronian recruits beat off the mountaineers at Dunkeld, no longer held together by a leader of ability, they broke up and retired to their own glens, and the war was practically over.

Though William's measures had thus been tolerably successful, although the Revolution was acknowledged in two portions of the Empire, Factions of the English Parliament. and likely soon to become so in the third, his position in London was most difficult and trying. Success had dissolved the union between the Whigs and Tories, and the triumphant Whigs had time to remember their sufferings in the last reign and to form plans of vengeance. The King desired above all things the cessation of faction and the union of parties, but on every question which arose the Commons displayed a most passionate temper. A certain number of attainders were reversed, and this was well enough; but when a Bill of Indemnity Bill of Indemnity dropped. was brought in, so many exceptions were made to it, that it became in fact rather a Bill of vengeance than a Bill of oblivion. The discussion of these exceptions lasted so long that the Bill had to be dropped for that session. But the intemperate Whig leaders, such men as Howe, Sacheverell, and the younger Hampden, were not contented to be thus balked of their revenge. Fierce attacks were brought against the Lord Attack on Halifax. President Caermarthen, and Halifax, the Privy Seal. The position of Caermarthen was so strong that his enemies were afraid to divide the House against him. Halifax had made more enemies, and was not so firmly supported by the King's influence. The practical mind of William found little to like in the subtle and questioning intellect[822] of Halifax; and as the affairs in Ireland had been virtually entirely in that nobleman's control, the wretched condition of the Protestants, the lengthened misery of Londonderry, and the temporary success of James and Tyrconnel, were all laid to his charge. It was said that he even purposely neglected Ireland in order to render a new Government indispensable. However, he contrived to escape impeachment by a narrow majority of sixteen; and the relief of Londonderry, and the immediate despatch of Schomberg at the head of a considerable body of troops to support the Protestant interest, tended to check the vehemence of the popular anger which was directed against him.

Late in August, the Parliament broke up till October, and all eyes were turned towards the fate of Schomberg's expedition. His troops consisted for the most part of raw recruits, scarcely able to discharge their firelocks. He could not venture to fight with such an army, but displayed great skill and determination in the manner in Misery of the English army in Ireland. which he overcame overwhelming difficulties; for, while encamped in the neighbourhood of Dundalk, treason was discovered in the camp of some French Protestant refugees, some regiments of which accompanied him. The refugees themselves were trustworthy, but a certain number of other foreigners had found their way into their regiments, and opened correspondence with the Irish. Sharp vengeance fell upon the chief conspirators. But a more terrible enemy than treason attacked the English troops. A deadly pestilence arose and carried them off by hundreds: their misery was unspeakable; the ties of morality and decorum were relaxed, the men got drunk sitting on the corpses of their dead comrades, and the horror of the time is well shown by the fact, that several ships lay in Carrickfergus Bay filled with carcases, and not a live man on board. The blame of the wretched condition of the army was traceable to the general maladministration which existed in the Government. The Chief Commissary was a man named Shales, who supplied the army with quite uneatable food, drew money largely for supplies which never reached the troops, and let out the troop horses, when collected, to English farmers. But it was not only in the army that this maladministration was visible. Admiral Herbert, now Lord Torrington, sunk in debauchery, allowed the same offences to be perpetrated in the navy. It would be unfair to lay this to the charge of William. The deeprooted mismanagement of the last twenty years rendered it almost impossible for him to introduce reforms with any rapidity, nor, with all the weight of foreign affairs on his hands, could he personally supervise every department. His[823] own department was well and successfully managed, and the English troops abroad won some honour in a skirmish against the French at Walcourt.

Still it was not to be expected that Parliament, on its reassembling, should be in a better temper than when it separated. It again renewed its violent courses. The necessary supplies were indeed voted; The Bill of Rights, by which the Declaration of Right was to be formed into a statute, and which in the last session had been thrown aside because the Lords wished to introduce the name of the Electress Sophia in the succession to the throne, was passed without that amendment; but besides this scarcely any other work was done. On the other hand, the Whig majority proceeded on their course of vengeance. The violence of the Whigs. The Earls of Salisbury and Peterborough, Sir Edward Hales and Obadiah Walker were impeached; a Committee to inquire into the death of Russell and Sidney, known as the Murder Committee, was appointed, and the attack upon Halifax renewed. At length the Whigs, conscious that the King was not well pleased with their vindictive temper, attempted to secure their own permanent supremacy in Parliament. They introduced a Corporation Bill, for restoring all the charters which had been forfeited in the reign of James; and to this, at the suggestion of Sacheverell and Howard, were appended two clauses, the one providing that all who had taken part in the surrender of the charters should be incapable of holding office for seven years, the other adding that all who, in spite of being thus incapacitated, presumed to hold office should be fined £500, and be debarred for life from public employment. These clauses, which would have in fact disfranchized the Tory party in every borough, they attempted to pass through the House by a surprise, when the greater part of the Tory party had returned home for The Tories throw out the Corporation Act. Christmas. But so violent and factious a measure called out all the energies of the Opposition. The country gentlemen came crowding back to town, and, after a violent debate, the Whigs were defeated by a small majority. The Tories thought to improve their triumph by reintroducing the Bill of Indemnity without the exceptions, but they quite overrated their strength. Their attempt was defeated by an enormous majority, and a Bill of Pains and Penalties incorporated with the Indemnity Act, which rendered it a mere measure of proscription. But this violent measure was not destined to pass the House. The fierce struggle of parties was so repugnant to the King, any attempt[824] at firm national government appeared to him so hopeless, that, having William threatens to leave England. secretly arranged means of retiring to Holland, he sent for his ministers, and told them it was his intention to withdraw from England, leaving the Queen upon the throne. The threat stupefied the Whigs. To whatever excesses their passion may have led them, they felt that their safety was bound up with the prudent chief they had elected. A passionate scene ensued, in which the Tory Nottingham and the Whig Dissolves Parliament, Jan. 27, 1690, and undertakes Irish war. Shrewsbury vied with each other in intreating William to forego his plan. At length he yielded, but determined that he would escape from the atmosphere of faction which surrounded him, and himself go to carry on the war in Ireland. Having stated that such was his unalterable intention, he prorogued and dissolved the factious Parliament which he had been unable to bring to reason.

The dissolution brought with it a reaction. The Tories in the New Tory reaction in new Parliament. Parliament were as strong as the Whigs had lately been. Even London returned four opponents to the obnoxious clauses of the Corporation Act. As yet the theory of a ministry not having been established, there was no great change, yet the balance among the ministers was somewhat altered. Halifax withdrew from the Government; the Board of Treasury and the Board of Admiralty were both reconstituted, with a larger proportion of Tories, and Caermarthen attained such an amount of power as to make him virtually Prime Minister. Sir John Lowther Venality of Parliament. was put at the head of the Treasury, while the purchase of votes, an art at which Caermarthen was an adept, and which for many years to come was constantly employed by the Government, was intrusted to Sir John Trevor, who became Speaker. William had hitherto tried to act without bribery; he had found his efforts futile, and his influence in Parliament neutralized by the passion of faction. He now, against his own feelings, allowed Caermarthen to have his way. The strange venality of Parliament at this time, and for many years afterwards, may probably be traced to the fact that the secrecy with which debates in Parliament were shrouded prevented the exercise of any wholesome popular opinion upon the vote of the representatives, while the Crown had lost that power of coercing the Opposition which it had enjoyed in the time of the Tudors. It became necessary to purchase what could not be procured by violence, while there was no pressure from without to restrain the cupidity of unprincipled members. With his new Parliament William found himself more free to act.

[825]

Its first duty was the settlement of the revenue. This had hitherto been chiefly collected under Acts passed for short terms only. It was now put on a permanent basis. The hereditary revenues, consisting of the rents of royal domains, fees and fines, post office and ecclesiastical dues, together with that portion of the excise which had been paid to Charles II. as the price for the abolition of feudal services, were given to William and Mary. These revenues amounted to about £400,000 or £500,000 a year. The King had hoped to obtain a grant for life of the other excise and custom duties which had been granted to James, and had amounted to £900,000 a year; but the Tory majority felt as distinctly as their opponents that an income which set the Crown free from the necessity of consulting Parliament might prove a source of evils similar to those of the last reign. They therefore gave William for life only £300,000 a year from the excise, the remaining £600,000, which arose from customs, they granted for four years only.

On other points the Parliament now acted more in accordance with the King's wishes, although the Whigs produced several embarrassing measures, and attempted to compel all place-holders to take an oath abjuring King James. But William was determined to check the course of vengeance; the known wish of the King enabled the Tories to throw out the obnoxious measure, and the revenge of the Whigs Act of Grace, May 20. was finally balked by an Act of Grace from the Crown, which took the place of the unfinished Bill of Indemnity. This declared a perfect oblivion for all political offences up to that moment, excepting from the benefits of the Act only such of the regicides as were still alive, and about thirty others; of whom some were either dead or in safety abroad, while the rest, though in England, were suffered to live unharmed. It is a noble addition to the glory of William that, through his firmness and generosity, no blood was shed at the Great Revolution.

Meanwhile the King had been hastening preparations for his war. The number of the troops in Ireland had been raised to 30,000, at length well armed and well provisioned; a fleet, with still more provisions and equipments, was ready to receive the King at Chester. But at that moment it became very difficult for him to leave the Jacobite plot discovered. country, for the Jacobites had determined to seize the opportunity of his absence for a great effort. Clarendon the Queen's uncle, Dartmouth commander of the fleet which should have opposed William's landing, and Preston[826] James's last Secretary of State, were the leaders of the scheme. Fortunately their secrets were intrusted to a man named Fuller, who at once determined to turn traitor. He gave over to the Privy Council the despatches from the Queen in France, which had been sewn into his buttons. His fellow-messenger was apprehended; when convicted and condemned to death, he too confessed, and the chiefs of the conspiracy were in the hands of the Government. Nevertheless it was a terrible time to be absent from home. An insurrection might break out at any moment, and an invasion was threatened from France.

William was determined that, come what would, he would put an end to the disgraceful state of affairs in Ireland. He placed the Government in the hands of the Queen, assisted by a Council of nine, with Danby William goes to Ireland. for her chief minister, Admiral Russell to advise her on naval, and Marlborough on military affairs, and then crossed to Belfast. Fortunately the two objects of the Jacobites proved incompatible; the threatened invasion so roused the national spirit, that domestic insurrection became impossible. While William advanced southward, Threatened invasion and insurrection. and the Irish army, reinforced by a considerable number of French under Lauzun, fell back behind the Boyne, a great French fleet under Tourville appeared off the Needles. Torrington, the English commander, had been reinforced by a Dutch squadron, yet shrunk from the encounter, and retreated towards the Straits of Dover. The Queen and her Council sent peremptory orders to fight. Jealous of Russell, afraid of risking a great battle with superior numbers, Torrington unwillingly obeyed. Battle of Beachy Head. With shameful policy, he sent the Dutch squadron forward to bear the brunt of the danger, and left it almost unsupported, till, after exhibiting their usual stubborn bravery, the Dutch were compelled to fall back with their shattered ships, and Tourville swept the Channel unopposed. Almost at the same time as the news of this disgraceful defeat reached London, tidings arrived that the allies, under the Prince of Waldeck, had been beaten by Luxemburg at the battle of Spirited behaviour of England. Fleurus. But the very misfortunes which seemed falling upon the nation roused its spirit. The Lord Mayor offered the Queen at once £100,000, 10,000 Londoners, well armed for immediate purposes, and six regiments of foot and two regiments of horse, to be raised at once, without cost to the Crown. The same temper was visible throughout England, and suddenly, after three days of depression, hope was again raised in the national mind by the news of the battle of the Boyne.

[827]

James had determined to make a stand behind that river, which separates the counties of Louth and Meath, falling into the Battle of the Boyne. July 1, 1690. sea at Drogheda. The position was a fairly strong one; the ground rose immediately from the river, and some of William's generals scarcely liked to venture upon an attack. But he felt that some great blow was necessary to retrieve the disasters of the last year, and he gave orders for crossing the river at once. Early in the morning of the 1st of July the English began to advance. Young Schomberg was sent some miles up the river, to cross at the bridge of Slane, and thus turn the left flank of the Irish army. His success in this movement alarmed Lauzun. There was a narrow passage at Duleek, four miles south of the Boyne, where two carriages could scarcely pass between impassable bogs. If Schomberg could secure this pass the Irish would be enclosed in a trap. It was necessary at any price to avoid this danger; Lauzun therefore marched to oppose him, taking with him all the French troops, leaving the Irish alone to hold the river. William commanded the left wing, formed entirely of horse. He fought his way across the river not far above Drogheda. In the centre Schomberg led the main body of the infantry across the fords of Old Bridge. The Irish infantry which should have opposed him, thoroughly demoralized by a year spent under lax discipline and in habits of plunder, fled at the first onset. The cavalry, who had been more carefully drilled under command of the traitor Richard Hamilton, strove in vain to restore the day. For half an hour the struggle in the bed of the river was fierce. The leader of the Protestant refugees was killed, and Schomberg himself, while rallying these troops, and calling out to them, "Come on, gentlemen, there are your persecutors," also fell. But William, having crossed with the left wing, now came up on the flank of the Irish, and the passage was secured. The Irish cavalry were left entirely unsupported by the infantry. Fighting bravely, and with considerable loss, they were slowly driven from the ground. Their leader Richard Hamilton was taken prisoner. James, whose personal courage it had been usual to praise, turned early from the fight and fled towards Dublin. The rout of fugitives hurried through the pass of Duleek, covered by the French infantry, who had been resisting young Schomberg's flank attack all the day. William is said to have been slack in the pursuit; Schomberg's death, and his own exhaustion, after having been thirty-five hours out of the last forty on horseback, may have been the cause of this. On neither side was the loss very great. Of the English about 500 are said[828] to have been killed, of the Irish 1500; but they were chiefly cavalry, the only trustworthy Irish troops.

James, having reached Dublin, summoned the Lord Mayor and principal Catholic citizens to the castle. Forgetful of his own speedy flight, he upbraided the Irish for cowardice, and vowed he would never more command an Irish army. He then at once took flight again, hurried to Waterford, and thence by Kinsale to France. Lauzun and Tyrconnel, with the remains of their army, also thought it desirable to evacuate the capital, which William entered in triumph. For a short time he thought of returning to England, for news of the defeat of Beachy Head and of the battle of Fleurus had reached him, and his presence in London seemed necessary. But when he heard of the courageous spirit showed by the nation, and knew that the only use Tourville had made of his victory was to attack and burn Teignmouth, thus still further exasperating the people, he felt that the crisis was over, that he might remain to complete his victory.

He gradually conquered the country as far as Limerick. There the Irish stood at bay. In the eyes of the French commander nothing could be more useless than the attempt to defend the city. "The walls could be knocked down with roasted apples," said Lauzun. He consequently withdrew his troops, and the Irish were left to themselves, under the command of Sarsfield, the only Irish general who seems to have possessed any military character, and vain though their hopes seemed to Lauzun, the defence of the city was successful. The want of artillery at first checked the proceedings of the besiegers. A daring raid, headed by Sarsfield, destroyed the convoy which was bringing up the siege train. The artillery was buried and exploded, and Sarsfield's party returned unhurt. Then came the heavy rains which occur at this William returns to England. Sept. 6. season in Ireland; the country around the town became a marsh. A final vigorous assault proved unsuccessful, and the siege was raised. This check was somewhat balanced by the success of an expedition planned and Marlborough's success in the south. commanded by Marlborough, which had landed in the south, and in five weeks had conquered both Cork and Kinsale. William returned to England in September, intrusting the government to three Lords Justices, and the management of the war to Ginkel. But no further military operation of importance took place till May in the following year.

The northern and eastern part of the island was in the hands of[829] the English, and brought under some sort of government by the Lords Justices. In that part trade and industry had revived. In the Irish portion of the island, into which the Celtic inhabitants had crowded, there was wild confusion and much distress. Gangs of robbers infested the country, the soldiers were little better themselves than robbers. The currency of James's brass money entirely ruined trade. As usual in Ireland, jealousy of race began to show itself. In the Councils of Regency and of War, to whom the management of James's affairs were intrusted, men not of Irish blood had considerable influence; they were therefore involved in constant quarrels with the purely Irish party. Some order however began to show itself when Tyrconnel returned from France, accompanied by a French general of ability called St. Ruth. St. Ruth devoted himself with extreme energy to discipline the crowd of disorderly bandits whom he had to command, and prepared as well as he could to oppose the advance of Ginkel, who, seconded by Tollemache and St. Ruth comes from France. Mackay, moved in the beginning of June from their headquarters at Mullingar. The French generals, both now and before, had been of opinion that Athlone was the right spot for the Irish to make a stand. It lay almost in the middle of the island, half on one side, half on the other of the Shannon, separating the provinces of Leinster and Connaught. Ginkel determined that he would take this place, which seemed to him to be the key of the Irish frontier. It was a work of no common difficulty. St. Ruth thought the attempt absolutely hopeless. "His master," he said of Ginkel, "ought to hang him for attempting to take the town, mine ought to hang me if I lose it." The half of the town upon the English side of the river was taken on the 19th, but the real difficulty yet remained. Siege of Athlone. The narrow bridge which joined the two towns was gallantly defended. There was a ford lower down, but it was almost impassable. During the rest of the month the efforts of the besiegers were in vain. At last want of supplies compelled them either to succeed or to retreat. A gallant assault on the ford, which was almost up to the necks of the men, proved successful; to the astonishment and anger of St. Ruth the town was taken (June 30).

In spite of the advice of Sarsfield and the rest of the Irish generals, who wisely wished to employ their undisciplined troops in a partisan warfare, St. Ruth determined to fight. He fell back about thirty miles from Athlone, to the hill of Aghrim, where his troops occupied rising ground, covered along its whole front by a deep bog; while along the bottom of the firm ground ran enclosures, which were turned into[830] breastworks. Against these difficulties Ginkel marched. But the Irish, now well posted and well commanded, showed such firmness, that it seemed probable they would make good their position, and evening was already drawing on, when at length Mackay, with the Battle of Aghrim. July 12, 1691. English and Huguenot cavalry, succeeded in passing the bog, and placing his troops on the flank of the Irish army. At this critical moment St. Ruth was killed. With singular folly, his friends concealed his death, not only from his men, but also from his generals. Sarsfield had been ordered to remain immoveable with reserves till St. Ruth ordered his advance, as the order did not come Sarsfield did not move, and the victory of the English thus became complete. The Irish army broke up, and was pursued with relentless cruelty; 6000 or 7000 Irish are said to have been put to death as they fled. The plain beyond the field of battle was so studded with white corpses, that it was described as looking like a pasture covered with flocks of sheep.

This battle completed the conquest of Ireland. The fall of Galway immediately followed, and Ginkel proceeded to attack for a second time the city of Limerick. The chances were now all in favour of the English, while the Irish were thoroughly disheartened by their late defeat. Ginkel's army was well supplied, and all hope of succour was Second siege and capitulation of Limerick. Oct. 3. cut off from the besieged by an English squadron which occupied the Shannon. Under these circumstances a capitulation was granted, the terms of which were fairly favourable to the Irish. By the military treaty, all officers and soldiers who desired it were conveyed to France, under command of their own generals. By the civil treaty, the Roman Catholics were promised the enjoyment of such privileges as they had enjoyed in the reign of Charles II. To all who took the oath of allegiance a perfect amnesty was promised. It is to the disgrace of England that this treaty with regard to the Catholics was not kept. End of the Irish war. For the time, however, Ireland was completely subdued, and the English supremacy established so firmly, that for more than a century, in spite of the difficulties which more than once beset the English Government, no outbreak of the Irishry against the Englishry was even suggested.

In Scotland, at length, the establishment of the Government was Revolution completed in Scotland. equally complete. The members of the factious Club had gone so far as to make common cause with the Jacobites. But in the Parliament which met in 1690, under the management of Melville as Lord High Commissioner, the[831] Government succeeded in obtaining a majority. The union among its opponents was at once dissolved. A general acquiescence met the re-establishment of the Presbyterian form of Church government, and no further difficulties of importance were to be apprehended. William could now turn his attention to the affairs of England and of the Continent.

In England, from the middle of 1690, the Jacobite intrigues continued. The lenity shown by William, after the abortive efforts of the Jacobites during the threatened French invasion, encouraged further conspiracies. It seemed certain that William's presence would be required abroad, and that again during his absence an opportunity would be offered for striking a blow against the Government. In December 1690, a meeting was held of the leading Jacobites, and it was determined that Preston should be sent to St. Germains. He was to beg James to return to England, bringing with him a sufficient French force to secure his success, but at the same time, in the name of the Jacobites, he was to intreat him to allow the Protestant religion to remain undisturbed, and to rule in strict accordance with law. Preston's plot thwarted. Besides this general letter, separate papers were intrusted to Preston, especially one from the nonjuring Bishop Turner, apparently in the name of Sancroft and his brother Bishops. He also took with him notes as to the most vulnerable points of the coast. But the captain of the ship which was engaged to take him over thought it wiser to inform Lord Caermarthen what he was doing, and just as the messengers thought they were safe out of the river, a vessel of remarkable swiftness belonging to Lord Caermarthen's son suddenly appeared alongside, and they were discovered hidden among the gravel which formed the ballast of their vessel.

The capture of Preston, and the disclosure of the Jacobite plot, allowed William to go abroad, leaving the complete investigation of the treason to his ministers in England. On the Continent his diplomacy had been singularly successful. He had brought together a great coalition, and had succeeded in winning the Duke of Savoy, whom the King of France had reckoned among his allies, and whose territory closed the passage of the French to the Spanish dominions in Italy. Success would have cemented the coalition, and induced Denmark and Sweden, which were still wavering, to join it. But in rapidity of action a coalition is seldom a match for a single power, and Louis was able to forestall the action of the allies, and capture the important fortress[832] of Mons, in spite of all William's efforts to relieve it. But this first success, though damaging to the coalition, produced no very important military events; the advantages of the French both in Spain and Italy were counterbalanced by the disasters which befell their allies First crisis of the war over. the Turks in Hungary, and the main armies in Flanders under William and Luxemburg were content merely to watch each other. The first crisis of the war was in fact over. The centre of the coalition was William; his strength was derived from his position as King of England; deprived of that position, he would have lost most of his influence, and the only chance of depriving him of it had been the success of the Irish. It was in Ireland, therefore, that the real crisis of the war had arrived. The defeat of James at the Boyne in 1690, and of St. Ruth at Aghrim almost exactly a year after, had thus rendered all hopes of destroying William's position futile. Once again, in the following year, the same critical situation of affairs arose. With the battle of La Hogue the success of James became hopeless, and though the war continued for many years, there is no other point in it which can really be called critical.

The causes which led James still to cherish hope, and which induced him to persuade Louis to contemplate that invasion of England to which the battle of La Hogue put an end, are to be found in the conduct of the Jacobite party in England: for while William's attention was constantly turned to the Continent, treason found its way among his own immediate ministers. Uncertain even yet of the stability of the new Government, three of the greatest among them determined to be safe on either issue. Admiral Russell, and Godolphin, head of the Treasury, succeeded in obtaining written pardons from James; and Marlborough, whose previous treachery might have been supposed unpardonable, made such a show of repentance, that he obtained the same favour, promising in exchange, when he should be in command of the English troops, to bring them over to the enemy. But even the treachery of Marlborough and of Marlborough. partook of the greatness of his character. His views reached far beyond this commonplace act of treason. He was already devising plans by which the fate of England and of Europe should be in his own hands. As his schemes were not yet ready, though the opportunity he had mentioned to James arose in Flanders, he contrived to excuse himself from performing his promise. But before long circumstances led him to believe that he might carry out his treacherous[833] plans in a way more in accordance with his own wishes. The session of Parliament had been a somewhat stormy one. The immense emoluments of place-holders had excited the anger of the Opposition, and although the extreme measures suggested, which went so far as to cut down all official salaries to £500, had destroyed all attempts at wholesome reform, there was much continued discontent against the Court. There had been bitter quarrels also between the Upper and Lower Houses upon new arrangements of the Treason Law which had been suggested, and all parties seemed to be combined in mistrust and dislike of the favours lavished on foreigners. This state of affairs seemed to open the way for Marlborough's intrigues. In fact, years of rivalry and several bloody wars, coupled with constant outrages on one side or the other on distant colonies, had rendered the Dutch at least as hateful to the English as the French; nor was the feeling diminished by seeing many of the greater and more lucrative offices in the hands of members of the hated nation. By working on this feeling, Marlborough hoped to induce Parliament to petition the King to discharge all foreign troops, a line of conduct which at a subsequent period was actually followed. Once rid of these troops (and he thought it impossible that William, situated as he was, could withstand a formal Parliamentary request), Marlborough relied on his own ability to induce the English army, which was very jealous of William's liking for his own Dutch troops, to further his views. The absolute authority which his wife exercised over the Princess Anne enabled him to secure her adhesion to his plans. She wrote friendly and repentant letters to her father. With the army at his command, and with the Protestant heiress inclined to favour his projects, Marlborough would declare for James, and secure his return without the danger of foreign invasion, without the shedding of a drop of blood. Such at least was the story he told the Jacobites. Men who knew his character mistrusted him. It was more likely, they thought, and this seems to have been his real plan, that he would declare not for King James, but for Princess Anne herself. He would thus become indirectly the ruler of England, and as such the head of the European coalition, and the arbiter of Europe.

Luckily for William, even the Jacobites looked with suspicion on the scheme; Bentinck received information of Marlborough's treachery. The King, placed on his guard, stripped him of all his offices; and when Anne, who knew well the reason of his disgrace, persisted in ignoring it and in[834] bringing the Duchess of Marlborough to Court, the spirit of the Queen The Queen's quarrel with the Princess Anne. was roused, and a bitter quarrel broke out between the sisters. The full details of the plot were not at the time known, and a false plot, invented and brought to light by a wretched informer of the name of Fuller, gave Marlborough an opportunity of ostentatiously clearing his character. He was thus regarded as a martyr to the jealousy of William, and to an unreasonable dislike of her sister on the part of the Queen.

Although for the time the danger of Marlborough's treason seemed to have been escaped, it was undoubtedly the knowledge of its existence, and of the feeling prevalent among William's other ministers, that encouraged James still to retain hopes of success in England.

Before passing to the events to which those hopes gave rise, an incident must be mentioned which, though it had but little effect at the moment, has been always considered as a blot on William's character, and added point to the bitter attacks directed against him towards the close of his reign. Melville had proved unequal to the task of governing Scotland, and the management of the affairs of that country had passed almost entirely into the hands of the Dalrymples, father and son, the elder of whom was President of the Court of Session, having been lately raised to the peerage by the title of Viscount Stair. The son, known as the Master of Stair, was appointed Secretary for Scotland, resident in London. To him now fell the duty of pacifying the Highlands, where the civil war continued to smoulder. Unable to give the Highlanders any effectual support, James had told them that they were at liberty to make peace with the conqueror. It has been already mentioned that local politics had more to do with the conduct of the Highlanders than any question as to the reigning dynasty, and that their hatred directed against the head of the Campbell clan arose largely from the condition of dependence to him in which they found themselves, and which was due in a great degree to unpaid arrears of rent. It was determined now to adopt a plan which had been formerly suggested, and to expend some £15,000 in relieving them from their difficulties. The distribution of this money was unwisely intrusted to Breadalbane, himself a Campbell, and too much interested in the encroachments of that house not to be unpopular. He was profoundly and justly mistrusted by the Highlanders, and the negotiations for the distribution of the money proceeded but slowly, the chief leader of the opposition to the settlement being[835] Macdonald of Glencoe, one of that tribe which had suffered most from the growth of the Campbells. Pressure was put upon the Highlanders to bring the negotiation to a conclusion. A proclamation was issued, promising pardon to all who, before the 31st of December 1691, should swear to live peaceably under the existing Government. All who refused to take this oath were to be regarded as public enemies. As the Government appeared to be in earnest, the chiefs yielded, making it a sort of point of honour to yield as slowly as possible. In this foolish contest of honour Mac Ian of Glencoe was unfortunately the victor. Not till the very day named did he appear at Fort William to take the oaths. When he arrived there he found to his dismay that there was no magistrate to receive them, and he was compelled forthwith to set out through the winter snow to Inverary to find a magistrate. The journey was so difficult that it was not till the 6th of January that he reached Inverary. Under the circumstances, the sheriff there consented, though after the prescribed date, to receive the oath, and sent it, with a certificate stating the circumstances to Edinburgh. The slowness of Macdonald had played into the hands of his enemies the Campbells. Breadalbane and Argyle were at one in their determination to use their advantage, and they found a ready assistant in the Master of Stair, whose views, free from all local feeling, were of the sternest description, and who thought the Highlanders should be treated as uncivilized barbarians. He had been disappointed at the submission of the clans, and rejoiced at the opportunity of making one example. By his means the certificate granted by the sheriff appears to have been suppressed, and an order was drawn up and laid before William, in which, along with other instructions to the commander of the army in Scotland, were these words with regard to the clan of Glencoe: "It will be proper, for the vindication of public justice, to extirpate that set of thieves." William signed the order, probably without carefully reading it, almost certainly without understanding what Dalrymple meant by extirpation. His scheme was one of the utmost barbarity. A detachment of soldiers was sent into the glen as though on a friendly mission. They were kindly received and hospitably kept for more than a week. Then, at a fixed date, when other troops were to have stopped all the passes, they suddenly fell upon their kindly hosts and cruelly murdered them. The plan was but partially carried out. The passes had not been stopped, and not more than thirty-eight of the Highlanders were actually killed. But the villages were destroyed, the cattle driven off, and it is unknown how many more[836] perished as they fled in the dead of winter in the wild mountains which surrounded their glen.

It was just after this event, in March, that William went abroad to resume the Continental war. As usual, his absence was the time of danger for England. An invasion from France had long been planned, and was on the point of taking place. Excited by the constant untruthful account of his agents in England, encouraged by the artful and well-planned treachery of Marlborough and William's other ministers, James had never ceased to press upon Louis the wisdom of an assault upon England. His urgent instances had always been met by the opposition of the war minister Louvois. Conscious that his superiority lay in the organization of large disciplined armies in the field, and led by the experience of his life to look to the great operations of regular warfare on the Rhine and in Italy as the real sources of greatness for France, that minister had always set his face against little wars. He was moreover jealous of the influence of Lauzun at the Court of St. Germains, and had repeatedly pointed out what was very true, the falseness of the Jacobite accounts, the weak character of James, the total untrustworthiness of his resources, and the consequent necessity which would be laid upon France of carrying out such an invasion, in fact, entirely unaided. He had dwelt also upon the strong national feeling of the English, repeatedly exhibited when an invasion was threatened, and the uncertainty, even were the attempt successful, of the continued assistance and alliance of a Prince so ignorant and selfish as James. Nevertheless, in this instance James was right, not that all and more than all that Louvois urged was not true, but that the separation of England from the coalition, the command of the sea, and the blow which would be dealt to William's influence, were worth any sacrifice which France might make. Louvois' arguments, however, had hitherto prevailed; the assistance given to James had been but slight. But Louvois' death (which took place on the 16th of July 1691) opened brighter hopes to the exiled King. Louis was at length persuaded; and a vast plan was made which, had it been carried out as intended, might well have been successful. An army was secretly collected during the winter on the coast of Normandy. Two fleets were assembled at Brest and at Toulon, numbering together 80 ships of the line, and placed under the command of Tourville and D'Estrées, to convoy this army to England. James, misled by his hopes and by the double-dealing of Russell, believed, and made Louis believe, that the English fleet was thoroughly[837] disaffected. Secure in this belief, it was without much anxiety that the invaders found the spring far advanced, while still the weather prevented the junction of the fleets.

But meanwhile all secresy had been lost. The Queen in England, and William in Holland, had put forth all their energy, and a combined Dutch and English fleet of 90 ships was in the Channel under command of Russell. At last one French squadron, that of Tourville, consisting of 44 ships, made its appearance. It was supposed that, weak as it was, it was sufficient for all necessary purposes; it could probably beat the Dutch contingent, and the English fleet was of no account, for neither Russell nor his men were likely to fight. Relying on this false belief, Louis issued peremptory orders to his admiral to cover the invasion, and fight the enemy wherever he met them. But James's folly had already gone far to thwart any hopes based upon the temper of the English. He had issued a Declaration, the work of his counsellor Melfort, excepting from all hope of pardon, not only a long list of gentlemen by name, but whole classes of Englishmen, all judges, jurymen, and lawyers who had been employed in any of the prosecutions of Jacobites, all magistrates who did not instantly (regardless of where they might be) make common cause with him upon his appearance, all spies and informers who had divulged his secrets, even the insignificant fishermen of Sheerness who had hindered him on his first attempt to escape from England. So ridiculous, so ill-judged was the Declaration, that, far from suppressing it, the English Council reprinted it, and distributed it largely, with a few pungent criticisms of their own. Even Jacobites had to confess that at least 500 men were excepted. It is easy to conceive the effect of such a Declaration, when contrasted with William's noble Act of Grace of the preceding year. What James's folly had thus half done the Queen's sagacity completed. Urged on all sides to apprehend known Jacobites, with the denunciations of a plot, perfectly fictitious indeed, but none the less very plausible, the creation of a rascal of the name of Young, just placed in her hands, and fully conscious of the intrigues of Russell her admiral, she wrote a noble letter, expressing her trust and reliance on the patriotism of her fleet, and sent it to Russell, with orders to read it to the captains of his fleet. Russell, at heart a Whig and a devoted lover of his profession, hesitated no longer. He would fight, he said, though King James himself were in the hostile fleet. He went from ship to ship, encouraging the crews, and when Tourville bore down upon him there was no sign of faint-heartedness[838] in the English fleet. Overpowered by numbers, the French fleet fled, broke into fragments, and was destroyed piecemeal. But twelve of the largest ships, with Tourville himself, took refuge under the Forts of La Hogue, under the eyes of James and Marshal Bellefonds, commander of the army. There, as they lay in two divisions in shallow water, they were attacked on two successive days by a flotilla of English boats, under Admiral Rooke; and under the guns of the forts, which were supposed to render them quite secure, they were taken and burnt, while James looked on and saw the destruction of this his last hope.

This great victory over the French, the first which the nation had won for many years, drove the people wild with delight. All the more heavy was their disappointment at the feeble manner in which it was followed up, and at the ill success of the war in the Netherlands in the latter part of the year. An expedition against St. Malo failed through the jealousy of its commanders. Subsequent ill success of the fleet. The broken fleet of Tourville, unable to keep the sea, assumed a new form. French cruisers and privateers covered the ocean, and hundreds of English merchantmen fell a prey to them. The commercial world suffered more heavily from the individual enterprises of men such as the privateer captains Jean Bart and Dugouay Trouin than from the great united fleets of France, and almost regretted the victory which had called to life such enemies.

The chief incidents of the war in the Netherlands—the fall of the great fortress of Namur, and the battle of Steinkirk—were very characteristic of the art of war at this period. It was a time of slow, methodical, and scientific movement in the field, but of great advance in the art of attacking and defending fortresses, which in the hands of Vauban and Cohorn was so far perfected, that for more than a century no important change was made in the system they advocated. Louis did not press his advantage; after taking Namur his army was diminished by detachments sent to other quarters, and William thought he saw an opportunity of striking a heavy blow against his weakened opponent. A traitor in the English army had habitually informed Marshal Luxemburg of every movement of the allied troops. His correspondence was discovered, and with a pistol at his breast he was forced to write false information which William dictated. Having thus, as he hoped, Battle of Steinkirk. Aug. 4. misdirected the vigilance of his enemy, the King determined upon a surprise. The unexpected difficulties offered by the country prevented its success.[839] Luxemburg got his troops into order with extraordinary rapidity, and the English division under Mackay soon found itself hotly engaged. It was successful in its first efforts, but the household troops of Louis were sent against it, and Count Solmes withheld the supports which should have come to its assistance. The division was nearly destroyed, and the anger of the English blazed up fiercely against the Dutch general, who, set over the head of the English commanders, thus basely deserted their troops.

It was thus, with many causes of discontent, that, upon the return of William to England, the Parliament assembled. Mismanagement had neutralized the great victory of La Hogue; the discovery of Preston's plot had not been followed by a single act of justice upon the Jacobites, a sharp quarrel had broken out between the Queen and her sister, which, as Marlborough's treachery was unknown, seemed merely capricious and causeless; the war in the Netherlands had been a mere disastrous repetition of the last year's campaign; William's chief misfortune was commonly attributed to the mismanagement, or perhaps the treachery of the Dutch general; the House of Lords had been alienated by the apprehension of two of its members, who had been put to their recognizances, and no further charge brought against them; the harvest in England had failed, so that corn had doubled its natural price; and the police had grown so lax that highwaymen in gangs of twenty and thirty infested the country, and robbed almost within sight of London. Both Lords and Commons consequently entered warmly upon the consideration of the state of the nation. But the continued jealousy which existed between the two Houses brought their inquiries to nothing. As yet neither Ministry nor Opposition was sufficiently organized to secure the advantages either of stable government or of thorough reform. The administration was carried on as before with all the evils of a Ministry divided against itself, in the presence of a factious and disorganized Opposition.

Some important steps were however taken with regard to finance. There was still a tolerably unanimous feeling in favour of the war, and money had to be procured. In the arrangements for supplying the necessary money, the financial talents of Charles Montague, a young and rising member of the Whig party, first became conspicuous. Early known as a man of letters, and the author in company with Prior of "The Town and Country Mouse," he had been introduced to the King by his patron the Earl of Dorset, and, after strengthening his position by a marriage with the Dowager[840] Countess of Manchester, had entered political life, and had been appointed one of the Lords of the Treasury in 1691. The financial measures recommended consisted of a reorganization of the Land Tax and of the first establishment of Government loans. The extraordinary expenses of Government had in early times been met by subsidies. These subsidies were levied both on moveables and on land, but were chiefly supported by an assessment on the land at the nominal rate of four shillings in the pound. Land had increased greatly in value as the demand for it increased, while gold and silver had fallen greatly in value after the discovery of America. In the assessment for subsidies neither of these circumstances was taken into consideration. The four shilling land tax had come in reality to be less than twopence in the pound. During the Commonwealth, and subsequently, a different method of taxation had been followed. The sum to be raised had been first determined, and each landowner had been called upon to pay a proportional share. In 1692 the Land Tax was reintroduced and reorganized. A new valuation was made, and upon this basis a tax was annually laid upon the land varying from a minimum of one shilling in time of peace to four shillings Origin of the National Debt. Jan. 20, 1693. in times of emergency. Four shillings on this new valuation produced about £2,000,000. This sum fell considerably short of what was required. In addition, therefore, a loan, which is the origin of the National Debt, was raised. Money was plentiful in the country, and was so easily obtained, that bubble companies and stock-jobbing had become rife. Montague determined to turn some of this superfluous wealth to the use of the country, and to spread the payment of the debt over several generations. The plan at first adopted in raising these loans was not exactly the same as our present method of perpetual funding. The lenders were life annuitants, and the interest of the loan was secured on new duties on beer and other liquors. As each annuitant died his annuity was divided among the survivors, till their number was reduced to seven, who would at that time be naturally in receipt of an enormous interest on their original loan. After that, on the death of each of those seven, his annuity lapsed to Government. The whole debt would therefore be extinguished at the death of the longest-lived annuitant.

The money thus collected was soon spent upon another disastrous campaign. Louis, in spite of the exhausted condition of his country, made extraordinary efforts in all directions. As far as the English only were concerned, the two great events of the campaign were the battle of Landen and the destruction[841] of the Smyrna fleet. Louis, using his late conquest, Namur, for his point of departure, had formed two armies, one under Boufflers, the other under Luxemburg, and hoped to repeat the triumph of former years by the capture of either Liège or Brussels. But he found it was impossible to take either of those cities without fighting a pitched battle with William. In spite of the earnest request of his generals, he withdrew to Versailles, and removed the army of Boufflers to the Rhine. Though thus weakened, Luxemburg, by a threatened Battle of Landen. July 19. attack upon Liège, induced William to reduce his forces to save that town, and then falling upon him at Landen, defeated him after a battle, the stubbornest and bloodiest of the war. William's skill somewhat neutralized the effect of his defeat, and Charleroi was the only new acquisition of the French in the Low Countries.

The loss of the Smyrna fleet made perhaps even greater impression upon the English than the defeat of Landen. The fleet, in which was accumulated more than a year's supply for the Eastern markets, and which numbered 400 ships, was to be convoyed in safety from London through the Straits of Gibraltar. After passing the Channel Loss of the Smyrna fleet. June. unopposed, the English admirals, supposing that the danger was over, withdrew towards England with their ships of war, and the trading fleet passed onward, guarded only by Rooke with about twenty men of war. Off St. Vincent it fell in with the whole combined navy of France, for the squadrons of Toulon and Brest had joined, and were lying in wait for their rich prey off the coast of Spain. The convoy was completely broken up, many vessels destroyed, while the others fled for safety in all directions. The loss of the English was estimated at many millions. The disaster would certainly have been much worse had not two Dutch ships which formed part of the convoy gallantly sacrificed themselves, and engaged no less than eighteen of the enemy's fleet.

In other parts of Europe the armies of France were equally successful. Catalonia had been invaded and Rosas taken. Catinat had defeated the Duke of Savoy in the great battle of Marsiglia (Oct. 3). The Turks had compelled the Germans to raise the siege of Belgrade. Yet, in spite of these successes, France was so worn out, that hints of a desire for peace began to reach the English King.

The possibility of being called upon to settle this great point, and the necessity of taking speedy advantage of his enemy's weakness, brought more clearly home to William the great difficulty which had[842] beset his reign. For the position which was necessary to enable him William's difficulty with regard to his Parliament. to engage authoritatively in the affairs of Europe, for the money required for the pay of his army, and for the subsidies by which alone the allies were kept true to their engagements, he was dependent upon Parliament. For at the Revolution the Parliament had taken upon itself the supreme authority of the nation. Yet upon that Parliament he was unable to rely; for the representative body, though conscious of its power, had not yet learnt to use it advantageously. It was that worst of all forms of supreme power, a large disorganized assembly. Well aware that, both as head of a confederacy and as a general, freedom of action was necessary for him, William had kept as far as possible the management of foreign affairs in his own hands, and had sought to win the favour of all parties by a judicious impartiality. In the main he had been well supported in his foreign policy; but faction was so rife, the increasing divergence of opinion so great, and the capricious character of the Lower House so evident, that he could take no important step with confidence. He could not answer for a year's continuance of the war spirit, nor be certain that any steps he might take with regard to peace would be acknowledged even by his own ministers. It became necessary, if possible, to introduce some order and organization into this uncertain body. It would be better to risk a formal opposition of a certain number, and be sure of unanimity in his own administration, than to be at the caprice of a He forms a united Whig ministry. popular assembly. William therefore listened to the suggestions of Sunderland, and determined to place himself entirely in the hands of the Whig party, that party to which he owed his elevation to the throne, and which was pledged to the continuation of the war. During the next two years a change in ministry was gradually carried out, which ended by the establishment in 1696 of the first united ministry in English history. It was led by the chiefs of the Whig party, of which the leaders were Somers, Halifax, Russell and Wharton (known afterwards as the Junto).

Parliament during these years was occupied in financial arrangements to meet the constant drain of the war, and in perpetual party struggles which terminated in the complete triumph of the Whigs, and in the substitution of the leaders of that party for their Tory rivals in all the chief offices of the administration. The first trial of strength between the parties arose upon the question of the naval administration of the former year. The whole nation smarted under[843] the disasters which had followed on the great victory of La Hogue, Party struggles. which the Whigs had attributed not only to the maladministration of the two Tory admirals to whom the fleet had been intrusted, but also to treachery. It was impossible, they argued, that Louis could have denuded the Channel of his fleet, and allowed a junction of his admirals so far south as St. Vincent, unless he had had good reason to believe that the rich prey he desired would fall into his hands but weakly guarded. The Tories, who were unable to deny the maladministration, were anxious to exclude the word "treacherous" from the motion. The Whig party was however triumphant, and by a considerable majority the word was retained. But though the general assertion of treason was thus made, the Commons, as was not unusual, shrunk from fixing the treason upon any particular person, and each individual accused was acquitted by a small majority. Enough had been done, however, to give the King a fair opportunity of re-establishing Russell, the great enemy of Nottingham the Secretary, at the head of the Admiralty, and thus taking one step towards his Whig ministry. It was impossible for Nottingham to remain in office with Russell; he was consequently removed from the Secretaryship, and a fresh vacancy thus created, which, after some delay, caused by the conscientious scruples of Shrewsbury, who felt keenly the fault he had once committed in tampering with the Jacobites, was filled by that nobleman, one of the Whig chiefs. At the close of the session, therefore, William found himself with most of his chief officers belonging to the Whig party. Trenchard and Shrewsbury were Secretaries. Russell was the head of the Admiralty. Somers was Lord Keeper, and Montague Chancellor of the Exchequer. The only two Tories of importance left were Caermarthen, Lord President, and Godolphin, at the head of the Treasury. But the character of the latter minister led him to devote himself almost exclusively to his official business, of which he was master. Caermarthen was therefore, in fact, the only important element of discord in the administration.

Montague owed his elevation to the continued success of his financial plans. A fresh loan, known as the Lottery Loan—because though the whole rate of interest was low, in exceptional cases chosen by Establishment of the Bank of England. lottery it was very high—was successfully negotiated, and more important than this, the Bank of England was triumphantly established. Banking with private goldsmiths had come into fashion within the last two reigns, when the convenience of cheques in the place of ready-money payments[844] had become obvious, while the advantage to the banker who had the use of the ready money was also plain. The fault of the system was its insecurity, which had been proved by the not unfrequent bankruptcy of one or other of the banking goldsmiths. A Scotchman of the name of Paterson had some years previously suggested the plan of a national bank, by which the Government should obtain some of the advantages of the banker, and the public, while gaining the convenience of cheques, should have a better security than private goldsmiths offered. This scheme Montague now adopted. He borrowed rather upwards of a million, and formed the lenders into a banking company, allowing them to treat the loan to Government as part of their capital, the interest of which, secured upon taxes, gave them the requisite supply of ready money. They were bound to pursue no other business except banking, yet, even with this restriction, so desirable did the plan seem, that it was at once triumphantly carried through. As a contingent advantage to Government, it is to be observed that the company, which included many of the chiefs of the moneyed interest, were pledged, for their own preservation, to support the present settlement of the throne. Their existence depended upon the regular payment of the interest upon their loan, which it was scarcely possible that the Jacobites, if successful, would pay. The importance of this point became very obvious afterwards, when, in more than one crisis, the credit of Government was saved by advances from the Bank. One other important measure The Triennial Act passed. Dec. 1694. was carried by this Parliament, and that also was in accordance with the principles of the Whigs. This was the Triennial Act, limiting the duration of Parliament to three years. The King, always jealous of his prerogative, had already once refused his assent to this Bill; but now, having placed himself in Whig hands, he withdrew his opposition, and the Bill was passed.

He was indeed in no position to enter into a struggle with his Parliament. A great blow was falling on him, which unhinged him more than any difficulties or defeats had yet done. This was the Death of Queen Mary. Dec. 20. death of his wife, who had sickened of the smallpox, and, after a short illness, died on the 20th of December 1694. Her death caused universal sorrow in England and among the Protestant interest on the Continent, while it raised the hopes of James and his friends, who believed, not without a show of reason, that William succeeded in holding his place chiefly by means of the popularity of his Queen. Their hopes proved ill founded, for though at first the King seemed so broken-hearted that he declared[845] he could never again lead an army, when once he had conquered his first grief, he resumed his old energy, and success such as he had never yet met with attended his efforts both at home and abroad.

Meanwhile in England there was no cessation in the strife of parties. The Whigs pursued their triumphant course, and combined to remove the last of their opponents from the Government. Trevor, a Tory, had in the early part of the reign been made Speaker of the House, chiefly for the purpose of carrying out Caermarthen's plans of corruption. Employed in corrupting others, it was not likely that he should be himself above corruption. Suspicions of his venality having arisen, the Whigs proceeded to examine the accounts of the City of London and of the East India Company, which, after much contest, had obtained a renewal of its charter. The Committee found that the City had paid Sir John Trevor in the preceding session 1000 guineas for forwarding a local Bill. The proof was too clear to be questioned. Trevor from the chair had to put the question whether he was guilty or not of high crime and misdemeanour, and to declare before all men that "the Ayes had it." He saved himself from the unutterable ignominy of announcing his own expulsion by feigning illness. A new Speaker, Foley, who did not belong clearly to either party, was elected in his place.

The accounts of the East India Company afforded the Whigs even greater triumph. Sir Thomas Cook, who was the head of the Company, confessed to having disbursed very large sums to secure the charter, but would give no particular accounts. The Commons, determined not to be thwarted, passed a Bill condemning him to refund all the money thus spent, in addition to a heavy fine, unless he made a full confession. In the Upper House the Bill was strongly opposed by Lord Caermarthen, now Duke of Leeds, who, laying his hand upon his heart, solemnly averred that he had no personal interest in the matter, and was moved by public considerations only. It was finally arranged that a joint Committee of the two Houses should inquire into the expenditure of the money that had been secretly spent, and that if Cook confessed he should be held guiltless. The joint Committee met; the King and the Duke of Portland, whose guilt in the matter had been suggested by the Tories, were proved perfectly innocent. But £5000 were traced, if not to the Duke of Leeds himself, at all events to his confidential man of business. Articles of impeachment were made out against him. They could not, however, be brought forward, because the man of[846] business, who would have supplied necessary evidence, had made his escape to Holland. The Duke of Leeds continued to assert his innocence, but confessed that he had allowed money to be paid to his steward, considering this a very different thing from taking it himself. It also appeared that the money had been refunded the very morning of the first sitting of the joint Committee. Though and of Caermarthen. May. foiled of their impeachment, the Whigs and the Commons had done their work. Leeds was obliged to retire from active life, and was never afterwards employed in the administration. The sole discordant member of the Government was thus got rid of.

Abroad likewise affairs took a turn more favourable to England and the Whigs. Just before the death of Mary the war had entered into a somewhat new phase. The navies of the two great powers had transferred the scene of operations to the Mediterranean. Thither Tourville had gone from Brest, and thither Russell, with the English fleet, had followed him. He had found means to keep the French fleet in harbour, and to do good service to the general cause by the relief of Barcelona, which was on the point of falling into the hands of the French.

The absence of the French fleet from Brest, which led to the supposition that the harbour must be unguarded, seemed to afford an opportunity for an attack in that quarter. An expedition was planned; the forces were intrusted to Talmash, while the Duke of Leeds' son Caermarthen commanded the fleet. It gave occasion for a new act of villany on the part of Marlborough; though the plan was kept a profound secret, he contrived to worm it out, and as had happened once or twice before in his career, he used his knowledge only to lay the details of the plan before James, and to secure the destruction of the English expedition. Vauban, the great French engineer, was sent down to re-fortify the place. Every vantage-ground was crowned with batteries, and into the trap thus laid for him Talmash had rushed headlong to meet his death, in company with 700 English soldiers (June 7, 1694). Marlborough's treachery in this instance was rather personal than political. Talmash alone of the English generals could in any way compete with him, and he knew that at his death or failure William, who it must be recollected did not know the full extent of his treachery, would be obliged to restore him to his command. His treacherous plan succeeded. He was again employed, though so thoroughly mistrusted, that William[847] refused when he went abroad to give the regency to Anne, which he well knew would be but to give it to Marlborough. But the death of Mary, which occurred at the close of the year, while it excited the other Jacobites to action, for a time rendered Marlborough true to William; for it was followed by a reconciliation between the King and the Princess Anne, and Marlborough was now content to wait till the King's death for the completion of his designs. The more earnest Jacobites followed a different course, and it was in the midst of a conspiracy aimed against his life by Fenwick, Charnock, and Porter, that William set out for Flanders (May 1695).

In that country he had no longer the same formidable enemy with whom to contend. Luxemburg was dead, and his place was ill supplied by Villeroy and Louis' illegitimate son, the Duke of Maine, who was sent to learn the art of war under him. As Flanders was Campaign in Flanders. 1695. expected to be the great seat of war, the bulk of the French army was placed under Villeroy in that country. Boufflers, with 12,000 men, guarded the Sambre. William, however, had set his heart upon regaining Namur. Judicious feints deceived Villeroy as to his intentions, and suddenly his own army, that of the Brandenburgers and that of the Elector of Bavaria, marched straight against the city. Boufflers had just time to throw himself with his troops into the town. A body of troops under the Prince of Vaudemont had been left to watch Villeroy in Flanders. When that general advanced, the Prince could not hold his isolated position, and only succeeded in making good his retreat through the cowardice of the Duke of Maine. Villeroy advanced almost unopposed. He took the towns of Dixmuyde and Deynse, the garrisons of which, contrary to the terms of capitulation, were sent prisoners to France; and hoping by threatening the capital to draw William from Namur, he approached and ruthlessly and uselessly bombarded Brussels. But, undisturbed by Villeroy's manœuvres, William energetically pursued the siege. He was assisted by Cohorn, who had originally fortified the town, and had seen it taken by the skill of his great rival Vauban. Vauban had since much increased the fortifications, and Cohorn was eager to regain his honour by capturing it. At length, after some fierce assaults, in which the English under Lord Cutts, who for his bravery under fire got the nickname of "the Salamander," had greatly distinguished themselves, the town surrendered, but the castle still held out. It became evident to Villeroy that the actual presence of his army could alone raise the siege. Drawing troops from all the neighbouring[848] garrisons, he approached with 80,000 men. But William now felt himself strong enough to give him battle without withdrawing from his operations. For three days the armies remained in presence, and William lay expecting the attack, but Villeroy judged his position too strong to be taken, and withdrew. The fate of the fortress was now sealed, but Boufflers thought that his honour demanded that he should stand an assault; nor was it till the English had succeeded at the cost of 2000 men in making a lodgment in the Surrender of Namur. Aug. 26. place that he consented to treat, and for the first time in history a French marshal surrendered a fortress to a victorious enemy. Having gone through the ceremony of surrender, Boufflers was much surprised and enraged at being arrested on his road to France. His angry exclamations against the breach of the terms of capitulation were met by the reply, that William was only following the example of Louis with regard to the garrisons of Dixmuyde and Deynse. He was kept in honourable imprisonment till those garrisons were restored.

It was thus no longer as a beaten and unfortunate, though skilful general, that William returned to England. The Triennial Bill having come into operation, the present Parliament would have come to a natural conclusion the following year. It had on the whole acted so much in favour of William and the Whigs, that William, could he have prolonged it, would probably have been willing to do so. But he wisely judged that it would be better to call his new Parliament while still popular from his successes, than to wait the chances of the New Whig Parliament. Nov. 22. future year. The event proved that he was right. A brilliant triumphant progress through England was followed by the return of a Parliament with an immense majority favourable to the war and to the Whig interests. Four Whigs were returned for London. Westminster followed the example of the neighbouring city, and so great was the enthusiasm that even the great Tory leader Seymour, whose interest in Devonshire was believed to render his return for Exeter sure, was defeated in that town. The Parliament thus assembled had very important work before it, and, acting in unison with the King, his ministry, and the whole country, carried it through to a noble conclusion.

This important work was the re-establishment of the currency. The English coin had originally been of hammered metal, it was constantly liable to inequality in weight, and being left with raw edges, easily clipped. In[849] Charles II.'s reign this defect had been partially cured by the use of machinery, and words had been printed round the edges of the coin; but as the bad hammered coinage was allowed to be current side by side with the new milled coinage, the better coinage had either been hoarded or had left the country, as invariably happens, when some part of the coinage of the country is of less intrinsic value than the rest. Consequently the evil became worse. Coin was more constantly clipped, and as it wore out was more easily counterfeited. Its defects at length became so obvious that shopkeepers refused to take it except by weight; thus causing heavy suffering to the lower orders, who generally received their wages by tale, and had to pay by weight, and every little transaction became the occasion of a dispute. So far had the evil gone, that when trials were made in different parts of the country, the coinage had proved on an average to be little more than half its proper weight. A re-issue of coin became absolutely necessary. The arrangements fell into the hands of Somers and Montague, of John Locke the philosopher, and Isaac Newton the mathematician. In devising their plan two great questions met them. By whom should the expense be borne? How could the inconvenience of the short supply of coin which must inevitably follow when the present coinage was called in be best alleviated? A very large minority wished to avoid the difficulty by keeping the present money in circulation, but lowering its nominal value. This plan, which was in fact to perpetrate a fraud upon all creditors, was not likely to find favour with the four sagacious men with whom the question rested. Two schemes recommended themselves chiefly to their attention. Locke proposed that, after a certain fixed date, the coin should be valued by weight only. This prevented any deficiency in the circulating medium, as the present money would not be withdrawn from circulation, but it threw the whole expense of bringing the nominal and real value of the coin into harmony, not on the Government, but on the individual possessors of the coin. It was evidently fairer that, where the evil was a national one, the nation should bear the expense. Somers suggested that, with extreme secresy, a proclamation should be prepared, saying that in three days the hammered coin should pass by weight only, but that those who held it might bring it in parcels to the mint, where it should be counted and weighed, and immediately restored, with a written promise of a future payment of the difference between the nominal and real value of the coin. Thus the money would be withdrawn from circulation only for the[850] short time necessary to count it, while the nation would subsequently pay the difference. But for this plan secresy and suddenness were necessary, or the intervening period would have given opportunity and temptation for unlimited mutilation of the coinage. Secresy would have rendered it impossible to consult Parliament, and Montague, in the existing state of party feeling, shrank from the responsibility this implied. It was therefore determined to act in a perfectly honest, simple and straightforward manner; and immediately on the opening of Parliament, a Bill was framed in accordance with certain resolutions previously taken. By these it was declared that the old standard should be kept up, that milled coin should alone be used, that the loss should fall on the nation, not on individuals, and that the 4th of May following should be the last day on which hammered coin should be allowed to be used. The advantage of the good understanding between the Government and the Bank now became evident. To meet the expense of the new coinage, £1,200,000 was wanted. The Bank advanced it without difficulty on the security of a window tax, which took the place of the much hated hearth tax, and which lasted on almost to our own time. At last the critical day, the 4th of May, drew near. Fortunately the country was in an enthusiastic mood. Two great Jacobite plots, closely connected, which had been concocted during the previous summer, had been discovered. These were Berwick's plot for a general insurrection of the Jacobites and for an invasion from France; and a plot concocted at St. Germains, intrusted to Barclay, for the assassination of William on his road from Kensington to Richmond. Invasion and assassination are the two forms of conspiracy which the English people cannot bear; and the full discovery of these schemes, with the proved certainty that both Louis and James were fully conscious of all their atrocious details, roused the nation for an instant to an unusual unanimity of enthusiasm, and enabled Parliament to set on foot a great association, signed by hundreds of thousands, who pledged themselves to stand by the King, to support the war, and to pursue with vengeance any attempt upon his life. Good tempered and loyal though the people were the crisis was a fearful one. The operations of the mint were very slow. £4,000,000 of the old coinage lay melted in the treasury vaults. As yet scarcely any new silver had appeared. Money was not to be had either for trade or for private payments. Large employers somehow contrived, with a certain quantity of the old coinage which had not been clipped, to pay the wages. But the greater part of England lived on credit; and it is probable that even thus the crisis would[851] scarcely have been got over, had it not been for an expedient of Montague's, who issued Government securities, bearing interest at threepence a day on £100. These are what are known now as Exchequer bills, and form a floating debt due by Government. They were eagerly used, and with the paper issues of the Bank and the free use of cheques and credit by all, the dangerous time was tided over.

But the most alarming feature was not the difficulty in the commercial world, but the difficulty felt by Government and by the King himself in provisioning the troops and carrying on the war. In the midst of the commercial crisis the Bank of England had met with great difficulties; the goldsmiths, who had always hated their great rival, took the opportunity of attempting to destroy it by villanous means, they bought up all the Bank paper on which they could lay hands, and suddenly bringing it forward, demanded immediate payment. The Bank directors with great courage gained time by refusing to pay the nefarious claim, and referring their enemies to the courts of law. By means of calls on their subscribers they continued to pay by far the greater part of the private and just claims upon them, but they did not appear to be in a position to assist the King when he suddenly wrote home to say that £200,000 were absolutely necessary.

William had hoped that his wants would have been met by the establishment, in accordance with a favourite plan of the Tories, of a Land Bank, as a rival to the Bank of England. This somewhat absurd scheme had been invented by a projector of the name of Chamberlain, who supposed that every proprietor of land possessing that security ought to have the disposal of at least as much money as his land was worth, and therefore suggested a bank which should lend money entirely upon landed security, overlooking the difficulty that land is not always at hand and payable on demand as money is. Harley, the representative of the Tories, now offered to advance the Government £2,500,000 at 7 per cent. The payment of his interest was to be secured by a tax upon salt. If half that sum should be subscribed before August, and half of that half paid up, the subscribers were to be incorporated as the Land Bank. This Bank was expressly intended to suit the wants of the country gentry, and to injure the moneyed interest. The company was therefore bound to lend no money but on mortgage, and to lend on mortgage at least half a million a year. It was not allowed to receive more than 3½ per cent. interest on these mortgages. Now,[852] as the ordinary rate of interest on mortgages was nearly 7 per cent. it was plain that no capitalist would lend his money at half of the ordinary profits. It might have been plain also that the landed gentry whose chief object was to borrow were not likely to lend. It was not therefore very obvious where the capital was to come from. The King, however, hoping to obtain money on easy terms, headed the list of subscribers with £5000. When the Land Bank was called upon to advance its promised loan, it was found that the whole subscriptions consisted of no more than £6200. So eager was the Government for money, that it offered to give the Bank its charter in exchange for a loan of £40,000 only, but the subscriptions never rose beyond £7500, and the scheme proved completely abortive.

The King was compelled therefore to apply to the Bank of England, which by his patronage of the Land Bank he had done his best to injure. True to their political creed, a full court of subscribers consented to advance the necessary £200,000, without one dissentient voice. The Government was saved, and the connection between the Bank of England and the Whig party sealed for ever. Meanwhile, Newton's efforts as Master of the Mint had been ultimately successful. Provincial mints had been established, and from them and from the mint in London £120,000 of coin was turned out every day. By August the crisis was over, and a period of unbroken commercial prosperity began.

But although marks of commercial prosperity were already visible, the financial difficulty was not entirely over. When William, who had been abroad during the worst of the difficulty, opened Parliament upon his return (Oct. 20), he had to confess that, although the crisis had passed without disturbance in England or great disaster abroad, there was still need for some exhibition of continued firmness on the part of Parliament. In fact, the plan of reducing the standard of the coin was so plausible, and had impressed itself so deeply on the ignorance of the masses, that a very large party both in and out of Parliament were still anxious to have recourse to that step, and till all chance of such a measure was gone no speculators were willing to put the new money in circulation, and it was constantly hoarded. Consequently a scarcity of money still prevailed; and not only in England, but throughout Europe, there was a very general feeling that England was ruined, that the source of wealth which had hitherto supplied the European coalition with the means of war was dried up, and that peace was inevitable. But in the midst of these difficulties the triumph of the Whigs was[853] complete. The Parliament stood firm, and carried by a triumphant Credit of England restored. majority three resolutions, which destroyed all the hopes of the enemies of England. First, that the Commons would assist the King to prosecute the war with vigour; secondly, that under no circumstances should the standard of money be changed; thirdly, the Parliament pledged itself to make good the deficiencies in Parliamentary funds established since the King's accession. The first promise was at once abundantly fulfilled by munificent grants for the war; the second caused the immediate production of the hoarded coin; while upon the third was framed Montague's plan known by the name of the General Mortgage. Taxes set apart to meet the interest of various loans had proved insufficient. The deficit was no less than £5,160,000. It was now ordered that, should the proceeds of the old funds and new taxes now set aside for the purpose prove insufficient, the general funds of the country should be charged with the liquidation of the debts. By such means as these the credit of the country was finally re-established.

The discovery of the Assassination plot, and the enthusiasm to which it gave rise, has been already alluded to. It was one of two Jacobite conspiracies, matured in the middle of the crisis, when it was a common belief that the Government would never be able to pass securely through the dangers which surrounded it. One of these conspiracies was for a general rising of the Jacobites and a simultaneous invasion of England from France. The completion of this plot was intrusted to James's natural son, the Duke of Berwick, and in it, had it been carried out, would have been involved all the best of the Jacobite gentry of England. But side by side with it was a baser conspiracy, among the more unprincipled and desperate friends of James, for the assassination of the King. The management of this conspiracy, which is known by the name of the Assassination Plot, was intrusted to Sir George Barclay, a Scotch refugee. It seems certain that the scheme was sanctioned by James himself, as Barclay was sent over with a few select followers and a considerable sum of money, authorised to do any acts of hostility which might conduce to the service of the King. It was also certainly known to the Duke of Berwick, who was informed of every step in its progress. He was too honourable himself to take a declared part in it, but did not feel called upon in any way to interfere in the matter. His own mission proved unsuccessful. The English Jacobites were willing to rise, but not till a French army[854] appeared in the country. On the other hand, Berwick could only assure them that, after the failures which had already taken place, no French army would enter the country till the Jacobites were actually in arms. On this point the negotiations broke down, and Berwick, unwilling to be mixed up with the darker schemes of Barclay, hastened to leave England before the fatal day should arrive. This day, the 15th of February, had been already fixed. Barclay had succeeded in collecting about forty men, some supplied from France, some English Jacobites of desperate character. With these it was determined to assault the King on his return from hunting in Richmond Forest. Every Saturday he was in the habit of going thither, crossing the Thames by boat near Turnham Green. The spot chosen was a narrow swampy lane leading up from the river. But, just before the time fixed, William received from Portland information that there was a design upon his life. He was induced to postpone his hunting, although he gave little faith to the information, which had been received from most untrustworthy sources. But in the course of the following week fresh information was brought by a gentleman of the name of Pendergrass, who was known to be an honourable man. Every precaution was taken to allay the suspicions of the conspirators, and on the very day when the attempt should have been made several of the leaders were arrested. The troops were set in motion, the Lord Lieutenant of Kent repaired to his county, and Russell hastened to take command of the fleet to oppose the intended invasion. French troops had been already collected at Calais, and Louis, who had been informed of the scheme, though he had not actually authorized it, had determined to take advantage of the opportunity its success would offer.

The measures taken proved sufficient. When the King went in state to Parliament, and explained what had been done, the enthusiasm of the House was roused. Two Bills were rapidly passed, the one suspending the Habeas Corpus Act, the other ordering that the Parliament should not be dissolved by the death of William, and an association was set on foot by which the House of Commons bound itself to stand by King William, to avenge his murder, and to support the order of succession settled by the Bill of Rights. Throughout the country the feeling excited was very strong. Means were taken in all the cities of England to search thoroughly for conspirators, the house of one of them was razed to the ground by the populace, and one after the other most of them were captured. Three of them, Charnock, King and Keyes, were[855] brought to trial. Only a few months before, a Bill which had Arrest and execution of the conspirators. occupied the public attention through several sessions had received the royal assent. By this the procedure in the case of trials for treason had been changed. Before the passing of that Bill a prisoner charged with treason had not been allowed to see the indictment before he was brought to the bar. He could not put his witnesses upon oath, nor compel their attendance, nor was he allowed the service of counsel, while the Crown enjoyed all the advantages of which he was deprived. The Bill enacted that all the above-named disabilities should be removed. The opposition to this Bill had been grounded chiefly upon the advantage it appeared to give to traitors at a time when the Government was notoriously open to their attacks; and Parliament had, by way of compromise, postponed till the 25th of March 1696 (at that time the beginning of the new year) the operation of the Act. The prisoners claimed, not without some show of reason, a postponement of the trial till that date. But their request was overruled, the trial was proceeded with at once, and they were all condemned and executed (March 24).

But, by the witness of two of the informers, Porter and Goodman, a more important person had been implicated, if not in the present Trial of Sir John Fenwick. Aug. plot, yet at least in one of a similar nature which had been set on foot immediately after the Queen's death. This was Sir John Fenwick, a man highly connected, who had brought himself prominently forward as a Jacobite intriguer, and had earned the personal dislike of William by a public insult to the Queen. By the law of Edward VI. two witnesses were necessary to prove the guilt of treason, and Fenwick's chief hopes lay in his being able to bribe either Porter or Goodman to leave the country. His first attempt on Porter failed. Porter informed the Government, received the money, and gave up the agent who offered it him. Fenwick then attempted to gain time by making a confession. This was drawn up with great art: while none of the real facts were brought to light, accusations, only too well founded upon fact, were brought against Marlborough, Godolphin, Russell, and Shrewsbury. It was asserted that Marlborough had promised to bring over the army, Russell the navy, while Godolphin only held office by the leave of the exiled King. William, with great wisdom, although he knew how much truth there was in these accusations, absolutely ignored them, and ordered the trial of Fenwick to be proceeded with without delay. But some of the contents of the confession became known, and the[856] Whigs decided that, for the honour of the party, it could not be passed over in silence. Godolphin, the last remaining Tory in the Government, they would have been unwilling to acquit; he was induced to resign, and the course was now clear. It was of the highest importance that a real confession should be got from Fenwick, but this he now refused to give, as he had just received information that his agents had contrived to get Goodman, the second witness against him, out of the country. Exasperated by seeing, as they thought, the enemy, who had tried to undermine the character of their chiefs, slipping from their grasp, the Whigs brought the question before the House. The confession was voted false and scandalous, and rather than let their victim escape, in the heat of their anger, they determined to have recourse to the dangerous expedient of a Bill of Attainder (Nov. 13). This attempt, which, as it superseded the law of the land by an exercise of the power of Parliament, had an unconstitutional and revengeful appearance, met with the strongest opposition, but was carried in the Lower House by a small majority. The question became one of party, and finally, after a long struggle, it passed the House of Lords by a majority of only seven. Great interest was made for the prisoner, His execution. Jan. 28, 1697. but William refused to listen to any request for pardon, and Fenwick was executed. William's inflexibility is better explained by his desire to shield the Whig party, whom Fenwick would certainly have accused during his trial, than by the supposed existence of a personal hostility between himself and his prisoner.

This troublesome business having been got rid of, the session closed in complete triumph for the Whigs, among whose leaders promotions were freely distributed. Somers was raised to the Peerage and made Lord Chancellor, Russell became Earl of Orford, and Montague became First Lord of the Treasury. This triumph of the party reached its climax in the course of the year, when the war was brought to an end, and the policy of William and the Whigs vindicated by the signature of the Peace of Ryswick.

During the critical year 1696 want of money had paralyzed the action of both armies in the Netherlands, the destruction of the Louis desires peace. French magazines at Givet had rendered it difficult for Louis to maintain his troops, while William, though England was by no means exhausted as France was, was as completely hampered by the want of ready money. Louis had indeed in the course of the year made overtures for peace, but the improvement[857] in his prospects, caused by the conduct of the Duke of Savoy, who had deserted the coalition, joined his army to the French under Marshal Catinat, and successfully insisted that Austria and Spain should declare the neutralization of Italy, had induced him to recede from one of the fundamental conditions of peace—the recognition of William as King of England. The negotiations had been broken off, but succeeding events induced Louis, in 1697, to renew his proposals. The Assassination Plot had failed; William was more popular and better supported than he had ever been; the country had passed successfully through its period of crisis, had emerged more powerful than ever and more determined to support the war, and the great French military project for the capture of Brussels had been thwarted by the rapidity of William's movements. Louis therefore now, for the first time in his life, offered reasonable terms, consenting to resign many of the conquests he had made during the war, to give back Lorraine to its Duke, Luxemburg to Spain, Strasburg to the Empire, and to acknowledge the King of England. William, Opposition of the coalition. who was never carried away even by his most impetuous feelings, much as he hated France, at once recognized the justice of these offers and the wisdom of accepting them. He found however much difficulty in managing the coalition. The two great powers who had done the least to support the war now did all in their power to frustrate the pacification. Spain, moved by a foolish vanity little suitable to its weak condition, made demands which it was impossible that Louis should grant, while the Emperor, moved by selfish policy, would have been only too glad to continue a war, carried on chiefly at the cost of England, till the death of the Spanish King, which was every day expected. He would then, he imagined, be able to secure by means of the European coalition his succession to that monarchy. At length, after many difficulties, plenipotentiaries from France and the coalition were assembled (March 1697), the one party at the Hague, the other at Delft, and conferences were held at Ryswick, which lies nearly equidistant between these two towns. But the ceremonies of diplomacy, the ridiculous details of precedence, seemed to promise that the negotiations would be dragged out to an interminable length. William was not to be so treated. Having made up his mind that peace was desirable and that the terms offered were fair, he was determined that the peace should be speedily made. While the plenipotentiaries were wasting their time at Ryswick, a series of private meetings took place between Portland and Marshal Boufflers, between the[858] armies, a few miles from Brussels. A few meetings sufficed to Terms of peace. settle the terms, which were reduced to writing on the 6th of July. Beyond the general terms of treaty already offered by France, some personal questions between William and Louis had to be settled. A mutual promise was exchanged that neither king would countenance assaults upon the other. William was to be acknowledged as King of England, and the Princess Anne as his successor. Mary of Modena was to receive whatever sum of money the English Law Courts held to be her due; and though Louis, with his usual magnanimity, refused to stipulate that James should leave France, it was understood that he should withdraw either to Avignon or to Italy. Spain and the Emperor still refused to accept the proffered terms. Louis declared that, unless they were accepted by the 21st of August, he should no longer hold himself bound by them. The day passed, and, as was to be expected, the French King raised fresh demands; he would no longer surrender Strasburg. But the opposition of Spain had already been crushed. The disasters of the year had brought that country to reason; Vendome had captured Barcelona, and a French fleet, joined by the buccaneers of the West Indies, had taken and sacked Carthagena. William therefore, though much vexed at the obstinacy of the Emperor, which involved the loss of Strasburg, found himself able to accept the new terms, in concert with all the great powers of the coalition, with the exception of the Emperor, and at length, on the 10th of Treaty of Ryswick. Sept. 10. September, a treaty was concluded between France, Holland, Spain and England. France surrendered all the conquests made since the Treaty of Nimeguen, and placed the chief fortresses of the Low Countries in the hands of Dutch garrisons; William was recognized as King of England, Anne as his successor, and all assistance was withdrawn from James. A month later the Emperor also consented to treat. By this second treaty all the towns acquired since the Peace of Nimeguen, with the exception of Strasburg, were restored, together with Fribourg, Brissac, Philipsburg, and all French fortifications on the right bank of the Rhine. Lorraine was restored to its Duke, Leopold, who granted however a passage through his dominions for French troops. The Elector of Cologne was recognized, and the rights of the Duchess of Orleans upon the Palatinate compromised for money. William and the European coalition were thus triumphant. Louis had for the first time to withdraw to his own boundaries, and the succession of England was secured. At the same time France gained what had now become[859] absolutely necessary, time to recruit her strength, and leisure to prepare for that great struggle which all men saw to be imminent, when the death of Charles II. of Spain, without a direct heir, should leave the succession of that great monarchy to be disputed among the various claimants.

The joy of England at the conclusion of the war was enthusiastic. The King made a triumphal entry into London, and was everywhere received with enthusiasm. The crowning point of his reign had been reached. Almost without knowing it, he had solved the great constitutional question of the time, and, supported by a ministry in harmony with the Commons, and the national representatives in harmony with the people, had triumphantly brought to conclusion the great objects of his life, established the Protestant succession in England, and proved to Louis the necessity of respecting the rights and feelings of the rest of Europe.

On the very day after the rejoicings to celebrate the Peace of Ryswick, on the 3rd of December 1697, the Parliament, which had hitherto shown itself so firm in support of the Crown, so unanimous and vigorous in its action, met for its third and last session. William had every right to expect a period of peace and prosperity. But, unfortunately, the very success for which England was rejoicing brought with it the seeds of faction and division. For at once a question had to be settled, on which the Whig party was itself divided, and on which the national feeling was on the whole strongly opposed to the King. The establishment of peace naturally involved the question of the fate of the great army, numbering more than 80,000 men, which England had kept up for the last nine years. The nation, suffering heavily from taxation, was not likely to be willing to continue in peace the efforts made during war. It was, moreover, a deeply ingrained feeling among the country gentry of both parties that a standing army in time of peace was an intolerable evil. The Tories had indeed already adopted the policy which long marked the party. They would have wished England to confine itself, even in war, to the pursuit of success upon the sea, which they regarded as her natural element, and to have withdrawn as far as possible from all the complications of Continental policy. But, even setting aside this view, the experience of both parties led them very naturally to regard an army in time of peace as the inevitable instrument of tyranny. While the Tories remembered with horror the triumphant Ironsides of Cromwell, the Whigs recalled with no less detestation[860] the importation of Irish troops at the close of the last reign, and London overawed by the great camp at Hounslow. On the other hand, William, with his eyes fixed abroad, with a profound mistrust of France, and certain knowledge of the rapid approach of another great Continental quarrel, could not bring himself to approve of the breaking up of an army which he had brought to such perfection. The ministry, under his immediate influence, and guided by the far-sighted sagacity of Somers, believed, like the King, in the approach of fresh danger, and thoroughly disbelieved in the efficacy of half-drilled militia to withstand such well-trained troops as Louis had always at his disposal. The national feeling was, however, too strong to be withstood. A resolution was passed that the number of soldiers should be reduced to the same amount as had been kept on foot after the peace of Nimeguen, a resolution which was liberally construed by the Government to mean 10,000. On other points the ministry and the Parliament remained at one. It was in vain that an attack was directed against William's lavish grants of Crown lands, in vain that an accusation of peculation was directed against Montague, it resulted only in a formal declaration on the part of the Commons of the great services of that statesman.

Montague's success as a financier had indeed reached its culminating point in this session by the temporary settlement of the question with regard to the Indian trade which had so long excited the commercial The East Indian trade. public in England. It has been incidentally mentioned that the renewal of the charter to the East India Company in 1693 had produced the fall of Lord Caermarthen. The Company, originally consisting chiefly of Whigs and incorporated by royal charter, had, in the hands of Sir Josiah Child, who exerted an almost dictatorial authority in its management, allied itself closely to the Tories. Its monopoly had also become very unpopular, as the increase of capital and the great receipts of the Indian trade had excited a wish among the mercantile community to enter more largely upon that branch of traffic. As early as 1691 an association of its enemies had been formed, which, although it was not chartered, was commonly spoken of as the new Company, and had succeeded in obtaining a request from the Parliament to the King that he would give the old Company the three years' notice of the withdrawal of its charter which was legally required. An accidental illegality had in fact just then invalidated the charter. It was to procure its restoration that, in 1693, Cook, to whom Child had now relinquished much of his authority, had so lavishly expended the secret service money,[861] some of which had been traced to Caermarthen. His bribery was successful. The charter was renewed by the King, but the Parliament, at the instigation of the new Company, took a different view of the question, and declared that every man had a right to trade, unless debarred by Act of Parliament. This declaration of the limits of the constitutional power of the Crown in matters of trade William could not venture to oppose. From that time onwards, therefore, the trade had been legally free, but the power of the Company had been so great in the Indian seas, and its conduct so oppressive, that it had been impossible for free traders to carry on their business with any success. Again, in 1698, the question was strongly pressed upon the attention of Parliament, and again the old Company found strong supporters in the Tory party, while the Whigs upheld the demands of those who wished to participate in its advantages. There was a division in the views of the opponents of the Company. Some were eager for perfect freedom of trade, while others joined in the general feeling of the nation, that, although the present monopoly was a bad one, some sort of restriction was still necessary. It was understood that to advance money to Government was the surest way to obtain its support, and the old Company offered £700,000, at four per cent., as the price of the renewal of its charter. But Montague, anxious for money to relieve the embarrassments of the Government, anxious to Formation of the General East India Company. 1698. establish a second great Whig society of capitalists, who would support him as the Bank had already done, believed that he saw his way to gaining those ends by opposing the Company, and brought forward a plan by which he hoped to secure the support of both sections of its opponents. He suggested the formation of a company, to be called the General Company, and proposed that a loan of £2,000,000, at eight per cent., should be advanced to Government, and that the subscribers should receive the monopoly of the Indian trade, but be free from the obligation of trading as a joint-stock society, unless they should afterwards wish it. He carried the Bill for its formation through Parliament, and, in spite of the forebodings of his enemies, found that the immense sum which had been promised was readily subscribed in two or three days. The Bill was carried on the 3rd of September, but, on the 5th of the same month, the greater part of the subscribers declared their desire to become a joint-stock company, which was therefore chartered by Act of Parliament by the title of the English Company trading to the East Indies. The struggle between the companies was found to be so destructive to English[862] trade, that, in 1702, arrangements for their union were made. A The two Companies united. 1708. common court of managers was established, their stocks equalized, and trade carried on under the name of the United Company of Merchants trading to the East Indies. But each company still traded with its own separate stock. Many inconveniences still attended this division of interests, and at last, in 1708, upon the award of Lord Godolphin, a final and complete union was made; and, as the separate adventurers who had not joined either company were bought out, the monopoly again fell into the hands of the great United Company. But though his plan was thus ultimately a failure, for the moment Montague had all the credit of another great financial triumph, and the Whig party might reasonably expect that, in spite of the one single defeat with regard to the standing army, their position would be as good in the new Parliament as it had been in that which was just closing.

Meanwhile the King's personal attention had been as usual directed rather to foreign than to home politics. The great question which at once occupied the minds of diplomatists after the Peace of Ryswick was the succession to the throne of Spain. It seemed very improbable that Charles II., a miserable hypochondriac, should live much longer. At his death there threatened to be a general scramble for his vast possessions. Early in the year, an embassy of unusual grandeur had attended Portland to France. The question had been there opened, and a corresponding French embassy under Tallard had subsequently and with the same object been sent to London. On the dissolution of Parliament the scene of negotiation was transferred to Holland. The question was one of great intricacy and difficulty.[2] It was not easy[863] to point out the legitimate successor, even had it been possible to allow the Spanish monarchy to pass unbroken into the hands of any of the claimants. The eldest of Charles's sisters had married Louis XIV., a younger sister had married Leopold of Germany. Leopold was himself Charles's first cousin, grandson of Philip III. In direct descent, therefore, the Dauphin stood next to the Spanish king. Next to him came the offspring of Leopold's first marriage with the Spanish Princess, namely, the Electress of Bavaria, but she gave over her right to her son, the Electoral Prince. The third in order was the Emperor Leopold. But the marriage of the Infanta with Louis had been accompanied by a formal renunciation of her rights, sanctioned by the Cortes. The marriage of the second Princess with Leopold had been attended by a similar renunciation, not sanctioned by the Cortes. The marriage of Leopold's mother with the Emperor had been attended by no renunciation at all. Thus, if the renunciations were valid, the claims in accordance with them came in exactly the opposite order to the claims by order of descent. But the change in the balance of Europe involved in the accession to the throne of Spain of a prince of either the imperial house of Germany or the royal house of France was of far graver importance than the mere legal rights to the throne. Both Leopold and the Dauphin, conscious that Europe would not submit to their acquiring Spain for themselves, had handed on their claims to representatives, who might be considered as comparatively harmless. Leopold had substituted for himself the Archduke Charles, his son by a second marriage, the Dauphin his second son Philip. But, in spite of this arrangement, France, England and Holland had considered it dangerous that the Spanish dominions should pass entire into the hands of either of the claimants, and the negotiations of this year were directed to forming a plan for dividing them with some sort of equality among the First Partition Treaty. three. The product of these negotiations was the First Partition Treaty, definitively signed at the Hague on the 11th of October. By this the bulk of the Spanish dominions—Spain, the Indies, and the Netherlands—was to pass to the least powerful of the three claimants, the Electoral Prince. France was to receive Guipuscoa in the north of Spain, and the Two Sicilies; the Austrian competitor was to be satisfied with the Milanese. The treaty had been arranged as quietly as possible, but the republican institutions of Holland were not favourable to secresy. Rumours of what had been done reached Spain. The desire of the King and the Castilians was to preserve at all hazards the integrity of the Empire.[864] Charles was therefore persuaded to make a will, and to declare that candidate whom France and England seemed most to favour, namely, the Electoral Prince, heir to his whole dominions; and thus for a time the matter rested.

Having thus temporarily settled his position abroad, William returned to England with the hope of a peaceful session. The hope was singularly falsified by the event. The great Whig party, so noble and united in adversity, had fallen to pieces, and a Tory reaction begun. The greatness and success of its measures had left room for faction. The unpopularity both of William and Montague afforded opportunity for the attacks of malcontents. On the assembling of Parliament after the new elections (Dec. 6, 1698), it became evident that a large number of unknown men who had been elected, although nominally Whigs, intended to make common cause with the extreme Tories, and that The Country Party. this united faction, under the title of the Country Party, would form an opposition against the Crown. The last session had already marked out the lines this opposition would take. The points at issue would be the maintenance of the army, the distribution of Crown grants, and the conduct of individual members of the ministry. On the first of these points the King did not act wisely. Unable to understand the insular politics in favour with the English, he insisted that the ministry should propose a standing army of 20,000 men. Afraid to introduce a Bill which they knew they could not carry, the ministry suffered the initiative to slip from their grasp, and a private individual was allowed to propose that the number of troops should be further lessened to 7000, and that all those 7000 should be born Englishmen. In spite of the efforts of theDismissal of the Dutch guards. ministry the Bill was carried, and William found himself compelled to order the departure of his favourite Dutch guards. Hurt to the quick, he seriously formed the intention of quitting England. He even drew up his farewell speech, and was only moved to remain by the earnest prayers of Somers and by his own returning wisdom.

Assured of their majority, the Opposition proceeded to attack the late ministry. Their favourite object was Montague, who had laid himself open to their assaults by the pride and luxury which he had exhibited in his good fortune, and still more by the indecent rapacity with which he seized on the valuable place of the Auditorship of the Exchequer, worth at least £4000 a year; this he placed in the hands of his brother, to be held until he should want it. The next victim[865] was Russell, Lord Orford, whose administration only escaped censure by a single vote. And before the session closed, the third point, that of grants of Crown lands, was touched upon in a way which produced much after disaster. The method used on this occasion illustrates a point Rivalry between the two Houses. deserving of notice. The Revolution had placed the supreme power in the hands of Parliament; but Parliament itself consists of two elements, of two Houses drawn from different classes. Besides the general party struggles, besides the frequent contests between King and Parliament, and subsequently between Parliament and people, there was therefore a class rivalry between the two Houses, which had shown itself already on more than one occasion during the reign, and was rendered more prominent now by the fact that the party feeling in the Upper House was on the whole decidedly Whig. The weapon which the Commons intended to use in this strife was their exclusive right of introducing money Bills. Those Bills the Upper House had the power of rejecting entire, but not of amending. The Commons now "tacked" or appended to the Bill for the Land Tax a clause appointing seven Commissioners to inquire into the manner in which the forfeited land in Ireland had been granted out. This obnoxious clause the Lords were compelled to pass, or to reject the Bill entirely, and thus stop the supplies. Though keenly feeling the coercion put upon them, by a plan which would have proved fatal to the Upper House had not the good feeling of the nation and the strength of popular opinion ultimately compelled the Commons to abandon it, the Lords passed the Bill, feeling probably that the present occasion was scarcely important enough for a great constitutional struggle. The Money Bill having been passed, the King, in some anger, prorogued the Parliament (May 4).

As usual, when Parliament was not sitting, William withdrew to Holland, a habit which, now that the war no longer necessitated his presence there, increased his unpopularity in England, and the session of Parliament which he returned to meet in November 1699 was still more stormy than the last.

The discontent in England was backed up by more serious discontent in Scotland. The whole of that nation might be now reckoned among the enemies of the Court. For, during the recess, on the 5th of October, certain news had reached England of the failure of the great Darien scheme, and the complete destruction of those wild hopes of wealth and greatness which had been for the last four years buoying up the Scotch nation. Paterson,[866] the same man whose scheme for the Bank of England had in the hands of Montague proved so successful, was the originator of this disastrous project. He had persuaded himself that the natural wealth of a country has nothing to do with its prosperity. The commercial cities of the ancient world, and Venice and Holland in modern times, had risen to greatness and wealth without any territorial possessions of importance. He believed that he could reproduce this phenomenon in the case of Scotland. The scheme of Columbus had been to introduce the wealth of the East by a short and direct route into Europe, and thus to destroy the traffic of the Venetians. He had found his plan thwarted by the interposition of America; and the discovery of a passage round the Cape of Good Hope had turned all men's attention in that direction, and had been the great source of wealth both to the Dutch and Portuguese. But the plan of Columbus had never been quite forgotten, and Paterson now thought to renew it by establishing a line of communication across the Isthmus of Darien. The Scotch were to colonize and occupy the isthmus, which would become, in the view of the projector, the great emporium of the whole Eastern trade. Although he did not explain the details of his scheme, it was listened to with enthusiasm by his fellow-countrymen; and in 1695, an extraordinary Act passed the Scotch Parliament, and received the assent of the Lord High Commissioner, authorising the formation of a Corporation, half the capital of which was to be held by Scotchmen, with the monopoly of the trade with Asia, Africa, and America for thirty-one years. With the exception of foreign sugar and tobacco, all its imports were to be duty free. Every servant of the Company was free from imprisonment and arrest. The Company was authorized to take possession of unoccupied territories and exercise legal rights, and the King promised to obtain satisfaction at the public charge if foreign powers assaulted it. Subscriptions to the amount of £200,000 and upwards were speedily forthcoming, and a branch of the Company established itself in London. There, however, the absurdities of the plan were at once discovered, and it met with a very cold reception. Any colony, to be useful, must be either in America or in the Spice Islands; now interference in America would not be tolerated by Spain, nor would Holland look on quietly at the occupation of the Spice Islands; a maritime war was in fact inevitable; Scotland, singlehanded, could scarcely hope to carry on such a war, and England would almost infallibly be drawn into it, and this on behalf of a Company which, by changing Scotland into a free port,[867] would virtually make it an enormous centre for smuggling to the extreme detriment of English trade. The attention of the King was drawn to the subject. He expressed his entire disapprobation of the scheme, and dismissed the Lord High Commissioner and the Secretary; but the law was made and could not be rescinded. In 1698, in the midst of wild enthusiasm, 1200 colonists set out from Leith, with Paterson among them, and reached Darien in safety, and there established their colony, but almost immediately came into contact with the neighbouring Spanish governor, and the inevitable war began. At first, however, the reports were favourable, and in the following year a new armament of four ships and 1800 colonists left Scotland for Caledonia, as the new settlement was called. They had not been gone long before news arrived at New York that the colony no longer existed, and that the wretched remnant of its inhabitants had sought refuge in New England. In fact, the climate had proved eminently unhealthy, in spite of the assertions of Paterson. Provisions had failed, and, worn out and enfeebled, the colonists, feeling themselves entirely unable to repell the assaults of Spain, determined to withdraw. After miserable suffering, a few of them reached New York, and the second expedition arrived in Caledonia to find only uninhabited ruins. They determined upon reoccupying these, rebuilt the fort, and during the few healthy months continued, though with heavy losses, to carry out their operations. But before long a Spanish fleet appeared before the town, and an army, marching across the isthmus from Panama, blockaded it on the land side. Resistance was impossible. Already 300 of the new-comers had died, the survivors promised to depart within a fortnight, and on the 11th of April left the colony for ever. The disaster was regarded by the Scotch as a national injury on the part of England. The Company had throughout excited great anger in the Southern kingdom; the colonial governors had done all they could to discourage the colony when it arrived, and the Scotch were ready to trace this opposition to national jealousy,—to attribute it even to William's partiality for his Dutch subjects, whose trade might have been injured. In truth, the whole business was a proof, as William pointed out to the House of Lords, of the difficulty of managing two countries with different interests under one Crown, and the necessity of a closer union between the nations.

It was thus, supported by the discontent of Scotland, that the malcontents of Parliament resumed the question of the management of the royal property. After a fruitless attack[868] upon Somers, who had indeed received a grant, but one against which no reasonable complaint could be made, they proceeded to follow up the work of the last session, and to act upon the recommendation of the seven Commissioners who had been appointed by the tacked clause of the preceding session. The Crown lands had been constantly dealt Irish forfeitures. with according to the King's pleasure, without parliamentary interference. In early times, however, they had been regarded as a trust. Parliament had frequently demanded that the King should live upon his own revenues, and Acts for the resumption of grants had been passed, the last being that immediately following the battle of Bosworth. Since then the gift of the Crown had been considered a perfectly sound title. Whatever dislike, therefore, William's lavish grants to his Dutch favourites had excited, there would have been very great difficulty in calling in question his right to make them. The use to which the forfeited lands which had fallen into William's hands after the Pacification of Limerick had been put was more open to objection. A Bill ordering them to be applied to the public service had been interrupted and left incomplete, and the King had promised that the Commons should have another opportunity of considering the question. As they had since taken no steps in the matter, he seems to have considered himself free to act as he pleased. Of the forfeited lands, which amounted to about 1,700,000 acres, a fourth had been restored to its ancient possessors, according to the Limerick Pacification. Some of the rest had been mercifully given back to Irishmen, some to men like Ginkel and Galway, who had distinguished themselves in the Irish wars, but by far the larger portion had fallen to the King's personal friends, such as Woodstock, the eldest son of Portland, and Keppel, Lord Albemarle. The Commission could not arrive at unanimity, and sent up two reports. But that of the majority, which was very hostile to Government, was alone accepted by the Commons. It ridiculously over-estimated the grants at a sum of, £2,600,000, and at the same time declared that very undue leniency had been shown to the Irish. Had these grants not been made, and the confiscations properly exacted, much of the present heavy taxation, they said, might have been spared. The Resumption Bill passed. April 10, 1700. Commons, longing to be free from taxes and hating the Dutch favourites, took up the matter with factious warmth, and the Resumption Bill was passed, vesting all the forfeited lands in the hands of trustees, and offering large rewards to informers who would point out lands which ought to have been confiscated. They even, with palpable injustice, included[869] in their inquiry lands which had never been forfeited. Expecting opposition from the Upper House, they again tacked this Bill to the Land Tax Bill. The Lords now determined upon a struggle. Little as they liked the Dutch favourites, they could not allow themselves to be thus overridden. Their opposition was, however, unsuccessful; the nation felt with the Commons, and foreign affairs had reached a crisis which rendered peace at home necessary to the King. The quarrel was pressed so far as to threaten a complete breach between Parliament prorogued. April 11, 1700. the Houses, and a fatal blow to the Constitution. By the influence of the King the Lords were induced to yield, and the triumphant Commons were passing to fresh assaults on the King's friends, when, having passed the Land Tax Bill and thus supplied himself with money, William suddenly prorogued the Houses.

The necessity which had driven him to this step was the reopening of the question of the Spanish succession. In January 1699 the Electoral Prince had died. The whole question thus assumed a new shape, and William's undivided attention was required. For the same reason, probably, and to allay the opposition in the House, he thought it necessary to remove Somers from office, and to place the Great Seal in the hands of Sir Nathan Wright. The Second Partition Treaty, which the King was now engaged in arranging, was such as was rendered necessary by the death of the Second Partition Treaty. third claimant. The bulk of the Spanish dominions was now to be given to the Archduke. It was to him that now Spain, the Indies, and the Netherlands were assigned, while Milan, which had formerly fallen to his share, was to be transferred to France, to be ultimately exchanged for Lorraine, a German fief, very important to round off the French dominions. But again these arrangements were upset. Portocarrero, the Spanish minister, was in the French interest, and supported by Harcourt, the ablest French diplomatist. By playing upon national feeling, which was strong against any partition, these statesmen excited the anger of the Spaniards against William, who had already incurred their enmity by his fancied support of the Darien scheme; and Charles was at length impressed with the absolute necessity of making another will. The events of the late session had given rise to the belief that William was not really master of England, while the visible greatness of France seemed to afford the best chance of keeping the Spanish monarchy undivided; the will was therefore made in favour of the Dauphin's son Philip, Duke of Anjou, who was declared heir to the whole of the Spanish dominions. The treaty was not well received in[870] England. While one party clamoured that too much was given to France, another complained of the injustice of forestalling the wishes of the Spanish people, and there was a general feeling of anger at the secresy with which the treaty had been arranged, a treaty which might easily draw England into a foreign war, and which had been concluded entirely without consulting Parliament. This anger reached its highest point when, in November, the King of Spain died, and Louis, in defiance of all his treaties, accepted his grandson's great inheritance. William had determined that the whole responsibility should lie with himself, trusting in his own diplomatic skill; he had been beaten at his own arts, and his great treaty was absolutely useless.

In fact, there was no time when the King had been so unpopular or his enemies so strong. Nearly every class, except his own immediate followers among the Whigs, were alienated from him; the mass of the people had suffered from heavy taxation, the nobles were sore at the unwise preference given to foreigners; the whole nation shared in this feeling, and disliked his constant absences from home; the scandal of the Irish forfeitures had just been brought to light; the country gentry remembered with anger the failure of their Land Bank, and saw with envy the increasing importance of the moneyed interest. One thing was plain, that nothing could be done with a Parliament so adverse as the last, with a ministry so powerless as the late holders of power had New ministry. Dec. 1700. proved. William therefore dissolved the Parliament, summoning a new one for the following February; and, freeing himself from the old ministry, called to his councils Rochester, the late Queen's uncle and the head of the High Church Tories, with Godolphin and Sir Charles Hedges. For the present his only hope lay in the possibility of a general European war; of this as yet there was but little sign. Austria had indeed refused to acknowledge the new King of Spain, and withdrawn its ambassador from Madrid, but in other countries it seemed as if the will of the late Spanish King would be quietly accepted. William himself could do nothing, and for the time was compelled to submit. His new ministry entreated him to New Parliament. Feb. 1701. acknowledge Philip; his Parliament showed no disposition to support him in any hostile steps against France. Two questions which he placed before them in his opening speech were, the succession of the throne of England, the settlement to which had been rendered necessary by the late death of the Duke of Gloucester, the young son of the Princess Anne (July 29, 1700), and the position which England should assume in the face of the[871] altered aspect of European politics. It was in vain, upon this latter point, that he attempted to urge them to energy. The King of France had driven the Dutch to acknowledge Philip, by suddenly entering the Low Countries, and capturing 15,000 of their troops who had been intended to garrison the barrier fortresses. William and the Dutch States had in vain demanded the withdrawal of the French troops and the surrender of the strongholds. But even this act of aggression did not arouse the Parliament to energy. They acknowledged the obligations of England under the Treaty of 1677, and promised to send succours to the Dutch, but there seemed no immediate prospect of any grants for the purpose. Nor was the other point much more Succession Act. vigorously prosecuted. A Bill of Succession was indeed produced, but nearly every clause seemed evidently aimed against the King's former conduct. The new sovereign was not to leave the kingdom without leave of Parliament; no person not a born Englishman was to be capable of holding any position of trust, or of receiving any grant from the Crown. England was not to be engaged in war for the defence of any dominions not belonging to the Crown of England. All matters relating to the Government were to be transacted in the Privy Council, and countersigned by such members of that body as should advise or consent to them. Having thus secured, as they thought, the insular position of England, the House proceeded to settle the succession upon the Electress Sophia of Hanover. Thus, though the Protestant succession was secured, a Bill which William had hoped would be a singular expression of popular sympathy with his own efforts was in fact a vote of censure on many of the acts of his reign.

While public business was thus proceeding languidly, the whole energy of the House was directed against the old Whig leaders and against the House of Lords. Impeachments were hurried on against Lord Portland, Lord Orford, Lord Somers, and Montague, who had now become Lord Halifax. Against each of these the main charge was the share they had taken in the Partition treaties. But, in the case of Portland and Montague, there were additional charges in reference to the grants and dilapidations of the royal revenue, for which they were said to be answerable; while against Somers and Orford was alleged a ridiculous story concerning their participation in the notorious exploits of Captain Kidd. This man had been sent out by private enterprise to destroy piracy in the Indian Sea, and had there himself turned pirate. Both Somers and Orford had[872] subscribed to the original enterprise. Somers, as Chancellor, had sealed Kidd's commission. It was now ridiculously suggested that they had all along known of his piratical intentions. But, while sending up these impeachments, the Commons felt absolutely certain that the Whig majority of the Lords would at once acquit their victims, for it was well understood that the measure was not one of justice but one of faction; they therefore passed an unjustifiable address to the King, praying him to dismiss the four Peers from his Council, even before the impeachments were heard. The House of Lords produced a counter address. The Commons demanded longer time to complete their impeachments, but the Peers were determined to bring a matter on which their judgment was in fact foregone to a speedy issue, and had now both law and right on their side. They therefore positively refused to extend the time, and the 17th of June was fixed for Lord Somers's trial. Westminster Hall was fitted up with the usual preparations for impeachment. The Lords marched in all pomp to their judgment-seat. The Commons, declaring they had been denied justice, refused to appear. There were no accusers, and Somers was declared acquitted.

But many signs had begun to show themselves in the country which induced William to believe that the popular opinion was turning, and he ventured to put an end to the very dangerous fight The Kentish Petition. between the Houses by a prorogation (June 24). What is known as the Kentish Petition was the great sign of this changed feeling. This petition had been sent up by the Grand Jury of Kent. It hinted that public business had been neglected, and the pursuit of personal vengeance substituted, and humbly deprecated the least mistrust of the King, and implored the House to give effect to its loyal addresses by turning them into Bills of supply. So arbitrary was the House of Commons at this time in the assertion of its privilege, that it was only by consenting to remain outside the House, and be personally answerable for their document, that the five gentlemen who brought up this petition were able to get it presented at all (May 8). It raised a storm of anger, was voted scandalous, infamous and seditious, and the five gentlemen were dismissed to prison. But their cause was taken up by the whole Liberal party, and the desires expressed in the petition were brought before the public in much more forcible language in a The Legion Memorial. memorial written by Defoe, and called from its signature "The Legion Memorial." This expression of opinion could not but have been gratifying to the King.

[873]

Hope was indeed again opening before him. Not only could he feel certain of some support, however weak, at home, but the persistent retention on the part of Louis, in spite of all their clamours, of the Dutch barrier fortresses and the 15,000 troops he had captured had begun to rouse the war spirit of that people. Left more free to act now that Parliament was prorogued, William at once despatched 10,000 troops into Holland, under command of Marlborough, and before long went thither himself, to lay the foundation of a Grand The Grand Alliance. Alliance between England, Holland, and the Emperor. This treaty was completed in September. But the terms of it proved surely how low William's hopes still were. It only declared that it was desirable that satisfaction should be given to the Emperor on account of the succession of Spain, and pledges given for the security of England and her allies. It allowed two months for peaceful negotiations. After that time the contracting powers pledged themselves to attempt the recovery by force of arms of Milan for Austria, and of the barrier fortresses for Holland.

At this moment James II. of England lay dying. With all Europe submitting with ill-dissembled dislike to the late acquisition of Spain by the Bourbons, and ready to take any opportunity for disturbing the newly-appointed King, to acknowledge, in contravention of the Treaty of Ryswick, the young Prince of Wales as King of England, was a step full of danger for the French King. It could not have been hidden from Louis, as it certainly was not hidden from his ministers, that the real strength of his present position was the depressed condition of William, thwarted by his factious Parliament; and Louis must have known that nothing was more likely to change that weakness into strength than a violation of the Peace of Ryswick,—the destruction of the one great advantage which England had gained by nine years' expenditure of blood and treasure. But the Louis acknowledging the Pretender. Sept. 16. influence of Madame de Maintenon, who had been won over to the interest of the Stuarts, and a certain theatrical magnanimity which seldom deserted Louis, proved stronger than prudence. At the deathbed of James he promised to uphold the claims of his son, and three days afterwards the young Prince was formally acknowledged by the whole Court as King of England.

No better news could have reached William. Again, as in the time of his first landing in England, his enemy had done more for him than any skill or diplomacy of his own could effect. The whole nation burst into a flame. Patriotic and loyal addresses came pouring in upon him. Public bodies in all parts of the country passed resolutions full of affection for him. The[874] conduct of the late majority was denounced as factious wrangling, and the cause of the great insult which had been laid on the country; and the connection between the Tory party and Louis seemed to be rendered plain when the French ambassador was found seated at supper in a well-known Jacobite tavern surrounded by the most ardent members of the Tory party. The King seized the moment of excitement, and, though conscious of the delays it would entail, at once dissolved Parliament. A struggle such as has seldom been seen excited England from end to end, and everywhere it became evident that the reckless conduct of Louis had secured the restoration of the Whigs. London returned four Whig members, Wharton again won back his supremacy in Buckingham, even the virulent Howe was defeated and lost his seat in Gloucestershire. The flame of indignation still blazed high when William met his new Parliament New Parliament and Ministry. on the last day of the year, and, in words of unusual fire, bade them drop their factious disputes, and know no other distinction than that of those who were for the Protestant religion and the present Establishment, and of those who meant a Popish prince and a French government. The ministry was largely changed. Godolphin left the Treasury to make room for Lord Carlisle; Manchester was made Secretary instead of Hedges, and other Whig Lords were admitted to the Privy Council. It is true that the unanimity was by no means perfect. The Tories were still strong in the House. There was still some fear of the ultimate return of the Stuarts. But the Government was strong enough to pass a Bill for attainting the pretended Prince of Wales, and a still more important Bill abjuring the house of Stuart, and pledging those who took the oath to uphold in turn each successor named in the Act of Settlement. The acceptance of this oath was made requisite for every employment either in Church or State.

It was thus in the full flush of a new victory, with hopes high, and with a well-grounded belief that his life's work of opposition to the encroachments of the French would not after all be wasted, that William, broken down by disease and suffering, died. He had long been so ill that his life had been despaired of, but he was still able to ride. On the 20th of February, his horse, stepping upon a molehill, fell with him, and his collar-bone was broken. This accident rendered his recovery hopeless. He lived just long enough to express his strong desire for a Union with Scotland, and to appoint the Commission which gave the royal assent to the Abjuration Act. On the 8th of March, surrounded by his faithful friends, he breathed his last.

[875]

ANNE.

1702-1714.

Born 1665 = George of Denmark.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

POPE.—Clement XI, 1700.

In passing to a new reign we pass to no new epoch. No new principles are at work, no new influences visible. The same constitutional growth which had been gradually developing itself since the Revolution makes its way steadily onwards. The sole difference is the difference in the person of the sovereign. In the yet unfixed state of the Constitution this might have introduced important changes, and did in fact, by the absence of[876] the strong personal character of William, tend to easier and more complete development of parliamentary action. But the importance of the Queen was much neutralized by the complete mastery exercised over her mind by the Duke and Duchess of Marlborough. The effect of Marlborough's supremacy was to reproduce almost exactly the circumstances of the former reign. Though an immoral politician, a self-seeking and avaricious man, Marlborough was too great not to appreciate the grandeur of William's European schemes. Thus, as far as European policy was concerned, he passed almost completely into that King's place, pledged both by his natural intellect and by his personal interests to pursue very much the same course as William had taken. It is scarcely going beyond the truth to call the earlier part of Anne's reign the reign of the Duke of Marlborough; and he encountered exactly the same difficulties, and was reduced to exactly the same straits, as his predecessor had been in his attempts to carry out a national policy without regard to party.

The dissolution of Parliament had followed as a natural consequence upon the death of the sovereign who had summoned it, and in whom it was regarded as depending. The new position which the Parliament had occupied since the Revolution had naturally modified that view. By a law passed at the beginning of the eighth year of William's reign, Parliament was allowed to sit for six months after the King's death. It was therefore with the same Whig Parliament, which had come into existence just after Louis had acknowledged the Prince of Wales, that Anne's reign began. The conduct of the Parliament during the few months of its existence was entirely free from faction. It completed and applied the Abjuration Bill, on which it had been busy at the end of the last reign, established an examination of public accounts, and granted with great unanimity the same revenue as William had enjoyed; and further, took a first step towards a measure which William had recommended, and which the failure of the Darien scheme had rendered almost inevitable, by passing a Bill for appointing Commissioners to arrange, if possible, for a complete union with Scotland.

But it soon became evident that both the tendencies of the Queen and Marlborough's views on home politics would lead to the restoration of Tory influence. On the Duke himself and on his wife honours and Tory ministry. offices were freely lavished, and the new ministry was drawn almost entirely from the Tory party. Thus Godolphin, Marlborough's son-in-law, was made Lord Treasurer;[877] Nottingham and Sir Charles Hedges, Secretaries of State; Lord Normanby, shortly afterwards Duke of Buckingham, Privy Seal; Pembroke, Lord President; Jersey was given a place in the Council; while offices were found for Seymour and Levison Gower in the Privy Council, from which Somers, Halifax, and Orford were excluded. Yet even already Marlborough's intention in some degree to disregard party was shown in the retention of some Whigs in office, among others the Duke of Devonshire, who kept his place as Lord Steward. More important, with regard to the future history of the reign, was the division which even thus early began to show itself among the Tories themselves. Rochester, who had come over from his post in Ireland, not only desired a much more complete exclusion of the Whigs from office, but also opposed, in pursuance of the accepted policy of the High Tories, the declaration of war. Thus already, before the dissolution which took place on the 25th of May, two facts, which together form the key to the political history of the reign, were visible,—Marlborough's determination to rely upon a mixed Government, and the disinclination of one section of the Tories to support him in his war policy.

In pursuing the future history of the reign there are three subjects which require special attention, the European war, the Union with Scotland, and the parliamentary and ministerial history; and although the war and the history of the ministry constantly affect one another, it will probably tend to clearness if, for the first few years at all events, these three subjects are treated separately.

The opposition of the Tories to the war had been entirely useless. The completion of the negotiations set on foot by William had been intrusted to Marlborough. Immediately, at the beginning of the reign, he had gone to the Hague, and war was declared in London, at Vienna, and at the Hague on the 4th of May. Meanwhile so many Princes had joined the Confederation, originally consisting of England, Holland, and Austria, that war was declared by the Diet of the Empire. The Elector of Brandenburg had been induced to join by the promise of the royal title; the Elector of Hanover and the Elector Palatine had also given in their adhesion. On the other hand, though the brother Electors of the Bavarian House, the Elector of Bavaria and the Elector of Cologne, had at first agreed to remain neutral, Louis felt pretty sure of the course they would ultimately take, and of the friendship of Victor Amadeus of Savoy, whose daughter had married the new King of Spain, and the position of whose dominions rendered his friendship[878] of great value, giving as it did an access into Italy to the French.

The Queen's love for her husband had induced her to wish that he should be made Commander-in-chief both of the English and Dutch forces, though utterly unfit for the post, and Marlborough seems to have honestly attempted to procure this appointment. But the Dutch would not hear of it, and ultimately Marlborough took the field in July as Commander-in-chief, with Overkirk as his Lieutenant commanding the Dutch troops.

Two points distinguish this war from the preceding one. Hitherto in all great confederations against the French the Spanish Netherlands had been in the hands of the confederates, but as Spain was now in close alliance with France, it became necessary to conquer this part of the Netherlands. And, secondly, the death of William had been followed by the complete depression of the house of Nassau in Holland, and the supremacy of the republican party, which by no means shared in the late King's hatred to France, and which, from jealousy of all personal authority, caused the general to be accompanied by field deputies, with a right of mixing in all councils of war. This was one of the greatest of Marlborough's difficulties, as the deputies seldom failed to hamper him, and to throw obstacles in the way of any adventurous plans. Before Marlborough took the field the campaign had opened. The French had command of the Spanish Low Countries, of the Duchy of Luxemburg, and, through the friendship of its Elector, of the territories of the Elector Clement of Cologne, who was both Archbishop of Cologne and Bishop of Liège. Both the Rhine and Meuse were thus in their hands and the fortresses held by their garrisons. The whole southern frontier of Holland, which left the sea near Ostend, crossed the mouth of the Scheldt, and cutting off a portion of Brabant, joined the Meuse somewhat to the north of Venloo, was thus open to them, while by way of the Rhine they had an opportunity of attacking the Dutch provinces from the east. While Holland was thus assailable on two sides, the advancing angle of the French dominions exposed them in a similar manner. The valley of the Moselle, which leads directly into the heart of Lorraine, could be attacked either from the north or by a German army coming from the south by way of Landau. Anxious to secure their frontier towards the Rhine, the Dutch had early in the year besieged and taken the fortress of Kaiserwerth, and bent chiefly upon their own[879] security, would have preferred to retain Marlborough and the army in the neighbourhood of that river. But the Duke saw that the passage of the Meuse where it makes the northern frontier of the Dutch Brabant, and an advance southwards towards the Spanish Netherlands, would necessitate a concentration of the French troops, and transfer the seat of war to that province. In spite of the opposition of the Dutch, he therefore crossed the river at Grave, and proceeded directly south into Spanish Brabant. As he had expected, his appearance there obliged Boufflers to withdraw from Guelders to oppose him; and although the opposition of the field deputies prevented a general engagement, Marlborough was enabled to secure the eastern frontier of Holland, to take the fortresses of the Meuse,—Venloo, Ruremond, Stevensweerth, and Liège,—to overrun Guelders, Cleves, the Electorate of Cologne, with the exception of Bonn, the whole of the Bishopric of Liège and the Duchy of Limburg, thus cutting off the French from the Lower Rhine.

Meanwhile an attack had been made upon France from the Upper Rhine. The Margrave Louis of Baden, having crossed the river with the German forces, found himself opposed by Catinat, who did not show his usual ability, and suffered the Margrave to besiege and take Landau and to overrun Alsace. The success of the German army was marred by the defection of Bavaria, which, throwing aside its neutrality, declared in favour of France. Villars was detached from Catinat's army to join the Elector of Bavaria; and as an access was thus opened to the French into the heart of Germany, Louis of Baden had to withdraw from his conquests, and, turning to meet the new danger, suffered a heavy defeat at Friedlingen.

While such was the course of the war in Germany and Flanders, in Italy, Prince Eugene of Savoy, the general of the allies, had, even The war in Italy. in the winter, been carrying on operations against Marshal Villeroi. That Marshal had been taken prisoner at Cremona, and had been succeeded by Vendome. A great but indecisive battle had been fought in August at Luzara, after which the armies were left facing each other, the French still occupying The war at sea. the Milanese. The maritime war had been as indecisive as that upon the Continent; an English expedition under the Duke of Ormond had been sent against Cadiz; it had failed in its original object, but on the way home had succeeded in destroying a Spanish treasure fleet in the Bay of Vigo. In the West Indies, an event occurred almost unprecedented in English history. The English fleet had been defeated in a great battle, not by the[880] superiority of the enemy, but by the treason of its own commanders. Admiral Benbow, who had engaged a superior force of the enemy, after a fight of several days, was deserted by some of his captains. Wounded and dying, he was forced to withdraw. He lived long enough to have his captains condemned to death by court martial.

The campaign of this year was thus wholly indecisive. The English and Dutch had secured the possession of the Rhine and the Meuse; but the German army was threatened in front from Alsace, while its rear and southern flank were exposed to the victorious army of Villars and the Elector of Bavaria: in Italy the French still held the Milanese against the attacks of Prince Eugene. But before the next campaign opened the position of France had changed considerably for the worse. The diplomacy of Louis had hitherto secured the predominance of French influence in both Spain and Italy by the adhesion of Savoy and Portugal to his cause. Victor Amadeus of Savoy had been won by the marriage of his daughter with the King of Spain; but, situated in the midst of great powers, his conduct was almost of necessity shifting, and his policy directed rather to his own advantage and to the interests of Italy than to the more general interests of Europe; the offer on the part of Austria to give up to him the districts of Montferrat and Novara induced him to desert Louis and to declare in favour of the Grand Alliance. The French army in the Milanese was thus separated from France, and its energy paralyzed. By similar means the fidelity of Portugal was also undermined. A promise of a certain portion of the Spanish possessions both in Spain and in America, and a treaty known as the Methuen Treaty, securing to Portugal great advantage in her trade with England, induced her to join the Grand Alliance. The importance of this adhesion was great, as it afforded an opening for the allied armies to act directly against Spain, the possession of which country was the real object of the war. Nor were these defections the only causes of danger which beset France. Disturbances had broken out in Louis' own dominions. The Protestants of the Cevennes, driven to despair by the cruel conduct of the Intendant, Marshal de Baville, and of the Catholic clergy, had broken into open rebellion, and the irregular efforts of the Camissards, as they were called, had become formidable under the skilful guidance of Cavalier, a baker's lad, who showed extraordinary aptitude for partisan warfare.

These misfortunes on the part of France were somewhat balanced[881] by the defection, already mentioned, of the Elector of Bavaria; and Campaign of 1703. Louis determined to take advantage of the road to Vienna thus opened to him, and to throw his chief efforts in that direction. Thither therefore Villars marched through the Black Forest, having previously captured the fortress of Kehl opposite Strasbourg. The movement, however, was only partially successful; while Villars wished to march upon Vienna, already threatened by an insurrection in Hungary, the Elector insisted upon moving into the Tyrol. The peasantry of that mountainous district, deeply attached to Austria, thwarted all his efforts to advance, and when Louis of Baden, leaving the lines of Stolhofen, appeared in Bavaria, the Elector was compelled to withdraw and rejoin Villars. Too weak to defeat the Margrave, the combined generals were obliged to content themselves with checking the German troops coming against them from Franconia under Count Stirum at Hochstädt. Villars, who traced the ruin of the campaign to the rejection of his advice, clamoured to be recalled, and his place was but badly filled by Marsin.

Meanwhile, Marshal Tallard had been repairing last year's disasters in Alsace. Brisach had been taken, the Prince of Hesse, with troops from Stolhofen, had been defeated at Spires while attempting to relieve Landau, and that city had been retaken by the French (Nov. 17). In Flanders Marlborough had formed a great plan to conquer Antwerp and Ostend, but had been thwarted by the slowness of the Dutch, and by the defeat of their army under Opdam at Echeren. The Duke had to content himself with the capture of Bonn upon the Rhine, and with further progress upon the Meuse, where he captured Huy and Limburg.

The following year, 1704, saw a change in the ministry at home. Finding himself thwarted by the extreme High Tories, Marlborough had obtained their dismissal, and the admission of Harley and St. John to the ministry. In the meantime Louis was making vast efforts, and had set on foot no less than eight armies. There was to be war at once in Flanders, in Bavaria, in Alsace, in Savoy, in Lombardy, in Spain, and against the Cevennes. To Villars was intrusted the reduction of the Cevennes, which had been vainly attempted the preceding year by the Marshal Montreval. The Duke of Berwick was to subdue Portugal, Vendome to act against Savoy, Villeroi to stand on the defensive in Flanders, and the great effort of the year was again to be in Bavaria, where the events of the preceding year promised fresh success. There a considerable French army under Marsin had collected, and thither now was proceeding[882] a fresh army under Tallard, which would raise the forces in the country much beyond anything the Emperor could bring to meet them. Early in May Marshal Tallard led 15,000 troops through the Black Forest, and formed his junction with the Elector. He then hastened back to Alsace, where 30,000 men had been left to oppose the Margrave of Baden.

The march to BLENHEIM. June to August 1704.

The position of the Emperor seemed indeed almost hopeless. While the French and Bavarians were advancing directly towards his capital on the west, the Hungarians, under Prince Ragotski, with constantly increasing forces, were approaching Vienna from the east, so that in June it became necessary to throw up works for the defence of the capital. Marlborough watched the coming crisis with much anxiety, and formed a plan of great boldness for the Emperor's relief. It was no less than to march the whole of the troops under his command, and to transfer the seat of war to Bavaria, interposing between Vienna and the advancing Bavarians. Previous experience had taught him that there was no hope of persuading the Dutch to countenance such a plan. To the States he therefore suggested only a campaign on the Moselle, and co-operation with Louis of Baden in the south; to Godolphin alone he told his secret. At length a threat that he would move upon the Moselle with the English alone, backed up by the influence of Heinsius, the Grand Pensionary, who was his constant friend, induced the Dutch to give their consent to the part of the plan he had disclosed to them. Other obstacles were The march to Blenheim. met with from the other allies, but they were all at length overcome, and early in May Marlborough set out, ostensibly for the Moselle. To keep up this notion he went first to Coblenz, and the French proceeded to collect their armies to meet him. He then went on to Mayence, and it was believed that he intended to act in Alsace. He was there obliged to disclose his real object. He left the Rhine, marched up the Neckar, and advanced through the Duchy of Wurtemberg. On his road to Mondelsheim, he had a meeting with Eugene, who was commanding the Imperial army on the Rhine. To him he told his plans; and the intercourse of the two great chiefs ripened into unbroken friendship. They were there also joined by Louis of Baden, a punctilious German general of some ability, but belonging to an older school of tactics. Marlborough and Eugene suggested that the Margrave should retire to his lines at Stolhofen, and hold them against Tallard, while Eugene should bring such of the German army as was moveable to co-operate with[883] the English. The Margrave, however, insisted on the place of honour. Eugene went back to the Rhine, the Margrave joined Marlborough; and the difficulty of the chief command was compromised, the generals were to command on alternate days. After making[884] these arrangements, the armies proceeded on their march through the rough hill country of Wurtemberg. Having crossed the Neckar at Laufen, they followed the course of its tributaries, by Gross Heppach, Ebersbach, and the difficult pass of Geislingen, and finally emerged upon the plains, reaching the Danube at Elchingen, a little to the east of Ulm. The Elector, expecting an attack upon that city, garrisoned it and withdrew, still on the north bank of the river, to Dillingen, further to the east. But Marlborough had no intention of attacking Ulm, he continued his march eastward, determining to pass round and beyond the Elector's army and to secure Donauwerth, which would supply him with a bridge to cross the river, and might be turned into a fortified place for his magazines. With some difficulty he persuaded Louis of Baden to march in this direction. His intention being at length evident, the Elector of Bavaria sent 12,000 men to occupy the strong hill of the Schellenberg, commanding Donauwerth. When the day broke, the English army were at Amerdingen, still fourteen miles from Donauwerth. It was however the day of Marlborough's command. At three in the morning he started on his march, and afraid of allowing the opportunity to slip, though his men were weary from their long journey, Marlborough determined to assault the Schellenberg that same afternoon. The battle was a fierce one, but the allies were entirely successful. The Bavarians fled in disorder. Some thousands crossed the bridge, but the weight of the fugitives broke it down, and a vast number were drowned in the river. The Elector of Bavaria now withdrew to Augsburg, to await the arrival of reinforcements from France. Marlborough and his army crossed the Lech, and proceeded to follow him. Bavaria was at his mercy. He offered the Elector terms of capitulation. They were however refused, and Marlborough was guilty of the one act which is a blot on his military career, he gave the country up to military execution.

The two French generals Villeroi and Tallard, outwitted by Marlborough's march, had meanwhile taken counsel together, and once more Tallard, leaving Villeroi in Alsace, led a reinforcement of 25,000 men to join the Bavarians. He was watched and followed by Prince Eugene, who reached the Danube at Dillingen almost at the moment that Tallard had formed his junction with the Bavarians at Augsburg. As Eugene's reinforcements were necessary, Marlborough fell back to meet him, and soon Eugene, leaving his troops behind him, appeared in person in the camp. Between them they persuaded the Margrave of Baden that the capture of the fortress of Ingolstadt[885] was necessary, and that, as it had hitherto never been taken, it would be much to his honour to reduce it. Thus rid of their pretentious colleague, Eugene and Marlborough arranged their junction, which was finally made, without disturbance from the French, on the 11th of August, a little to the east of Hochstädt, on the north of the Danube. The combined armies of the French and Bavarians had also betaken themselves to the same side of the river, and were now advancing from the west to meet the allied army, should they wish to fight. It was believed, however, that such was not Marlborough's Battle of Blenheim. Aug. 13th. intention. Tallard thought he was withdrawing towards Nordlingen, and, as he said after the battle, had intended to fall upon him and fight him on his way thither. When it became evident that a battle was to be fought, the French general, advancing from Hochstädt, took up a strong position in the neighbourhood of the village of Blenheim. The hills which lie along the north of the Danube there fall back a little, enclosing a small plain. Across this runs a brook called the Nebel, at the foot[886] of a spur of rising land which runs from the foot of the receding hills to the Danube, where its termination is crowned by the village of Blenheim. The course of the Nebel is full of morasses difficult to pass, but a gradual slope of firm ground leads from it to the top of the rising ground. Along this ridge the French and Bavarians took up their position. The Elector of Bavaria, with Marshal Marsin, occupied the left, where, in the midst of woods, the rising ground joins the hills; Marshal Tallard with the French occupied Blenheim and the right. Considering Blenheim as the key of the position, Marshal Tallard fortified it with palisades, and placed in it a considerable portion of his infantry, thus depriving himself of their assistance upon the battlefield, and weakening the centre of his army. To the French was opposed Marlborough in person, while Eugene, in command of the right wing, and with a considerably smaller number of troops, led the attack against the Elector. The difficulties he met with prevented Eugene from being early in position, but news were at length brought that he was ready to begin the battle, and Marlborough at once proceeded to the attack. The battle began on the part of the English with an assault upon the intrenched village. It was too strong to be taken, and the assailants were driven back with some loss. But the vigour of the opposition his troops had met with showed Marlborough his enemy's mistake. He determined to direct his chief assault upon the centre of the line. The infantry which were attacking Blenheim were ordered to seek shelter behind some rising ground, and to keep up such a feigned attack upon the place as should give employment to the troops stationed there. Meanwhile, with considerable difficulty, the English army was brought across the marshes, and established in position upon the firm ground beyond. In the French line cavalry and infantry were interlaced; this arrangement was copied by the assailants. The first effort of the English to ascend the slope was defeated, but after a fierce interchange of fire, a second attempt broke the French cavalry, and destroying the infantry, pierced the centre of the French line. The battle was in fact won, no help could be sent to Tallard by the Elector, a decisive charge of cavalry drove the enemy's horse off the field, and the army fled in two bodies, one towards the river, the other towards Hochstädt. Both were hotly pursued, and of those who fled towards the river thousands perished in the stream. Blenheim still held out, but, cut off from all succour, surrounded by the whole English army, and threatened by the approaching artillery, the gallant garrison was compelled to capitulate,[887] and 11,000 men laid down their arms. The right wing being completely destroyed, the Elector of Bavaria had found it necessary to withdraw his troops from the battle, although they had hitherto held their position against the fierce attacks of Eugene. In the confusion he managed to retire without much loss. The victory, however, was a very complete one; 60,000 strong in the morning of the 13th, on the 14th the French and Bavarian generals found themselves at the head of no more than 20,000 men. All their tents and baggage, and most of their artillery and colours, had fallen into the hands of the allies. The list of killed and wounded on the side of the allies was about 12,000. Marshal Tallard himself was among the prisoners. Again, even after this defeat, the Elector of Bavaria declined all terms, and his wife, as Regent, had to submit to such conditions as the German Emperor chose to impose. So great was the blow, that the French retreated with extreme rapidity; they gave up the strong fortress of Ulm, and withdrew beyond the Rhine, whither they were pursued by the allies, who, following separate routes, again assembled at Philipsburg; nor even there did Villeroi withstand them, but still falling back, allowed them to recapture Landau, during which operation Marlborough completed his work by rapidly marching into the valley of the Moselle and conquering Trèves and Trarbach.

Events of some importance had been taking place in three of the other seats of war. In Spain, Berwick had completely worsted the Portuguese, who had been so badly succoured by the English under the Duke of Schomberg that he had been recalled, and Ruvigny, Earl of Galway, a French refugee, put in his place; while, to balance this, a fleet under Sir George Rooke, having on board the Prince of Darmstadt, and some troops, while returning from an unsuccessful attack on Barcelona, made an easy conquest of Gibraltar, and took possession of it in the name of the English, to whom it has ever since belonged. In the Cevennes, a merciful policy had brought the rebellion to an end, and Cavalier having been offered the commission of colonel in the French army, which he at first accepted and then declined, had been allowed to leave the country. He entered the English army, rose to the rank of general, and was subsequently Governor of Jersey.

Meanwhile affairs in Italy had been assuming a shape which rendered it probable that the great interest of the war would be transferred thither in the following year. Vendome had been rapidly reducing the territory of the Duke of Savoy. One after the other his fortresses had been captured, and no hope seemed left him but in[888] immediate succour, either from the Emperor, who was not likely to give it, or from Marlborough himself.

As was natural after his great successes, Marlborough expected that the next year would be one of much importance. Seeing the impossibility of himself assisting Savoy, he had contrived to persuade the King of Prussia to allow 8000 of his troops to proceed to Italy, and to serve under Eugene, who had been despatched thither. His own intention was to follow up his late victory by an invasion of France. He had intended that this invasion should be by the valley of the Moselle, upon which a joint attack was to have been made, by himself up the river, and by Louis of Baden coming from Landau. The plan had been so far foreseen, that the ablest of the French generals, Marshal Villars, was stationed on the Moselle, while Flanders was intrusted to Villeroi, and Marsin continued in Alsace. The weak co-operation of the German Prince rendered the plan abortive, nor did the death of the Emperor Leopold, nor the succession of Joseph the young King of the Romans, increase for any length of time the vigour of the Imperial armies. But while Marlborough was still waiting for the Margrave's assistance, Villeroi had suddenly assumed the offensive, had retaken some of the fortresses of the Meuse, and invested Liège. As usual, on the slightest sign of danger, the Dutch were clamorous for Marlborough's return. His disappointment on the Moselle inclined him to listen to them, and his appearance in Flanders at once re-established affairs. Though disappointed in his main object, he still intended to fight a great battle; but, as usual, jealousy of the allied commanders, and the constant slowness and opposition of the Dutch general, prevented him from bringing on an engagement. He however succeeded in breaking the great line of French fortifications extending from Antwerp to Namur upon the Meuse, and in advancing to the attack of Brussels across the plain of Waterloo, where, but for the opposition he met with among his own colleagues, a great battle might have been fought: he writes, that he felt sure that, had he fought such a battle, it would have been a greater victory than that of Blenheim. However, his difficulties were more than he could overcome. The year passed away without great events, and the French began to think that he had owed his victories to chance. Upon the Rhine, Louis of Baden, though he had been so backward in his support of Marlborough, showed the ability which he really possessed by winning a great battle at the end of the year at Hagenau, unfortunately too late to assist Marlborough in his plans. In Italy,[889] though Eugene won the battle of Cassano, the position of the Duke of Savoy became continually more precarious, and the crisis had not passed.

It was in fact not with either of the great regular armies that the allies this year won any great successes, but with the small and mixed forces in Spain, which had been placed under the eccentric but vigorous command of Lord Peterborough. Leaving Galway to prosecute the war in the west, this general, who held with Sir Cloudesley Shovel a joint command of the fleet also, drew the Prince of Darmstadt from Gibraltar, and sailed round the east of Spain. After some successes on the eastern coast, he was eager to march direct upon Madrid. But the Archduke Charles, now calling himself Charles III., who was with him, listened in preference to the suggestions of Darmstadt, who had once been Governor of Catalonia, and trusted much to his influence in that province. The plan of an attack upon Madrid was therefore overridden, and the army proceeded to besiege Barcelona. Serious quarrels occurred between the leaders, for which Peterborough's want of caution was no doubt much to blame, and the siege was on the point of being given up. Already the heavy cannon were withdrawn from the trenches and carried on board ship, when suddenly Peterborough appeared in the tent of the Prince of Darmstadt, with whom he was not on speaking terms, and telling him that he intended to attack the enemy that night, challenged him to follow him. Laying aside his animosity, the Prince at once accompanied him. Peterborough's intention was to capture the citadel of Montjuich, a fort at some little distance from the town itself, and this he trusted to do by a sudden attack when the enemy were off their guard. The attempt was perfectly successful. The English troops followed the defenders pell mell into the walls of the fortress. Scarcely was the stronghold taken than the Spaniards began to advance from the town to retake it. Peterborough rode forward to reconnoitre; a panic seized his troops in his absence, and they were already relinquishing the fort, when he galloped back and rallied them, and fortunately found that their absence had been unperceived. The possession of this citadel was followed before long by the fall of the city, which capitulated on the 9th of October (1705). The greater portion of the troops in Barcelona, and much of the open country, at once declared for King Charles. The kingdom of Valencia followed this example, and in the capital of that province Peterborough subsequently took up his abode. Nor did his successes end there. In the following year, the French, under Marshal Tessé and[890] King Philip himself, attempted to regain Barcelona. The Count of Toulouse, a natural son of the French King, blockaded it from the sea. Peterborough, moving from Valencia with but 3000 regular troops, did his best to employ Tessé's army, which was 20,000 strong. But the siege went forward uninterruptedly. Already the trenches were within 150 yards of the wall, and an immediate assault was to be expected, when the English fleet under Sir John Leake, second in command, approached. Though his numbers were nearly equal to those of the Count of Toulouse, Leake, a prudent commander, wished to wait for expected reinforcements under Byng. But Peterborough, feeling that delay would be ruinous, determined upon a strange step to compel immediate action. He got on board an open boat and proceeded in quest of the English fleet. After searching for a whole day and night in vain, he at length reached the squadron. Having produced a new commission which had been given him, which gave him full command over Leake whenever he was himself on board, he at once hoisted his flag and gave orders for the attack. But meanwhile, hearing of the arrival of the English, the Count of Toulouse had withdrawn his fleet, the town could be easily approached from the sea, and Tessé thought it better to raise the siege. After this brilliant exploit, Peterborough again wished to march upon Madrid from Valencia, but King Charles, on the advice of his German council, whom Peterborough speaks of by the contemptuous name of "the Vienna crew," determined upon advancing straight through Aragon, and called upon Peterborough to move his troops from Valencia to join him on the march. Meanwhile the army of the west, under Galway and Das Minas, had, after considerable delay, moved upon Madrid also, and had occupied it. They found, however, the feeling there strongly in favour of King Philip. As Aragon and Catalonia had favoured Charles, so, in the spirit of hereditary opposition, the Castilians devoted themselves to the interest of Philip. So strong was the opposition they met with, that the allies had to leave the capital and fall back eastward towards the approaching army of Charles, with whom they formed a junction. But in the combined army there were far too many commanders for vigorous action. Peterborough, the only man of genius among them, found himself constantly thwarted: he put no restraint upon his tongue. Bitter quarrels were the consequence, and he found it necessary to leave the army and betake himself to Italy, which had been his original destination, in order to negotiate with the Genoese for a supply of money.

[891]

Battle of Ramillies May 23rd 1706.

The same year which saw these sudden and unexpected successes in Spain was marked by still more complete success against the French in other parts of Europe. Marlborough was determined to wipe out the bad impression which the inactivity of the last campaign had caused. His own ardent wish was to march with the army as he had in the Blenheim campaign, and to throw himself into Italy, where the critical position of affairs still continued. Finding it impossible to gratify this wish, he determined that he would at least do something vigorous in Flanders which might serve as a diversion to his friend Eugene in Italy. Bringing his army therefore across the lines which he had broken the year before in the neighbourhood of the sources of the little river Gheet, he came in sight of Villeroi, with whose army the Elector of Bavaria, having lost all troops of his own, was now serving. The place where the armies met was Ramillies.[892] Thither Villeroi had drawn his troops, with the intention of covering Battle of Ramillies. May 23, 1706. Namur, which Marlborough's advance seemed to threaten. The French general had received instructions to risk a battle to save that town, and therefore afforded Marlborough the opportunity he so much desired. The French army was very strongly posted upon a range of heights forming a semicircle round the sources of the little Gheet river. Their right almost touched the Mehaigne river, and was covered by the villages of Tavière and Ramillies. Across it ran an old road known as the road of Queen Brunehaud, closely adjoining which, in the highest part of the position, was a barrow known as the Tomb of Ottomond: from this point the position swept round till it terminated at the village of Autre-Eglise, being covered from that point by the Gheet and the marshes in which it rises. The steepness of the heights at Autre-Eglise, and the river and marsh in its front, rendered the position almost impregnable, but at the same time made it difficult for the troops stationed there to act upon the offensive. Marlborough at once saw that he had the advantage of occupying the inside of a circle, so that to any given point the movement of his troops was shorter than that of his enemy's could be. He saw also that the Tomb of Ottomond was the key of the position. If this was once in his possession, the whole line of the enemy could be enfiladed. He ordered therefore a vigorous but false assault on Autre-Eglise. His feint succeeded; both the French generals rode to that part of the field, believing it to be the point of danger. Then Marlborough ordered the real attack to be made in the neighbourhood of Tavière, Ramillies, and the road of Brunehaud. He was enabled to draw troops from his right to strengthen his left in their attack, and after some warm fighting, especially about the village of Ramillies, the position was forced, the English troops formed at right angles to their original position, and pressed onward along the high ground occupied by the enemy. Villeroi and the Elector found it impossible to save the day. Fresh difficulty was caused by the breaking down of the French baggage as it was withdrawing northwards towards Judoigne. Thus interrupted, the retreat became a rout; the enemy were pursued far beyond Judoigne to within two leagues of Louvain. They did not even rest there; a hurried consultation was held by torchlight in the market-place, and the flight immediately continued towards Brussels. The river Dyle, which Marlborough had failed to pass the preceding year, was thus left open.

The consequences of this victory were unexpectedly great. Brussels[893] opened its gates to the advancing conquerors; King Charles was proclaimed King in the capital of the Spanish Netherlands; even the line of the Scheldt was deserted, and Ghent, Bruges, and Oudenarde, fell into the hands of the allies; the great naval strongholds, Antwerp and Ostend, which had before now sustained memorable sieges, surrendered, the one on account of some quarrel within its walls, the other because of its inability to withstand the advancing allies. The list of conquests is concluded by the strongholds of Menin and Ath. In fact the effect of the battle was to drive the French entirely out of the Netherlands; Mons and Namur being the only towns of importance still remaining in their hands.

The battle even influenced affairs in Italy. The complete disorganization of the French army in Flanders made a change of commanders imperatively necessary. Vendome, regarded in some ways as the ablest French general, was summoned from Italy, where he had been acting successfully against Eugene. He had driven the Imperial army to Saves Eugene in Italy. retreat behind the Adige; the Milanese had thus been cleared, and Piedmont conquered with the exception of Turin. Into that last fortress the unfortunate Duke had withdrawn. For the purpose of taking it, a well-appointed army, under the Duke de la Feuillade, son-in-law of Chamillart the war minister, but without other claims to the command, crossed the Alps and invested the town. It was of the last importance that it should be relieved, and Eugene determined upon a march, bold even to rashness, for the purpose. Crossing the Po not far from its mouth, he followed the river upwards upon its south bank. The obstacles he encountered were many; but Vendome at this critical moment was recalled to Flanders, and Marsin and the Duke of Orleans, who took the command, allowed Eugene to cross river after river without opposition, contenting themselves with following his movements upon the opposite bank of the river. At length Eugene approached Turin, formed a junction with the Duke of Savoy, whom the laxity of the siege had allowed to leave the city with 10,000 men, and passing beyond Turin, turned his back upon France, and marched against the investing army. The siege had been carried on without skill, the lines were of immense length, and severed into various sections by the numerous rivers which join the Po in the neighbourhood of Turin. Orleans was eager to lead the troops out of the trenches and risk a pitched battle, which, as the French had a considerable advantage in numbers, might easily have resulted in Eugene's defeat. He was overruled by Marsin, who unexpectedly produced a commission as commander-in-chief,[894] and the army awaited the assault in their trenches. Even in this position they were badly commanded. Three generals, issuing sometimes contradictory orders, prevented the proper concentration of troops, and when Eugene marched against that section of the works which lay between the Doria and the Stura, not more than a third of the French army is said to have been ready to oppose him. The route of the French was complete, 200 guns, and much stores and money, fell a prey to the victors (Sept. 7). The effect of the victory was greater than the victory itself. It was found impossible to lead the broken troops into the Milanese; they fell back in confusion behind the Alps, thus leaving the force on the Adige to be surrounded by enemies. Piedmont returned to its allegiance, and in fact the whole of Italy was irretrievably lost to France, and compelled to join the Grand Alliance.

The disasters of France had been continuous. Blenheim had secured Germany, and in this year of 1706, Ramillies had been followed by the conquest of the whole of the Netherlands, Turin by the conquest of the whole of Italy, the relief of Barcelona by the occupation of Madrid by the allied forces, although they had subsequently been compelled make Louis desire peace. to fall back towards Valencia. So great were the French disasters that Louis began to think of treating, and suggested as terms on which peace might be made a new Partition Treaty, by which he would consent to acknowledge Queen Anne in England, to give the Dutch the barrier they demanded, to grant great commercial advantages to the maritime powers, and to surrender Spain and the Indies to the Archduke Charles, if only he could preserve for his grandson Philip a kingdom in Italy consisting of Milan, Naples, and Sicily. These terms were very attractive to the Dutch, who thought they had already secured all they required, but were by no means satisfactory to the Emperor, who saw that the barrier given to the Dutch must of necessity be taken from the Spanish dominions in the Netherlands, and therefore from his brother:[3] nor to Marlborough, who, though he confessed he did not believe that the King of France would ever make peace without securing some kingdom for his grandson, was desirous for his own sake to continue the war, and thought the Marlborough rejects his terms. French demand for the Milanese after the great victories which had been won unreasonable. With some difficulty he persuaded Heinsius to reject the terms, and the war proceeded on its course. It might have been better to have[895] accepted Louis' terms. Never again were the affairs of the allies in so prosperous a condition, although the continuation of the war undoubtedly told in their favour by the gradual exhaustion it produced in France.

It seemed indeed in the course of the next year as if the tide of victory had wholly turned. Peterborough had returned to Spain, and viewing the altered state of affairs, was now as eager to act on the defensive as he had been before to urge an advance upon Madrid. His advice was again disregarded. The introduction of Sunderland into the ministry at home was unfavourable to him, and he was recalled, leaving the command of Spain in the somewhat incompetent hands of Das Minas and Galway. These generals, determining to act on the offensive, marched out of Valencia towards Madrid, but were met near Almanza by the lately Almanza. April 25, 1707. reinforced army of Berwick, and suffered a complete defeat. The consequence was the loss of Valencia and Saragossa, so that Charles was only able to maintain himself in the province of Catalonia. The battle of Almanza was fought on the 25th Stolhofen. May 22. of April. On the 22nd of the following month, Marshal Villars completely surprised the Margrave of Bareuth, who had succeeded the late Margrave Louis of Baden in command of the Imperial troops on the Rhine. The lines of Stolhofen, which had been so long held against the French, were taken and destroyed. Nor was the advance of the allied army of Italy into the south of France more successful. Eugene and the Duke of Savoy reached Toulon and besieged it. But sickness had much decreased the number of the allies; a considerable detachment had been sent to complete Toulon. Aug. 20. the conquest of Naples, and the appearance of Marshal Tessé with a large army, and the threat of an assault upon their rear, induced them to raise the siege and retire beyond the Alps. Nor was there anything done in Flanders to redeem the ill-success which had met the allied arms elsewhere. Marlborough in vain attempted to bring the French to a pitched battle. The Dutch had lost confidence after receiving the news of Almanza and Stolhofen, and renewed their old dilatory policy; the rains also somewhat impeded the campaign, which was closed without any important event.

One valuable diplomatic service, however, Marlborough had performed. Charles XII. of Sweden was in the midst of his victorious career. Having defeated the Russians at Narva, he had succeeded in driving Augustus, Elector[896] of Saxony, from the throne of Poland, and entering Saxony itself, was now in the neighbourhood of Leipsic. Sweden was the old ally of France, and Louis did not let Charles forget it. For a moment there seemed a chance that Charles would follow in the footsteps of Gustavus Adolphus, throw himself and his victorious army into Germany, and ruin the cause of the allies. To deter him from this step Marlborough visited him at his camp, and successfully directed his ambition towards his old enemies the Russians, against whom he shortly marched to meet his ruin at the battle of Pultowa.

The beginning of the ensuing year was marked by a new incident in the war. The hopes of Louis were raised by the reports of the general discontent prevalent in Scotland; a large portion of that nation had seen with dislike the late completion of the Union, and assurances were brought to France of the readiness of the Jacobite party to rise in arms. An invasion was determined on and actually set on foot. The fleet was all ready to sail, when Prince James Edward, afterwards called the Old Pretender, but now known by the name of the Chevalier de St. George, who was to accompany it, was taken ill of the measles. The expedition was postponed for some weeks, and these weeks were enough to destroy its chance of success. Byng with a powerful fleet appeared in the Channel, troops were brought over from the Continent and others collected in England, and though the little squadron succeeded in eluding the fleet and reached the Firth of Forth, there was no sign of a general rising of the Jacobites, and it had to return from its fruitless expedition, glad to escape with safety.

This threatened invasion had of course retained Marlborough in England. It was not till somewhat late that he could join the army. With a slight change of generals the war continued its old course. Villars was employed to reduce Piedmont, Berwick and the Elector of Bavaria were on the Rhine, Spain had been intrusted to the Duke of Orleans, while in Flanders, which was this year selected as the great battlefield, Vendome was to oppose Marlborough, having with him as nominal commander-in-chief the Duke of Burgundy, the heir to the French throne. Marlborough had again formed a great scheme for the campaign. His intention was that the Elector of Hanover, who after the defeat of Stolhofen had taken command of the Imperial troops, should remain on the Rhine, and that Eugene, with whom he again longed Marlborough's plan. to act in co-operation, should form a new army and assist him on the Moselle. The two generals met in April at[897] the Hague, and there agreed that they would make an ostensible plan for the invasion of Lorraine, but that they should in fact join their two armies, and act rapidly and decisively to complete the conquest of the Netherlands. Eugene met with infinite difficulties in forming his new army, and Marlborough was still singlehanded when Vendome began an offensive movement.

The French army had been concentrated at Mons, on the south-west of the Netherlands. It thence advanced northward towards Brussels. Fearing for the capital, Marlborough took up a position to cover it, but suddenly the French marched off eastward, and threatened Louvain. This was, however, but a feint. The real intention of the French was to act upon the western frontier, upon the river Scheldt. The Dutch had made themselves highly unpopular in the Netherlands since they had had possession of that province; the disaffected inhabitants of the great towns on the Scheldt had opened correspondence with Vendome, and were prepared to surrender their cities to him. Having therefore drawn Marlborough towards Louvain, he suddenly marched westward to Alost, across the front of the English army, sending forward on his march detachments, to which Ghent and Bruges surrendered without a struggle. As the town of Oudenarde, somewhat higher up the river, would complete the security of these new acquisitions, it was determined to besiege it. Marlborough had followed close upon the heels of the French, circling round Brussels so as to defend the capital. He had not ceased to urge Eugene to join him with his troops, which, according to agreement, should have been with him many weeks before. The delay was no fault of the Prince's; he was already hurrying to join Marlborough, when, hearing that it was his intention to fight a battle in defence of Oudenarde, and unable to bring up his troops, he hastened forward alone and joined the English army. Between Marlborough's army and Oudenarde ran the river Dender, which the French determined to hold to cover the siege. Alost, which lies a little to the north of Oudenarde, they already possessed; at about an equal distance to the south, also on the river Dender, was the entrenched camp of Lessines. Could they occupy this they would be in a good position to cover the siege. Marlborough foresaw their intention, and determined to forestall them. Although the river between Lessines and Alost makes a considerable curve, and Marlborough, on the convex side of it, had almost twice the distance to traverse that the French had, he pushed on with such rapidity that he secured Lessines and the passage[898] of the river before the French columns appeared in sight. It was now evident to the French generals that Marlborough intended to fight. They drew in their detachments, and marched rapidly to cross the Scheldt at Gavre, to the north of Oudenarde. Marlborough marched direct upon that city, so that the converging lines of march would speedily meet. It was known that there was much disputing and ill-feeling between Vendome and the Duke of Burgundy, and that the latter Prince intended, if possible, to avoid an engagement. With all speed Marlborough sent forward General Cadogan to secure the passage of the river, and prepare bridges for his army. After he had performed this duty, Cadogan rode forward to reconnoitre, and saw the French troops crossing at Gavre, and, in ignorance of the immediate vicinity of the English, quietly sending out foragers. With such troops as he had he drove in the outlying posts of the enemy, who now, apprised of the approach of Marlborough, found a battle inevitable.

A little to the north of Oudenarde the river Norken joins the Scheldt, after a course almost parallel to that river. Between the Norken and the Scheldt an irregular semicircle of hills sweeps with the convex side of one of its arms at Oudenarde, while the other, surmounted by the village Oycke, overhangs the Norken; it contains in its hollow two little brooks which fall into the Scheldt just north of Oudenarde. On the other side of these brooks, closing the opening of the semicircle, is an irregular mass of rising ground sloping away northward towards the junction of the Scheldt and Norken. Vendome gave orders to occupy this irregular mass and the valleys of the brooks, the arm of the semicircle between Oudenarde and the course of the brooks being occupied by Cadogan. But the Duke of Burgundy counter-ordered his commands, and arranged his troops upon what was doubtless a stronger position, the range of hills beyond the Norken. But though stronger for defence, it was much less favourable for an offensive battle. These contradictory commands cost the French their first loss. Seven battalions of their troops having pushed forward towards Oudenarde as far as Eyne, were fallen upon and destroyed by Cadogan, who thus crossed the brook and ascended the irregular high land beyond it. Had Vendome's order been carried out the position of Cadogan would have been very precarious. He was almost unsupported, although Marlborough was coming to his assistance with some cavalry, which he led forward for several miles at a gallop. As it was, however, the English army came up by degrees, and took position with their left on the semicircle of hills, and their right supporting Cadogan beyond the brook. Thwarted in his first schemes, Vendome now wished to remain beyond the Norken, knowing that the enemy were wearied with a long march (it was already four in the afternoon), and that he would have an opportunity of withdrawing quietly in the night towards France. The Duke of Burgundy again thwarted him. He commanded the right wing, and insisted upon sending his troops forward across the Norken into the valleys where the brooks ran. The country was there broken up with enclosures, and a fierce hand-to-hand battle was fought with the English right, which Marlborough had intrusted to Eugene. The exhibition of all the English cavalry upon the high lands beyond the brooks held the French left entirely in check; and while Eugene and the English were disputing the hedges and enclosures in the valley, Marlborough, passing to the left, observed that the extremity of the semicircle, which overhung the Norken and was occupied by the village of Oycke, was unguarded by the French. He caused Overkirk with the Dutch reserve to march round the hills to occupy this point, and thus completely envelop the French right. The effect was the total annihilation of that part of the French army, and it was owing to an accident alone that any part of it escaped. The two extremes of the enveloping English line came so close together, that in the darkness they fired upon each other. The mistake was happily soon discovered, but fearing a repetition of the accident, the general gave orders rather to let the French escape than to run the risk of renewing such a disaster. Some 9000 men thus broke through at a gap in the semicircle of hills near the Castle of Bevere, and made their escape to France. The rest of the beaten army retired toward Ghent.

[899]

Battle of Oudenard. July 11th, 1708.

[900]

Both armies were speedily reinforced. Eugene's troops arrived from the Moselle, and joined the English; Berwick, with part of the army of the Rhine, which had been observing them, reinforced the French, but the relative numbers of the troops were not much changed. Marlborough and Eugene had now to settle upon a further plan of action. Before them lay the great city of Lille, one of the earliest conquests of Louis XIV., newly fortified with all the skill of Vauban. Siege of Lille. Dec. 9, 1708. That the allies should cross the frontier and enter France was speedily determined. But while Marlborough suggested the bold plan of leaving troops to mask Lille, while the main army marched direct to Paris, Eugene, though by no means a timid general, urged the more regular course of besieging and[901] capturing the great fortress which lay in their way before proceeding further. The arguments in favour of this plan were too plausible to be disregarded. It was decided that while Eugene in person undertook the siege, Marlborough should command the covering army. Even to bring the siege material to the spot was a matter of no small difficulty; the artillery alone required 16,000 horses, and the progress of the siege was watched by a French army of 100,000. When these preliminary difficulties were triumphantly overcome, there still remained the great fortress itself, occupied by 15,000 men, under the able command of Boufflers. At one time the Dutch deputies were so alarmed at the slowness of the progress made that they urged the renunciation of the project. One of the greatest difficulties experienced by the allied commanders was the provisioning of the army; the land communication with Brussels was entirely cut off, all provisions had to be brought from Ostend, whither they had been conveyed by sea. The French determined to interrupt this line of communication also, and to destroy one of the convoys which had been intrusted to General Webb, with a most insufficient detachment of troops. It has been suggested that Marlborough was here playing one of his old tricks, that, in his jealousy of Webb, he wished for his destruction, and had intentionally exposed him to this danger. If such was the case he was thoroughly disappointed. When the French troops fell upon the convoy at Wynendale, Webb made a most gallant defence and beat them off. The very slight notice taken by Marlborough in his despatches of this gallant action gives some colour to the rumour. The victory of Wynendale was at all events the turning-point of the siege; from this time rapid progress was made. On the 22nd of October Boufflers found it necessary to capitulate for the town, while retaining the citadel, and on the 9th of December he marched out of his last stronghold with all the honours of war. The reconquest of Ghent and Bruges followed upon the fall of Lille.

In other directions the war had been languid. In Spain only had anything been done. There Stanhope had taken the command in conjunction with Staremberg, the Imperial general, and had succeeded without much difficulty in capturing Port Mahon in Minorca, a place then regarded as more valuable than Gibraltar, and of the highest importance as affording a safe winter harbour for the English fleet in the Mediterranean.

For some years the exhaustion of France had been great. The finance ministers had been reduced to the most ruinous expedients[902] to maintain the war, and the whole people were suffering terribly. Exhaustion of France. 1709. To crown their misery, the winter of 1708 was of extraordinary severity and duration. The corn crops were frozen in the ground, the very apple trees perished with cold. Famine threatened to destroy what the war had spared. Louis became very anxious to treat; and as for some years it had been supposed that the Dutch were inclined to accept a separate pacification, it was to them that Louis addressed himself. The war party was however for the present in the ascendant, and Heinsius, who, as Grand Louis offers to treat. Pensionary of Holland, exercised a predominant influence in the Council of the Dutch, let it be clearly understood that the Republic would treat only in conjunction with the allies, and that the allied demands would be very high. Louis however despatched an ambassador to see what terms could be made, but he met with a cold reception. The Government in England, especially the Whig members of it, were indignant at the threatened invasion of Scotland in the previous year, and induced the Parliament to vote that the Queen's title and the Protestant succession, the dismissal of the Pretender from High demands of the allies. France, and the demolition of the fortifications of Dunkirk, should be necessary elements in any treaty: while the Dutch claimed a line of ten fortresses on the Flemish frontier (including some still in the possession of France), and the restoration of Strasburg and Luxemburg. Nor, in exchange for these high demands, was any specific promise of peace given. Such was the position of the French Government, that even these terms were taken into consideration, and Torcy the French minister offered, though he could get no proper passport, to go himself privately and see what could be done to ameliorate them. He found the allies determined to demand at least the resignation of the whole Spanish succession, together with the restoration of Newfoundland to England. This demand put Louis in a difficult position. It was no longer, he declared, in his power to surrender Spain, for his grandson King Philip had a will of his own, and, although he might have been induced to resign Spain for an Italian kingdom, did not choose to become altogether crownless. Louis now reaped the fruits of his former bad faith as a negotiator. The allies, believing that this excuse was fictitious, and alleged merely to gain time, drew up their demands in accordance with the preliminaries, and would promise in exchange for the great concessions demanded from Louis only two months' truce. If in that time Philip could not be induced to resign Spain, the French King was to pledge himself[903] to join with the allies to expel him by force of arms. When Rejected by Louis. Torcy returned with these terrible terms, a Council was held at Versailles, and amidst tears of indignation at the ignominious propositions, it was determined that, in spite of the necessity of the moment, it was impossible to accept them. Louis declared, if he had to fight, he would rather fight against his enemies than against his own children. And now at length, humbled by reverses, he threw himself on the patriotism of his people; a stirring proclamation was circulated through the provinces; the King set the example of patriotism by turning his plate and costly works of art into money; the whole nation was touched by his humility, and the war began again with renewed vigour. The allies had indeed pressed their demands beyond what was either generous or politic.

Villars, the only great French marshal as yet undefeated, was intrusted with the duty of checking the victorious advance of Eugene Battle of Malplaquet. and Marlborough. His name, and the newly roused patriotism of the country, raised the spirits of the army, though they were in want of many of the necessaries of life. Villars, determined to act upon the defensive, saw Tournay fall without moving. Thence the conquerors advanced to Mons, the capital of Hainault. It seemed necessary, if possible, to prevent the siege of this town. The rapidity of the movements of the allies prevented Villars from attaining that object, but the investment was scarcely formed when he crossed the Scheldt at Valenciennes, and appeared with his army in the immediate neighbourhood. The corner of the country between the Haine river on the north, and the Trouille on the east, in which Mons stands, is crossed by a barrier of high ground, rendered more difficult by large woods and forests. To approach Mons from the south and west this ridge has to be crossed, and the only convenient passage is by the Trouée, or open gap, between the woods of Lanière towards the east, and Taisnière towards the west. Between these woods the high land falls by several ravines into the plain of Mons. On the crown of the ridge is the heath and village of Malplaquet. Marlborough and Eugene, supposing that the object of Villars would be to pass through this gap and attempt to raise the siege of Mons, brought their army to the foot of the ascending ravines. But Villars, under whom Boufflers, though his senior in rank, was serving as a volunteer, feeling certain that at all events a battle would be fought, determined to adopt a defensive position, and during the night and day after his arrival at Malplaquet strongly[904] fortified the flanking woods and the crown of the hill. Marlborough was anxious to attack before the fortifications were complete, but Eugene thought it necessary to await the arrival of troops coming from the siege of Tournay. A day was thus lost, and time allowed to render the fortifications much stronger. The battle, which began[905] upon the 11th of September, was the most bloody and hardly contested of the war. In their first assaults the allies were repeatedly driven back, but the pressure upon the wood of Taisnière was so strong, especially when it was outflanked and threatened from the extreme right of the allies under Withers, that Villars had to weaken his centre to hold his ground. Marlborough perceived the weakness and took advantage of it. The entrenchments in the centre of the line were broken through and captured, and thus the position forced. Villars had been severely wounded, and the command had devolved upon Boufflers, who brought off the French army in perfect order, and the fruit of the hard-earned victory was nothing but the field of battle. The English encamped the following night upon the French position, having lost in their disastrous victory 20,000 men. Mons fell, but the campaign had then to be closed.

Battle of Malplaquet. Sep. 11th, 1709.

Thus far it has been possible to follow without interruption the general course of the war, but from this time forward the state of politics in England exercised so decided an influence upon it, upon the negotiations which were to bring it to a close, and upon the position and conduct of Marlborough, that it becomes necessary to turn back and trace the history of parties since the Queen's accession. Speaking quite generally, that history consists in the gradual substitution of a Whig for a Tory Government. Rochester and the extreme high Tories were disinclined to a great offensive war, and consequently directly opposed to Marlborough. The Duke, not wishing to break with any great section of English politicians, attempted, as William had done, to govern by means of the moderate men of both parties. But there was a second question which, even after the dismissal of the Tories who disliked the war, prevented the completion of his plan. The Tories were desirous that stringent measures should be taken to support the exclusive authority of the English Church, and in this point were strongly supported by the feelings of the Queen. The Whigs, on whom Marlborough was induced for the purposes of the war more and more to rely, were on the other hand inclined towards more liberal measures. It was upon this point that the second secession of the Tories took place, leaving Marlborough entirely in the hands of the Whigs, and in a certain degree in opposition to the Queen. It was the Whig determination when triumphant to suppress the expression of High Church feeling that produced the complete overthrow of Marlborough's ministry. At the same time, as in the former reign, disputes between the Houses continued,[906] especially when a Tory majority in the Lower House came into collision with the constant Whig majority in the House of Lords.

Already, before the Parliament called by the late King had been dissolved, Rochester and the extreme high Tories had shown their disinclination to the war, and had besides given proof of a more exclusive party spirit than suited the views of Marlborough, to whom, as to William, the affairs of Europe and the conduct of the war were all in all, and who had no taste for party conflict. As was to be expected from the character of the ministry, a strong Tory majority was returned in October to the first Parliament of the Queen's reign. But Rochester's views were not shared by the whole of his party; Tory Parliament. Oct. 1702. indeed, the strength of party feeling tended for the time to give Marlborough the support of the Tories. In their eagerness to throw blame upon the late King, they could not refrain from contrasting him with the Duke. Marlborough had by this time begun his successful career by capturing the towns of the Meuse, and the Commons proceeded to congratulate the Queen, saying, "The wonderful progress of your Majesty's armies under the conduct of Marlborough have singularly retrieved the ancient honour of the English nation." The word retrieved, intended to imply censure on the late King, was, in spite of the opposition of the Whigs, carried by a large majority. For the present then, if merely out of opposition to William, the Tories as Dismissal of Rochester. 1703. a whole seemed pledged to support Marlborough, liberal grants were made, and shortly after the close of the session, the Government, resting upon the general feeling in its favour, felt itself strong enough to get rid of Rochester. Displeased at receiving no more important office than that of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, he left his government there, and remained in England. He thus afforded an opportunity to his enemies to order him to return to his duties. On his refusing to do so, the command was repeated in a more peremptory manner, and in his anger he sent in his resignation, which was accepted.

Before this, however, the question of Church government had been raised in the House, and the storm it excited had caused a somewhat hasty prorogation. It had been the habit of dissenting members of corporations so far to do violence to their conscience as to receive the Occasional Conformity Bill thrown out. Sacrament according to the law of the Church of England upon their appointment to municipal offices. Having thus duly qualified themselves, they had continued to hold office, but had gone back to their old forms of worship. This[907] habit, known as occasional conformity, was viewed with great jealousy by the Tories. In the first session of the Parliament a bill was brought in to render occasional conformity illegal, and to inflict heavy fines upon those who held office on such terms. The chief supporter of the measure was Henry St. John, afterwards so well known as Lord Bolingbroke. The Bill passed the House of Commons, but its amendment by the House of Lords produced such violent altercations, that the Queen found it necessary to put an end to the session. It was during this session that the Commissioners for the Union with Scotland first held their sittings. The progress of the negotiations which produced the Union in 1706 will be given subsequently.

The Parliament reassembled in November 1703, a month rendered remarkable by the greatest storm ever known in England; it is calculated that no less than 8000 lives were lost in it, while 800 houses and 400 windmills were reduced to ruins. The devastation caused among the forests in the country may be estimated by the fact that Defoe, travelling through Kent, counted 17,000 uprooted timber trees, and then desisted from reckoning them from weariness.

The session was again the scene of a great contest between the Houses. The war was still well supported, and the grants were upon a very liberal scale, rendered necessary by the additional troops required for Portugal and Spain, since Portugal had joined the Great Alliance, first under a treaty with Austria, and subsequently under The Methuen Treaty. the well-known Methuen Treaty with England. This treaty, regarded as a triumph of diplomacy, was completed by Mr. Methuen, the English minister at Lisbon, at the close of 1703. It was in exact accordance with the commercial views of the time, and contained but two articles. By the first English woollen manufactures were admitted into Portugal, by the second it was arranged that the duty on Portuguese wines should always be less by one-third than that on the wines of France. It was supposed that this would not only secure the friendship of Portugal, but would also bring much gold and silver, of which the Peninsula was the great emporium, into England, an object regarded as of the first importance under the mercantile system. It was when the Bill Occasional Conformity Bill again thrown out. against occasional conformity, which had been dropped in the preceding session, was reintroduced that the contest began. The ministers who had been eager the preceding year that the Bill should be carried, had, since the resignation of Rochester and the opposition offered by his friends,[908] grown less eager in their Tory views. In spite of their very lukewarm support, the Bill again passed the House of Commons by a large majority. But again it met with great opposition from the Lords, and was finally thrown out by a majority of eleven. As no amendments had been proposed, there was no room for angry conferences Disputes on the Aylesbury election. between the Houses. But an opportunity for quarrel was found in questions arising from the Aylesbury election. The returning officers for that borough had been notoriously guilty of tampering with the returns in favour of their own friends. At the last election the vote of Matthew Ashby had been rejected. He brought an action against the returning officer, and a verdict was found in his favour. The case was removed into the higher court, and three of the four judges of the Queen's Bench decided that all decisions with regard to votes rested entirely with the House of Commons. Upon this Ashby brought his case by a writ of error before the House of Lords, where the decision of the Queen's Bench was set aside, and the case finally settled in favour of Ashby. On this the Commons engaged in the quarrel, and declared that Ashby, by appealing to the law, was guilty of a breach of privilege. The Lords replied, declaring that the right of voting, like any other right, might be maintained by an action at the common law. There for the present the quarrel was left. It seems tolerably clear that on this point the Lords were in the right, but the newly won position of the House of Commons inspired its members with most overweening views of their own importance. In February of this year (1704) the Queen celebrated her birthday by surrendering her claim to the first-fruits of ecclesiastical benefices, which were hereafter to be employed for the benefit of the Church, and which have since been administered under the well-known name of Queen Anne's Bounty.

It was with the knowledge and co-operation of Marlborough—though he had himself taken the opportunity afforded by the prorogation to go abroad to fight the great battle of Blenheim—that his friends in the ministry succeeded in relieving themselves of the rest of the extreme Tories. For the removal of Rochester in the previous year had by no means cleared the Government of the party opposed to the active prosecution of the war. His views were accepted and supported by Nottingham and Jersey in the Upper House, by Hedges and Seymour in the House of Commons. Nottingham, true to his principles, had thrown every obstacle in his power in the way[909] of a plan which had come before the Council for utilizing for the general purposes of the war the insurrection of the Cevennes. Thwarted in his opposition, after the close of the session, he haughtily demanded of the Queen the immediate dismissal of all the Whigs in the Government, threatening in case of refusal to retire. The Queen, who loved the Tories, would probably have wished to retain him, but she was irritated at the tone of his demand. Her irritation was fostered by Godolphin and the Duchess of Marlborough, and she brought herself to dismiss both Nottingham and his followers, Jersey Replaced by moderate Tories. and Seymour. The ministry had to be reconstructed. But Marlborough and Godolphin were by no means disposed to put themselves into the hands of the Whigs; they therefore called to office another section of the Tories not adverse to the war. Harley, the Speaker of the House of Commons, was made Secretary of State, Mansell replaced Seymour, the Earl of Kent, a moderate Whig, succeeded Jersey, while the Secretary of War, an unimportant person, made room for St. John.

These changes did not improve the position of the ministers, as the Tory Party had still a strong majority in the House of Commons. Parliament. Oct. 29, 1704. Marlborough's own popularity with the House was shaken, and in the autumn session of 1704, the prevailing feeling showed itself in the form given to the vote of thanks with which the Commons met the victory at Blenheim; this was so expressed as to place on a level with the great general who had saved the Empire the Tory Admiral Rooke, who had fought an indecisive battle in the Mediterranean, for which many men thought he deserved rather blame than praise, for though almost as strong as the enemy, he had withdrawn from the battle without effecting anything. The Tory temper of the House was again shown by the increased passion with which the Occasional Conformity Bill was introduced and supported. A considerable number of the most vehement Tories were eager to adopt their old method, and to tack it to a Bill for the Land Tax. The Government, and that section of the Tories who followed the newly-appointed ministers, were sufficiently strong to defeat this movement, and the Bill met its usual fate in the House of Lords. As in the preceding session, unable to quarrel with the House of Lords for exercising their undoubted right, the Commons found means of attacking them by renewing the question of the Aylesbury election. Resting upon the decision of the House of Lords, other inhabitants of Aylesbury had sued the returning officers. The House of Commons had committed them to Newgate. The Queen's Bench[910] had refused to interfere; the prisoners demanded a writ of error. The Commons addressed the Queen against the writ, and put the prisoners into the custody of their own serjeant-at-arms. The heat of the dispute rendered a prorogation necessary (March 14).

But the conduct of the Tory majority had tended still further to incline the ministry towards the Whigs. Rooke was superseded as commander-in-chief of the fleet, Sir Cloudesley Shovel, a Whig, put in his place, and as the three years of the Parliament were now run out, the Government influence was exercised at the elections against all those who had voted for tacking the Occasional Conformity Bill. Even stronger signs were visible of the intention of the Government to form a junction with the Whigs; the ministers began an intrigue with the Junto, promising before long to give the Great Seal to William Cowper (a promise which was shortly after fulfilled), and admitted the Duke of Newcastle to the ministry as Privy Seal in the place of the Tory Duke of Buckingham. Nor was it the Government only which was changing its views. The nation at large, thoroughly interested in the war and disgusted at the conduct of the Tories, returned at the new elections a large majority of Whigs. The growing influence of the Whigs was supplemented by a family tie which connected Marlborough with that party; as Godolphin, whose son had married one of his daughters, formed a link with the Tories, so Sunderland, who had married another, connected him with the Whigs. It seemed as though a bargain advantageous to both sides might be struck between the Duke and the Whig party. The accession of Sunderland to the ministry would on the one side strengthen Marlborough's personal position, and render it more possible for him to carry on his plan of government without parties; while, on the other, it would secure to the Whigs a means of at once influencing the character of the administration. It was determined therefore that Sunderland should enter the ministry, and as there was then no vacant office, he was employed at once as extraordinary ambassador to Vienna, and in the course of the following year (1706) was raised to the office of Secretary of State. His appointment, and the gradual inclination of the Government to the Whigs, was followed,Marlborough's composite ministry. 1707. at the beginning of the year 1707, by the creation of several Whig Peers, and by a final breach with the High Tories, when the names of Buckingham, Nottingham, and Rochester were struck from the list of the Privy Council. Marlborough seemed now to have gained his object. The administration[911] was a thoroughly composite one. On the one side were a number of Whigs led by Lord Sunderland, on the other a section of more moderate Tories headed by Harley and St. John.

But Marlborough underrated the difficulty of managing a coalition. In his necessary absence abroad this difficult operation was in the hands of Godolphin, always a timid minister, without any real political convictions, and ill qualified for a great party struggle. And such a party struggle was now inevitable. All the ministers were indeed at present willing to uphold the war. On other points their views were diametrically opposed, and both sections were anxious for a more complete admission to power of their own friends. It was the personal influence of the Churchills alone which could support so strange a conjunction. That influence depended upon the favour of the Crown, which by its indirect power of influencing Parliament was practically rather strengthened than weakened by the Revolution. If that favour could be withdrawn the ill-assorted ministry must inevitably fall. This truth was clear to Harley, a man of intriguing character and the leader of the Tory section of the Harley, seeing its weakness, Cabinet. He perceived that it might be possible to rise upon the fall of the Churchills, and saw how their power might be undermined. The Queen was a devoted High Church woman; Marlborough and his friends, especially since his growing predilection for the Whigs, were avowedly careless, if they were not Low Church; Harley, on the other hand, had a great reputation for religion and orthodoxy. Again and again patronage had been bestowed on what the Queen considered Latitudinarian principles. Displeased and hurt, she was yet too timid to stand alone, Harley supplied her with the support she wanted. His cousin, Mrs. Abigail Hill, who was a cousin and protégée also of the Duchess of Marlborough, ingratiated herself with the Queen; she was appointed bedchamber woman, and married with the Queen's influence, without the knowledge of the Duchess of Marlborough, to Mr. Masham, a intrigues against Marlborough. member of Prince George's household. Her quiet, even temper formed a happy contrast to the termagant violence of the Duchess, and Harley succeeded in making her his instrument. He roused in the Queen a dread of the subversion of the Church, and she found courage to make several Bishops without consulting her ministers.

The Whig Junto was even more angry than the ministers themselves at this conduct. They suspected Harley's design, and determined to drive him from the ministry. Both parties felt that the crisis had[912] arrived. One or other of them must become predominant. They both determined to make their power felt, and by a strange manœuvre the extremes of both sides joined to attack the ministry. The chief points of attack were the naval administration,—which, as it implicated her husband, was always a tender point with the Queen,—and the determination of Marlborough to pursue the course William had Failure of the composite ministry. marked out, and to carry on the war chiefly in Flanders. It was in this session of Parliament, which began on October 23, 1707, that the joint assault upon the Government was made. The maladministration of the navy was the chief topic, but the Tories also introduced a motion in the House of Lords, recommending a change of the seat of war from Flanders to Spain, where the battle of Almanza had lately proved disastrous to the allied armies. Marlborough pointed out in vain that this would produce an immediate peace with the Dutch, who would feel their country open to invasion from France; and although the Whigs, pledged as they were to support the policy of William, could not join in such a motion, Somers drew up a declaration, embodying both the disapprobation felt for the management of the fleet, and as much of the Tory feeling in favour of a change in the seat of war as was possible for his party to accept. The declaration stated that "it is the opinion of this Committee that no peace can be honourable or safe to her Majesty or her allies, if Spain and the West Indies be suffered to continue in the power of the house of Bourbon." But the manœuvre of the Whigs in joining in the assault against Government had been successful; it was not necessary to press the hostile resolution. Godolphin had been thoroughly frightened, and recognized the necessity of breaking up the unnatural friendship and of allying himself with one or other of the great parties. With the war still continuing he could not but choose the Whigs. At once entering into negotiations with the chief of that party, he induced Somers, as President of the Committee charged with the duty of throwing the late resolutions into the form of an address, to change the resolutions, by a slight alteration in the words, from an attack upon Government into a pledge for the continuation of the war till the French had been entirely broken. The suggested resolutions mentioned the West Indies, reflecting on the comparative weakness of our naval efforts, and Spain, implying a change of the scene of war. The introduction of the Harley and his colleagues resign. Feb. 11, 1708. words "or any other part of the Spanish monarchy," entirely destroyed these hostile allusions. The Whigs had shown their power, it was no longer possible to refuse[913] them their reward. It became necessary to break with Harley and the moderate Tories. The discovery that a man of the name of Gregg, a clerk in Harley's office, was in treasonable correspondence with France, threw some suspicions on his master's fidelity, and Marlborough and Godolphin agreed on Harley's dismissal. The Queen was more difficult to move. It required a threat of resignation on the part of the ministers to induce her to give up one who, as she believed, thought entirely with her on Church matters, but she was not yet free from the influence of the Churchills, and she yielded. With him retired St. John, Harcourt, and Mansell, whose places were taken by Boyle, a zealous Whig, as Secretary of State, John Smith as Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Robert Walpole as Secretary of War. Marlborough and Godolphin had apparently triumphed by means of the Whigs, but their victory was won at the price of the Queen's favour and of submission to the dictation of the Whig party, who at once set to work to secure office for themselves; nor were they scrupulous in the means they used, the threat that they would turn their assault on the naval administration directly and by name upon her husband, then on his deathbed, induced the Queen to remove Pembroke and give the Presidency of the Council to Somers. Sunderland, though himself a minister, intrigued with the Scotch Jacobites to throw out the ministerial candidates at the election of Peers held in accordance with the Union. To all this the General and Treasurer had to submit. The administration was completed upon a Whig basis, when Orford was forced upon the Queen as head of the Admiralty.

Marlborough was fully alive to the insecurity of his position. It is often attributed, though perhaps without sufficient reason, to the desire to keep up his personal ascendancy, that he refused the Insecurity of Marlborough's position. terms offered by Louis; and in the following year the disastrous victory of Malplaquet has also been considered a political battle. A truer view of the case seems to be that, afraid of taking any decided steps, he chose to occupy merely the position of an agent of Government, and obey even against his own convictions the dictation of the Whig party. At the same time, he made two desperate efforts to obtain a position independent of home politics—he applied to the Archduke Charles for the office of Governor of the Low Countries, which would have produced about £60,000 a year, and he also demanded from Queen Anne the position of Captain General for life. In both cases his efforts failed. As far as England was concerned, he probably owed his disappointment chiefly to the conduct of his wife. Finding herself supplanted[914] by Mrs. Masham, she lost all command of her temper, and perpetually outraged the feelings of the Queen by her violent complaints.

The triumph of the Whigs, which had seemed so complete, was of very short duration. Their fall was caused by a fault which had been too prevalent among them since the Revolution—whenever they had the upper hand, they became dictatorial and overbearing. Already they had made themselves distasteful to the Queen by the eagerness with which they had forced themselves into power, and an unnecessary exhibition of that power rendered them distasteful to the people. A certain Dr. Henry Sacheverell, a strong upholder of the doctrine of non-resistance, had Dr. Sacheverell. preached two sermons, one at the Assizes of Derby, one before the mayor and aldermen at St. Paul's. The mayor, who sympathized with his views, suggested that he should print the sermons, and though the common council, when consulted, declined to authorize this step, the preacher acted on the mayor's suggestion and published both. They became a sort of political manifesto, which was largely circulated through the country. The Whigs were naturally angry at this semi-official production of doctrines subversive of all the principles of the Revolution. They determined to take notice of the sermons, and, foolishly disregarding the advice of Somers, they proceeded by the extraordinary method of impeachment instead of the common process of law. This naturally raised the foolish utterances of a clergyman to the dignity of a party question; and when they further insisted upon a ceremonious hearing in Westminster Hall, the trial became the fashionable topic of the day. The excitement throughout England was very great. All other public business came to a standstill, and when the Lords, though they found Sacheverell guilty, took a very moderate view of his guilt, and punished him only with three years' suspension, the verdict was regarded as a virtual acquittal, and celebrated as a party triumph. The exhibition of feeling called forth by this trial proved both to the Queen and to her secret advisers how great a hold the Tory party had upon the country. Encouraged by Harley, who loved an underhand intrigue, and by his creature Mrs. Masham, she proceeded to act upon her new-found knowledge, and it became evident how formidable the power of the Crown still was. Without Dismissal of Sunderland and Godolphin. Aug. 8. consulting Godolphin, she made the Duke of Shrewsbury Lord Chamberlain. Godolphin, instead of resigning at this marked act of distrust, put up with the affront. Still further emboldened by this weakness, the Queen dismissed Lord[915] Sunderland, whom she had always disliked, and followed up the blow by the dismissal of Godolphin himself. The office of Lord Treasurer was for the time kept in abeyance, but Harley was made Chancellor of the Exchequer, and was virtually Prime Minister. For a little while Harley attempted negotiations with the Whigs, who still retained office, but finding them impracticable, he determined to rest upon the Tories only, induced the Queen to dissolve Parliament, Harley's Tory ministry. Nov. and formed an entirely Tory ministry, the most important members of which were Harcourt, who became Lord Chancellor, Rochester, Lord President, and St. John, who succeeded Boyle as Secretary of State.

It was with this ministry that Louis attempted to renew the interrupted negotiations of 1709. The battle of Malplaquet and the fall of Mons had forced him to this course, and to consent that a congress should be held at Gertruydenberg. At first Holland refused to treat except upon the preliminaries of the preceding year, and they still demanded the assistance of Louis in ejecting his grandson the King of Spain. Finally, both English and Dutch seemed to have waived this point, but the opposition of Austria and Savoy rendered any general negotiation impossible, and the war was resumed.

In Flanders it produced nothing beyond the capture of Douay, but in Spain it was of more importance. There Stanhope succeeded with The war in Spain. some difficulty in inducing his colleague Staremberg and the Archduke Charles to advance towards Madrid. They defeated the Spaniards, from whom French assistance was withdrawn during the negotiations, at Almenara and Saragossa. They pushed on into Castile, and again occupied Madrid. Thus, inasmuch as the war had been fairly successful, it was in favour of the Whigs, although the successes having been chiefly in Spain (the pursuance of the war in which country was a part of the Tory programme), they were less important politically than they would have been had they taken place in Flanders. But whatever advantage the Whigs might have obtained from the war was neutralized when, before the end of the year, events occurred in Spain which entirely altered the complexion of affairs in that country. Stanhope's hopes for a successful issue of his enterprise were based on the active co-operation of the army of Portugal. Philip, with his Spanish army, having retired northwards, there was nothing to prevent the junction of the two armies. But, in spite of the entreaties of the English general, the Portuguese would not move, and as the hope of any successful issue to the negotiations[916] dwindled, Louis again allowed assistance to be sent to Spain, and a considerable army, which the national spirit of the Castilians had formed round Philip, was placed under the able command of Vendome. He at once saw the necessity for preventing the proposed union; and his advance to the Bridge of Almaraz rendered it henceforward impossible. Stanhope was for wintering in Castile, and the army withdrawing from the capital amidst the joyful shouts of the inhabitants, took up a position in accordance with Stanhope's wishes. But the Archduke Charles, who was as uxorious as his rival, could not bear separation from his wife, and hurried home with upwards of 2000 cavalry, the arm in which the allied troops were already overmatched. When it became evident that no hope was to be expected from Portugal, the general saw that to winter in Castile was impossible, and withdrew towards Aragon. But Vendome, smarting under the disgrace he had suffered at Oudenarde, outdid himself. With extreme rapidity, he pressed upon his enemy, who was retreating in two parallel armies, one under Staremberg, the other under Stanhope. With vastly superior forces he came upon the latter general, as he was resting his troops at Brihuega, without the least notion of the close approach of Vendome. Stanhope made a most gallant defence, expecting to be relieved by Staremberg, but hours passed by, and for some unexplained reason, Staremberg did not appear; thus having continued his defence till ammunition failed, Stanhope was compelled to capitulate. The surrender was already completed before Staremberg appeared. His slowness had ruined his cause, but he did what he could to re-establish it; and at Villa Viciosa a great battle was fought, in which both parties claimed the victory. But no fresh victory could have given Vendome more perfect success. Staremberg was obliged to fall back, and reached Barcelona with 7000 men only, the relics of the army which had been so triumphant in the earlier part of the year.

The elections, made while the ferment of the trial of Sacheverell was still unsubdued, produced a strong Tory majority. And it was thus, Harley's policy for peace strong at home and assisted by disaster abroad, that Harley and his Government were able to set on foot their change of policy, and in spite of the failure of the preliminaries at Gertruydenberg, to enter into negotiations for a final peace. It seems probable that from the first Harley's policy was directed to the restoration of the Stuarts, as well as to a return to the main feature of their foreign policy, friendship with France. It is of course possible that his intercourse with the Jacobites was merely[917] intended to secure his parliamentary position, but certainly his conduct was quite in accordance with the belief that he was in earnest. The tortuous and underhand manner in which the peace was first set on foot points in this direction, still more so do the letters of the Abbé and restoration of the Stuarts. Gaultier, written in the year 1710, which declare that the new ministry had a great consideration for the Pretender, and that some members of it were working for him only. The restoration of the Stuarts would be rendered easier by three things. In the first place it was scarcely possible without the assistance of France. This seems to explain, better than the mere wish to follow the traditional Tory policy of peace, the immediate steps taken to put an end to the war, and the very favourable terms granted to Louis after his disasters. Secondly, it could not be undertaken without the support of the High Church party, which was very strong. This explains the constant support given by the Government to that party. And thirdly, the success of such a scheme would have been best secured by the assistance of Marlborough, who was known to have already frequently intrigued with the Court of St. Germains. On the other hand the Duke would be the most formidable opponent. Steps were therefore taken to secure his assistance, and when that was found impossible, his complete ruin became the object to be sought.

On his return from his somewhat unfruitful campaign, Marlborough seemed inclined, with his usual selfishness, to submit to anything for the continuation of his personal position. We are told by St. John that he expressed his sorrow for his former wrong step in joining the Whigs. He even attempted to soften the angry vehemence of his wife, but her fate was in fact determined by the personal feelings of the Queen. No entreaties of the Duke, who even threw himself on his knees before her, could induce the Queen to go back from her wish to deprive the Duchess of all her offices. She was compelled to surrender her gold key, and left her apartments at St. James's, having first gratified her spite by carrying off the brass locks and marble chimney-pieces. The Duke himself, though he had suffered many indignities, was permitted to continue the conduct of the war, being assured that he should be well supported.

Having thus for the time secured themselves from his opposition, the Government proceeded to open secret negotiations with the Court of Versailles. The agent employed was a priest named Gaultier, who had been Tallard's chaplain, and was a[918] warm friend of the Pretender's cause. This sudden idea of peace was most unexpected and welcome to the French. "Asking us whether we wished for peace," says Torcy, "was like asking a sick man whether he wishes to recover." Gaultier returned with the message that Louis could not, so soon after the failure of the late treaty, suggest peace to the Dutch, but he would gladly listen to the mediation of England; a shrewd answer, which at once tended towards separating England from her allies. The knowledge that a peace with France was likely, and that all further help from England was hopeless, induced a French refugee of the name of Guiscard, who had been prominent in arranging attacks upon France and assistance to the rebels in the Cevennes, to turn traitor. His correspondence was discovered, and in despair, upon being examined in the Council, he determined to revenge himself upon the authors of his misfortune, and stabbed Harley with a penknife. Harley's popularity was raised still higher by this attack on him; he was made Earl of Oxford, and shortly after, on the supposed success of his financial scheme for incorporating the public creditors into a company to trade in the South Seas, was made Lord Treasurer. The High Church temper of the time was further illustrated by the passage of a Bill for erecting fifty new churches in London, and of the Occasional Conformity Act, now proposed in the House of Lords which had always previously obstructed it.

The negotiations opened by Gaultier were also continued, Prior was sent to Paris, and a more specific scheme was set on foot than had been produced by the verbal negotiations of the spring, although, unmoved or ignorant of the action of the Government, Marlborough was attempting to continue his great career. He had Marlborough's plans for the campaign of 1712. planned a combined movement with Eugene against Villars, who had constructed lines near Arras and Cambrai so strong that he boastfully said he had brought Marlborough to the "non plus ultra." The vigour of the campaign was checked by the withdrawal of Eugene, who was required to superintend and guard the Electoral Diet at Frankfort, which had been summoned to elect the successor to the Emperor Joseph, who had died on the 17th of April. It was Marlborough's intention to reduce Bouchain and Le Quesnoy, to winter in France, and in the spring press forward towards Paris. His schemes were only partially successful, owing principally to the slowness of the Imperialists. By some skilful manœuvres he succeeded in passing the formidable lines, and[919] besieged and took Bouchain, but was unable to carry his great project further.

On his arrival in Paris, Prior found that Louis had authority to treat for Spain as well as for himself, and proceeded to explain the conditions demanded. England no longer insisted upon the surrender of the Spanish crown, but would be satisfied with the pledge that the two crowns should never be united; Gibraltar, Minorca, and Newfoundland must be secured to England; Dunkirk demolished, and four towns granted for trade in South America. Great commercial advantages must be granted both to the English and Dutch, and fortified towns given as barriers for the Dutch in the Low Countries, and for Austria on the Rhine. All this was as yet kept profoundly secret. The negotiation was subsequently transferred to London, and there, in September, eight preliminary articles were drawn up. Louis was to acknowledge Anne and the Protestant succession; a new treaty of commerce was to be made; Dunkirk was to be demolished, some fair equivalent being given; Gibraltar, Minorca, and Newfoundland, with the exception of some fishing rights, were to be secured to the English. In addition to this, the Assiento, or grant of the slave trade with America, was withdrawn by Spain from France and given to England. A second set of preliminaries was prepared for Holland, omitting the chief advantages gained by England, but introducing stipulations to secure a barrier and to prevent the junction of the crowns of France and Spain. The Dutch, though much dissatisfied with the desertion of the English, were compelled to give in their adhesion, and Utrecht was appointed as the place where the conference was to be held. Austria was even more outspoken in its anger, and the Imperial minister in London, who was rash enough to express the indignation of his Court in a published appeal to the people, was compelled to leave the country.

Affairs had reached this point when Marlborough returned from his campaign. Entering into communication with his old friends Attack on Marlborough on his return. the Whigs, he found that they had formed a coalition with a section of the Tories under Nottingham, who was much displeased at having been excluded from all the late ministerial arrangements. Marlborough's object was no doubt to join the strongest side. The present position of the Whig party seemed to him so promising that he gave it his adhesion. Nor Parliament, Dec. 7. was he mistaken as things then stood. On the opening of Parliament, Nottingham moved, as an amendment to[920] the Address, the old Tory resolution that no peace could be safe or honourable to Great Britain or Europe if Spain or the West Indies were allotted to any branch of the Bourbons, and after a hot discussion succeeded in beating the Government by a majority of eight. In the House of Commons, on the other hand, the Government commanded a large majority. Harley and St. John had now to consider what steps to take against this hostile coalition in the Lords. They determined, in the first place, to strike a heavy blow at Marlborough, and the report of a Commission which had been issued to examine into the public accounts afforded them an opportunity of doing so. Basing its assertion on the deposition of Sir Solomon Medina, who had contracted to supply the army in Flanders with bread, the Commission reported that the Duke had received on those contracts large sums of money, amounting on the whole to £63,000, while his secretary, Cardonnel, had also received large douceurs. It also declared that Marlborough had received 2½ per cent. on all subsidies to foreign troops, amounting on the whole to £177,000. Acting on this report, the ministry stripped Marlborough of all his offices. Marlborough was so notoriously avaricious, and his character was so mean, that these charges seemed to the public probable; but, in fact, his reply was tolerably complete. The bread money had habitually been received by every commander-in-chief in Flanders, and had been expended chiefly in obtaining information as to the enemies' plans. The percentage on the subsidies was a free gift from the princes to whom they were paid, and Marlborough had not accepted them without the royal warrant. In the state of feeling at the time these excuses were not much regarded. Having got rid of their most powerful enemy, the ministry made use of the royal prerogative to neutralize the influence of the Lords. Twelve new Peers were created, which gave them a permanent majority.

Having by these strong measures secured their position in Parliament, Harley and St. John proceeded with their negotiations. There Command of the army given to Ormond. 1712. was some difficulty with regard to the prosecution of the war while the Congress was sitting. The command had been given to the Duke of Ormond, a man of strong Jacobite principles; he was privately instructed not to undertake any offensive operations against the French, and he consequently informed Villars that he need not be afraid of attacks from the English, although the pressure which Eugene put upon him was so strong that he could not refuse to join in the siege of Quesnoy. His strange[921] lukewarm prosecution of the war, which seemed rather like friendship than hostility, did not pass unnoticed in England. But all complaints were answered by the assertion that the Queen would shortly lay before Parliament the conditions of a peace. In fact, she was only waiting till Philip of Spain should have made up his mind whether to accept an equivalent for the Spanish crown, and retain his rights on The Queen announces the treaty. June 6. France, or remain where he was and renounce those claims. When the answer arrived, preferring the latter alternative, the Queen went down to the House and explained the proposed treaty. Though violently opposed, addresses of confidence were carried.

An armistice was at once declared, and the English troops ordered to separate from Eugene. It was not without a considerable feeling of disgrace that 12,000 English troops withdrew from their old comrades in arms; the English stipendiaries refused to obey the command, and remained with the Prince. A visit of St. John, now Lord Bolingbroke, to Paris, put the finishing stroke to the negotiation, and peace was virtually declared. The campaign, completed by Eugene alone, was unsuccessful. His defeat at Denain, and further successes won over the allies by Villars, inclined the new Emperor to look more Peace of Utrecht. 1713. favourably upon the peace. The treaties were ultimately signed at Utrecht on the 31st of March 1713. The Emperor's peace, by which the Electors of Cologne and Bavaria were reinstated, was postponed for a year, and was finally completed at Rastadt in the following March. It is certain that the terms gained were infinitely less advantageous than the lengthened and victorious war might have justified, or than those which could have been obtained at the negotiations of Gertruydenberg. The desertion of the Catalans, who had risen in insurrection chiefly at the instigation of the English, was undoubtedly an act of selfishness; and Government would even have sacrificed the advantages of the Methuen Treaty, and granted commercial terms far more in favour of France, had not the moneyed interest proved too strong for it. At the same time, though the Peace of Utrecht was not a glorious one, there is much to be said in its favour; the changed position of Europe, by the accession of Charles to the Imperial crown, had in truth put the questions at issue upon a totally new footing; it would have been quite as disadvantageous to the general European balance that Spain and Austria should have been joined in the hands of the Imperial house as that Spain and France should have been in the hands of the Bourbon Princes.

[922]

After the close of the great war, the question of succession, rendered more pressing by the failing health of the Queen, came prominently forward. In the midst of the negotiations the Pretender had written a letter to Queen Anne, and Bolingbroke had been throughout in correspondence with him. Harley's conduct. It is difficult to determine how far Harley was really mixed up in the plot of changing the succession. That he had frequently expressed himself as friendly to the Pretender is certain; but his indolence in business, his constant difficulty in making up his mind, and his love of intrigue, prevented him from taking any strong or definite line in the scheme for the Stuart restoration. Bolingbroke's views. With Bolingbroke the case was different. He was unaffected by any Church views, for he did not believe in Christianity; he knew that the part he had already played had rendered him obnoxious to the Elector of Hanover, he had therefore little hope of office after the Queen's death. On the other hand, he was certain of being a trusted minister of the new Stuart king. To help him in the Cabinet he had Brumley, Ormond, and probably Harcourt. But for the success of his plan extreme care was necessary; for the general feeling of the country, though Tory and High Church, was nevertheless Protestant and Hanoverian. An over-hasty declaration of Jacobitism would probably destroy his ministry.

A new Parliament assembled in February. It was again Tory in its views; and it shows the real object of Bolingbroke's tactics, that the Pretender during the elections wrote to his friends to use their best efforts in favour of the Government. The new appointments also, which were made on the occurrence of vacancies by deaths, show the same Jacobite tendencies. Wyndam became Chancellor of the Exchequer, Athol and Mar two of the chief officials in Scotland. Nor was the Jacobite scheme confined to the appointment of ministers, more immediate practical measures for securing the change of Government were taken. The Ormond reorganizes the army. Cinque Ports were placed in the hands of Ormond, and the entrance of a foreign force into England thus rendered easy; the army was remodelled, and the greater part of those troops which William had organized disbanded; while a plan was set on foot for obliging officers in the army known to be friendly to Marlborough to sell their commissions, which only failed because Harley, either through indolence, or because he really shrunk from supporting the Jacobites, neglected to have the funds[923] ready for the purchase. The Whigs, on their side, also organized themselves for the coming crisis. General Stanhope was regarded as their leader. They seem to have been ready for all emergencies, intending even to employ force, if necessary, to secure the throne for the Hanoverian Elector. In spite of the caution of Bolingbroke, the scope of his plans began to be discovered, and it became necessary still further to blind the nation. Pretending to treat as libels all suggestions that he was aiming at the restoration of the Stuarts, he introduced a resolution that the Protestant succession was in no danger, but his credit was too far shaken to allow of a complete victory. The motion was indeed passed, but the small majority proved how large a section of the Tories were attached to the Hanoverian house, and were willing on that point to make common cause with the Whigs. That party were encouraged to take a further step. Thinking it of the last importance that the Electoral Prince should be in England to take possession of the inheritance of his house on Anne's death, they induced the Hanoverian minister to demand his writ of summons to the House of Lords as an English Peer in virtue of his title of Duke of Cambridge. The Government was thrown into great perplexity; to refuse it seemed to confess their Jacobite tendencies, to grant it was certain to enrage the Queen, who, like other childless sovereigns, was morbidly touchy about the succession, and it would moreover deal a heavy blow at their own plans. The writ was given, but accompanied by a letter from the Queen to the Electress Sophia, couched in such angry language that it is said to have caused the death of that princess, now far advanced in years.

But a schism within its own body was gradually undermining the ministry. Harley, undecided upon all points, and strongly bound by old ties to the Low Church and dissenting interest, could not throw himself heartily into the vigorous policy of Bolingbroke; he was, moreover, jealous of the ever-increasing importance of his energetic colleague. The Schism Act, a measure conceived in the most exclusive High Church spirit, brought their rivalry to a crisis. It enacted that no person should keep a public or private school, or act as tutor, unless a member of the Church of England, and licensed by his Bishop, thus in fact throwing the whole education of the country into the hands of the Church. Harley, bred a dissenter, and always relying much on the support of the Nonconformist bodies, could not give it his hearty support. With his usual indecision, he played fast and loose with the Bill. But he had lost the ear of the Queen, Bolingbroke and Mrs. Masham had supplanted him, and the[924] favourite so played upon the Queen's High Church propensities, that, after a hot altercation in the Council before the eyes of the Queen, she was induced to dismiss the Lord Treasurer.

In the dismissal of his dilatory rival Bolingbroke saw the removal of the last obstacle to the completion of his schemes, and he was preparing to form a ministry wholly in the Jacobite interest, when the Queen's sudden illness upset all his plans. Had the matter come to the decision of arms, Marlborough, who had just returned from abroad, might, after the treatment he had received at the hand of the Tories, have been trusted to do his best for the Whigs. But, fortunately, the question was destined to meet with a peaceful solution. The Duke of Shrewsbury, in his time the leader of the Whigs of the Revolution, and subsequently guilty of treacherous correspondence with the Stuarts, continued his vacillating policy. The part he had taken in 1708, in persuading the Queen to rid herself of the Whigs, had given him the confidence of the Tory party. But he had never ceased to regret the one false step of his life, and was firmly attached to the Hanoverian succession. His position in the ministry enabled him for the time to become really master of the situation, and to thwart all the schemes of Bolingbroke. With this end in view he arranged a plan with the Dukes of Argyle and Somerset. As the Council was sitting to consider what steps to The Queen's death. take in consequence of the Queen's illness, the two Dukes suddenly made their appearance, claimed their right as Privy Councillors, were by Shrewsbury's advice admitted, and at once proposed that the Queen, who had for the moment recovered consciousness, should be requested, in view of the coming crisis, to make the Duke of Shrewsbury Lord Treasurer. A deputation, of which the Duke was himself a member, went to her bedside, and persuaded her to give him the White Staff. Vigorous measures were at once taken. Troops were collected, the Elector summoned over, and everything was ready to withstand armed invasion, and to hasten the peaceful acceptance of the legal heir, when the Queen died on the 1st of August.

For several sessions the Parliament had been acting under the new title of the Parliament of Great Britain, the Union with Scotland having been completed in 1707. Quite at the beginning of the reign, in 1702, leave having been given both by the Scotch and English Parliaments, Commissioners had met to make arrangements for the Union, which had always been a favourite[925] project of William's. Neither party were, however, much in earnest, and the members of the Commission were lax in their attendance. There was no difficulty in agreeing upon the main points, but upon trade and finance the claims advanced by the Scotch, who seemed to wish on the one hand for equality of duties, and on the other for exemption from liabilities, were regarded as untenable, and in February 1703 the Commissioners ceased to meet.

On the 6th of May in that year the Scotch Parliament met, under the Presidency of the Duke of Queensberry as Lord Commissioner. Its temper was anything but conciliatory. The ill feeling excited by the Darien Scheme had by no means subsided. The late futile efforts of the joint Commission had still further roused the angry feelings of the people, and there was an idea afloat, by no means without foundation, that the High Church Tories, who were just coming into power, would seize the opportunity for an assault upon the National Church. All these causes influenced the temper of the Parliament, and instead of taking measures tending towards the Union, it seemed bent upon doing all that was possible to render the kingdoms quite separate. The Queen's letter, in which she recommended toleration, was contemptuously neglected, and a strong declaration passed, confirming the Presbyterian Church, "as the only Church of Christ in the Kingdom." Politically, the conduct of the Parliament was even less conciliatory. Resolutions were passed declaring that, after the death of the Queen, no King of England should make peace or war without consent of the Scotch Parliament; though the nation was in the midst of a great war with France, restrictions on the trade in French wine were removed; Fletcher of Saltoun introduced what were known as the Limitations, by which the authority of the Crown was seriously compromised; its power of appointing to the great offices of Government was transferred to the Parliament; and finally, a Bill of Security with regard to the succession was introduced, authorizing Parliament to name a successor from among the Protestant descendants of the royal line, but asserting that whoever that successor might be he was not to be the same as the successor to the Crown of England, unless proper security was given for the freedom of religion and trade. The nomination of the Princess Sophia, hazarded by the Earl of Marchmont, was received with derision and anger. All these Bills, except the last, received the royal assent. But the refusal to pass the Bill of Security was so unpopular, that it was found necessary to adjourn the House without securing any subsidy.

[926]

In the following year the Parliament again met. It was hoped that a new Commissioner would manage it more successfully, Scotch Parliament. July 1704. and the Marquis of Tweeddale was appointed to succeed Queensberry. The policy of conciliation was carried to an extreme, and Godolphin, always a timid minister, allowed Tweeddale to give the royal assent even to the Act of Security.

The hostile feeling exhibited by the Scotch Parliament only went still further to prove what the Darien Scheme had made evident, that the Union was imperatively necessary. Whigs and Tories therefore combined, when the English Parliament met, in attacking Godolphin for his weakness; and in December, Somers brought forward, and succeeded in passing through both Houses, a law which seemed to threaten war between the countries. After Christmas 1705, all Scotchmen were to be regarded as aliens, the importation into England of the chief Scotch products—cattle, coal, and linen—was prohibited; and as a still stronger threat, it was ordered that the Border towns should be fortified and put into a state of security, and the militia in the northern counties called out. This severe threat was not without its effect. But the anger of the Scotch at the time only grew more vehement. In April of the following year, 1705, Thomas Green, a captain of a ship belonging to the new East India Company, had been seized by the agents of the Darien Company, charged with piracy in the East, and with the murder of a Darien captain. It was afterwards proved that the captain was alive; nevertheless, in spite of orders from the English Council, the Scotch ministers were overawed by the popular feeling, and the unfortunate man, with some others of his crew, was hanged. But England was now determined that the Union should be effected. Tweeddale was removed from his commissionership, and Argyle, assisted by Queensberry, put in his place. This gave Tweeddale an Scotch Parliament. June 1705. opportunity of forming a third party in the Parliament, which attempted to hold the balance between those who were for the Union and those who opposed it, and was known by the name of the Squadrone Volante. On the whole, however, this party acted with the Government. The Queen had instructed the Parliament to consider the question of the settlement of the succession, and the appointment of Commissioners to treat. With regard to the first point it proved obstinate, it insisted on first discussing the condition of trade, and could not be induced to name any successor. With some slight alterations, it passed again[927] the Limitations suggested by Fletcher of Saltoun, and added further, that a Scotch ambassador should be present at all treaties involving the two nations. But upon the second point, by the aid of the Squadrone Volante, the Government was successful. The threatened Alien Bill indeed began to have its effect; and it was ordered that the Commissioners should not begin to act till that Bill was repealed. As it seemed to have done its work, this suggestion was attended to, and in November the English Parliament repealed the Act.

Thus then, the chief obstacles being removed, in April 1706, the Commissioners, thirty-one on each side, met. The English Commissioners at once suggested as the prime object of negotiation, that there should be one Kingdom, one Parliament, and one Successor. The Scotch seemed first to desire a Federative Union, but yielded, on condition that their religion should be free, and that their trade should enjoy a general equality of advantage. It was the details, especially of taxation and trade, which gave the greatest trouble. The Scotch insisted on discussing them in detail. It was finally agreed that they should be exempt from terminable taxes, and receive an equivalent for any present loss they might sustain, by taking their share in the public debt of England, which was larger than their own. The revenue of England was about £5,700,000, that of Scotland about £160,000. The debts of England amounted to £17,700,000, those of Scotland, taken roughly, to £160,000; that is, England owed three and a half, Scotland only one year's revenue. The equivalent fixed was £398,000, which was employed to pay off the whole Scotch debt, to dissolve the Darien Company and indemnify its shareholders, and for other Scotch purposes. The other questions were easily settled. The title of the United Kingdom was to be Great Britain, the national flags were to be incorporated in one. The Scotch taxes amounted to little more than a fortieth of the English. Had this been observed as a basis of representation, they would have had but thirteen members of Parliament. But this being held too few, they were granted forty-five members, which was about a twelfth of the whole House of Commons. The same proportion was taken for the basis of the arrangement of the Upper House, and thus of the whole Scottish Peerage sixteen were to be elected to sit in the united House of Lords.

When the Treaty had been settled by the Commissioners, it was brought before the Scotch Parliament, where it met with violent opposition. In one way or another it was objectionable to many classes. The Jacobites saw in it the final destruction of all their hopes of a[928] change of dynasty. The extreme Presbyterians did not believe in a Union which would leave their Church untrammelled. The views of the Revolution had gone further in Scotland than in England, and a considerable body of active spirits had adopted republican views; to them the establishment of a monarchy backed by the strength of England was distasteful, as rendering any fulfilment of their hopes impossible. And the Edinburgh tradesmen recognized to the full the loss they would sustain by the removal of Parliament to London. The discussion on the various points went on throughout Scotch Parliament. Oct. 1706. the whole of the year. The final effort of the Opposition was to be a great protest, to be produced at the debate upon the share Scotland was to have in the national legislature. This protest was to be presented by Hamilton, as premier Peer, and to be followed by a secession of the minority. But Hamilton's heart failed him at the appointed moment, the protest was not presented, and on the 16th of January 1707 the measure was finally carried by 110 votes to 69.

Having been successfully passed through the Scotch House, the Bill had now to be ratified by the English Parliament. So many changes had been made that it was possible there might be much difficulty in securing the easy passage of the Bill. But as the Whigs and the Government were determined that at all hazards it should become law, they accepted without question all the Scotch amendments. When the articles of the Treaty had thus been carried through the House, there yet remained the Act of Ratification to complete it. It was still possible for the opponents of the Bill to reopen discussion upon each article in detail. The skill of Sir Simon Harcourt, the Attorney-General, thwarted this disastrous intention, by so wording the Bill that the articles themselves were not called in question, but their ratification alone demanded. He induced all parties, who were on the whole agreed that in some shape or other the Bill had better pass, to accept it. With little opposition therefore it was carried through both Houses, and became law, and the succeeding Parliament took the name of the Parliament of Great Britain. Party feeling was at the time very high, and accusations of bribery were lavishly flung abroad, but a closer examination appears to prove that these charges were unfounded.

[929]

GEORGE I.

1714-1727.

Born 1660 = Sophia of Brunswick.
____________________|_________________
| |
George II. Sophia = Frederick William.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

England had been slow to accept the principle of succession by parliamentary instead of hereditary right; since 1688 the struggle had been continuous, it had reached a crisis in the closing years of Queen Anne. The triumph of the Whigs, secured to them by the constant successes[930] of the War of Succession, had rendered them over-confident, and an act of foolish severity had been followed by their complete overthrow. The natural inclinations of the Queen, and the weakness of her character, which rendered her constantly liable to be subjugated by the influence of those around her; the talents and intriguing ambition of St. John, and the energy and compactness of the Jacobite body resting upon the general Conservative feeling of the nation, had rendered the return of the Stuarts to the throne a very probable event. A few weeks only were wanting for the completion of the plot, and James Edward would probably have been received as heir to the throne, and the work of the Revolution have been undone. The unexpected illness of the Queen, the rapidity and energy with which the Hanoverian Lords of the Council had carried out what was virtually a coup d'état, had destroyed these hopes. When the Lord Treasurer's staff was placed in the hands of the Duke of Shrewsbury, all hope of carrying out this counter-revolution with the aid of the executive was at an end. Although he had more than once faltered in his allegiance to the Whig party, it was now well understood that he was endowed with something not far short of a dictatorship, for the express purpose of carrying out the enactments of the Act of Succession. Everything was done as arranged by that Act. There was no difficulty with regard to the regency; sealed packets containing the names of those who were to act as the Council of Regency, chosen by the Protestant successor, Council of Regency. were in his hands. On their being opened, the names of eighteen Lords, almost exclusively of the Whig party, were found, who, together with the seven great officers named in the Statute, were to act, under the title of Lords Justices, as an interim Government until the arrival of the new King. It is to be observed that the name of the Duke of Marlborough was not among them.

Parliament was to continue for six months before dissolution, and everything for the present passed off quietly; the Civil List was voted as in the preceding reign; and on the 18th of September the King and his eldest son arrived in England. He was not a man to excite enthusiasm. An unostentatious man, used to a Court where his will was law, but where the manners were singularly primitive and plain, he was little suited to the peculiar position of an English Parliamentary sovereign, from whom, along with the possession of but little real power, much dignity and some magnificence were required. Unable therefore to[931] comprehend the working of that constitution over which he had come to preside, and without ability sufficient to carry on a policy of his own, he naturally threw himself into the arms of that party to which he owed his Crown. The great offices, several of which had been for the last month united in the hands of Shrewsbury, were New Whig ministry. therefore distributed among the Whigs. Townshend was put at the head of the Government, and with him were Halifax, General Stanhope, Lord Cowper, Nottingham, and Lord Townshend's brother-in-law, Sir Robert Walpole; while Sunderland was made Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, and the Duke of Marlborough (though the King had already shown his well-founded mistrust of him) reassumed the offices of Commander-in-chief and Master of the Ordnance. His power, however, was gone.

The establishment of the Hanoverian house had thus very much the appearance of a triumph of a faction. There were no attempts at conciliation, such as had been made after the Revolution, no efforts to give a general and national character to the Government. The King came forward as the head of the triumphant Whig party. This attitude naturally at the time excited much ill-feeling, yet on the whole it was wise. George was not the man to carry out a scheme of comprehensive government which had already twice failed in the abler hands of William and of Marlborough. The questions at issue were too vital to admit of compromise, and the Whig party were wise in their view of the crisis. A crushing victory was necessary to teach both their conscientious and factious opponents a lesson,—the one must yield to the force of circumstances, the other must discover that their only road to office lay in concession to principles which they were too weak to shake. Conscientious upholders of the Stuarts must be taught that their choice lay between submission and the resignation of their claim to be regarded as Englishmen; those who used the Stuarts as a road to power must be led to see that they must henceforward limit their opposition to points of minor importance, that the main principles of government were fixed for ever.

But the conduct of the King and of the Whigs, though wise, was such as to drive the Jacobites to extremities, and to render an appeal to arms sooner or later almost certain. The irritation of the high Tories at once showed itself. In January, as the six months had elapsed, the House was dissolved, and on the meeting of the new House in March, it was found, as was at that time usually the case, that the party in power commanded a large[932] majority. This however had not been secured without serious riots. In Manchester and the midland counties the riots assumed the form of an attack upon the dissenters, and were so serious as to necessitate the passing of a Riot Act. By this Act, which is still in force, it is enacted, that "If any twelve persons are unlawfully assembled to the disturbance of the peace, and any justice of the peace, sheriff, &c., shall think proper to command them by proclamation to disperse, if they contemn his orders, and continue together for one hour afterwards, such contempt shall be felony, without benefit of clergy."

Having secured their majority, it became evident that the Whigs intended to use their regained ascendancy to the uttermost. The Address, both in the House of Lords and in the Commons, was obviously pointed against the framers of the Peace of Utrecht, and before three weeks were over a secret committee was appointed to consider that peace. Bolingbroke had already fled and taken service with the Pretender. Ormond, who till this time had remained in England, putting himself ostentatiously forward as the leader of the Jacobite opposition, followed his example. Oxford alone awaited his trial. The two fugitives were proceeded against by bill of attainder. The impeachment of Oxford was after a while dropped; in fact, it was difficult to substantiate the charge of treason against him. It was not till long afterwards that any real proof existed of treasonable correspondence with the Pretender; and it was scarcely possible to twist the faults and weaknesses of the Peace, the desertion of the Catalans, even the surrender, unasked, of Tournay, one of our conquests, into crimes under the law of treason; nor was the doctrine of the responsibility of ministers as yet sufficiently established to allow the majority at once to answer Oxford's solemn declaration, that he had acted distinctly upon the royal authority. It is true that the plea had been overruled in the case of Danby; but even in the last reign the Whigs had themselves sought shelter, after the battle of Almanza, behind the royal authority, and it was not till more than twenty years of regular party government had intervened that the doctrine was thoroughly understood and adopted.

Meanwhile the aggressive policy of the Whigs was hurrying on an outbreak of the conspiracy which the timely death of the late Queen had checked. It was widespread. Ormond, until his flight, had been busily engaged in organizing it in England, while Bolingbroke had taken it in hand in France:[933] for then, as always, it seems to have been accepted, that any insurrection would be useless without material help from France. In many parts of the country, particularly in the west, the feeling against the Hanoverian succession was strong, and measures had been taken to secure Bristol and Exeter, and other great western towns. In Scotland the difficulty was rather to restrain than to urge forward the Jacobite feeling. Many causes combined to create a widespread Disaffection in Scotland. discontent in that country. In the north the feeling of loyalty to an hereditary chief was part of the national character, inwoven with the whole system of clanship. The national pride was flattered by the thought of a Stuart, a Scotchman, sitting upon the throne of England. Moreover, there was one chief of predominant power whose interests had been always Whig, and jealousy of the ascendancy of the clan Campbell, and of its head, the Duke of Argyle, or Mac Callum More, on this, as on several other occasions, tended to throw all rival clans into the arms of any party of which he was the declared enemy. In the Lowlands other influences were at work. The Presbyterians were not likely to forget the unsparing cruelty of the later Stuarts, and now that they had the upper hand, the tolerated Episcopalians met with no great courtesy at their hands; a constant source of quarrel was thus opened, and the Episcopalians and Catholics might be well expected to seek refuge from the intolerance of their victorious rivals, and a restoration even of their former superiority, in the establishment of the exiled dynasty. But more than that, everything English was unpopular. Two great imaginary injuries were rankling in the national mind. The nation had never forgiven King William's treatment of the Darien Scheme, and were still smarting under the supposed yoke which the Union had laid upon them. Whoever was King of England was their natural enemy, so that, except in those places where settled industry had already felt the advantage of the union with England, there was great readiness to join in any enterprise which would be injurious to her. There were therefore ready to join the cause of the Stuarts in the north all the great clans except the Campbells, and in the south the Episcopalians, and those nationalists who regarded as righteous any act of antagonism to England.

But the movement, both in Scotland and in England, was held to depend on the conduct of France, and it was probable that, under Bolingbroke's able management, assistance would come from that country. The King was indeed[934] far different from the Louis of other days. Enslaved by the religious influence of Madame de Maintenon, and surrounded by bitter party disputes with regard to the legitimization of his bastards, his energy was gone, while war and taxes and persecution had much depressed the power of France. Still, irritated by the Whig assault upon his friends in England, the champion as he believed himself of legitimacy, and angry at the opposition raised by the English ministry to his new fortifications at Mardyke, he had used his influence with Spain to procure sums of money for the conspirators, had himself supplied arms, and had allowed a small squadron to be equipped at Havre at the expense of France. The flight of Ormond, the first blow to the conspiracy, was followed, on the 1st of September, by the death of Louis. The Government passed into the hands of the Regent Orleans, whose policy was of a purely personal character, his chief aim being the exclusion of the Spanish house from the succession should the young King die. To secure his plans at home external peace was necessary. Personal friendship, both for Stair the English ambassador, and for Stanhope the English secretary, rendered him still more disinclined to break with England. Hope from France was gone. Bolingbroke saw at once the course affairs were taking, and despatched a messenger to tell the leaders of the conspiracy that, as Scotland could not rise without England, and England could not rise without France, and France had no intention of moving, all thoughts of insurrection had better be dropped.

His prudent message came too late. The Pretender, weary of waiting, had taken matters into his own hands, and a leader had Mar organizes the insurrection in Scotland. already been despatched to raise the northern counties of Scotland. This leader was the Earl of Mar. At Anne's death Mar was Secretary for Scotland, a man of no very great ability, but who, for his skill in trimming his sails to the wind, had earned the nickname of "Bobbing John." He once more tried to play his old game, but found himself mistrusted, and had to give place to the Duke of Montrose. He now hurried to London, sought favour at Court, took a wife from among the leaders of the Whig party, and having thus thrown people off the scent, hurried back to Scotland to organize the insurrection. His chief influence was in Aberdeenshire, north of the Grampian hills; and there, early in September, he contrived a meeting of the chief clans of the neighbourhood. He was joined by Tullibardine, the heir of the Duke of Athol, who brought with him the Murrays, and by the great clan of the Gordons, with Lord Panmure, from the north of Perthshire,[935] towards which county he at once began to march. The Pretender could not refuse to support Mar's open movement on his behalf. In October he hurried across France, evading an attempt of Orleans to arrest him, and an attempt on the part of the English ambassador to assassinate him. He reached St. Malo in safety. Thence an expedition under Ormond was to have been thrown upon the English coast. Twice Ormond was thwarted by the weather; his third attempt was Vigorous measures of the English Government. too late, the English fleet lay before the port. Had he succeeded in landing, no better fortune would have awaited him; the English Government had already heard of the gathering of the Highland clans, the Habeas Corpus Act was suspended, the more active Jacobites arrested; such troops as were then in England, some 8000 in number, were hurried to the west (for the Scotch outbreak was looked upon only as a feint); some 6000 troops, due from Holland as a guarantee for the Protestant succession, were demanded; fresh regiments were rapidly formed; and the command in Scotland was given to Argyle, the natural opponent of the Jacobite clans. The vigorous measures of the Government had in fact already broken the neck of the conspiracy.

But there was still real danger in the North, for Mar had an overwhelming superiority of forces, and before the end of October he had the complete command of Scotland as far as the Forth. Argyle, desirous of confining the rebellion as much as possible to the north and east, attempted to hold the line of that river. Mar, to whom immediate success was everything, and who overrated the strength of his party in England, was desirous of crossing the Border as soon as possible, in order to rally the disaffected round him. He had now about 12,000 men with him, but these were poorly armed, and even this poor equipment was due to no care of Mar's, but to a gallant dash by the Master of Sinclair upon an English ship lying in the Forth. With these troops he would probably have been unable to have passed Argyle at Stirling, even if he had not been prevented from moving by the expected arrival of the Pretender. It was therefore determined that a detachment under One detachment marches into England, Brigadier Mackintosh should be thrown across the Firth, and marched direct for England, while the main body should threaten and retain Argyle upon the upper river. The movement was well executed, and 1500 men passed over at a broad part of the estuary near North Berwick. They thence, after an ineffectual march upon Edinburgh, proceeded unopposed directly south to Kelso, as Argyle was kept from following them by Mar's[936] movements. They were here joined by some horse under Lord Kenmure, and by a few English horsemen under Mr. Forster, with whom was Lord Derwentwater. One cause at least of the insurrection is clearly pointed out by a proclamation which was here issued, in which the chief stress was laid upon the foreign domination imposed upon the nation by the late Union. Some difficulty was found in persuading the Highlanders to cross the Border, and the march was directed therefore in a more westerly direction, following along the back of the Cheviots, and crossing into England near Longtown in the direction of Carlisle. Even in spite of this concession to their feelings, several hundreds of the Highlanders deserted, and the rest had to be tempted forward by a promise of pay. From Carlisle they marched up the valley of the Eden to Penrith, crossed the hills to Lancaster, where they were well received by the many Catholic families in the neighbourhood, and, foolishly leaving this strong place behind them, pushed on for Preston on the Ribble. Since entering England, the command-in-chief had devolved on Mr. Forster, and the insurgents knew that they were being followed by General Carpenter with between 2,000 and 3,000 men. Forster—a very inefficient commander—directed his attention only to the pursuing army, and discipline was much relaxed. On the 11th of November, General Wills was marching upon Preston northward from Wigan. To reach Preston he had to cross the Ribble by a bridge, and then pass upward along a lane which is described by Cromwell, in 1648, as "very deep and ill," and which it had cost him four hours to clear. Wills met no opposition till he reached the town, where a gallant defence was and is defeated at Preston. Nov. 13. made behind barricades. The neglect of all proper precautions is somewhat explained by the fact that Mr. Forster was unable to attend a council of war held that morning, having been compelled to take to his bed on account of "some damage" which he had received "at a convivial entertainment." On the 13th, however, Carpenter joined Wills, the town was completely surrounded, and the insurgents saw the necessity of a surrender. Much dispute has arisen about the terms of that surrender. It seems probable that Wills used ambiguous language, understood by the insurgents to contain a promise of clemency—by himself, as insisting upon an unconditional surrender. Colonel Oxburgh, Mr. Forster's negotiator, declared upon the scaffold that the words used were: "You cannot better entitle yourselves to that clemency than by surrendering yourselves prisoners at discretion." 1500 rebels gave themselves up, among them eight noblemen. As[937] however a considerable number of English Catholics had joined the Scotch since entering Lancashire, a good many of the rebels must have made good their escape.

On the same 13th of November on which Generals Carpenter and Wills had joined their forces the insurgent operations in the North had also come to a disastrous conclusion. Mar had moved slowly south and west along the great valley of Strathmore, which leads direct from Perth to Stirling. He was approaching Dunblane when he heard that Argyle with 4000 regular troops was already occupying it. On a neighbouring eminence called Sheriffmuir, a spur of the Ochil hills, the armies encountered. The royalist left wing was unable to withstand the rush of the clansmen, and immediately withdrew Mar is defeated at Sheriffmuir. towards Stirling. The insurgents had held that their own left wing was secured by some marshy ground, but Argyle perceived that a light night-frost had rendered the morass passable. He fell with his cavalry upon the left flank of the Highlanders, and drove them from the field. The battle was thus equally balanced, the peculiar curve of the ground rendered any general view of the action impossible, and Mar, on his return from the pursuit of the right wing, finding his own left destroyed, determined to retreat, leaving to Argyle the full advantages of the victory.

The battle of Preston had proved the impossibility of relying upon any formidable insurrection in England. As the royalist troops were The Pretender appears, but flies before Argyle. collected and armies strengthened, the chances of success became less every day. Mar remained quiet at Perth, and Argyle and the English saw that delay was wholly in their favour. But in January a new colour was given to the affair by the arrival of the Pretender at Peterhead. He at once assumed the style of royalty, issuing proclamations and appointing a day for his coronation. The English ministry could not believe that so bold a step would have been taken without promised support from France. Immediate action became therefore necessary, and through villages burnt by the Pretender's order, and deep snow which Mar believed impassable, Argyle moved northwards, gradually threatening Perth. From the first James had shown but little military spirit, and now, although the clansmen offered to fight for him to the last, on the 30th of January (1716) the army was withdrawn from Perth across the frozen Tay, and marched along the coast to Montrose, whence James and Mar withdrew secretly to France, deserting their followers, who, still retiring northward, were wholly broken up as an army when Argyle reached Aberdeen on the 8th of February. Like[938] every man that ever bore the name of Stuart, with fair abilities, James was selfish and self-seeking to the last degree. Faithless to his friends, a slave to his sensual passions, he was respectable only in a certain gift of personal bravery, in a sort of grandeur of obstinacy, and in the tenacity with which he clung to his religious creed and his hereditary rights.

As is always the case on the defeat of a domestic treason, strong pressure was brought to bear upon the ministers to induce them to act leniently towards the prisoners. The seven noble prisoners—Derwentwater, Kenmure, Nithsdale, Wintoun, Widdrington, Carnwath and Nairn—were impeached by the House of Commons, all but Lord Wintoun pleaded guilty, and sentence was pronounced. Then every means was brought to bear upon the King—private petitions from the wives of the accused noblemen, supported by the influence of all the ladies of the Court; petitions of ladies to Parliament, and lastly, an address from the majority of the Lords, urging him to reprieve if possible. These efforts were so far successful that all were reprieved with the exception of Derwentwater, Kenmure, and Nithsdale. The two first were executed, the escape of the last was contrived by the skill of his wife, who conveyed a woman's dress to her husband, in which he passed safely out of his prison, personating a lady friend who had accompanied the Countess on her visit, and who remained in his place. Three other important prisoners, Mackintosh, Forster, and Lord Wintoun also made good their escape, which seems to indicate either a strong sympathy on the part of the gaolers, or perhaps a wish on the part of the Government to avoid the necessity of more executions. Of the lesser prisoners, many of the common men were executed or transported; officers who had been in the King's service were summarily shot; but a very large proportion of those captured in Scotland being brought for judgment to Carlisle, in contravention, it was asserted, of the terms of the Union, were punished lightly or released, for fear of exciting fresh national quarrels.

It must not be supposed, however, that the excitement on the part of the Jacobites, or the fear on the part of the Hanoverians, was by any means allayed, and as by the existing Statute of 6 William and Mary, Parliament would be dissolved at the close of the year, and a new election held in the spring of 1717, there seemed great probability of a renewal of the contest, or at least of very serious riots during the election time. With this in view, the ministers proposed that the existing Parliament[939] should be continued for a term of seven instead of three years. This, which was meant for a temporary measure, has never been repealed, and is still the law under which Parliaments are held. It has been often objected to this action of Parliament, that it was acting arbitrarily in thus increasing its own duration. "It was a direct usurpation," it has been said, "of the rights of the people, analogous to the act of the Long Parliament in declaring itself indestructible." It has been regarded rather as a party measure than as a forward step in liberal government. We must seek its vindication in the peculiar conditions of the time. It was useless to look to the constituencies for the support of the popular liberty. The return of members in the smaller boroughs was in the hands of corrupt or corruptible freemen; in the counties, of great landowners; in the larger towns, of small place-holders under Government. A general election in fact only gave fresh occasion for the exercise of the influence of the Crown and of the House of Lords—freedom and independence in the presence of these two permanent powers could be secured only by the greater permanence of the third element of the Legislature, the House of Commons. It was thus that, though no doubt in some degree a party measure for securing a more lengthened tenure of office to the Whigs, the Septennial Act received, upon good constitutional grounds, the support and approbation of the best statesmen of the time. It was upon these grounds that Lord Somers declared that the measure would be the greatest possible support to the liberty of the country, and Speaker Onslow, with a clear view of the tendency of the Act, believed that it would emancipate the House of Commons from its former dependence on the Crown and the House of Lords. It was however probably the more far-sighted only who saw the advantages to which the Septennial Act would lead. It was meant for a temporary Act, and the reasons for its necessity, as set forth in the preamble, are the expenses of frequent elections, the constant renewal of party animosities, and the probability, "at this juncture, when a restless and Popish faction are designing and endeavouring to renew" the rebellion within and invasion without, of an election being likely to prove destructive to the peace and security of the Government. At the same time it is plain that men's eyes were being opened to the threatened loss of independence of the Lower House, for a private Bill was introduced, and subsequently carried through in a modified form by Government, to forbid the holders of pensions withdrawable at will from sitting in the House.

No sooner was the great question which had held the Whig party[940] together settled by the suppression of the insurrection, than certain elements of disunion which already existed in the Cabinet began to make themselves felt, and a train of circumstances began, which ended in the disruption of the ministry. The tumult of pardon and execution had scarcely subsided, when the King, to the great dislike of his ministers, giving way to those natural inclinations which were for many years to be the chief weakness of our Hanoverian Princes, insisted upon the repeal of the clause of the Act of Settlement which restrained the King from leaving England, and hurried to his hereditary dominions. Stanhope accompanied George and Stanhope go to Hanover. him as representative of the English ministry, Townshend being left at home. This separation of the ministry of itself afforded room for intrigue, and the state of affairs both at home and abroad supplied a more than usually appropriate occasion for it, for the hereditary family quarrel had already broken out between George and his eldest son. It was impossible, however, to ignore his claims to the regency during his father's absence, nor would Townshend permit them to be overlooked. The King was with difficulty persuaded to put the Government in his hands, with the inferior title of Guardian of the Realm and Lieutenant, and under considerable restrictions. The minister in England was thus at once put, in some sort, in opposition to the King, and in a position which gave great opening for the intrigues of his enemies who surrounded the King; for a clique, consisting of the King's Hanoverian courtiers, Bernsdorf, Bothmar, George's private Secretary Robethon, and Madame de Schulenberg, Duchess of Kendal, the royal mistress, were full of animosity to the minister. Like the Scotch followers of James I., they regarded England as a sort of promised land, and took umbrage at the attempts of the English ministry to check their rapacity. The mistrust thus engendered was rapidly increased by subsequent events, chiefly connected with the affairs of the Continent.

As the King entered Hanover with Stanhope, the minister was met by the Abbé Dubois, an agent of the Regent Orleans, and negotiations began for the establishment of friendly relations with France, which mark an entire change in the politics of Europe. To complete the security of the new succession, it was regarded as necessary that the Pretender should be removed beyond the Alps, and that all hope of assistance to his cause from France should cease. Open hostilities to gain this end seemed out of the question. Austria was much irritated by the Barrier Treaty, by[941] which the Dutch were secured a line of fortresses in the Austrian Netherlands, garrisoned by the Dutch, but paid by Austria. The Emperor, too, was naturally jealous of the increasing power of the Princes of the Empire, three of whom had acquired kingdoms; the Elector of Saxony was King of Poland, the Elector of Brandenburg King of Prussia, the Elector of Hanover King of England. The temper of Austria thus forbade all hope of re-establishing the Grand Alliance. The withdrawal of support from the Pretender had to be sought by peaceful means; and the Regent, intent on his personal aims, was willing to surrender the cause of the Stuarts, and to destroy the works at Mardyke as the price of peace with England. On these terms negotiations for a treaty, in which Holland was to share, were begun.

The German objects of the King rendered its speedy conclusion an object of the first importance. After his defeat at Pultowa, Charles XII. had withdrawn to Bender, where he had vainly attempted to rouse the Turks to assist him against the Russians. In his absence, Russia, Poland, and Denmark, the countries which in turn he had conquered, combined against his deserted country; and the King of Prussia, for his own ends no doubt, but with some appearance of keeping the balance between the parties, succeeded in neutralizing Pomerania, and in obtaining the sequestration into his own hands of the strong town of Stettin. This arrangement by no means pleased Charles, who hastened home from Bender, hoping by an alliance with England to keep his enemies at bay. The accession of the house of Hanover destroyed this hope. The Elector of Hanover had obtained from Denmark Bremen and Verden, part of the spoils of Charles, and was pledged by his own interests to oppose him. He insisted upon an English fleet being sent to the Baltic, though the question was obviously one of German interest only. Not content with opposing Sweden, George eagerly desired that the fleet should be used against Russia, for that country had invaded Mecklenburg, and intended apparently to appropriate it. Again it was evident that the question was chiefly of German interest. Townshend placed the English view of the affair before the King—it did not matter much who possessed Mecklenburg, but to attack Russia, the chief opponent of Sweden, was to leave Charles XII. free for dangerous designs in favour of the Stuarts, in which he was now almost openly engaged. Fortunately diplomacy induced the Czar to withdraw, and the question was thus solved.

But while eager for war with Sweden and Russia, George was[942] naturally anxious for the conclusion of the peace with France, and thought himself purposely thwarted by his minister, when the peculiarities of the Dutch constitution threw delays in the way of its completion, and Townshend refused to break faith and conclude the treaty without the accession of the Dutch. The King's dislike for Dismissal of Townshend. Townshend, excited by his opposition to his German plans, was sedulously fomented both by his Hanoverian courtiers and by the Earl of Sunderland, who, thoroughly discontented with his subordinate position in the ministry as Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, had joined the King at Hanover, and had entered busily into the intrigues going on there. A letter from Townshend, in which, in order to allow the longer absence of the King, he recommended that additional powers should be given to the Prince in England, brought matters to a crisis. Townshend was dismissed from his office, and offered in exchange the viceroyalty of Ireland. For the sake of the party, and upon some sort of apology from the King, Townshend accepted his new office, and the quarrel was temporarily healed.

During this brief reconciliation, the negotiations which had been carried on at the Hague and Hanover were completed, and a Triple Alliance was signed in January 1717, by which the clauses in the Treaty of Utrecht having reference to the Protestant succession in England, to the French succession, and to the renunciation of the Spanish King to his claims on the French throne, were guaranteed.

But Walpole and the other friends of Townshend took an early opportunity of showing their discontent at the treatment of their leader, and it became necessary to dismiss them. The direction of the Government thus fell into the hands of Stanhope, as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sunderland and Addison became Secretaries of State, and James Craggs Secretary at War. The occasion of the final schism was a demand for a supply to oppose the intrigues of the King of Sweden. The lukewarmness of Walpole's support was so marked that his friends and those of Townshend voted against Government, and the supplies were carried by a majority of four only. The fraction of the Whigs who thus left office at once passed into vigorous opposition; yet the crisis was one which should have overpowered party feeling.

The state of Europe was such as to threaten difficulty, even danger, to England. Two statesmen of unusual ability were at work in Europe; to both of them the fall of the new Government in England was an object, and when their[943] intrigues for a moment brought them together, there was a brief interval of real danger. These were Charles XII. of Sweden, and Alberoni, the Prime Minister of Spain.

Charles had found himself thwarted in his schemes for re-establishing his power by the opposition of the English King. The same opposition had checked the Czar in his ambitious schemes on Mecklenburg. In union with his minister, Görtz, an adventurer who had passed into his service from that of the Prince of Gotthorp, Charles determined on a new combination of the North to suit the altered politics of Europe. He allied himself with his old enemy the Czar, and despatched Görtz to Holland, to see what he could do in France and England. In each of those countries he found it possible to enter into communication with a large discontented minority. In France, the Duke of Maine, irritated at the loss of the position which the late King's will would have given him, had put himself at the head of the older and graver statesmen, who clung to the old policy of enmity with England. In England, the Jacobites were still looking out for foreign support. To both countries Görtz sent an agent,—while Spaar was, if possible, to produce a change of government in France, Gyllenborg was instructed in England to promise the Tories the assistance of 12,000 men under the personal command of the King of Sweden. In seeking assistance for his plans, Görtz had come across another intrigue tending in the same direction. He found in Alberoni a man whose views were for the time identical with his own, and Spanish money found its way largely both to the Pretender and to the Swedish agents. Fortunately the English Government obtained information of what was going on. Justly holding that his ambassadorial rights were forfeited by his treason, they apprehended Gyllenborg and seized his papers, and persuaded Holland to act in the same manner with regard to Görtz. The papers thus seized afforded full justification for what they had done. But though thwarted in this scheme, both Charles and the Czar continued to act in unison with Spain against the interests of England. It was to meet this plot that the supply was demanded which caused the final schism in the English ministry. The death of Charles in September 1718, at the siege of Friedrichshalle, whither he had gone in his haste to secure Norway, the possession of which was a part of his bargain with Russia, prevented the Northern branch of the intrigue from bearing fruits, and a revolution in Sweden, which changed it into little more than an oligarchical republic, removed it for more than sixty years from the scene of history.

[944]

Alberoni's plots were of more importance. He was one of those statesmen who owe their rise to the democratic character of the Roman Church. The son of a market gardener, of a singularly undignified exterior, he had found means to make himself indispensable Alberoni. to the Duke of Vendome during the war of the Spanish succession, and had subsequently established his position in Spain by bringing about the marriage of Philip with Elizabeth of Parma. His object was entirely patriotic; he desired to replace Spain in the list of great European nations. For this purpose he set to work with remarkable success to revive the industry and wealth of the country. But his views reached further than this; he aimed at the destruction of the Treaty of Utrecht. By that treaty Austria had gained almost all that Spain had lost. It was therefore against Austria that his designs were chiefly directed. Knowing of the irritation which existed between Austria and England with regard to the Barrier Treaty, and believing that France would be unwilling to do anything to the disadvantage of a Bourbon kingdom of its own creation, he supposed that Austria would be without allies. To secure friendship with England, he even granted her great commercial advantages. The defensive alliance between England and Austria, in 1716, was the first blow to his plan. The subsequent conclusion, in 1717, of the Triple Alliance opened his eyes to the probable policy of France. It was then that he threw himself into the intrigues of the Jacobites and the party of the Duke of Maine, and put himself into communication with Charles of Sweden. Alberoni's chief object was to destroy the Austrian power in Italy. Conscious that Spain had gained in strength by the loss of her widespread foreign dependencies, he had no intention of conquering that country. But he wished to restrict the Austrian power there, firstly, by the establishment of younger branches of the Spanish house in Sicily (at the instant belonging by the Treaty of Utrecht to Victor Amadeus of Savoy), and in the duchies of Parma and Tuscany, where the reigning houses were drawing towards extinction, and to which Elizabeth Farnese had claims; and, secondly, by the increase of the territory of Savoy, which he designed to compensate for the loss of Sicily by the cession of a portion of Lombardy. The possession of Sicily was therefore of the first importance to him. But Austria had already been negotiating with the powers of the Triple Alliance for the exchange of that island for Sardinia. Alberoni himself desired to wait till Spain had acquired more power at home, but the apprehension by the Austrians of a newly appointed Spanish inquisitor roused the anger of Philip V., and,[945] against his will, Alberoni was hurried into war. To prevent the exchange of Sicily he at once took possession of Sardinia, and would probably have proceeded to attack Sicily, when the Powers of the Triple Alliance intervened.

Their offer of mediation involved the renunciation on the part of Austria of all claims on the Spanish monarchy, which had never hitherto been dropped,—on the part of Spain of all claims on the Italian provinces. The exchange of Sicily for Sardinia was to be carried out, and Parma and Tuscany to be given to Don Carlos. Enraged at this offer, the work of men, as he said, "who cut and pared countries as they would Dutch cheeses," Alberoni at once set to work all the apparatus his intrigue had prepared. The anger of Savoy was aroused at the loss of Sicily; the Turks, already at war with Austria, were subsidized and urged to further exertions; Ragotski, Prince of Transylvania, was brought forward to demand his hereditary dominions, to hamper Austria on the east; the Spanish envoy in France busily stirred up faction there; Charles XII. and the Czar were urged to immediate action; and an expedition against England, headed by Ormond or the Pretender himself, was set on foot. The whole of Europe seemed involved. The mediating Powers found themselves likely to be drawn into war. Stanhope was removed from his position as First Lord of the Treasury, and made Secretary of State for the Southern Department, which included foreign affairs, and on June 4, 1718, Admiral Byng set sail from England for the Mediterranean.

The crisis was so threatening that the Austrian Emperor, who had refused to accede to the mediation of the Powers, yielded. England procured for him the Treaty of Passowitz, which secured him from the Turks, bought off at the expense of the Venetians, from whom they had conquered the Morea; and a Quadruple Alliance between England, France, Austria, and Holland was formed on the basis of the old project of mediation, with this difference, that Parma and Tuscany were to be held by Don Carlos only as fiefs of the Empire. Without open declaration of war, France and England had virtually joined the Austrian alliance. Alberoni, however, persisted in his schemes, but fortune had turned against him. The Spanish fleet, not knowing whether it was peace or war, was fallen upon and destroyed by Byng off Cape Passaro; Savoy, yielding to the pressure of the Quadruple Alliance, accepted Sardinia in exchange for Sicily; the death of Charles XII. broke up the Northern Alliance; the conspiracy in France was discovered when[946] approaching maturity, the Spanish ambassador and the Duke and Duchess of Maine apprehended; of the Pretender's expedition, scattered in the Bay of Biscay, two frigates only reached Loch Alsh in Scotland. A few hundreds of the Highlanders gathered to their standard, but the appearance of English troops put them to flight; the chiefs escaped to Spain, the Highlanders were allowed to fly Fall of Alberoni. Dec. 1719. unmolested to their hills, the Spanish troops were taken prisoners of war. War having now been regularly declared, the French crossed the Pyrenees, and again and again defeated the Spanish troops; and at length Philip was compelled to dismiss his great minister, and on the 19th of January 1720 acceded to the terms of the Quadruple Alliance.

The affairs in the North of Europe were settled in a similar high-handed fashion. There too a nation, struggling to regain its old preponderance, had to be crushed. The death of Charles XII., and the revolution which followed it, put an end to any chance of Sweden's regaining its position in Europe. The new Government fell back upon the old policy of the country; Bremen and Verden were allowed to remain in the hands of George, and an alliance with England and France was entered into. As a necessary consequence the late allies of Sweden again became its enemies. But the friendship of France and England drove them to peace. Orders were even issued to the English Admiral of the Baltic to fall upon the fleet of the Czar without declaration of war, unless with Denmark, his ally, he consented to a cessation of hostilities. Too weak to resist, Denmark accepted a sum of money and retired from the contest; and the Czar, European peace. 1720. now standing alone, withdrew, though still in arms, to await a better opportunity for action. The foreign policy of Stanhope had thus been successful, and though unjust and domineering, secured for Europe a peace of twelve years.

Meanwhile the minister had carried out with consistency the politics of his party at home. In acting thus he was met with considerable difficulties. On the one hand he had to manage and repress the meddlesome and rapacious German coterie which surrounded the King, on the other he was met by a strong opposition headed by that party of the Whigs which had left office with Townshend.

In all the chief measures of his administration he found an eager and at times a successful antagonist in Walpole. It was chiefly through his instrumentality that the impeachment of Oxford came to an untimely end. The Lords were persuaded[947] to refuse to listen to any evidence in support of the charge of misdemeanour Trial of Oxford. June 1717. before they had heard that on the graver charge of treason. They knew that it was impossible for the Commons to support the more important charge. A quarrel between the Houses ended in the refusal of the Lower House to proceed to the impeachment. The Lords gravely assembled on the appointed day in Westminster Hall, sat there for a quarter of an hour, and then, as no accusers appeared, declared the impeachment at an end. Again, Walpole, regardless of party ties, vehemently upheld the charges of peculation brought against Lord Cadogan by the Jacobites in the House headed by Shippen. And again, with great inconsistency, Repeal of the Schism Act. Jan. 1719. he opposed the repeal of the Schism Act. The Act for restraining Occasional Conformity passed in the last reign, and the Schism Act of 1714, by which it had been followed, pressed very heavily on the Dissenters; and Stanhope, whose views appear in some respects to have been more liberal than those in vogue at the time, went so far in his wish to relieve them as even to dream of mitigating the severity of the Test and Corporation Acts. However, wisely yielding to the advice of Sunderland, he confined himself to an attempt to get the Schism Act repealed, and succeeded, after much opposition, in both Houses; but his narrow majorities show that a more extensive measure would have been useless. The Test Act continued in force, though rendered practically nugatory after the beginning of George II.'s reign by a Bill of Indemnity passed almost every year in favour of those who had evaded it.

On the two last named occasions Walpole's opposition had been useless. On the more important question of the limitation of the power of the Crown to create Peers by the Peerage Bill, he fortunately proved too strong for the minister. Like the Septennial Act, the Peerage Bill was introduced partly on theoretical, partly on party grounds. The Revolution had been an aristocratic rather than a popular movement. The power or rather the influence of the Crown had not been destroyed, but was in abeyance, the Hanoverian monarchs being as it were in a state of tutelage to the Whig party, whose strength was in the Upper House. Popular in language, but aristocratic in feeling, this party regarded political liberty as best secured by its own predominance, rendered permanent by such institutions as a Septennial Parliament and an exclusive hereditary nobility. It feared alike the power of the King and the power of the people, and already the adoption of the Treaty of Utrecht, carried by the popular will and[948] by a large creation of Peers, had shown the possibility of a union between King and people which might sooner or later destroy its influence. To guard against such a danger was the primary object for which Stanhope introduced his Peerage Bill. But temporary party interests had as much weight with him as general theory. Stanhope and his friends, especially Sunderland, were in dread of the conduct which might be pursued by the Prince of Wales when he came to the throne. He was on bad terms with his father, and regarded Sunderland as the chief cause of the royal jealousy. It was generally believed that his accession would be followed by a creation of peers from among his own favourites. Thus both on public and party grounds the ministry thought it desirable to limit the royal prerogative. As was natural, the Tories, in their dislike to restrictions on the royal prerogative, and the party of Walpole, who opposed it because it was a Government measure, made common cause against the Bill. By its enactments the Crown was to be restrained from the creation of more than six beyond the existing number of 178 English peerages (the power of creating a new peerage whenever an old one became extinct being reserved), no new peerage was to be created with remainders except to the original recipient and his heirs male; while, to place the Peerage of Scotland on the same footing, the sixteen representative Peers of that country were to give way to twenty-five hereditary Peers nominated by the Crown. The Bill met with little opposition in the House of Lords, but was thrown out by a large majority in the Lower House, where Walpole pointed out "that one of the most powerful incentives to virtue would be taken away, since there would be no arriving at honour but through the winding-sheet of a decrepit lord, or the grave of an extinct noble family."

At the present time a defeat on so important a measure must have driven the ministry from office. But the theory of party government was as yet so little perfected, that not only did Stanhope retain his place, but his administration was so strong, that the Whig malcontents thought it better to renew their old connection with it, and both Walpole and Townshend re-entered the Government, the one as Paymaster of the Forces, the other as Lord President. It seemed as if nothing short of some great convulsion could shake so powerful a Government, and, though little apprehended, such a convulsion was near at hand.

It was still early in the history of finance. It was only of late years that the moneyed interest had become so important in the[949] country as to admit of the discharge of the public liabilities by means The South Sea Scheme. of large and regular loans. But when once the practice had been begun it had been largely adopted, and during the wars of the reign of Queen Anne the debt had risen from sixteen to fifty-two millions. Ignorant of the resources of the country and of the ease with which such a debt might be supported, the financiers of the day were in constant terror of its rapid increase. A member of the House, a certain Mr. Broderick, was expressing the general feeling when he said, "I agree with the ministers, that until the National Debt is discharged, or in a fair way of being so, we cannot properly call ourselves a nation." But besides the general dread of the amount of the debt, there was a very well-grounded dislike to the high terms on which much of it had been contracted. The money having been borrowed in time of war and difficulty, the terms offered to the lender had been proportionately favourable. A settled Government, the success of the Hanoverian succession, and the continued and rapid increase of wealth which had followed it, had rendered money much cheaper, and Government was paying seven or eight per cent. upon its loans, when private individuals could borrow on good security at four per cent. But the manner in which much of the money had been raised forbad any effort at changing the rate of interest. The loans had been largely contracted in the form of annuities, many of them for ninety-nine years; and of these a considerable portion were irredeemable, that is to say, Government was pledged to the payment of the interest as originally arranged, unless some change could be made with the consent of the creditors.

Financiers had therefore two objects in view,—to lessen the whole amount of debt, and to lower the interest payable on what remained. The establishment of the Bank of England had shown the value, in a mercantile point of view, of the Government credit. It became an understood principle that money lent to Government, and thus secured upon the credit of Government, was an excellent form of capital; and when advances were required, or when it became convenient to substitute a single great creditor for a number of little ones, this principle had been brought into use. Two such attempts had been made, the one by Harley in 1711, the other by Walpole in 1717. Harley, when Lord Treasurer, had found a floating debt (a debt, that is, payable on demand of the creditor) of ten millions, and had got rid of the danger of immediate demand by forming a company of the creditors of this floating debt. The ten millions were[950] funded, that is, the interest and not the capital was paid; the interest was secured upon the customs, and the fund of ten millions became Formation of the South Sea Company. 1711. the capital of the company of creditors, who were induced to allow their claims to be thus funded by the promise of the monopoly in the mercantile advantage which Spain had granted England at Utrecht. This came to but little,—the Assiento, or supply of slaves, and the admission of a yearly ship of 500 tons burden to the American colonies. Even this advantage was lost in the difficulties which arose with Alberoni. The first ship did not sail till 1717, and as far as the South Sea trade went Harley's plan was a failure. But the credit gained by the Company in the transaction was good, other lines of trade were opened up, and the Company became great, flourishing and powerful.

In 1717 Walpole had been very desirous to diminish the National Debt. He established the first sinking fund, borrowing £600,000 at only four per cent., using this money to pay off liabilities bearing a higher interest, and applying the money thus saved to the extinction of the debt. He also, taking advantage of the value of Government credit, induced both the Bank and the South Sea Company to accept a lower rate of interest for the money they had already advanced, and to advance between them nearly £5,000,000 more, for the purpose of paying off as far as possible those holders of redeemable debts The South Sea Scheme. 1720. who refused to accept the lowered rate of interest. The great South Sea Scheme of 1720 was in principle nothing but a repetition of this manœuvre. The South Sea Company, believing devoutly in the power of credit, was anxious to extend itself as far as possible. The Government was so eager for the reduction of the debt that the King had made special mention of it in the speech with which he opened Parliament in the close of 1719. Under these circumstances the proposition of Blunt, director of the South Sea Company, found a ready hearing with the ministers. Between them an arrangement was devised, perfectly justifiable and harmless as far as the principle of it went. The bulk of the Government debt consisted in redeemable and irredeemable annuities, on all of which large interest was paid, and on which that interest must continue to be paid unless the holder of the annuity voluntarily reduced it. There is said to have been about sixteen millions of each class of security. Government wished to bring the whole mass into one general fund, bearing a lower rate of interest, and the South Sea Company was so greedy of the Government credit, that it expressed itself anxious to add the whole of this enormous amount to its[951] capital. It is plain that any transaction of the sort, as far as regarded the irredeemable annuities, must have been entirely voluntary. All that the Government could do was to allow the Company to persuade the holders to exchange their annuities for shares in the Company. With regard to the holders of redeemable annuities, payment in full must be offered, but that payment might be given in shares of the Company. In other words, those who accepted the exchange became proprietors in the Joint-stock South Sea Company to the amount of their claim on the Government. With regard to the Government, the South Sea Company alone became creditor, instead of a multitude of old annuitants, and was contented to receive henceforward, instead of the seven or eight per cent. the annuitants had received, five per cent. till the year 1727, and after that four per cent. till the capital as well as the interest should be returned, for the fund was made a redeemable one. If the transaction were thoroughly successful the capital of the South Sea Company would be increased by about thirty-two millions, advanced to Government at five per cent., and Government would have to pay five per cent. interest instead of seven or eight, besides having the power of redeeming the capital.

So great were the advantages understood to be gained by this accession of capital in Government hands, that other companies wished to share in them. It was voted by a large majority that these advantages should be put up to public competition. The Bank of England and the South Sea Company set to work outbidding each other, the latter finally proposing terms which were virtually a payment to Government of seven millions and a half. This money was to be devoted to the public service, to pay off debts contracted to the end of the year 1722, and after that as much as possible of the capital of the South Sea Company itself. It is plain that for the success of this scheme two things were requisite. In the first place, a readiness on the part of the public to accept the Company's shares in exchange for their Government annuities; without that Government would not be freed, nor would the Company get its increased capital. But this exchange would of course bring in no ready money. Secondly, therefore, a large number of new shareholders would be required to subscribe, paying for their shares in ready money, in order to meet the demands of those holders of redeemable annuities who refused all exchange, and to cover the heavy premium of £7,000,000. Now both of these objects were dependent on the popularity of the Company's shares; and it was in this that the mistake of the arrangement lay; Government[952] had in fact made too good a bargain. By an extensive system of bribes large sums of fictitious capital were invented and distributed gratis among influential members of the Government, and still more largely among the hungry Hanoverian courtiers, whose influence it was regarded as all important to secure. All fear of the success of the scheme was almost immediately removed. So great was the belief in the vast Company, backed up by this huge accession of Government credit, so well had the directors done their business, that a very large majority of the annuitants pressed with extreme haste to accept the terms offered, though those terms were very low. The public were then invited to subscribe the new capital. Five separate subscriptions of upwards of a million were in succession opened, and all filled, with equal rapidity.

It was however in its secondary effects, rather than in its immediate consequences, that the scheme exerted the most extraordinary influence. There was a great deal of money in the country, and there was no satisfactory way of using it. Much had been hoarded, for there were not then as now numerous industrial investments in the market in which small sums could be employed. The apparent The rage for stock-jobbing. success of the South Sea Company, and the promises which it held out for rapid fortune-making, excited the spirit of speculation to the highest degree, and companies sprang into existence with unexampled rapidity. Some were real and serious—waterworks, paving companies, and companies for the improvement of all branches of manufacture. Some were mere transparent impostures—as a company for the importation of Spanish donkeys, for the fixing of quicksilver, or for wheels of perpetual motion. It did not matter much what they were, for the rage for stock-jobbing was such that any hardy promoter of a company might hope to float it at all events till he had himself realized a handsome fortune. Change Alley became a scene of the wildest excitement—people in all lines of life hurrying to buy and sell as during the railway mania of our own time. But among all the companies the South Sea Company maintained its pre-eminence, and its shares rose, till in August the £100 share was worth £1000. The Company continued to promise largely, even fifty per cent. profits. The absurdity and danger of such reckless proceedings began to become obvious. The nominal value of all the shares in all the companies then existing was held to be £500,000,000, or twice the value of all the land in England. But many of these companies, being unchartered, were illegal, and had no right to issue shares,[953] and the legitimate companies, especially the South Sea, looked with jealousy at their illegal competitors. Apparently unconscious how much their own success depended upon the universal delusion, they Bursting of the bubble. proceeded to prosecute some companies which had acted illegally. The effect was instantaneous. The nation began to return to its senses; the bubble burst, and the stocks of all unchartered companies fell with extreme rapidity. In the universal ruin they carried with them the South Sea Company. The panic was as rapid as the eagerness to purchase had been. Before the end of September South Sea stock was at 175. The difference between that sum and the £1000 which they had touched will give some measure of the loss involved. The ruin among all classes was unspeakable.

So great was the desolation that it was found necessary for Parliament to intervene. Not that the great Company itself was in any way bankrupt, its shares were still at a large premium, they never fell below 175; not that any law of political economy had been broken; Government had never pledged itself to support the credit of the Company, or to force either its shares or its engagements Punishment of the directors. on the public; but simply because private speculation had caused so vast an amount of misery, and because the nation was exasperated at it, interference became absolutely necessary. Examination into all the details of the plan no doubt proved a considerable amount of venality on the part of the ministry, of bribery and fraud on the part of the directors. But even thus it was freely acknowledged that under no old law had any crime been committed, and it required a retrospective Act of Parliament and the creation of a temporary crime to bring the directors within the reach of punishment. As Gibbon said, the steps taken were in fact an act of popular vengeance and contrary to justice. They consisted in the appropriation of the private property of the directors to the amount of £2,000,000 for distribution among the sufferers, the remission of the £7,000,000 due by the Company to Government, the payment of all the just liabilities to the Company, and a division of the capital that then remained, about thirty-three per cent., among the proprietors.

These measures are due exclusively to Walpole, the one man specially fitted from his financial abilities to deal with the present crisis, and in whose favour it was remembered that he had been out of office when the plan was set on foot. The official inquiries into the circumstances of the South Sea[954] Scheme left him indeed in a position of undisputed supremacy in the House. Several members of the Government were implicated in the frauds of the Company; Aislabie, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was found guilty and expelled the House. The younger Craggs died of smallpox before the inquiry was completed, and his father committed suicide. Charles Stanhope was acquitted by a majority of three only, and although Sunderland was declared innocent by a large majority, public opinion was so strong against him that he had to leave the ministry. In the following year he died. During the angry debates which arose on these matters Lord Stanhope had been attacked with virulence by the Duke of Wharton, and the anger which he had felt had been such as to cause a rush of blood to the head, of which he died shortly before his relative Charles Stanhope was acquitted. There remained no possible rival to Walpole, who with his brother-in-law Townshend returned to power as First Lord of the Treasury. Thus, when the new Parliament assembled, he found himself absolute master of the field, at the head of an unbroken Whig party, supported by an overwhelming majority, and for twenty years maintained his position, to the immense advantage of England and to the lasting security of the reigning house.

Not that the Jacobites were as yet extinct, but they were silenced in Parliament, and had to rely upon conspiracy or foreign assistance. Their hopes in fact were at this moment in some respects higher than ever, for the disturbance and discontent caused by the collapse of the South Sea Scheme, together with the birth of an heir to the House of Stuart in the person of Prince Charles Edward, seemed to afford them an opportunity for greater activity. The Stuart papers prove the existence of a well-organized intrigue, under the management of a Committee of five, Lord Orrery, the Earl of Arran Lord Orford's brother, Lord North, Lord Gower, and Atterbury Bishop of Rochester. The letters display in a very curious manner the false hopes with which the party were constantly buoyed up. Atterbury indeed showed signs of considerable Bishop Atterbury's plot. wisdom, the reintroduction of Walpole and Townshend to the ministry seemed to him a great blow to the cause. "The reconciliation," he writes, "is not yet hearty and sincere, but I apprehend it will by degrees become so. The Tories have no good foundation on which to stand. Disaffection and uneasiness will continue everywhere, and probably increase. The bulk of the nation will be ever in the true interest and on the side of justice. The present settlement will perhaps be detested[955] every day more and more, and yet no effectual step will or can be taken to shake it." The great South Sea Scheme also seemed to him a difficulty. "That body of men, who have increased their capital by £40,000,000, begin to look formidable. They cannot but be the governors of the kingdom." He therefore urged instant action before the Whig settlement had time to ripen or the financial plans to be brought to successful conclusion. Even a few years later the Earl of Orrery wrote, "It is not an extravagant computation that four out of five of the whole nation wish well to you." Nevertheless all these Jacobite writers were obliged to confess, even after the failure of the scheme, that the united Whigs were too powerful, and the general prudence of all classes too great, to allow of any successful movement without assistance from abroad. It is plain also that there were numerous sections and much want of discipline in the Jacobite camp. Atterbury's influence was disapproved of by many; Gower had a band of followers of his own; and James was so alive to this source of weakness that he earnestly pressed for the election of a responsible head, naming the Earl of Oxford as the fittest person for the purpose. These divisions, and the want of self-reliance in the face of the powerful Government, constantly prevented the Failure of the conspiracy. Jacobites from obtaining success; their agents were perpetually soliciting foreign countries for help, and the chain of foreign diplomacy which Stanhope had wrought was so close, that such ill-advised requests could scarcely fail to reach the ears of the English ministry. Thus a determination to take advantage of the confusion caused by the South Sea Scheme, by the death of Stanhope, which was supposed to have broken the link with France, and by the new election for Parliament, was brought to Walpole's knowledge. The Regent had been asked to supply 5000 men, but Dubois was not likely to overthrow the diplomatic edifice he had so carefully built up. He at once informed the English minister at Paris. And at the opening of the new Parliament George was able to give a short summary of the conspiracy, involving an expedition headed by James and Ormond from Spain and Italy, the seizure of the Tower, the Bank and the Exchequer, and the declaration in London of King James; and at the same time he could state that some of the chiefs, especially the Bishop of Rochester, were already under arrest.

The superiority of the Whig party was now shown in the Bills that were passed relative to this conspiracy. The Habeas Corpus Act was suspended for a whole year, the longest time on record;[956] sums were granted for an increase of the army; a tax of £100,000, to be collected from all Nonjurors, was enacted; and as the evidence was scarcely sufficient to go before a Court of Law, Bills of Pains and Penalties were introduced against some of the subordinate agents, and against Atterbury himself, who was forced to leave the kingdom. At Calais he met Bolingbroke, who had just received his pardon and was returning to England. He had been dismissed by the Pretender after the failure of 1715, and had vowed never again to serve so ungrateful a master. None the less did he continue for the rest of his life to hamper by his intrigues the Whig party. The chief cause of his irritation was Quarrel between Carteret and Walpole. that his overtures were rejected by Walpole, who already began to show that thirst for power and jealousy of men of great talents which was one of his marked characteristics, and which was the ultimate cause of his fall. Carteret, who with Townshend was now Secretary of State, was his first victim—a man of the most brilliant parts and of unrivalled knowledge of foreign affairs. He had succeeded to much of the influence as well as to the views of Stanhope. Abroad he was inclined to plunge England into the complications of Hanoverian policy. It was in fact natural that with his great knowledge of foreign affairs he should be led to consider them more important than other English statesmen, who then as now were inclined towards a policy of isolation. At home, too, his views were less exclusively those of a Whig partisan than those of his fellow ministers. He feared probably less than the occasion demanded the strength of the Jacobites. He looked upon the sole possession of power by the Whigs on the Hanoverian succession as a necessary but only temporary evil. He was desirous of a far larger admission of the Tory element, and would willingly have admitted Bolingbroke and those Tories who would have accompanied him among the ranks of the ministry, or at all events among the ranks of the ministerial supporters. But to Walpole such views were exceedingly distasteful. He well knew Bolingbroke's ability and feared him as a personal rival. He felt also that if Bolingbroke were instrumental in destroying the Tory opposition, the King could not but feel under considerable obligations to him, and that his own exclusive influence would be shaken. Bolingbroke's overtures were therefore most coldly received, and he withdrew again to Paris, where an intrigue was going on, in which he took a prominent part, and which ended in the fall of his friend Carteret. The intrigue itself was of a very despicable character, and[957] was connected with the marriage of a daughter of Madame de Platen, sister of the King's mistress, the Countess of Darlington. To counteract Carteret, who was employing the English ambassador in the Countess's interest, Townshend sent Horace Walpole as his agent to Paris. The existence of two rival ambassadors, one only properly accredited, brought matters to a crisis. The King, in spite of a strong personal friendship for Carteret, was obliged to yield to the influence of Walpole, and his rival had to withdraw to the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland.

But although the office given to Carteret was regarded as a retirement, in the present instance it promised to be no sinecure. Ireland was in a state of wild excitement, lashed to fury by the exceedingly able but untrue writings of Swift, who in his Drapier's Letters had by exaggeration and falsehood given an aspect of tyrannical misgovernment to a commonplace and legitimate financial act. There was great need of a new small coinage for Ireland, and Walpole had given a patent in 1722 to a certain William Wood, giving him power to coin farthings and halfpence to the value of £108,000. The contract and quality had been declared satisfactory by Sir Isaac Newton, Master of the Mint. The Irish Parliament declared that the patent would occasion a loss to the nation of one hundred and fifty per cent., an extraordinary assertion based upon the fact that a pound of rough copper in Ireland was worth twelve pence, while a pound of coined fine copper was to be worth thirty pence. But the mint in London gave eighteenpence a pound for its copper. The charge of coinage was fourpence, the duties upon copper imported into Ireland were twenty per cent., and the difference of exchange between England and Ireland rendered a slight diminution of the weight reasonable. Of course, however, it is certain that the patentee made something by the bargain, especially as the voracious Duchess of Kendal had been bribed to obtain it. But all facts and all reasoning were useless against the storm raised by Swift's Letters, and it was not till Walpole had exhibited his usual prudence in accepting inevitable defeat, and cancelling the patent, that Ireland was quieted.

It was not in Ireland only that the financial measures of Walpole met with opposition. For years the tax upon malt had been with great difficulty collected in Scotland. This tax had been changed into a charge of threepence upon every barrel of ale. Edinburgh was in commotion, and the brewers refused to brew. Lord Isla, the Duke of Argyle's brother,[958] was acting as Walpole's agent in the matter. He prudently declined to interfere, certain that love of profit would speedily break up the combination. A public meeting, Walpole tells us, was held, and the question put by the chairman, "Brew or not brew?" He began by asking the man on his right hand. But he and many who followed him refused to vote, till at last one bolder than the rest refused to be bound by the majority and voted "Brew." The assembly broke up in some confusion, but before morning there were forty brewhouses hard at work in Edinburgh and ten in Leith.

The remainder of the reign offers but little of interest in domestic history, but before Walpole could enter unchecked on that course of peaceful policy which is the chief characteristic of his long tenure of office, he had yet one difficulty with Spain to overcome, while at home there was already springing up that opposition of discontented Whigs combined with the Tory party, which, under the fostering influence of Bolingbroke behind the scenes, and led in Parliament by the ability of Pulteney, formed the formidable opposition to Spanish difficulties. 1725. which Walpole ultimately succumbed. Since the adhesion of Spain to the Quadruple Alliance and the fall of Alberoni, a Congress had been sitting at Cambrai to arrange the details of the final settlement of Europe. The chief points at issue were the renunciation of the title of King of Spain, to which the Austrian Empire fondly clung, the Grand Mastership of the Order of the Golden Fleece, which the Emperor also claimed, and the restoration to their owners of certain Italian provinces of which the Emperor had taken possession. To gain these ends, Spain, absolutely renouncing the policy of Alberoni, attached itself closely to France and England, purchased the favour of the latter country by a treaty of commerce, renewing the Assiento and the annual ship to the Spanish colonies, and of the former by a marriage-treaty. This marriage-treaty Orleans was induced to accept in pursuance of his plan for keeping continual hold of the regency; all views of ultimate succession were gradually fading from him as the young King improved in health. It was a threefold arrangement; the Infanta Mary Anne, then only three years old, was to marry Louis XV., the two daughters of the Regent were to marry the Prince of Asturias, heir to the Spanish crown, and Don Carlos, presumptive heir to Parma and Tuscany. Spain had thus done so much that she awaited with confidence the meeting of the Congress at Cambrai. But that Congress was very slow in its operations, and the hasty Queen of Spain and her ambitious husband began to weary of the[959] ill success of their concessions, and to think that perhaps after all matters might be brought to a more speedy termination by direct action, without mediators, at the court of Vienna. The Spanish Government was the more inclined to this step, because it had been persuaded that the Austrian court would lend no unwilling ear to direct negotiations.

This belief had been forced upon the King and Queen by a strange, adventurous, but very able foreigner, who was rapidly rising into somewhat the same position in Spain that Alberoni had held. This was the Baron Ripperda. A Dutchman by origin, a soldier by profession, he was unusually well versed in the details of business and of political economy. He had taken up all Alberoni's views as to the possible expansion of the resources of Spain, and, thinking there was more room for his ability in that country than in Holland, had had himself naturalized there. He followed the King during his temporary resignation of the Spanish throne, and returned with him on his son's death to the possession of full power. There seems little doubt that throughout Ripperda had been in the pay of the Austrian court, and it was chiefly at his instigation that the Congress at Cambrai was deserted and direct negotiations between the courts opened. He had set before the King and Queen very plausible reasons not only for a negotiation but for a change of policy, no less complete than an entire desertion of the mediating Powers and of the principle of the Quadruple Alliance, and a close friendship with the House of Austria. Spain would thus be freed from the constant encroachments of England upon her trade, and the interference of France, which had been very irksome to the Spaniards since the Bourbon accession, would be avoided. The old question of the Barrier Treaty was exciting the animosity of England and Austria; for Austria, in distinct contravention of the commercial articles of that treaty, which forbade to the Austrian Netherlands the trade of India, had established a great Ostend India Company. And there was another object very dear to the Emperor's heart towards which Spain could lend important aid. It could guarantee the Pragmatic Sanction, pledge itself, that is, to preserve the Austrian succession to the daughter of the Emperor, a pledge which in the case of Spain meant a great deal, as Spain had fair claims to a considerable portion of the succession on the extinction of the direct male line of the Austrian house. With these hopes and with these offers Ripperda set out for Vienna, with the intention of entirely destroying the present arrangements of Europe, of breaking the[960] existing marriage-treaty with the Orleans princesses, of substituting for them the Austrian archduchesses, and of restoring Europe to its ancient attitude by the close alliance of Austria and Spain in opposition to France and England.

The success of Ripperda's scheme, the completion of his great act of treachery, was rapidly secured by an act of a very similar description on the part of the Duke of Bourbon. That prince had an almost insane dread of the possible succession of the Orleans house to the French throne; to preclude its possibility he desired the immediate marriage of the young king. But his betrothed Spanish bride was but a baby; regardless therefore of all treaty obligations, the Duke sent her back almost without explanation to Spain, and married the young King to Maria Leczinska, daughter of the ex-King of Poland. The rage of the Spanish king knew no bounds; he sent peremptory Treaty of Vienna. April 30, 1725. orders to Ripperda to bring the treaty with Austria to a conclusion upon any terms. Under these circumstances the great Treaty of Vienna was made on the 30th of April 1725. It consisted of three separate treaties, two public and one private. By the public treaties the Pragmatic Sanction was guaranteed; the Spanish ports opened to German commerce; the succession of Parma and Tuscany promised to Don Carlos; and Austria pledged herself to use her best influence to secure the restoration of Gibraltar and Minorca. Had this been all it would have been fair enough, somewhat humiliating to the countries left negotiating uselessly at Cambrai, but not otherwise than in accordance with the principles of the Quadruple Alliance.

On the supposition that there was no secret treaty the English Opposition desired that no notice might be taken of the transaction, and reprobated the action of the Government in forming a counter treaty as Hanoverian. But there can be little doubt that there was a secret treaty. Its tenor was afterwards disclosed by Ripperda. In it the marriages between the two houses were arranged; Austria and Spain pledged themselves to assist the restoration of the Stuarts; and to compel, if necessary by force, the restoration of Gibraltar and Minorca. The existence of this treaty before long reached the ears of the English ministers. For some little time the Jacobites had been extremely active. An envoy had come to rouse the loyalty of the clans, and had found them not disinclined to revolt; and the Duke of Wharton, one of the Jacobite leaders, had gone abroad and held ostentatiously secret meetings with Ripperda. Ripperda's own tongue was none of the[961] quietest, and he boasted constantly of his great plans. The threat against the power of England was rendered more dangerous by the attitude of Russia, where the Empress Catherine, who was receiving large subsidies from the Spanish court, was eager to win for her son-in-law the Duke of Holstein the province of Sleswig, which the Danes had taken from him.

To meet this threatening alliance therefore, on the 3rd of September, the counter Treaty of Hanover was signed between England, France and Prussia, for mutual assistance should either of the countries be attacked. The real intention was to compel the Emperor to relinquish the Ostend Company, and to withstand any attempt on the part of the Pretender. Ripperda had returned in triumph to Madrid; but his success was shortlived. He found himself unable to fulfil the promises he had made to the Austrians; the people of Spain hated him; he was driven from office, and had to seek refuge at the British embassy, where his confessions completely justified the precautions the Government had taken in bringing about the Treaty of Hanover. In spite of his fall the treaty he had arranged still continued effective.

It seemed as if Europe was upon the verge of a great war, divided as of old into North and South, Protestant and Catholic. The indignation excited by the Treaty of Vienna in England was very great. As it was well put in the King's speech, it appeared as if the appropriation of the English trade was to be given to one country, and Gibraltar and Port Mahon to another, as a price for assisting the Stuart Pretender to the English throne. Very large subsidies were granted, and the army and navy increased. A British squadron blockaded Porto Bello, another squadron entered the Baltic to overawe the Russians; the Spanish galleons were seized. The foolish publication of a direct appeal from the Emperor of Austria to the English people excited the anger even of the Opposition, and secured the speedy dismissal of Palm, the Austrian ambassador. A Spanish army proceeded to invest Gibraltar.

But the skilful though selfish policy of Prussia, and the pacific tendencies of Walpole and of the new French minister Fleury, produced an arrangement. The Emperor found that his position was becoming dangerous. Prussia, at once the leader of the princely opposition to the Imperial house, and yet thoroughly German in its tendencies, determined to be neutral. It could not assist the[962] Emperor in supporting a treaty which by its marriage clauses threatened to put a Spanish prince on the Imperial throne. The King had hopes of gaining from France some portion of the Juliers succession. But the house of Brandenburg had become of great Preliminaries of peace. May 31, 1727. importance in European politics; neither party could well act without it. Its neutrality induced the Emperor to consent to the signature of preliminaries of peace, signed at Paris on the 31st of May 1727. He agreed to suspend the Ostend Company for seven years, and to refer other disputes to the general Congress. The pacific policy which had produced this arrangement was Walpole's. The skill which had formed the Treaty of Hanover, the dread of which had undoubtedly produced the peace, belonged to Townshend. And here began the ill-feeling between the brothers-in-law which ultimately produced the disruption of their friendship.

The period of this exciting foreign crisis was rendered interesting in England by the rising power of the Opposition to Walpole. At the back of that Opposition was constantly Bolingbroke. Enormous bribes had secured for him the favour of the Duchess of Opposition to Walpole headed by Bolingbroke. Kendal. Great stress had been brought to bear on Walpole to consent to his complete restitution. But Walpole would go no further than to allow a restoration of property, the attainder and consequent exclusion from the House of Peers was kept constantly suspended over his head. His anger against the minister who thus thwarted him knew no bounds. He set himself to work to form an Opposition. William Pulteney, an old friend of Walpole's, but like Carteret cast off as too able, lent himself to Bolingbroke's plans, and became his mouthpiece in the House of Commons. Between them they established the Opposition paper, the Craftsman, and under their influence every measure of the Government was vigorously attacked by the Jacobite or Whig members. Underhand intrigue promised to be even more effectual than overt opposition. The Duchess of Kendal, by dint of bribing, had grown to be zealous in the cause of the Opposition. She was constantly at work on the King, urging the full restoration of Bolingbroke, urging even the admission of him and his friends to the ministry, and the dismissal of Walpole. George indeed held bravely to his old minister. He showed him the insidious attacks which the Duchess put into his hands, and allowed him thus to meet and counteract them. But Walpole himself felt that the constant importunity of the favourite would sooner or later have its effect.[963] He was even, it is said, thinking of withdrawing to the Upper The King's death. June 9, 1727. House, when the King's death at Osnabrück, on his return home from Hanover, put an end for a moment to the almost successful intrigue.

England had been singularly fortunate in escaping the dangers which generally accompany a violent change of dynasty. The attention of the new Government is usually so constantly directed towards the maintenance of its position in the face of the eager opposition of its worsted rivals, that it neglects the external interests of the country, and the nation sinks for a time into insignificance. In the first days of the Revolution the nation had fortunately fallen into the hands of a great statesman, whose wide policy, carried out with consummate ability by the Duke of Increased importance of England abroad. Marlborough, had raised it to a very high position. At Utrecht it had treated as one of the first European nations. The skill of Stanhope had secured the prestige thus won. It was England which was the chief power of the Quadruple Alliance, her fleet in the Mediterranean which gave the first great blow to the plans of Alberoni. Twice the appearance of her fleet in the Baltic had overawed the North, and when the new European combination brought about by the Treaty of Vienna had threatened the existing arrangements of Europe, it was the diplomacy of England which called into existence the counter Treaty of Hanover.

At home the survey of the reign is not so satisfactory. There was deep depravity in both domestic and public life. The licentiousness which had marked the whole Stuart period had lost nothing of its wickedness, but a good deal of its elegance, in its union with the corruption of a small German court. With a king without wit, without taste for the arts, without knowledge of literature, without perception of beauty, and swayed by two ugly, ignorant and rapacious mistresses, we hear with no surprise tales of the coarseness of the time. If possible, the depravity of public life was greater than the private immorality. It is enough to mark the character of the reign that the Lord Chancellor, the Earl of Macclesfield, was towards its close convicted of disgracing the seat of justice by receiving bribes, and was removed with ignominy from his office; that three ministers at least, if not more, were compromised in the iniquitous transactions of the South Sea Company, and that the King's mistress amassed an immense fortune from the bribes by which her favour was purchased. But even worse than this shameless venality was the political infidelity which universally[964] prevailed. It is this which is the real danger of a disputed succession. There is an uncertainty as to which party may ultimately be successful, which engenders a spirit of political gambling, while for any fancied insults, or any real loss of power, immediate revenge can be sought by a mere transfer, and frequently a secret transfer of allegiance. To this may be added the tendency of compulsory oaths, which men persuade themselves that they may accept as a matter of form, and which therefore weaken all sense of conscientious engagements. There was hardly a statesman of note who had not more or less tampered with the Jacobite party. Even Walpole is not quite clear of the charge, while the whole body of High Tories were in constant danger of drifting into Jacobitism.

Nor was this the only cause leading to low political morality. The reigning King was a foreigner in all his habits and in all his tastes. He was surrounded by a Hanoverian court, who regarded England as an instrument for the aggrandizement of Hanover, and formed a centre for all intrigues to win the royal favour at the expense of patriotism. It is strange, indeed, that their influence was less directly felt in English politics, and it is perhaps owing to those very Hanoverian predilections of the King, which are so often urged against him, that their influence was not greater. He was so thoroughly German in language and in thought, he was so incapable of comprehending the English Constitution and manners, that his real interests were entirely centred on his Hanoverian dominions, and in all matters in which they were not concerned he left England to work out its own revolution, and was compelled, moreover, to throw himself wholly into the hands of that party on whom the revolution rested, and with whom it was a matter of life and death to secure the completion of that revolution, and to maintain the security of the Parliamentary King. It was fortunate that that party was guided by the wisdom of Walpole. That jealousy of power which was his chief weakness was itself an advantage, since it tended to exclude from power the Tory party, and gave a united character to the Government, which proved the hopelessness of success to all who did not accept it.

[965]

GEORGE II.

1727-1760.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

POPES.—Benedict XIII., nbsp;   1724. Clement XII., 1730. nbsp;   Benedict XIV., 1740. nbsp;   Clement XIII., 1758.

[966]

The ascendancy of Walpole was in great jeopardy on the death of George I. Bolingbroke's intrigues against him, backed by all the influence of the Duchess of Kendal, had indeed been thwarted by the straightforward manner in which George I. had put all complaints against him into the minister's own hands—a striking instance of that love of justice and fidelity to old friends which were the redeeming traits of his otherwise uninteresting character. But Walpole had now to do with a sovereign whom as Prince of Wales he had always opposed, and who had been known to use strong expressions of disapprobation with regard to him. George II., a little, dry man, gifted with the hereditary bravery and obstinacy of his family, but with very limited abilities, and a mind far more easily touched by little things than by broad interests, could not be expected to forget Walpole's opposition, nor to appreciate his calm, tolerant wisdom. When Walpole brought him the news of his father's death, he was at once directed to apply to Sir Spencer Compton, a dull, orderly man, Speaker of the House of Commons and Treasurer to the Prince of Wales. Walpole was wise enough to profess friendship for the new favourite, who even employed the ability of his predecessor to draw up the speech which the King was to deliver to the Council. For some days it was believed that Walpole's power was gone. His usual throng of followers deserted him and crowded to Sir Spencer Compton's levée. But before any definite arrangements had been made, Sir Spencer unwisely gave Walpole opportunities for personally explaining himself to the King. He was thus able to remove the bad impression the King had received as to his foreign policy, and to outbid his rivals in the arrangements he proposed to make for the Civil List, a point very close to the King's heart. He completely succeeded in winning the Queen to his interests; and when she heard that Compton had had to appeal to his assistance in arranging the speech from the throne, she took the opportunity of impressing upon George the absurdity of employing a minister who was obliged to lean for support upon his rival. The Queen's influence, which was very great, turned the scale in his favour. The ministry continued unchanged. Compton, feeling his brief importance at an end, withdrew from the contest, and shortly afterwards accepted the position of President of the Council as Lord Wilmington.

The offer which had proved so effective a means for securing Walpole's power consisted of £130,000 to the Civil List, and a jointure of £100,000 to Queen Caroline. The Civil[967] List, which had been settled after the Revolution at £700,000 a year from all sources, had proved insufficient, saddled as it then was with a variety of expenses, such as the judges' and ambassadors' salaries, beyond the mere expenses of the Court. Anne had been £1,200,000 in debt, George I. £1,000,000. Walpole now offered to induce the House to raise it to £800,000 a year, allowing the King to claim anything beyond that sum which should arise from the hereditary revenues.

Before long Walpole won the entire confidence of the King himself, but it was at first chiefly on the friendship of the Queen that he relied. She was a woman of very considerable ability. Her intellectual fault indeed was an attempt to know too much. She collected around her men of learning of all sorts, dabbled in divinity, dabbled in metaphysics, patronized poetry, and delighted in listening to theological discussions, in which she kept the part of strict neutrality, believing it is thought but little on either side. But her influence in bringing forward men of ability, especially in the Church, was very great. Her sense was excellent, and by means of it, in spite of the King's royal immorality, she contrived to rule him absolutely. She thoroughly appreciated Walpole, and together they pursued that policy, which was no doubt the right one Character of Walpole's ministry. for the maintenance of the Hanoverian succession. This consisted in the pursuit of peace in every direction—peace abroad, peace at home. If any point was strongly contested it was given up; if any abuse was unobserved it was suffered to rest untouched; and in general their object was to let the nation learn by its material prosperity the advantages of an orderly and settled Government. As a consequence of this policy the period of Walpole's government was uneventful, and was occupied rather with the great Parliamentary struggle between himself and the Opposition under Pulteney than by any great national affairs.

The chief strength of that Opposition consisted of the discontented Whigs, most of whom were driven to oppose Walpole by his insatiable love of power. We have already seen Pulteney and Carteret forced from the ranks of the Government, and all overtures with Bolingbroke rejected. In 1730, Walpole quarrelled with his old friend and brother-in-law Townshend, who was only restrained by his patriotism from joining the Opposition. In 1733, Lord Chesterfield was added to the list. These leaders had behind them a certain quantity of supporters who took the name of Patriots,[968] and wished to be regarded as the true old Whigs, looking upon Walpole with his large majority as seceders from them. There was much plausibility in this view: for the Whig party under Walpole seemed to have become closely attached to the Crown, and was supported principally by Crown influence. As the original principle of the Whigs had been antagonism to the over-great power of the Crown, it could be plausibly urged that they had now assumed the position of their former enemies. The Hanoverian line had ascended the throne with a parliamentary as contrasted with a hereditary title; it had therefore naturally found its chief supporters among the Whigs. With the Hanoverians that party had entered upon power. But the Revolution, while practically subordinating the power of the King to that of Parliament, had constitutionally left it untouched. The Hanoverian kings did not indeed employ it to its full, but placed it in the hands of the minister, who, by means of the royal influence, practically ruled England with as unquestioned a sway as any great minister of the Stuarts. The difference lay in this, that the power of the Crown consisted in the immense influence it possessed by means of pensions, places, and the command of the public money, and worked through the House of Commons, and not in opposition to it. The patriot Whigs were conscious of the power of the Crown, and were true to their principles in opposing it. Their error lay in this, that they did not understand that that power was formidable only so long as there was a venal House of Commons. Eager as they thought for liberty, they formed a close connection with the High Tories and Jacobites, the greatest enemies of liberty; and in their eagerness for office did their best to oppose that Government, which for the present, at all events, was the only safeguard against the restoration of the Stuarts, for the events of 1745 render it plain that danger from the Jacobites was as yet by no means over. In fact, however, principle had little to do with the matter, it was personal animosity to the minister, and anger at exclusion from office, which inspired the Opposition. Even the party names "Whig" and "Tory" were beginning to lose their meaning. By far the greater portion of the House was thoroughly attached to the Hanoverian succession. Some fifty Jacobites sat in it under the guidance of Shippen, and a certain number of country gentlemen, with Wyndham at their head, still retained the title of Hanoverian Tories. But the Parliamentary struggle lay in fact between different sections of the Whigs, either of which, whatever their pretensions may have been when out of office, would probably have acted in[969] much the same way had they succeeded in obtaining it. It was not till the close of this reign and the beginning of the next that the old party names began again to acquire significance. It had become evident that the power and influence of the Crown, but little diminished, as has been said, at the Revolution, had as it were been placed in commission in the hands of the great leaders of the Whig party, who by means of their own Parliamentary influence, added to the King's power which they wielded, had assumed a monopoly of the Government antagonistic at once to the Crown and to the people. Those who regarded this condition of things as a disturbance of the old balance of the Constitution began to rally round the King, and when George III. resumed into his own hands the power of the Crown and broke with the Whig oligarchy, he found his support in this new Tory party.

To oppose the many able men whom enmity to the ministers had driven into the ranks of the Patriots, the Government had little more than the inert strength of an unfailing majority to show. Besides Walpole himself, whose talents were unquestioned, the Government consisted of somewhat second-rate men, such as Newcastle, whose fussy silliness was a constant theme of jest, Stanhope, Lord Harrington, an excellent diplomatist but no politician, and Lord Harvey, a clever but bitter and effeminate courtier. But the Government was supported on almost every question of importance by a vast majority of the House, whose votes the surpassing skill of Walpole as a manager secured—many of them by small places and pensions, or other "considerations," as bribes were then called. That Walpole reduced the purchase of a majority, a practice by no means unknown, to a system must be allowed. It may be urged in his favour, that he used, but did not cause, the venality prevalent among all public men of the time, and employed it so as to secure what was upon the whole the government most advantageous for England at the time.

The folly of the Pretender spared the minister all trouble with regard to the Jacobites, for James had succeeded in alienating his ablest partisans. He had quarrelled with Atterbury as he quarrelled with Bolingbroke, he had excited scandal by his quarrel with his wife, and had suffered an unworthy favourite, Colonel Hay, or Lord Inverness as he called himself, to supplant all his better partisans in his favour. And when the death of Lord Mar was followed by that of the Duke of Wharton and of Atterbury in 1732, the Jacobite cause fell into the hands of very[970] inferior agents, whose intrigues, insignificant as they were, seem to have been thoroughly known by Walpole.

It was thus with one source of danger practically removed that Walpole resumed the threads of foreign policy. The last reign had European complications. closed before peace had been concluded with Spain, and while there were still unsettled difficulties with the court of Vienna, although preliminaries had been signed both in Paris and in Spain by what is known as the Convention of the Pardo. It must indeed have been obvious that the Treaty of Vienna, plausible as it seemed, could not have been a lasting treaty. The Bourbons were upon the throne of Spain, and the close junction of the houses of Bourbon and Hapsburg was an impossible contradiction of all history, especially as the desire which was really the moving passion of the Spanish court, the establishment, namely, of a Spanish kingdom in Italy, was fundamentally opposed to the interests of Austria. At the same time the shadow of the approaching dissolution of his kingdom at his death was constantly overhanging the Emperor. No ideas of present greatness, not even the hope of restoring the Empire to the position it had held under Charles V., appeared in his eyes so important as to secure the reversion of his own estates for his daughter, according to the Pragmatic Sanction, by which, in 1713, he had arranged the succession to his hereditary kingdoms. It was impossible for him to hurry into a general war, which must of necessity prevent the acceptance of that arrangement. There was already a strongly expressed feeling in Germany against the marriages on which the Vienna Treaty rested, and which might have the effect of placing a Spaniard on the Imperial throne. The threatened secession of his chief allies, and the fear of postponing the acceptance of the Pragmatic Sanction, were sufficient reasons to induce the Emperor to withdraw from his bargain. He therefore accepted the mediation of France, where Fleury, though he probably never forgot the old policy of the country which he governed, always apparently exhibited a love of peace; and it was agreed that disputed points should be referred to a general Congress to be held at Aix-la-Chapelle, but subsequently moved to Soissons.

At the Congress the Emperor, afraid of exciting the national prejudices of the Germans, entirely deserted his Spanish allies, and instead of hastening a favourable negotiation, perpetually threw obstacles in the way. As far as England was concerned, the great point at issue was Gibraltar, which Spain had already besieged in vain. The ministry, both before and now, seem[971] to have regarded the surrender of it as neither impossible nor very injurious; the view of the nation was very different. But as is so often the case, the Congress came to very little. Spain, finding herself deserted by Austria, and observing that the Congress was falling Treaty of Seville. Nov. 9, 1729. to pieces by constant delays, had recourse to a direct treaty; and on the 9th of November 1729 the celebrated Treaty of Seville was signed. It was a defensive alliance between England, Spain and France, to which Holland subsequently acceded. Spain revoked all the privileges granted to Austrian subjects by the treaties of Vienna, re-established English trade in America on its former footing, and restored all captures. The Assiento was confirmed to the South Sea Company, and arrangements made for securing the succession of Parma and Tuscany to the Infant Don Carlos, by substituting Spanish troops for the neutral forces, which since the Preliminaries had been occupying those countries.

The Emperor now found that he had outwitted himself. He had clung to the Treaty of Vienna just long enough to irritate two of the Disappointment of the Emperor. great countries of Europe, he had put difficulties in the way of its completion, and hesitated about fulfilling it, just long enough to irritate the third. Old friends and old foes had made common cause. His hopes for the Pragmatic Sanction seemed entirely gone. It was not likely that he would sit down quietly while Spanish troops occupied fortresses in what he considered his dominions. He broke off all diplomatic relations with Spain, sent troops into Italy, and on the death of the Duke of Parma seized his duchy. But all men really knew that the bribe was ready, if they would only give it, to put an end to all his opposition. And the impatient Queen of Spain—angry with the shilly-shally policy of her new allies (who would not insist with sufficient rapidity on the completion of the Seville treaty), throwing over France, which she regarded as the chief delinquent in the matter—joined with England and Holland to offer the long wished for guarantee. Thus at length by the second Treaty of Vienna all the much vexed questions were decided. Austria was glad to accept the Second Treaty of Vienna. March 16, 1731. terms proposed at Seville, agreed to destroy the Ostend Company, to establish Don Carlos in his duchies, and not again to threaten the balance of European power. And in 1732, under the escort of English ships, the Spanish troops took possession of the disputed fortresses.

Both these treaties were arranged in accordance with the pacific[972] views of Walpole. When the second was concluded he was absolute master of affairs in England; for almost immediately after the Treaty of Seville the old jealousy which had long smouldered between him and Townshend burst out, and Townshend had found it necessary to withdraw. Townshend was a proud, rough man, ill fitted to play the subordinate part which Walpole was determined to thrust upon his colleagues. Besides general ill-feeling, several specific grounds of difference existed between them. The first Treaty of Vienna had greatly irritated Townshend, who would have wished to avoid all compromise and to proceed to extremities with the Emperor. The link which had bound the brothers-in-law together had been broken by the death of Lady Townshend, Walpole's sister; and Walpole's conduct with regard to the Pension Bill supplied a fresh ground of quarrel. The Opposition had discovered, without exactly tracing it to its constitutional The Pension Bill. source, the power of the royal influence, and early in 1730 Mr. Sandys introduced the first of those Bills for restraining it which became from this time onwards one of the regular weapons of attack against the ministry. He moved for leave to bring in a Bill to disable all persons from sitting in Parliament who had any pension direct or indirect from the Crown, and proposed that every member as he took his seat should swear that he held no such pension. The attack was exceedingly well judged, for it gave expression to a very general feeling, and Walpole, who studiously avoided shocking the feelings of any large section of the nation, was at some loss how to meet it. But he knew that he could rely upon his great Whig supporters in the Upper House, and of that House Townshend was the leader. Walpole therefore suffered the Bill to pass the Lower House without opposition, so that it was upon Townshend and the Lords that the whole odium fell when, as a matter of course, they rejected it. On these and various other grounds such ill blood sprang up between the brothers, that it is told, though upon doubtful authority, that they nearly came to blows at an entertainment in the house of Mrs. Retirement of Townshend. 1731. Selwyn. It was impossible that both the ministers should remain in office; the influence of the Queen turned the scale in favour of Walpole, and Townshend resigned, withdrawing with unusual patriotism from political life, and devoting himself at Reynham, his house in Norfolk, to the improvement of agriculture. It is to him that we chiefly owe the cultivation of turnips. This change, by allowing a proper rotation of crops, and[973] thus avoiding the necessity of leaving fields to lie fallow, added nearly a third to the cultivable area of England, while by supplying large quantities of cattle-food from a comparatively small space of ground, it enormously increased the food-producing resources of the country.

For two years the ascendancy of Walpole was unquestioned. He was enabled to turn his thoughts to domestic improvements. English was substituted, certainly most reasonably, for the ancient Law Latin in all legal proceedings, to the grief it is said of some conservative lawyers, and against the opposition of most of the judges. There was a Committee of Inquiry also into the condition of public prisons, which brought many revolting horrors to light. Both in the Fleet and Marshalsea torture by thumbscrew and otherwise was constant, and the condition of poor prisoners who could not bribe the gaolers was inconceivably horrid. Forty or fifty of them, for instance, were locked up for the night in a cell not sixteen feet square. Gaol-fever and famine were constantly destroying them, so that the deaths at one prison were frequently eight or ten a day.

But it was as a financier that Walpole was most favourably known, and somewhat strangely it was a great financial reform in the year 1733 that almost brought him to ruin. Walpole was desirous of lessening even the weak opposition by which he was confronted in Parliament; and in the hope of attracting to himself the country gentlemen, he appealed, in accordance with his usual principle, to their love of money, and sought some way to lessen the Land Tax. For this purpose he suggested an excise upon salt. This must have been contrary to his own convictions. He could not have been ignorant how important an article salt is in many manufactures, how necessary an article of purchase even among the poorest. He was in fact taxing the poor and the manufacturing classes for the sake of winning the landed interest, which would be called upon to pay a land tax of one instead of two shillings. The new duty was carried, but by no large majority. The chief argument against it was that it was a step towards a general excise, which, because it seemed to infringe on the rights of the subject by giving revenue officers the right of entering houses, was much detested, and regarded as a badge of servitude. Although the tax upon salt was not really intended as a beginning of a general excise, it was nevertheless true that Walpole had a scheme of that nature in his mind: for it was found after a year's experience that the new tax upon salt fell short by two-thirds of the sum required to admit[974] of the reduction of the Land Tax to one shilling. It was to a new measure of excise that Walpole looked to supply the deficiency. The excisable articles at that time were malt, salt, and distilleries, and the produce of the tax in 1733 was about £3,200,000. When Walpole's project of extending the excise got wind it proved most repugnant to the people. Numerous meetings were held, and many members were instructed to vote against any such attempt. But when the project was brought before the House, then in Committee, it appeared that Walpole, disowning all intention of establishing a general excise, confined himself solely to the duties on wine and tobacco; and even on those commodities designed no increase of the present duties, but merely a change in the manner of collecting them. In future the dues were to be collected after the manner of an excise from the retailers, and not as heretofore in the form of customs at the ports. Fraud and smuggling were so prevalent that in tobacco alone the customs, which ought to have produced £750,000 a year, produced in fact only £160,000. As these frauds took place chiefly at the ports or along the seaboard, Walpole hoped by taxing the retail trade, and not the importation, much to lessen them. In addition to this, he would have established a system of warehousing without tax for re-exportation, thus making London a free port. It was undoubtedly an excellent plan. As he pointed out, it was the shops and warehouses alone which were under supervision, not the houses of the retailers; liberty was in no way infringed; it enabled him to remit the Land Tax to the advantage of the country gentlemen; the scheme was advantageous to the importer, who could re-export free of duty; the price of the commodity was not raised. But none the less did it meet with the most violent opposition. Wyndham likened it to the unjust imposts of Empson and Dudley, and Pulteney derided it as a vast plan to cure an almost imaginary evil. The people beset the doors of the House during the debate in great crowds, irritating Walpole till he let fall the unhappy words—"It may be said that they came hither as humble suppliants, but I know whom the law calls sturdy beggars;" an expression which was never forgiven. The resolution was carried, but by an unusually small majority. On this and subsequent motions a Bill was founded, and in the course of many discussions a new cry was raised by Pulteney, that, as most of the seaport boroughs were already in the hands of one or the other branch of the administration, this was a plan for bringing inland towns under the same influences; and before the Bill came to a second reading, the ministerial[975] majority of sixty had dwindled to sixteen. The excitement became dangerous; even the army was infected, and Walpole, according to his usual principle, yielded to the violence of the storm and withdrew the Bill. But though thus thwarted, he did not forego his revenge on the defaulters of his own party. Chesterfield, the ablest man in the ministry, Lord-Steward of the Household, was somewhat rudely dismissed. Lord Clinton, the Earl of Burlington, the Duke of Montrose, the Earls of Marchmont and Stair, and by a questionable exercise of prerogative the Duke of Bolton and Lord Cobham, were deprived of their commission in the army,—an arbitrary act not lost sight of by the Opposition.

As Walpole, true to his principles, had purchased peace at home by concession, we find him the next year for the same object keeping entirely aloof from a new war which had broken out in Europe. The Peaces of Seville and Vienna had apparently completed the arrangements of the Treaty of Utrecht, and settled all differences between the courts of Spain and Vienna; but treaties based upon arbitrary territorial arrangements for the purpose of preserving the balance of power are always very liable to be broken. Neither Fresh European war. party considers itself quite fairly treated, and is ever on the look-out for some opening to regain its lost power or to acquire some new influence. The Peace of Utrecht had closed the War of Succession, undertaken solely to establish the balance of power in Europe, and had been exactly such a treaty as has been described. The Peaces of Seville and Vienna had been necessary to modify in some degree its arrangements. A quarrel as to the election of a new King of Poland was sufficient to render for the time all three of them useless. It will be remembered that the French King had married the daughter of Stanislaus, ex-King of Poland. All French influence therefore was now employed to secure his re-election, while the Czarina Anne of Russia and the Emperor strongly upheld the claims of Augustus, son of the late King. A Russian and a Saxon army were sufficient to secure the throne for Augustus; but the Emperor's interference, although indirect, had enabled Fleury to show himself in his true colours, to listen to that great section of his countrymen who were weary of the lengthened peace, and to bring on a war which promised to be far more advantageous to France than any success in Poland could have been. In his attack upon Austria he was joined at once by Spain: for the Queen, the real ruler of the Peninsula, was still discontented with the losses Spain had suffered by the late treaties, and was besides very anxious to secure[976] a crown for her son Don Carlos, who was already Duke of Parma. There was a short campaign upon the Rhine, where Berwick commanded the French, Eugene the Imperial army. Though the French lost their general before Philipsburg, they were everywhere successful, and when the united armies of Spain and Sardinia threw themselves on the kingdom of Naples, they found no great difficulty in conquering the Austrians, and completing the conquest of that country and of Sicily by the victory of Bitonto. Don Carlos assumed the kingdom as Charles III.

Nothing could induce Walpole to side with either party in this war, although he suffered much obloquy for refraining from it; and the Emperor, unable to secure his assistance, allowed the pacific mediation of France and England to have its weight. Preliminaries of peace were set on foot (Oct. 1735), which ripened in three years into the great treaty called the Definitive Peace of Vienna, by which the Spanish house was allowed to retain Naples and Sicily. Sardinia was rewarded with some frontier towns, among others Novara and Tortona, Lorraine was ceded to France, and the young Duke of Lorraine, Francis, the affianced husband of Maria Theresa (heiress to the Austrian Empire), was persuaded to accept Tuscany in exchange. France and Sardinia again ratified the Pragmatic Sanction. This somewhat trivial war thus completed the incorporation of France, established the Bourbons in Naples, and was the cause of the connection between Tuscany and the Austrian house.

Walpole had been more than usually anxious to keep clear of European wars, because the time for the dissolution of the Parliament under the Septennial Act was rapidly approaching, and there seemed every reason to believe that the struggle at the coming election would be a very fierce one. The Opposition were already supplied with several very effective cries. The Excise scheme, the arbitrary punishment of his opponents, and his determination to keep up a standing army, would all powerfully excite the people against the minister. Before the dissolution they added one more cry against him by making a strong attack upon the Septennial Act. As most of the Opposition Whigs had voted for this Act, they had always shrunk from demanding its repeal. It required all the skill of Bolingbroke, the wire-puller of the Opposition, to induce the two parties to unite in the assault. The debate is interesting, as showing in a great speech of Wyndham the temper of the Opposition and the sort of charges to which Walpole was exposed. "Let us suppose,"[977] said Wyndham, "a man abandoned to all notions of virtue and honour, of no great family, and of but a mean fortune, raised to Wyndham's speech against Walpole. be chief Minister of State by the concurrence of many whimsical events, afraid or unwilling to trust any but creatures of his own making, and most of them equally abandoned to all notions of virtue or honour, a man ignorant of the true history of his country, and consulting nothing but that of enriching and aggrandizing himself and his favourites; in foreign affairs trusting none but those whose education makes it impossible for them to have such knowledge or such qualifications as can either be of service to their country or give weight or credit to their negotiations. Let us suppose the true interest of the nation by such means neglected or misunderstood, her honour and credit lost, her trade insulted, her merchants plundered, her sailors murdered; and all these things overlooked only for fear his administration should be endangered. Suppose him next possessed of great wealth, the plunder of the nation, with a Parliament of his own choosing, most of their seats purchased, and their votes bought at the public expense. Let us suppose attempts made to inquire into his conduct, and the reasonable request rejected by a corrupt majority of his creatures.... Upon this scandalous victory let us suppose this chief minister pluming himself in defiances, because he finds he has a Parliament, like a packed jury, ready to acquit him at all adventures. Let us suppose him arrived to that degree of insolence as to domineer over all the men of ancient families, all the men of sense, figure, or fortune in the nation, and as he has no virtue of his own, ridiculing it in others, and endeavouring to destroy or corrupt it in all.... Then let us suppose a prince, ignorant and unacquainted with the inclinations and interests of his people.... Could there any greater curse happen to a nation than such a prince on the throne, advised and solely advised by such a minister, supported by such a Parliament?" Walpole replied in a speech scarcely less vigorous, unveiling the secret influence of Bolingbroke, attributing to him the whole management of the Opposition, and pointing out his vast ambition and unequalled faithlessness.

The election, after a severe struggle, ended by giving Walpole a large majority, although considerably smaller than he had hitherto commanded. The depression of the Opposition was great, especially as Bolingbroke, weary of all exclusion from power, and involved in quarrels with Pulteney, withdrew to France.

The leadership which Bolingbroke thus resigned fell in some[978] degree into the hands of the Prince of Wales, not indeed that he possessed any of the talents of a leader, but that he formed a rallying-point for all sections of the Opposition. From his first arrival in England, in 1728, there had been the usual differences between him and his father. He had thought himself ill-used in the matter of his intended marriage with Wilhelmina of Prussia, whom, though he had never seen, he pretended to adore. The mutual dislike of the fathers of the proposed bride and bridegroom had broken off that match. He had since married a sensible wife, Augusta of Saxe-Gotha. But it was the parsimony of his father which had principally excited his displeasure. He held his income of £50,000 a year entirely at his father's will, whereas his father when Prince of Wales had £100,000 secured to him. But parsimony was the ruling passion of George II., and nothing could persuade him to increase his son's income. Round the Prince had collected all the great leaders of the Opposition; Pulteney, Chesterfield, Carteret, Wyndham and Cobham were intimate with him, and Bolingbroke was his political instructor. Nor was this all. Although the Queen had a love of literature, and in some ways patronized clever men (especially in the matter of Church preferment), Walpole had always refused to show them the least favour; and as a natural consequence, all the better writers allied themselves closely with the clever men of the Opposition, especially with Bolingbroke, who had always been their friend. Swift, Pope, Gay, and Arbuthnot, were constantly writing vigorously against Walpole. "Gulliver's Travels" are full of strokes of satire against the conduct of affairs. Some of Pope's sharpest lines refer to the Queen's implacability towards her son. The "Beggars' Opera" of Gay was regarded as being directed almost entirely against the Government. The "Quarrels between Peacham and Lockit" were by some thought to allude to the quarrel between Townshend and Walpole;[4] and in the Craftsman, the organ of the Opposition, letters of the most virulent description were constantly published against Walpole. To this brilliant Court it was natural that the younger men rising to notoriety should ally themselves. The intellect of the political world seemed there to be centred, and the specious name of Patriot was apt to attract enthusiastic youth. Pitt and Lyttelton began their political career as members of this Opposition.

[979]

It was not till the year 1737 that a public outbreak between the King and Prince took place. In the preceding year an event had happened, which, though of little historical importance, has been rendered interesting by Sir Walter Scott in his "Heart of Midlothian." During the King's absence in Hanover the Queen was left Regent. Two smugglers, Wilson and Robertson, were imprisoned in the Tolbooth, and tried to escape. Wilson went first, but being a big man, could not get through the aperture they had made. Feeling that he had injured Robertson, on the following Sunday in church he succeeded in grasping one of his guards in each hand, and a third with his teeth, thus giving Robertson an opportunity of escape, of which he availed himself. A strong sympathy was excited for Wilson, and after his execution the soldiers were attacked with stones. Porteous, who commanded the guard, fired upon the crowd. For this he was tried and condemned to death, but, in consideration of the provocation, was reprieved by Queen Caroline. The people, enraged at this, organized a riot, and though notice was given to the magistrates, no efficient means were taken for suppressing it. The gates were locked, and the commander of the troops, frightened by Porteous' example, refused to act. The Tolbooth was broken open, and Porteous hanged to a barber's pole, all with the greatest order and regularity. Having done this, and paid for the rope with which they hanged Porteous, the crowd dispersed, nor could any of the rioters be detected. The Queen, regarding the disturbance as a personal insult to her authority, was extremely angry. It was proposed to abolish the Edinburgh city guard and the city charter, level the gates, and declare the provost incapable of holding any office. The opposition of the Scotch members and of the Scotch nobles was however too great to be disregarded, and ultimately the city being fined £2000, and the provost declared incapable of office, no further punishment was inflicted.

During this year the Prince of Wales had married. But this by no means tended, as it was hoped, to the union of the Royal Family, for the Prince at once renewed his demands for an increase of income. He determined at length to follow Bolingbroke's advice, and demand that the sum he received should not depend on the King's will, but be permanent and fixed by the Parliament. This threat induced the King to make some overtures, with a promise to give the Princess a jointure. They were rejected, however, and the battle fought out. The great flaw in the organization of the Opposition was then made manifest, for the Tories (forty-five in number) refused to vote in[980] favour of a Hanoverian prince, and the ministers were victorious. This dispute was followed by a still more scandalous squabble, the Prince hurried his wife from the King's residence at Hampton Court to the empty palace of St. James's when she was on the point of giving birth to her first child, who would be in the direct line of succession to the throne. This insult was never forgiven, and the King gave his son a peremptory order to leave the Court. He withdrew at once to Norfolk House in St. James's Square, Death of the Queen. which became the centre of the Opposition. The Queen remained implacable, refusing to see him even on her deathbed. Her death happened within a few weeks of this unhappy quarrel, to the great loss of the King, whose want of intellect she had chiefly supplied, of Walpole, whose staunch friend she had always been, and indeed of all England, for by seconding Sir Robert's views she had been mainly instrumental in securing for it that period of comparative rest which was so much wanted to re-establish its wellbeing after the troublous time of revolution it had passed through. It was believed that Walpole's power had rested chiefly on her influence, and there was a general expectation that her death would be followed by his downfall. The Opposition were much disappointed when they found his influence with the King as great as ever. It is Walpole retains his influence with the King. said that with her parting words she had recommended the King to continue to trust in her favourite minister; and her advice was then as always followed by him. For though he was not a faithful husband, having had Lady Suffolk for his mistress during the first years of his reign, and now allying himself with Sophia de Walmoden, created Countess of Yarmouth, his mistresses never had any great political influence over him—no influence at all events comparable to that exercised by the Queen.

The Opposition, though disappointed, by no means relaxed its efforts, and found a favourable point of attack in Walpole's pacific tendencies. There were still several points of dispute unsettled with Spain. The limits between Georgia and Florida were undetermined. By the Treaty of Seville trade was established on its former footing between the two countries, and the commercial relations between them were therefore regulated by the somewhat indefinite treaties of 1667 and 1670. By these the right of search and the right of seizure of contraband goods was allowed to the respective nations. This right was exercised with varying severity by the Spaniards according to their relation with England at the time. But the trade of English America had very much[981] increased, and would not be restrained from seeking legally or illegally the trade of South America. There was no doubt abundant smuggling. Even the South Sea Company, which was allowed to send one ship a year, contrived in fact much to increase that number by sending tenders with her, which secretly replenished her cargo as she parted with it. On the other hand, it is equally certain that the Spanish Guarda-Costas had exercised their authority roughly, and many tales of the ill-usage of British subjects were current. These stories were collected and brought up in Parliament by the Opposition, the best known being that of Jenkin's ear. Jenkin was a captain, who asserted that his ear had been torn from him, and that he had been bidden to take it to his king. "Then," said he, "I recommended my soul to God and my cause to my country." The George desires war. ear, wrapped in cotton, he was in the habit of showing to his listeners. This claptrap story was most effective in rousing the popular indignation. Walpole resisted the clamour, but met with great difficulties. The King, who was at heart a soldier, now freed from the peaceful influence of his wife, was urgent for war; and in the Cabinet itself Newcastle began to bid for increased power by favouring this desire of the King.

In this eagerness for war, which is frequently represented as a folly on the part of the nation, the people were probably really wiser than their rulers. The state of Europe was becoming such that war was necessary for England, if she was to uphold her position, and to obtain that paramount situation in commerce and on the sea which her people then as now regarded as her due. Walpole's peace policy was certainly directed rather to the aggrandizement of his party than to the general interest of the nation, and in pursuit of it he had allowed himself to be duped by the pacific language of Cardinal Fleury. His attention had been distracted from the broader lines of European politics to the details of the constantly shifting diplomacy of the time. It is now known that, as early as 1733, the Family Compact had been entered into between the two branches of the House of Bourbon, for the express purpose of hampering the trade of England, and with a stipulation for mutual assistance both in war-ships and privateers in case of any encroachment on the part of England. Nor was the agreement a dead letter. M. de Maurepas had been busily and successfully employed in reorganizing the French navy.

Walpole attempted at first to pursue his established policy of peace. He opened negotiations with Spain, supported by such signs of[982] coming hostilities as induced that Court to agree to a convention. Many English prisoners and some English prizes were restored, and Negotiations with Spain. 1739. compensation was promised to the amount of £200,000. Against this, however, was set £60,000 to be paid by England for the destruction of Spanish ships by Admiral Byng in 1718, and in his eagerness for prompt payment Walpole suffered it to be further reduced to £95,000. The disputed points were left for further negotiation. No mention was made of the right of search; the limits of Georgia were not defined. When this convention became known the popular indignation was great. It was regarded as a resignation of our rights. The ridiculously small sum given for compensation was pointed out, and the payment of £60,000 for what the people regarded as a glorious victory was naturally much resented. It was in opposing this convention that Pitt seems first to have shown his great powers of oratory. The ministerial majority was only twenty-eight. Believing that they could now safely proceed to extremities, the Opposition determined upon seceding from the House. With the arguments all on one side, and the votes upon the other, it was impossible, they said, for them to continue to do their duty there. It was a foolish manœuvre, which, though tried more than once, has never been successful. To the public it invariably appears factious, and as no Opposition has been found determined enough to keep it up for any length of time, it has always been made ridiculous by the speedy return of the seceders. In the present instance Walpole sarcastically thanked the Opposition for their withdrawal, and proceeded at once to pass several measures which would otherwise have been sharply opposed; among others, a subsidy to Denmark for a palpably Hanoverian object—the security, namely, of the little castle of Steinhorst in Holstein.

But though he had carried his convention, and although the Opposition had withdrawn, and Cardinal Fleury had offered the mediation of France, it became obvious to Walpole that he must either declare war or resign. His love of power prevented Walpole declares war rather than resign. him from taking the latter and more honourable course, and, to the loss of both power and fame, he suffered himself to be dragged against his convictions into war, which was declared on the 19th of October. The joy of England was very great, although Walpole was full of gloomy forebodings, for, as he himself said, "no man can prudently give his advice for declaring war without knowing the whole system of the affairs of Europe as they stand at present.... It is not the power of Spain and the[983] power of this nation only that we ought in such a case to know and to compare. We ought also to know what allies our enemies may have, and what assistance we may expect from our friends." He felt certain that the area of the war would soon be extended, for, although he had successfully used his efforts to maintain friendship with France, he knew that there was an intimate connection between France and Spain which must sooner or later bring the former into the field. Moreover, his information as to the plans of the Jacobites was exceedingly accurate, and while the Opposition were constantly deriding the notion of any formidable organization of that party, he never ceased to be on his guard against it. The justice of his views was at once shown, when the declaration of war called to life the slumbering energy of the Jacobites. Intrigues were immediately set on foot; a Committee was appointed in England; overtures were addressed to Spain; and, as Fleury gradually grew colder and more estranged from England, proposals were made to him also, to which he listened, and promised that he would send a body of troops, probably the Irish Brigade, to support any attempt in favour of the Stuarts; thus would be fulfilled the condition without which the English Jacobites had always refused to rise. It was hoped that the Duke of Ormond and the Earl Marischal might make a simultaneous expedition from Spain.

Meanwhile, Walpole, having once yielded, seemed conscious that he no longer possessed the absolute dominion over Parliament he had so long enjoyed. Wyndham, his chief enemy, indeed had died: but in the ranks of the Opposition were still to be found all those men of ability whom twenty years of exclusive and jealous power had made his enemies; and to his old foes was now added the exciting eloquence and uncompromising energy of Pitt. To oppose this formidable body Walpole stood almost alone in the Commons, supported only by such men as Henry Pelham, a conscientious and sensible but not first-rate man, Wilmington, and Sir William Young, whose ready ability scarcely atoned for his damaged character. In the House of Lords he still counted the Duke of Newcastle, Lord Hervey, and Lord Hardwicke among his party. But Hardwicke and Newcastle were both opposed to his peaceful views, and the latter was already intriguing against his chief. The Duke of Argyle had lately become hostile to the ministry, and had been deprived of all his employments. Walpole thus became the single object of all the Opposition invectives. Every measure for the last twenty years which had either failed[984] or been unpopular was brought against him. The quarrel had become personal between him and the Opposition. His efforts to retain his power were unceasing. He yielded in the Cabinet as to the manner in which the war was to be carried on; he gave the chief command of the expedition in the West Indies to his political enemy Vernon; to secure the Jacobite votes at the next election he even went so far as to enter into correspondence with the Pretender, although probably without serious intentions. But this conduct did but encourage his enemies, and in the last session of Parliament (1741) Mr. Sandys brought forward a motion, which was repeated in the Upper House, for his removal from the King's councils. Walpole so far rebutted the charges brought against him, that, after a defence of great eloquence, he succeeded in throwing out the motion by a very large majority.

Walpole's forebodings were speedily fulfilled. Not only, as we have seen, was the Jacobite party at once again called to life, but his expeditions against Spain were by no means great successes. Anson indeed, although all his other ships were lost, made several successful attacks upon treasure-ships, captured Paita, and succeeded in bringing 'The Centurion' safe home after a circumnavigation of the globe. But Vernon, though successful in taking Porto Bello (when his conduct was vociferously contrasted by the Opposition with that of Hozier in 1726),[5] was repulsed with heavy loss in an assault on Carthagena. France had become thoroughly hostile, and when, on the 20th of October 1740, the Emperor Charles VI. died, it became evident that the war would shortly become European. In spite, however, of these proofs of Walpole's foresight, in spite of his success against Mr. Sandys' motion, the charges which had been brought against him had such an effect at the next election that the Opposition found themselves with much increased strength, and it became pretty plain that the Government would have but a very small majority. The session opened with a series of close divisions. The Opposition succeeded in carrying their Chairman of[985] Committees against the Government candidate, and when he found Walpole resigns. 1742. himself at last defeated on the Chippenham election petition, Walpole took the resolution of resigning. A few days later he gave up all his places, and was made Lord Orford.

Thus closed the career of the statesman who for twenty years had been the sole guide of English politics. It is remarkable how few great measures can be traced to him; but he probably displayed true wisdom in allowing all reforms, however much they may have been required, to remain for a time in abeyance. The one thing which England required was rest. The last hundred years had been one continual scene of political turmoil. During the whole of that period the Revolution had been slowly working itself out, and the English Constitution had been changing. The power had gradually shifted from the King to the House of Commons. The ministry had ceased to be a body of secretaries, to whom was indeed intrusted the chief management of all national affairs, but who, inasmuch as they were still in theory, and in a great degree in practice, merely called upon to execute the King's commands, might be chosen indiscriminately from all parties. Instead of this it had become, what it has practically ever since been, a Committee of the majority in the House of Commons. In a social point of view, during much of the same period, England had been perplexed by a choice of masters, and in some degree by a choice of religions. Walpole seems thoroughly to have understood this position, and to have set himself steadily to work to complete and give stability to the changes which had been going on. He had seen, that far more important than any further improvements to the Constitution was the establishment on a firm footing of what had already been done. His chief object was therefore to make himself absolute master of the House of Commons. For this purpose he used means which we should now consider disgraceful. He is reported to have acted on the principle that every man had his price. He steadily opposed all efforts for the exclusion of pensioners, not from a wish to increase the power of the Crown, but because he wanted to secure the power of the minister, who he saw must henceforward be the real governor of England. He opposed the Peerage Bill because it threatened to increase the power of the Lords as against the Commons. He persistently refused all attempts at coalition (such as had been contemplated by Stanhope and subsequently proposed by Bolingbroke), because he wanted the ministry[986] to be the representatives of the party which had the majority in the House, and of that party only. He kept a tight hand throughout his administration upon the Jacobites, conscious that the security of the reigning house was the only way of calming the uneasiness which all classes felt while they had any choice of rulers offered them. For similar reasons, with regard to religion, he refused to listen to any propositions for the relief of Roman Catholics, which Stanhope had also contemplated; and still further to calm religious discords by the sense of one strong paramount Church of England, he also refused all concessions to the Dissenters, although they systematically supported him. In saying, however, that the power had passed to the House of Commons, we must be careful not to regard the House of Commons as a popular assembly. The next phase of our history, the complement to that part of the Revolution which we have now passed, is the struggle of the people to get possession of their own House. At the time of which we are speaking the House of Commons was so filled with nominees of great lords, the electoral body was so limited, and the distribution of seats so arbitrary, that the House of Commons could in no way be regarded as a fair representation of the people, and the great Whig majority rested not on the liberal feeling of the nation, but upon an oligarchy of great Whig nobles. In his foreign policy Walpole was influenced by similar principles. Though the Peace of Utrecht was a Tory peace, its maintenance, and that of the balance of power it had established, was his chief object. Anything was better than that England should be engaged in war. War at once opened the door for Jacobite hopes. War at once touched that material prosperity which was to be the surest claim of gratitude to the reigning house. Moreover, as a financier, Walpole hated war. It was in this capacity, if we set aside his general ability and skill in management, that Walpole was greatest. We have seen how prudently he re-established credit after the bursting of the South Sea bubble, and how wise was his plan in his ill-fated Excise Bill. If some of his measures (as the Salt Tax) were dictated by political rather than economical necessities, it is yet certain that he inspired universal confidence, and owed much of his power to the support of the moneyed interest. His personal character, like that of most of his contemporaries, was not good. A large, coarse-looking person did not belie the coarseness of his tastes. He drank freely, joked coarsely, and had more than one natural child. Although in one of his speeches he plumes himself on having never been charged with corruption, his private fortune[987] was certainly much increased by his ministry, and if we except his collection of pictures at Houghton, there is no sign that he had any appreciation of literature or of the arts. His ignorance of literature, and his contempt for it, is indeed notorious. He spent vast sums of money in purchasing the services of pamphleteers; scarcely one of them was worth anything. He seems to have regarded writing like any other trade, as being capable of being purchased by the piece. Patronage to literary men he systematically refused; we therefore find all the able writers of the time ranged on the side of the Opposition; and it is for the same reason perhaps that the worst points of his character are those which are more commonly known.

The chief fault of Walpole had been his jealousy of talent; on his fall there was no one in the ministry of sufficient influence to take up the reins which had fallen from his hands. Had there been any The new ministry under Wilmington. great difference of principle between him and the Opposition, a complete change of ministry would naturally have resulted. But both the Government and the Opposition had been in the main Whigs. Any man of commanding intellect might have kept the late ministry together. As it was, a sort of coalition was made. Pulteney, it is difficult to say why, avoided the responsibility of the Premiership, and withdrew into insignificance in the Upper House as Lord Bath. The nominal head of the new Government was Wilmington, that same dull man who had for a moment thought to supersede Walpole at the beginning of the reign. Under him many of the old Cabinet were retained; Newcastle, Hardwicke, and Young keeping their offices. The new element was represented by Argyle, who was reinstated as Master of the Ordnance, Carteret, who succeeded Lord Harrington as Secretary, and Sandys, who became Chancellor of the Exchequer. Of Tories there appeared none, and Chesterfield and Pitt were excluded from the arrangement.

So slight a change in the construction of the Government seemed but a poor termination to the fierce opposition to which Walpole had been subjected. In fact, the rivalry had been one of persons Character of the new ministry. and not of principles. The ministry were compelled indeed, by pressure from without excited by their own clamours, to institute a Committee to inquire into the conduct of the great Prime Minister. But though it consisted principally of his personal enemies, too many interests were at stake to render their task easy; and when their report came, it appeared so trumpery, when compared with the charges which had been lavished[988] upon the minister in Parliament, that it was a mere object of ridicule. It seemed as though the system of Walpole was after all to be continued. Many of his followers still remained in the Cabinet, as the Pelhams (Newcastle and his brother Henry Pelham), and Yorke, Lord Hardwicke, and even the virtual Prime Minister, his enemy Carteret, was obliged by stress of circumstances to adopt that very Hanoverian policy which had so often been laid to the charge of the late minister. Carteret was a man of genius, but of irregular life, and so capricious, and sudden in his actions, that his administration has been called the drunken administration. Disregarding home patronage for the higher and more exciting work of foreign diplomacy, he found his influence gradually and surely passing into the hands of the Pelhams. It was necessary for him at all hazards to secure the King's friendship; he therefore allowed 16,000 Hanoverians to be taken into English pay, and it was strange to hear Lord Bath, and Sandys, the accuser of Walpole, upholding the Hanoverian connection.

A ministry which showed itself thus inconsistent with its assertions when out of office, and in which the elements of disunion were so evident, could not last long. The death of Wilmington (1743), the nominal Prime Minister, was the signal for its dissolution. The candidates for the Premiership were Pulteney on the one hand, supported by the talents of Carteret, and by the favour which this minister's newly-found interest for Hanover had given him with the King; and on the other hand Pelham, as representative of the party of Walpole, and backed by the influence which he still possessed. The question was settled in favour of Pelham, who, though without commanding abilities and constitutionally timid, possessed much of his late leader's love of quiet and power of management. Carteret continued for some time in power under his new chief; but their union could never be cordial, and before the close of 1744, Carteret—who had by continual flattery of the King's weakness so ingratiated himself with his master that the Pelhams thought their legitimate influence damaged by it—was dismissed. But before the confusion which arose on Walpole's fall had settled down one great point in his policy had at all events been reversed—England had thrown itself vigorously into the Continental war.

Such indeed was the position of Europe that it was impossible that England should hold aloof. But Walpole had at least tried, and with some effect, the power of diplomacy. The death of the Emperor Charles VI. of Germany had opened two great questions for which Europe had been long preparing. One of[989] these was the succession to the Austrian dominions, which Charles Question of the Austrian succession. had attempted to secure for his daughter by means of the Pragmatic Sanction, and the other was the succession to the Empire. The questions were closely connected. The most dangerous claimant for the succession to the Austrian dominions was the Elector of Bavaria, who alone of the powers of Europe had refused the acceptance of the Pragmatic Sanction; he was also the most influential candidate for the Imperial dignity. The Elector rested his claim to the Austrian succession upon an arrangement by which, as long ago as the middle of the sixteenth century, Ferdinand I. was said to have substituted the heir of his daughter Anne, from whom the Elector was descended, in the place of any other female heir. A second claimant was the King of Spain, who regarded himself as the heir of all the rights of a descendant of Charles V., who, when he divided his empire with his brother, reserved the right of succession to his own immediate posterity should the direct male line of Ferdinand become extinct. Both Bavaria and Spain were close allies of France, and the possession of the Empire by the Elector, or of the Austrian dominions either by the Elector or the Spanish King, would render the influence of France paramount in Europe. It was necessary for England to oppose such an increase of the power of the Bourbons. For this purpose it had appeared necessary to Walpole to re-establish something resembling the Grand Alliance, a union at all events which should include the maritime powers, Hanover, Prussia (rapidly rising to a first-rate power), and Austria.

But Prussia had just fallen into the hands of the ambitious Frederick II., supplied by his father's care with a magnificent army and with a full treasury. He saw that the opportunity had arrived for making good certain long pending claims upon a portion of Silesia, and without declaration of war, occupied the disputed territory, and marching into Bohemia, entirely defeated the Austrian troops at Molwitz. He was however yet so far German at heart, that he was willing to guarantee the election of Maria Theresa's husband to the Empire, and to support the Pragmatic Sanction, if his claims in Silesia were satisfied. To induce the Austrian princess to accept these terms became the object of English diplomacy. It was thwarted by Maria Theresa herself. A strange infatuation had taken possession of the Austrian ministers during the close of the late Emperor's reign; in spite of his action in the Polish war, they believed in the pacific tendencies of Fleury, and relied[990] upon the friendship of France. All overtures on the part of Frederick were therefore disregarded, all appeals from England set at naught. The foolish dreams of Austria were dispelled when Frederick, thus repulsed, threw away his last remnant of German feeling and entered into close alliance with France, offering to renounce the claims which he had upon the Duchy of Berg, and to give his vote for the election of the Bavarian Elector to the Empire if his claims on Silesia were guaranteed.

Thus Maria Theresa found herself standing alone in Europe, supported by England only, which indeed supplied her willingly with subsidies, but still directed its chief efforts to persuading her to purchase Frederick's friendship by the cession of Silesia. In accordance with the convention with Prussia, in August 1741, two French armies were poured across the Rhine, one passing through Swabia to assist the Elector in a direct advance on Vienna, the second through Westphalia. So little was England prepared for war, that the King, as Elector of Hanover, was obliged to declare the neutrality of his Continental dominions for a year, a step which excited great anger in England, where the war spirit ran high, and which was a fresh source of complaint against Walpole. At this crisis of her danger Maria Theresa found assistance in that part of her dominions where she had least right to expect it. The hand of the Hapsburgs had been heavy upon Hungary, yet thither she betook herself, and yielding back to them almost the whole of their constitution, excited the warlike magnates to enthusiasm by confiding to their charge her person and that of her child. As they crowded round to kiss the infant's hand, the hall rang with the shouts, "We will die for our king, Maria Theresa!" A moment's breathing space would allow time to bring the levée en masse of Hungary into the field: the opportunity was afforded by the diplomacy of England, which induced Frederick, who saw with jealousy the advancing power of France and Germany, to check his victorious march and sign a secret treaty at Kleinschnellendorf. The gathering forces of Hungary, the withdrawal of Frederick, and the errors of the Elector and of the French, who were jealous of each other, changed the face of the war. The march to Vienna was postponed for the capture of Prague. The withdrawal of the invaders to Bohemia allowed the Austrians to make a counter blow. As the Elector Charles Albert hastened to Frankfort to secure his election as Emperor, Khevenhüller, with the Austrian troops, was approaching his capital of Munich. Again, at the earnest entreaties of France, Frederick deserted his late[991] engagements and renewed the war, but, unable to hold his advanced position at Olmutz in Moravia, he too fell back upon Bohemia, where the war was now centred.

The changed aspect of affairs was completed by the conduct of England: the pride of the country had been touched by Vernon's failure at Carthagena; the neutrality of Hanover had caused great discontent; and when, in February 1742, Walpole had been driven from the ministry, the first act of his successors had been to increase both army and navy, to vote large subsidies to Maria Theresa, to induce the States-General to follow the lead of England, and to send an army of 30,000 English and Hanoverians into the Low Countries. It was understood that, although as yet but auxiliaries in the main quarrel, it was the rivalry of France and England which was again to be decided in arms. Both the arms and diplomacy of England were successful. In the Mediterranean the fleet under Commodore Matthews forced King Charles of Naples to neutrality, and allowed Sardinia, driven by the ambition of Spain to side with Austria, to defeat all the projects of the Bourbons in that country; while the urgent instances of the ambassador at Vienna at length prevailed, and Maria Theresa was induced to give the price which Prussia demanded,—Silesia was conceded by the Treaties of Breslau and Berlin in June 1742. Frederick once more threw over his allies, and the French and Bavarians stood alone in Germany. They were unable to make head against their enemies, their troops were shut up in Prague, and only after a brilliant but disastrous retreat did a shattered remnant of 14,000 men reach a place of safety in January 1743.

[992]

Battle of Dettingen. June 27th 1743.

The tide of victory was then already turned when the English made their first appearance in Europe, acting in conjunction with some 18,000 subsidized Hanoverians. The command of the English army, which to the number of 16,000 had been all the last year lying inactive in Flanders, was given to Lord Stair, and the object of the allies was to drive the French entirely out of Germany, and if possible invade Alsace and Lorraine, on which the eyes of the Austrians, who had but lately lost them, were constantly fixed. To oppose the movement an army under the Duke de Noailles entered Franconia, and the various divisions of the British army and their allies from Hanover were set in motion towards the Maine. With characteristic slowness, Stair proceeded to collect upon the Maine an army of 40,000 men. Towards the Maine also on the south De Noailles betook himself with about 60,000. Stair lay idly awaiting his 12,000 Hanoverians and Hessians who had not yet appeared, and thus gave De Noailles opportunity of securing the south of the river and holding most of the passages across it. Having waited long enough to be thus Battle of Dettingen. outgeneralled, Stair suddenly changed his plan, and, without receiving his reinforcements, marched up the river towards Franconia. He passed Hanau, where he established his chief magazines, and moved towards Aschaffenberg. Between these two towns branches of the Spessart mountains approach the Maine, and about half way between the two is the large village of Dettingen. From Dettingen to Aschaffenberg extends a narrow plain, entered by a somewhat difficult passage between the mountains[993] and river at Dettingen. On reaching this plain the English found themselves outmarched by De Noailles, and thus cut off from Aschaffenberg. It was while thus entangled that they were joined by the King and the Duke of Cumberland. The King found the army cut off from the supplies it had hoped to draw from Franconia, and in danger of being separated from its magazines at Hanau also. Thither it was determined if possible to secure a retreat. As the English believed that the enemy was higher up the river than they were, and that they should be closely pursued, the King took command of the rear as the post of danger, but De Noailles had already forestalled them. He had at once moved down the river so as to put himself between the English and Hanau, taking up his position at Seligenstadt. He sent some 23,000 men, under his nephew the Duc de Grammont, across the river to occupy Dettingen. These troops occupied a very strong position behind a swamp and a ravine made by a watercourse. De Noailles' main army lay on the southern bank, but bridges of communication were made between the two divisions, and cannon placed on the south bank to play upon the flank of the retreating English. Escape seemed almost impossible, especially as the English were in entire ignorance of these movements. On finding his advance checked at Dettingen, George at once left the rear and put himself at the head of the army. There seemed no course but to cut a way through De Grammont's forces. This commander, however, believing himself engaged with the advanced troops of the English army only, and thinking to crush them, rashly left his strong position and crossed the ravine. He found himself in front of the whole English army. The King's horse had run away with him, and he had dismounted and put himself at the head of his troops, and addressing them a few inspiriting words, led them to the attack with much gallantry. De Noailles saw the destruction of his plans and hastened to retrieve the error of his nephew. His efforts however were useless. The mass of infantry, led by his Majesty in person, broke through the enemy, whose loss was so great that De Noailles recalled them beyond the Maine. The retreat towards the bridges became a rout, and they left more than 6000 dead and wounded upon the field. The King wisely determined to get out of his dangerous position as soon as possible, and pushed on that night to Hanau, leaving his wounded to the mercy of the French commander, who treated them exceedingly well. Stair, as hasty in the moment of victory as slow in his preliminary movements, urged immediate pursuit, but was overruled by the King. On receiving the[994] expected reinforcements he again urged advance, but jealousies had sprung up between him and the German commanders. He was disgusted at the rejection of his advice, and talking loudly of Hanoverian influence, sent in his resignation, which was accepted.

The objects of a further advance however were obtained without bloodshed. The French army in Bavaria had been beaten backwards Effect of the victory. by Charles of Loraine,[6] and had retired behind the Lauter into Alsace, whither De Noailles, finding himself unsupported between two enemies, also withdrew. The victorious allies pushed on after them, the King to Worms and Prince Charles to beyond the Rhine opposite Alt Brisach. The new Emperor was thus left without allies, and concluded (July 1743) a convention of neutrality with the Austrians, and withdrew to Philipsburg.

A favourable opportunity for peaceful arrangements seemed to have arrived. Prussia had gained its object; French intervention had failed; the Austrian succession was secured; the only open question was what was to be done with the expelled Emperor. George and his favourite minister Carteret, who were at Hanover, undertook the negotiations. George, as Elector of Hanover, and Carteret, from his general interest in foreign politics, took a German and not an English view of the situation. It was George's object, as Elector of Hanover, to appear as a paramount power among the other electors, and to form a strong alliance in the Empire entirely in his own interests. For this purpose he had naturally,—considering the antecedents of his second kingdom England, regarded a close alliance with Austria as of the utmost importance. At the same time, as a Prince of the Empire, he had no strong wish that the Imperial dignity should be constantly in Austrian hands, and was quite willing to allow the validity of the election of the Emperor Charles. In conjunction with Carteret, he therefore agreed that Charles should retain the Imperial title upon condition of renouncing all claims on Austria, of allowing the validity of the vote of Bohemia in all affairs of the Empire, and of dismissing the French from the fortified places they still held within the Empire. He even consented to insist upon the restoration by Austria of Charles's hereditary dominions, Bavaria (now to be erected into a kingdom), and upon the payment of a large sum to the Emperor to support his dignity. Had this treaty been completed, George would have appeared as the mediator of the peace of the Empire, as the champion of the rights of the princes, as the defender of the Austrian dominions, and altogether as the chief[995] power in Germany. To a certain point the interests of the people of England had been the same as that of their King. But their real enmity was against France, and under the guidance of a Whig aristocracy, they would have wished to pursue their traditional policy of opposing the Bourbons chiefly at sea. The arrangements of the proposed treaty by no means suited them. They had long been clamouring against the German tendencies of the King, they had seen with extreme dislike the employment of subsidized Hanoverian troops, and now positively refused to pay a subsidy to the Emperor—a Bavarian prince and the hereditary friend of France.

To the astonishment of the negotiating Powers and the shame of Carteret, the proposed treaty was suddenly broken off. England wanted war with France, and considered it could be best carried on by close alliance with Austria, which was only too glad to continue the war, with the hope of retaining its hold on Bavaria and rewinning Silesia. A treaty known as the Treaty of Worms therefore took the place of the former pacific arrangements. England, Holland, Austria, Saxony, and Sardinia, agreed to assure the Pragmatic Sanction and the European balance, while Sardinia undertook the armed defence of the Austrian dominions in Italy. It was met by a counter treaty known as the League of Frankfort, the most important members of League of Frankfort. April 5, 1744. which were France and Prussia; for the elevation of Hanover implied the degradation of Prussia, and the promise of the King of Sardinia set free Austrian troops which the Prussian King believed would be used only for the purpose of reconquering Silesia. The European contest was thus assuming a more general and intelligible form; England and France, hitherto auxiliaries, appeared each at the head of a great league, and it was their interests, and indirectly the supremacy of the sea, which were now at issue.

Even yet no declaration of war between England and France had been issued, but it was natural that the French, aware of the real character of the war, should use every means for distressing England. Early in the year it set on foot an attempted invasion of England in favour of the Stuarts. An army of 15,000 was collected at Dunkirk, and placed under the command of the best French general, Marshal Saxe, while fleets were collected at Toulon and Brest for the invasion of England and to support a Jacobite rising. The Brest fleet came out of harbour and approached the English coast. The English fleet was drawn into[996] pursuit; and for the moment the coast of Kent was unguarded. A considerable portion of the French army was on board the transports and had sailed. Once again England owed its safety to the weather. A violent storm blowing direct upon Dunkirk, prevented the movement of the rest of the transports, scattered those already at sea, and the loss was such that the French ministry abandoned their design, and Marshal Saxe was appointed to command the army in Flanders. The naval armaments and this open support of the Pretender gave rise to warm complaints of breach of treaty on the part of our envoy at Paris; as his complaints were listened to with disdain, a formal declaration of war was at length made.

On the Continent the selfish policy of the French, who could think of nothing but the extension of their own boundaries, ruined the success of the war. The Netherlands were invaded and rapidly overrun; Savoy and Piedmont conquered; but these successes on the extremity of the scene of action did not tend to the conclusion of the war. Frederick of Prussia advanced through Bohemia and took Prague, and thus saved France from a threatened invasion of Alsace; but, unsupported by his allies, he fell back from the Austrian dominions, and upon the death of the Emperor (Jan. 20, 1745) was unable to prevent the election of the Prince of Tuscany, husband of Maria Theresa, who ascended the Imperial throne as Francis I. Maximilian, the son of the late Emperor, had shown himself willing to accept the views of Austria; by the Treaty of Fuessen (April 22, 1745) he renounced all claims to the Austrian succession, promising to recall his troops from the French armies, and to give his vote to Francis, husband of Maria Theresa, who on her side recognized the election of his late father, and restored all her Bavarian conquests. Again it appeared that general negotiations might have been possible. But Carteret had been Changes in the ministry. Nov. 1744. driven from office, and the Whigs under Pelham were bent on carrying on their hostility with France. His unpopular Hanoverian tendencies, and the offhand manner in which he had treated the Pelhams, secured Carteret's fall. His place was taken by Walpole's old colleague Harrington. With Carteret withdrew Lord Winchelsea and several others, thus affording Mr. Pelham an opportunity for carrying out that form of administration to which his timidity urged him. In exact contrast to Walpole, he dreaded opposition, and sought to make friends of all parties, and to establish his ministry on what was then called a broad bottom. He persuaded Chesterfield and Pitt to give up their[997] opposition, and the former to accept the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland. To the Tory Lord Gower he gave the Privy Seal, and even Sir John Hind Cotton, an undoubted Jacobite, was given a place about the Court. This was not done without great opposition from the King, who disliked Chesterfield and Pitt for their opposition to his Hanoverian schemes, and had a natural mistrust of Tories and Jacobites. The effect of these changes was almost to suppress opposition in the House. The ministry, now including most of the leaders of the Opposition, satisfied with a change of principles, made but little change in practice. The reunited Whig party felt that, as they were engaged in an open war with France, they were, even while subsidizing Germans, carrying out their true policy. Pitt openly declared that he no longer opposed subsidies in face of the present state of affairs abroad. He pointed out that the object of the war was somewhat changed, that, the minister who rested wholly on his foreign influence being removed, they were no longer fighting German subsidies granted. 1745. solely in the interests of Austria, but to secure an equitable peace for themselves and their allies. However this may have been, the system of German subsidies went further and further. The Hanoverian troops were for the present dismissed, but their pay was added to the Austrian subsidy. Saxony was bought, the Elector of Cologne was bought, and so was the Elector of Mayence; and next year (1746) 18,000 Hanoverians were again taken into English pay. Robert Walpole lived just long enough to see the dangers he had kept aloof for twenty years gathering round England. He died in March 1745, leaving England plunged deep in a Continental war, with constantly increasing grants for military service, and consequently increased financial difficulties, and on the eve of the most determined and dangerous effort which the exiled family ever made for the recovery of their crown.

The war still continued under the mistaken conduct of the French. But neither their successes against England at Fontenoy, nor the invasion of the young Pretender which they supported, nor their victory over the Sardinians at Basignano, were the least decisive. As Frederick, who felt himself deserted, bitterly said, the victories might as well have been won on the banks of the Scamander. What he could do singlehanded the Prussian King did. He defeated the Austrians at Friedberg, and again upon the Sohr. He conquered the Saxons at Kesseldorf and occupied Dresden. But seeing clearly that his allies were bent upon their own ends, he[998] again listened to the anti-Bourbon diplomacy of England, made a separate peace with Austria, and the Treaty of Dresden (Dec. 25, 1745) closed the second Silesian war. But, in spite of the withdrawal of Prussia, the general war continued. Early in the spring a French army under Marshal Saxe invested Tournay. The Netherlands were occupied by an allied army of English and Dutch. There Campaign in Flanders. should have been 28,000 English and 50,000 Dutch, but, although it was their own country that was threatened, the Dutch were so dilatory that the allied army numbered little more than 50,000. These were under the Duke of Cumberland and the Dutch general the Prince of Waldeck. The Duke, who was young, was somewhat controlled by the Austrian Marshal Konigsegg, and had with him as his military guide General Ligonier. With these troops the Duke advanced to the relief of Tournay. Marshal Saxe, whose forces were much superior in numbers, could afford to leave 15,000 men to continue the siege, while, marching southward along the river, he occupied a very strong position to cover his operations. The position was rendered almost unassailable. The French faced southward; on their right was the river Scheldt, with the fortified bridge securing their communication and retreat, and the village Antoing. A narrow and difficult valley ran along their front from Antoing to Fontenoy, and their left was covered by the wood of Barré, on the right of which a redoubt had been constructed. The whole of this position was fortified with field-works and abattis, with the exception of a gap between Fontenoy and the wood of Barré, where the difficulties of the approach were held to be of themselves sufficient. It was resolved to assault this terribly strong position. To the Dutch was intrusted the attack of the French right, with the villages Antoing and Fontenoy; to the English the attack on their left. The attack of the Dutch was without energy, and failed, and the Prince of Waldeck, withdrawing his troops to a safe distance, kept them unemployed the remainder of the day. A Battle of Fontenoy. May 11, 1745. similar want of energy was exhibited by General Ingoldsby, who had been instructed to assault a redoubt on the left of the French and to clear the wood of Barré. Finding more opposition than he expected, he withdrew when the enemy were on the point of abandoning their redoubt, and demanded further orders. The English and Hanoverians, on the other hand, energetically assaulted the unfortified gap between Fontenoy and the wood. Regardless of the flanking fire by which they were decimated, they pushed across the ravine and up the opposite hill. The space[999] was narrow, and they advanced, without deploying, in a solid column 10,000 strong with a face of about forty men. The ground was too rough for their cavalry, which therefore advanced in their rear. In this solid formation, with astonishing heroism and determination, they pushed on, crushing all opposition, and unchecked by frequent cavalry charges. They won the crown of the position, cut the enemy's centre, and were moving onwards towards the bridge of Calonne, threatening thus to cut off all retreat from the broken army. The victory seemed decided, and Voltaire allows that, had the Dutch only moved, the French must have been inevitably routed and destroyed. But the Prince of Waldeck never stirred. Fresh troops could therefore be brought from Antoing and Fontenoy to repel the victorious column. In this work it was the Irish Brigade which chiefly distinguished itself, and at last when, by the advice of the Duc de Richelieu, four cannon were placed right in front of the column so as to fire down its whole length, finding itself wholly unsupported, the heroic body began to give ground. It retired as it had come, slowly, disputing every yard, and entirely without confusion. When it reached ground where cavalry could act, that arm, hitherto useless, covered the retreat, and the whole army fell back to Ath. Tournay was treacherously surrendered, and the allies had to content themselves with covering Brussels and Antwerp. This wonderful unsupported advance, though useless for the battle, and purchased with immense loss of life, was for long a just source of pride to the English soldier.

It was the necessity of withdrawing troops for the defence of England which had rendered the campaign in Flanders after the partial defeat of Fontenoy so disastrous. Prince Charles Edward, though bitterly disappointed by the failure of the expedition in the preceding year, did not leave France; and as the French ministry, occupied with their continental affairs, refused him further assistance, he determined to go alone and unsupported to Scotland, and throw Prince Charles Edward lands in Scotland. himself on the loyalty of his friends there, although in all his previous negotiations with them they had refused to think of a rising unsupported by foreign troops and arms. Scraping together what little money he could, and purchasing a small supply of firearms, the Prince embarked at Nantes in a privateer. He was escorted, without the knowledge of the Government, by a French man-of-war, in which his stores were placed. On the passage to England they encountered an English vessel, which, though unable to capture the French man-of-war engaged it so[1000] vigorously that it had to withdraw to France to refit, and it was in the little privateer, 'La Doutelle,' thus stripped of his supplies and with only seven companions, that the Prince reached the Hebrides. In this plight he met but a cold reception, and it was not without considerable persuasion that Macdonald of Clanranald and other gentlemen of that tribe joined him. Their chief, Sir Alexander Macdonald, and the head of the Macleods, on whose assistance he had relied, kept aloof. Of more importance even than the Macdonalds was the adhesion of Cameron of Lochiel. This chief seems to have been won, against his better judgment, by the persuasive power of Charles, who undoubtedly had in an unusual degree the art of attracting adherents. While still in the extreme west of the mainland Charles was joined by Murray of Broughton, who had been his chief agent, and whom he appointed his Secretary of State. The Prince had reached the mainland on the 25th of July; it was not till the 30th that information was received by the Government that he had left Nantes, and he had been three weeks in Scotland before it was known in London. On the 19th of August the insurrectionary standard was raised in the solitary valley of Glen Finnan, where the aged Marquis of Tullibardine, the rightful heir to the dukedom of Athol, read Prince Charles's Commission of Regency. This ceremony was graced by the presence of a considerable number of English prisoners, who had been captured a few days previously by Lochiel's followers as they were marching to reinforce Fort William.

Scotland is cleft in sunder by a great valley running from the Beauley Firth in the north-east in a south-westerly direction to the salt-water lake Loch Eil. This valley, at present occupied by the Caledonian Canal, forms the basin of a chain of lakes, by far the largest of which is Loch Ness, occupying nearly half of the north-east end of the valley. Between its northern extremity and the sea lies the town of Inverness; at its southern end was Fort Augustus, one of the forts established to keep the Highlands in check, while, where the valley reaches Loch Eil, there was the still more lonely post of Fort William immediately under Ben Nevis. It was in the close neighbourhood of this fort that Charles's followers were first collected, and it was while trying to strengthen it that the royal troops had first come into collision with the insurgents. The tribes to the north of Inverness, as well as Sir Alexander Macdonald and Macleod, were either well-affected or held in neutrality chiefly by the influence of Duncan Forbes of Culloden, Lord President, who had[1001] also contrived for the present to attach Lord Lovat, head of the Frasers, to the Government interest, so that it was with the western clans only that Charles began his expedition.

The English military commander in Scotland was Sir John Cope, who had altogether about 3000 men under his command. All this time the King was absent from England, and orders had to be issued by the Lords Justices. They approved however of Cope's plan for immediately marching into the Highlands and crushing the insurgents if possible among the mountains. With this intention, leaving his dragoons behind him, Cope set out from Stirling along the direct north road towards Inverness. At Dalwhinnie, which is now a posting-station on the great north road, the military road made by Marshal Wade branched off to Fort Augustus, which it was Cope's object to reach and relieve; the main road passed onwards to Inverness. The mountain which forms the south-east side of the great valley in which Fort Augustus lies has to be crossed. It is called in this place Corrie-Arrack, and to cross it the road winds in steep zigzags. The Highlanders had got possession of this difficult pass, and intended to destroy Cope's army while ascending the zigzags. Their disappointment was great when they found that he had turned aside at Dalwhinnie, and was in hasty march for Inverness. By this means he probably hoped to strengthen the loyal clans of the north and to draw the Prince's army in pursuit. He however left the road towards the capital quite unguarded. Charles at once pushed on and crossed the Badenoch mountains to Blair Athol, from whence the great road runs, without any obstacle, through the Pass of Killiecrankie Charles avoids him, and gains Edinburgh. into the plains of Perthshire. He rested a few days at Perth, where he was joined by Drummond, Duke of Perth, and by Lord George Murray, the Duke of Athol's brother, a man of considerable military experience and capacity. He then crossed the Forth a little above Stirling, the dragoon regiments which had been left there retiring before him, and advanced rapidly towards Edinburgh. The Castle of Edinburgh was secure, but the town had no adequate fortifications, and the inhabitants doubted long and painfully as to whether they should open their gates or not. The news that Cope, on learning his mistake, had taken ship and had already reached Dunbar, encouraged them to think of resistance, but their determination vanished away after a skirmish called "the canter of Colt-Brig," when two regiments of dragoons ran away, and did not stop till they reached Dunbar. Negotiations were set on foot, but were cut short by the surprise of the town by the Highlanders. On[1002] the 17th of September Charles took possession of Holyrood House, and it seemed as if the inhabitants of Edinburgh were by no means sorry to Cope lands at Dunbar. receive him. He could not rest long, however, as Cope was marching along the Firth from Dunbar. He expected to meet his enemy between that town and Edinburgh, but the Prince marched along the hills to the south of the Firth, and Cope was surprised to find his enemy again beyond him. He was then near Prestonpans. He changed his face at once, and lay with his back to the Firth and his face to the hills, as he believed in an unassailable position, separated from the Highlanders by a morass. But Charles was bent on fighting, and a narrow pathway through the morass to the eastward was pointed out to him. Down this he led his forces so as to gain a position eastward of the English, who had again to change their face, looking now directly eastward, with their backs to Edinburgh. Their infantry were in the centre, their cavalry on Is defeated at Prestonpans. Sept. 21. either flank. The battle is said to have been decided in six minutes. The rush of the Highlanders renewed the panic among the dragoons, who all took to their heels. The infantry stood with their flanks exposed, and as their fire did not check the Highlanders, they were soon engaged at close quarters, where the Highland target parried the bayonet thrust, while the right hand was free to use the claymore. The line was soon broken, and it is said that not more than 170 escaped death or capture. The cavalry, taking Cope with them, did not draw bridle till they reached Berwick.

Some preparations had been made in England to withstand the advance of the rebels. Marshal Wade was at Newcastle with such troops as he could collect, the Dutch were called upon to supply, in accordance with their treaty, 6000 men, and some regiments were recalled from Flanders. But throughout the population of England there was now, and through the whole campaign, a strange carelessness as to which side should prove victorious. The Revolution had been, comparatively speaking, an aristocratic movement. It had moved the power from the Crown only to put it in the hands of the nobles. Parliament was so far from being an adequate representative body, that the disputes carried on in it excited no very warm interest in the nation at large. At times indeed it was necessary for the Opposition to excite the people by some national cry; but that Opposition had uniformly employed the most violent language against the Hanoverian influence and the minister of the Hanoverian King. Such partial views therefore as[1003] the people had been allowed of what was going on among their governors had all tended rather to direct the loyalty, which was then so inherent a characteristic of the English, towards the exiled house. Except in the matter of religion, the people at large were able to discover but little difference whether their king was a Stuart or a Guelph; and on this occasion the assurance had been carefully spread that the privileges of the Church of England would not be touched; indeed one of Charles's difficulties arose from the jealousy of his Protestant followers. The class who had gained by the Revolution was that class which Walpole and Walpole's policy had chiefly favoured—the middle class; but as usual the middle class was apathetic and slow to risk anything unless for some personal object. At first therefore it was the Government, unaided by the people, which had to check the insurrection. It will be seen that afterwards the aristocracy offered, though in a very selfish manner, to come forward, and that some towns, especially in Scotland, awoke to their responsibilities, but on the whole it was the Government alone which had to act by means of its soldiers, and England had been stripped of soldiers for its foreign wars. On the other hand, the Jacobites had seen the insurrection of 1715 so thoroughly futile, and had during Walpole's long administration so settled down under the existing Government, that only a few of the more enthusiastic took a real interest in the quarrel.

Had Prince Charles advanced immediately after the battle of Prestonpans he would have found himself almost unopposed; but by the time he had collected some money, gathered in his reinforcements, organized his army, and persuaded the Highlanders to cross the border, Marshal Wade's army had increased to 10,000; the Dutch and English troops had come from abroad; there was a second army under the Duke of Cumberland formed in the centre of England; the guards and trained bands had marched out to Finchley and formed a third body, which the King declared he would himself lead. To turn the position of Wade at Newcastle it was determined, as in 1715, to march along behind the Cheviots and enter England by Carlisle; and the clans (about 6000 strong) crossed the Border on the 8th of November. Carlisle yielded without much difficulty, and on the recommendation of Lord George Murray, who now assumed the military command of the army, it was determined to advance into the heart of England. In two bodies they marched up the Eden over Shap Fell to Lancaster and to Preston; the Prince winning the heart of the Highlanders by wearing[1004] their dress and marching at the head of the second division, as strong and unwearied as the best among them, for he was gifted with a fine athletic body, which he had further trained by constant exercise. His carriage he insisted upon offering to the aged Lord Pitsligo. His care for his followers, of which this is an instance, tended much to endear him to them; he was at this part of his life adorned with many of the best graces of a king; his clemency was the constant complaint of his sterner counsellors. It is said indeed to have encouraged more than one attempt at assassination. Towards his enemy, the Elector as he called him, he was also studiously merciful and dignified. In all negotiations with his followers or with the French the safety of the Hanoverian Elector and his family was bargained for; and even when £30,000 was put upon his head, dead or alive, after entirely refusing to make a counter proclamation, he insisted on offering only £30. This was indeed afterwards overruled, and a larger reward offered, but he even then said he felt sure no follower of his was capable of winning it, and the proclamation ended: "Should any fatal accident happen from hence let the blame lie entirely at the door of those who first set the infamous example."

The army passed Preston, that ill-omened town to the Stuart cause, in all haste, entered Manchester, where they met with more recruits than usual, skilfully deceived the Duke of Cumberland into the idea that they were marching towards Wales, got past his army, and had nothing between them and London except the camp at Finchley. They reached Derby, but there Lord George Murray and all the commanders unanimously advised retreat. It was true that they had eluded both Wade and Cumberland, but those commanders with their armies were following them close; the slightest check before reaching London, and their little army of 5000 would be enveloped by 30,000 men; it would surely be better to fall back upon their supports in Scotland, where Lord Strathallan had a force of some 3000 or 4000 men. Charles was unable to hold out against these arguments, backed by all the men of military weight in his army, and very sullenly and unwillingly at length gave his consent to a retreat. It is plain that the Scotch chiefs had been thoroughly disappointed in the neutrality of the English population, were beginning to fear for their own heads, and thought it more prudent as well as more practicable to separate the two kingdoms, and establish but retreats, to the relief of the government. Charles at all events at first as King of Scotland. This determination was an immense relief to the Government. Whether a further march would have been successful[1005] or not, it is certain that the Government regarded its chances of success as very great, and London was stricken with panic; the Bank was reduced to pay in sixpences; the Duke of Newcastle is said to have seriously thought of declaring for the Pretender; the King sent some of his valuables to the river ready for embarkation. The camp at Finchley was by no means completed; Wade and Cumberland were so far behind that they scarcely hoped to come up with the Highlanders; the occupation of London would have been the signal for a French invasion, and probably for a great Jacobite rising in England. The day on which the news of the advance to Derby was known was called Black Friday.

The retreat was very rapid, and, as was natural, now that the soldiers were in bad humour, by no means orderly. The insurgents were closely pursued by the Duke of Cumberland, who came up with them, but was checked in a skirmish near Penrith, and passing through Carlisle, which was speedily recaptured by the English, reached Glasgow, where they established themselves, and by means of large requisitions succeeded in refreshing and reorganizing themselves Charles besieges Stirling. Jan. 3, 1746. after their rapid march. They had marched 580 miles in 56 days. After a week's rest they advanced to besiege the Castle of Stirling, which was defended by General Blakeney. Being joined by the Scotch army under Strathallan, with whom were some French soldiers, and Lord John Drummond, a general in the French service, the Pretender's army reached the number of 9000, the largest he ever commanded. Wade, who had grown slow from age, was superseded by General Hawley by the advice of the Duke of Cumberland. He was an officer of some experience, but little talent, and of a ferocious disposition. He was nicknamed the Lord Chief Justice, and as Horace Walpole tells us, "was brave and able, with no small bias to the brutal." He profoundly despised his enemies, and advancing to relieve Stirling Castle, took up his position at Falkirk without even ordinary military precaution. He was not even present with his army, but was enjoying, with some of his officers, the civilities of Callendar House, where the Countess of Wins the battle of Falkirk. Jan. 17. Kilmarnock, whose husband was with the Pretender, was entertaining and delaying them. There are two roads between Stirling and Falkirk; some troops were sent forward by the straight road to deceive the English, while the main body under Charles swept round to the south. They were then separated from the English by a high rugged heath called Falkirk Muir. When the news of their approach was brought to Hawley, he[1006] hastened to the field, and led his cavalry rapidly forward to try and secure the crest of this hill. It was a race between him and the Highlanders, and they succeeded in winning it. Hawley fell back to lower ground, and arranged his troops, with their right upon a broken ravine which descended to the plain. His artillery got hopelessly jammed in a morass. The battle began with a charge of the royal cavalry on the left, which was met by a steady fire from the Highlanders, from which the dragoons as usual fled, all but one regiment. The Highlanders, then rushing forward, entirely broke the centre and left of the royal army, but their rush was checked by the ravine on the right; the royal troops there held their own, and being joined by the one steady regiment of cavalry, were enabled to make an orderly retreat. One of the flying regiments had fought well at Fontenoy, and Lord John Drummond, who had been present at that battle, believed that their retreat was a feint, and by his advice further attack was suspended. Charles had shown considerable skill in bringing his troops with their back to the wind, so that the driving storm and cold January wind might beat full in the faces of the English troops.

The Duke of Cumberland, who had been detained in the south of England in expectation of a French invasion, was indignant at this defeat, and declaring that he would himself willingly lead the broken remains of Hawley's army against the Highlanders, got himself appointed commander. He was a young man of great energy, with the hereditary bravery of his family, and an active if not a very able general; he had, moreover, won the confidence of the army at Fontenoy. He was a man however of violent passions, and at present roused almost to ferocity by the success of the Highlanders, which touched his pride both as a military man and a prince of the Hanoverian house. The Pretender did not follow up his success, but persisted, from a false sense of honour, in the siege of Stirling, and allowed the broken English army to be reconstituted. He was however obliged to desist from this project by a memorial signed by all his chiefs, and presented by Lord George Murray. Some coldness had arisen between the Prince and his followers ever since the retreat from Derby, and the present prudent counsel tended still further to widen the breach. The army was divided into two bodies, and marched rapidly towards Inverness, where they were to unite. Cumberland hastened in pursuit. Inverness was easily mastered, and the neighbouring clan, the Mackintoshes, joined the Prince. But the English,[1007] now fully on the alert, prevented the arrival of any supplies from France, and the army was suffering from want of provisions and money. Cumberland's army was meanwhile well supplied from the sea, and marched towards Inverness along the coast from Aberdeen. The passages of the rivers, Spey, Findhorn, and Nairn, were but weakly disputed, and on the 14th of April the royal army entered the town of Nairn. That night Charles slept at Culloden House, the seat of President Forbes, who had fled on his approach. Want of provisions, and the habit of the Highlanders of returning at times to their homes, had reduced his army to about 5000, and of these many were absent from the standards in Inverness and He defeats Charles at Culloden, April 16, elsewhere searching for food. It was determined, at the suggestion of Charles and Lord George Murray, to attempt a night surprise, but the darkness of the night and the weariness of the men prevented its success, and the hour proposed for the attack still found them four miles from the English posts. They fell back to Culloden Moor. Murray and some others wanted to retire, but Charles and some of his more reckless followers from France, in overweening trust in the dash of the Highlanders, insisted upon fighting. The men of Athol, the Camerons and the Stuarts, had the right of the line under Lord George Murray, while the Macdonalds, who claimed that position ever since the battle of Bannockburn, sulkily received orders to occupy the left. Taught by former experience, the Duke of Cumberland ranged his army in three lines, with cannon between every two regiments, the second line being drawn up three deep, and arranged as men now are when forming square to receive cavalry. The opening cannonade was wholly in favour of the English, and observing the loss of his followers, Murray advanced with the right. Wearied and harassed as they were, the Highlanders broke through the first line, and captured two cannon, but the firm formation and scathing fire of the second line threw them into hopeless confusion. On the left of the Highland line the Macdonalds, aggrieved at their position, remained immoveable, in spite of the urgent entreaties of their commander, in spite even of the touching words of Macdonald of Keppoch, who cried as he fell, "My God, have the children of my tribe forsaken me!" They afterwards fell back and joined the second line. They were however now outflanked, and their retreat threatened, and though there were some thoughts of trying to retrieve the fortunes of the day with the unbroken left, the more prudent officers regarded the battle as lost, and compelled Charles to fly. He went first of[1008] all to Lord Lovat's residence, but, finding but a cold reception from that scheming villain, who was trying to keep well with the Government, while he had sent his son and clan to join the Prince, he fled onwards till he reached the Castle of Glengarry, beyond Fort Augustus. The broken fragments of his army were collected, about 1200 in number, by the skill of Lord George Murray at Ruthven in Badenoch. But Charles gave up the struggle, and sent orders that they should look to their own safety. The insurrection was over: vengeance began. The cruelty with which that vengeance was executed gained Cumberland and cruelly suppresses the rebellion. the nickname of "The Butcher." In the pursuit after Culloden but little quarter was given, and acts of brutal ferocity stained the glory of the day. Some wounded Highlanders who had crawled to a farm building were deliberately burnt to death in it. The prisoners were kept in want of the necessaries of life, and many of the wounded put to death in cold blood. Cumberland fixed his headquarters at Fort Augustus, and harried the neighbouring country with every species of military execution. Acts of cruelty and of wild license were done chiefly at the instigation of General Hawley, but not without Cumberland's knowledge. The Duke was however, and rightly, hailed as the saviour of England.

For five months Charles was a solitary fugitive in the Highlands and Hebrides. He frequently had to trust his secret to the poorest Highlanders, but the high price set on his head never induced them for a moment to break their faith. His best known escape took place in South Uist, whither he had been tracked very shortly after the battle of Culloden, and where he was surrounded by upwards of 2000 men. Flora Macdonald, a young lady visiting Clanranald's family, succeeded in bringing him safely through this difficulty by procuring from her stepfather, who was an officer in the King's army, a passport for herself and a female servant. In this disguise she took Charles with her into Skye, where, making his secret known to the wife of Sir Alexander Macdonald, who was in the King's interest, she by her means got him put under the charge of Macdonald of Kingsburgh, who brought him to a place of safety. We are told that his height and want of grace in the management of his petticoats, especially in passing the watercourses, very nearly betrayed him. Flora Macdonald afterwards married the son of Macdonald of Kingsburgh. At last, on the 20th September, attended by Lochiel and a considerable number of other fugitives, he set sail[1009] for France from Loch-na-Nuagh, the very spot where he had landed fourteen months before.

Thus terminated a most romantic piece of military history, astonishing both in the success which the small body of Highlanders were able to gain and the rapidity with which their successes were brought to an end. Had Lord George Murray been a worse general, and had the Scotch chiefs had less at heart the separation of Scotland from England, the success of the enterprise might have been different.

At the two critical periods of the war, at Derby and after the battle of Falkirk, Charles was probably right in disliking any retrograde movements. No doubt, on purely military grounds, his opinion was wrong; but a body of half-trained enthusiastic Highlanders are nothing unless victorious. The marked change visible in their retreat both from Derby and from Stirling, on both of which occasions great disorder and want of discipline arose, shows that the moral side of the movement was not sufficiently considered by the generals. On the other hand, Lord George Murray showed great skill in hoodwinking and passing the armies both of Wade and Cumberland, and much good judgment in refusing to introduce regular drill or arms among the Highland regiments. The Lords Balmerino and Kilmarnock were beheaded for their share in the conspiracy, and Lord Lovat, wily though he had been, was convicted on the evidence of the Prince's Secretary of State, Murray of Broughton, who turned King's evidence, and executed. Many stringent measures against the Highlanders were at once passed, such as the Disarming Act, the Act to forbid the wearing of the Highland dress, and more important, an Act for the abolition of heritable jurisdictions, by which the arbitrary power of the chiefs of the clans was destroyed, and regular tribunals under responsible judges established.

At the very time that the Highlanders were still in the country England had passed through a ministerial crisis. The Pelhams had found themselves thwarted and in danger of being supplanted by Granville (Carteret); for although they had succeeded in driving him from the ministry, he was still the King's favourite—a position which he had earned by constantly seconding the royal wishes with regard to foreign politics. The chief opponents of these views were Pitt and Chesterfield, and the Pelhams now determined upon bringing matters to a crisis by demanding the admission of Pitt into the ministry. The King, influenced by Lord Granville and Lord Bath, refused to admit him, and the Pelhams, their friend Lord Harrington[1010] (Stanhope), and their whole party resigned. The King at once instructed Lord Granville to form a new Government. He undertook the task, but three days sufficed to show that the King's favour was no match for the Parliamentary influence of the great Whig party, of which Newcastle was the acknowledged leader. Much against his will, the King had to receive back his old ministry upon any terms they chose to propose, and Pitt became first Vice-Treasurer of Ireland, and shortly afterwards Paymaster of the Forces. In this position he was enabled much to increase his popularity, by rejecting the vast profits which it had been the habit hitherto for the Paymaster to make. That officer had been in the habit of receiving a large percentage upon all foreign subsidies, and of using as his own the interest accruing from the large balance of public money he had constantly in hand. These profits Pitt rejected, and at once established a reputation for disinterestedness.

The insurrection in Scotland had had considerable effect upon the continental war. The campaign in Flanders, where the Austrians had been deprived of English succour, had been very unfavourable, and after the battle of Raucoux, the French, under Marshal Saxe, had mastered nearly the whole of the Austrian Netherlands. But, deprived of their Bavarian allies by the Treaty of Fuessen, of the Prussians by the Treaty of Dresden, and all hearty support from Spain by the death of Philip V., they began to think of peace, and negotiations were opened at Breda. Lord Harrington, having fallen under the King's displeasure for his conduct in the ministerial crisis, had resigned, and Chesterfield was called from the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland to become Secretary of State. He at once began to use his influence, which was very great, both from his social gifts and from his eloquence, in favour of peace, so that there seemed some hopes of a cessation of the war. It was pursued however without check during the whole of the next year. In Holland the appearance of 20,000 French within the frontier roused the national spirit, and the people, disgusted with the dilatory conduct of their republican chiefs, rose in revolution; they again looked for safety to the house of Nassau, and the young Prince of Orange, a son-in-law of George II., was made hereditary Stadtholder. In conjunction with the Duke of Cumberland he took command of the army in Flanders, but was defeated with much loss to the English at the battle of Laufeldt. The great fortress of Bergen-op-Zoom was taken, and at length Maestricht, on the safety of which Holland depended, was itself besieged. To balance these disasters, the course of the[1011] war in Italy had been constantly disastrous to France. The Austrians, freed from the pressure of Frederick on the north, were able to act with vigour. They were so successful that Genoa was taken, and Provence itself invaded; and though in the following year the Austrians were driven from France and Genoa regained, the war in that direction closed with a complete victory over the French at Exiles, and the French troops withdrew to their own country, not to appear in Italy again till the renewed vigour of the Revolution plunged them afresh into a career of conquest. Meanwhile, however, in spite of these disasters upon land, England had been steadily gaining its real object. Holland, whose political importance had almost disappeared, and which had become a faithful follower of England, was still more closely joined to that country by its late revolution. Upon the sea disaster everywhere met the French. Their colonial empire was attacked, Cape Breton Island was captured, and the St. Lawrence and Canada thus laid open to the English. Their navy gradually dwindled away, till it was represented by three or four ships only. They were wearied of the war, and alarmed at the immense addition to their debt. The Dutch were disappointed at the want of success which had attended their revolution; and the English were satisfied with the destruction of the French marine. All parties were thus at length ready to listen to a reasonable peace.

It was therefore determined to hold a congress at Aix-la-Chapelle. Moreover, the Pelhams had now resumed in some degree the pacific policy of Walpole, and the apparent certainty of the fall of Maestricht brought matters to a crisis. On the 30th of April the preliminaries were signed between France, England and Holland, Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. Oct. 1748. without waiting for the agreement of Austria and Spain. The terms of those preliminaries befitted the causeless war which they terminated. The chief condition was the complete mutual restoration of all conquests, and the return of each party to its position before the war. There were, however, some slight changes; Parma was to be given to the Infant Don Philip; the cessions of Austria to both Prussia and Sardinia were to be secured, and Spain was to restore the Assiento Treaty and the right of a periodical vessel in the South Seas to the English, while the fortifications of Dunkirk towards the sea were to be destroyed; in exchange for its losses Austria received the complete guarantee of the Pragmatic Sanction and the acknowledgment of the Emperor. The restoration of conquests Results of the war. touched even India, where the conquest of Madras and the resistance of Pondicherry to the English arms had[1012] raised in the minds of the French well-grounded hopes of founding a colonial empire. Taking the war as a whole its results were these: Holland had disappeared from the rank of great nations; it was evident that it could not defend itself against France. Austria, though it had lost Silesia, had learnt the strength to be derived from the military resources of its eastern provinces. Prussia had proved itself a predominant power in Europe. England had secured its maritime supremacy. France had exhibited its growing weakness, had lost its best opportunity of re-establishing itself upon the sea, and under a show of magnanimous generosity had made plain to the world its total absence of good government, of good administration, or good diplomacy.

The period of the premiership of Henry Pelham is marked by the absence of parliamentary contest. Taught by the stormy close of Walpole's career, he so far deviated from his master's precepts, that, instead of wishing to stand alone in his government, his chief object was to conciliate all parties, and the broad ministry over which he presided included nearly all the men of striking talent in Parliament. There was no opposition worth mentioning, except a little clique who gathered round the Prince of Wales, and at whose head was Doddington. It was not till the death of Mr. Pelham in 1754 that the strife of parties again began.

Meanwhile the system of subsidies to foreign powers was quietly carried on, even Pitt ceasing to raise his voice against them. The lull of party strife, and the strength of his position, enabled the minister, who was a good financier, to alleviate what was then considered a very threatening danger to the country, and at the same time to demonstrate the firm and constant increase of the national wealth. He determined to introduce a measure (1750) for the reduction of the debt, which was at that time about £78,000,000, paying an interest of £3,000,000 a year. This sum was at that time regarded as very formidable. But Pelham, rightly thinking that the country could well bear the amount of debt, directed his attention not to diminishing the capital but to lowering the rate of interest. This plan had indeed been carried out constantly since the time of William III., and as the operation had been always successful, it marks the increased confidence of the nation in the Government, and the increased wealth of the nation, since money could be procured at gradually cheapening rates. Under William III. eight per cent. had been given: under Queen Anne the interest had been reduced[1013] to six: under George I. to five and to four; Pelham now proposed to reduce it to three per cent. In spite of some natural opposition the Bill was carried. Those who were unwilling to receive the reduced interest, and there were few such, received their capital from money borrowed at three per cent. The rest accepted the terms, which were three and a half, for the next eight years, and three per cent. after 1758. The annual saving was more than half a million, and Smollett says that Europe saw with wonder England reducing the national obligations immediately after a war which had almost ruined Europe. Three millions was indeed a considerable charge upon a revenue amounting to about £8,523,540. This was derived from four principal sources;—more than £3,800,000 from Excise and Malt Tax, £1,900,000 and over from the customs; £1,637,608 from the Land Tax, and the rest from the stamp duties and other small sources. The late war had cost the nation upwards of £30,000,000, and many financiers, not foreseeing the enormous development of the national resources which the next half century would produce, took a gloomy view of the financial position of England. But, as we have seen, the ease with which Pelham completed the reduction of the interest proved that there was considerable wealth in the country.

Indeed, although the great industrial period had not yet quite arrived, both commerce and manufactures were making considerable strides, and that wealth was accumulating which was to find its employment in the next decade. Several branches of foreign trade had been relieved from restrictions—whale and herring fisheries, the African trade and the silk trade had all been relieved, while manufactures had been steadily increasing. As early as 1715 silk spinning had been introduced at Derby; and the woollen manufactures, which, with the silk, were heavily protected, were of great and increasing importance. The use of cotton, which was to change the whole face of Lancashire, was regarded most unwisely as injurious, and but little use was made of it except for mixing with silk and wool, and in a small degree for exportation. Protection of silk and wool even went so far that penalties were laid on the wearing and selling of calico goods. Both in Birmingham and Sheffield metal works were largely established, and silver plated upon other metals, which was introduced at Sheffield in 1742, was soon widely used under the title of Sheffield plate. Improvements, too, had also been made in the stocking-frame, and, in 1738, John Kaye had invented his shuttle, which doubled the amount of work[1014] which could be done. But while cotton was as yet scarcely thought of, and improvements in the old manufactures were only introduced by degrees, the second great source of English wealth was discovered and set to work. The quantity of iron in the United Kingdom is very large, but keen observers complained that, while there was plenty for our own supply and for exportation, we still imported largely from America, where it could be worked cheaper. This was because it had been thought necessary that iron should be smelted with charcoal, and as carriage was as yet wholly by land and expensive, it was only when iron occurred in woody districts, such as Surrey and Sussex, that it could be worked with advantage. The occurrence of the termination Hammer in the name of several villages in Surrey marks this old state of things. The railings round St. Paul's Cathedral were regarded as the great achievement of the southern ironworks. In 1740 means were discovered of working iron with pit-coal, which at once opened an almost unbounded sphere for industry. The discovery is attributed to Dr. John Roebuck of Birmingham, who, in the year 1759, established the great Carron ironworks in Stirlingshire. It is curious that a similar plan should have been regarded as one of the bubbles of the South Sea year. Agriculture was still in a backward condition, especially with regard to implements. The plough was still a rude machine, chiefly of wood. Turnips were still crushed with the beetle. Cultivators, and other means of assisting or saving the trouble of ploughing, were unknown. But in the east of England, at all events, the value of frequent manuring was understood;—turnips and other root-crops had taken the place of fallow, and a limited rotation of crops was in vogue. The use of the drill, although invented in 1732, was little known. All these improvements were however gradually getting introduced, as the waste lands or great common fields were by degrees enclosed. Suffolk, where this had been early done, was at the head of agricultural improvement.

During the period of parliamentary quiet which preceded Pelham's death, two or three measures of permanent interest were passed. In 1751 the reform of the Calendar was proposed and carried triumphantly through Parliament, chiefly by the exertions of Chesterfield, Lord Macclesfield, and Bradley the astronomer. The Julian Calendar, in which the length of year was slightly miscalculated, had been reformed by Pope Gregory XIII. in 1582, and this reform had been gradually adopted in all countries in Europe except England, Russia, and Sweden. England is said to have rejected it from hatred of the Papacy. The[1015] effect was, that while the year in every other country began upon the 1st of January, in England it began on the 25th of March; while, as compared with other countries, there was a difference of eleven days in computing the days of the month. The change proposed was, that the year 1752 should begin upon the 1st of January, and that eleven days should be suppressed between the 2nd and 14th of September, so that the third of that month should be called the 14th, and that henceforward such changes should be introduced as would make the solar and legal year coincident. The chief practical difficulty was in the matter of payments. It was settled that these should not be put forward. It is thus that the 5th of April, the 5th of July, the 10th of October, and the 5th of January, still remain the days on which the dividends of the public funds are paid. This change met with a good deal of ignorant opposition. The common Opposition election cry was, "Give us back our eleven days."

In 1753 a Marriage Act, usually known as Lord Hardwicke's Act, was brought in, to decrease the number of the formal acts which constituted a pre-engagement, in which a man might be entangled by carelessness and against his own will, and, secondly, to check very rapid marriages. At this time the facilities given to marriage enabled heirs and heiresses to marry without consent of their natural guardians—a practice still further supported by a quantity of broken and disreputable parsons who hung about the Fleet Prison, and were known as Fleet Parsons, whose performance of the ceremony was binding, and who could of course always be procured for money. By the new Act marriages must be performed in the parish church, after publication of banns, or by special licenses granted by the Archbishop, and on payment of a heavy sum. Any clergyman solemnizing a marriage in contravention of these restrictions is liable to seven years' transportation. A Bill for the naturalization of Jews, although carried, had to be repealed before the popular uproar. The Bishops, who had supported the measure, drew upon themselves the larger share of the popular indignation. They Decay of the Church. were indeed at this time unusually liberal in their views. In the earlier part of the reign Queen Caroline, in whose hands the appointments had chiefly been, had carefully selected men of good repute and of liberal tendencies; in opposition to the general feeling of the clergy, she confined her appointments almost exclusively to Whigs. It is possible that this conduct, however praiseworthy in itself, may have tended to increase the general laxity among Churchmen and Dissenters, which had already begun to[1016] be visible before the death of Bishop Burnet. Since that time a variety of causes had combined to increase it. Thus, the separation of the Church from the State in their political views, the Church being chiefly Jacobite while the State was Whig; a similar division between the Bishops and their clergy, and between the Universities, and the Government, and the Bishops, all tended, by loosening the bonds of authority, to the decay of the Church. The falling away of the Dissenters, and the entire defeat of the Roman Catholics, had also removed all competition; and while thus unnerved, the Church had been called upon to answer the requirements of an increasing population and of growing towns. It had, moreover, to combat the very general growth of that scepticism which was so rife in France, and which was one of the remarkable symptoms of the coming revolution.

It was this state of public morality which induced the Wesleys to begin their effort at a revival of religion, and to establish and organize the great body of Wesleyan Methodists. They began their career at Oxford, where they collected a small band of followers, deeply impressed with the necessity of heartfelt religion. The most prominent among them was Whitfield, who, after a youth passed in the humble avocations of a waiter in the "Bell Inn" at Gloucester, was now struggling to educate himself for the Church as a servitor at Pembroke College. In his zeal for religion, Wesley went as a missionary to Georgia. He met with no great success there; but on his return, in 1738, he found that his society had grown, and had reached even London. Whitfield had been ordained, and had become renowned for his eloquence. He it was who, while working at first among the colliers at Kingswood near Bristol, introduced that field preaching which became the main instrument in the spread of Methodism. It was some time before Wesley could bring himself to adopt this custom; but it afterwards became his constant practice. A separation soon occurred between Whitfield, who was extreme in his views, and Wesley, who had separated himself from the Moravians, with whom he had at first worked, but who in England at least were guilty of many extravagances. The withdrawal of Whitfield made Wesley undisputed chief of the new sect, and to him was left its organization. His agents were for the most part energetic, half-educated laymen, who all looked to Wesley as their absolute chief. His object was not to separate from the Church, he himself said, "Our service is not such as supersedes the Church service: we never designed it should;" and only a very little while[1017] before his death, he said, "I declare once more that I live and die a member of the Church of England, and that none who regard my judgment or advice will ever separate from it." What he tried to do was to bring religion within the reach of those who, either by character or by the line of life they pursued, were unlikely to be reached by the ordinary apparatus of the Church, and to excite among his hearers a more true and enthusiastic religion than the formalism at that time prevalent. His society was to be not the enemy, but the handmaid of the Church. Its organization was strict and admirable. The preachers moved on in constant succession from district to district, so that neither preacher nor hearer should grow weary of monotonous work. A conference, consisting of preachers whom he selected, was held every year. The Methodists were divided into classes, with a leader to each class, and a weekly class-meeting was held. Love-feasts were also established, and any grave sin was visited by exclusion from the society. The effect of this earnest and well-arranged effort at reform was very great; not only on the Methodists themselves, who were principally among the poorer classes, especially miners and people out of reach of ordinary Church influences, and who at his death in England and America numbered nearly 110,000, but also on the Church, by exciting that warmth and emulation which we have seen was at the time so much wanted. Although its influence was thus great and excellent, it must not be concealed that, as was natural, enthusiasm produced some eccentricities which will explain a good deal of the opposition which Wesley undoubtedly met with among the higher classes and among careless Churchmen.

As in wealth and religion, so in its political tendencies, this period was one of growth and of preparation for the more important half century which was to follow. In that period was to begin the second phase of the political change introduced at the Revolution:—the gradual assertion by the nation of their right to proper representation in Parliament. There were signs that the people at large were already growing weary of the influence of a few great nobles, of the squabbles of aristocratic parties for their own personal aggrandizement, and of the secresy in which the conduct of their nominal representatives was veiled. It is thus that the Opposition could generally rouse an almost irresistible expression of feeling by appealing from the overwhelming majority of Parliament to the passions of the nation. It was thus that Pitt, regarded as a disinterested and patriotic man, without any of the[1018] usual sources of influence, became the most popular and powerful statesman in the country; and thus when, in 1752, Mr. Murray charged with interrupting the high bailiff at a Westminster election, refused to kneel to the House, and was consequently imprisoned during the session, he was led in triumphal procession by the sheriffs of London and Middlesex. Indeed, the privileges claimed for the members of the House might alone have sufficed to excite opposition. We hear that the very rabbits, fish, and footmen of the members were taken under the august protection of the House.

The term of the existing Parliament was just over, and it seemed as if the same quiet course would be pursued in the following one, when all such ideas were overthrown by the unexpected death of Henry Pelham. His death broke the tie which connected so many Pelham's death gives the Government to Newcastle. 1754. able men of varying opinions, and it became evident that parliamentary and party struggles would again occur. The King is said to have exclaimed, "Now I shall have no more peace." Upon the Duke of Newcastle fell the task of attempting to continue the existing Government. He himself took his brother's place at the head of the Treasury; he appointed Henry Legge as his Chancellor of the Exchequer. But it was not easy to supply Pelham's place as leader of the House of Commons. The choice seemed to lie between Henry Fox, who was Secretary at War, a friend and protégé of the Duke of Cumberland, Pitt, who was Paymaster, and Murray, who was Attorney-General. Pitt, personally disagreeable to the King, and moreover at this time in ill health, was not to be thought of; Murray's ambition was confined to the law; the Duke therefore applied to Fox. But they quarrelled about the arrangement of patronage, of which Newcastle was very jealous; and ultimately Sir Thomas Robinson, a man of no mark, was made Secretary, and given the management of the House. Pitt and Fox combined to render his position ridiculous and miserable. "The Duke might as well send his jackboot to lead us," said Pitt to Fox. Before the new Parliament had been assembled a month it was found necessary to make terms with Fox, who was given a seat in the Cabinet, although remaining in his subordinate place. This caused a permanent estrangement between the two statesmen. With Fox's assistance Newcastle got through the year.

But Newcastle was not the man to uphold a ministry during a time of such difficulty as was evidently approaching. Everything pointed to a speedy renewal of war. At the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle the limits of our American[1019] colonies had been left undefined; while in India, where Dupleix and Labourdonnais had inflicted heavy blows on the English during the war, although the nations were at peace, the French and English contrived to continue their rivalry by allying themselves with native princes, and Clive had already rendered his name famous by the defence of Arcot and the restoration of English power in the and America. Carnatic.[7] Thus there were dangers both in the East and in the West. In America the main object of the French was to secure the valley of the Mississippi, to connect by this channel their Canadian colonies with those upon the Gulf of Mexico, and thus to confine the English to the strip of country between the Alleghany mountains and the sea. The English would thus be constantly threatened on all sides, cut off from direct intercourse with the Indians, and from all hope of any extension of their settlements towards the west. The French began their encroachments by erecting forts on the Ohio river, which were to secure the connection between the Mississippi valley and Canada. A colonial war, in which the name of Washington first becomes prominent, arose from these encroachments. And this local warfare continued, till it became necessary for the Government to take the matter up. A force under General Braddock was therefore despatched against Fort Duquesne on the Ohio; but his careless stupidity led him into an ambush, where he himself and a great number of his troops were killed.

In spite of these hostilities, and although the existence of unsettled questions had caused a very uneasy feeling between them, France and England were as yet nominally at peace. And Newcastle, wholly unfit to conduct a great war, and eager to temporize as long as possible, seems to have tried to confine the war to matters affecting the prosperity of the American colonies. Thus Admiral Boscawen was sent out with orders to watch the French fleet, and attack it if it appeared bound for the Gulf of St. Lawrence. The consequence was an engagement, in which the French lost two ships. The rest of the fleet, to the disappointment of the English people, reached its destination. So again, Hawke's fleet in the Channel received strange and contradictory orders. One party in the Council wished to act openly and declare war. Newcastle suggested that no orders should be given to Hawke, but that he should be sent out to cruise, and that he should be ordered not to attack the French fleet unless he thought it worth while. Finally, instructions were given him to attack line of[1020] battle ships, but nothing smaller, and to spare trading vessels. He had not been gone a week when orders reached him to destroy everything large and small between Cape Ortegal and Cape Clear. The consequence was a large capture of prizes, and a not unfair outcry from France and the rest of Europe against the strange conduct of the English in seizing vessels without a declaration of war.

It was plain that war could not much longer be delayed; and the King's thoughts turned as usual to his continental dominions. Although the importance of the crisis was universally felt, he was content to leave England in the hands of a regency; and as soon as Parliament was over, just before Boscawen sailed, he hurried to Hanover. Next to France, the object of George's dread was Prussia. More than one cause of quarrel had arisen with that country. Frederick had refused to assist in securing the election of the Archduke Joseph (afterwards Joseph II.) as King of the Romans, a project which Newcastle and George had deeply at heart, believing that it would preserve the European balance and strengthen Austria against the French. Deprived of Frederick's assistance, the plan came to nothing. In 1753, again, a dispute had arisen about some ships captured in the late war, and condemned, as Frederick asserted, unjustly by the English Admiralty courts. To such an extent had the irritation against Prussia increased, that it He makes subsidiary treaties against Prussia. 1755. was confidently believed that Frederick intended to assist the Pretender in another attack upon England, taking advantage of the disturbance to secure Hanover for himself. Against Prussia, therefore, George began contracting great subsidiary treaties with the continental princes. The most important of these were with Hesse and with the Czarina of Russia. A factory, says Horace Walpole, was opened at Herrnhausen, where every prince that could muster and clothe a regiment might traffic with it to advantage.

It became Newcastle's duty to carry these contracts through Parliament. He knew the opposition they were certain to meet They are opposed by Pitt. with, and the necessity of finding some strong support in the Lower House; but his Cabinet was there represented by no man of mark. He had recourse to Pitt, who held the office of Paymaster, but he positively refused to support the subsidies. His colleague Legge went further, and refused to sign the warrants which were to open the Treasury. Newcastle had then recourse to Fox, and succeeded in securing his services by removing Robinson, and making Fox Secretary of State. But the introduction of the[1021] address at the opening of Parliament in the autumn, when the Russian and Hessian subsidies were recommended, was the signal for an open mutiny in the ministerial camp. It was attacked in vehement words by Pitt, who, in a well-known passage, likened the new coalition to the junction he had once seen of the Rhone and the Saône; the one a gentle, feeble, languid stream of no depth, and the other a boisterous, impetuous torrent. Newcastle had no alternative but to discharge both Pitt and Legge from their offices.

Meanwhile the courage of the nation had sunk very low. There was a dread of an immediate French invasion; and the Government so thoroughly lost heart as to request the King to garrison England with Hanoverian troops. This dread was kept alive by a simulated collection of French troops in the north. But, under cover of this threat, a fleet was being collected at Toulon, with the real design of capturing Minorca. The ministry were at last roused to this danger, and Byng was despatched with ten sail of the line to prevent it. Three days after he set sail the Duke de Richelieu, with 16,000 men, slipped across into the island, and compelled General Blakeney, who was somewhat old and infirm, to withdraw into the castle of St. Philip, which was at once besieged. On the 19th of May—much too late to prevent the landing of Richelieu—Byng arrived within view of St. Philip, which was still in the possession of the English. The French Admiral, La Galissonnière, sailed out to cover the siege, and Byng, who apparently felt himself unequally matched—although West, his second in command, behaved with gallantry and success—called a council of war, and withdrew. Blakeney, who had defended his position with great bravery, had to surrender.

The failure of Byng, and the general weakness and incapacity of the ministry, roused the temper of the people to rage; and Newcastle, trembling for himself, threw all the blame upon the Admiral, hoping by this means to satisfy the popular cry. But Fox, his chief supporter, was in no mood to risk anything by fidelity to so weak a chief. He therefore resigned the Seals; and as Murray insisted upon either resigning or being made Lord Chief Justice (which office was given him), Newcastle, without support in the Commons, found himself obliged to resign also.

It was hoped that Fox and Pitt might come in together, but their quarrel was irreconcilable. After some negotiations, therefore, the Duke of Devonshire was made First Lord of the Treasury, and Pitt[1022] First Secretary of State and real Prime Minister. The measures Pitt's vigorous government. 1757. of the new Government were in strict accordance with the principles of the party which Pitt represented. The Hessians were dismissed, a Bill was passed for increasing the militia, by which 32,000 men were to be called out; reinforcements were sent to America; the enterprising and warlike character of the Highlanders was enlisted on the side of order by the formation of Highland regiments, a step which did more towards the pacification of the country than any measures of coercion. Pitt also did what he could to dissociate himself from the conduct of Newcastle with regard to Admiral Byng. A court martial held upon that officer had been bound by strict instructions, and had found itself obliged to bring in a verdict of guilty, though without casting any imputation on the personal courage of the Admiral. On his accession to power Pitt was courageous enough, although he rested on the popular favour, to do his best to get Byng pardoned, and urged on the King that the House of Commons seemed to wish the sentence to be mitigated. The King is said to have answered in words that fairly describe Pitt's position, "Sir, you have taught me to look for the sense of my subjects in another place than the House of Commons." The sentence was carried out, and Byng was shot on the quarter-deck of the 'Monarque' at Portsmouth (March 14, 1757). But the new ministry was of short duration. Pitt found himself unable to stand up against the dislike of the King, and the want of that Parliamentary influence which Newcastle's position as head of the Whigs, and his long course of corruption, had gained him. He was summarily dismissed. The King tried to get back Newcastle and his subservient ministry (whom he used to speak of as "Newcastle's footmen"), and, after a period of intrigue, Pitt had to consent to a compromise, giving his own talents and popularity, and accepting in exchange the great Parliamentary support of Newcastle. To this ministry Fox was persuaded to give his adhesion, and to accept the lucrative post of Paymaster-General. Thus was formed that strong Government so gloriously known as Pitt's ministry.

While these ministerial changes had been going on in England, our dispute with France as to the limits of our American colonies had become blended with a quarrel of quite a different origin, which was to plunge Europe into a general war for several years. As early as 1745, before the signature of the Treaty of Dresden, the Courts of Berlin and Dresden had entered into some sort of arrangement for curtailing what they[1023] regarded as the undue pre-eminence of Prussia. After that treaty the Empress Queen seems to have been still more anxious for some similar plan, and almost immediately after the termination of the War of Succession, had entered into relations with the Czarina Elizabeth of Russia; a treaty had been agreed to, to which there were added secret clauses, providing that any movement on the part of Prussia against either Russia, Austria, or Poland, should be held wholly to invalidate the Treaty of Dresden; and in the result of a success of their arms, it was arranged that Prussia should be divided between the three countries. These arrangements are sometimes spoken of as the Treaties of Warsaw and of St. Petersburg. To this treaty the Elector of Saxony, who was also King of Poland, was a party, though without signing. In 1754, magazines and armies were prepared in Bohemia and Moravia; the Saxon army was collected at Europe prepares for war. Pirna; and finally, in 1756, adroit flattery addressed to Madame de Pampadour, the reigning mistress at the French Court, induced France to join in the alliance. Louis and his ministry, ignoring the really vital question which was then at issue with England, reversed the traditional policy of France, rejected the proffered alliance with Prussia, and threw the country headlong into a European war, in close alliance with its old enemy the Austrian House.

In accordance with the traditions of European policy it was England, not France, who should have appeared as the ally of Austria. But a coldness had been gradually springing up between the Courts. The Barrier Treaty of Utrecht, by which the Austrian Netherlands Alliance between England and Prussia. were debarred from the Indian trade, was a constant cause of uneasiness. The part which England had taken in mediating the Treaties of Breslau and Dresden, which ceded Silesia to Prussia, had been mistaken by the Austrian Court; although in fact both wise and friendly, it had excited deep displeasure. Thus, when an alliance was mentioned, the terms proposed by Austria were so high that the English Government had no choice but to refuse them. Under these circumstances, as Hanover could not be left exposed wholly without friends, England turned to the opposite party and allied itself with Prussia.

Frederick had already entered upon the war. The appearance of hostile preparations had aroused his suspicions. He demanded a plain answer as to the intentions of the Empress Queen, and on Frederick's first campaign. receiving an evasive reply, he determined upon striking the first blow, although he knew that his nation numbered[1024] but 5,000,000, while the number of the allies could not be estimated at less than 90,000,000. He passed rapidly through Saxony, blockaded the Saxon army in Pirna, and, collecting all his forces, defeated the Austrians under Marshal Braun at Lowositz (Oct. 1, 1756). After this victory he rendered the relief of the Saxons impossible, and the whole army surrendered at Pirna. Frederick occupied Dresden, and there found and published copies of the secret treaties, which fully justified his conduct. The French had made a false step in plunging into the continental war. They were already successful in the Mediterranean; already the overbearing conduct of the English, in laying a nominal blockade on all the ports of France, had excited the general indignation of the Continent. The real policy of that country was to direct all their energies to the colonial and maritime war with England. It is probable that they thought to wring from George concessions in the colonies in exchange for the security of Hanover, which lay exactly between the contending parties. But Pitt at once apprehended the error they had made, and saw a great opportunity for raising the power of England. He knew that when France was busied in the endless difficulties of the European war, England, while subsidizing foreign troops, could employ her real power in completing her Supported by Pitt. colonial empire. He therefore braved the charge of inconsistency, and threw himself heart and soul into the defence of Hanover and the support of Frederick. To understand how complete his apparent change of views was, and his courage in openly avowing them, the principles of the party which he had hitherto represented must be remembered. Though a section of the great Whig party, they differed in their views both as to foreign and domestic policy from the main body of the Whigs. To both the power of France was an object of dread. But,—while the official Whigs desired to check it by the preservation of the balance of power in Europe, by close connection with the continental powers, by money subsidies, and by occasional assistance of troops,—Pitt Foreign policy of the various parties in England. and his friends thought that, as England was an island, its natural policy was to depend upon the navy; that as trade was our proper business, so the navy was our proper strength; that we did but weaken ourselves by entangling ourselves with foreign politics; that our army should be entirely defensive, and that we need have no fear of invasion while we commanded the sea. Thus while one party upheld the necessity of subsidies and a considerable standing army, the other wished for no[1025] subsidies, a strong militia, and a powerful navy. The differences were not less in their respective views of home policy. The main body of the Whigs were desirous of retaining quite unchanged the Constitution as settled by the Revolution, and held that power must be secured by parliamentary influence and the distribution of patronage. In Pitt's more liberal view, parliamentary influence should have been unnecessary—a Government pleasing to the people, which a good Government would naturally be, would want no other support. Pitt's alliance with Newcastle and his acceptance of his parliamentary influence was as entirely opposed to this view as his maintenance of subsidies to the European powers was to all appearance opposed to his former views of foreign politics. But circumstances had arisen which to his mind entirely altered the position of England, and he frankly declared that it was for the sake of England that Hanover was threatened, and that he would win America for them in Germany.

The object Pitt set before him in his new ministry was to raise the national spirit. For this purpose he threw himself with all his vehemence into the war, and his energy became visible in every department. He at once assumed the whole conduct of foreign affairs, leaving to Newcastle the jobbery he so much liked; it is even said Disasters of the year 1757. that the Admiralty had orders to sign his despatches and instructions without reading them. But he was met with difficulties arising from the bad Government and the bad appointments which he found on entering office. It was thus, with wholly inefficient generals, that he set to work to do what he could in the year 1757. True to his general view of employing England chiefly on the sea, it was to expeditions to the French coast that he at first looked for success. Before he was well seated in the ministry such an expedition had been despatched against Rochefort under Admiral Hawke and General Mordaunt. The fleet acted well enough, but Mordaunt and his soldiers brought the expedition to ruin, though Wolfe volunteered to capture the town if he might be intrusted with 500 men. In America the same want of success met the English. Lord Loudon was there commanding in chief, a man who was incessantly busy and never did anything; he was graphically described by Franklin as resembling a St. George and the dragon on the sign of an inn, always mounted on a galloping horse, but never advancing a step. Under such leadership the attack on Louisburg failed. Worse than this was the disaster which attended our troops in Germany. The Duke of Cumberland, bold and active,[1026] but no general, allowed himself to be outmanœuvred by Marshal D'Estrées, suffered the French to cross the Weser unopposed, was beaten at Hastenbach, and while attempting to cover the fortress of Stade, was surrounded by the French and compelled to sign the Convention of Klosterseven, by which it was agreed that his army should be entirely broken up, the auxiliaries sent to their homes, and the Hanoverian troops go into cantonments. To complete the misery of the situation, Frederick had himself suffered a disastrous defeat at Kolin, in Bohemia, while covering the siege of Prague. The extraordinary campaign which saved Prussia does not belong to our history; it is enough to understand, that with extreme rapidity he threw himself towards the western extremity of his widespread dominions, and filled the gap which Cumberland had left open. The great victory of Rosbach, in the neighbourhood of the Saale, over the French and Imperialists, rendered that flank secure for the present. Suddenly darting back again into Silesia, where his affairs had not been going prosperously in his absence, he completely defeated the Austrians at the battle of Lissa, north of the river Schneidwitz, and thus rendered that flank secure also.

This year, so disastrous in Europe, had been marked by the signal success of our arms in India, whither Clive, who had come home after his brilliant successes in the Carnatic, had again returned as Governor of Fort St. David. He had been summoned to Bengal to revenge the horrors of the Black Hole of Calcutta, and had there laid the foundation of the English power by the brilliant victory of Plassy.[8]

The disasters which had met the English arms in all directions moved the anger of Pitt, and he determined on a thorough change of generals. In the place of Cumberland, who had shown his inefficiency in the last campaign, Ferdinand of Brunswick, a worthy disciple of Frederick's, was appointed to command the army of Hanover; and as the Convention of Klosterseven was repudiated by the English, he found the defeated army at Stade ready to receive him. Loudon gave place to Amherst and Wolfe. It was in America that the English troops were chiefly employed. The mouth of the St. Lawrence was guarded by Cape Breton Island and Louisburg. At New York the Hudson falls into Success in America. the sea, and from its mouth there runs northward, nearly into the valley of the St. Lawrence, a valley and chain of lakes, of which the first is Lake Champlain. The fortress which holds the road is Ticonderoga. On the Ohio, as already mentioned,[1027] was Fort Duquesne, where Fort Pittsburg now is. The French possessions were to be attacked by each of these three points. Amherst and Wolfe, with a fleet under Boscawen, were to capture Louisburg. Abercrombie was to push up the Hudson and take Ticonderoga, while to Forbes was intrusted the capture of Fort Duquesne. Working hand in hand, without jealousy, Amherst and Boscawen succeeded at once in capturing Louisburg, which had last year been supposed unassailable. Fort Duquesne was also taken. Ticonderoga, strong from its situation in the midst of water and marshes, resisted all efforts, but the line of junction between Canada and the Mississippi was effectually cut.

In Europe the same energy was visible. The army of Ferdinand was reinforced by a considerable number of English troops. Prince Ferdinand was opposed by the Count of Clermont, an unusually incapable general, who had in fact never before seen troops in the field. He succeeded in clearing Hanover and driving the French behind the Rhine at Creveld. He there Victory of Creveld. June 23, 1758. defeated them with a loss of some 6000 men, but found himself unable to retain his advanced position, and recrossed the river. Pitt had often asserted that, much as he wished to uphold the cause of Frederick, nothing would induce him to send British blood to "the Elbe, to be lost in that ocean of gore." But this successful campaign induced him to change his view, and a considerable body of troops, about 12,000 in number, under the Duke of Marlborough and Lord George Sackville, were sent to join Prince Ferdinand. These same officers had just been employed in executing one of those joint military and naval expeditions which Pitt seems at first to have thought the proper means by which England should assist in a continental war. Like all such isolated expeditions, it was of little value. St. Malo, against which it was directed, Expeditions to Cherbourg and St. Malo. was found too strong to be taken, but a large quantity of shipping and naval stores was destroyed. The fleet also approached Cherbourg, but although the troops were actually in their boats ready to land, they were ordered to re-embark, and the fleet came home. Another somewhat similar expedition was sent out later in the year. In July General Bligh and Commodore Howe took and destroyed Cherbourg, but on attempting a similar assault on St. Malo, they found it too strong for them. The army had been landed in the Bay of St. Cast, and, while engaged in re-embarkation, it was attacked by some French[1028] troops which had been hastily collected, and severely handled. In spite of this slight check it was plain that the tide of victory had Campaign of Frederick. changed. The campaign of King Frederick had been marked by chequered fortune. He had found the siege of Olmutz, in Moravia, beyond his strength, but upon the east of his dominions had won a great victory over the Russians, under General Fermor, at Zörndorf (August 25); and though he suffered a heavy defeat by a night surprise at Hofkirchen, he managed his retreat so ably, that before the end of the year he had rid Saxony of the Austrians and again secured Silesia.

The success which had marked the course of the British arms in all parts of the world continued to attend them, and this year (1759) is one of the most glorious in our military annals. Horace Walpole remarks, that "it was necessary to ask every morning what new victory there was for fear of missing one." In January came the news of the capture of Goree in Africa, in June the news of the capture of Guadaloupe, in August of the victory of Minden, in September of Lagos, in October of Quebec, and in November of Quiberon. The contrast between the England of 1757, crouching in fear within its own limits and crying for help to Hanover and Hesse, and the England of 1759 is indeed striking. There was again a threatened descent of the French upon England, but there was now no craven fear of such an event. Pitt had raised the temper of the people. The threat was regarded not only with indifference, but as a means of acquiring further triumph. England could well defend itself. The militia was called out and mobilized; the fleet was so large and in such order that it could efficiently watch all the French ports. Boats for the expedition were building at Havre; Rodney anchored in the harbour and bombarded it for fifty hours, destroying most of the boats; Boscawen was watching De la Clue at Toulon; Hawke was watching Conflans at Brest. Thurot, in Dunkirk, was also blockaded. This arrangement of fleets produced in the course of the year two great naval victories.

The French desired to connect their scattered squadrons. For this purpose De la Clue attempted to come out of Toulon and to join the fleets in the north of France. As he passed round Spain, Boscawen, Naval victories of Lagos and Quiberon. whose duty it had been to watch him, fell upon his fleet off Lagos. Three of his ships were taken and two destroyed, while eight vessels, which had been separated from him, were lost as they came through the straits; so that, with the exception of two ships, the whole of his squadron was annihilated.[1029] This was in September. In the following month a still greater success met the English navy. Sir Edward Hawke attacked the Brest fleet under Conflans off the point of Quiberon. He had been driven from his watch by stress of weather, and Conflans had taken the opportunity to come out of harbour, hoping to destroy a detached squadron which was off the coast. But Hawke's return was too quick for him. He made a junction with the detached squadron, and thus, superior in force to the French, drove them back towards the coast. The French withdrew among the rocky islets near the mouth of the Vilaine. It was blowing a gale, and the rocky coast was full of danger. But Hawke replied to the representations of his pilot by giving him peremptory orders, that whatever the risk might be, he was to lay his ship alongside of the French admiral's. "You have done your duty in showing me the danger, now you are to obey my orders and lay me alongside the Soleil Royal." The victory was complete: two French ships struck, four were sunk, and the rest, all damaged, ran for shelter to the Vilaine. This blow, together with the complete destruction of Thurot's squadron, which had come out of Dunkirk and made a landing in Ireland, completed the practical annihilation of the French fleet. The total loss up to this time of the French navy was sixty-four ships, without counting Thurot's squadron. During the same time the English had lost but nine.

But the great victory of the year was the capture of Quebec. To secure Canada was one of Pitt's chief objects. Louisburg and Duquesne had already fallen, and the country itself was thus open to his attack. The French army was under the command of an excellent general, the Marquis de Montcalm, who had his headquarters at Quebec. General Amherst was the English commander-in-chief, but subordinates of more than usual vigour were necessary for him, and Pitt, who had kept his eye on Wolfe since the attack on Rochefort, and had seen his energy at the siege of Louisburg, disregarding all claims of seniority, intrusted to him the attack on Quebec. This was originally to be a combined movement. Amherst was to march up by Lakes Champlain and George, take Ticonderoga and Crown Point, where Abercrombie had failed last year, and thus reach the St. Lawrence. Generals Prideaux and Johnson were to take Fort Niagara, and then, passing down Lake Ontario into the St. Lawrence, to join in the attack on Quebec, securing Montreal on the way. Though both these latter expeditions were successful, the difficulties met with rendered them so slow that the[1030] combination failed. The plan was Pitt's own, and was probably too extensive; it may be doubted whether he had sufficient knowledge of what it is possible for an army to do. Wolfe, with 8000 men, embarked in the squadron of Admiral Saunders, and reached the Isle of Orleans in the St. Lawrence river on the 13th of June. The expedition experienced no disasters in the way, having fortunately captured a vessel with some excellent charts of the river.

Quebec lies on and below the rocky edge of a plateau on the left or northern bank of the St. Lawrence, just above the junction of the St. Charles river, which thus covers its eastern side. On the other side of the St. Charles the ground again rises and continues in a rugged and difficult mass, till it sinks where the river Montmorency falls into the St. Lawrence in a lofty waterfall. The ridge between the Montmorency and the St. Charles is called Beauport. On this Montcalm's army was in position, precluding the possibility of investing Quebec, to which he had access by a bridge across the St. Charles. On the other or Quebec side of the St. Charles, the heights on the edge of which the town is built extend up the St. Lawrence, and are called the Heights of Abraham. They were believed to be inaccessible to an army. The Isle of Orleans lies in the St. Lawrence from the mouth of the Montmorency till almost opposite Quebec harbour. As long as Montcalm's army occupied the line of Beauport Quebec could not be invested. In that position the army was unassailable. To draw him from it therefore was Wolfe's great object. For this purpose frequent feints were made, but were all unavailing. One assault indeed near the mouth of the Montmorency was attempted, but the English were beaten off. Nor were the defenders of the town idle; again and again were fire-ships sent down, but the skilful vigilance of Saunders rendered all such efforts unavailing. A battery or two were erected and the town was bombarded, but this did little or no good. It seemed plain that from the Isle of Orleans nothing could be done. The army was moved in succession to two points higher up the river and above Quebec. But Montcalm would not move; he was content to send an army of observation up the river, and the besiegers lost all hope of the succours they had expected from Amherst and Johnson. On the 9th of September, Wolfe wrote a despatch in which he seemed quite to despair of success. Within a week Quebec was taken. The bold design occurred to him of surprising the Heights of Abraham, and thus compelling Montcalm to fight. He ordered feints to be made both up and down the river while he quietly collected boats. As it was, they were so few in[1031] number that his army had to cross in two divisions. Very early in the morning of the 13th of September he began his attempt. With immense toil, up a passage so narrow that at times only one could pass, his soldiers forced their way, and even dragged up one piece of artillery, and when the morning came Montcalm found between three and four thousand men in position opposite to him upon the heights. To cover Quebec it was necessary for him to withdraw his troops from Beauport and to cross the St. Charles. This he at once proceeded to do, and the battle began. Early in the day Wolfe, who was on the right wing, was wounded and carried to the rear, but before he died he had the gratification of knowing that the victory was secured. Both armies lost their first and second in command. Five days afterwards Quebec was surrendered. Wolfe was but thirty-three when he died; he entered the army at fourteen, and had seen much service; a shy, retiring, domestic man, of unprepossessing exterior and weak frame, he owed his promotion entirely to the feeling of confidence which his sound sense and chivalrous energy inspired. It is much to the credit of Pitt that he should have found out his merits, and having found them out have ventured to place so great a responsibility upon so young and unprepossessing a person.

While all the efforts in which the English were engaged singlehanded had thus been successfully carried out, they had also, in conjunction Victory of Minden. with their German allies, won on the 1st of August the great battle of Minden. The French had early in the year taken possession of Frankfort. Their army, strongly reinforced—for the new ministry of the Duc de Choiseul began by being very energetic,—was divided into two; the northern corps under Marshal Contades, the southern army about Frankfort under De Broglie. An attempt of Ferdinand to regain Frankfort was frustrated by De Broglie, who beat him at the battle of Bergen. The two French armies then joined, and pressed upon the Prince till they drove him behind Minden, a town on the left or French side of the river Weser. It became clear to Ferdinand that a battle must be fought to save Hanover. He therefore advanced southwards up the Weser, carefully keeping his communications with that river open, while the object of the French seems to have been chiefly to separate him from it. By spreading his army so as to give it the appearance of weakness, though it was in reality capable of rapid concentration, he induced the French to leave an extremely strong position they had taken up upon Minden Heath, with their right covered by[1032] the town, which was in their possession. A body of troops, apparently detached, upon the extreme left of the allies, and close to the Weser, was the bait by which the French were attracted. They hoped by destroying this ill-supported detachment to cut the Prince off from the river. But as De Broglie approached what he believed to be the weak point, he was surprised to find the whole allied army in array before him. Ferdinand by this clever trap brought his enemy to an engagement upon his own ground. The battle consisted in great part of a series of charges of French cavalry on compact bodies of the English and Hanoverian infantry. Weary with their futile exertions, the cavalry, who formed the centre of the French line, gave way. The line was broken, and a charge of cavalry alone was wanted to complete the destruction of the army. Three aide-de-camps were sent in succession to Lord George Sackville, bidding him charge. He pretended not to understand the order, and said he must consult the Prince in person. The same order was given to the Marquis of Granby, who commanded in the second line, and a vigorous charge made, but time had been wasted, and it was too late. The victory was however rendered tolerably complete by a body of 10,000 men, whom Prince Ferdinand had had the courage and foresight to detach from his army, although he was already numerically weaker than his enemy, for the purpose of cutting the enemy's communications. Lord George Sackville was tried by court martial and dismissed from all his military appointments.

The story of the British victories of the year is completed by the success of their arms in India, where the siege of Madras was raised, much of the Carnatic secured, and Wandewash taken by Colonel Coote.

It is necessary to say a few words about the war carried on under Frederick's own eye. The plan of the campaign was much the same as the last. The Russians advanced to gain the Oder, and fought Frederick's fourth campaign. and won the battle of Zullichau over General Wedel, after which they were joined by an Austrian army under Loudon. Against this united force the King advanced, leaving Daun's army already threatening Berlin. He met Saltikow and Loudon at Kunersdorf. The Russian position was forced, seventy cannon taken, and the victory appeared complete, when suddenly Loudon advanced with his troops and altered the fate of the day. In these two last battles the Prussian forces had been weakened by 30,000 men, and the King, feeling certain that he was at the end of his resources, made every arrangement for committing[1033] suicide. Unaccountably the enemy did not advance, and he had time to collect a few troops. But fortune was still against him; his general, Fink, with 12,000 men, was surrounded, and had to surrender at Maxen; Dresden had fallen into the hands of Daun. After this reinforcements from the army of Prince Ferdinand enabled the King to continue the campaign, till the extreme cold of winter made it necessary to go into winter quarters. The following year Frederick still made head against his gathering enemies. He was unable indeed to save Berlin from the hands of the Russians, but he rescued Silesia by the victory which he gained over Loudon Battle of Torgau. 1760. at Liegnitz, and at his approach the Russians fled from his capital. He then turned his arms against Daun, who was still master of Saxony. The fearful battle of Torgau was fought, where the victory was secured to the Prussians, but at the cost of 14,000 men; the Austrians are said to have lost 20,000. This was the last pitched battle of the war.

The constant success of his schemes raised Pitt to the highest eminence of power. His ministry was unopposed. Year by year he was enabled, without difficulty, to carry through the House a subsidy of £670,000 to the Prussian King, and to set his estimates at from twelve to twenty millions, a sum before this unheard of. His power over the House was absolute; members were actually afraid of replying to him, and the only difficulty which met him was the temper of his relative Temple, who insisted upon receiving the Garter, and almost shipwrecked the ministry by The King dies. Oct. 25, 1760. his selfish claims. It was at this moment of prosperity that the King suddenly died, and, as had long been expected, a change took place in the counsels of the Sovereign.

[1034]

GEORGE III.

1760-1820.

CONTEMPORARY PRINCES.

POPES.—Clement XIII., 1758. Clement XIV., 1769. Pius VI., 1775. Pius VII., 1800.

[1035]

Secretaries of State.

On the 25th of October news was brought to the Prince of Wales that his grandfather was dead. It was an event which must have been for some time expected, and George III. and his friends were prepared for it. His training had been somewhat peculiar. Bute's influence over the young King. 1760. The Princess of Wales, his mother, had kept him much secluded, and his education had been chiefly withdrawn from the hands of the distinguished men whom the King had given him as governors, and intrusted to sub-preceptors of the Princess's own choosing. Her constant friend and adviser in this and other family matters had been Lord Bute, who had thereby acquired the greatest influence over the young King. It was understood that henceforth his advice would chiefly regulate the policy of the Crown. His influence and that of the teachers he had selected, some of them it is believed nominated by Bolingbroke, had all tended politically in one direction, so much so that complaints had been made, though uselessly, to the late King of the unconstitutional precepts which his heir was being taught. The views with which the young Prince's mind was filled were those which Bolingbroke[1036] had developed in "The Patriot King." The beneficent rule of a powerful monarch governing his people by his own will, but for their good, was the ideal he had been taught to set before him. It was pointed out to him that since 1688 the will of the sovereign had been held captive by that great Whig party which had produced the Revolution and secured the Hanoverian succession. And it had been impressed upon him that it was his duty to free the prerogative from this state of servitude, and to annihilate party government by restoring to the Crown its freedom of choice and action. It was with the deliberate intention of carrying out this plan that the King began his reign. Nor was the plan, had it been properly executed, either impossible or unjust. It was felt that the old party divisions were in fact obsolete, that Whig and Tory, in the sense of Hanoverian George's view of royalty. and Jacobite, were things of the past; and that it was highly detrimental to the public service that able and loyal men should be excluded from all share of the Government because, very frequently on only hereditary grounds, they belonged to a party opposed to the great Whig connection. Yet such had been the case. Parliamentary contests had, till Pitt's accession to power, been nothing but greedy struggles for place and power between two sections of the Whig party which had separated in 1716. Had the King made use of his present popularity, and of that advantage which he possessed over his predecessors in his English birth, to exercise his prerogative of choice in selecting eminent men from all parties for his ministry, and had he taken for his chief minister a man who stood well with the nation, the feeling of the country would almost certainly have gone with him. Unfortunately his somewhat narrow intellect and his restricted education made him unable to take a wide view of his position, filled him with a vehement prejudice against the whole Whig party, and made him rest for support on the personal friendship of a second-rate man, who laboured under the unpopularity attending his Scotch birth and his supposed favour with the Princess of Wales.

The behaviour of the young King was at first all that could be desired. In his family relations indeed he was nearly always respectable. He still further added to his popularity by directing a change in the law with regard to the judges, so that their commissions no longer terminated with the death of the King. They henceforward held their commissions for life, unless deprived of them at the joint petition of the two Houses of Parliament. They were thus rendered absolutely independent of Court favour.

[1037]

The six months which elapsed before the dissolution of Parliament passed without any great changes, although there was no lack of indication of what was coming. The King's name was constantly put forward. Newcastle, who had kept all patronage in his hands, found places filled without his knowledge, and complained that he was met with the uniform answer that it was the King's desire; and Bute openly rebuked Lord Anson for filling the Admiralty boroughs without consulting the King. With the dissolution of Parliament the changes in the ministry began. Legge gave place at the Exchequer to Lord Barrington; Charles Townshend became Secretary at War, and Dashwood, another follower of Bute's, took the place that Townshend vacated, while four days afterwards (March 25th) Bute was appointed one of the Secretaries of State in the place of Lord Holderness, who had been removed and handsomely compensated. The admission of Bute to the ministry could hardly fail to produce the dismissal of Pitt, for on the great question of the day they were in direct antagonism. Bute, in pursuance of his policy of opposition to all that the Whigs had done, was determined if possible to break off the English connection with the Continent; and, unable to see the difference between buying troops from a Prince of Hesse and assisting the greatest monarch of the time in a war from which England was reaping nothing but benefit, he intended to refuse the payment of the King of Prussia's subsidy, and was strongly bent upon peace.

Frederick's own campaign of 1760 had closed, as has been already said, with the dreadful battle of Torgau, and the same year Prince Ferdinand had held the French in check, worsting them at Warburg, but had been unable to keep them out of Göttingen and Cassel; and the hereditary Prince of Brunswick, detached to the siege of Wesel, had been defeated at Kloster-Campen. In 1761 the campaign was continued, and the Duke of Broglie was driven back to the Maine and beaten at Langen-Saltza. But Prince Ferdinand was not strong enough to keep what he had regained. The French again advanced, and in June the Prince of Soubise joined the Duke de Broglie, and they together moved forward to the Lippe. They were defeated at Kirch-Denkern, but the effect of the victory was small, and both armies closed the year in much the same position as they began it. These campaigns, resulting in little but loss of life, and the exertions which they entailed, and which had brought France to the verge of bankruptcy, had become intolerable; and early in the year De Choiseul had induced[1038] both Austria and Russia to consent to negotiations at Augsburg. But as the connection of England with the continental question was accidental, and her quarrel with France quite separate from it, it was thought expedient that a separate arrangement should be made between the two countries. For this purpose M. de Bussy was in June sent to England and Mr. Hans Stanley to Paris.

The terms offered by the French were not unreasonable. The difficulties lay in Pitt's views as to the rights of England, which were undoubtedly very high. He had, as he said that he was able to do, raised England from her degradation. He had done this by means of a successful war, and had no mind to lose his work or to consent to what would be but a mere cessation of hostilities. He would have, he said, no new Peace of Utrecht. Choiseul's first offer (on the 26th of March) was, that each of the belligerents should keep what they held in Europe on the 1st of May, in West India and Africa on the 1st of July, and in India on the 1st of September. Pitt refused this, insisting that Pitt opposes peace. the date fixed in all cases should be that of the signature of the treaty. He was hoping in fact that fresh victories would improve his position; nor was he disappointed. Before the end of July Belleisle, an island which must be considered an integral part of France, Dominique in the West Indies, and Pondicherry in the East, were added to our conquests. The territorial arrangements were for the most part easily settled; but three demands of the French Pitt obstinately refused to grant. These were the restoration of one of her African settlements and Belleisle in exchange for portions of Germany then in her possession—these Pitt demanded without exchange; secondly, compensation for prizes taken before the declaration of war, and lastly, the withdrawal of all English troops from Germany. As the first of these demands was not unreasonable, as the second was obviously just, and the third belonged, and could probably have been transferred, to the general Congress, Pitt would scarcely have refused them had he not seen reason for believing that the propositions of the French were hollow. The fact is, he was already beginning to suspect, and more than suspect, the existence of a treaty inimical to English interests between France and Spain. Ever since the accession of Charles III. to the Spanish throne, in the year 1759, the two Courts had been gradually approaching one Suspecting the existence of the Family Compact. another; and the policy which Marlborough's wars had been designed to check was gradually winning its object. In July De Bussy, on presenting the draft of the proposed[1039] treaty, appended to it certain claims on the part of Spain, desiring that these might be settled at the same time as the French claims. Pitt was naturally indignant at this, and haughtily replied, that France was "not at any time to presume a right of intermeddling in such disputes between Great Britain and Spain." The Spanish minister, General Wall, owned that he was cognizant of the measure, but expressed peaceful wishes with regard to England. However, though Bristol, the English minister at Madrid, had been so completely deceived that he continued to assert the friendly disposition of the Spanish Court, the correctness of Pitt's surmises became evident, when in August the arrangement known as the Family Compact was signed. By this treaty the Bourbon houses of Spain and France contracted a close and perpetual alliance. Besides France and Spain the Bourbon Princes of Naples and Parma were to be admitted to it. There was a secret clause binding Spain to declare war on England if peace was not made before May 1762. The knowledge of this treaty induced Pitt not only to break off negotiations, but to determine upon war with Spain, for which he immediately made preparations, planning a great expedition against Havannah in the West and Manilla in the East Indies. With his usual haughtiness, he urged these measures Pitt resigns. Oct. 5, 1761. upon the Council, but Temple alone supported him. He indignantly declared that he would not be responsible for measures he did not manage, and on the 5th of October resigned. Thus terminated that splendid administration which had raised England from the depths of degradation to a position of first-rate importance in Europe.

Bute was at once practically supreme in the Council, although he had yet to rid himself of Newcastle. He was afraid of Pitt's popularity, and did his best to injure him by persuading him to accept a pension, and the title of Lady Chatham for his wife, hoping by that means to make it appear that Pitt was not hostile to his Government, or at all events to wreck his popularity, which rested largely on the public belief in his disinterestedness. Lord Egremont became Secretary in his place. Before the year was over Pitt's wisdom was vindicated. The change of ministry in England and the safe arrival of the treasure-ships, which Pitt would have forestalled, changed the tone of the Spanish Government, and even the pacific Bute found it necessary to declare war in January War with Spain. 1762. 1762. Already the impossibility of Bute's peaceful view was demonstrated, but he none the less prevented the payment of the Prussian subsidy; although this looked[1040] very like a breach of faith, it could be urged in extenuation that Frederick's need was much lessened by the death of the Czarina and the accession of Peter III., a devoted friend and admirer of the Prussian King. Bute's policy was indeed so completely opposed to that of his predecessors, that there is reason to believe that he even used his influence to induce Russia to withdraw from its new alliance. This change of policy afforded Newcastle, who was conscious that he was sooner or later to be got rid of, an opportunity of leaving the ministry with dignity. On his resignation Bute at once named himself Prime Minister, and proceeded to carry out, in some points at least, his favourite principles. These were peace at almost any price, and the abandonment of continental connections, the increase and restoration of the power of the Crown, and Government without bribery. But these aspirations degenerated in practice into a war, which was successful owing to his predecessor's arrangements, a vindictive assault upon the Whig party, and the most shameless corruption ever practised in England. The expeditions which Pitt had planned were carried out. Martinique, held to be impregnable, and with it Granada, St. Lucia, and St. Vincent, were captured by a squadron under Rodney, and this was but a stepping-stone to the capture of the still greater prize—Havannah. The expedition against the Philippine Islands was equally successful.

But Bute, in his eagerness for peace, did not even wait to hear the result of the expeditions, but at once reopened peace negotiations with France. Left to himself, he would have taken no account of the last great conquests. Councillors less anxious for peace succeeded in getting them exchanged for Florida. In November the peace was Terms of the peace. Nov. 3, 1762. signed. The conditions were much the same as those of the preceding year. America passed wholly to the English, the French keeping the rights of fishing round Newfoundland. England kept Tobago, Dominica, St. Vincent, and Granada, but restored Martinique and St. Lucia. Minorca and Belleisle were to be exchanged. The French evacuated their conquests in Germany, but on the other hand—and this was a concession Pitt had refused—Goree was restored to France, and the English army was withdrawn from Germany. In India the French were to have no military establishment, but their factories were restored. All claims on the part of Spain were entirely rejected. On the whole, the peace, though it did not destroy the House of Bourbon, as Pitt would have wished, probably gave England as much as she had a right to expect. The conclusion of the treaty was[1041] rendered easier by Frederick's continued successes in Germany. Although the Czarina Catherine, who had succeeded Peter, had Close of the Seven Years' War. reverted to the old policy of Russia, and withdrawn her troops from Frederick's assistance, he had been able to retain his superiority throughout the campaign. Prince Ferdinand had gained fresh successes in Westphalia, and had taken Cassel from the French; while Prince Henry, the King's brother, had won a victory at Freiberg, which closed the Seven Years' War.

Bute, while thus obtaining peace, though in a way so irritating to our German friends that England stood henceforward absolutely without allies, had been carrying on his vindictive attack upon the Whigs. The opportunity selected for this purpose was the passage of the peace through Parliament. Grenville, a man of firmness, but Attack on the Whigs. Feb. 10, 1763. without commanding abilities, and deficient in tact, had taken Pitt's place as Leader of the House of Commons. But he was not regarded as strong enough to make head against the opposition which was expected, for the Whigs of all sections, conscious of Bute's designs against them, were beginning to combine. Bute selected a man of greater powers to assist him. He bargained with Fox (whose conscience was not scrupulous when money was to be made) to assume the lead of the House. It was hoped that he might bring some Whigs with him. This he found himself unable to do, and with consummate audacity set to work to purchase a majority. The Paymaster's office became in fact a shop for the purchase of votes, £200 being the least price given. Against such a majority all efforts were of course useless, and the peace received the approbation of Parliament. After this victory vengeance began. The Duke of Devonshire, the head of the great Whig house of Cavendish, for declining to attend a Cabinet Council, was rudely deprived of the office of Chamberlain, and the King with his own hand scratched his name off the list of Privy Councillors. All placemen who had voted against the peace were dismissed. Newcastle and Rockingham were removed from their Lord Lieutenancies, and even the meanest officers of the administration—tax-gatherers and customhouse officers, who owed their places to Whig patronage, were removed. Bute appeared triumphant. Even the cider tax, a ridiculously unfair excise suggested Bute resigns. April 8, 1763. by the ignorance of Dashwood, his Chancellor of the Exchequer, was carried by a large majority in his venal House. Suddenly Bute resigned. It is difficult to explain why. Perhaps it was because he was conscious of the unpopularity[1042] he had incurred. His Peace of Paris was distasteful to the nation; he had driven from office Pitt, the favourite of the people; he was a Scotchman; the voice of scandal constantly coupled his name with that of the Princess Dowager of Wales, and the odious name of favourite was indissolubly attached to him. Whether well or ill founded, his unpopularity had reached such a pitch, that he was afraid to leave his house without a bodyguard of prize-fighters. Perhaps experience had taught him his unfitness to conduct the Government. Perhaps, and this was the general belief of the time, he preferred the irresponsible power of the favourite to the dangers and responsibility of He names Grenville as his successor. the minister. He named Grenville for his successor, and as he had always used him as his creature, he probably still hoped to find him a pliant tool. In this he was disappointed; and though for a few years he doubtless had much private influence with the King, this part of his career has been much exaggerated, and he himself complained bitterly of the King's ingratitude.

With Grenville the Secretaries of State, Lord Egremont and Lord Halifax, were regarded as holding the direction of public affairs. This ministry has therefore been sometimes called The Triumvirate. Bute found them by no means ready to accept his interference, and soon began to intrigue against them. Grenville more than once complained to the King of his want of confidence. The sudden death of Lord Egremont gave an opportunity for a change in the ministry, and Bute so far changed his former policy as to recommend the King to send for Pitt. A long interview with the King, in which Pitt stated the necessity of bringing back some of the Whig connection to power, left him with the impression that he was to be minister, and he wrote to the Whig chiefs accordingly. But two days after, on a second interview, he found matters changed. The King wished the Earl of Northumberland, Bute's intended son-in-law, to be Prime Minister, and desired several of the present ministry to be retained. This Pitt would not hear of, designating Temple, Devonshire, and others who had just fallen under the King's displeasure, as his colleagues. The negotiation Bedford joins the ministry. was broken off. Probably on the day which intervened between the two interviews Bute had changed his mind. In carrying through the peace negotiations he had been assisted by that section of the Whigs which was under the influence of the Duke of Bedford. It is to this section that Fox belonged. The Duke, though of a retiring character, was now induced to accept office[1043] by a false rumour, that Pitt had expressly declared that he would not admit him to any Government of which he was the chief. A mixed ministry of the followers of Grenville and Bedford was formed, and is generally known by the name of the Bedford Ministry. The Secretaries of State were Halifax and Lord Sandwich, a man of mean character and licentious morals.

The new ministry met Parliament on the 15th of November, and both Houses were at once occupied with questions with regard to Wilkes. The unpopularity of Bute had found expression in numerous pamphlets. Among the Opposition writers was Wilkes, member for Aylesbury, who, in conjunction with an author of the name of Churchill, had established a paper, The North Briton, in which the favourite and his Government had been very roughly handled, and which won popularity by unreasoning general assaults upon the Scotch nation. He had so far exceeded the usual practice of pamphleteers of the time as to write the names of his opponents at full length, instead of employing initials. When the King had prorogued Parliament (April 23rd) on Bute's resignation, he had spoken of the peace as honourable to his crown and beneficial to the people. This produced an attack in the famous No. 45 of The North Briton. Grenville had at once proceeded against the author. A general warrant (that is, a warrant in which no individual names are mentioned) was issued against the authors, printers, and publishers of the paper, and under it Wilkes was apprehended, his house and papers being also ransacked. He at once became a political martyr. The chiefs of the Opposition, Temple and Grafton, visited him in his prison, and he proceeded to try the validity of his arrest. Chief Justice Pratt, before whom the case came, held that Wilkes was exempted from arrest by his privilege as a member; for a member of Parliament is free from arrest on all charges except those of treason, felony, and breach of the peace, and a libel, he said, could not be construed as a breach of the peace. But though the law had failed to punish him, he was pursued by the vengeance of the Government; he was deprived of his commission in the militia, and his supporter, Temple, was removed from the Lord Lieutenancy of Buckinghamshire. The result of the trial was received with public rejoicings in all corners of England. This dispute between Government and a scurrilous writer, of most licentious morals, would be scarcely worth mentioning, although it occupied nearly the whole session, were it not one of the proofs of the want of harmony existing between Parliament and those whom Parliament[1044] was held to represent. It was one of several incidents which showed that the venal House of Commons, consisting of nominees of the Court or great families, was rapidly ceasing to command the obedience of the people, and that the machinery of the Constitution was thereby becoming dislocated.

The question at once came before both Houses. In the House of Lords it assumed a personal form. Lord Sandwich, a former friend of Wilkes, and his associate in his greatest debauchery, but now Secretary of State, did not think it unbecoming to produce an obscene parody on Pope's "Essay on Man," of which Wilkes was the author, and demand his punishment. The book had never been published; fourteen copies had been privately printed; it had come into Sandwich's possession when Wilkes's house was ransacked, and afterwards by tampering with Wilkes's printer. Sandwich complained of it as a breach of privilege, for it was addressed to him. "Awake, my Sandwich!" it began, instead of "Awake, my St. John!" of Pope's Essay, and ridiculous notes were added, attributed to Warburton, Bishop of Gloucester, who had annotated Pope's work. In the House of Commons Wilkes rose and complained of his imprisonment as a breach of privilege, but he met with little sympathy. By a large majority No. 45 was voted to be a seditious libel, and ordered to be burnt by the common hangman. A dangerous riot was the consequence, nor was the operation completed till a jackboot and petticoat, the popular emblems of the Princess of Wales and Lord Bute, were committed to the flames to share the fate of the obnoxious publication. Further proceedings against Wilkes were postponed by a duel in which he was engaged Wilkes is expelled by the Lower House. with a Mr. Martin, who had grossly insulted him, and in which he was wounded; but he was eventually expelled from his place in the House. On the two constitutional questions which were involved in this quarrel—the construction to be given to the privilege of members and the legality of general warrants—the popular party was defeated, in spite of the powerful support of Pitt. In opposition to the Courts of Law, Parliament held that privilege could not cover a seditious libel; and Grenville and his majority contrived to shelve a resolution which was introduced declaring the illegality of general warrants. The whole question excited the intensest interest; the House is said to have once sat for seventeen hours. Wilkes, unable to withstand all the assaults upon him, had, in spite of his popularity, been obliged to withdraw to France.

[1045]

Grenville and his ministry had hardly completed this quarrel, in which they had wantonly embroiled Parliament and people, when they took a fresh step which, though well intentioned, was destined, from the way in which it was carried out, to lose England the best of her colonies.

The thirteen American provinces owed their origin to many different causes, and were very distinct both in their character and laws. There was, in the first place, the group of New England provinces, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire (which included what is now called Vermont), and Rhode Island; these owed their origin to the Pilgrim Fathers, and though the first zeal of their Puritan religion had died away, much of the stern character of their original founders remained among the population: their capital was Boston, almost surrounded by the sea, and already a port of very considerable importance and wealth; the Hudson formed their boundary towards the west. Then there came a group of provinces originally belonging to the Dutch, and known as the New Netherlands. These had come into the hands of England during the war between Holland and England in the reign of Charles II., and had been granted to the Duke of York. New Amsterdam became New York, and Fort Orange, higher up the stream, Albany. Another part of the same grant was New Jersey, lying between the Hudson and the Delaware. This had been given for payment by the Duke of York to Lord Berkeley and Sir George Carteret; the western part had been subsequently parted with by Berkeley to the Quakers, and the whole province, which was surrendered to the Crown in the reign of Queen Anne, was therefore known commonly as the Jerseys, and was peopled almost exclusively by Quakers, Presbyterians and Anabaptists. Spreading from their colony in New Jersey, the Quakers, under their great leader William Penn, had occupied the large province of Pennsylvania, with its capital Philadelphia lying inland to the west. One other province belongs to this group, Maryland, which was regarded as a sort of appendage to Pennsylvania, but had a separate assembly of its own; the governor however was generally the same as the Pennsylvanian governor. Below these two groups were three great colonies, owing their origin to less easily defined sources. Virginia, south of the Potomac, originally founded by Raleigh, had then (by a grant of King James I.) passed into the hands of merchant adventurers. Behaving badly, and quarrelling with their colonists, they were deprived of their rights, and in 1624 the colony became a Crown[1046] colony. It had been peopled principally by Church of England men and by men of good English birth. As the oldest colony it was the best peopled, while the birth and character of its proprietors, who resembled English gentlemen, caused them to be regarded as the aristocracy of the colonies. The two Carolinas had been granted to a number of proprietors in the reign of Charles II., but, as in most other cases, the original proprietors had quarrelled with the people, and sold their rights to the Crown. Below these Carolinas was Georgia, founded for philanthropic purposes as a refuge for insolvent debtors and persecuted Germans by General Oglethorpe, the originator of the inquiry into the English prisons in 1728. The only power not English now in North America was that of Spain, which had received a portion of Louisiana from the French in exchange for Florida, which they had been obliged to cede to the English. French influence had disappeared after the Peace of Paris.

There was an infinite variety of religion, law and government in these provinces, but in all a certain assimilation to the English Constitution; a house of assembly, an upper house or council, sometimes elected, sometimes nominated by the governor, and the governor himself in the Crown colonies nominated by the King and the proprietors in conjunction. The population appears to have been about two and a half millions.

The old view of the use of colonies was that they should be employed entirely for the advantage of the mother country. It was held that, by the mere fact of their existence, and for the protection they received, they were bound by a debt of gratitude. They were thus the constant subject of mercantile legislation in favour of the mother country, and by the existing navigation laws very close restrictions were laid upon their trade. By those laws the colonies were prohibited from procuring a large number of articles—those, namely, which formed the chief manufactures of England—anywhere except from the mother country. They thus became naturally one of our principal purchasers. Although their imports into England were considerable, the balance of trade was constantly against them—that is, taken as a whole, they constantly owed large sums of money to England. This balance had, of course, from time to time to be made up by payments in actual money, which was chiefly procured by the colonies by means of illicit trade, carried on partly with the West India Islands, but chiefly with the Spanish colonies of America, and was illicit chiefly in that it broke the customhouse regulations of Spain. The[1047] colonial illicit or free trade, as it was called, was regarded in point of morality as something quite different from European smuggling. It was carried on openly and systematically by the best colonial merchants, and enabled the colonies to get rid of their timber and those wooden products known under the name of lumber, and also of a considerable quantity of their farm produce which would otherwise have been wasted. A wise minister would not have thought of meddling with such a business, which was in fact the only means by which the colonists were enabled to carry on conveniently their trade with England. But Grenville, with his narrow and legal turn General suppression of smuggling. of mind, could see no difference between colonial smuggling and smuggling in England. This he was determined to put down, and not content with the ordinary means of repression, English men-of-war were employed in all directions as customhouse vessels, and naval officers, people said, were degraded into customhouse officers of the King of Spain. The effect was a crushing blow to the trade of America. And, as if to render the position of the colonists still more distressing, in 1764 a series of enactments were made, laying duties upon various articles for the benefit of England,—at the same time declaring for the first time the right of England to raise a revenue from her colonies; and while the quantity of money in America had been considerably diminished by the stoppage of the free trade, the present Act was rendered more irksome by ordering all the duties imposed to be paid in hard cash into the English Exchequer. It was coupled, too, with another Act stopping the use of paper money in America. Taken together, this series of arrangements had therefore produced the following effects—a large branch of commerce, the chief source of ready money, was destroyed; at the same time more ready money was demanded by England; and the colonists saw themselves prevented even from carrying on their domestic trade in the ordinary channels.

These measures had produced retaliation from the Americans; it had been determined that as little trade as possible should be carried on with England. Lamb was not to be eaten, and lambs were not killed, in order to increase the stock of sheep for the supply of the wool which was England's great manufacture; and in all other possible ways men denied themselves European luxuries. It has been said that the preamble of the Act for the new duties stated the The Stamp Act. necessity for raising a revenue from the English colonies, and at the same time Grenville had proposed a Stamp[1048] Act as one of the means of raising such revenue. With singular want of wisdom, though with kindly feeling, he put off bringing in a Bill for the establishment of this tax, which would be an article of excise or inland duty, till the assemblies of the different colonies had stated their views with regard to it. The Americans, though probably without any real legal grounds, drew a line between the levying of customs and the imposing of an inland tax. It is probable that by the strict letter of the law they were liable to both, for even the Long Parliament had only granted temporary exemptions from taxation. But when their attention was drawn to the intentions and claims of the English Parliament, and when a tax, new in fact though perhaps not in principle, was suggested to them, and a year given them to talk it over, it was natural that their opposition should be roused. Five colonies sent petitions against the new measures, but they were wholly disregarded, and the Stamp Act passed without much opposition in Parliament.

The ministry seemed unusually strong—it had triumphed over Wilkes; and its financial policy, though ruinous, had been accepted—when suddenly the King became alarmingly ill, suffering from that loss of intellect which afterwards incapacitated him from reigning. In alarm at this illness, on his recovery he desired a Regency Bill to be passed. The natural person to have appointed Regent would have been the Queen. The King had been hastily married in the first year of his reign (1761) to the Princess Sophia of Mecklenburg, a marriage which, as it was contracted chiefly by the influence of the Princess Dowager and Lord Bute, and without the will of the King, for the purpose of withdrawing him from his dangerous love for Lady Sarah Lennox, might have been expected to turn out ill, but which became in fact a happy life-long union. The King however, instead of suggesting, as was natural, that his wife should be Regent, desired to keep the appointment in The Regency Bill. 1755. his own hands. The Government objected to this, without limitations, and suggested that the King's choice should lie among the Queen and the members of the Royal Family resident in England. When this Bill was brought forward it was pertinently asked who the Royal Family were? and it became evident that the ministry did not themselves know how to define it. They ultimately concluded, however, that the Princess Dowager was not a relation of her own son. In making this ridiculous assertion, and insulting the Princess by excluding her name, they were probably instigated by the dread of a Bute ministry in[1049] case anything should happen to the King. In pursuance of this policy, Halifax hurried to the King, and persuaded him that the unpopularity of the Princess Dowager was such that the introduction of her name in the Bill would infallibly be followed by its omission on the demand of the Commons, and the Princess thus exposed to public insult. The King, taken off his guard, and naturally wishing to spare his mother so public a mark of disrespect, consented to the omission of her name. The Bill was brought into the House of Lords and passed, limiting the regency to the Queen and the descendants of the late King and Queen resident in England. When the Lord Chancellor—an honest man—explained to the King what he had done, he was much disturbed, but no entreaties of his could move Grenville to change the Bill. Upon its introduction into the Lower House the absence of the name of the Princess was at once remarked, and a large majority voted for its introduction; thus making obvious to the King the shameless trick of which he had been the victim. For this he could not forgive Grenville and Bedford, and at once began arrangements for getting rid of them.

For this purpose he called in the assistance and experience of his uncle the Duke of Cumberland, whose upright and consistent conduct had given him an authority and importance which he had not sought. He was a firm Whig, and had of late years regarded Pitt as the real head of that great party. To him therefore the Duke now applied. In a long interview Pitt explained his views and stated his terms. He demanded that an alliance with the Protestant powers of Europe should be entered into, to balance the Family Compact, that general warrants should henceforward be declared illegal, and that officers dismissed for political reasons should be restored. Everything seemed to promise success, but Pitt wished to see Temple, to whom he was bound by ties of relationship, party, personal friendship, and even pecuniary assistance. After his interview with Temple it was evident that some obstacle had arisen, and the negotiation was broken off. The fact is, that Temple, infinitely Pitt's inferior, had come to terms with George Grenville, and was planning a family Grenville ministry; and Pitt's lofty view of his obligations to his brother-in-law prevented him from breaking with him. The King was thus thrown back, bound hand and foot, into the hands of his old ministry. They would consent to remain in their places if the King would pledge himself to dismiss Bute from his friendship, to get rid of Fox, now Lord Holland, from the Paymastership, turn Mr. Stuart[1050] Mackenzie out of his place as Privy Seal for Scotland, make Lord Granby Commander-in-Chief instead of the Duke of Cumberland, and give Ireland to the ministry, which meant the dismissal of the Earl of Northumberland, Bute's son-in-law, from the Lord-Lieutenancy—a mere set of personal and vindictive conditions, contrasting finely with Pitt's political demands. Such as they were the King was obliged to accept them, but he could not bring himself to like or trust his ministry, and after a strong, though not perhaps unduly strong, representation from Bedford against the underhand employment of the King's influence against his own ministers, he determined that he would rid himself of them, even at the cost of accepting the Whig Houses. Pitt was again applied to, talked honestly and simply to the Duke of Cumberland, stating as his terms an European alliance, the abolition of general warrants, the repeal of the cider tax, and a change in American taxation, thus in his two sets of terms clearing himself of all complicity with the follies of the present Government. But Temple refused to take the position of Prime Minister except Pitt retires into private life. as the head of a Grenville administration, and Pitt with infinite sorrow gave up the negotiation, sold his house at Hayes, and declared his intention of retiring to Somersetshire, where an admiring stranger had lately left him the house of Burton-Pynsent.

The Duke of Cumberland, finding that Pitt was by some means separated from the great Whig party, applied directly to its acknowledged family chiefs, who agreed to form a ministry, putting forward as their head Lord Rockingham, a sporting man of sound sense and large possessions, but no power of language or popular government.[9] Under him were the Duke of Grafton with no parliamentary experience, General Conway, a sensible man, but without any of the gifts of leadership, to whom was intrusted the management of the House of Commons, and the veteran Duke of Newcastle, to whom was given the Privy Seal, with a special perquisite of the patronage of the Church. With the exception of Lord Chancellor Northington, there was in fact scarcely any one of the requisite degree of efficiency in the ministry. Its life could not be a long one. It is fair to say that Burke, who was now first introduced to public life by Lord Rockingham, speaks highly of him for enlargement of mind, clear sense, and unshaken fortitude.

This weak Government found on its hands a question of difficulty[1051] too great for it. The Stamp Act had been very badly received in America; there had been riots in many of the towns, involving much loss of property; the collectors had been obliged to renounce their offices, and the stamped paper had been destroyed. Virginia had solemnly protested in regular form through the House of Burgesses; and a Congress of delegates of nine or ten of the States had met at Question of American taxation. New York (October), and passed resolutions, claiming for the provincial assemblies the exclusive right of taxation. At home the merchants had begun to feel the effects of the self-denying determination of the Americans, in a diminution of their trade, and of the enforcement of the laws against smuggling, in the impossibility of getting money payments for their goods. The sum due is stated variously at two to three millions. During the recess of Parliament the writings and proceedings of the ministry had an air of weakness, and finally, unable to act vigorously themselves, they determined to put the matter into the hands of Parliament.

In January Parliament met, and on the 14th the subject was brought before the House. There was a great debate. Burke then made his maiden speech, and was followed by Pitt, who had not yet expressed his views, and had indeed absented himself from the House for a year. Expectation was raised to the highest pitch, and in a Return of Pitt, and his declaration of views. 1766. magnificent speech he declared, what till that moment had in England been scarcely thought of, that Parliament had no right to tax the colonies, for taxation and representation went hand in hand. He however, like the Americans, drew a line between taxation and customs. Customs he regarded in the light of trade regulations, and therefore in the hands of the Imperial Legislature. After a speech of weak acquiescence from Conway, Grenville made an able reply; he exposed the fallacy of distinguishing between taxes and duties, alleged many instances of the taxation of unrepresented bodies, and charged the Americans with ingratitude for declining to pay for a war so entirely in their own interest as the last. Pitt, though he had spoken, was, contrary to the rules of the House, called upon by the general voice to speak again. He rose, and declared himself ready to answer Grenville on every point. His reply was such as a statesman must make to a lawyer. "I rejoice," he cried, "that America has resisted; three millions of people so dead to all the feelings of liberty as voluntarily to submit to be slaves would have been fit instruments to have made slaves of the rest." He had not come down with the "statute book doubled down in[1052] dog's ears to defend the cause of liberty," and as to gratitude, he supposed that all the bounties to America were for English purposes. There was a trade with America of £3,000,000 a year, and it was trade which carried England through the last war. "This you owe to America, and shall a miserable financier come with a boast that he can fetch a peppercorn into the Exchequer to the loss of millions to the nation?" He closed by stating his belief that England could crush America to atoms, but the triumph would be hazardous. If she fell she would fall like the strong man; she would embrace the pillars of the State, and pull down the Constitution with her. He advised the immediate and entire repeal of the Stamp Act, but that the other rights of Parliament, apart from taxation, should be clearly declared. There was no doubt much weight in Grenville's instances of imperfect representation, but they were not wisely urged against Pitt, who in his first speech had himself pointed out in very trenchant words the wretched state of the representative system in England. Indeed, he almost alone seems to have understood the real meaning of the Wilkes riots, and to have wished to bring Parliament and the people into harmony. Pitt's bold speech encouraged the ministers to act, and after a long examination of witnesses, among The Stamp Act repealed. whom Franklin, who had come over as an agent to oppose the Act, was the most important, the Repeal of the Stamp Act was proposed and carried amid the enthusiasm of the mercantile and liberal world on the 21st of February. For this time Pitt's political wisdom had saved England from a disastrous breach with her colonies.

Once embarked on a policy of repeal, the Rockingham ministry continued to reverse the acts of its predecessors. The trade of America was again fostered, and Dominique and Jamaica were made free ports; the obnoxious cider tax was ameliorated, general warrants were condemned, as was also the practice of depriving military officers of their commands for political opposition. General Conway was himself the last victim of this practice. Foreign manufactured silks were also prohibited, and thus the clamours of the Spitalfields weavers were silenced, which, during Grenville's administration, had produced a riot directed chiefly against the Duke of Bedford. But, in spite of these healing measures, the Government was never strong. The King detested it as being distinctly a party Weakness of the Government. Government, and the abilities of the ministry were not conspicuous. They tried in vain to induce Pitt to join them. Upon the failure of this negotiation the King[1053] was glad to have recourse again to that great man. For the third time since the close of his administration Pitt had the destinies of the nation in his hand. Twice his Quixotic attachment to his friend Lord Temple had ruined his plans. He had always aimed at a broader basis of government than mere personal or party connection, and during his great administration had succeeded in acting independently. There was something therefore in common between him and the King, though no doubt their view of the destruction of party was different. To Pitt it meant the selection of able men of all political connections, under his own pre-eminent guidance, to form a ministry, which should work for the national good, and be responsible to the nation. To the King it meant the selection of efficient administrators, without any pre-eminent minister, and answerable to himself. There was apparently, however, enough in common between them to induce Pitt to accept the administration, and to break off his connection with Temple, who insisted, as a condition of his support, that the whole of the Rockingham party should be dismissed. Pitt, on the other hand, determined on a fusion with that party. Pitt becomes Lord Chatham and Prime Minister. July 1766. Rockingham himself left the ministry, but his chief supporters remained under Pitt. Grafton was nominally Prime Minister and First Lord of the Treasury, Conway and Shelburne were the Secretaries of State, Charles Townshend Chancellor of the Exchequer, Lord Northington became Lord President, and was succeeded as Chancellor by Pitt's friend Pratt, Lord Camden. Pitt himself surprised the world by taking a peerage as Lord Chatham and the small office of Privy Seal. In acting thus he no doubt miscalculated his strength; he felt himself unable from his growing infirmities to continue to lead the House of Commons, and believed, as he had indeed good right to believe, that his personal character and influence would enable him, in whatever position he might be, to blend the ministry from whatever party he chose them into an harmonious administration. The effect did not answer his expectations. His acceptance of a peerage was regarded as the acceptance of a bribe, especially as his avowed principle in the selection of his colleagues was the same as that rendered so unpopular by Bute and the King—the destruction of party. He thus lost his popularity; of party influence he had little or none; he was deficient in knowledge of party tactics, which during his great administration had been in the hands of Newcastle. His natural arrogance had grown on him, and was rendered worse by his irritable state of health. He tried to win the Bedford party, but[1054] would not give them enough. He introduced a number of Tories and courtiers into the administration, and thus shocked the great Whig party; and when, as shortly happened, illness obscured for a time his intellect, the ministry lost all cohesion and fell to pieces.

But though thus failing as a tactician, it was impossible for Pitt to be in office without setting on foot magnificent and beneficial plans. He immediately began the new foreign policy which he had so often sketched. Mr. Hans Stanley was despatched to the Courts of Berlin and St. Petersburg to cement an alliance against the house of Bourbon. But at Berlin he met but a cold reception. Frederick, whose character was as mean and selfish as his abilities were great, did not care in the least for the defence of Protestantism or for the safety of England, now that his own safety did not depend upon her friendship. Indeed, since Bute's withdrawal from the war he had hated England heartily, and alleged the want of continuity in English policy as a reason for engaging in no alliances. In truth, his mind was already fixed upon his wicked plan for the dismemberment of Poland. Pitt, now Lord Chatham, was thus foiled at the outset, and his foreign policy failed. Two other great schemes he was unable to bring to completion; one for the better government of Ireland, and the other for what he saw would speedily become a matter of the greatest importance—the regulation of our Indian conquests. He intended to do what we have but lately seen done,—assume for the Crown the sovereignty of India, and confine the Company to their proper and mercantile pursuits.

In the midst of these vast schemes, having given indications that he contemplated a Reform Bill, an India Bill, the pacification and better government of Ireland, alliances which would have forestalled the great alliances of his son, and a plan which might perhaps have retained America, Chatham fell ill at Bath, and the Government ceased to have a natural head.

While Chatham was thus absent from his post his reckless Chancellor Chatham's illness and mental failure. Jan. 1767. of the Exchequer brought in a scheme for again raising revenue from America. The sum was indeed a very small one—£40,000, and raised upon tea, glass, and paper, and therefore falling, it might be urged, under the head of those mercantile arrangements which the colonies admitted the Townshend's financial measures. right of Parliament to make; but in the present state of affairs in America it was a mere act of madness. The repeal of the Stamp Act had been made conditional on[1055] the repayment of property injured in the riots. This the Assemblies had agreed to only with much grumbling, and the Assembly of New York had gone so far in its opposition to a requisition for supplying necessaries to the troops that it had been suspended. While America was in this irritable condition Townshend's measure came to inflame the smouldering mass.

What Chatham had spoken of as the rotten part of the Constitution was, early in the year 1768, brought into full play. There was a general election, in which bribery and the purchase of seats were shamelessly employed. £4000 is said to have been the average price of a small borough. Oxford offered to re-elect its members for £7500, to be applied to the liquidation of a corporation debt; and to show how ridiculously inefficient the representation was, it may be mentioned that in a population of eight millions there were only a hundred and sixty thousand voters. The people were by this time beginning, though perhaps somewhat blindly, to feel that the representative body did not really represent them, and, as usual, they fixed upon one individual, and that not a very worthy one, as a representative of this feeling. Wilkes had already been a popular martyr and the victim of Wilkes elected for Middlesex. 1768. the vengeance both of King and Parliament. He now presented himself for election in London. He was there rejected, but immediately afterwards elected by a large majority in the county of Middlesex. His election produced riots in London, and the Government—contrary probably to their own judgment, and urged by the King—determined to interfere. Wilkes was apprehended as an outlaw, and riots ensued, which were suppressed only by the use of the troops. Twenty people were killed and wounded. The military were not only acquitted when tried upon the charge of murder, but were rewarded by Government. The anger of the people increased, and in the riots which ensued in various parts of England the point immediately at issue was complicated with other social questions, many depressed trades taking the opportunity of exhibiting their discontent. The Government which had to deal with this difficulty was the Duke of Grafton's—Chatham immediately upon his recovery had retired from it, and Lord Shelburne had also left it. Grafton, without views of his own, had become the mere tool in the hands of the King and his party. George was set with dogged obstinacy upon the suppression of insubordination in America and the destruction of Wilkes in England. Under such circumstances the war with the people was[1056] carried to extremes. When a vacancy occurred in the representation for Middlesex there was a fresh contest, and Glyn, a partisan of Wilkes, was elected. In the attendant riots blood had been shed. The murderers were convicted, but again pardoned and rewarded, and the anger of the people became still greater. Wilkes's petitions were neglected, and on his publishing a severe letter against Lord Weymouth, Secretary of State, the House, instead of leaving the matter to the Law Courts, declared it a breach of privilege, and unable to pronounce a libel against a Peer a breach of the privileges of the Commons, they proceeded, perfectly illegally, to have Wilkes arrested and brought to the bar of the House, and there tried for libel. Wilkes avowed the letter, and Lord Barrington, Secretary of War, and one of the "King's friends," moved his expulsion. A new writ was issued for Middlesex, and Wilkes was re-elected almost unanimously. The House voted that he could not sit, and a fresh writ was issued, and Wilkes was again unanimously elected. Another election was ordered, and this time the Government contrived to get about three hundred votes for Colonel Luttrell against eleven hundred given for Wilkes. The House declared that Luttrell was the member. So iniquitous a decision raised Wilkes into the position of a great popular leader, and was not carried without many vigorous protests from the most influential members of the Liberal party. It tended much to lessen the power of the ministry; both great cities and great counties held meetings to express their want of confidence in the present representation and to ask for a dissolution.

Nor did the ministry strengthen itself by its dealings with America. The new imposts of 1767 had been received with great indignation by the colonists, especially in Massachusetts. There the governor, Francis Barnard, seems to have been totally destitute of all power of conciliation. He was backed up by Lord Hillsborough, Colonial Secretary, scarcely more temperate than himself. The Assembly, in its quarrel with the governor, issued a circular letter to the other colonies, calling for their co-operation against the new taxes. They refused to retract this step at the command of Lord Hillsborough, and were dissolved. The difficulties of the crisis went on increasing. The customhouse commissioners were foolish enough to capture and detain an illicit trader; serious riots were the consequence; the commissioners were mobbed and their houses robbed. The spirit of resistance spread. The Society of Sons and Daughters of Liberty, who refused to use imported goods,[1057] multiplied in other colonies. The view of the Government was not conciliation, but coercion. Troops and ships of war were crowded into Boston. In England the feeling was strongly against the Americans. Coercive measures were recommended and applauded; Francis Barnard was raised to the rank of a Baronet; the conduct of the people of Boston gravely censured in Parliament; and at length Bedford's section of the Whigs produced a motion which could hardly fail to excite resistance. The Duke moved, and the Parliament applauded his motion, that as it was probable that American juries would sympathize with their countrymen, the rioters might be withdrawn from their country, in accordance with an obsolete law of treason of the reign of Henry VIII. This measure, which seemed to deprive the colonists of their first rights as Englishmen, met with deserved execration both at home and in America. But to crown all, and to put the ministers quite in the wrong, some general action on their part was wanting. This want was supplied when the conciliatory efforts of Grafton were defeated in his own Cabinet. He suggested the removal of all taxation of America. English pride forbade the Council to accept a measure which they thought derogatory to the rights of an Imperial nation. Therefore, for the mere purpose of asserting the right, they agreed to the removal of all taxes but one, and insisted that the tax on tea should be kept. Thus the original principle of the right to tax was upheld, and the sting still left to rankle in the minds of the Americans.

The unpopularity which their conduct had brought on the ministry was increased by the vigorous and bitter assaults of Junius. This anonymous writer, probably Sir Philip Francis, lost no opportunity of attacking, with the greatest animosity, the Duke of Grafton and his supporters, not even sparing the King, and by his bold assaults, excellent style, and by the mystery which hung over him, drew upon himself much public attention, and directed men's minds to all the weaknesses of the administration.

The incompetency of the ministry was indeed becoming obvious. In the first place it was divided within itself. The Prime Minister, with the Chancellor and some others, were remnants of the Chatham ministry and admirers of Chatham's policy. The rest of the Cabinet were either men who represented Bedford's party, or members of that class whose views are sufficiently explained by their name, "the King's friends." Grafton, fonder of hunting and the turf than of politics, had by his indolence suffered himself to fall under the influence of the last-named party, and unconstitutional[1058] action had been the result which had brought discontent in England to the verge of open outbreak. Hillsborough, under the same influence, was hurrying along the road which led to the loss of America. On this point the Prime Minister had found himself in a minority in his own Cabinet. France too, under Choiseul, in alliance with Spain, was beginning to think of revenge for the losses of the Seven Years' War. A crisis was evidently approaching, and the Opposition began to close their ranks. Chatham, yielding again to the necessities of party, made a public profession of friendship with Temple and George Grenville; and though there was no cordial connection, there was external alliance between the brothers and the old Whigs under Rockingham. In the first session of 1770 the storm broke. Notwithstanding the state of public affairs, the chief topic of the King's speech was the murrain among "horned beasts,"—a speech not of a king, but, said Junius, of "a ruined grazier." Chatham at once moved an amendment when the address in answer to this speech was proposed. He deplored the want of all European alliances, the fruit of our desertion of our allies at the Peace of Paris; he blamed the conduct of the ministry with regard to America, which, he thought, needed much gentle handling, inveighed strongly against the action of the Lower House in the case of Wilkes, and ended by moving that that action should at once be taken into consideration. At the sound of their old leader's voice his followers in the Cabinet could no longer be silent. Camden declared he had been a most unwilling party to the persecution of Wilkes, and though retaining the Seals, attacked and voted against the ministry. In the Lower House, Granby, one of the most popular men in England, followed the same course. James Grenville and Dunning, the Solicitor-General, also resigned. Chatham's motion was lost, but was followed up by Camden, Granby and Grafton resign. Rockingham, who asked for a night to consider the state of the nation. Grafton found it nearly impossible to prop up his falling ministry; the Great Seal went, as Lord Shelburne said, a-begging. Charles Yorke was indeed induced to take it in spite of his former political connections, but, overwhelmed apparently by the coldness of his former friends, he committed suicide. Grafton thus found himself in no state to meet the Opposition, and in his heart still admiring Chatham, and much disliking business, he suddenly and unexpectedly gave in his resignation the very day fixed for Rockingham's motion.

The Opposition seemed to have everything in their own hands, but there was no real cordiality between the two sections. The[1059] Rockingham party despised the City friends of Chatham, who, under Want of cordial alliance among the Opposition. the leadership of Lord Mayor Beckford, had become prominent in the Wilkite riots, and since that time by a somewhat impertinent use of the right which the City possessed of directly approaching the King with petitions. They dreaded also the paramount influence the Grenville party were nearly sure to possess in any joint Government. On the other hand, Chatham despised the half measures and moderation constantly advocated by the Rockingham party. The King, with much quickness and decision, took advantage of this disunion. To him it was of paramount importance to retain his friends in office, and to avoid a new Parliament elected in the present excited state of the nation.

There was only one of the late ministry capable of assuming the position of Prime Minister. This was Lord North, Chancellor of the Exchequer, and to him the King immediately and successfully applied, so that while the different sections of the Opposition were still unable to decide on any united action, they were astonished to find the old ministry reconstituted and their opportunity gone. The new Prime Minister was a man whose unwieldy person and want of grace seemed little to fit him for the command of a popular assembly. His frame was bulky, his action very awkward, and his shortsighted, protruding eyes, swollen cheeks and over-large tongue, enabled Walpole to compare him to a blind trumpeter. But under this awkward exterior he had great capacity for business and administration, and much sound sense; he was a first-rate debater, and gifted with a wonderful sweetness of temper, which enabled him to listen unmoved, or even to sleep, during the most violent attacks upon himself, and to turn aside the bitterest invectives with a happy joke. With his accession to the Premiership the unstable character of the Government ceased. Resting on the King, making himself no more than an instrument of the King's will, and thus commanding the support of all royal influence, from whatever source derived, North was able to bid defiance to all enemies, till the ill effects of such a system of government and of the King's policy became so evident, that the clamour for a really responsible minister grew too loud to be disregarded.

Thus is closed the great constitutional struggle of the early part of the reign—the struggle of the King, supported by the unrepresented masses, and the more liberal and independent of those who were represented, against the domination of the House of Commons. It was an attempt to break those trammels[1060] which, under the guise of liberty, the upper classes, the great lords and landed aristocracy, had succeeded after the Revolution in laying on both Crown and people. In that struggle the King had been victorious. But he did not recognize the alliance which had enabled him to succeed. He did not understand that the people had other objects much beyond his own. He saw that they felt thus far with him, that they disliked the comparative servitude in which he was placed, that they felt hurt at the coercion frequently brought to bear upon him by the dominant faction, that they were willing and anxious to assist him in breaking those ties of party, which were little else than the ties of faction and class. Seeing this, he did not recognize that the people were equally disinclined for the establishment of personal government, that they wanted to strengthen the Crown and to weaken the Whig party, chiefly as a means of attaining to a more complete system of self-government. He believed that his own power and his own skill had been chiefly instrumental in the success which had met his efforts. He had no intention of allowing any of the fruits of that success to fall to any but himself. Kind-hearted and well-meaning, he wished to govern for the good of his people, but he distinctly wished to govern for them and not to let them govern for themselves. It is thus that during the ministry of North, and of those who preceded him, the royal influence was constantly employed in repression,—repression of all popular movements at home, repression of all attempts at liberty in the colonies; and this principle Lord North, backed by a servile House of Commons, was able to uphold.

The House was indeed notoriously under ministerial influence, and one of the last acts of Grenville was to attempt a reform in one particular at least. Disputed elections had hitherto been referred to a Committee of the whole House, and had thus become the merest party questions, in which the right and wrong of the case was never thought of. Grenville's measure, which was carried against considerable opposition, gave the cognizance of such questions to a select Committee, with judicial powers, and themselves bound by oath. Even thus justice was not secured, and though the number of the Committee was subsequently again decreased and fresh measures taken to secure fair decisions, it has lately been found necessary to put the settlement of election petitions into the hands of some of the regular judges. This important measure closed the career of Grenville; before the year was out he died. Thus Lord North found himself relieved from an able[1061] opponent, while the Opposition lost one of its chiefs, and became still more disorganized. About the same time the death of the Marquis of Granby, who by his popularity had formed a link between Chatham's party and the rest of the Opposition, still further weakened that body, and left North with comparatively easy work on his hands.

It was the American question which still pressed for solution. Profound anger had been aroused by Bedford's vindictive proposal, and by the maintenance even in a single instance of the right to tax. Hitherto the quarrel had been principally with the New Englanders, but a more general opposition was evidently approaching when the aristocratic province of Virginia came forward to take the lead. When a solemn demand in the House of Burgesses for the repeal of the obnoxious measures of the English Parliament had only produced a dissolution of the House by the Governor, Lord Bottetort, an organized opposition was formed by men who subsequently became the chief actors in the War of Independence. A declaration, signed by Washington, Patrick Henry, Randolph and Jefferson, was issued against importing British goods till the restrictions of 1767 had been withdrawn. In Massachusetts the cry against the troops and the King's ships was continued, and there too the legislative assembly was prorogued. The complaint made against the number of soldiers kept in the province, and the consequent danger of collision, was not groundless. On the 5th of March a riot took place; and though Captain Preston, who commanded the soldiers, gave no orders to fire, the troops were unable to command their temper, and some blood was shed. This "massacre," as it was called, did much still further to embitter the feelings of the people of Boston. It is pleasant to see that even amidst the wild political excitement Preston and his soldiers got a fair trial, and, being defended by John Adams (afterwards President), were Lord North upholds Lord Hillsborough's policy. acquitted. This fray happened the very day that Lord North in England announced his determination of clinging to the policy of Lord Hillsborough, and said he was ready to remove all taxes except that on tea. In vain was it pointed out to him that the value of the tax was little more than £300 a year, and that the Americans had now made up their minds on the principle, and did not care for the mere lessening of burdens. He persisted in his view, saying that the Americans deserved no indulgence, and his motion was supported in the House, by 204 against 142. For a brief space the American question seemed[1062] settled. Massachusetts and Virginia still continued loud in their expressions of discontent, but in most parts of the continent the question now seemed rather a small one, and the hostile measures against English trade were generally disregarded.

This period of quiet lasted about three years, during which the ministry of Lord North constantly acquired strength, though there were not wanting signs of the great faults which characterized its policy. In the affair of the Falkland Islands, indeed, in spite of the outcries of the Opposition, there seems to have been no real lack either of prudence or firmness. These desert islands had been occupied by Affair of the Falkland Islands. the English as a point of importance in the South Seas. Both French and Spaniards had turned their attention to them also, and a Spanish settlement, called Fort Soledad, had been formed on one of the islands. The English had, however, no idea that their neighbours intended to dispossess them, when, in June 1770, a force of Spaniards from Buenos Ayres arrived off Fort Egmont, and obliged the garrison to retire. This outrage in the midst of peace very nearly plunged the nation into war with Spain and France; for it was Choiseul who was the instigator of the difficulty, and the skill of Harris (afterwards Lord Malmesbury), Chargé d'affaires in Spain, would probably have failed to avert it had not Madame Dubarry, who had lately gained complete influence over Louis XV., seized the opportunity to overthrow the minister. On his fall Madame Dubarry's clique, D'Aiguillon, Terray, and Maupeou, became paramount in France, and, as might be expected under such circumstances, that country ceased for a time to have much influence in European politics.

Though this affair had on the whole been carried through with success, there had been a certain quantity of opposition in London, showing the unpopular character of the Government. Murmurs against the press warrants had been heard, and opposition to them had been overruled chiefly by Chatham's influence. But the feeling of discontent broke out in full force the following year. Great jealousy had always been felt in Parliament as to reports of the The liberty of reporting Parliamentary debates. debates held there, and such meagre accounts as had been published, from the memory of hearers or other private sources, had habitually been brought out under some disguise and with an affectation of secrecy. In 1770 this habit had passed into disuse. The Commons, already angry with the House of Lords for having excluded strangers, and indignant that, while the Lords secured secrecy their own debates were[1063] publicly reported, resolved to enforce the existing orders against some of the printers of reports. Among others, one Miller was summoned to be reprimanded. He however refused to come, saying he was a livery-man of the City. A messenger sent to fetch him was himself apprehended and taken before the Lord Mayor, Brass Crosby, and Aldermen Oliver and Wilkes. These magistrates supported the arrest and held the messenger to bail. The House was very indignant. As the Mayor and Oliver were members, they justified in their places in Parliament what they had done, and were committed to the Tower. This was a sign for a renewal of the riots attending the Wilkite difficulties. Mobs filled the streets, and Lord North was ill used. The City took up the part of its members, who lived in prison at the public expense; and although the law courts held that the City was in the wrong, appearances became so threatening that the House let the matter quietly drop; and on the prorogation in May the prisoners were allowed to leave their confinement in triumphal procession, and the question was not again raised. This secured for ever the liberty of reporting.

In spite of this victory the popular party in the City was losing ground, and Wilkes was not the name of power it once had been; while within the walls of Parliament the ministry was constantly acquiring strength and the Opposition becoming more and more broken up. Grafton had again consented to return to office; Lord Sandwich, a follower of the Duke of Bedford, accepted the Admiralty. Lord Suffolk, the leader of what was left of Grenville's party, became Secretary of State. The Opposition was thus reduced to the party of Rockingham and such few followers as consistently clung to Lord Chatham, but these two sections could never work well together, and the three Whig propositions of the year were all lost by want of union. The want of harmony between the Parliament and the country, and the consequent need of some reform, had been shown by the late quarrels in the City. Chatham brought in a Bill with that object, embodying his old plan of increased county representation. This, as it seemed the only manner of securing an addition of independent members, and as there was not yet in existence an important manufacturing and industrial element unrepresented, was probably the best measure that could have been taken. But it did not find favour with the Rockingham party, and was put aside. The same fate attended an effort on the part of the Rockingham party to define the law of libel, and to give the jury in such cases the right of settling not only the fact of[1064] publication, but the character of the libel. Chatham thought that measure should have been left for him, and a ridiculous struggle between the two Whig sections in the House was the result. On the third question, the dissolution of the present Parliament, which had been the favourite object of all the City opposition and addresses, Chatham found himself almost alone. While thus all effective opposition disappeared, Lord North found his chief parliamentary support in his law officers. Thurlow, his Attorney-General, and Wedderburn, his Solicitor, afterwards Lord Loughborough, brought—the one the weight of great legal knowledge, very strong sense, a wonderful power of invective, and a determination of character almost brutal; the other a time-serving readiness and facile elegant eloquence which was always at the service of his chief.

Excellent as the King's domestic life was, he did not escape the family discomforts which so constantly attended the house of Hanover. Two of his brothers gave him much displeasure by their marriages. The Duke of Cumberland,[10] a man of libertine life, after scandalizing the world by appearing as defendant in a case of criminal conversation, married Mrs. Horton, a sister of that Colonel Luttrell who had been forced upon the electors of Middlesex; while the Duke of Gloucester now declared his marriage with Lady Waldegrave, an illegitimate daughter of Sir Edward Walpole. To guard against such marriages in future, the Royal Marriage Bill was passed, which forbids any member of the Royal Family, unless children of princesses married abroad, to marry before the age of twenty-five without the King's consent. After that age they must give a twelvemonth's notice of their intended marriage, which may be completed unless it be petitioned against by both Fate of the Queen of Denmark. Houses of Parliament. A more real disgrace than these marriages was the fate of George's sister, Caroline Matilda, Queen of Denmark. Her husband was a disgusting and licentious sot, whose villanous conduct so changed her naturally good disposition, that it was not found difficult for her enemies to gain credence for a story which connected her name in a disreputable manner with a certain Struensee, at that time favourite and Prime Minister in Denmark. This man, a physician by profession, had acquired absolute control over the King's mind, and had speedily risen to power. His enemies were of course numerous, and the opportunity offered them by the Queen's conduct only too favourable. Struensee and the Queen were suddenly[1065] apprehended by night, and the Queen, after some remonstrance from King George, allowed to retire to Zell, where she died after a few years, protesting her innocence. Struensee, however, was executed, and confessed the crime with which he and the Queen were charged.

From such comparatively trivial matters as royal marriages and misconduct it is necessary to turn to what forms one of the darkest passages in the political history of Europe. England, under the guidance of a ministry bound to support the selfish policy of a King whose real aim was solely the aggrandizement of the Crown, had held selfishly aloof from foreign affairs. France had just disgraced the last capable and vigorous minister she possessed, and lay supine under the hands of the King's scandalous mistress. So these two great countries, to their eternal disgrace, looked calmly on while the Eastern powers, without reason or plea of reason, dismembered an old kingdom and reduced a noble people to slavery. The institutions of Poland were very different from those of the rest of Europe, and such as lent themselves easily to the plans of encroaching neighbours. Since the failure of the house of Jagellon Constitution of Poland. (1572) the monarchy had been elective. So great a prize had naturally attracted the notice of foreign powers, who sought to secure the advancement of their own interests by obtaining the election of some favourite candidate of their own. Faction within the country was the inevitable consequence, and the arrangements of the constitution made faction permanent. There was no middle class. The nation had not gone through the same processes as other Western people. Nobility was easily obtained, and Its peculiar institutions. each member of the nobility ranked as the peer of all the rest. Below the ranks of the nobility came the serfs. Political power, and also most of the executive, was vested in this wide aristocratical democracy. Usually delegates of the nobles constituted a governing house. Sometimes the whole body could, and did, claim the right of legislating. In the delegates' house one veto could check the progress of any law. If to this is added that the nation was divided by fierce differences in religion, it will be seen that no fairer field for foreign intrigue can be conceived. Nor, in spite of their individual bravery, were the Poles in a position to withstand force; the nobility still clung to their old habit of fighting on horseback, so that, at a time when modern warfare had fairly begun, there was no infantry but such as consisted of serfs. The strength of the army still consisted in an irregular body of light horse. Well might[1066] the Czarina Catherine say that anything might be had from Poland for the trouble of picking it up. She had made the experiment. On the death of Augustus of Saxony, in 1764, Russia had compelled the Poles to elect a late favourite of the Empress, Stanislas Poniatowsky, and from the time of his election had in fact treated Poland as her own property. It had been the hereditary policy of France to withstand Russian influence in Poland, and during Choiseul's ministry this policy was continued. The Turks were induced to make a war with Russia, which, though disastrous to them, no doubt somewhat lengthened the dying agonies of Poland. The confederates, who opposed in arms the reigning king and the Russian party, chiefly on the ground that they had insisted on the rights of the dissidents or dissenters in opposition to the orthodox Catholics, received constant though secret help from France. The conduct of Austria also was as yet ambiguous, and, judging by its natural interests, should have been opposed to that of Russia. On such hopes the confederates rested. Occasional success lured them on more rapidly to inevitable ruin. But France was too far away to give real help. Choiseul fell before the intrigues of the Dubarry party, and neither nation nor ministry was in a temper or position to pursue with energy a distant and unselfish policy. On the other hand, Austria speedily began to see more advantage in joining the prosperous and rising powers of Eastern Europe than in trying to prop up against them a falling cause. It became evident that Russia would soon be absolute master of the kingdom. Frederick of Prussia could not see such an accession to the power of his dangerous neighbour without taking some corresponding measures, and as a Prussian army entered and pillaged ruthlessly all the northern provinces, it became plain that there existed some understanding between Frederick and the Empress. The movement of Austrian troops, at first supposed to be friendly to the confederates, soon proved that Maria Theresa, however grandly she might write Treaty of Partition. and speak, had joined in the conspiracy of robbers; and before the year 1772 was over the treaty made early in the year was declared; and the necessary concessions were wrung with much violence from the King and legislature, absolutely unable to assert any will of their own. The final ratification took place in May 1773. The kingdom was to be partitioned. Each of the three great neighbours was to receive a portion somewhat in proportion to its size. Russia got 87,500 square miles; Austria 62,500; Prussia only 9,465 square miles, but these containing the best and most industrious part[1067] of the nation. What remained was formed into an hereditary monarchy in the house of Stanislas. It is fair to say, as an excuse for the supineness with which England looked on at this vast national crime, that the best and wisest of her statesmen had systematically directed their attention to the depression of the house of Bourbon. In the system of balance of power, as then understood, nothing was regarded as so likely to prove a check on the power of that house as the increase of the influence of Russia. Any movement in favour of Poland must have been in union with France and in opposition to Russia, and would have tended at first to reverse that action, which was generally regarded as most consistent with the safety of English interests. In the face of recent facts (1871), it may be clearly evident that the dangers of Europe come from the East and not from the West; but it is not fair to blame statesmen or nations because they did not foresee the French Revolution and its consequences, nor to throw indiscriminate censure on the whole system of the balance of power because it has sometimes Balance of Power. produced disasters. As long as the social constitution of Europe remains the same as it has been since the breaking up of the feudal system, as long as the feeling of nationality survives, in some form or other the balance of power is a necessary safeguard to national independence. The fictitious divisions into which Europe has by dynastic influences been forced, and the maintenance of which has been the chief cause of the disrepute into which the system of balance has fallen, have disappeared, or are disappearing, before more natural and truly national divisions; but until these in their turn give way to some wholly new industrial organization the undue preponderance of one nation must be an object of dread to all the rest, and their efforts must be directed, as events afford opportunity, to diminishing that preponderance.

It is fair also to say that the ministry had enough upon their hands already. Although there had been a comparative cessation of the troubles in America, there had been many signs that they were by no means over. The more advanced leaders, indeed, in Massachusetts were too determined in their views and too skilful as managers of agitation to let the friends of the English connection, though doubtless considerably the larger part of the population, carry the day through their inactivity. The discontent of the colonies had been sedulously kept alive by the skill and vigour of the leaders of the Opposition party. In the midst of constant quarrels with their governor, Hutchinson, an American by[1068] birth, the Massachusetts leaders appointed a committee of twenty-one for the purpose of organizing opposition to the Government. This step was followed by Virginia, where, in 1773, a corresponding committee of still wider scope was appointed; and at length two events occurred which entirely destroyed all hope of a peaceful accommodation. These incidents were the publication of some letters of Hutchinson, and an arrangement with the India Company which had in reality no connection with the quarrel. In June 1773, certain letters were laid before the House of Representatives of Massachusetts purporting to be written by Hutchinson, their governor, and his brother-in-law, Oliver, Lieutenant-Governor. These letters, written in 1767 and the two following years to Whately, the private secretary of Grenville, were of a private and friendly character. They took a view favourable to the Government, and stated the opinion of the writer, that a firm exhibition of authority would best tend to check the colonial discontent. The letters had been forwarded from England by Dr. Franklin, who was acting as agent for Massachusetts. As they were private letters, and Mr. Whately was dead, it is impossible that Franklin should not have known that they had come into his hands by unfair means. He had not the least right to use them. Indeed, on sending them to America he made a stipulation that they should not be published. Of course such a stipulation in the heat of a political quarrel was intended to be broken; and they were not only produced and read, and acknowledged by Hutchinson, but published. Their effect was very great; it seemed to the Americans as if the English Government had been urged to all its acts of severity by a party of traitors among themselves. The House of Representatives at once addressed the King, warmly demanding the removal of Hutchinson from his place as governor, since he had, they said, betrayed his trust, and given private, partial, and false information to Government. The petition was sent to Lord Dartmouth, who had succeeded Lord Dunning's petition rejected. 1774. Hillsborough as Colonial Secretary, by him it was laid before the King, who referred it to the Privy Council. The Council, consisting chiefly of "the King's friends," met in January 1774. Franklin, as Colonial agent, was present. The petitioners were represented by Dunning, the great Opposition advocate. The administration had unwisely given the affair the air of a Government question by naming Wedderburn, the Solicitor-General, as Hutchinson's counsel. Dunning contented himself with saying that the petitioners had no impeachment to make, no facts to prove; they only appealed to the King's judgment. With most unwise[1069] want of reticence, Wedderburn, feeling himself in the presence of a very favourable audience, gave vent to a furious diatribe against America, and more especially against Franklin—a man, he said, to be shunned by all honest men, from whom men would henceforth hide their papers; in short, a thief. The Council heard, laughed, and applauded. Franklin stood unmoved, no muscle showing how much he felt the insult, but it did not miss its mark. For him from that day no accommodation was possible, and the brown suit in which he stood was put by, to be worn again only when the treaty declaring America independent was signed. The petition, in which a people had expressed their earnest and passionate feelings, was declared frivolous and vexatious, and Franklin was removed at once from his office of Deputy Postmaster for the colonies.

Wedderburn had, no doubt, in his violent invective only expressed the feeling of most of the English nation; only a few weeks after the meeting of the Privy Council news had reached England which was not likely to render the bitterness between the two people less. In 1772 the India Company had come to Parliament demanding a loan. The India Company's difficulties. 1772. Much censure had been thrown on their officers and their manner of action, and alterations had been insisted on, which placed the Company very much at the mercy of Government. As a sort of compensation a Bill was brought in in their favour, by which they were enabled to export their teas from their London warehouses to the American colonies free from the English duties, and liable only to the much smaller duty to be levied in the colony. This measure would allow the India Company to get rid of a large surplus stock of tea then lying on hand, and would enable the colonists to buy their tea considerably cheaper. To the colonists however it bore another aspect. The whole plan seemed to them a scheme to surprise or bribe them into compliance with the very measure of taxation they were so strenuously opposing. This belief was supported by the fact, that all the consignees who were to receive the tea were warm partisans of England, and was fostered by the whole body of tea merchants and free traders, who saw themselves likely to be driven from the market by this direct tea trade. The opposition party took means to organize a resistance. The consignees were duly warned. The tea ships entered Boston harbour, but the captains were so fully convinced of the futility of their speculation, that they would willingly have again withdrawn. Some little customhouse formalities detained them; and meanwhile they were boarded by a body of men dressed as Mohawks, who tossed the[1070] obnoxious tea into the sea. Similar steps, though less violent, were taken elsewhere, and none of the tea sent over under this disastrous law found its way into the market.

Such violence, and such contempt of authority, exasperated the minds of the English people. Lord North seems still to have inclined to conciliatory measures, but the remnant of the Bedford party, always particularly bitter against America, was too powerful for him, especially as the King's opinion, before which North always yielded with fatal weakness, was thrown into the scale on the side of severity. Two measures were devised to punish the refractory The Boston Port Bill. 1774. colony. By the first, known as the Boston Port Bill, the customhouse, and consequently all the trade, was moved from Boston, and the port was declared closed; in fact the thriving town was rendered desolate. The warehouses stood empty, the docks and quays were deserted. Salem was chosen to take the place of Boston; but so strong was the feeling against the Bill, that the very merchants of Salem, though the benefit would have been all theirs, petitioned against it. The anger excited by the Bill was not confined to Boston; a feeling of indignation pervaded all the colonies. Their sympathy was soon increased by Massachusetts government Bill. fear for their own liberties; for a second Bill was introduced, abrogating the old charter of Massachusetts. Its popular constitution was to be destroyed, and the colony was to become in the strictest sense a Crown colony; the council was to be named by the Crown instead of by the people; and the judges, magistrates and sheriffs were to be nominated and removed by the governor without consulting the council. All the other colonies naturally felt their charters insecure.

In fact, all seemed to show that the critical time had come. Attempts were indeed made subsequently at reconciliation, but they were hollow, and the proposers of them knew that they were hollow. Henceforward an appeal to arms became almost certain, and the idea of claiming independence, as yet only existing in the minds of a few of the leaders, began to become prevalent. Virginia at once threw in her lot with Massachusetts. A fast was ordered on account of the Boston Port Act, and the governor dissolved the assembly. The leaders met at the Raleigh Tavern, and agreed upon a form of association against trade with England. Washington, hitherto hopeful of reconciliation, declared his readiness to raise 1000 men at his own cost for the support of the people of Massachusetts. In spite of all Government opposition, most of the colonies[1071] accepted the lead of Virginia, kept the fast, and agreed to the association, while, as a chief step in the direction of general revolt, a Congress was summoned at Philadelphia, and attended by representatives of the assemblies of twelve colonies, Georgia alone being absent. The English, too, understood that the two great Bills were little short of a declaration of war. Hutchinson was recalled, and General Gage was made Governor of Massachusetts, while Boston was filled with troops. Of course a quarrel between the new governor and the assembly was inevitable. The assembly was dissolved, and refusing to disperse, collected and sat at Concord, constituting thus in fact a rebel government, whose orders were implicitly obeyed. Gage had been obliged to fortify Boston Neck; as a counter measure the Concord assembly established a permanent committee of public safety, organized 12,000 militia, and enrolled minute men, or picked men from the militia bound to serve at a minute's notice. While things were thus drifting into war in Massachusetts, the General Congress issued a Declaration of Rights, setting forth the rights of the colonists as Englishmen, and declaring that the late Acts were infractions of these rights, and must be repealed before America would submit, and passed a resolution forbidding importation Acts of the General Congress. from England, the use of imported goods, and after the interval of a year exportation to England also. These, and other acts and papers of the Congress, acquired much weight by being to all appearance issued unanimously, an important advantage which was only gained after a trial of strength, in which the views of the advanced leaders were carried by a majority of one. When defeated on a scheme of reconciliation proposed by Mr. Galloway, and considered as a test question, the minority wisely accepted their position, and desisted from all protest, so that all the acts of Congress might have their full weight.

A general election in England in September of this year made it plain that the temper of the people was no less bitter and determined in the mother country than in the colonies. A large ministerial majority was returned ready to support any acts of coercion. The Opposition began by demanding papers in an amendment on the address, but the real Chatham's motions for reconciliation. 1775. struggle did not begin till January, when Chatham again expressed his opinion, moving the immediate repeal of the obnoxious statutes of the preceding year and the withdrawal of troops from Boston. The majority against him was overwhelming; none the less did he at once set to[1072] work, with Franklin's help, to prepare a scheme of reconciliation, though Franklin had probably neither much hope nor much wish that it should succeed. It was at first fairly received by Lord Dartmouth, the Colonial Secretary, but again Lord Sandwich and the Bedford party overawed their more temperate colleague, and it was rejected with scorn. The wisdom of some step in the same direction North's measure for the same purpose. seems however to have been plain to Lord North, who in a short time produced a scheme of his own. This did not go further than to say, that so long as the colonies taxed themselves with the approbation of King and Parliament no other taxes ought to be laid on them. It was much too late for any such trumpery measure.

It was indeed too late for any schemes of reconciliation, and the appeal to arms began. General Gage, who in spite of his representations had been left without reinforcements during the winter, could not see the Skirmish at Lexington. April 1775. preparations made for arming and supplying the militia, carried on by the provincial Congress, without taking some measures to prevent them. In April he determined to destroy the stores at Concord. Some militiamen, who were being drilled at Lexington, only dispersed after firing upon the troops; and when the soldiers, after destroying such of the stores as had been left at Concord, began their homeward march, they found themselves assaulted from behind every hedge and cover, and were compelled to seek refuge in a very distressed condition with a body of troops who had been sent to support them. The English loss was 270, while the rebels lost less than 100 men. This slight success raised the spirits of the colonists; militiamen crowded in from all quarters, and General Gage was blockaded in Boston. The rebels even ventured to attempt an expedition against the neighbouring province of Canada. A Bill passed Canada Bill. the preceding year in England had given a constitution to Canada. This colony, nearly wholly French, neither understood nor valued English institutions, and was firmly Roman Catholic in its religion. The constitution was wisely conceived in a more arbitrary spirit than would have suited Englishmen, and with great liberality established the Roman Catholic worship. The Americans, unable to see the wisdom of this, and Puritan in their own religious beliefs, fancied that Canada must be smarting under its wrongs, and that they should find hearty sympathy there. In this belief, and to open the road thither, two New Englanders raised troops on their own responsibility—Arnold, a horse dealer, and Ethan Allen—and advanced against the forts which held the valley of Lakes[1073] Fall of Ticonderoga. May. George and Champlain, which, with the valley of the Hudson, forms the natural road from New York to Montreal. They speedily seized Ticonderoga and Crown Point.

The first question which met the second General Congress was whether they should take upon themselves the responsibility of these actions or accept the conciliatory resolution of Lord North. There was no hesitation on the part of the Congress. Lord North's proposition was thrown aside at once; orders were issued against supplying any British force or officer; a national name was assumed—The United Colonies; coercive measures were decreed against any province which should refuse to recognize the authority of Congress; and on the flimsy excuse of a contemplated invasion from Canada, the actions of Allen and Arnold were acknowledged, and an attack on Canada organized. These were acts of rebellion and war, and the Congress, conscious that the die was cast, proceeded to appoint a commander-in-chief. Their choice fell upon Colonel Washington, a Virginian gentleman, and a member of the Congress, who had seen some service in the late frontier wars, and was much respected by his province. He was a powerful, somewhat silent man, of very strong sense, and great powers of self-control, possessing that commanding influence which Washington chosen commander-in-chief. is given by strong passion and enthusiasm habitually subdued, but just visible under a constant and calm exterior. His unquestioned honesty, his hatred of disorder, and his great simplicity of character, fitted him well to give dignity to a cause which ran the risk, if it fell into inferior hands, of degenerating into a selfish and riotous uproar.

Washington at once hurried to the seat of war, but before he arrived another battle had been fought. A narrow channel separates Boston from another town of the name of Charlestown, behind which rise two masses of high ground, known as Breed's and Bunker's Hill, from which Boston is commanded. Breed's Hill is the nearer of the two to Boston. It was natural to suppose that General Gage, whose forces had been raised to 10,000 men by reinforcements under Generals Clinton, Howe and Burgoyne, would assume the offensive, and at all events try to secure these hills. The Americans attempted to forestall him, and some rude defences were thrown up on the ridge of Breed's Hill. About 2000 English were sent to dislodge them. The Americans fought well, more than once the English drew back before their fire, but[1074] rallied by Clinton, they eventually took the position, driving the enemy, more than twice their number, in disorder along Charlestown Neck, where they were open to the fire of our ships. More than 800 of the English fell in the desperate struggle.

Battle of Bunker's Hill June 18, 1775.

Although the insurgent troops were justly proud of the gallant stand they had made against disciplined forces, the army when Washington joined it was not such as a general would wish to command. Even in the late battle well authenticated cases of cowardice had occurred among the officers. The militia regiments of the various states regarded each other with jealous eyes; there was no sort of uniformity of dress, no trace of soldierly bearing; the soldiers showed little subordination to officers scarcely better than themselves; and, worse than all, there was a fearful deficiency of powder. It taxed the ability and temper of their new general to the full to bring the motley crowd into order. He exacted the sternest discipline, drew a sharp line between the officers and men, procured hunting shirts to supply the lack of uniform, and by unremitting toil gradually produced a tolerable army. Why General Gage looked quietly on while this process was being carried out it is difficult to say. Even setting aside the[1075] lack of ammunition, of which however he was fully informed, he had troops enough to have destroyed the enemy which were blockading him without difficulty, and might thus perhaps have ended the war at a blow.

The slowness which characterizes the English generals at the beginning of the war is probably to be traced to the prevalent idea that reconciliation was still possible, and that the terrible extremity of civil war might be avoided. Even at this very time the Congress was sending to the King a last appeal; but this document, known as the Olive Branch Petition, was not received in England. There was a technical objection to it which secured its rejection; it purported to come from the Congress—an illegal and unrecognized body. The Americans could scarcely indeed have expected that it would have produced any effect. It held out no hope of concession, but expressed only vague wishes for reconciliation. It probably served the turn of those who sent it by allowing them to throw the blame of the future war entirely on the English. It might have been wise on the part of the ministry, even thus late, to have accepted overtures of peace, but it would have been a stretch of wisdom which no man had a right to expect; for the Congress had undoubtedly by its action assumed a position of complete independence and hostility which a Government could scarcely be expected to overlook.

Even before the Olive Branch was sent the Congress had determined to take advantage of the successes of the preceding year, and had organized, under Generals Montgomery and Arnold, an attack upon Canada, which General Carleton was ill prepared to repel with less than 1000 British troops. While Montgomery crossed Lake Champlain and pushed on to Montreal, Arnold, with incredible labour, had made his way up the valley of the Kennebec, and so down the Chaudière, to Quebec. Unable to prevent the junction of the armies, Carleton hastened to throw himself into the capital, and upon the Heights of Abraham succeeded in checking their advance, with the loss of Montgomery their leader. Arnold could do no more than keep up a nominal blockade, so ably was the defence conducted, and the general who superseded him, meeting with no sympathy from the Canadians, was forced to withdraw in disorder beyond Lake Champlain.

Meanwhile the dilatory conduct of Gage, who had now been succeeded by General Howe, had lost Boston to the English. Washington had at length found himself strong enough to take and[1076] fortify the Dorchester Heights, which commanded the English lines on Boston Neck. A general engagement, which could scarcely have Howe retires to Halifax. March, 1776. ended otherwise than favourably to the English, would have still rendered the town tenable, and Howe was inclined to bring on a battle. But a continued course of bad weather frustrated his plans, and thinking that for military reasons New York, where the royal party was strong, would make a better base of operations, he determined to withdraw; he accordingly removed all his troops to Halifax, there to await promised reinforcements. So long were the fresh troops in coming that Howe had to leave Halifax without them. There was considerable difficulty in supplying him. The military arrangements of England have been constantly found inefficient at the opening of a war; it was only by purchasing troops at an exorbitant price from the Duke of Brunswick and the Landgrave of Hesse that the immediate want could be supplied. It was therefore only on a limited scale that Howe was enabled to carry out that plan for the arrangement of the troops which was afterwards continued during the war; and which consisted of making New York the centre of operations, to be supported by two subsidiary forces, the one acting in the Southern States, the other from Canada. In pursuance of this plan, he despatched a force against Charleston, in Carolina, under General Clinton, while he himself moved to Sandy Hook, thus threatening New York, whither Washington had hastened from Boston. He was there joined in July by his brother, Admiral Lord Howe, and found himself, with his reinforcements and with the troops which had been sent to Charleston and had returned upon the failure of the expedition, at the head of nearly 30,000 men.

Lord Howe brought with him full powers for himself and his brother the general, empowering them, in accordance with a late Act of Parliament, to receive the submission of any colony, and after such submission to grant pardon and redress. An Imperial nation, defied by its colonies and not yet beaten, could hardly offer more, and to those not thoroughly conversant with what was going on in America, it must have seemed that there was every chance of such terms being accepted. Never as yet had the chances of the insurgents seemed so small. It is true that the revolt had become universal; but the spirit of the commercial population of the Northern States was severely tried, and seemed to be yielding under the depression of trade caused by the war. The English army was for the time actually more numerous than that of[1077] Washington, whose troops, nominally but 27,000 strong, were diminished by illness or absence. Those who remained were in a miserable condition, and consisted chiefly of men enlisted for short periods, who could scarcely be properly drilled before they returned to their homes. But the state of feeling was no longer what it had been. It was no longer a question of pardon or redress. The more earnest and violent men had, as is usual in civil commotions, been coming more and more to the front. The idea of a total separation from England had been rapidly gaining ground; republican and democratic principles had made their appearance; the writings of Thomas Paine had been published, and so largely were his views received, that a declaration, issued by the aristocratic State of Virginia, served afterwards as the model for the Declaration of the Rights of Man issued by the revolutionists of France; and already, before the arrival of Howe with his offer of pardon, the extreme party had determined to check all lukewarmness and put an end to all chance of reconciliation by taking an irretrievable step. In June, Lee of Virginia proposed in Congress that the colonies should declare Declaration of Independence. July 4, 1776. themselves independent. The numbers on division proved to be exactly equal, but Dickinson, the writer of the "Pennsylvanian Farmer's Letters," and the leader of the moderate party, consented to withdraw, and the motion for independence was thus carried by a majority of one. The document itself is not a very powerful one, but shows how abstract political views had become mingled with the original questions in dispute. It is based on the Declaration of Virginia, recapitulates all the real or fancied grievances of the colonies, and, with curious political dishonesty, attributes them all to the personal tyranny of the King. The Declaration of Independence, issued on July 4th, reached Washington's army just before Lord Howe's arrival; it of course rendered his pacific mission fruitless. The colonies had assumed the position of an independent nation, and claimed to be treated with all the respect due to such a position. Howe's letters to Washington were even returned unopened, because they were not addressed to him by his full military style and title.

[1078]

Neighbourhood of NEW YORK October 1776.

To the English nothing now remained but to take advantage of the superiority of their troops. An attack upon the lines of Brooklyn, at the end of Long Island, separated from New York only by a narrow channel, was ordered. The Americans, in about equal numbers, came out of their intrenchments, and for the first time during the war a battle was fought in the open[1079] field. The victory of the English troops was immediate and complete. It was due only to Howe's want of vigour in pressing his success that Washington was able to withdraw his army to New York, whence, finding it impossible to hold his ground, he retired ultimately to the mainland, taking up a position at Kingsbridge, and leaving the city in the hands of the English. It was plain that the temporary militia of the colonists was useless against regular troops, and in spite of its republican dread of a standing army, the Congress at length listened to Washington's repeated representations, and authorized the enrolment of some regular troops. But for more than a year he was compelled to do his best with his old militia, and nothing but the continued and incomprehensible slowness of the English generals saved him from disaster. Step by step he was driven backwards, till he was compelled to cross the Delaware and leave the whole of the Jerseys in the hands of the English. The road to Philadelphia seemed open, and the Congress, in fear, withdrew to Baltimore. But the English, when they found that all the boats on the Delaware had been removed, quietly withdrew into winter quarters upon a very extended line, and waited in hopes of being able to cross the river on the ice. The time thus wasted lost them all the advantages they had won, and gave Washington an opportunity to recover. Eager to strike some blow which should raise the spirits of the colonists and enable him to fill the ranks of the army, he determined to take advantage of the weak and extended line of the English. On Christmas evening, trusting to the effects of the day's debauch, he crossed the river, and surprised and captured the garrison of Trenton. Cornwallis, who had the command of the advanced troops of the English, came to the rescue, but Washington Washington recovers New Jersey. Jan. 3, 1777. by another night march swept round the English army, and captured or destroyed two regiments at Princeton. He was unable to secure, as he had intended, the supplies at Gloucester, but before long he succeeded in clearing New Jersey of the English, and confining them, as before, to New York and Rhode Island.

Howe remained idle till June, thus allowing much time to the Americans, to whom time was everything. But in June preparations Threefold plan of the English. for a great joint movement were matured. Not only was the main army in New York again to resume the offensive, but advantage was to be taken of the possession of Canada, and an attack organized from that country. This branch of the combined movement was placed under the command of General[1080] Burgoyne. The cleft made by the valley of the Hudson is continued northward by the Lakes George and Champlain, and a natural road thus formed from Canada to New York. Down this the Canadian army was to march, assisted by the co-operation of Clinton, who was to lead troops from New York to meet it. Thus the disaffected provinces of New England would be severed from the rest of America.

Howe's army, which was now comparatively powerful, was expected to make its way through the Jerseys, and to complete the project of last autumn by capturing Philadelphia; but, finding Washington ready to oppose his advance, he suddenly withdrew his troops and embarked them in the fleet. He appeared for a moment off the mouth of the Delaware, but again, finding more obstacles than he had expected, took to the sea, and sailing all round the promontory between the Delaware and the Bay of Chesapeake, ultimately arrived at the top of that piece of water at the Head of Elk, nearly as far from Philadelphia as when he started. The time spent in making this long circuit enabled Washington to be fully prepared to cover Philadelphia. He took up his position in Brandywine Creek. He was there quite outmanœuvred. While one division of the English held the ground in front, another marched round and fell upon the rear and left flank, and completely routed his army. He still tried to hold the line of the Schuylkill, but it was passed by the English with little difficulty, and Philadelphia occupied. The capital was thus in the hands of the English, but the expeditionary character of the attack prevented it from being so effectual as a steady advance would have been, while it rendered the conquest nugatory by separating it entirely from New York, the real basis of operations. In some degree to correct this error, it became necessary to secure direct access by sea by the capture of the forts which held the mouth of the Delaware. For this purpose the English army was divided, one portion remained at Germanstown Battle of Germanstown. Oct. 4. to hold Philadelphia, and the rest were moved to the siege of the forts. Washington took advantage of the weakness of his immediate opponents and attacked the troops at Germanstown. At first he was successful, but a panic, such as not unfrequently seizes young and half-disciplined troops, changed his half-won victory to defeat. The forts of the Delaware were at length captured, and the operations of the English seemed to have been thoroughly successful.

It was indeed a moment of intense depression in the American[1081] army; nothing but the extraordinary patience and steadfastness Washington reorganizes the army. of Washington could have saved it. Half-disciplined troops, many of them inclined to desert, or to leave their standards as soon as their short time of enlistment was over, thousands without shoes, a commissariat ridiculously incompetent and notoriously fraudulent, a civil power inclined to meddle and complain of the military arrangements, such were some of the difficulties with which he had to contend. He managed in spite of all to keep his army together, and to induce his troops to go into winter quarters at Valley Forge, a wild but strong position among the hills on the Schuylkill river a little above Philadelphia. News from the North came to cheer him in his distressed condition.

Though successful in itself, the real object of Howe's expedition had not been obtained, it had not enabled the army of New York to go to the assistance of Burgoyne, and that general had been compelled to surrender with all his army on the 17th of October. In June he had advanced along the west side of Lake Champlain, and had taken the fortress of Ticonderoga, Fort Anne, and Fort Edward on the Hudson. Hearing that the Americans had supplies but slightly guarded at Bennington, on the road to the Connecticut river, he sent a small detachment to secure them. This was the beginning of his misfortunes; the difficulties proved greater than was expected, the expedition failed and had to retire in haste, with the loss of all its artillery. However, trusting to the co-operation of the army from New York, and of a force which was to make its way from the great lakes by Fort Stanwix down the upper Hudson and join him before Albany, Burgoyne continued to advance. He collected thirty days' supplies and crossed the Hudson, thus cutting himself off from Canada, and relying for safety upon his power of opening communication with New York. The militia of the neighbouring district at once rose behind him, thus completely severing his communications. His Indian auxiliaries had left him; he could not rely much on his Canadian troops, and now found himself in face of General Schuyler with 16,000 men. The help on which he had calculated did not come, Lieutenant Colonel St. Leger failed before Fort Stanwix, and Clinton was unable to leave New York. Burgoyne attempted an assault on the American position before Behmus's Heights, north of Stillwater, but failed. To advance seemed impossible, he therefore ordered a retreat, though this was scarcely less difficult. He had told Clinton that he could hold out till the 12th of October, and when that day came he was still close to[1082] Saratoga, and now neither retreat nor advance was possible. His boats upon the lake, which afforded him his sole means of procuring supplies or of transport, had been destroyed; he had no choice but to make some sort of surrender. On the 17th of October a convention was signed by which he surrendered his whole force to General Gates, who had assumed the chief command of the American troops. His army was allowed to march out of camp with the honours of war to the bank of the river, there to lay down their arms, and to be forwarded to England, under promise not to serve again during the war. Though the reception of the prisoners by both generals and men was most generous, and though Burgoyne lived as a guest in General Schuyler's house, the terms of the convention were not honestly fulfilled; Burgoyne, indeed, was allowed to return to England, but the main part of the army was detained in America for several years. The blame of this breach of treaty is held to attach to Congress only, and not to Washington.

The autumn session of 1776 had been opened with a speech full of the successes of the English arms. The battle of Brooklyn, the fall of New York, the expulsion of the invaders from Canada, were all topics of congratulation. The feeling of the nation went with the Government, and the opposition in Parliament dwindled to a very small minority; but in spite of their weakness they continued to urge conciliatory measures, and at the beginning of the session, both in the Upper and Lower House, amendments in that sense were moved to the address. So plain was it, however, that such efforts were wholly useless, that Lord Rockingham's party ostentatiously retired from all public questions, attending the House only during private business. Fox indeed, who had left the ministry in 1773, and had become the foremost champion of the American cause, remained in his place, but the rest of the party did not reappear, till, finding their step worse than useless, they took the opportunity of a debate upon the Civil List to return to public life.

This debate arose on a demand for an increase to the Civil List of £100,000 a year, and £600,000 to pay off the debts already owing. Under the existing circumstances the necessity for the measure was obvious, for the King's ordinary tradesmen were unpaid, and his servants' wages in arrears. The Civil List already amounted to £800,000 a year, and the known personal frugality of the King and Queen rendered the disappearance of so large a sum the more scandalous. In fact, nearly £600,000 had been spent[1083] since 1769 in secret service. It was easy to explain the insufficiency of the Civil List and the permanence of the ministerial majority in Parliament; not only had the Pension List been largely increased, but there were a swarm of sinecure officers about the Court, from grand falconers in the House of Peers to turnspits of the kitchen who sat in the House of Commons. The Civil List was increased, but the grant was accompanied by a strong expression, on the part of Sir Norton Fletcher, of the feeling of the House, that under the existing pressure of taxation such extravagant use of public money was much to be blamed,—words which were subsequently formally accepted by the House as their own.

The session closed with another effort on the part of the Opposition. On this occasion it was Lord Chatham who led the attack. He returned, after two years of illness, and still swathed in flannel, to move an address, urging the King to arrest the misfortunes in America. The measures he advised were unconditional redress of grievances, and repeal of all penal statutes; in other words, he would have granted all the demands of the Americans with the exception of their independence. But, while urging moderate counsels with regard to America, he blazed out at the idea of an alliance of the colonists with the French, and demanded instant war. American intrigues with France. His motion was of course lost. His fears of an alliance with France were not however unfounded; already, before the Declaration of Independence, Silas Deane had been sent over to Europe to try and make some arrangement. If the confession of the culprit is to be believed, Deane's handiwork was to be seen in the nefarious plans of a man called John the Painter, who in the December of the preceding year (1776) had attempted to fire the dockyards of Portsmouth. Again, immediately after the Declaration of Independence, Adams and Franklin had been sent over as accredited agents to make a commercial and defensive alliance with France. But though they had been well received both by the ministry and by the salons of Paris, where for the time Franklin was the fashion, their representations were mistrusted, and no real help was given. The French had no wish to engage in a failing cause, and continued to keep up an appearance of friendship with England, even, at the instigation of our ambassador, issuing, though probably intentionally too late, a lettre de cachet to stop the Marquis of Lafayette from sailing to join the colonists. He had no difficulty in avoiding it, and was present with Washington during the Philadelphian campaign. But the Court of France was in fact only watching[1084] the turn of events. The news of the defeat of Burgoyne had scarcely France acknowledges the independence of America. Dec. 1777. reached Europe before the independence of America was acknowledged and a commercial treaty made. In case of France becoming involved in the war with England, this treaty was to be extended into one by which France engaged to supply military assistance on the sole condition that America should never acknowledge the supremacy of Great Britain.

Already, by the time of the meeting of Parliament for the autumn session, rumours of Burgoyne's difficulties had reached England, though no news of his final disaster had arrived. The danger of war with France, to which Chatham had alluded in the spring, seemed to increase, and men's thoughts began to turn towards the great statesman who had before saved England in similar difficulties. Nor did Chatham refuse to respond to the general expectation; not for many years had he shown such activity as in this session. In moving an amendment on the address, he demanded the withdrawal of all troops from America, stigmatized with due severity the employment of savage Indians in the war, and strove to rouse the national spirit against France. But the energy and eloquence he exhibited throughout the session were unavailing. He consistently upheld the view that conquest of America was quite impossible, that it was worse than useless to carry on the war, and that all the demands of the colonists should be granted with the exception of independence. This, he said in the strongest words, it was impossible for England to grant. He relied, no doubt, on the natural hostility between the colonists and France, and it is possible that, had he been placed in office, his policy might have been successful. He was loved and trusted by the Americans; concessions from his hands might have been received. He was feared by France; his plan of removing the troops from America would have left the resources of England free for a foreign war; his threats and his name might have deterred the French from war. But certainly no other man could carry out such a policy, and so it was generally felt; North himself acknowledged the impossibility, and was most desirous of resigning; Lord George Germaine, who, disgraced at Minden as a military man, had become as member of the Government the chief supporter of repressive measures in America, was also preparing to give up his post. The ministry seemed on the point of giving way, and indeed the necessity for such a step was increasing rapidly. Early in December came the terrible news of Saratoga,[1085] and three weeks later the preliminaries of the treaty between France and the colonies were agreed upon, though the French ministry had not scrupled to cover their intentions by false statements on the matter.

The Opposition began to feel triumphant. Though still quite outvoted in the House, they knew that the majority turned with the ministry, whatever it might be; but they did not sufficiently reckon on the King's obstinacy. He had been right in his boast at the beginning of his reign; he was thoroughly English; he reflected and sympathized with the most vulgar feelings and prejudices of the people. The disasters in America had called out considerable enthusiasm in England; money had been largely subscribed for keeping up more troops, and the temper of the nation was evidently The King insists on Lord North retaining office. for pressing the war with energy, regardless of consequences. In vain did Lord North express his desire to resign, and declare the necessity of conciliatory measures. The King, strong in the popular feeling, reproached him for intending to desert him, as he called it. On further pressure he gave him leave to apply to Chatham and the Whigs, but only on the absurd condition, that they should join the present ministry, serve under Lord North, and carry out the same policy as the existing Government. He would not hear of the ministry being put frankly into Chatham's hands. As usual, Lord North yielded, and consented to stay in office. He even consented to bring in bills absolutely reversing all his own policy, and which could have come with good grace only from the Opposition. His Conciliation Bill, now in the hands of the ministry, was carried without difficulty, and all Lord North's Conciliation Bill. American demands, short of independence, were granted; all officers appointed by Congress acknowledged, and commissioners, with the most ample powers to discuss and arrange all points of quarrel, appointed. North still wished that, as this was in fact the Opposition policy, the Opposition should have the duty of putting it into effect; but the King and the course of events were too strong for him. The Conciliation Bill had hardly Rupture with France. passed when an open rupture with France took place. The treaty concluded on the 6th of February was notified in insulting terms to the English Court. Such a treaty was followed by the inevitable withdrawal of ambassadors, and war with France was in fact upon us.

To the Opposition it seemed as if the play had been played out. They were inclined for immediate submission. If England could not[1086] conquer America alone, what hope was there of conquering America joined with France with the whole house of Bourbon in its wake? They urged the immediate recognition of the independence of the colonies. Such, as has been before explained, were not the views of Chatham; his spirit rose with the idea of war with his old enemy, and he relied on his own ability, not indeed to conquer, but to conciliate America while he crushed France. His plan was never put to the test. On the 7th of April the Duke of Richmond moved in the House of Lords that all troops should at once be withdrawn from America, and a peace concluded, which of course implied the independence of the contracting parties. Chatham, very weak and ill, and against the advice of his friends, went down on purpose to oppose the motion. Scarcely able to walk, his feeble steps were supported by his son William and his son-in-law Lord Mahon. After hearing the Duke of Richmond's motion, he rose with difficulty, and resting on his crutch, and with his eyes looking unnaturally vivid in his shrunk face and under his great wig, he proceeded to make a vigorous reply. His voice was very low, and at times his memory failed, but here and there his eloquence rose to its old pitch, and he again thrilled his hearers as he recounted the dangers which England had outlived, and demanded whether the country which but seventeen years ago was the terror of the world "was to stoop so low as to tell its ancient inveterate enemy, Take all we have, only give us peace." The Duke replied in a weak speech; and Chatham rose again, eager to answer him, but before he could speak he was seen to gasp, to lay his hand Death of Lord Chatham. May 11, 1778. upon his heart, and to sink back, apparently dying. The death of this greatest of English statesmen put an end to all hope of a new policy. Unless the Americans received the conciliatory measures of Lord North well—which was most unlikely—the war must be fought out. Every honour was paid to the memory of Chatham. He was voted a public funeral in Westminster Abbey, and a monument, which is placed over the door at the west end of the Abbey, and represents him with his arm raised in the act of speaking. His debts were paid and a large pension settled on his family. Four Lords protested against these honours and the ministerial people kept chiefly aloof from his funeral. But the feeling of regret and admiration was universal. The Duke of Richmond's motion was of course negatived, and it remained to be seen what the Commissioners could do.

Before that question could be answered a subject was brought before the notice of Parliament and nation which was destined to[1087] play an important part and to take the place of the American contest as a party test. This was the question of Catholic relief. The laws still existing against the members of the Roman Catholic religion Laws against Roman Catholics repealed. were most severe in character. They had been enacted chiefly in the reign of William III., when England was still in mortal terror of the restoration of the malign influence of the Stuarts and their religion, and they bore the marks of their origin; many of them were indeed, as Dunning said in seconding the motion for their repeal, a disgrace to humanity. Sir George Savile, member for Yorkshire and a great Whig leader, moved the repeal of some of them; he had no intention, he said, of touching the whole penal code against Catholics, and was willing to substitute a test; but he moved the repeal of some of the most obnoxious laws. These were the law which punished the celebration of Catholic worship as felony in a foreigner, as high treason in a native, and the laws by which the estates of Popish heirs educated abroad passed to the next Protestant heir, by which a Protestant heir could take possession of his father's or other relative's estate during the lifetime of the real proprietor, and by which Papists could acquire property only by descent. The first law was so monstrous, and the others so evidently tended to foster the worst forms of family division and public informing, that their repeal met with little opposition. Dundas, Lord Advocate, promised a similar Bill for Scotland. This was the beginning of opposition. The Scotch were indignant at any sign of toleration, and organized a resistance which speedily spread into England. The Protestants found a mouthpiece in Lord George Gordon, a young man of slender intellect, and nearly mad on religious topics; although his principles were so unsettled that he died a Jew, he now threw himself with frenzied vehemence into the Protestant movement. The King, with his usual power of sympathizing with the narrower views of his people, took up the same side, and during the remainder of the reign Catholic emancipation served as a test by which to try whether his ministers would be subservient or not.

Meanwhile the Commissioners under the Conciliatory Bills had reached America (May 1778). It was at once plain that they were too late. The French alliance had been made known, and the Americans were as yet full of enthusiasm for their allies. For a time the influence of Washington had been shaken. His toilsome but inglorious work of reconstituting the army of Valley Forge had been unfavourably contrasted with the brilliant success of Saratoga; Gates, a man in every way his inferior,[1088] had been set up as his rival, and placed at the head of a war committee, which overruled Washington's advice and wishes. But the ridiculous failure of a plan which, in the interests of the French, the committee had suggested for attacking Canada had brought the Congress to reason, and their trust in Washington had been restored. The division of interests which had threatened the rising republic was thus healed, and the Commissioners found a unanimous feeling against entertaining their suggestions. Nor had the success of the English been such as to assist their views. After a winter idly spent in Philadelphia, Sir William Howe had been succeeded by Clinton, who had found it necessary to withdraw his army to New York, which with Rhode Island were the sole possessions left to England. The answer which the Commissioners received was therefore very decided. No such questions as were raised could be considered till the fleets and armies of England were withdrawn or the independence of the colonies acknowledged. The Commissioners could only retire, leaving behind them a manifesto threatening the utmost severities of war.

But, in spite of the confidence which the French alliance aroused in the minds of the Americans, the immediate effect of the treaty was not advantageous to them. A joint attack upon Rhode Island brought to light the dislike and jealousy between the new allies which Chatham had foreseen. The timely arrival of the English fleet compelled the French admiral, d'Estaing, to leave the coast. The Americans thought themselves deserted and gave up the siege. Their general, Sullivan, published an indignant general order, and addressed to Effect of the alliance between America and France. d'Estaing a sharp remonstrance. In deep dudgeon, he ceased for the rest of the year to assist the Americans, and acted wholly for French interests, trying to excite a national sympathy in Canada, and finally sailing away to the West Indies. For the time the French were almost as unpopular with the colonists as the English. In other respects the year's campaign was rather in favour of England. Georgia was occupied by an expedition sent from New York, and the Island of St. Lucia was captured from the French. But the object of the alliance was really obtained, for the war was no longer confined to America.

Resting on the support of the King, and backed in its American policy by the general feeling of the nation, North's ministry, in spite of the poor success which had attended our arms in America, had hitherto had an appearance of strength. It was now, after a struggle of a few years, to succumb to a succession of difficulties which brought to light its inherent inefficiency.[1089] The extension of the sphere of the war brought the first danger. A powerful fleet had been sent into the Channel under Keppel, which at the mere rumour of the approach of a superior fleet of the French retired. When strongly reinforced, it brought the enemy to action off Ushant, but after some hours' fighting the two fleets withdrew, without the slightest advantage on either side; not one ship of either nation had struck. To shield himself from the natural indignation felt at so ridiculous a result, Keppel tried to throw the blame on Pallisser, his second in command. As Keppel was in opposition, and Pallisser a Lord of the Admiralty, the recriminations of the admirals were taken up by their respective parties, and a vehement parliamentary war arose. At length Keppel succeeded in obtaining a court martial, but the people as well as the Parliament had joined in the quarrel; there were violent demonstrations in his favour, and the case being in fact prejudged, the trial ended in his triumphant acquittal. A far less complete and unqualified sentence of approval awaited Pallisser when he in turn was tried. Already it was evident that the hold of North's ministry was shaken; it had now to face a direct attack in Parliament. Burgoyne and Howe, both members of the House of Commons, were eager to throw all the blame of the recent miscarriages upon the shoulders of the Government; and an attack on the Admiralty was so successful, that Lord Sandwich was only rescued by a narrow majority from censure by the declaration of Lord North that he would resign were the censure carried. In his difficulties Lord North made some overtures to the Whigs, but all negotiations were rendered abortive by the restrictions placed on them by the King, who would indeed allow new ministers to be introduced, but would hear of no new measures. With the fatal facility which marred his character, North yielded to the King's stronger will, and remained in office against his own convictions, a mere official to carry out the policy of his master. His difficulties were further increased when Spain followed in the wake of France and also declared war; and the united fleets of the two countries assembled, apparently with the intention of invading England. In spite of a considerable exhibition of national spirit, it was all Sir Charles Hardy, who had command of the Channel fleet, could do to cover the coast of England and postpone a general engagement. Fortunately, though the allies were vastly superior in numbers, their ships were ill supplied and scarcely seaworthy, and they found it necessary to withdraw to their respective countries, leaving the Channel free.

[1090]

But it was not only from abroad that dangers were gathering round England. The Irish, whom the people and Government of England have always regarded as a colony, and treated in the same Difficulties in Ireland. spirit of jealous selfishness that had alienated the Americans, began to think of following the example of these colonists. Their trade had always been avowedly governed and confined to suit, not Irish, but English interests. In addition to the usual restrictions, they had been suffering from an embargo on their provision trade with America, and their other industries were sinking in the general depression. When they saw Lord North proposing conciliatory measures, and promising relaxation of trade restrictions to America, they not unnaturally began to raise their claims to similar indulgences. Their requests were so reasonable that some small relief was given, but Lord North was afraid to carry out to the full a policy of free trade in face of the vigorous opposition of the great trading cities of England, where, with true commercial selfishness, any chance of a new competitor was regarded with vehement dislike. Burke was brave enough to speak heartily in favour of the Irish, in spite of instructions from his Bristol constituents; his bravery cost him his seat at the next election. With their fair claims thus trifled with, the Irish again learnt a lesson from America. What could not be got by asking might be yielded to an armed nation. On the pretext of an intended attack by the French on Belfast, soldiers were demanded. But Ireland had been denuded of troops for the American war; no troops could be sent. The inhabitants had now their excuse for arming themselves. Quite without disturbance, and with loyal protestations, volunteer corps sprang up all over the country; by the end of the year, in spite of the influence of Government, they numbered 50,000 men. In the presence of this army, with the Dublin companies in arms before the doors, the Irish Parliament of 1779 met. The national cause had found an energetic and eloquent leader in Henry Grattan. He moved an amendment to the address, demanding free trade as the national right of Ireland. The amendment passed unopposed, and was carried by the volunteers in triumph to the castle. Encouraged by this success, backed by the armed force around them, and by the populace of the city, the Parliament proceeded to the strong measure of granting supplies for six months only. Such events at once attracted attention in England, and votes of censure were moved by the Opposition on the Irish policy of the Government. But Lord North had also learnt wisdom from American affairs, and early[1091] in 1780 he passed Bills acknowledging the commercial equality of Ireland and a free export of their chief commodities.

But even Ireland was by no means the last of Lord North's troubles. The feeling against government by influence had been steadily on the increase. With characteristic selfishness, the mass of the people had sympathized with the war, which seemed to some rebellion against the natural supremacy of Englishmen, and which others saw clearly was a revolt against that commercial system which they regarded as the chief safeguard of their own interests. But want of success, increased taxation, and a diminution of trade, began to change the current of opinion, and men observed with jealousy the impossibility of carrying any measure against the influence of the Court. The King had completely triumphed, and by means of his friends, his pensioners, contractors, and sinecurists, could at all times command a large majority in Parliament. The Whigs, finding that influence which they had so long wielded thus transferred to other hands, began to see the enormity of such a system, and the great leaders of the party, whose territorial power was very great, put themselves at the head of a reform movement which soon became important. In the autumn of 1779 motions for economical reform were brought into the House of Lords. They were rejected; but in December the general feeling, and the determination of the Whigs to create an organization outside the House, were shown by a great meeting in York, attended by a large majority of the freeholders of the county. This influential meeting was followed by others of the same sort in many counties, and the organizers of the party went so far as to establish committees of correspondence on the model of the committees in America. Twenty-three counties and many large towns, in spite of the constant opposition of the Government, sent up petitions like the one agreed to in Yorkshire, demanding a reduction in exorbitant emoluments and the abolition of sinecures. Sir George Savile presented the Yorkshire petition on the 8th of February, and three days afterwards Burke introduced a great measure for economical reform of which he had already given notice. Lord North found it so impossible to oppose him, that the Bill passed almost unanimously into Committee. It there, however, encountered a most vigorous resistance, and was finally destroyed piecemeal. But the movement, once started, continued its course. Mr. Crewe introduced a Bill to deprive revenue officers of their votes, and Sir Philip Clerke another for the exclusion of contractors from the[1092] House. Outside the House the pressure became heavier and heavier, till at length, on the 6th of April, after a great meeting of the people of Westminster, where Fox had harangued, and which was thought sufficiently dangerous to demand the presence of troops, Dunning rose in the House, and after blaming the ministry for their underhand obstruction to Burke's Bill, produced the startling resolution, that "it is the opinion of this Committee that the influence of the Crown has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished." This resolution, with a very slight alteration, he was enabled to carry against Government by a majority of eighteen. It was followed by two other resolutions in the same direction, one declaring the right of the House to reform the Civil List, the other that the abuses complained of should be immediately redressed. Both were carried. But when the House again met, and he proceeded to more detailed motions, Dunning found that the corrupt body he addressed, though willing enough to affirm abstract resolutions, had no real liking for reform. His majorities rapidly diminished, and finally no action was taken upon the resolutions which he had carried.

Scarcely had the ministry managed to escape from Dunning's resolutions when a new danger came upon them. This time they did not stand alone. All parties in the House had to join to repel a common enemy. It has been mentioned that a measure of Sir George Savile's for the alleviation of the penal laws against Roman Catholics had been carried, and that the motion of introducing a similar measure for Scotland had caused much displeasure in that country. The feeling spread, and Protestant associations formed themselves throughout England, and fixed upon the crackbrained Lord George Gordon for their chief and representative. The agitation had been kept up during the last year, and now Lord George wanted a great demonstration and petition to be got up. He declined to present the petition unless accompanied by 20,000 followers, who were to meet in St. George's Fields, adorned with blue cockades. Instead of 20,000, some 60,000 men were present, and proceeded to march across London Bridge to the Parliament House. There, in Palace Yard, they held their position unmolested, while they attacked and ill used any obnoxious Peers, or broke into the lobby of the Lower House, and, with their excitement kept alive by addresses which Lord George delivered from the staircase above, demanded that their petition should be at once attended to. Lord George was brought to some reason by a threat of personal violence if he continued his foolish behaviour, and the military at[1093] length arriving, the immediate precincts of the Parliament House were cleared. But though foiled in their wish to intimidate the House, the mob were by no means satisfied, and the unaccountable and timorous delay on the part of the executive, whether ministry or magistrates, allowed the riot to reach such a height that it could be with difficulty controlled. That night the chapels of the Sardinian and Bavarian embassies were burnt, and after a day of comparative quiet, the mob, finding itself unopposed, proceeded to renewed acts of violence. For four days London was in its hands. The prisons were broken open, Catholic chapels burnt and sacked, the shops of Catholic tradesmen pillaged, and the houses of those who were known to be favourable to the Catholic claims either destroyed, as those of Lord Mansfield and Sir George Savile, or kept in a state of siege. Johnson tells us how he saw the mob, quietly and undisturbed, destroying the sessions house in the Old Bailey. Horace Walpole found Lord Hertford's house barricaded and the lord himself and his sons loading their muskets in expectation of an assault. On the 7th the tumult rose to its height. This was the fifth day of the riots. The town was so intimidated that blue flags and strips of blue were shown on most houses, and few came out without the blue cockade. The rioters had long since passed from under the control of their religious leaders, and were guided by leaders of their own. On this day more than one attack was made on the Bank, headed by a fellow mounted on a brewer's horse, with a harness of the chains of Newgate jingling about him. More chapels were sacked, more prisons opened. No less than thirty-six fires were blazing at once. The most fearful scene was in Holborn, where Mr. Langdale's distillery was broken open and set on fire. There, amid the flames fed by constant supplies of spirit, the wretched rioters flew upon the liquor, drinking the gin from pails, or lying grovelling and lapping it from the kennel; many died of actual drunkenness, many more perished helplessly in the flames. It was time that something should be done, yet the ministry and magistrates alike shrank from doing anything. There was a notion abroad that the military might not act till an hour after the Riot Act had been read by a magistrate, and courageous magistrates could not be found; nor was it forgotten that on previous occasions soldiers had been harshly treated by juries for over zeal. The emergency was one which well suited the dogged and courageous character of the King. On the 7th he summoned a Privy Council, and put to it the question whether the soldiers might be employed without the machinery of the Riot Act. None[1094] of the members of the Council would take the responsibility of recommending such a course, and the Council had almost separated without doing anything, when George called upon Wedderburn, who was present as legal assessor, to state the view of the common law. He unhesitatingly said that a soldier did not cease to be a citizen, and might, and should, interfere to prevent acts of felony. This was all the King required. There were 10,000 troops in London, and he now felt he might act energetically. Orders were sent to Lord Amherst, the commander-in-chief, to that effect, and that evening and during the night such vigorous measures were taken that the mob was at once crushed and the crisis over. The numbers killed and wounded by the military were not less than 500, and probably very many more, as many were carried off privately. Undoubtedly the King's decision on this occasion saved London. Of the prisoners some twenty-nine were executed. The Lord Mayor was tried and Trial of Lord George Gordon. convicted of criminal negligence. Lord George Gordon was arrested and foolishly tried for high treason. Wedderburn had meanwhile become Lord Chief Justice, and before him he was tried. The Judge's address was more like the pleading of an advocate than the charge of a judge, and people felt it so; the turn of feeling also had a little changed, and Lord George was acquitted. He died, a Jew, in 1793 of gaol distemper caught in Newgate, where he had been confined for libelling the Queen of France. When the House of Commons again assembled the gigantic Protestant petition was considered. It was met by five resolutions, the joint work of the political enemies Burke and North, which declared the continual approval of the Commons of the late Act of Toleration.

In the midst of these difficulties at home there had been some rays of comfort from the success of both fleet and army abroad. Early in the year Rodney had been placed in command of a fleet which was to act in the West Indies. On his way out he had Rodney's victory. instructions to relieve Gibraltar, which had been closely invested since the beginning of the war with Spain. While carrying out these orders he met the Spanish fleet off Cape St. Vincent and gained over it a complete victory. Four line of battle-ships were taken, four destroyed, only four made their escape. Gibraltar was then relieved, and Minorca also, so that Rodney could write home that the English were masters of the Mediterranean. He thence proceeded on his way to the West Indies, where De Guichen, with the French and Spanish fleets, could not be brought to an engagement, and where for the time nothing was done. Though Rodney's successes and[1095] those of Admiral Digby in the Bay of Biscay were somewhat neutralized by the entire destruction of our West and East India fleets, ably planned and carried out by the Spaniards off the Azores, they raised the spirits of the Government, coupled as they were with cheering news from the army. Just as the Gordon riots were suppressed, information arrived that Charleston, the capital of South Carolina, had Capture of Charleston. fallen into our hands. On several occasions during the war the eyes of the commanders had been turned southward. The feeling of loyalty was less shaken there than in the more northern provinces, and it seemed desirable that the efforts of England should not be confined to one little spot along the whole of the enormous seaboard of America. Savannah in Georgia had already been taken, and in pursuance of a general plan for acting on a more extended basis, Clinton moved with the bulk of his army from New York and besieged Charleston. The siege was carried on with vigour and skill, and General Lincoln found himself obliged to surrender. Clinton set actively to work to reduce the Carolinas. Virginia, one of the centres of disaffection, would thus be between two fires, and something more tangible might be effected than had yet been The interest of the war passes to the South. done by the army at New York. In fact, the interest of the war was now transferred to the South, for though Washington and the main American army still lay about New York, its effect there was only to neutralize the English army opposed to it, while the active operations which led to the end of the war were carried on at Carolina and Virginia.

Before describing the final struggle, it will be well to see the difficulties under which the English laboured. The war had become a world-wide one. Not only had the two maritime powers France and Spain engaged in it, but it was plain that our old rivals the England alone against all Europe. Dutch were soon going to do so also. Before the end of the year an unusually strong instance of our determination to insist on the right of searching neutral ships, when a convoy was searched and captured under the guns of the convoying War with the Dutch. ships of war, had raised the anger of the Dutch to a high pitch. The capture of a vessel containing Mr. Laurens, late President of the American Congress, and proofs that he was engaged in making an alliance with the States of Holland, rendered it impossible to avoid a declaration of war, and Holland was added to our armed opponents. Nor was this all. The same odious rigour of search nearly brought all the nations of the North upon us. The Empress of Russia had suffered from it at the hands of the Spaniards. She[1096] therefore, acting probably at the instigation of the King of Prussia, Armed neutrality of the North. constituted herself the champion of neutral rights, and succeeded in uniting the nations of the North in an armed neutrality in support of the doctrine that neutral ships made neutral cargoes, and that nothing was contraband of war except what had been definitely made so by treaty. In other words, she claimed for neutrals the right of carrying the property of belligerents unmolested, a right which virtually told against the English only, whose main hope lay in keeping dominion of the sea and stopping the trade and supplies of its enemies. The Armed Neutrality also upheld the now generally received principle that a blockade to be respected must be efficient, that is, that there must be sufficient force before a blockaded port to prevent the entrance of trading vessels. The whole maritime power of Europe was thus arrayed against England, and yet it was only by keeping the upper hand at sea that she could hope to carry out successfully her attempts on land. It was impossible to pour large armies into America and to subdue a continent without some easily accessible base of operations. This base the sea afforded. It will be seen in the sequel that the loss of naval supremacy was the immediate cause of the disaster of Yorktown.

But as yet the arms of England continued to be successful. Clinton, leaving Cornwallis to command in the South, had hastened back from Carolina to New York, that he might be ready to oppose the French fleet, whose arrival had been threatened. In June the expected armament arrived, consisting of seven line of battle-ships and 6000 men under the Count de Rochambeau. The rapidity with which Rhode Island was at once occupied and placed in a state of defence thwarted the efforts of the English to regain it, but the British fleet was so much stronger than that of the enemy that a blockade was maintained around the seaboard of the province, which paralyzed all action on the part of the French for the rest of the year. This forced inactivity of Rochambeau gave rise to one of the best known episodes of the war. Washington left his headquarters to Arnold's treachery. meet the French general and concert measures for action if possible. His absence was used for the purpose of carrying out a piece of treachery which had long been hatching. General Arnold was in command at West Point on the Hudson, a position of great importance, as it prevented the occupation of the valley which affords direct communication between New York and Canada. Married to a royalist wife, with a feeling that his undoubted[1097] genius was not sufficiently valued, and smarting under a public reprimand for some dishonest practices into which he had been led by his poverty and love of ostentation, Arnold had for some time been in secret correspondence with Clinton, making arrangements for changing sides, and handing over to the English the important post of which he had charge. The correspondence had been carried on through Major André, a young and very promising officer, now Adjutant-General of Clinton's army. Washington's departure seemed to offer an opportunity for carrying out the plan. To complete the negotiation a personal interview was required, and Major André, with instructions from Clinton not to enter the lines of the enemy and to wear uniform, repaired to the neighbourhood of West Point. When day dawned the interview was not over, and André was induced to continue it in a house within the American lines. On leaving he was also imprudent enough to dress as a civilian. He had already passed the lines on his homeward journey, when he was accidentally met and stopped by some militiamen; he avowed himself an English officer, but presented a pass from Arnold; the pass was disregarded, he was searched, and papers found in his boot. Under these circumstances there were about him all the outward marks of a spy, and as such he was Trial and death of Major André. treated. Much to the anger of the English, Washington, refusing to hear any representations in his favour, brought him to trial before a court of American officers, by whom he was condemned. He even rejected the last prayer of the enthusiastic soldier, that he might be saved from a felon's death, and had him hanged, with all the usual attendant circumstances of disgrace—a piece of stern but perhaps necessary justice, and, in spite of the outcry raised at the time, apparently in strict accordance with the laws of war. Timely information of André's capture enabled Arnold to escape from his house, where Washington was momentarily expected, and to obtain shelter on board the English man-of-war which had conveyed André to the ill-fated meeting. Washington was surprised on reaching Arnold's house to find no host, but it was not till he had paid a visit to West Point, and found the commander absent there also, that he discovered the real state of the case.

While things were thus at a standstill round New York, the war had been actively prosecuted in Carolina. Alarmed by the fall of Charleston, the Americans had sent General Gates to take the command there; they regarded him as their ablest general, and he figured in some degree as a rival to Washington.[1098] He found the English in possession of a line of country extending from Pedee river to Fort 96. The main body of the English, under the command of Lord Rawdon, lay in the neighbourhood of Camden, towards the centre of this line. Against this position Gates advanced; his march was a very difficult one; he had to make his way through a rough uncultivated country, where provisions were not to be obtained; for several days his troops had to subsist on the peaches which are there almost indigenous. He was able, in spite of these difficulties, to bring into the field a force numerically double that of the English, who were no more than 2000 strong. His troops, however, were unable to withstand the attack of a well-disciplined force. On the left and centre they at once threw down their arms and took to flight. The troops from Maryland and Delaware upon the right showed, it is true, more firmness, but the victory of the English was complete, and Lord Cornwallis, who had hurried up to assume the command, improved it to the utmost. Colonel Tarleton, an officer of indefatigable energy, pushed rapidly forward, and succeeded in surprising Colonel Sumter, a partisan officer, on the Catawba, and the whole army moved steadily forward to Charlotte, with the intention of invading North Carolina. A slight check sustained by a body of loyal militia, however, alarmed Cornwallis, and, together with the smallness of the number of troops at his command, induced him to postpone his forward movement till the following year. In the interval he and Lord Rawdon, his second in command, were guilty of acts of most impolitic severity. Such prisoners as could be proved to be deserters from the royal army, or to have once accepted the royal Government and to have subsequently joined Gates, were hanged. Some of the disaffected residents of Charleston were deported to Saint Augustin, while the property of others was sequestrated. Rawdon in fact went even further, and ventured to set a price on the head of every rebel. Such acts went far to alienate the people, and by weakening the security of the communications increased the difficulties of the following year, and tended to neutralize the effects of a very promising campaign.

The same success which had attended the English arms in Carolina followed the efforts of the fleet in the early part of the next year; Rodney captured from the Dutch, who had joined the coalition St. Eustatia captured. 1781. against England, the enormously wealthy island of St. Eustatia. Much of the property collected there belonged however to English owners, and a vast clamour arose when the admiral declared it all prize of war. He asserted, and it[1099] subsequently became plain, that the island was used as an entrepôt for the collection of goods which were afterwards to be supplied to the enemy. Other charges brought against him, accusing him of hasty and over rigorous action, afterwards proved to be equally ill founded, for fortunately both military and naval commanders were members of Parliament, and had full opportunity of vindicating themselves before the House, and of stripping the charges against them of the exaggerations which surrounded them. Thus General Vaughan was charged with forcible removal of all Jews from the island, but was able to produce a written document from the Jews themselves thanking him for his considerate treatment of them.

These successes soon proved to be delusive. The coalition against England was becoming too powerful to be withstood. Already a great drawn battle with the Dutch had been fought off the Doggerbank, and Sir Hyde Parker had been compelled to withdraw his shattered fleet into English quarters; and it soon became evident that we had for the present lost our supremacy of the sea, or at least were unable to keep a commanding superiority in all parts of the world at once, for to such dimensions had the war grown. Thus the French made an attack upon Jersey, which was only saved, when it had already fallen into their hands, by the intrepidity of Major Pierson, a young soldier of twenty-five, who himself lost his life by almost the last shot fired; another and more successful expedition under the Duke of Crillon assaulted Minorca; while a great armament setting out from France parted midway across the Atlantic, thus becoming two fleets, one of which, under Bailli de Suffren, was able to give us full employment in the Indian waters, while the other, under De Grasse, raised the naval power in the West Indies above our own. Rodney found himself unable to save the Island of Tobago, and, broken by the climate, was compelled to return to England. Nor was his successor Sir Samuel Hood more fortunate; a detached squadron was found sufficient to counterbalance the English fleet in the West Indies, while De Grasse sailed with the bulk of his fleet to the American coast, where his arrival at once turned the balance against us, and deprived us of that command of the sea which was absolutely necessary for our success. The fatal effects of this loss were soon to be apparent.

The first warlike event of the year was an expedition under General Arnold (who had obtained a command from his new masters) directed against Virginia, in the hope that such a diversion[1100] might assist Cornwallis in what was intended to be the main effort of the year. It produced however no great effects beyond the destruction of a considerable amount of property, and when Cornwallis set himself in motion, he found himself faced by a more formidable opponent than General Gates. At the instigation of Washington, Nathaniel Greene, a self-made general, who had risen from a blacksmith's forge, had been given command in the South. He proved himself a man of great vigour and tenacity, and though invariably beaten when opposed to any large body of English troops, he contrived to recover so quickly, that the barren name of victory was usually all that was left to the English. The campaign opened by the defeat of Colonel Tarleton, who had rashly attacked the Americans under Morgan at Cow-pens; nor could Cornwallis succeed in getting between the victorious general and Greene's army; their united forces were compelled however to fall back before Cornwallis' advance till they had evacuated the whole of North Carolina. Political necessities checked the English advance, and Cornwallis attempted, without much success, to consolidate the royal influence in Battle of Guildford Courthouse. March 15. the province; but, by the middle of March, Greene found himself again in a position to re-enter Carolina and to give battle to Cornwallis in the neighbourhood of Guildford. He occupied a position at Guildford Courthouse; as usual the English were victorious, as usual they reaped nothing from their victory, for Cornwallis, finding his troops much diminished in numbers and not meeting with the assistance he expected from the inhabitants, was compelled to fall back upon Wilmington. Greene did not long pursue him, for by thus withdrawing to the coast he had laid open the road into South Carolina, where Rawdon had been left with a small detachment. Greene saw his opportunity, and pushing boldly southward, again approached the English post at Camden. Afraid to attack Rawdon without reinforcements, he occupied a strong position upon Hobkirk's Hill, about two miles from Camden. There Rawdon thought it prudent to attack him, and he was driven from his position. The ludicrous insufficiency of the Hobkirk's Hill. April 25, 1781. English troops (there were but 900 engaged in the battle) again prevented them from using their victory, and Greene was enabled, without risking another engagement, to compel Rawdon to withdraw his troops to the immediate defence of Charleston.

Meanwhile two courses had been open to Cornwallis at Wilmington; he might either hurry in pursuit of Greene and assist the[1101] hard pressed army of Rawdon, or push northward and effect a junction with the Virginian expedition, which has already been mentioned, under Arnold and Phillips. To pursue the first course was to give up all his previous successes, to relinquish all hope of striking a decisive blow; for independent action his own army, numbering only 1500, was too small: he decided therefore to march northward, and in May formed a junction with the expedition, by which the number of his troops was raised to 7000. He left Wilmington on the day on which the battle of Hobkirk's Hill was fought. Till the heat of summer compelled a cessation of active fighting, Cornwallis was always superior to his enemy; but as the autumn advanced, the Americans, who had been constantly reinforced, were again a match Position of the English armies. for him. The three English armies were then acting—the main body, 10,000 strong, under Clinton at New York—Cornwallis' army, about 7000 strong, on the coast of Virginia—Rawdon's handful of men, now under the command of Colonel Stewart, a little in advance of Charleston. Before the close of the year the whole of South Carolina and Georgia were lost, with the exception of Charleston and Savannah; for Greene, coming down from his summer position on Battle of Eutaw. Sept. 8. the Santee Hills, had succeeded, after a very severe struggle at the Eutaw Springs, in obliging Colonel Stewart to retire to Charleston Neck, leaving the whole open country to be overrun by the Americans.

The position of Cornwallis was also becoming critical. Cut off from support on the south, his only hope was to fight his way northwards to join Clinton, or to receive large reinforcements from this general by sea; but it was not likely that Washington would allow his army to be neutralized by the English troops in New York. It was almost certain that he would turn his attention southward, join General Cornwallis in Virginia. Wayne in Virginia, and render a northward movement of the English impossible. The only real hope was from the sea, but the sea was no longer a secure basis of operations. The English fleet, now under the command of Admiral Graves, who had succeeded Arbuthnot, tried its strength against De Grasse in September. The action was indecisive, but it became evident that, when all the fleets were joined, the French could muster thirty-six sail of the line in the Bay of Chesapeake, while the English force was no more than twenty-five. But as yet the English did not acknowledge the naval superiority of their enemies, and Cornwallis, acting as he believed, though apparently erroneously, on instructions from Clinton, took possession of Yorktown, a village on the high southern bank of York[1102] river, and there awaited assistance. The defensive position thus taken up by the English army and the want of energy shown is explained by the news which had reached Clinton, that the French were thinking of withdrawing if the war should last beyond the current year. He believed that, could he contrive to weather the difficulties which surrounded him, the opposition of the Americans, unable to stand alone, would on the loss of their allies disappear without further effort on his part. His hope was not unfounded; it was in truth a critical moment for the Americans. At a meeting between the American generals and De Grasse, the Admiral had declared that he had orders not to remain longer than November; the nation was on the verge of bankruptcy; the New England States, with the selfishness which had marked them throughout, were ready American armies close round Yorktown. to give in. It was thus absolutely necessary for Washington to act quickly and to win some striking success. What Clinton therefore ought to have foreseen happened; Washington turned his attention towards Virginia, and undeterred by an assault on the New England States which Clinton attempted as a diversion, the mass of the American army began steadily to gather round Cornwallis. The position which he occupied was not a happy one, it was in fact untenable without command of the sea, which, as has been mentioned, had already been lost. He occupied the southern bank of the York river, there about a mile wide, and on the northern side the little village of Gloucester. The fortifications were of no great value, and the advanced posts were at once withdrawn upon the receipt of a despatch from Clinton, stating that there was every hope that the fleet, with 5000 men, would attempt to relieve the army, and would leave New York for that purpose in about ten days' time. This was a fatal error, as it gave the enemy positions commanding the works. The besiegers numbered 18,000, their large and powerful artillery being in part supplied by the French ships. The first parallel was completed on the 9th of October; the fire from it was overwhelming: on the 11th the second parallel was opened, nor could the bravery of the besieged prevent the capture of two advanced redoubts on the 14th, which were at once included in it. It now became evident to the besieged that the expected reinforcements had failed them, and after a brilliant sally, during which many of the enemy's guns were spiked, Cornwallis, finding all his guns silenced and his ammunition drawing to a close, felt that he had to choose between surrender and an effort to withdraw his troops from their untenable position. He determined to attempt the latter plan; his[1103] scheme was a desperate one; his troops were to be transported in open boats to Gloucester, they were there to break through the enemy's lines, which were not strong in that direction, to seize the horses of the besiegers and of the neighbouring country people, and make their way to New York. The boats with their loads had already crossed once when a storm arose which rendered the further prosecution of the plan impossible, and when morning dawned Cornwallis had no alternative but to make terms. He agreed to surrender all his troops as prisoners of war, and on the 19th of October, 4000 British soldiers who remained fit for work marched out with the honours of war between the long lines of the French and American army and laid down their arms. It is worth mentioning, as a strange little piece of professional arrogance, Cornwallis compelled to surrender. Oct. 18, 1781. that when marching between the lines of French on the one side and Americans on the other, the English officers saluted punctiliously all the French officers as belonging to a regular army, but refused any acknowledgment to the Americans. This was virtually the close of the war. The infant Hercules had strangled its second serpent, as was afterwards portrayed on Franklin's medal.

The close of the war under such circumstances of failure could not but bring with it the fall of the ministry. The news arrived at a striking time, but two days before the opening of the session. With such a weapon in their hand, and with the stored-up rancour of ten years of opposition, the leaders of the Whigs pressed motion after motion against the Government. Tottering condition of the Government. Fox and Burke vied with each other in their bitter assaults, and the young Pitt, who had come into Parliament as member for Appleby, on the nomination of Sir James Lowther, rapidly assumed a high position on the same side. The Budget was in itself a proof that Lord North was yielding; the estimates were so small, that he had to explain that he intended to give up all notion of a war on a "continental plan by sending armies to march through the provinces from South to North;" he would henceforth content himself with holding some important harbours on the American coast. Outside Parliament, in the metropolitan counties, vigorous opposition meetings were held, and the public anger was raised to its climax by a succession of misfortunes which befell our arms. Admiral Kempenfeldt found himself completely outnumbered in the West Indies, and the whole of the Leeward Islands, except Barbadoes and Antigua, were lost. Minorca, which was regarded as of even more importance than Gibraltar,[1104] and the key to the Mediterranean, surrendered after a gallant defence. The Bailli de Suffren thwarted an expedition against the Cape of Good Hope, at the same time at home the Irish difficulties, which will be treated of more at length afterwards, were becoming most threatening. Under these circumstances, a motion by General Conway, that Defeat of the ministry on Conway's motion. the war on the continent of America should be discontinued was lost by one vote only, and a repetition of the same motion a week later was carried by a majority of 234 against 215. Lord George Germaine, who was pledged to the continuance of the war, withdrew from the Government, and finally a direct vote of no confidence on the 15th of March was only lost by a scanty majority of nine. North saw that further struggle was hopeless, and on the 20th compelled the King to allow him to declare the administration at an end. He went out of office with his usual tact and good humour. A great attack had been arranged for that evening, which was to be led by Lord Surrey; he and North rose at the same moment, and the cries from the rival parties could not be quelled till Fox rose and proposed a formal motion that Lord Lord North's resignation. Surrey be first heard. With admirable presence of mind, North rose and said that he would speak to that motion, and prove its inutility by declaring his government at an end. There is a well-known anecdote of his persistent good humour; expecting a long debate, the Opposition members had sent away their carriages, and as they stood awaiting them shivering in the drizzling rain, Lord North passed through them to get into his. "Gentlemen," he said, "you see the advantage of being in the secret," and drove off.

North's resignation was the complete defeat for the time of the King's plans; but George III. was a man of the most obstinate and determined character, and he by no means intended as yet to give up the fight. The Opposition which had formed the alliance to drive North from office consisted of two sections. First, the old or Revolution Whigs, as they liked to call themselves, who, true to their aristocratic principle, had chosen for their leader the wealthiest but by no means the ablest man among them, Lord Rockingham, an agriculturist, a sporting man, of respectable talents and much honesty, though without any of the gifts of oratory which are necessary for the management of a public body; and secondly, those Whigs who had owned the leadership of Chatham, and who now followed the Earl of Shelburne; a party less tied by aristocratic connections, and representing, as far as could then be represented, the real liberal interests of the country.[1105] To avoid the necessity of putting himself into the hands of his particular enemies, the Whig families, it was to this section that the King at once applied. But, as Chatham had always found, it was of itself far too weak a party in Parliament to form a satisfactory ministry. Moreover, the eagerness with which Burke and Dunning had of late years demanded financial reform, and the share they had taken in driving North from office, made it impossible for their claims to be ignored. Shelburne therefore refused the King's request. The King's discomfiture seemed quite complete when Rockingham New Whig Government. accepted office. The ministry consisted of equal numbers of the two sections of the Liberals. Rockingham, Keppel, Lord John Cavendish, the Duke of Richmond, and Mr. Fox, of the one party; Lord Shelburne, Camden, General Conway, Lord Ashburton (Dunning), and the Duke of Grafton of the other. Strangely enough, the balance between them was held by the Tory Lord Thurlow, the King's personal friend, who remained in the position of Lord Chancellor. Pitt haughtily refused to accept any subordinate office.

Three great questions at once presented themselves to the new administration,—to pacify the clamours of Ireland, to complete the economical reforms to which they were pledged, and by means of which they hoped to regain some of the power of which the successful policy of the King had robbed them, and to bring to conclusion as honourably as possible the American War.

In Ireland the agitation had been constantly on the increase since the conciliatory measures of Lord North in 1780. Free trade had been granted, but this step towards independence had opened the way to still further demands; if they had followed the Americans thus far, why not follow them a step further and demand legislative independence also? The legislative superiority of England rested mainly upon two Statutes, Poynings' Law, or the Statute of Drogheda of the reign of Henry VII., by which all Bills brought forward in the Irish Parliament, except such as regarded money, were subject to revision or suppression by the English Privy Council, and the Statute 6 George I., which asserted the right of the English Parliament to legislate for Ireland. No sooner had Grattan succeeded in his first agitation, than he proceeded, in spite even of the wishes of his friends Lord Charlemont and Burke, to set to work the same machinery for the purpose of obtaining the reversal of these statutes. As early as April 1780 he had[1106] produced, though unsuccessfully, a motion in the Irish Parliament declaratory of Irish independence. Since that time his position had become stronger, disputes in Parliament had excited the national feeling, the volunteers had completed their organization, and appointed Lord Charlemont their commander-in-chief. A great meeting of deputies from the volunteers had been held at Dungannon, which had accepted to the full Grattan's propositions. With this great armed power behind him, and reinforced by the influence of the Roman Catholics, whose interests he had lately espoused, Grattan was enabled on the 16th of April to bring forward a final and successful address declaring the perfect legislative independence of Ireland. It was carried unanimously through both Houses. In face of this pressure, though not blind to the almost inevitable evils of a dual Government, Fox and Shelburne yielded the point, and the Statute of George I. was repealed in express terms.

The ministry had entered upon office supported by a vast agitation throughout the country, by county meetings, societies and corresponding associations, and these allies outside the walls of Parliament were eager for very sweeping measures of reform in all directions, especially financial reform, limitation of the influence of the Crown, the purity of the House, and reform of the representation. All these measures had a political as well as an economical side. They all formed portions of the avowed politics of the Whigs for breaking the power of the Crown. Both revenue officers and contractors assisted to uphold Government influence; the votes of the revenue officers were said to command no less than seventy boroughs, and contracts, given not because advantageous to the public, but for political purposes, were but so many indirect bribes. But the voice of the statesman is apt to be singularly tempered by his accession to office, and the Government Bills which Burke introduced in June proved but a weak reflection of his former measure. Certain obvious abuses were removed, secret service money was diminished, and a smaller share of it allowed to the Treasury; the Pension List was cut down, and £300 fixed as the outside limit for a single pension; the whole Board of Trade, which had proved useless, was swept away; but the expenses of the Principality of Wales and the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall, together with many useless offices of the Household, and public offices, were untouched, and the whole saving effected was only about £72,000 a year. Burke in thus limiting his propositions was doubtless acting under pressure from his colleagues. His own sincerity was proved by the limitation[1107] which he set to the inordinate emolument which as Paymaster he derived from his own office. But the honesty of the ministry as a whole was somewhat compromised when they forestalled the action of their own Bill, and hurriedly granted large pensions, varying from £2600 to £3200, to Lord Grantham, to the Chancellor, and to Colonel Barré. Still further proof that a limitation of the royal power and not real reform was the object in view, was given by the reception accorded to a measure for parliamentary reform introduced by William Pitt. Chatham had always seen and asserted that some measure of parliamentary reform was necessary if influence was to give way to any true national representation. But though constantly inveighing against Government influence when in the hands of their opponents, the Whig oligarchs, to whom parliamentary influence was as necessary as it was to the King himself, had no idea of lessening their own power, and Pitt's measure for transferring it to the counties, at that time the chief homes of independence, though ably supported, was defeated by a majority of twenty, swelled by the open opposition of some of the ministry and the lukewarmness of others. Fox and the Duke of Richmond however supported him. Divisions in the Cabinet upon so important a question, scandals such as the Barré pension and the unsatisfactory carrying out of promises of economical reform, tended to lessen the popularity of the ministry. But it was the management of the great question of all, the completion, namely, of an honourable peace, which displayed chiefly the weakness of the administration.

As far as America itself was concerned the fall of Yorktown had virtually put an end to hostilities, and the declared policy of England Conclusion of the American War. reached no further than the retention of certain posts and harbours. It may be a question whether this was wise, for it is certain that the condition of the Americans was very deplorable. Bankrupt and impoverished, the Congress was in no condition to support the army in a state of efficiency, and from its factions and intrigues had so lost public confidence, that Washington was earnestly intreated to make himself dictator, and take the management of the country into his own hands. But it was impossible for the Whigs, after the language they had used in Parliament, where they had not scrupled to rejoice at American successes, and to speak of the American armies as our armies, to think of anything but peace at once and on any terms. But though the war with America thus died out, that with the allied powers of Europe was by no means ended. Spain and France had joined the Americans with the cry of[1108] independence, absurd enough from such monarchies, but with the real object of destroying the power of England, and reversing the humiliating terms forced upon them by the Treaty of 1763. The Dutch had joined the coalition for commercial objects of its own; they were desirous of destroying the English Navigation Act and of restoring the freedom of the sea. The moment seemed to have arrived when all these wishes could be gratified, and negotiations for a general peace were therefore of a twofold character and by no means easy to complete, as America was pledged not to conclude a treaty without her allies. A further complication arose from the peculiar arrangements of the English ministry, by which American affairs fell to the lot of Shelburne as Home Secretary, while Fox, his rival in the ministry, in his capacity of Foreign Minister had the duty of negotiating with the European powers. As Dr. Franklin, the most important American diplomatist, was at this time in Paris, that city became the centre of negotiations, and thither both ministers sent agents. Mr. Oswald, on the part of Lord Shelburne, began to open the business with Franklin, while Mr. Thomas Granville was accredited as plenipotentiary from Fox to arrange matters with M. Vergennes, the French minister. With singular ingratitude, the Americans, though bound not to conclude a treaty without their allies, thought it right to complete all the arrangements except the actual conclusion secretly and separately with the English, although they had not thought it beneath them to let their allies undertake all the more arduous parts of the war. Although there was some difference of opinion as to the exact manner of granting the independence of America, all parties in England were agreed that it should be granted, and as this was the sole point at issue between the countries, there was little to be done but the arrangement of boundaries and some minor details.

Very different was the case with the French; when the basis of the Treaty of 1763 was proposed it was absolutely refused. It was plainly asserted that the very object of the war had been to annihilate that treaty, and hints were thrown out that England would be expected to surrender even a large part of her East Indian dominions. "Your arms are too long," said M. de Vergennes, "why not be satisfied with Bengal?" Before the year was over events happened which caused the French to lower their tone. The fall of Yorktown and the subsequent failure of the arms of England had made them believe that her power was gone, and they confidently looked forward to the success of two great enterprises then on foot to complete her discomfiture. De Grasse, with a large[1109] fleet, was to join the Spanish fleet in the West Indies, take troops on board, and seize Jamaica. The fall of Minorca had set De Crillon free to complete the fall of Gibraltar, with a vast armament which he had been engaged in organizing. To Rodney was intrusted the duty of protecting Jamaica; he determined to prevent the junction of the enemy's fleets. A line of frigates within signal distance extended from St. Lucia to the French position at Martinique, and the enemy had not been two hours at sea before he was in pursuit. After some ineffectual efforts he succeeded in getting to the windward of the enemy, and on the 10th of April brought the French fleet to action. The number of the fleets was exactly equal. The superiority in number of men and weight of metal was in favour of the French. The battle is famous for the introduction into naval tactics of the manœuvre called breaking the line. Before this time it was usual to meet the enemy in line, to close up ship to ship, and win the battle chiefly by hard fighting. The new manœuvre consisted in advancing in column against the enemy's line, passing through it, thus breaking it in half, and enveloping one of the halves with the whole fleet. On the present occasion its use resulted in a complete victory. The English took or destroyed eight ships; the loss of the French was very great, being much increased by the crowded state of their vessels, which had on board the soldiers intended for the Jamaica expedition.

In spite of this great success, the ministry continued its efforts at peace, but so long as there was any hope of securing better terms by the capture of Gibraltar the French would not come to the point. Nor did the change of ministry caused by the death of Rockingham change the aspect of affairs. Gibraltar had now been three years besieged. British fleets had twice forced the blockade and relieved the garrison. General Elliot's defence was vigorous, and inspired his troops with confidence. In the last November a great sally had destroyed the greater part of the enemy's works, but now a final effort of the united house of Bourbon was to be made. De Crillon, fresh from his success at Minorca, took the command, and neglecting the attack from the land side, set his hopes on a terrific bombardment to be conducted from the sea. He constructed ten huge floating batteries, with walls of wood and iron seven feet thick, shot proof and bomb proof; a fleet of more than forty first-rates was in the harbour, and a fire from 400 pieces of artillery, in answer to which the English could produce but 100, was to annihilate the fortress. Elliot was not disheartened; trusting to the natural strength of the place in other directions, he concentrated[1110] the whole of his fire upon the terrible batteries. For a long while they seemed absolutely impenetrable, but at length the constant stream of red hot shot took effect, and at mid-day their fire slackened. Before midnight the largest of them burst into flames, and eight out of the ten were on fire during the night. The siege was over, and the fleet, which still waited in the hope of meeting Lord Howe on his arrival with a relieving squadron, was driven from the harbour by the weather before he came, so that he was able to enter and relieve the garrison unmolested.

This great success, following so close upon the West Indian victory, made it plain to the allies that England was by no means so prostrate as they had imagined, and there was no longer much difficulty in settling the preliminaries of a peace. France accepted readily the offers which had been rejected in the earlier part of the year. The English ceded the little islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon in the St. Lawrence, and the African establishments of Senegal and Goree. In the West Indies everything was restored to the same condition as before the war, with the exception of Tobago, which was given to France. In the East Indies the French were permitted to retain their commercial establishments, but without military occupation. The treaty for the destruction of Dunkirk was formally given up. With these slight Terms of peace. Jan 20, 1783. concessions France had to be satisfied. Spain kept Minorca; and the Floridas were given up to her—better terms than she had a right to expect. England received in exchange the Bahamas, which she had already reconquered, and the right of cutting logwood in Honduras. Holland, with whom the English Government had in vain attempted a separate treaty, gained nothing by her rejection of those overtures, but was obliged to agree to a mutual restoration of conquests, with the exception of the seaport town of Negapatam, which remained to the English. A provisional treaty had already been made with America, by which the independence of the States was formally declared, boundaries settled, and commercial relations re-established. The only difficulty was the claim for compensation for loss of property raised by the American loyalists. This however was waived.

The duty of concluding these treaties had not fallen to the same ministry as had begun them. The composition of the Rockingham ministry had not been such as to secure its stability; it consisted, as has been said, of two distinct and equally balanced parties. A rivalry between the leaders of[1111] these parties was inevitable, especially when one of them was a man so self-asserting and so conscious of his claims as Fox. United for a moment under the nominal leadership of Rockingham, a man of great influence though of slender ability, their union was at once dissolved at the death of that nobleman. Fox refused to serve under Shelburne, to whom the King at once offered the Premiership, and though several of the old ministers retained their places, the greater part followed their leader, and a split, which proved to be final, arose The Shelburne ministry. July 1782. between the two sections of the Whigs. The new ministry included, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Pitt, as yet but twenty-three years of age. Already his oratorical power and his aspiring genius had made him one of the first men of the House, and he was regarded as a worthy successor of Chatham. Till this period he and Fox had been on friendly terms, and usually on the same side on political questions, but he had his father's hatred of faction, or the introduction of personal motives into politics, and bitterly reproached Fox for his conduct in leaving the Government. Henceforward they were avowed opponents. Fox's own explanation of his conduct was as follows. He said that he had written by the King's orders to Mr. Grenville, then at Paris, to authorize him to offer to the American agents "to recognize the independence of the United States in the first instance, and not to reserve it as a condition of peace." At the same time an official letter, for the same purpose, was sent by the Earl of Shelburne to Sir Guy Carleton in America. Mr. Fox, suspecting that this measure though consented to in the Cabinet, had not the entire approbation of some of his colleagues, had, in order to prevent any misconception, purposely chosen the most forcible expressions that the English language could supply; and he confessed that his joy was so great on finding that the Earl of Shelburne, in the letter to Sir Guy Carleton, had repeated his very words, that he carried it immediately to the Marquis of Rockingham, and told him that their distrust and suspicions of that noble lord's intentions had been groundless, and were now done away. "Judge then," said he, "of my grief and astonishment when, during the illness of my noble friend, another language was heard in the Cabinet, and the noble Earl and his friends began to consider the above letter as containing offers only of a conditional nature, to be recalled if not accepted as the price of peace. Finding myself thus ensnared and betrayed, and all confidence destroyed, I quitted a situation in which I found I could not remain either with honour or safety."

[1112]

The Whig love of office had not been satiated by an eight months' tenure of it, nor had Lord North's party taken kindly to their loss of power, and in their greedy desire for personal aggrandizement, the leaders, who a few months before were speaking of each other as the most corrupt of the human species, found it consistent with their dignity to combine to eject Lord Shelburne's Government. They chose as their test question the terms of the peace. Lord North, probably, conscientiously believed that they might have been more favourable. Fox had himself offered much larger concessions to Holland, and had not disapproved either of the American or French terms, nor did he now offer the smallest suggestion as to what better terms might have been procured. In parliamentary influence, however, the coalition was quite irresistible, and at the opening of the session in the spring Lord Shelburne found himself in a minority The coalition ministry under Portland. April 1783. upon resolutions which had been moved condemnatory of the peace. He at once resigned. After a few ineffectual struggles the King had to accept the coalition ministry. Nothing could have been more distasteful to him; he found himself suddenly robbed of the whole advantage of twenty years of political scheming; he had triumphed on the fall of the Chatham administration, and for years had been served, as he would wish to be served, by a very able, popular, upright, but obsequious minister, only now to be thrown back, apparently bound hand and foot, into the hands of the hated Whig oligarchy. His policy had produced a disastrous war, an enormous augmentation of the National Debt, and an all but universal cry for a better system of economical government and national representation; while the Whigs, taking advantage of the opportunity which the ill success of royal Government gave them, had succeeded in regaining, as it appeared, an unassailable superiority. In parliamentary influence they were overwhelming; they numbered among their party Fox and North, the two ablest debaters in the House, and Burke, the greatest orator. They had also the long official experience of Lord North's party. Against them were the few remaining members of the old Chatham party, with no influence on which to rely, and upheld almost solely by the brilliant promise of young Pitt. The nominal head of the new Government was the Duke of Portland, for, as usual with coalitions, a man of no great ability was elected as the nominal chief. Fox and North were equal Secretaries of State, Lord John Cavendish was Chancellor of the Exchequer. The Cabinet was completed by Lord Keppel, Carlisle, and Stormont. The great strength of the new[1113] ministry was speedily shown; a second Bill for parliamentary reform was rejected by the large majority of 144.

This ministry, which seemed so irresistible, was doomed to be of short duration, and the factious movement, which seemed to have thwarted for ever the policy of the King, proved in the sequel the means of establishing his policy for the rest of the reign. The cause of this sudden change of fortune was the necessity for some legislation with regard to the affairs of India, but before relating the final struggle it will be necessary to give a brief sketch of the course of events in that country.

For this purpose the history can be broken conveniently into two periods. There are two classes of difficulties which the English have had to overcome. First, the rivalry with other European nations, and secondly, the opposition to their gradual encroachment offered by the native chiefs and native tribes. The first of these periods may be held to close at the Peace of 1763, and includes the formation and establishment by the English of the three Presidencies of Bombay, Madras, and Bengal, and the practical destruction of all other European influence.

The India Company sprang into existence in the first year of the seventeenth century. In December 1600, the Indian Adventurers were formed into a chartered company, their monopoly being at first granted for fifteen years, and subsequently in 1609 rendered perpetual, but revocable at three years' notice from the Government. It was the intention of the Company to dispute the trade of the East with two nations who had already made good their position there. The discovery of the Cape of Good Hope in 1497 by the Portuguese under Vasco da Gama, had been followed by nearly a century during which Portugal showed extreme energy both in arms, in literature, and in mercantile pursuits. The western coast of India, from Goa northwards to Ormuz in the Persian Gulf, was more or less completely conquered by the Portuguese from the native rajahs. In 1580, Portugal was conquered by the Spaniards; its greatness was at an end. The Dutch had already established important factories both in India itself and in the Spice Islands, and had with success contested with the Portuguese their monopoly of the Indian trade. It was in emulation of the Dutch, and taking advantage of the depression of Portugal, and in pursuance also of their systematic opposition to Spain, that the English Company was formed.

[1114]

At first this trade was small but very lucrative. The attention of the Company was chiefly directed to the exclusion of interlopers, or Foundation of Madras, Bombay, and Calcutta. free traders, who interfered with their monopoly. Their chief factories were Surat, near Bombay, which brought them into immediate conflict with the Portuguese, against whom they assisted the native princes, and Bantam, in Java, which placed them in conflict with the Dutch, at whose hands, in 1623, they suffered the famous outrage known as the Massacre of Amboyna, where ten Englishmen were put to death upon their confession of conspiracy against the Dutch extorted by torture. Both these positions were obviously inconvenient, and tended to permanent hostilities. Some more secure situation was desirable, and in 1640 the Rajah of the Carnatic allowed the Company to purchase ground close to the deserted Portuguese settlement of St. Thomé; and the Fort of St. George and the town of Madras rapidly rose to importance. This town took the place of Bantam. The marriage-treaty of Charles II. with Catherine of Braganza gave the town and island of Bombay to the English, and it took the place of Surat. In Bengal all three rival powers had factories upon the Hooghly, a branch of the Ganges. Not long after the transference of their business from Surat to Bombay the English became involved in some petty hostilities in Bengal, and were compelled to resign their factory, and found a home lower down the river at a village called Chutternuttee. They were in fact in great danger of being driven from the country, but they managed to mollify the anger of Aurungzebe, who was at that time on the throne of the Moguls, and in 1698 obtained a lease of the village, there built Fort William, and founded the town of Calcutta. The Revolution in England threatened for a time to destroy the India Company. A great rival company, called the New India Company, was formed, and was supported by the majority of the Commons. But finally, in 1708, the quarrels were adjusted, and the Companies coalesced to prevent the destruction of both, which threatened to follow their eager competition. Their whole capital was made to consist of £3,200,000, lent to Government at five per cent.; and they had the right of borrowing one million and a half more. Repeated prolongations of their privileges were made; in 1712 to 1736, in 1730 to 1769, in 1743 to 1783. Their three settlements formed separate presidencies or seats of government, unconnected one with the other, each governed by a president and Decline of Portuguese and Dutch competition. council. Events in Europe had practically destroyed the rivalry of Portugal, which had lost its energy, and moreover, in its dislike of Spain, had become the close[1115] ally of the English. The stress even of the Dutch competition was very greatly slackened. That country also, in its dread of France, was generally friendly to England, and from the position of its settlements its commercial importance was rather in the islands than in the mainland of India.

Aurungzebe had died in 1707, after a very long and glorious reign. He was the most successful of that line of Indian Emperors generally spoken of as Great Moguls, and the inheritor of a vast empire founded by Baber, a descendant of Timor the Tartar, who died in 1530, but whose work was carried on by his successors, notably by the great Emperor Akbar, whose reign ended in 1605. Aurungzebe carried the arms of this victorious empire, now stationed at Delhi, over nearly all the mainland and peninsula of India. His chief opponent was Sivajee, the founder of the Mahratta dynasty. This chief, who was never conquered, died young in 1680. On his death for a time the glories of the Mahratta dynasty declined. The head of this people, the Rajah of Satara, like other Eastern monarchs, became merely a nominal ruler, his Peishwa or Prime Minister, whose abode was Poona, became the real head of the race, but like by far the greater part of the Hindoo rulers of India, the Peishwa acknowledged the supremacy of the Mogul Empire. Wherever the Mahommedan arms had been really victorious, the provinces were in the charge of Subahdars, or Viceroys of the Emperor; the great bulk of the Peninsula, known as the Deccan, being in the hands of the greatest of their Viceroys, called the Nizam. The death of Aurungzebe was the signal for the dissolution of this great power.

In the midst of the prevalent dissolution a new and most dangerous rival of the English Company arose. This was the French Company which had been established under Louis XIV., and which, like the English and Dutch, had an establishment upon the Hooghly called Chandernagore; a settlement eighty miles south of Madras called Pondicherry; and to represent our settlement on the Malabar coast, the two islands of the Mauritius or Isle of France, and the Isle of Bourbon, won respectively from the Dutch and Portuguese. In 1744, when the Companies first came into active competition, two men of great genius were at the head of the French Presidencies; Labourdonnais at the Mauritius, and Dupleix at Pondicherry. The dissolution of the Mogul Empire has been not inaptly compared to the break-up of the Western Empire of Charles the Great. All the provincial governors who were at all in a position[1116] to do so, while keeping up for a time their nominal dependence upon the central court of Delhi, rendered themselves practically independent. It was of this state of dissolution that Dupleix, with singular ability, took advantage. As he gazed upon the shattered fragments of the decaying empire, on the rising independence of Hindoo rajah, mogul and nabob, and observed the constantly increasing power of the Mahrattas from the Western Ghauts, Dupleix formed the opinion that India was not for the natives, but for European conquerors, and as Dutch enterprise had sought another direction, and Portugal was Grandeur of Dupleix's schemes. a failing power, the only countries that could compete for the high position were France and England. Having settled upon his opponents, he settled also upon his means of offence. The French Company and its officers must become at once the nominal feudatories of the Mogul Empire, and without present conquest must so mingle in all the affairs of the native princes, and so assist them by means of native levies drilled in the European fashion, as virtually to master them all. In other words, he invented that system by the application of which the English power has subsequently been formed. The war of the Austrian Succession, which broke out in 1744, supplied him with his opportunity. A network of alliances was formed around the English settlement, and kept together by the skill of Dupleix and of his wife, a woman of Portuguese extraction and of extraordinary talents. But Dupleix's activity was crossed by the equal energy of Labourdonnais, who, with a fleet hastily gathered, captured Madras. The English inhabitants surrendered upon terms, the town was to be repurchased for £440,000. This was in strict accordance with the views of the French Government, but not in accordance with the views of Dupleix, who wished to drive the English from the Peninsula. A hot dispute arose between the two governors. Dupleix induced Labourdonnais to withdraw upon a false promise of surrendering Madras; and Labourdonnais returning to France, was there, with the ingratitude the French always showed to their colonial governors, subjected to several years of imprisonment and a trial, which was the immediate cause of his death. Retaining Madras, and with the aid of the Nabob of Arcot, Dupleix was proceeding, in 1747, to complete his conquest by the capture of Fort St. David. The approach of the English fleet saved the fortress, and even enabled the English to make a counter attack upon Pondicherry. It failed, and the fame of Dupleix and the French Success of Dupleix. was at its height among the natives when the Peace of 1748 compelled the restitution of conquests. But the[1117] plans of Dupleix were such that no war between the nations was necessary to enable him to carry them on. It was native quarrels he desired, and such quarrels arose at the death of the old Nizam El Mulk of the Deccan. His throne was disputed by his son Nazir Jung and his grandson Mirzapha Jung. At the same time Chunda Sahib appeared as a claimant for the viceroyalty of the Carnatic. Both the pretenders found their cause adopted by Dupleix, who understood well how secure his position would be did he succeed in establishing by his own power a Nizam of the Deccan and a Nabob of the Carnatic. Aided by the Marquis de Bussy, as great as a soldier as Dupleix was as a diplomatist, in 1749 the pretenders and the French won a victory at Amboor, in which the reigning nabob was killed. His son, Mahomet Ali, took the title of Nabob of Arcot, but was obliged to retire to Trichinopoly, while the whole country was in the hands of his rival. Thus successful in arms in the Carnatic, Dupleix was equally so by intrigue in the Deccan. In 1750, as the French approached Nazir Jung's army, a conspiracy which Dupleix had hatched broke out, and Nazir was murdered. Mirzapha acknowledged his debt of gratitude to the French, and it was at Pondicherry that he entered upon his rank, rewarding his European allies with the government of the whole country from Cape Comorin to the Kistna. Dupleix appeared to have gained his object. The Company of which he was the governor was accepted as a ruling power in India; the great princes of the neighbourhood both owed him their crowns. The only place still holding out against his authority was Trichinopoly, and thither he directed all his efforts.

It was then that England at last found a champion in Robert Clive. Unable to summon troops sufficient to relieve Trichinopoly, he determined to attack Arcot as a diversion. The plan succeeded. Arcot fell almost without a struggle. 10,000 men were detached from the armies of Dupleix and Chunda Sahib at Pondicherry, but their attempt to recapture Arcot was a signal failure; and when Clive secured the assistance of a band of Mahratta horse under Morari Row, the siege was raised, and was followed by a victory over Rajah Sahib, son of Chunda Sahib. Taking the Pagoda of Conjeveram on the way, Clive, in 1752, turned towards Fort St. David, but was recalled to fight Rajah Sahib, whom he again conquered in the battle of Coverpauk. He was then at leisure, in conjunction with Major Lawrence, who had come to assume the command, to raise the siege of Trichinopoly; and when the besiegers were themselves besieged in the islands of Seringham[1118] in the river Cauvery, and when Chunda Sahib was there killed, the failure of Dupleix's measures was complete. The war indeed continued some time longer. Bussy upheld the French nominee, Salabat Jung, in the Deccan; Dupleix still kept up hostilities in the Carnatic. But as his fortunes failed, his employers deserted him. In 1754 he was recalled. A treaty was made between the Companies, and Dupleix died in poverty and misery a few years afterwards in Paris.

In 1753 ill health had compelled Clive to go to England. In 1755 he returned to India as Governor of Fort St. David, of which he took possession on the 20th June 1756, having on his way assisted in the destruction of Gheriah, the sea-girt stronghold of the pirate Angria, who had long been the terror of the Bombay merchants. On the very day of Clive's arrival at Madras, Surajah Dowlah, the Nabob of Bengal, a young man of about nineteen years of age, cruel, effeminate, and debauched, had captured Fort William and Calcutta. Shelter afforded to a defaulting revenue officer of his, and the increase of the fortifications of Fort William, roused a quarrel between him and the English. He advanced upon Calcutta and captured it, and the The Black Hole of Calcutta. June 1756. world was horrified by the tragedy of the Black Hole. The prisoners, 146 in number, were thrust into a narrow chamber some twenty feet square, whence, after a night of unspeakable horrors, but twenty-three wretched survivors were dragged the following morning before Surajah Dowlah and sent as prisoners to his capital at Moorshedabad. The horrors of the Black Hole of Calcutta were beyond expression terrible; the heat of the night was intense, and as the agonies of thirst and suffocation came upon them, the prisoners struggled to the windows for a mouthful of fresh air, careless that they trod to death their fallen comrades; they insulted the guards in hopes that they would fire upon them; many died in raving madness. Mr. Holwell, the chief of those who survived, was so broken that he was unable to walk from the prison. When the news of this fearful event reached Madras, it was at once determined to take vengeance upon the Nabob. After some difficulties Clive was appointed to the command, and though four months were wasted, partly by contrary winds, partly by the jealousy of the various English commanders, by the middle of January 1757 Calcutta was regained. This success and a night attack upon his army excited in the mind of the Nabob such a dread of the English that he consented to enter into an alliance with them. The temporary cessation of hostilities with the natives and the arrival of reinforcements gave Clive an opportunity to destroy the French settlement of[1119] Chandernagore, although the Nabob, to whom the presence of the French as a counterpoise to the English was of great importance, had taken it under his protection. This act of open contempt for his authority excited Surajah Dowlah's anger anew, and afraid to oppose the English openly he entered into secret negotiations with the French, and intreated M. Bussy to march from the Clive's treaty with Meer Jaffier. Deccan to his assistance. His intrigues became known, and were met by counter intrigues: it was determined to depose him, and to place Meer Jaffier, his general, on the throne; and in order to deceive one of his agents named Omichund, who threatened to betray the conspiracy unless bribed by an enormous sum of money, Clive was guilty of forging the name of Admiral Watson. The treaty to which the false signature was appended promised the bribe, but was a sham treaty. On the real treaty which Admiral Watson had signed Omichund received nothing. The plot being ripe, Clive openly advanced towards Moorshedabad, the Nabob's capital, and on the 23rd June 1757 won Battle of Plassey. June 23, 1757. with his troops, numbering in all some 3000 men, the great victory of Plassey over 30,000 of the Nabob's troops. That battle secured the power of England in Bengal. Surajah Dowlah fled; Meer Jaffier was placed upon the throne. A sum of nearly £3,000,000 was paid to the Company, to which was given the entire property of Calcutta itself as far as 600 yards beyond the Mahratta ditch, and the zemindary or feudal tenure on payment of rent of all the country between Calcutta and the sea. The English thus had firm footing in Bengal, and before 1760, when Clive was again compelled to seek England, he had made two other steps in advance. In support of Meer Jaffier, he had advanced against and conquered Shah Allum, the Great Mogul, and for ever freed himself from competition of the Dutch by capturing the whole of a large squadron which they had sent to the assistance of their factory at Chinsurah in opposing the advance of the English.

The following year saw the final fall of the French power in India. While Clive was securing Bengal, the breaking out of the Seven Years' War had renewed the hostilities in the Carnatic. On this occasion Lally was the champion of the French. But able and vigorous as a soldier, his ill-usage of the natives, his eager temper and satirical tongue, surrounded him with disaffection both among the Indians and his own troops. At first his advent was marked with success. In the course of 1758 he captured and destroyed Fort St. David and retook[1120] Arcot. But, early in the following year, the disaffection of his troops and the arrival of Admiral Pocock prevented him from bringing to a successful issue an assault on Madras, and from this time onwards the English retained constant superiority. Colonel Coote, a soldier of Clive's training, took the command; and on the morning of the 22nd January 1760, won over the French the great battle of Wandewash. The European troops alone were engaged. It differed from other Indian battles in this respect, and was a national victory won upon Indian soil. Coote's sepoys, on congratulating him on his victory, thanked him for having shown them a battle such as they had never yet seen. The battle of Wandewash did for Madras what Plassey did for Bengal. The troops of the English and their allies gradually closed in round Pondicherry, and in spite of a firm and splendid resistance, that sole remaining stronghold of the French power surrendered in January 1761; and Lally, like his predecessors, returned to France only to meet with persecution from his employers, and finally death upon the scaffold. The Portuguese, Dutch, and French had thus all disappeared from the political world of India, though they still kept up trading stations at Pondicherry, Chandernagore, and Chinsurah. England had secured a sovereign position in its three Presidencies.

The further growth of the Empire was at the expense of native tribes, and carried on in the midst of strange domestic mismanagement. The English Government at Calcutta, left without the guiding hand of Clive, soon drifted into fresh quarrels with the natives. Mr. Vansittart was left as governor, and already, in 1760, he had thought it desirable to remove Meer Jaffier, the Company's creature, from the throne of Moorshedabad, and replace him by Meer Cossim, his son-in-law. The step was an unwise one. The new viceroy was of less malleable materials than his predecessor, and speedily came to look with great anger at the constant breaches of the revenue laws perpetrated by the English traders. He quarrelled especially with a gentleman who occupied the advanced factory of Patna high up the Ganges. To be out of the influence of Calcutta, he withdrew his capital from Moorshedabad to Monghir, and all seemed tending towards war. It was in vain that Mr. Vansittart went himself to Monghir, arranged for the payment of inland duties, and received as a sign of peace a present of £70,000. An embassy sent from Calcutta to complete the pacification was fallen on and murdered at Moorshedabad, and under the circumstances war became inevitable. The advance of the[1121] English was rapid and triumphant; Moorshedabad fell, and after a nine days' siege Monghir itself was taken. The Nabob found it necessary to fly, but before he fled, with the assistance of a renegade Massacre of Patna. 1763. Frenchman called Sombre, he committed a crime similar to that of the Black Hole of Calcutta. On the 5th October 1763 the whole of the English residents of the Patna factory (150 in number), enclosed within their prison walls, were shot down or cut to pieces, and their mangled remains thrown into two wells. One alone escaped. The Rajah and his instrument Sombre fled into the district of a neighbouring nabob, Sujah Dowlah of Oude, at whose court was tarrying, in a condition between exile and prisoner, the Mogul Shah Allum, who had been driven from his throne at Delhi by the advance of the Mahrattas. Sujah Dowlah had been appointed vizier, and virtually wielded all the power that was left to the descendants of the Moguls. With these allies Sujah Dowlah advanced to meet the English, and suffered, Battle of Buxar. Oct. 1764. on the 23rd of October, at Buxar, higher up the river than Patna, a terrible defeat at the hands of Major Munro. The fruit of the victory was the person of Shah Allum himself, and backed now by his authority, the English pressing on in their victorious course, the following year entered Allahabad, the chief city of Oude.

Victory in war and increased dominion had only increased the maladministration of the India Company, which reached such a pitch, that in 1765 it became necessary again to despatch Clive to the scene of action. This was not done without the most vigorous opposition. Two great parties had long divided the India House in London. Mr. Sullivan had for some time exercised a paramount authority there. Clive had appeared as his rival. Both parties lavished their wealth in creating votes, and a factious struggle arose in the heart of the Company. At length the general voice seemed to declare that Clive alone could restore order in the mismanaged Presidency. Clive saw his opportunity. He publicly refused to go out as long as Sullivan occupied the place of chairman of the Court of Directors. The proprietors were so frightened by this threat, that when the day of election of directors arrived, Sullivan found himself unable to carry more than half of Clive returns to India. May 1765. his list of directors, and Clive's friends were triumphant. He was sent out with full powers, and authorized to override the opinion of the Council, although usually the governor was entitled to only one vote. The struggle for bribes[1122] and ill-gotten gain was carried on to the moment of his arrival. Only a few days before he landed the viceroyalty of Bengal had been sold, contrary to all justice, to the illegitimate son of Meer Jaffier for £140,000. But the scene was speedily changed. In two days Clive and the Committee who accompanied him had mastered the state of affairs and declared their dictatorial authority. At the dread of his name alone Sujah Dowlah sought peace. He compelled Meer Cossim and his agent Sombre, who had organized the massacre of Patna, to leave his dominions, and a treaty was made in accordance with Clive's view, that for the present it was better to strengthen than increase our dominions. By this treaty Sujah Dowlah retained his provinces, surrendering only the districts of Corah and Allahabad, which were given as an imperial dominion to Shah Allum. In return the provinces of Bengal, Orissa, and Bahar, were granted for all administrative purposes to the Company, who thus became nominal as well as real princes of India. The Nabob of Bengal was pensioned with a yearly income. This was the beginning of a system which played a great part in our Indian history. By this means the Company were secured a revenue of two millions. But even yet Clive thought it imprudent to place the administration in European hands, and selected as native Prime Minister a Mahommedan, Mahomed Reza Khan. This choice was made deliberately, in spite of the claims of Nuncomar, the chief of the Bengal Brahmins. The rivalry between these two chiefs bore notable fruit afterwards. Having settled our difficulties with the natives, Clive turned to domestic reforms; he deprived the military of a large allowance, called "double batta," which they had received from Meer Jaffier, and quelled, with incomparable vigour and sagacity, a mutiny which arose in consequence; he forbade civilians to receive presents from the native princes, and restrained officials from engaging in private trading, while he himself set an admirable example of disinterestedness. Unfortunately he was unable to superintend the execution of his plans, but was compelled by ill health to return to England (Jan. 1767).

While the events that have been mentioned were going on in Bengal, the southern Presidency had had its own difficulties to contend with. Immediately above the plains of the Carnatic lies the hill country of Mysore, and there a new power had been established by the ablest opponent we ever met in India, Hyder Ali. A Mahommedan of low birth, a freebooter, a rebel, and commander-in-chief of the Mysore army, he succeeded at last in establishing himself on the throne of the Hindoo Rajah.[1123] Sometimes in confederation with the Nizam of the Deccan, sometimes with the Mahrattas of the Western Ghauts, Hyder kept up a continual war with the English. His army of 100,000 men was organized in the European fashion. Though unable to write, his retentive memory enabled him to be a most dangerous diplomatist, and though beaten in the field, his activity kept the English army in constant movement and exhausted the Company's resources. To such an extent was this the case, that Clive's reforms were counterbalanced, and in 1769 Indian stock fell sixty per cent.

Such threatening appearances in the commercial career of the Company, the constant scandal of their factious struggle in London, and the anomaly becoming every day more striking of a body of merchants exercising, and exercising very badly, sovereign rights over large conquered districts, excited the attention of Parliament. Chatham, as has been mentioned, intended to have enforced the rights of the Crown; and the Company only escaped some interference of the kind by offering to establish supervisors of its own and to pay the English Government £400,000 a year. But in 1773 matters had become much worse; a fearful famine had devastated Bengal, corpses choked and infected the Ganges, the fish and fowl became uneatable, more than half the population are said to have been swept away. It was Famine in Bengal. 1770. felt that no properly conducted Government could have permitted such an evil; and when in 1772 the united effects of the Madras wars and the Bengal famine reduced the funds of the Company to so low an ebb that they had to demand of Parliament a loan of a million sterling, legislation became inevitable. At the beginning of the year a Committee of inquiry had reported, and again in the autumn another secret committee had been named; upon their report Lord North formed what is known as the Regulating Regulating Act, 1773. Act. By this he granted the Company their loan, relieved them of their annual tribute to the State, and allowed them to export their bonded tea, with what disastrous effects in America has been already seen. In exchange he confined their interest to six per cent. till the loan was paid, and afterwards to eight per cent.; and, proceeding to the organization of their government, he established a supreme court upon the English model, made the Governor of Bengal Governor-General of India, and appointed by name in Parliament a new Council. Warren Hastings, already Governor of Bengal, was made the first Governor-General; Barwell, a member of the existing Council, was continued in his office; General Clavering, Colonel Monson, and Philip Francis, were named[1124] as the new members. During the discussions relative to this Act much blame had been thrown on Clive, and though a formal vote of censure was mollified by the words, that "Robert Lord Clive did at the same time render great and meritorious services to his country," Death of Clive. the trouble he underwent preyed upon a morbid mind and a body weakened by disease so much that he committed suicide (Nov. 1774).

The interest which has hitherto centred upon Clive is now transferred to the career of Warren Hastings. An Indian statesman by profession, and thoroughly acquainted with the wants both of native and European populations, he had entered upon the duties of the Government of Bengal in 1772. The post was not a light one: in India a people in the last stages of distress, a Government full of abuses, a small dominant population who believed their sole duty was to acquire wealth rapidly; in England a factious and fluctuating body of governors whose chief object was high dividends. Such Hastings Governor-General. were the conditions under which Hastings had to act. A change in the management of the land tax produced a larger revenue with less oppression; the country, freed from marauders, was in a better condition to pay taxes; but this was little. Rumours were afloat that Reza Khan, the finance minister, was peculating largely. On the accusation of Nuncomar, his old rival, he was apprehended by Hastings, who either believed the charges or acted in obedience to the Company's orders. On examination he was acquitted, but not replaced in his office, nor was Nuncomar appointed to succeed him; the administration was kept in English hands. The Viceroy, an infant, was deprived of half his allowance, and a quarrel having arisen between our old ally Shah Allum, who had made friends with the Mahrattas, and the English, Allahabad and Corah were resumed and sold to the Vizier of Oude for fifty lacs of rupees. More than that, for a further sum of forty lacs English troops were basely let to that prince to destroy his enemies, the neighbouring Afghan conquerers of Rohilcund. All these measures seem to have been dictated primarily by a desire for an increased revenue. It was at this crisis that the Regulating Act took effect, and the new councillors arrived in the Hooghly. The man of the most importance and activity among them was Philip Francis, who is now generally accepted as being the author of "Junius' Letters." The other two always voted with him, and all three came out with strong prejudices and a determination to oppose Hastings. The new Governor-General[1125] therefore found himself at once in a permanent minority, for, as before, he had but one vote in the Council. Barwell, the Indian member of the new Council, always voted with him. There arose therefore a fierce struggle for power, and the new councillors made haste to seek on all sides grounds for attacking Hastings. It was understood that they were willing to receive any charges against him. Nuncomar, who had been heavily disappointed at not receiving the vacant place of Reza Khan, charged him with having been bribed to pardon that great official; and Francis and his partisans determined to confront Nuncomar with Hastings at the council board. The Governor-General rightly refused to preside at what was virtually his own trial; but upon his dissolving the Council the three new members declared it not dissolved, and continued the inquiry. Fortune placed in the hands of Hastings the means of freeing himself from this awkward dilemma. A private charge of forgery was brought against Nuncomar, and he was tried before the new supreme court. It is impossible to say how far this charge was fostered by Hastings, he himself asserted upon oath that he had nothing whatever to do with it; at all events it was carried to its conclusion, and Sir Elijah Impey and his colleagues found the charge proved, and condemned Nuncomar to death. Impey, an old schoolfellow of Hastings, whose career showed him not to be above suspicion, is by many held to have acted corruptly; but his colleagues entirely agreed with him, nor does it seem that he did anything worse than import into India the habits and feelings of Europe when he suffered the sentence of death to be carried out. No doubt this was a shock to the moral feelings of the Hindoos, to whom forgery was not the grave offence that it is to us. However this may be, the death of Nuncomar secured the supremacy of Hastings. There was no one brave enough to bring charges either true or false against one whose vengeance seemed to have struck down the head of their religion. His supremacy was soon still further secured; by the death of Monson he found himself, by means of his own casting vote, master of the Council. One more violent struggle took place, after which he was able to act according to his own judgment, although constantly thwarted by Francis. In the height of his difficulties he had lodged a conditional resignation with his agent in London, and his agent, alarmed by the news from India, had presented it. Suddenly, in the midst of his triumph in Calcutta, a ship arrived with a new member of the Council and the news that the Governor-General had resigned. Hastings positively refused to ratify the act of his agent,[1126] which he declared was unauthorized by him. The bitter contest which arose from this subject was brought before the Supreme Court of Justice for arbitration. Sir Elijah Impey again settled the question in Hastings' favour.

Hastings could now turn his thoughts to what was his constant object, the aggrandizement of our power in India, and his view seems to have been to enter into close alliances with the great Mahommedan Princes, the Nabob-Vizier of Oude and the Nizam of the Deccan, to render them dependent on the English by means of large subsidies, and by their assistance oppose an effectual barrier to the great and increasing power of the Mahrattas, whom he regarded as the most dangerous rivals to the English. Affairs in the dependent Presidency of Madras gave him an opportunity for carrying out this policy. Mismanagement and peculation had been as rife there as in Bengal. The Rajah of Tanjore, a Mahratta prince, had been dispossessed in favour of the Nabob of Arcot, an old ally of the English. This measure was disallowed by the directors at home. Lord Pigot was sent out as governor to re-establish the Rajah. The same struggle between the Governor and his Council as had been seen in Calcutta took place in Madras, but proceeded to even greater extremities. The Council arrested Lord Pigot, who died a prisoner in their hands. Thus the policy of restitution was crushed, and the claims of the Mahratta Rajah of Tanjore were neglected. In Bombay, too, constant disputes had arisen with the Mahratta chiefs of Poonah, so that the whole of that great confederacy was ready for war. To appreciate the importance of such a war, it must be remembered that the Mahrattas had spread over much of India. The descendants of Sivajee, like the descendants of most Indian conquerors, had sunk into rois fainéants at Satara, delegating their real power to their viceroy, called the Peishwa of Poonah, whose office was hereditary. Dependent offshoots of this power had established themselves in the hills of the Malwa under the great princes Sindia and Holkar; in Berar under a prince called the Bonslah, in Gujerat under the Guicowar, and in the extreme south in Tanjore; while bands of Mahratta horsemen had, as we have seen, seized upon Delhi, and expelled for a time Shah Allum, the Great Mogul, who had however made terms with them, and was now again seated upon his ancestral throne. With this vast power, already on bad terms with both the southern Presidencies, it was discovered that the French were intriguing. With his usual vigour Hastings was determined to forestall war, which he saw was inevitable. For this purpose,[1127] in spite of the opposition of his Council, an army was at once despatched southward to act through Bundelcund. The command was given to Colonel Goddard. But Hastings, who seldom acted a straightforward part, intrigued at the same time with the Bonslah and with Rajonaut Rao, a deposed Peishwa, now a refugee in Bombay. Upon the news that France and England had declared war, still further energy was infused into military affairs; and Chandernagore, near Calcutta, and Pondicherry, just south of Madras, two French settlements, were captured. The Mahratta war was not without its reverses. The Bombay army was surrounded near Poonah, and escaped only on ignominious terms; but Goddard upheld the honour of the English arms, and defeated Sindia and Holkar, while Captain Popham took the almost impregnable castle of Gwalior. The war was regarded as of sufficient importance to require the presence of the veteran General Sir Eyre Coote, who was despatched from England to take the command.

But all prospect of carrying out the ambitious schemes of Hastings for subjugating the Mahrattas was suddenly clouded. News arrived in 1780 that Hyder Ali, who had long been watching his opportunity, had pounced upon Madras. He saw the English engaged in a vast Indian war, he knew that their arms were not successful in America, he expected the speedy arrival of a large French force, his time had come at last, and he flung himself in irresistible numbers upon the Carnatic. The English were virtually taken by surprise; one army under Colonel Baylie was destroyed, a second under Sir Hector Munro saved itself by rapid flight. In a moment Hastings comprehended the new situation of affairs; the news reached Calcutta on the 23rd of September, on the 25th he was ready with a complete new plan of operations. He offered peace and alliance to the Mahrattas; he embarked all available troops for Madras; in virtue of the supremacy of Bengal, he ventured to suspend Whitewell, the incompetent Governor of Madras; he gave the command to Sir Eyre Coote, and sent also vast sums of money thither. It was to sustain this great effort, without if possible diminishing the gains of the Company, that Hastings committed the rest of those acts of oppression which were afterwards alleged against him. To supply the greed of his employers he had sold British troops to Conclusion of the Mysore war. destroy the Rohillas; in his great struggle for power he had strained the law in the case of Nuncomar; to support his Mahratta and Mysore wars he stooped to actions of[1128] injustice and cruelty. The return of Sir Eyre Coote re-established affairs at Madras, he won a great victory at Porta Novo and a second at Pollilore. The general peace in 1783 put a conclusion to the war, which had been continued by Tippoo upon the death of his father Hyder Ali. Hastings had succeeded in concluding a treaty with the Mahrattas, and had his hands free for carrying on with energy operations against Mysore, the Dutch, and the French fleet under De Suffren. All the Dutch settlements had been captured; five great indecisive battles had been fought between De Suffren and Sir Edward Hughes; but no striking advantages had been won over Tippoo, who had even met with some successes on the Malabar coast. With the European nations terms had been arranged in France; with Tippoo a peace was made on the conditions of the mutual restorations of conquest.

To return to the conduct of Hastings. On the first alarm of war with Hyder Ali, he had demanded troops from Cheyte Singh, the Rajah of Benares, as from a feudatory of the Empire. This demand was annually renewed, together with the customary tribute of £50,000. Upon this being delayed it was raised to £500,000. This was still unpaid when Hastings determined to make a personal visit to Benares. He entered the city with an absurdly inadequate guard, and put Cheyte Singh under arrest; an insurrection was the consequence, and Hastings was for a time confined to his house by the populace and in imminent danger of his life. Perfectly calm and unmoved in the midst of his dangers, he yielded not one step; he succeeded in letting the neighbouring troops hear of his danger; Major Popham came to his rescue, and routed the people of Benares; Cheyte Singh was driven from his country, a new rajah, with a much enlarged tribute, was put in his place; his fortress at Bidzegur and all his property was seized. Hastings at once proceeded to similar acts in Oude. He entered into a nefarious compact with the Nabob to rob his mother and grandmother of their money. These two ladies lived at Fyzabad, the ancient capital of Sujah Dowlah; his son, the reigning Nabob Asaph Ul Dowlah, Robbery of the Begums of Oude. had withdrawn to the new city of Lucknow. The Begums possessed large landed property and Sujah Dowlah's treasure; it was agreed between Hastings and Asaph Ul Dowlah that this should be taken from them, the landed property going to the Nabob, the money being received as payment for heavy arrears due from the Nabob to the English. A lengthened siege and partial famine did not effect the purpose of the plunderers; it was[1129] found necessary to seize, to imprison, to starve, and torture two aged eunuchs, the princesses' chief friends and ministers, before treasure to the amount of about a million could be wrung from them; the excuse alleged for such unmitigated wickedness was that the Begums had intrigued for an insurrection in Oude. Again Sir Elijah Impey was on the spot to give his voice in favour of Hastings when the rumours on which these charges were based were submitted to him.

Whatever excuses might be found for such actions, in the difficulties of Hastings' position and the peculiarity of Indian habits, it was certain that the condition and rights of a Company which had become a sovereign ruler, and was at once under the necessity of demanding a loan to avoid bankruptcy, and guilty of what could not but sound to English ears as acts of the Parliamentary inquiry. 1781. cruellest oppression, must form a chief topic of parliamentary discussion. Accordingly, in 1781, two committees had been formed to inquire into the affairs of India. Their reports were strongly condemnatory of the Company's government, and the Secretary of State for the time being accordingly demanded Hastings' recall. To this the directors, as by law they had a right to do, refused to listen, but the matter could not be Dundas's Bill. 1783. dropped, and immediately after the formation of the coalition ministry Mr. Dundas produced a Bill for the regulation of India. His view was that the Governor-General's power should be increased, and the office given to some great independent nobleman such as Lord Cornwallis. Not only was this Bill regarded as a party measure, and by no means of sufficient breadth for its object, but also it was felt that the subject was one which should be handled by Government itself. In pursuance Fox's India Bill. Nov. of this view, in the autumn session of the same year Fox brought forward his great India Bill. The faults to be remedied were sufficiently obvious; a trading company had by a strange turn of fortune become a governor of large provinces, and had again and again engaged in extensive wars. It was plain that the functions of the merchant and the governor were not only distinct but antagonistic. The claims of the proprietors for large dividends, and the duty of the directors to work for the financial benefit of their employers, was certain to blind them to acts of injustice which had a tendency to fill their coffers. The main principle of any great India Bill must have been the resumption by the Crown of its inherent Imperial rights, which it had suffered accidentally to fall into disuse. Accordingly, Fox proposed that all[1130] the authority which the Company had exercised should be transferred to a body of seven commissioners, nominated in Parliament and capable of holding office for four years, after which the vacancies occurring in that body were to be filled up by the Crown. To them, as trustees, was to be transferred also the whole property of the Company. But the management of this property and the commerce of the Company was placed in the hands of a subordinate council of directors, proprietors each of them of £2000 stock, acting under and subject to the orders of the superior council. The vacancies in the subordinate council were to be filled by the Court of proprietors. There were additional stipulations for the purpose of checking monopolies, the acceptance of presents, the hiring out of British forces, and changes in the tenure of land, regulations in fact attempting to remove the principal known abuses of the Indian Government. The Bill was a thorough and great Bill, and the magnitude of the subject, and the freedom which the Government enjoyed from any party pledges in the matter, should have raised it out of the sphere of party politics, Objections to it. but it was at once furiously assaulted. There were raised against it two objections, corresponding to the two councils which it proposed to erect. First, it was urged that it was incompatible with the dignity of the Crown that patronage so enormous as that of India should be vested even for a time in any hands but those of the King himself.[11] As Lord Thurlow said, when the Bill was before the House of Lords, "the King will in fact take the diadem with his own hands and place it on the head of Mr. Fox." What rendered this defect more glaring was, that the new committee was named in the Act, and that all seven members of it were strenuous supporters of the present administration, so that a fresh and overwhelming source of influence was secured to Mr. Fox's friends. It was urged, secondly, that even granting the necessity and wisdom of such a transference of political power, the establishment of the second council for the management of the commerce of the Company was a violent and unnecessary infraction of chartered rights. Bad financial management, as apart from their political conduct, could not be alleged against the Company, nor did it seem probable that commerce would be better managed under the direction of a parliamentary Committee, even though working through a subordinate council of merchants, than if left exclusively[1131] in mercantile hands; besides, no later than 1780, the charter of the Company had been renewed, and to deprive it of the superintendence of its own trade was a manifest breach of that charter. Such were the objections raised by the Opposition, and they were largely echoed in the country, where the coalition, as is generally the case in England, was highly unpopular. The feeling out of doors is shown by a well-known caricature which represents the triumphal procession of Carlo Fox Khan, crowned and riding on a state elephant. However, the Bill was triumphantly passed through the House of Commons, where the coalition majority was overwhelming.

But the King, who hated his ministers, and whose pride was touched in its tenderest point by this Bill, was determined that it should never become law; rather than suffer such indignity he would refuse his assent to the Bill, exerting a prerogative which had lain dormant since the reign of William III., or take refuge, as he was fond of threatening, in Hanover. He was saved from either alternative by a plan suggested to him by Lords Thurlow and Temple, The King procures its rejection. which, although open to the charge of being unconstitutional, prevented the Bill from passing the Upper House. These two noblemen, using the hereditary right of British Peers to advise their sovereign, drew up and laid before George a strong memorandum against the Bill, which they called "a plan to take more than half the royal power, and by that means disable his Majesty for the rest of his reign;" and Temple suggested that the Bill might be stopped in the House of Lords if the King would authorize him to express his wishes. The King upon this supplied him with a paper to show to any Lord he pleased. The purport of it was, that "his Majesty allowed Earl Temple to say that whoever voted for the India Bill was not only not his friend, but would be considered by him as an enemy, and if those words were not strong enough, Earl Temple might use whatever words he might deem stronger and more to the purpose." The effect of this intimation, acting upon the minds of waverers and of those who prided themselves in the name of King's friends, was to secure a majority against the Bill. On the 17th of December it was lost by nineteen votes, Lord Stormont, a member of the ministry voting against it. The King thus assumed the strange position of His conduct unconstitutional. the opponent of his own responsible ministers. In fact, he felt the power of the hated Whigs closing around him, and thought any measure justifiable which would free him from their grasp and enable him to assume that position which had[1132] been the constant aim of his policy. Moreover, he no doubt relied somewhat on the unpopularity excited by the coalition, and on the apparently unprincipled and factious conduct of the united leaders. That his conduct is incompatible with constitutional monarchy there can be no doubt. If he disliked his ministers' measures he had one straightforward course open to him;—he should have dismissed them; if their majority was overwhelming, he should have dissolved Parliament; if he could not command a majority in the new Parliament, he was bound to submit. An underhand opposition to ministers, who are alone responsible to the nation, is entirely destructive of that confidence which is necessary to the very existence of a constitutional monarchy. Of course the uproar raised in the House of Commons was great. Motion after motion condemnatory of the action of the King in the House of Lords was carried by great majorities. The ministry determined that the Ministers dismissed. responsibility of removing them should be left to the King, who, perceiving the necessary consequence of his late step, on the 18th of December, sent the under secretaries to tell the ministers they were dismissed, refusing even to see them personally.

The great Whig party and the great following of Lord North being thus removed from office, it became a question where a ministry was to be sought. The only party remaining was the little section of Chatham's followers, headed by the young Pitt, and reinforced by a portion of the Tories, with whom they may now be considered as incorporated, although for several years Pitt's policy was decidedly Liberal. To this youth of twenty-four the King appealed for assistance, Pitt accepts the Premiership. 1783. and, relying on his own genius, he had the audacity to accept the struggle, though conscious that he must be defeated on every division. There followed a scene unparalleled in parliamentary history. The Cabinet had to be drawn almost exclusively from the Upper House; Lord Thurlow became Chancellor, Earl Gower President of the Council, Duke of Rutland Privy Seal, Lord Carmarthen and Lord Sydney Secretaries of State, and Lord Howe First Lord of the Admiralty, and this, with Mr. Pitt himself, was the whole Cabinet. In the House of Commons he could rely only on Dundas and his cousin William Grenville. When the writ was moved for a new election for Appleby on Pitt's taking office, it was received with shouts of laughter; no pity or favour was extended to the new minister; Dundas could hardly get a hearing on ministerial business, motions of great importance were pressed on even though Pitt had not yet taken his seat, and so certain[1133] did Fox feel of restoration to office, that he wrote to a friend in Dublin Factious violence of the Opposition. 1784. that he would not dismiss one member of his household till after the 12th of January. On that day Pitt was to make his appearance as Prime Minister. An address had been delivered to the King praying against either an adjournment or dissolution, for this was the step which Fox's party chiefly feared. On a favourable reply to this address, short Christmas holidays had been allowed, and the House had to meet again on the 12th. In those few days Pitt had got ready an India Bill, but before he was allowed to produce it Fox had succeeded in carrying no less than five motions against the Government, one of them pointing to "unconstitutional abuse of his Majesty's sacred name." In spite of this Pitt produced his Bill, which was similar in character to the Bill he afterwards carried; it was lost by a majority of only twenty-one, which on its second reading was still further diminished to eight.

Things began to look a little more encouraging for the minister. He determined with great wisdom to give the Opposition rope, and urged them to constant violence by an obstinate refusal to say whether he meant to dissolve or not. The language of the Opposition had been so violent that the reaction was becoming strongly marked in the country. "It was a contest," said Dr. Johnson, "whether the nation should be ruled by the sceptre of George III. or by the tongue of Fox." All attempts at mediation failed, although many independent members attempted to effect it. Fox's hope was, that if Pitt continued to avoid dissolution the 25th of March would arrive without a new Parliament. On that day the Mutiny Bill expired, and he hoped by refusing to renew it to compel his rival to resign. But the tide had now fairly begun to turn; Pitt's bravery was exciting the sympathy of the people, while the unmeasured virulence of Fox and his party was constantly damaging them. Pitt, too, had won great admiration by refusing for himself, although his private means amounted to scarcely £300 a year, a rich sinecure called the Clerkship of the Pells. This, with a somewhat ironical pride, he had given to Colonel Barré in exchange for the pension which the Rockingham ministry had so scandalously given him. The threats that supplies should be stopped seemed to many moderate people factious and improper, and numerous addresses poured in from the Corporation of London and other towns. On the 8th of March Fox played what may be called his last card; he brought in a paper under the threatening title of "Representation to[1134] the King;" after many hours of debate it was passed by a majority Pitt's victory. of one only. It was plain that the victory of Pitt was secure and that the Opposition had ruined themselves. Accordingly, when on the next day the Mutiny Bill came on there was no opposition, and having by firmness and moderation fairly weathered the storm, Pitt on the 25th recommended the King to dissolve the Dissolution of Parliament and defeat of Whigs. 1784. Parliament. The elections made it evident that the feeling of the nation was entirely with Pitt; no less than 160 of Fox's friends lost their seats—"Fox's martyrs" they were jocosely called. Several great contests took place, the most notorious of which was that for Yorkshire, where Wilberforce was brought in triumphantly in opposition to the great territorial houses, and that for Westminster, where Fox himself stood against Lord Hood and his old colleague Wray, who had become a ministerialist. The poll was kept open forty days, amid scenes of indescribable excitement. For twenty-three days Fox was at the bottom of the poll, but at length the strenuous canvassing of his friends, added to the charms of Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, and other lady politicians, succeeded in placing him second on the list. As more votes however were registered than there were voters, obviously some fraud had been committed, and a scrutiny was granted. Meanwhile, as the Whigs held illegally, no return was made, Westminster was unrepresented, and room had to be made for Fox in the close borough of Kirkwall. It was not till the following session that Pitt, who, with some want of liberality, upheld the conduct of the High Bailiff in refusing the return, was defeated in the House on the subject. The representatives took their seats, and Fox got £2000 damages from the Bailiff.

The great party struggle of the last year, which had terminated in the utter discomfiture of the Whigs and the establishment of the new Tory party under Pitt, had not left much time for the real Pressing measures. requirements of the State. India, Ireland, the finances, parliamentary reform, were all matters which pressed for immediate attention. Firm in his parliamentary majority and in the support of the King, Pitt proceeded to handle them. The Pitt's Budget. finances were naturally in a bad condition at the close of an unsuccessful war. The funds were standing only at 56 or 57, the unfunded debt was upwards of £12,000,000, and there was a considerable deficiency in the Civil List. One of the principal sources of the revenue was destroyed by systematic smuggling of tea. Men of otherwise respectable character and considerable[1135] capital were embarked in this trade. Large vessels brought their tea, and lay off at some distance, distributing their cargoes to small vessels, which landed them here and there on the coast. Regular receiving-houses were established and lines of carriers which brought the tea to the towns. It was estimated that the smuggled tea was at least as much as that which paid duty. Pitt lowered the duty both for this article and for spirits, the other great smuggled commodity, so as to withdraw the temptation from the smugglers. The deficit was made up by a house and window tax; this is known as the Commutation Tax. An Act called the Hovering Act was also passed, which extended the limits of the authority of the revenue officers to four leagues from the coast. Half the unfunded debt Pitt funded, and made up the deficit, which he considered a little below a million, by taxes on various commodities. These arrangements though they show no great novelty, were much applauded at the time.

Having thus cleared the way for general legislation, Pitt proceeded to bring in his India Bill. It was very like the one which had been defeated the preceding year, and was probably chiefly the work of Dundas. The fate of Fox's Bills had shown the strength of the India House, while the necessity for some Government control was acknowledged by all parties. The present measure was therefore one of compromise. A new ministerial department was established which should exercise the whole political control of the Company; this was to be called the Board of Control. By it was laid the foundation of that system of double government which continued in force till 1858. All business was to be carried on in the name of the Company, which retained the whole patronage except the appointment of the commander-in-chief, and other higher functionaries, whose appointment was subject to the veto of the Crown; but the Board of Control absolutely dictated the political conduct of the Government. Thus the chartered rights of the Company were left untouched; the balance of influence was not upset by a sudden change of patronage; the Board of Control, being ministerial, passed in or out of office with the ministry, but India was secured against mercantile views of policy by its political management being withdrawn from the hands of a merchant company. It was certainly a less complete Bill than its predecessor, it could not be a permanent arrangement, but tided over the present difficulty, and was carried without serious opposition.

[1136]

Much more difficult was the settlement of Ireland. The rational and patriotic demands of the volunteers, which had led to the legislation of 1780 and 1782, had been satisfied by those measures, but had been followed, as is always the case in Ireland, by agitation of a more revolutionary character. The leadership of the movement had passed from Grattan to Flood, rather a demagogue than a statesman, and the volunteers, a national and patriotic body, gradually dwindled to nothing, and in their place arose a clamorous and revolutionary democracy. The cry put forward was for parliamentary reform, the urgent necessity for which was indeed obvious. In a Parliament of 300, 116 seats were held by nominees of no more than 25 proprietors. The Government commanded 186 votes, pledged to them in exchange for the possession or hope of offices or pensions, 12 members were regarded as honest supporters of the Government, the regular Opposition was about 82, 30 Whig nominees, and 52 members of the popular party. To this Parliament Flood introduced a sweeping measure of reform. A scene Flood's democratic measure of reform. of wild uproar was the consequence, the Bill was thrown out by a large majority; no better success attended its reintroduction in a more moderate form. The mob rose in wild disorder, and acts of ferocious cruelty were perpetrated. The leader of this movement outside Parliament was Napper Tandy, an ironmonger, who did not scruple to intrigue with the Court of France. Some of the lower priests were also engaged on the popular side, but as Flood refused the franchise to the Catholics in his proposition, the main body held aloof from the movement. This state of disorder Pitt intended to improve by reforming the Parliament in a more practical and moderate manner and by commercial arrangements. All attempts at parliamentary reform had however to be abandoned; but the minister felt that before any vigorous measures could be adopted it was necessary to grant justice to the people. He determined therefore to complete the work of 1780, and to establish real commercial equality between England and Ireland. At the same Pitt's policy for Ireland. time he strongly held that equality of privilege implied equality of burdens. In accordance with this view eleven resolutions were brought into the Irish Parliament and accepted without much opposition. By these the restrictions of trade, which had already been removed as far as regarded Europe and the West Indies, would be removed in like manner with regard to the rest of the world; and with regard to imports, England and Ireland would become one nation, so that goods landed in Ireland could be re-imported into England without further duty. In exchange for this,[1137] all the hereditary income of the Crown, which was derived chiefly from customs, beyond the sum of £656,000 was to be applied to the support of the Imperial navy. Thus the money paid would bear a direct proportion to the advantages gained by Ireland by the extension of her trade. Pitt, sure of the economical soundness of the principles on which this Bill was based, only courted full discussion. He underrated Selfish commercial opposition. the selfishness of the commercial interest. On the resolutions being introduced to the English Parliament, the strongest opposition was raised by merchants and manufacturers, afraid of a fresh competitor; and Fox and Burke, the first of whom was confessedly ignorant of the laws of political economy, turned the opposition to their party purposes. The Bill had to be altered considerably, restrictions with regard to the Asiatic trade had to be continued, thus seriously diminishing the advantage granted to Ireland, while Pitt laid himself open to the charge of encroaching upon the newly-earned independence of that country by trying to establish the commercial superiority of England, since all this commercial legislation was to emanate from the English Parliament. The Whigs took immediate advantage of this error, and, unable to stop the Bill in the English Parliament, used all their eloquence to inflame the patriotic feeling of the Irish. The Bill in its changed form was therefore rejected in Dublin (August), and Pitt began to Pitt recognizes the necessity for a union. feel the necessity for that great measure which he completed eighteen years afterwards. If either true parliamentary reform was to be brought about or commercial equality to be established, not only legislative equality, but legislative union, it was plain, would be necessary.

This was not the only defeat which the ministry suffered. It was no more successful in its efforts at parliamentary reform in England. In fact, the interest felt in the question had begun to flag; it had been raised to its utmost by the separation between the representatives of the people and the people they represented, which had been so obvious during the administration of Grenville, and by Failure of Pitt's Reform Bill. the long and disastrous triumph of royal influence under Lord North. But Pitt's success rested entirely upon the will of the constituencies after the late dissolution, and the people were on the whole satisfied with their representation. But with Pitt, as with his father, the reform of Parliament had always been a favourite object; he now produced a Bill by which he hoped to win all parties to his side, but its very timidity weakened its popularity. He proposed to disfranchise thirty-six rotten boroughs,[1138] and to give the seventy-two seats thus gained to the counties and to London and Westminster. Thus far he was true to his old plan, but afraid of the opposition of borough proprietors, he consented to recognize as a part of the Constitution their rights of proprietorship, and designed to set apart a fund of £1,000,000 to satisfy the claims of the possessors of the boroughs which he wished to destroy. Such as it was the Bill was rejected by a majority of seventy, and Pitt regarded the question henceforward as settled against him. It is to be observed that all these measures, whether successful or not, were such as we should now speak of as Liberal measures.

The success of the Government in its financial schemes, on the other hand, was marked, although the arrangement which at this time excited most admiration has since been recognized as based upon an absurd fallacy. Alarmed at the great increase of the National Debt, and inspired with an honest wish to reduce it, Pitt produced his plan for a sinking fund. His taxes had been so successful, and the financial recovery of the nation at peace and under a firm Government had been such, that he found himself possessed of a surplus closely bordering on a million, and suggested that this million should annually be set aside and vested in commissioners to accumulate at compound interest. It was to be beyond the control of Government, and this fund with its accumulations was to be applied, as circumstances permitted, to the reduction of the debt. The principle is obviously sound as far as it goes, that is to say, what a nation saves it can clearly apply to the purpose of reducing its liabilities, but there the matter ends; there is and can be no peculiar and mysterious power in a sinking fund. But this was not seen by Pitt, or by those who approved of his plan, and when times of difficulty arose, the million went on year by year being religiously set aside, although not only one million, but many millions were yearly borrowed for the purpose of covering the current expenses of the year. Interest, and often much higher interest, was thus paid out on the one side in order that a less interest might be gained on the other. It was not till the year 1828 that this fallacy was finally exposed by Lord Grenville, who, strangely enough, had been the chairman of the committee who first recommended its adoption. It had however been virtually abandoned in 1807. Although Commercial treaty with France. Sept. 1786. he fell into this error, Pitt's financial views were generally broad; thus about this time he entered into a commercial treaty with France, by which, with some very few[1139] exceptions, prohibitory duties between the countries were repealed, a moderate tariff was established, and the famous Methuen Treaty with Portugal, which had almost excluded French wines, and changed the habits of the English nation, giving them a taste for the hot wines of the Peninsula, was abrogated. He also greatly simplified the custom duties, supplying their place in some instances with excise or customs levied inland, a most beneficial measure, but formerly so unpopular that it had almost proved fatal to the ministry of Walpole, the only great financial minister England had had during the century.

These measures, important as they were, excited little attention in comparison with the threatened impeachment of Warren Hastings. Though, as we have seen, censured, and almost recalled in 1781, the Governor-General had latterly retained his post unmolested, and came home in June 1785 on the natural expiration of his office. At home he was well received, but he had two vindictive enemies in the House of Commons, one, Edmund Burke, whose imagination had always been strongly drawn towards the majestic history of Hindostan, and whose hatred of oppression had been strongly fired by the accounts which had lately been received from India; the other, Philip Francis, the rancorous and defeated rival of the late Governor-General; and Hastings had scarcely arrived in England before Burke gave notice that he should call attention to his conduct. The feeling in England that Hastings had on the whole done a great work was so strong, that, although the ministry had shown him many marks of favour, it is possible that even Burke might have left him untouched had not his injudicious and wearisome agent, Major Scott, challenged inquiry. Burke accepted the challenge, and in April produced specific charges against him, based principally on his war with the Rohillas and on his conduct to Cheyte Singh and the Begums of Oude. Hastings, who was always unable to understand the feeling of the House of Commons, insisted on being personally heard at the bar, and wearied the House by reading a written document of enormous length, which occupied a day and a half in reading. On the first charge, however, with regard to the Rohilla war, a considerable majority was in his favour; it will be remembered that this belonged to the first period of his administration, and it was upon this that he had been already censured; but as Dundas, the original mover of the vote of censure, urged, with much show of right, the fault was an old one, and had been condoned by the subsequent appointment of Hastings as Governor-General.[1140] Hastings and his friends believed that his cause had gained the support of Government and was now secure. Great was their dismay when, upon the second charge with regard to Cheyte Singh, which Pitt supports them. was brought forward by Fox, Pitt rose and declared, that although he regarded Cheyte Singh as the vassal of the Bengal Empire, and liable to be called on for assistance, he could not but regard the infliction of a fine of £500,000 for the non-payment of £50,000 as ridiculously and shamefully exorbitant. On these grounds, he said, he should support the charge, all his friends voted with him, and Fox's resolution passed by a majority of forty. This entirely changed the aspect of affairs, but the lateness of the season (June 1786) rendered it necessary that the completion of the charges should be postponed till the next year. In the February of that year Sheridan, in a speech occupying five hours and forty minutes, produced the charge with regard to the Begums of Oude. So striking was this piece of oratory that it was deemed necessary to adjourn the House lest the excitement produced by it should prevent cool judgment of the matter. Again, and with the same result as Consequent impeachment. 1787. before, Pitt both spoke and voted in favour of the charge. On these and other charges Burke, in May, founded a resolution of impeachment, and proceeding to the Upper House, impeached the late Governor-General, who was taken into custody and admitted to bail. The trial did not actually begin till February 1788.

Another question which now arose, and which was in the next year to be of the greatest importance, was the conduct and character of the Prince of Wales. True to the traditions and customs of his family, he had allied himself to the enemies of his father, and not only in his political but in his domestic life had much outraged the King's feelings. From the respectable and somewhat repellant family life of the Court, the princes, one and all, took refuge in a disorderly and licentious life. The stern propriety of the father, and the somewhat unlovely rigidity of the mother, undid the work which their thoroughly domestic character should have done. The Prince of Wales had everything in his favour upon his entrance into life. Good-looking, of pleasant manners, of considerable ability, and views at all events nominally liberal, there was nothing to prevent his great popularity. Unfortunately the profligacy of his life, which the world might have pardoned, was the mark of a thoroughly depraved character, which led him into breaches of honour. This fault became very obvious in the year[1141] 1787. For some time he had been clamouring for the payment of his debts, and on the King's refusal to discharge them, he had in a huff reduced his establishment and pretended to live like a private gentleman. Meanwhile he had been entangled in an awkward love affair. Mrs. Fitzherbert, a Roman Catholic lady, had attracted his attention, and refused to listen to his advances unless he would marry her. This he did. Now, by the Act of Settlement, marriage with a Roman Catholic invalidated all claims to the throne, but by a second statute, the Royal Marriage Act, any marriage contracted without the royal consent was null. By pleading the second, the Prince could therefore avoid the action of the first, but by so doing was virtually taking away the character of his wife, and obviously evading the law. With this slur upon his character, he came to the Parliament for the payment of his debts. The charge against him was raised by Rolle, the member for Devonshire, and Fox, completely duped by his royal friend, was induced to give the fact a flat denial. The Prince completed his treachery by afterwards disavowing his instructions to Fox. Such conduct naturally produced a temporary coolness between them. After so strong a denial, however, it was impossible to refuse the Prince's demand, and his debts were paid, to the amount of £160,000.

The work of the last year was completed by the commencement, in February, of the trial of Warren Hastings. The trial took place in Westminster Hall, the Peers sitting as judges, presided over by the Lord Chancellor, and the accusations being supported by the managers appointed by the House of Commons, assisted by the most eloquent men in England, among their number, Fox, Burke, Sheridan, and Wyndham. The very talents of the accusers, together with the exaggerated and unlawyer-like style of Burke, tended to the safety of the accused. The trial became a mere exhibition of rhetoric; people crowded to hear the speeches, but withdrew as the legal points were argued, or the evidence produced, while Burke's language was so intemperate that the Lord Chancellor and even the House of Commons censured him. At the same time, in 1789, the gradual change of popular feeling was shown in the trial of Stockdale for libel against the promoters of Hastings' trial. He was prosecuted at the demand of the Commons, at the Government expense, but was acquitted. Three years afterwards Burke himself renounced sixteen of his charges, and all interest in the end of the trial gradually disappeared.

[1142]

The year was marked not only by the completion of old questions, but by the appearance of a new one. This was the question of the slave trade. The horrors of this trade had for many years been before the public, and the opposition to slavery had so far been organized, that it had been determined to assault—what it was believed might be overthrown without much difficulty—the actual trade in slaves, and leave the abolition of slavery itself for a future occasion. The horrors of the trade could scarcely be exaggerated. Ships built for the purpose were employed, in which the allowance of room for a slave was five feet and a half in length by one foot four inches in breadth. The extreme height between decks was five feet eight inches, but this was occupied by shelves, upon which the slaves were packed. Sixteen hours a day they remained below, chained to the deck, fed upon a pint of water and two feeds of horse beans. Such conditions of life, for weeks together, in the tropics, not being conducive to health, they were brought up and forced to jump upon the deck, under the influence of the whip, for the sake of exercise. If any difficulty arose, they were tossed overboard without scruple, and English law courts held underwriters answerable for such loss, as arising from the natural perils of the sea. No charge of murder, or even manslaughter, was ever dreamt of. These facts were elicited by a Parliamentary Committee, presided over by Whitbread, from witnesses who had previously described the excellent arrangements of the ships and the cheerful merry dancing of the slaves upon the voyage. Before any action could be taken upon these revelations, an event occurred which for a moment threatened the stability of the ministry.

In November, after some months of illness, the King was declared incapable of carrying on the business of the country. His illness assumed the form of insanity, and even if he should survive, as was thought doubtful, it seemed plain that a regency would be inevitable. The King's physicians, following the ignorant practice with regard to lunatics which obtained at that time, prescribed the strictest and most galling constraints, separated the King from his wife, refused him the use of knife and fork and razor, and intrusted him to coarse and cruel servants. Having by this means intensified the symptoms, they proceeded to pronounce them incurable. Fortunately for the King, Lady Harcourt was bold enough to recommend Dr. Willis, who, originally a clergyman, had for nearly thirty years been managing a private asylum for lunatics, where he had met with much success. On being summoned, he at once declared he could cure the King, and the Queen and Pitt placed[1143] him in his hands with implicit confidence. Thus when, after some prorogation, Parliament assembled in December, a committee which had examined the medical evidence expressed a hope of the King's recovery. Armed with this report, Pitt moved for an examination of precedents before arranging the regency, while Fox, forgetful of the Prince's late duplicity, and clutching eagerly at the power which seemed just within his grasp, asserted that precedents were useless, as "the heir-apparent had an inherent right to assume the reins of government." As Pitt immediately pointed out, this was to rob the Parliament of all power in the matter, although it had twice been regarded as competent to change the succession to the throne. The vehemence of the Whig party in fact overreached itself, and enabled Pitt, who firmly believed that he was on the point of being driven from office, with a somewhat ostentatious show of carelessness as to the favour of The Regency Bill. the future King or Regent, to produce a Bill nominating indeed the heir-apparent as the Regent, but under strict limitations. The principle he laid down was that, as the King would in all probability recover, he should, on resuming his functions, find things as little altered as possible. He therefore refused to the Prince of Wales the right of making Peers, or granting places, in reversion or for any term except during his Majesty's pleasure, while the care of the King's person and household was left in the Queen's power. Nothing, probably, but the feeling that the Prince was thoroughly immoral could have allowed Pitt to produce so stringent a Bill. It was not indeed passed, for the necessity of passing it was prevented by the recovery of the King. This had been the work of Dr. Willis, who, by mingled kindness and firmness, the removal of all the ridiculous restraints the King's doctors had laid upon him, had succeeded in restoring his self-respect and bringing him back almost to his usual state of sanity, although for some weeks longer he persistently believed, while showing the tenderest affection for the Queen, that he was deeply in love with one of the ladies of the Court.

Pitt's faithful adherence to George during his illness, and the firmness with which he had insisted on keeping things unchanged, though at the risk of total loss of favour for himself, bound the King Pre-eminence of Pitt. to him more closely than ever, and for many years to come his position was quite unassailable. Up to this time Pitt's policy had been enlarged and liberal in all directions. He had contrived to realize his father's plan, and resting on the authority of the Crown, but independent as a minister, had destroyed the monopoly of power so long held by the great Whig factions.[1144] This he had done without subserviency and without deserting the Liberal principles in which he had been trained, but he could not but feel that he rested primarily on the royal support, and insensibly his policy had become the royal policy, and he was pledged to support the influence of the Crown. This gradual and almost unobserved change was called into active exhibition by the events which were happening in Europe.

[1145]

GEORGE III.—CONTINUED.

1789-1820.

Secretaries of State.

The year which followed the King's recovery saw the opening of the Great Revolution in France. This event produced ultimately an entire alteration in the character of Pitt's policy, and a split between Burke and Fox which virtually annihilated for the time the Whig party, and rendered Pitt absolutely pre-eminent; but it was not till more than a year had passed that its full effect was felt in England, although from its first outbreak it had a tendency to exaggerate party differences, and brought into more striking contrast the principles of those who, like Pitt, desired the maintenance of a strong royal power, of those who, like Burke, looked no further than the establishment of an aristocratic constitution, and of those who saw with pleasure every advance towards the realization of those dreams of class equality which for more than a century had been stirring in Europe. When at length the influence of the Revolution became irresistible, England was in a position abroad to take a leading part in the European opposition to its principles, and at home social changes had occurred which rendered such a course of policy inevitable.

Although Pitt was probably aware that he was not a great war minister, or fitted, as his father had been, to inspire the nation with[1146] enthusiasm in the midst of danger, he by no means forgot to uphold the dignity of his country; and his management of foreign affairs certainly raised England from the depression into which she had sunk after the loss of her colonies, and the disadvantageous peace contracted with France and Spain at the close of the war.

One of the first instances in which this reviving spirit was shown was the affair of Nootka Sound. Spain, raising the arrogant claim that to her belonged the whole west coast of America, seized an English ship in Nootka Sound, in Vancouver's Island, and destroyed our settlement there. Upon this, Pitt, drawing closer his alliance with Prussia and Holland, and going so far as to increase largely the number of men in the navy, managed to exact from Spain a withdrawal of this claim and a restoration of English property, granting in exchange an assurance that illicit trade with the Spanish colonies should be checked.

But far more important than this single exhibition of determination against a country so decayed as Spain was the successful policy which Pitt pursued with regard to the general policy of Eastern Europe. The first opening which occurred was in Holland. Forms an alliance with Holland. In that country there existed, as usual, a constant strife between two great parties, the party of the Republicans and the party of the Prince of Orange. Of old the republican party had meant the party of the aristocratic and wealthy merchants of the country. The party of the Prince of Orange had almost without exception been favoured by the bulk of the people. But ideas had been rapidly growing; republicanism had assumed a somewhat different meaning. The war between ruler and aristocracy had been changing to a rivalry between the ruler, supported by the lovers of order and fixed authority, and those whose views were of a more democratic stamp. But the democrats of Holland still regarded themselves as the legitimate descendants of the republican party, and inherited the foreign policy of their predecessors. Like them, they sought the support and assistance of France, while the Stadtholder and his friends regarded England as their chief support. The agitation in Holland had been so vigorous that the Prince of Orange had been forced to withdraw to Nimeguen, leaving the Government in the hands of his rivals. In this there was a manifest danger to England. If the democrats remained in possession of the country Holland would become little else than a dependency of France, instead of what it had so often been, the[1147] firm ally of England. At the present moment France was more particularly ready to give it support. Vergennes, the French minister, was anxious to retain some sort of prestige for the Government, which was rapidly sinking in power and credit under the reckless and wasteful management of Calonne. No better opportunity could have been afforded him than the chance of undertaking a successful piece of diplomacy, or of war, in behalf of a democratic party, whose opinions had much in harmony with the rapidly increasing revolutionary feeling of France. Moreover, the commercial world of France was full of hostility to the late treaty with England; and as Vergennes had contracted that treaty, he hoped to wipe out some of his unpopularity by raising difficulties as to the completion of that part of it which touched upon the French trade with India. There the Dutch and French interests both led them to oppose England as far as possible, and a war would almost certainly have commenced had not Vergennes died. At the same time Calonne gave place to Lomenie de Brienne, and it was uncertain what course he would pursue. The question was brought to a crisis by a curious act of ill-judged violence on the part of the democrats, who seized upon the person of the Princess of Orange while she was visiting the Hague, it was believed for the purpose of attempting some reconciliation. As the Princess of Orange was the sister of the King of Prussia, he was able to use the attack upon so near a relative as a fair pretext for interfering on behalf of royalty. He marched 20,000 men to the frontiers under the Duke of Brunswick, thus affording Pitt the opportunity he desired of reconnecting England with European allies. He made common cause with Prussia, promising the assistance of the English fleet, and sent to demand from France an explanation of the 15,000 men they had assembled at Givet. The French refused an explanation, promised assistance to the States-General, and proceeded to send their troops into the country. The united arms of Prussia and England were entirely successful, the Stadtholder was restored to power with even less restriction than usual. The friendship thus begun ripened into alliance; and Holland, now entirely in the English interest, joining with England and Prussia, a sort of triple alliance was entered into for securing the peace of Europe, and to support the principle of the balance of power, in which Pitt was a firm believer.

The rising influence of Russia was the great object of Pitt's dread. The progress of that country was very threatening; its vast bulk and unknown resources, and the success which[1148] had hitherto attended its progress since the time of Peter the Great, had rendered it a very formidable element in the European system. Chatham had indeed regarded its growth as advantageous to Europe, the counterpoise at once to the power of the French and of the Prussians. His son took a different view, justified by the evident attempts of the Empress to increase her power at the expense of Turkey, and thus to secure the Black Sea, if not the Mediterranean, and by the ever-increasing influence which she exercised over both Prussia and Austria. Even the great Frederick had found himself obliged to court his formidable neighbour; again and again his brother, Prince Henry, had visited St. Petersburg; while Joseph II. of Austria was entirely led away by the Czarina's greatness. Already the greater part of Poland had been absorbed by that Empire; there now remained two powers at either extremity of the great mass of Russia which might easily have suffered a similar treatment. These were Turkey and Sweden. In the year 1787 the aggression for which Europe was waiting took place. The Emperor Joseph had a meeting with the Czarina, and travelled with her in her carriage as she went to visit the Crimea. He was there thoroughly dazzled by the greatness of the scheme which she unfolded to him. Turkey and Greece were to be conquered, and the old Empire of the East to be re-established. In exchange, it was hinted that something like a Western Empire should be constituted, and Italy, as of old, be placed under the Austrian sway. But the success of the Czarina and the Emperor was hampered by the sudden and vigorous assaults upon Russia from the side of Sweden under its King Gustavus III. This attack in its turn threatened to be neutralized by the intervention of the Danes, who were connected in friendship with the Czarina. Such, then, was the position of affairs which Pitt had to consider, in reference always to what he believed of vital importance, the European balance,—on the one side, Austria, Russia, and Denmark; on the other, Turkey and Sweden.

There were three countries against which Pitt could put in practice what appears to have been his fixed plan of European action; desirous of peace, and thinking few questions of sufficient importance to authorise him in plunging Europe into war, he hoped, by a show of superior power on the part of himself and his allies, to uphold the dignity of England and the existing balance of power. He began with the weakest. He drew closer his friendship with Prussia, and his threats in union with that power were sufficient to detach Denmark from its allies, thus[1149] to rid Sweden of the enemy in its rear, and to allow it to carry on its aggressive movements, which seemed so successful as a diversion in favour of Turkey. An alliance with Holland, Sweden, and Prussia secured the maintenance of peace on the part of Denmark. He then turned to Austria; for the danger from the joint attack on Turkey had become really imminent when the strong fortress of Oczakow had fallen into the hands of the Czarina's favourite Potemkin. The opportunity was favourable. Joseph II. had died, in 1790, just as all his plans, whether of aggressive ambition on the side of Turkey or of domestic reform in Flanders, had seemed to terminate in failure; while in Flanders a spirit of insurrection, too powerful for him to suppress, had been excited by certain reforms which he there introduced. Indeed, domestic dangers had threatened him on all sides. His successor, Leopold, was desirous of securing the friendship of French and German powers to aid him in his election to the Imperial Crown; and under threat of an immediate invasion Procures the Convention of Reichenbach. from Prussia, which Pitt had instigated, and impressed with the rising danger to all monarchies from the events which were occurring in France, he consented to conclude in August 1790 the Convention of Reichenbach and to withdraw from the Turkish war. Twice, then, Pitt's policy of intervention, combined with threats, but without actual warfare, had been thoroughly successful. The position of England began to stand higher abroad, and the country had again been brought into close connection with its old German allies.

His third intervention was less successful. The Czarina, left to herself both by friends and enemies, persisted in her course, and the fall of Ismail in December was marked by astonishing barbarities. Pitt thought to act upon the Russian Empress as, in conjunction with Prussia, he had acted upon Austria. He demanded that a peace should be made upon the status quo before the war, and threatened to support his demand by arms. An increase of the fleet was indeed ordered, but Pitt was mistaken both in the temper of the English and in that of the Russian Empress. The isolated threat of one country standing without allies did not seem to her very terrible; to the people of England the danger of a Russian aggression was of little importance. Pitt found it necessary to change his policy and withdraw his threat, and was content to allow Russia to conclude a peace by which she obtained the territory between the Bug and the Dniester and the fortress of Oczakow.

[1150]

But it was not only in its political position that England had developed with extraordinary rapidity after the American War. The whole condition of those industrial arts which give work to the lower orders was changed, and an enormous impulse given to the employment of industry. In spite of the constant complaints of those who were bent upon asserting the decline of the nation, the population had been gradually increasing ever since the Revolution of 1688; the rate of increase in the thirty years preceding 1780 was about 400,000 a year. This increase of population had already begun to call fresh land into cultivation; between 1760 and 1770 no less than a thousand enclosure Bills were passed. The improved processes of husbandry did even more than the mere extent of cultivable area to increase the productive power of agriculture. But this agricultural production could never have increased at the rate it did had it not been that the proportion between consumers and producers of food was rapidly being altered; for it was this period which changed England from an agricultural to a manufacturing country, and placed the weight of population, which had hitherto been greater in the South, entirely in the North. By successive steps all the great improvements in spinning and weaving were introduced; the discovery that iron could be worked as well with pit coal as with charcoal gave an immense impetus to the second great branch of industry; and the improvement in the steam engine, which enabled machinery to be worked irrespective of local peculiarities, spread the manufactures, which had hitherto nestled among the hills for the sake of obtaining water-power, into all parts of the coal-producing districts. This burst of industry of necessity produced great economic changes. The employment of labour in manufactories tended to increase the population rapidly. The increase of numbers, the growth of wealth among the manufacturers, called into activity more skill in agriculture, and demanded the occupation of more land. Land to which recourse is had under this pressure is naturally the worse land; it therefore requires more labour to produce its crop, and the most laboriously produced crop sets the value of the whole; the prices of the necessaries of life began rapidly to rise. Though the use of machinery made many things cheaper, and improved methods of husbandry prevented prices from rising as they would otherwise have done, as a general rule, while the price of luxuries decreased, the price of necessaries rose. Wages did not rise with a proportionate rapidity, and it was still a question whether, if the French war had not intervened, the relation between food and[1151] consumption, between prices and wages, would have been satisfactorily arranged. It was however evident that all these improvements, while they created great wealth for the middle and mercantile classes, by no means rendered the position of the mechanic and artisan easier, while, at the same time, higher and more intelligent employment, and the more sedentary life led by the mechanic, were well suited to foster habits of thought, and to make the half-educated man a shallow reasoner, ready to accept crude ideas as to the measures best fitted to produce improvement in the social position of himself and his class; and such ideas, emanating from France, had been for some time widely spread among the people.

Thus, while England had gradually resumed her commanding position abroad, and was ready with allies to join in any external movement, and while the growing wealth of the mercantile world was rendering it daily more certain that any such movement would be in a conservative direction, the people—increased in numbers and intelligence, but not bettered in their general condition—were becoming ready to lend a willing ear to any measures which promised to improve the political position of their class. And it was just at this time that the French Revolution broke out.

On the 5th of May 1789 the States-General of France was assembled for the first time since the year 1614. The causes of this momentous event, which produced nothing less than a complete change in the history of the world, were of ancient growth; the explosion had been slowly preparing ever since Louis XIV. had completed the mistaken policy of centralization, and had been able to say that the King and the State were one. The power and importance of the Crown had been secured at the cost of the destruction or degradation of all the conservative elements of society. The nobility, deprived of their local power, had been summoned to the capital to swell the splendour of the Court; without duties they still continued to enjoy privileges, while the administrative power was practically centred in the hands of the royal intendants; they were exempt from direct taxation, and known to their tenantry and dependants only by the feudal dues which they exacted, and by certain remnants of feudal services they could still claim. The judicial body, the "nobility of the robe," held their position, not by merit or by legal knowledge, but by purchase. The upper clergy were drawn to the Court like the nobles, and lived in splendour, while the village curé had hardly the means of livelihood.[1152] The people, oppressed by unjust taxation, excluded from all hope of bettering their condition, saw themselves deserted by their natural guardians and leaders, who seemed to enjoy wealth wrung from their toil, and honours earned by no merit of their own, but solely on the ground of birth. The misery of their position was aggravated by the constant recurrence of famines, and they saw with rage the corn trade so manipulated by men in the highest position as to all appearance to increase the scarcity. But an oppressed people will suffer long in silence unless the temper of the class above them be such as to favour the expression of their discontent. Such a temper had been called into existence among the thinking middle classes by the growth of scepticism and materialistic philosophy. Drawn originally from English sources, from the writings of the philosophers of the English Revolution, this form of thought had found its exponent in Voltaire, from the keen shafts of whose wit no abuse and no institution was secure. Montesquieu had pushed the same spirit of inquiry into political and constitutional questions, and Rousseau, more sentimental and spiritual in his views, had supplied a firmer but no less revolutionary basis to society than was afforded by the purely negative teaching of Voltaire. The literary power of these men make them the best known exponents of the spirit of the time, but the spirit itself was prevalent everywhere. Thus, while the institutions of the country were radically bad, they were exposed to the fiercest and most destructive criticism, and ideas of the possibility and rightfulness of a happier state of things were suggested to the public mind. The conduct of the Court and Government was not of a character to blunt the criticisms directed against them; the finances were in a state of hopeless disorder. The accession of Louis XVI. had for a moment raised hopes of a change of system; Turgot, an honest and able man of reforming views, was summoned to the ministry. But as his plan included of necessity retrenchment on the part of the Court and the taxation of the privileged classes, Court, nobles, and magistracy made common cause against him, and he found their opposition too strong for him. The same fate attended every effort at reform. Minister after minister was called to office, content either to follow the old course, which was inevitably leading to bankruptcy, or obliged to yield before the selfish opposition of the privileged classes. In turn, Clugny, Necker, and Calonne withdrew discomfited. At length, in 1787, the Cardinal Lomenie de Brienne accepted the difficult post. Like his predecessors, he soon found that there was no resource but the extension of[1153] taxation. This brought him into collision with the Parlement, the chief court of justice, whose members were drawn from among the privileged class. They contrived for a while to give their opposition the appearance of a popular movement against the power of the Crown; they even went so far as to declare that the right of extending taxation resided in the States-General alone. It was in vain that the King superseded the Parlement, and produced a new and by no means injudicious constitution; the mention of the States-General had seemed to open a new view to the people; nothing short of them would now be accepted. The new constitution fell hopelessly to the ground; the King found it necessary to recall Necker, the only minister who had enjoyed any popular confidence, and his triumphant return was speedily followed by the meeting of the States.

The assembling of the States-General, which was by many regarded with hope as the close of the difficulties of France, proved but the beginning of troubles. The unprivileged classes had at length obtained the means of expressing their wants, and would be satisfied with nothing short of complete revolution. Unfortunately, the King, a well-meaning man, with a real love for his people, was of a slow intellect, and easily guided by those around him. He fell into the hands of the princes and courtiers, and was induced to make common cause with the privileged classes, which were at first the real object of attack. When the Commons, or Tiers Etat, declared themselves the real representation of the nation, and changed the States-General into a National Assembly, he attempted to check them by a royal sitting, only to find his authority disregarded. The Commons assembled in the Tennis Court at Versailles (June 20), swore to perfect the constitution, and became the dominant power in the nation. An attempt to check their further advance by force of arms, the collection of troops around Paris, the removal of the popular minister Necker and the appointment of the Marshal de Broglie to the command of the army, drove Paris to insurrection. The thorough untrustworthiness of the army was proved; the Bastille fell (July 14); the National Guard sprang into existence; and a revolutionary Commune at the Hôtel de Ville governed the capital. The power of the sword passed into the hands of the people. Though the Assembly continued the work of the constitution, though, on the 4th of August, the aristocracy, in a moment of wild enthusiasm, surrendered all its old feudal rights, the mistrust of the Parisians, aggravated by the famine and the difficulty of subsistence, continued to increase. The Court imprudently[1154] gave colour to its mistrust, Lafayette, at the head of the National Guard, desired to get the management of the Revolution more entirely in his own hands. On the 6th of October a crowd of National Guards and starving women marched to Versailles and brought the King in triumph to Paris. He was followed by the The King brought to Paris. Oct. 6. National Assembly, which henceforward worked under the eyes of the Parisian Commune and people. The prestige of royalty disappeared, the King was in fact a prisoner in his own capital; the power had passed even from the National Assembly, and was centred in the people of Paris.

Such scenes, marked by acts of sanguinary vengeance on the part of the people, and showing the absolute powerlessness of the old system of Louis XIV., could not fail to excite the strongest interest in Europe. Nowhere was this more the case than in England. To some it appeared that our great enemy was perishing before our eyes of its own natural decay; while from another point of view, to lovers of liberty, there was a whole world of hope in the vigorous life exhibited by a people, downtrodden as the French lower orders were believed to be; to another party the hurried and irregular vehemence which had marked the changes in France seemed proof only of an anarchy shocking to all respect for form or antiquity, and sad evidence against the possibility of an orderly growth of reform. "The French have shown themselves," said Burke, "the ablest architects of ruin that have hitherto existed in the world. They have done their business for us as rivals in a way which twenty Ramillies or Blenheims could never have done." "How much is it the greatest event that ever happened in the world and how much the best," said Fox after the taking of the Bastille. While a third view, and this at first was Pitt's, rested complacently on the possible approximation of the Government of France to a constitutional monarchy similar to that of England.

The three years which elapsed between 1789 and the end of 1792 drew more distinctly the line which separated the two first of these opinions, and proved that the third was untenable. It was clear from the first which of them would ultimately gain the upper hand among the governing classes in England. Already, as early as March 1790, a proposition for the relief of Protestant Dissenters, and for the abolition of Test and Rejection of the Abolition of Tests and of the Reform Bill. Corporation Acts, which had been lost by only a small majority the preceding year, was thrown out by overwhelming numbers. A Bill for the reform of the representation,[1155] introduced by Flood, though Pitt had several times himself brought the subject forward, met with a similar fate; and shortly after the meeting of the new Parliament on November 25th, Burke issued what may be regarded as the manifesto of his party in his work Burke's "Reflections on the French Revolution." entitled "Reflections on the French Revolution." It was called forth by signs of the sympathy which the French Revolution was meeting in England. Its more enthusiastic admirers had determined to reap what advantages they could from the present state of excitement, and two societies—the Constitutional Society, founded a few years before, and the Revolution Society, an old established body connected with the Dissenting interest, and intended to support the principle of the Revolution of 1688—had entered upon a course of renewed activity. On its anniversary, in November 1789, the Revolution Society had not only listened to an inflammatory and revolutionary discourse by Dr. Price, a Unitarian minister, but had also sent an address of sympathy, signed by Lord Stanhope, their President, to the National Assembly, by whom it had been rapturously received. It was upon this text chiefly that Burke wrote. His book had a wonderful success, 30,000 copies were speedily sold, and writers have been found bold enough to imply that the safety of Europe was owing to this work. In truth, Burke saw more clearly than those around him the inevitable course of the Revolution; he foresaw its excesses and its miserable end in a military despotism; he saw, too, that it must of necessity become proselytizing. Terrified by these dangers, and unable to conceive the excellence of any government unlike our own, which was at that time a highly aristocratic limited monarchy, he did not see the truths which the French Revolution embodied, and which, had they been wisely directed and not rudely assailed, would have allowed Europe to pass into the new and inevitable phase of progress for which it is still struggling, without the constant outbreaks of passion on one side or the other which have marked the last seventy years. This work drew forth many replies, the most important of which were Macintosh's "Vindiciæ Gallicæ" and Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man,"—the first a temperate and excellent work of the man who was afterwards to be one of the greatest philosophical statesmen in England, the other the rough but sensible production of a revolutionist by profession.

The sentiments which Burke had declared in his essay he soon took an opportunity of declaring in Parliament. The question before the House was a new constitution for Canada. This was called for by the extremely antagonistic[1156] character of the inhabitants of the two parts of the colony. The inhabitants of Lower Canada were French, and used to French habits, those of Upper Canada entirely English. The province was in future to be divided, and the constitution of the Upper Province assimilated as nearly as possible to the English model. Hereditary peerages even were to be established. The Bill, granting as it did a sort of self-government to the colony, was a wise one, but Fox opposed it, and took the opportunity of speaking in high praise of the new constitution of France. Some days afterwards, upon the same measure, Burke arose and proceeded to reply, inveighing strongly Breach between Fox and Burke. May 6, 1791. against the Revolution. His own side vociferously called him to order; he persisted in his speech, deploring that he should be obliged to break with his friends, but ready, as he said, to risk all, and with his last words to exclaim, "Fly from the French constitution." Fox whispered there was no loss of friends, but Burke rejoined, "I have done my duty at the price of my friend; our friendship is at an end." Fox rose afterwards, and with tears in his eyes repeated that he regarded Burke as his master and teacher in politics, but he could not withdraw what he had said in praise of the French constitution; and thus the friendship of years was severed, and Burke was ranked with the ministerialists.

But it was not only in Parliament that the strong division of opinion caused by the Revolution was beginning to be evident. The conservative temper of the upper and middle classes was shown clearly in the riots at Birmingham. The friends of the Revolution had determined to have a public dinner to celebrate the anniversary of the taking of the Bastille. The dinner was chiefly planned by Dr. Priestley, a Unitarian minister, a man of much scientific repute. Hearing that his movement was unpopular, he attempted to postpone the dinner, from which he was himself absent; some eighty persons however met, and in the evening a fierce riot broke out against them; from Thursday till Sunday the riots continued, Dr. Priestley's house and library were destroyed, and much wanton mischief done. It was constantly reported, though never proved, that the magistrates of the district, far from trying to check the rioters, had been seen urging them on.

Up till this point Pitt had certainly shown no sign of yielding to the conservative feeling of the country. He had declared distinctly that he intended to pursue a policy of neutrality, to hold carefully aloof from any interference in the domestic affairs of France, and had even entirely neutralized the effect of the[1157] Convention of Pilnitz (Aug. 1791) by refusing to accede to the project of concerted action on the part of European powers which had there been broached. He even felt so certain of the continuance of peace, that his Budget, in the spring of the year 1792, was framed entirely upon a peace footing. He suggested the diminution of the number of sailors by 2000; he allowed the subsidiary treaty with Hesse to come to an end, and drew up a plan for the reduction of the interest of the Funds from 4 to 3½ or 3 per cent. He even continued his measures of improvement; he again supported, in a speech of unusual excellence, the immediate abolition of the slave trade, although without success; while, in conjunction with his great opponent, he carried through a Bill for a change in the libel law known as Fox's Libel Bill, which placed in the hands of juries the right of determining not only the fact of the publication of a libel, but the more important question whether the matter published was in its character libellous or not. The opposition offered to this Bill by Lord Chancellor Thurlow cost him his position; the Great Seal was put into commission. But the crisis had in fact arrived. The events which had taken place in France, and which continued to take place during the year 1792, and the corresponding excitement aroused in England, were gradually driving the minister to the persuasion that his peaceful policy of non-intervention was no longer tenable.

After its removal to Paris in October 1789, the Assembly, now under the influence of the Jacobin Club, and watched by the Parisians, proceeded rapidly in its work of destruction and reconstitution. All local arrangements and provincial powers disappeared when France was divided into Departments; the Crown lost its hold upon the judicial system, which was now grounded upon a popular basis; the Church became a department of the State, and the necessities of the State were supplied by selling its vast property, or, as purchasers were not forthcoming, by issuing bills payable in Church lands, called assignats. It became plain that the power of the Crown, and with it the power of the executive, was entirely disappearing. Nothing could save it but one of two courses—the King might become a traitor to his country, throw himself into the arms of his brother potentates, and begin a war of kings against peoples, or, withdrawing from his capital, rally round him all the conservative elements which yet remained in France. The King's flight to Varennes. June 1791. This was the plan of the one great man of the Revolution, Mirabeau; but Mirabeau died in April 1791; and in June of the same year the King adopted the other[1158] and worse course, fled from Paris, and was arrested at Varennes. He was brought back a prisoner, and remained with suspended authority till the Assembly in September, hurriedly completing its work of constitution-making, resigned its office. The King then resumed his authority at the head of the new monarchical constitution, but with power strangely clipped, and with an Assembly the leading members of which, the Girondins (so called because their leaders were representatives from the Gironde, a district near Bordeaux), eager and ambitious men, preferred theoretically a republic, and believed that their power would be best secured by plunging France into a war. It is not in fact true to assert, as is commonly done, that it was the attacks of the combined monarchs of Europe which drove France to war. Much sympathy was no doubt felt for the disasters of the The Girondin ministry declares war. April 1792. royal family, and the representations of the emigrant nobles and princes had met with some success in Russia and Sweden. But both those countries were far off. The more immediate antagonists of France—Austria and Prussia—were prevented by their domestic jealousies, their fear of Russia, and their relations with Poland, from at first dreaming of an open assault upon France. It was for their own ends that the Girondins stirred up the war spirit in France, and it could best be fostered by exciting the popular feelings by suggestions of interference on the part of foreign kings with the new-born liberty of the country, and by hinting that the King himself was a party to this conspiracy. It was thus, taking advantage of the sympathy which foreign courts no doubt expressed for the King, that the Girondins demanded, in an overbearing tone, immediate and satisfactory replies to their diplomatic questions, and failing these, declared war upon Austria in the month of April 1792. Their declaration of war was speedily followed by the reality of that union between Austria and Prussia which they had falsely urged as an excuse for it. But the Girondins had overreached themselves: by exciting the popular feeling against the King they had played directly into the hands of the Jacobins; and when the King, in June 1792, discarded his Girondin ministry and attempted to rule with something like independence, it was only with the aid of the Jacobins that they ultimately returned to power. For it was by this extreme party, still further excited by the injudicious and The King suspended. Aug. 10. threatening manifesto which the Duke of Brunswick had issued on the 25th of May, and by the ill success of the opening of the war, that the great insurrection of the 10th of August was carried out. The King was suspended from[1159] his functions, the Tuileries were taken, and though the Gironde was nominally restored, the power of the State was really in the hands of the Jacobins and the revolutionary Commune. The Legislative Assembly lingered but a few weeks longer, to give place in September Massacres of September. to a National Democratic Convention. The brief space between the 10th of August and the 21st of September was filled by the terrible consequences of the unbridled triumph of the people. The royalist prisoners were murdered in the prisons, the revolutionary Commune established in Paris, and when the Declaration of the Republic. Sept. 21, 1792. Convention met, in the midst of fear at home and fear of the advancing Prussians abroad, its first step was of necessity the declaration of the Republic and the dethronement of the King.

Almost on the same day that the Convention opened, the advance of the Prussians had been suddenly and unexpectedly checked. Dumouriez had occupied the Passes of the Argonnes, Kellermann had fought the cannonade of Valmy, and the Prussians, bargaining for a safe retreat, began to hurry homeward with ignoble speed. From this time onward the character of the war changed, and became really dangerous to Europe. A party more energetic than the Girondins was now in power. Dumouriez had always recommended the conquest of Belgium for political reasons; but war assumed a different aspect now that it was in the hands of the Jacobins; it went hand in hand with the propagation of revolutionary ideas. The victory of Jemmappes opened the road to Belgium; in the South, Nice and Savoy completed the desired frontier of the Alps; and the temper in which these conquests had been achieved was rendered obvious when, a few days after the battle of Jemmappes, the celebrated decree of the 19th of November Edict of Fraternity. Nov. 19, 1792. was issued, promising fraternity to all nations desirous of liberty, and when, two days afterwards, Savoy was formed into a new department as the Department of Mont Blanc. If further proof was needed of the character of the war, it was afforded by the peremptory orders which were issued to disregard all treaty obligations and to open the navigation of the Scheldt, which treaty after treaty, guaranteed by France and other countries, had closed, and the opening of which could not but bring France directly into opposition both to Holland and to England. The chief points to be remembered as affecting England are the declaration of war with Austria, sought by the French, and upon old fashioned principles; the fall of the Girondins, practically completed[1160] on the 10th of August; the union of Austria and Prussia produced by the war, but not contracted formally till after the death of Leopold; the advance of the allies, the consequent establishment of the Jacobins; the massacres of September; the summoning of the Convention; the check to the allies at Valmy; the renewal of the war of aggression upon different principles and with different success, those principles being illustrated by the ordering of the opening of the Scheldt and the appropriation of Savoy; while in Paris the completion of the second stage of the Revolution was marked by the suspension and trial of the King.

It was thus, with an enlarged knowledge of the principles and inevitable course of the French Revolution, that Pitt had to choose his conduct, and that in the course of this year (1792) the English people finally divided itself into parties, and in Parliament the old party names of Whig and Tory, which had in fact since the Hanoverian succession lost their significance, assumed a new meaning. The first movements of the Revolution were generally hailed with enthusiasm in England. In the grand march of the first days of the States-General and National Assembly there was nothing at first obvious to shock English feeling. On the surface it appeared only as if France had discovered, and was determined to realize, the same truths which England had already discovered; the people and the Crown appeared to be preparing to act hand in hand against the monopoly of the privileged classes, against the Divine right of kings, and for the establishment of that official royalty which already existed among us. To the leaders of the Whigs, who still erroneously believed that that party was the really Liberal party, there was everything to excite enthusiasm in the movement of the people, while Pitt himself could scarcely fail to recognize that the very same process was being carried out to which he owed his own elevation. But, by extraordinary mismanagement on the part of the French Court, and by the sluggish, uncertain character of the King, it came to pass that the cause of royalty became unfortunately and indissolubly connected with the cause of the privileged classes. The direction of the Revolution was shifted, and the assault was directed not only against them, but against the Crown; and not only against the Crown, in the sense that hereditary kingship was attacked, but also against all vigorous executive of which the King, even in his official capacity, might be regarded as the representative. Now Pitt's administration may be regarded as a popular triumph due to the union of King and people. It was[1161] quite untrue in England that the interests of the Crown and aristocracy were one; the power of the Crown, in so far as it was antagonistic to the power of the great families, was favourable to liberty. Nevertheless, the ideas of the French Revolution did in fact receive considerable sympathy in England, as was rendered more and more visible daily. The amount of that sympathy assumed an exaggerated appearance under the influence of the fear and horror created by the excesses in Paris, and the relation of classes which had not existed in England, but which those who sympathized with the Revolution chose to believe existed, did in fact arise. The choice seemed again to be offered between people and King. And all the privileged classes, and all the propertied classes, recognizing that a strong executive meant order, and that a strong executive was represented by the King, speedily made their choice, and gathered round the King.

There was thus formed a new Tory party, having for its watchword, "The Old Constitution," refusing to listen to any sound of reform or change, regarding every measure in a popular direction as a preliminary to popular excesses, the dominion of the uneducated, and the reign of socialistic ideas. At the head of this party Pitt, of late so liberal, placed himself, supported by Burke, the late Whig leader. Conscious of the strength he had himself derived from the Crown, conscious of the advances in liberty he had been able to obtain by means of his alliance with it, and thoroughly shocked with the disorder and violence of France, Pitt determined that of the two elements of the Constitution, which seemed to be coming into opposition one with the other, it was the Crown which at all hazards required the firmest support. To this new Tory party, before long, the greater part of the Whigs gave in their adhesion. But as a new Tory party was formed, so was a new Whig party. Certain large-minded men, such as Grey, saw no reason why a panic should check such obvious improvements as had already been set on foot. Certain vehement party men, such as Fox and Sheridan, of large and warm hearts, rejoiced when their feelings led them in the same direction as their political opposition, and formed together a small but united band, to whom the French Revolution was admirable, to whom war with France was wicked, and every attempt at the repression of disorder a wanton act of tyranny.

It has been already pointed out that both the social and constitutional condition of England afforded a good ground on which sympathy for the Revolution might take root. Not only were the numbers of the labouring classes[1162] largely increased, not only was the condition of the labouring class changing for the worse, the relations between capital and labour were in a much less satisfactory state than they now are, every form of combination among workmen was regarded as a crime, the line between class and class was very strongly drawn. Country people were complaining, in England as in France, of the absenteeism of landlords, the employment of harsh middlemen, and the general resort of all gentry to London. The Test Act and the penal laws were regarded by those who were affected by them as relics of persecution, all efforts to relax them were generally met with scornful rejection, and, before all, the representation was in a condition which, but for its evil effects, might be regarded as simply ridiculous. The sympathy which might thus have been naturally felt was not left without Revolutionary societies. instruction or direction. Those who most strongly felt its influence speedily formed themselves into societies, by whose means, in conjunction it seems pretty certain with assistance from the French themselves, writings and pamphlets, pointing out every flaw in the condition of England, and often using language which was certainly seditious, were spread broadcast among the people, and even among the soldiers. Of these societies by far the most respectable was one known by the name of the "Friends of the People." Its object was to excite and keep alive an agitation for the removal of the inequalities of the representation. It included many men of the greatest respectability, numbering twenty-eight members of Parliament in its lists, and such names as Lord John Russell, Grey, Sheridan, Erskine, and Lord Lauderdale. Far more dangerous were two societies which arose early in 1792, with branches in many of the chief towns of England. These were the London Corresponding Society, numbering between 6000 and 7000 members, organized as a secret society, and governed by a small secret committee of five, and a Society for Constitutional Information, consisting of the more advanced and thoroughgoing educated men of the time, and holding opinions of so dangerous a character that the Society of the Friends of the People thought it necessary to disclaim all connection with it. It was to check the action of these societies that the two first retrograde actions of Pitt were directed.

The outcome of the work of the Society of the Friends of the People was a motion brought in by Grey for a general reform of the representation. To this Pitt refused his support. Two things were necessary, he said, to induce a man to support a measure—the possibility of carrying it, and the[1163] possibility, when carried, of putting it into execution to the advantage of the people; both these conditions were now absent, not only did he believe that in the present state of feeling the Bill would infallibly be rejected by the House, but also it could not now be carried out without the greatest danger. The Bill was accordingly lost, and all chance of carrying reform disappeared. Yet the necessity for it was made very clear by a petition from the same society presented by Grey in the following year, which exhibited in all its nakedness the inefficiency of the representation, and proved that a decided majority of the House was returned in fact by no more than 154 individuals.

But while the respectable reformers were carrying out their efforts by parliamentary means, the two less scrupulous societies went on issuing papers and pamphlets to such an extent, that at length it seemed good to Government to issue a royal proclamation warning the people against seditious writings, and then to proceed to take legal measures against them. This proclamation was issued on the 21st of May, and the address moved in Parliament to thank the King for issuing it may be regarded as the exact point at which the new division of parties sprang into existence, for it was supported by many of the chief leaders of the Whigs, and though an effort made by Pitt to strengthen his party by a coalition with the Whigs failed for personal reasons, the Duke of Portland, Wyndham, Thomas Grenville, and others, came back to their allegiance to the wisdom of Burke, and joined henceforward in Diplomacy of M. Chauvelin. the united Conservative party. It is remarkable also for a second point which connects it with the international aspect of the French Revolution. M. Chauvelin had lately been sent over to England, with his far abler secretary Talleyrand, as minister accredited by the French King. But Louis' authority was little more than a shadow, and M. Chauvelin already thought fit to enter upon that peculiar course of foreign diplomacy which was characteristic of the revolutionists; he drew up a strong protest against the Proclamation, and demanded that it should be laid before Parliament. Of course Grenville, the Foreign Minister, had no alternative but to send back the letter, with a sharp rebuke, explaining to him what he seemed to have forgotten, the true position of a foreign minister. This was the beginning of that diplomatic squabble which ended in M. Chauvelin being dismissed from England.

But before the breaking off of diplomatic intercourse, the open sympathy expressed for the changes which had taken place in France had begun to rouse the fear of the governing classes in[1164] England. The proclamation against seditious writings had but Congratulatory addresses sent to France by the societies. Sept. little effect compared with the exciting news of the 10th of August, the massacres of September, and the retreat of the allies. The societies thought fit to send deputations with addresses of sympathy to the National Convention. The Revolution Society sent a present of a thousand pairs of shoes for the army, and the Corresponding Society, with four or five others of a similar character, sent a joint address, congratulating the French upon their republican form of government, especially admiring the outrageous conduct of the mob on the 10th of August, and even approving the sad events of September. Nor was their energy confined to words. Riots broke out in several towns both in England and Scotland. The most important were those in Sheffield and Dundee. At Sheffield the disturbances took the form of a regular Riots in Sheffield and Dundee. Nov. revolutionary riot. It was on a day appointed for rejoicing for the success of the French arms; a tree of Liberty was planted, and the procession passed through the streets, headed by an enormous picture of Dundas and Burke plunging their daggers into the heart of Liberty. "They are as resolute and determined a set of villains as ever I saw," writes an officer who was quartered in the place, "and will gain their object if it is to be gained; they have debating societies and correspondence with other towns; they have purchased firearms, and are trying to corrupt the soldiers." At Dundee almost the same events took place; again a tree of Liberty was planted, and the cries of "Liberty," "Equality," "No excise," "No King," were soon universally heard, though the ostensible cause of the riot had been the high price of corn.

This state of affairs—the seditious conduct of the societies, and the obvious tendency to riot—induced Pitt, in the beginning of December, to call out the militia. This he could only do legally by alleging insurrection as the excuse, and it was a somewhat strained construction of the word to apply it to these outbreaks. But Pitt had now made up his mind not only for repression in England but for war abroad, and the summoning of the militia was intended in fact as a first step in that direction. It was under these circumstances that an autumnal Parliament was summoned. The discussions naturally turned upon the conduct of the Government in calling out the militia, but Fox was unable to collect more than fifty votes to disapprove of the vigilance of the Government in internal matters.

[1165]

Much more really important were the indications of the near approach of war, given by the stress laid by the Government upon the decree of November, the opening of the Scheldt, and the irregular and unsatisfactory character of our diplomatic relations with France. From the beginning of 1793, although there was no declaration of war between England and France, it was perfectly clear that war was inevitable. An The Alien Bill. Jan. 4, 1793. Alien Bill was introduced, rendered necessary it was urged by the great assembly of foreigners in England, chiefly royalist emigrants, but also in part emissaries from the Jacobin government. Foreigners were by this Bill ordered to state the object of their visit to England, to enter their names on a register, and to obtain passports for moving to and fro. The Bill was at once asserted by the French to be an infringement of Pitt's commercial treaty of 1787, which had promised freedom of access to French citizens. It was followed by measures even more stringent. The exportation of all materials of war, the introduction and circulation of assignats, and the exportation of corn whether English or foreign, to French ports, were prohibited. While affairs were in this attitude, the catastrophe for which Europe had breathlessly Death of Louis XVI. Jan. 21, 1793. waited took place. Louis XVI. was guillotined on the 21st of January 1793. A thrill of horror ran through all classes of society, nearly the whole of London, and not the Court only, appeared in deep mourning, and orders were almost immediately sent to M. Chauvelin to leave England within eight days. The unofficial connections between him and Lord Grenville had been kept up ever since the King's suspension, but M. Chauvelin prided himself upon being in close connection with the Opposition rather than with the Government, and persisted in separating in his papers the interests of the Government and of the people. He had offered explanations and produced a long letter for the same purpose from Le Brun, the French Foreign Minister, with regard to the decree of the 19th of November, but the explanation was of a character to increase the irritation of the English. He had met every measure of the Government with an angry protest: he justified the opening of the Scheldt; he complained that he was obliged to enrol himself with the other aliens; he declared that the prohibitory Bills were distinct breaches of the treaty of 1787; and he was doubtless glad when the consummation he had aimed at was reached and he was ordered to leave the country.

[1166]

Some slight pretence was still kept up on the part of the French of a desire to keep the peace. M. Maret, well known afterwards as the Duc de Bassano, was sent over to take M. Chauvelin's place. The object of his mission is really unknown; he simply notified his arrival to Grenville, held no communications with him, and very shortly returned to France to find war already declared. At the same time another indirect offer of negotiation arose, strangely enough in Belgium, where Dumouriez desired an opportunity for a diplomatic meeting with Lord Auckland, our ambassador. It speaks well for Pitt's real desire to treat if treating were possible, that he at once accepted this proposition, holding that a general in command of an army might treat, without any implied recognition of the legitimacy or the stability of the Government which employed him. But though the required leave was immediately sent to Lord Auckland, it arrived too late, war had been already declared. It is a further proof of Pitt's pacific tendencies, that when he agreed to Dumouriez' proposal an embargo had already been laid upon English shipping in the French ports, an act of war which he was willing to overlook as long as any hope of negotiation remained.

But it may be fairly asserted, in spite of all that Fox and his friends urged, that there was no real opportunity after the massacres of September of treating with dignity with France. While M. Chauvelin was attempting on the 27th of December to explain away the November decree, on the 31st of the same month the Minister of the Marine wrote thus to the seaports of France: "The Government of England is arming, and the King of Spain, encouraged by this, is preparing to attack us. These two tyrannical powers, after persecuting the patriots in their own territories, think no doubt that they will be able to influence the judgment about to be pronounced on the tyrant Louis. They hope to frighten us. But no; a people that has made itself free, a people that has driven out of the bosom of France the terrible army of the Prussians and Austrians, this people will not suffer laws to be dictated to them by a tyrant. The King and his Parliament mean to make war upon us. Will the republicans of England permit this? Already these freemen show their discontent, and the repugnance they have to bear arms against their brothers the French; well, we will fly to their succour, we will make a descent upon their island, we will lodge there 50,000 caps of liberty, we will plant the sacred tree, and we will stretch out our arms to our republican[1167] brethren; the tyranny of their government will be immediately overthrown." In fact, as has more than once happened in our history, the disturbance of a few reckless men, which our free constitution permits to show itself without repression, was construed to mean what it might mean in less free countries. Misinformed by their emissary Chauvelin who saw but one party, willing to believe what they liked to believe, and ignorant of the character of the English nation, the French had persuaded themselves that there was a real division between the Government and the people of England, and were eager for the war.

That war they declared on the 8th of February, and by thus forestalling what must have been sooner or later the action of the English ministry, saved them from much difficulty. For there was considerable difference of opinion as to what should be the casus belli. England was pledged to neutrality, and was bound to France by a close commercial treaty. The only two grounds on which, technically, war could be declared, were the opening of the Scheldt and the destruction of the balance of power by the appropriation of Savoy. England being under distinct pledge not to interfere with the internal condition of France, neither the massacres of September, the establishment of the Republic, nor the death of the King, could with any justice be alleged as a ground of war. The appropriation of Savoy was an evident fact, but it was very plausibly urged that England, being in a state of professed neutrality, had entirely disregarded the invasion of France by the great Eastern powers, and had allowed to pass, without observation, the second partition of Poland. The opening of the Scheldt was no doubt contrary to treaties with Holland which England had guaranteed, but it was very reasonably urged that England was not called upon to plunge into a war unless Holland requested her to do so, and Holland remained studiously quiet. The guarantee of the treaty had been to save Holland from war; it might well seem a distortion of duty to force Holland into war for the preservation of the treaty. There can be no doubt that the Opposition was right in asserting that the war was declared against opinion; the point in which they were wrong was this, that they did not recognize the fact that opinion grown to a religion, a religion become propagandist in its nature, and that propagandist religion in arms was the greatest social danger which could threaten the world. Pitt and Burke saw this; the whole body of Tories and conservative Whigs dimly felt it. But the trammels of ages of diplomacy[1168] were too strong to allow of the fact being openly recognized. It was then with joy that the ministry found themselves released from their difficulties by the French declaration of war.

When England engaged in the war a campaign had already been fought to the entire disadvantage of the allies. The close of the year 1792 had seen the retirement of the allies from French soil, the battle of Jemmappes, and the occupation of Belgium and Savoy. The accession of England, Spain and Holland to the coalition so far invigorated it that its members believed that a campaign of a few months would complete their work; for dangers surrounded the French Convention on all sides. Dumouriez, a member of the Girondin party, displeased with the conduct of the Jacobin Convention, was meditating defection; the excesses of the governing party in Paris had aroused all the slumbering loyalty of France; La Vendée was in arms for constitutional monarchy and the Catholic religion; and both at Lyons and Toulon the reaction was for the moment triumphant. Dumouriez' treason had an immediate effect. Directly upon the declaration of war he invaded Holland, but seeking rather popularity with his army and the prestige of victory than the success of the plans of Government, he turned aside from Holland, and risked a battle at Neerwinden on the Gheet, in which he suffered a complete defeat from the Prince of Saxe-Coburg; and thus as a defeated general, and without his army, he gave himself up to the Austrians. His defeat and defection allowed the allies to advance along the whole frontier. But their movements were dilatory; instead of marching upon Paris they wasted their time in taking Mayence, Condé, and Valenciennes; they even committed the mistake of binding the captured troops to refrain from war only against themselves; they were therefore available to suppress the insurrection in La Vendée, and the troops hitherto employed there could be sent to the eastern frontier. The same want of energy continually marked the progress of the allies. The Prussians and Austrians were in fact too jealous of each other, and too much bent upon their interests nearer home to act with vigour. Time was again wasted in sieges. While the Austrians sat down before Cambrai, the Duke of York with the English troops besieged Dunkirk. Their communications were kept open by the Dutch at Menin and Hoondschoote. But the French army, under the vigorous management of the Jacobins, and guided by the military genius of Carnot, was no longer to be trifled with; Houchard fell upon the weak position of the Dutch, and York[1169] was driven to a disastrous defeat with the loss of all his artillery. The success was indeed only momentary; a panic seized the French troops, and they fell back to Lille, thus affording the allies an opportunity of advancing to the attack of the fortress of Maubeuge, which closed the road to Paris; but Jourdan, who had succeeded Houchard, now put in practice Carnot's principles. Hastily gathering 50,000 men, he fell upon half that number of Austrians, and completely defeated them at Wattigny. Success had also attended the French against the Prussians on the Upper Rhine. There, too, the terrible rigour of the new Government had restored the aspect of affairs. St. Just and Lebas had appeared as conventional commissioners in Alsace, bringing terror with them. The beaten armies were supplied and organized. Two young generals of the revolutionary school, Hoche and Pichegru, were placed in command, and the tide of victory was turned; the Prussians had to fall back, compromising the advanced position of the Austrians, and before the close of the year the French army, which had begun the campaign with a series of disasters, found itself victorious along the whole frontier line.

The Convention had also been successful in its wars in the interior of France. After six weeks of bombardment, on the 9th of October, Lyons yielded, without conditions, to be given up to the fearful cruelty of Collot d'Herbois; and the victorious troops hurried southwards to besiege Toulon, which had placed itself in the hands of the English, and had admitted the allied fleet to its roadstead. The genius of Bonaparte is said to have secured its capture. He saw that one fort called the Equilette commanded the roadstead, and that its possession would oblige the English, who were the soul of the defence, to withdraw. The capture of the fort answered his expectation; Lord Hood, without making terms for the inhabitants, collected such of the royalists as could crowd on board his ships, and sailed away, having first set fire to all the stores, and to forty ships of war which were in the harbour (Aug. 27, 1793). The insurrection of La Vendée had also been suppressed. Intrusted at first to ignorant men, with no claim to command except the strength of their revolutionary principles, the Convention troops had been everywhere defeated. But when Kleber was put in practical command the course of victory changed. Terribly defeated, and with all their chiefs of importance mortally wounded, the insurgents determined to try the fortune of war upon the other side of the Loire. They marched northwards towards Laval, defeated their pursuers, and had they[1170] made common cause with the Bretons might still have been successful. But trusting to help from England, which never came, they undertook a fruitless assault upon Granville in Normandy. Thinking themselves betrayed, and longing for their homes, the ill-organized mass of peasants insisted on being led southwards: even then there was some life in them. They defeated the republican General Rossignol and threw him back upon Rennes; but failing in an attack upon Angers, they marched pointlessly towards Le Mans. They were there received with terrible slaughter by Westermann, Kleber and Marçeau; 18,000 men, women and children were killed, and the rest fled, pursued by the pitiless Westermann. The fugitives reached the Loire, fought one final battle at Savenay near its mouth, where they were all, with the exception of some eight or ten thousand men, either put to death or captured.

Thus revolutionary France had proved itself no contemptible enemy to the united troops of Europe, and established its rule unquestioned in France. It was plain that all hope of an easy subjugation of France was over, and it was with the greatest difficulty that Pitt was able to keep the coalition together; the eyes of Prussia were eagerly bent upon Poland, an easier prey than France. Of increase of territory England had no hope; the war had been forced on her, and was honestly a war of opinion. But any cessation of her efforts would have placed her in a worse position than when the war began, and Pitt and the upper classes of England were not blind to the fact that the occupation of the continental nations in the great war afforded England immense advantages both at sea and in the colonies; it was worth making great efforts to gain the undisputed mastery of the sea both in commerce and in arms. Nor did the large sums of money, raised chiefly by way of loan, appear so ruinous as they really were. The effect of large loans is to increase the wealth of the capitalist at the expense of the working man; nor, as the chief weight of the accumulating taxation falls on posterity, does it become immediately evident. Thus supplied with almost unlimited means, Pitt succeeded in keeping up the coalition, taking into English pay, it is almost true to say, the whole of the Prussian army, and doing nearly as much for the Austrians.

Pitt's energy was equalled by that of France, and the Convention had the additional advantage of being free from constitutional rules. Vast conscriptions filled their armies, forced requisitions supplied them with arms and equipments.[1171] It was with the army of the North, 160,000 strong, under Pichegru, that the English had most to do. On each side the armies were divided into three divisions, and the duty of marching with 100,000 men on Paris was intrusted to Coburg. Defeated in the centre, the French had met with unexpected success on the left, Clairfait, the Austrian general, having been twice beaten at Moucron and at Courtray. Upon this, Pichegru almost destroyed his centre to strengthen his wings, and the threefold manœuvres became twofold. The key of the campaign was the possession of the Sambre; the Austrians lay in an advancing angle with their left upon that river from Mons to Charleroi. If the French could cross the Sambre they would be virtually in the rear of the Austrians. To this point, therefore, the Commissioners of the Convention, St. Just and Lebas, repaired, and attempted to inspire the troops with something of their own enthusiasm. Again and again the French were driven back. But Carnot's plan of massing troops was at length employed; the greater part of the army, which under Jourdan had been facing the Prussians on the Moselle, was turned northward, and Jourdan took command of 100,000, well known as the army of the Sambre and Meuse, just as the Commissioners had been driven back for the fifth time behind the river. After a sixth failure, the Commissioners insisting upon a seventh effort, the river was successfully crossed, and on the heights of Fleurus a battle was fought in which, though it was not completed, the Austrians were practically defeated. Step by step the English and the Austrians retired, the one towards Holland, the other towards the Rhine. By July the English were behind Breda, the Austrians beyond the Meuse. Want of supplies checked the French advance for a few weeks, but by October the English were driven into the corner between the Yssel and the Rhine, and the army of the Sambre and Meuse had captured Cologne and Coblenz. The occupation of Belgium by the French compelled the Prussians further south also to fall behind the Rhine, the left bank of which was thus in possession of the French army from Basle to the sea. Even south of that point successes had been won. The Sardinian position of Saorgio had been turned, and the passes of the Alps were opened to the French, who were thus in a position to invade Italy on the one hand and Holland on the other. The lateness of the season, and the wretched state of the equipment and commissariat, might have induced the French to be satisfied with these conquests, and few armies would have thought of facing an unusually severe winter shoeless and in rags, for to such a plight had the bad[1172] management of the Revolutionary Government brought them. But to this army of enthusiasts the winter was but a useful ally for the conquest of Holland, where a strong feeling in their favour already existed among that large section of the people, who had seen with anger their attempted Revolution of 1787 suppressed by the arms of Prussia, and to whom the Government of the Stadtholder was very distasteful. The failure of the preceding campaign had obliged Pitt to insist upon the recall of the Duke of York, much to the King's displeasure, and Pichegru now found himself opposed to General Walmoden, the Hanoverian commander. But of opposition there was really none. The lines of the three great rivers, the Meuse, the Waal and the Lech, were abandoned without a fight, and crossed by the French, either upon the ice or by means of pontoons; and finally Walmoden left Holland to its fate, and retreated across the Yssel and the Ems to embark his army safely in Bremen. The The French capture Amsterdam and the Dutch fleet. 1795. Stadtholder had already fled from the Hague and taken refuge in England. Amsterdam was occupied by the French without difficulty, the ragged regiments waiting patiently in the bitter snow in the streets of the rich city till their quarters were arranged for them without the least attempt at disorder. A striking finish was put to the campaign by the capture of the Dutch fleet in the Texel. The ships were ice-bound, and fell into the hands of a regiment of cavalry, who galloped across the ice to secure them. Holland was at once erected into a republic upon the French model.

But in spite of these continual reverses of the allies, in spite of the perpetual failure of the British arms in the Low Countries, Pitt had not been mistaken in the indirect advantages which the war would give him. The conflagration at Toulon had inflicted an almost irreparable loss upon the French fleet. In Corsica the veteran patriot Paoli had aroused the feeling of his countrymen against France. Nelson and Hood, with 1000 British soldiers serving as marines in their ships, had taken Bastia, which was regarded as almost impregnable, and the people of Corsica had begged King George to accept their crown. While thus in the Mediterranean English supremacy had been established, a still greater success had attended her fleet off the coast of France. By immense exertions a powerful and well-equipped fleet of twenty-six ships had been assembled by Bon St. André and placed under the command of Villaret Joyeuse. It left the harbour of Brest for the purpose of convoying a large fleet laden with flour[1173] from America. The English Channel fleet, under Lord Howe, sailed to meet it. In number of ships and weight of metal the English fleet was somewhat inferior, but the Revolution had stripped the French marine of its best officers, who had habitually been supplied by Brittany, now royalist in its tendencies. Bon St. André, originally Defeat of the French fleet. June 1, 1794. a Calvinistic clergyman, had all the fearful energy belonging to the Conventional Commissioners, but little of the skill of a seaman, yet he frequently overruled the commands of Villaret Joyeuse. Thus, when the fleets met upon the 1st of June, the French were unable to prevent Admiral Howe from repeating Rodney's well-known manœuvre of breaking the line. The defeat of the French was complete; several ships went down, and five line of battle-ships remained as English prizes.

Upon the Continent, however, success had been wholly on the side of the French; the campaign of 1794 and the winter of 1795 had added Belgium, Holland, the left bank of the Rhine, part of Piedmont, Catalonia, and Navarre, to their dominions. The coalition began at once to fall to pieces. As it was plain that there was no further hope of a military promenade to Paris or of territory to be gained at an easy price, the King of Prussia, who had been only kept up to the mark by enormous subsidies from England, made his Prussia, Spain and Holland leave the coalition. peace with the French. It was the pressure of England alone which had driven Spain and Holland into the war. Although Pitt had procured a change of ministry in Spain in accordance with his own views, and the substitution of Godoy for Miranda, the Spanish Government now awoke to its true interests. All the advantages of a maritime war of necessity fell to the lot of the English, and Spain saw herself aiding in the destruction of the only efficient rival to the English upon the sea, and thus in fact rendering certain her own insignificance on that element. The Spanish Government was therefore willing to treat. Holland, completely conquered, and with half its population preferring the French rule to that of the Prince of Orange, who had been forced upon the country, obtained peace by giving up its chief fortresses, paying a large indemnity, and making an offensive alliance with France against England, by which thirty ships of war were placed at the disposal of the French. Many of the smaller states both of Germany and Italy declared themselves neutral. England was thus practically left without allies, with the single exception of Austria, which was only induced to continue its engagements by a subsidy of four millions and a half. This series of treaties was completed in the course of the year[1174] 1795, chiefly by Barthélemy at Basle; the treaty with Tuscany, Feb. 9; with Holland [at the Hague], May 15; with Prussia, April 5; and with Spain, July 14.

The campaign of the following year, 1795, was confined to the Rhine, where Pichegru commanded the army of the Rhine and Moselle, Jourdan that of the Sambre and Meuse. Pichegru was meditating treachery, and lay idle opposite the Black Forest till the advance of Jourdan from the North to co-operate with him for the purpose of retaking Mayence forced him into action. He took Mannheim, and might have taken Heidelberg, but he wilfully resigned this advantage, and fell back in disorder upon the lines of Weissembourg, where he signed an armistice with the Austrians preparatory to joining them. His retreat had compelled that of Jourdan also.

The English meanwhile had engaged in a lukewarm way in an expedition which, had it been carried out with vigour, might have changed the face of affairs. After the great destruction of the Vendéan army at Savenay, the war continued to smoulder both in La Vendée itself and in Brittany. But north of the Loire it assumed a somewhat different character; the open, simple and heroic devotion of the Vendéan peasantry, who had followed their priests, gentry, and leaders of their own rank to battle, was wanting, and the hostilities of Brittany assumed rather the form of brigandage than warfare. The country was infested with small bands, who kept up connection with one another by means of private signals, but who seldom appeared in large numbers, and worked chiefly by night-surprises and by rapid and secret cutting off of detached posts. The chief man of the Chouans, as the Breton insurgents were called, was Cormatin. But certain men of higher rank were also among them; the chief of these was Count Joseph de Puisaye, a man of considerable energy and ability, who had been a member of the National Assembly. De Puisaye saw that irregular warfare could produce but little effect, and desired to obtain assistance from England, where the Government was supposed to be ready to assist any endeavour against the French Republic; an impression kept alive by the rumours, probably much exaggerated, spread by agents who were constantly passing and repassing through the Channel Islands between France and England.

In the autumn of 1794 De Puisaye betook himself to England and laid his plans before Pitt. It was suggested that 10,000 British troops should be joined with the corps of emigrants, and should land in Brittany and seize Rennes, and thence push forward at once over Normandy, Maine and Poitou. It was thought advisable that a prince of the blood should either[1175] accompany the expedition or shortly appear upon the scene, and the Count of Artois was selected for the purpose. Lord Moira, favourably known in the American War as Lord Rawdon, was to take command of the English troops. But though speed and secresy were of the first necessity, the expedition hung fire, and news of it reached the ears of the French Government. The reason for this delay was partly jealousy and disunion among the emigrants themselves, partly Pitt's mistrust of the readiness of the French to join him, and his knowledge of the danger of relying on the assertions of sanguine exiles, and partly the discovery of the feeling existing among the royalists themselves in La Vendée and Brittany against the introduction of any large foreign army; for the belief seems to have been prevalent that Pitt's objects were selfish, and that an English army would be rather a danger than an assistance. It is at all events certain that the royalists in Paris, in their dislike that the reaction should be brought about by any means but their own, did their best to injure the expedition. The consequences of the delay were serious. In spite of considerable sums of money sent from England, and a good deal more much cheaper money, consisting of forged assignats, which were exported largely, in the spring of 1795 the skill of Hoche and Canclaux, the generals opposed to the insurgents, and the very favourable terms offered by the Convention, induced the chiefs both of the Vendéans and of the Chouans to accept an amnesty. The terms offered were certainly unusually tempting. A large indemnity of several millions of francs was to be given to the people to repay them for their losses; the houses that had been burnt were to be rebuilt; ten millions were to be given to the chiefs to take up the bonds that had been issued in their names during the insurrection; Charette was to be allowed to keep up 2000 men in the pay of the Government, freedom of religion was to be granted, and there were to be no requisitions in La Vendée for five years. The agreement was made as solemn as possible. The first to accept it was Charette, with whom the treaty was signed with great pomp in the city of Nantes in February. Subsequently, in April, Stofflet gave in his adhesion to the same arrangement, and finally the Chouans did the same. It seemed a proof of their sincerity that they gave up into the hands of the Commissioner of the Convention nearly a million of forged assignats, which they had received from the English fleet round the coast; but on the part of the insurgents it appears that this treaty was illusory, forced upon them by the delay of the English. It was used however as an additional ground for refusing large assistance,[1176] and it was an army of emigrants only, with a considerable quantity Destruction of the expedition to Quiberon. of stores and money, which in July of 1795 at length set sail from England. Even then the plan of De Puisaye was overruled for the worse. For the sake of a good roadstead for the English fleet, it was arranged that the landing should be upon the peninsula of Quiberon, close to Carnac, instead of in the north of Brittany; and again, apparently in mistrust of De Puisaye's partisan system of warfare, it was thought necessary to give him as second in command a royalist emigrant of the name of D'Hervilly, a red tape soldier, who had displayed considerable courage on the 10th of August, but who was a very bad man for the present irregular warfare. It even seemed doubtful whether his authority did not supersede De Puisaye's, and after Quiberon was reached, it was thought necessary to send an appeal to England to settle this weighty question. Meanwhile, after two days of delay, the troops were landed at Carnac. They were received with an enthusiasm so riotous and irregular, that the commander's love of discipline received a severe shock, and he ceased to trust his wild allies. However, in three days they were joined by some 10,000 men, and De Puisaye was eager to rush forward and raise the whole of the neighbouring country, but the answer from England had not yet been received, and the troops waited on in inactivity. At length something was done. A small fort called Port Penthièvre covers the little isthmus which joins the peninsula of Quiberon to the shore. D'Hervilly proceeded to bring up all his artillery, but before his operations were completed, De Puisaye and a few hundred Chouans had gained possession of the place without difficulty. With his regular troops in the peninsula and holding the fort, and with his Chouans spread along the mainland, De Puisaye was compelled to remain inactive. All the jealousies which existed among the royalists burst out, and even worse than that, time was allowed for General Hoche to increase his 5000 troops, which might easily have been routed, to double that number. He suddenly attacked the invaders, and drove the whole mass, Chouans, emigrants, and all, to the narrow confined peninsula. Their efforts to break loose were unavailing; fresh emigrant troops under Sombreuil came from England. De Puisaye's authority was confirmed, but it was too late. Some republican troops taken in Fort Penthièvre had been admitted to the emigrant ranks. They entered into treacherous correspondence with Hoche's army, and by their assistance the fort was recaptured. The exit from their peninsula was thus entirely closed to them, the[1177] enemy's cannon was placed along the corresponding shore, and swept the isthmus and the roadstead, while the republican troops, advancing from the fort, drove the invaders backward into the corner of the tongue of land. They were literally driven into the sea. The scene was a fearful one. Many in despair threw themselves upon their own swords, many tried to reach the boats of the fleet, and were a ready mark for the republican musketry. Some thought themselves fortunate in reaching fishing-boats which were hovering about the coast, but in zeal for their own preservation the boatmen lopped off their hands and suffered them to sink. Some 900, with De Puisaye at their head, reached the English squadron and were saved. About 700, under De Sombreuil, made, as they thought, terms with General Humbert, but the conditions were only verbal, and included, as the French asserted probably with truth, a reference to the Convention. The reactionaries in power were glad of the chance of freeing themselves of the charge of favouring the royalists. Orders were given that the law against emigrants taken in arms should be carried out to the letter. The prisoners were brought out in batches and shot upon the seashore till 700 of them had been killed. After this the fate of the insurgents was sealed. In the following year (1796) the Count of Artois again appeared upon the coast, and Charette and Stofflet were again in arms, but the Count of Artois was content to remain in idleness at L'Ile Dieu, and Hoche succeeded in the difficult work of at once conquering and conciliating all that remained of the insurrection. Charette and Stofflet were both captured and shot.

There can be but little doubt that when war was first declared the feeling of the English people was very strongly in favour of it. Accustomed for years to trust to Pitt, they continued their perfect confidence in him though his policy had changed, and, as we have seen, the opposition in the House of Commons was virtually destroyed. The confidence of the nation was chiefly exhibited in the readiness with which it met all the demands for increased taxation and for immense loans; in fact, Pitt was strongly supported by the commercial classes. With them the war was in itself popular, they were clearsighted enough to see how vast was the opening likely to be afforded them by the increase of English power upon the sea.

In the year 1793 Pitt gained a fresh right to their gratitude by the assistance he afforded them during a brief monetary crisis which threatened to be very destructive. The year had been one of great financial difficulty. The[1178] sudden expansion of manufacturing industry which had followed upon the great inventions at the beginning of the reign, and the increase of commerce which followed the close of the American War, had rendered necessary a large amount of capital. The want had been met by a largely increased paper currency. Reckless banking had become prevalent, and provincial banks issued notes far beyond their capital. A very slight panic would be enough to cause the collapse of such a system. It was found that to meet the necessities of the exchange between England and the rest of the world bullion would have to leave England. Bullion was already scarce, and the Bank of England therefore thought it necessary to restrict its issues. This was enough to cause the failure of a few great houses; a panic ensued; there was a run upon the provincial banks; out of 350 more than 100 failed. Yet there was in reality quite enough property both in securities and in goods to enable merchants to meet all demands. It was only for the moment that there was a deficiency of money, that is, of the means of exchange. Pitt, with admirable clearness, recognized the real solvency of the country, and authorized the issue of bills on the Exchequer to the value of five millions. These were advanced to merchants, who could prove their solvency, against securities or goods. As these bills rested on the credit of the nation, they were readily received, the engagements of the merchants were satisfied by their means, and credit was restored. As it proved, not more than four millions was borrowed, and the whole sum was speedily repaid without loss to the nation.

The effect of the complete trust placed in Pitt was to allow him to give full rein to his new policy. Now that policy was one entirely of repression, and the effect of it in the long run, indeed before the year was out, was to divide England much more sharply into the propertied and non-propertied classes, and to bring into existence a state of feeling highly undesirable, and which tended much to produce those very evils it was intended to prevent. While every movement in a liberal direction was certain to be checked, laws of the most stringent description were willingly passed, and at first the execution of existing laws, especially with regard to seditious writing, received great public The Traitorous Correspondence Bill. March 15, 1793. support. In this class may be mentioned the Traitorous Correspondence Act. There has always been great dislike to tampering with or extending the law of treason, yet there were but fifty-three members of the House of Commons who could be found to lift their voices against this Bill,[1179] which declared guilty of high treason, firstly, all those who supplied any arms or military or naval stores to the enemy; secondly, all those who purchased lands in France, for the use of assignats rendered the sale of land the chief support of French finance, and the purchase of land was therefore regarded as indirectly strengthening the hands of the enemy; thirdly, it prohibited all intercourse with France without special license under the Great Seal; and fourthly, the insurance of French vessels by English merchants. The two first of these offences were to fall directly under the old law of Edward III., and to deprive those who were guilty of them of the advantages secured to them by the ameliorations of the law which had since been made, such as the right to employ counsel, and to be furnished with the list of the jury, the necessity of two witnesses to secure conviction, and the lapse of a certain period between the indictment and the trial.

But it was chiefly in the prosecution for seditious meetings and seditious writings that the character of the Government showed itself. The best known of these in the year 1793 was that of Muir. This young man, a member of the Society of the Friends of the People, was indicted for spreading the works of Thomas Paine. He defended himself with great ability upon the ground that he had only aimed at the reform of Parliament. His speech was greeted with loud applause, but the Lord Justice-Clerk summed up most strongly against him, and asserted the strange doctrine that the Government was made up of the landed interest. "As for the rabble," said he, "who have nothing but personal property, what hold has the nation on them?" He sentenced Muir to fourteen years' transportation. The severity of the judges and the frequent trials that the Government ordered had not the effect of checking the popular feeling. Delegates from various parts of Scotland, in concert with the Friends of the People and other societies, assembled at Edinburgh. The leading spirits were Maurice Margarot and Joseph Gerald, agents from London. These delegates assumed the name of a convention, spoke of the first year of the British Republic, and otherwise mimicked their French brethren. In December the law came upon them, and three of them, with Margarot and Gerald, were transported for fourteen years.

Up till this time the people as a whole had been heartily with Pitt; but the course of the year had tended to change their feelings, the war had been by no means the light undertaking expected, and it began to be seen that its continuation meant fearful expenses, heavy taxes, and a system of[1180] government but little in accordance with the general character of English administration. Some even of Pitt's old friends began to whisper of peace, but his will was not one to yield to opposition. In Parliament he was still supreme, and in this first beginning of difficulties he exhibited the greatness of his energy and his resources. He branded with fierce words, which reminded his hearers of his great father, all who dared to think of peace; he openly avowed that the idea was impossible till some total change took place in the French Government, thus putting his actions on their true basis. Backed by his commercial friends, he found means to continue the subsidies to Prussia and Austria, he purchased the adhesion of several of the smaller German states, induced the Spaniards to continue a war which was wholly against their own interests, and obliged the lesser Italian states to join the coalition; he even allowed Russia to perpetrate the second partition of Poland as a price of her neutrality. With such efforts as these he contrived to carry on his war; it was not unreasonably that he became the ogre of the French, the one object of their insatiable hatred.

At home he would not abate one jot of his policy. Again the prosecutions went forward. So little had the late action of Government been successful that discontent and the intrigues of the societies were becoming even more envenomed. The English had taken a leaf out of the Scotch book; two of the great societies—the Constitutional Society and the Corresponding Society—determined that they too would have a convention. It seems to have been a far more real and dangerous thing than the Scotch convention. The workmen were stirred up, meetings were held in all the great towns attended by delegates from London, revolutionary songs were composed and circulated, and a considerable number of weapons constructed and secreted. It was the intention of the Convention to overawe Parliament somewhat in the same way as the Jacobin Club overawed the French Assembly. The Government determined to act as strongly as possible against it, and instead of accusing the leaders of seditious practices merely, they thought it advisable to treat their conduct as a great and capital crime, and to bring them to trial for high treason. The leaders arrested were Hardy, Secretary of the Corresponding Society, Adams, Secretary of the Constitutional Society, Horne Tooke, the well-known opponent of Junius, the Rev. Jeremiah Joyce, author of the "Scientific Dialogues," and tutor to Lord Stanhope's sons, Thelwall, a political lecturer of some importance, and three others. A[1181] secret committee of the House, having examined their books and papers, reported that there were ample proofs of a traitorous conspiracy for overawing Parliament. Upon this report the Government advanced a step further, and in spite of the eager opposition of the minority, carried through the House the suspension of the Habeas Corpus. Trials for high treason followed both in England and Scotland. In Scotland the prosecution was successful, but the English trials did not go off so smoothly. Hardy was tried first on the 28th of October. Sir John Scott (afterwards Lord Eldon) conducted the prosecution; but although the evidence, if true, tended to show that language of a most seditious character had been used, and weapons and plans of insurrection made, yet the skill and eloquence of Erskine, who laid his chief stress on the grave constitutional danger of any enlargement of the Treason Act, procured an acquittal. The Government was not satisfied, Horne Tooke was also tried. He defended himself with his usual effrontery and humour, and again an acquittal was obtained. Still the Crown persisted, and Thelwall the lecturer was tried; again the accused was acquitted. The excitement about the trials was intense, the speeches of the rival barristers were listened to with extreme interest, and the acquittals were hailed with the wildest enthusiasm. It was plain that a considerable change had taken place in the feelings of the people; the strings of repression had been drawn too tight; the line between class and class was becoming more sharply marked.

The same fact is rendered obvious by the completion in this year of the consolidation of the new Tory party. Ever since the middle of 1792 the Duke of Portland and his friends had voted with Government, but they now openly joined it, and were admitted to some of the best places. The Duke of Portland became Secretary for the Home Department, Earl Fitzwilliam Lord President, and Mr. Wyndham Secretary at War. The one point which connected the new recruits with the ministry was the determination all felt to carry on the war. Pitt was therefore hampered in two directions. When Parliament was opened on the 13th of December 1794, there appeared to be a growing feeling in Desire for peace. favour of peace, and Pitt found himself opposed to many of his old friends, the country gentlemen; but his union with the Duke of Portland and his party rendered a change of policy at present impossible. He was in the hands of the war party; afraid of losing their support, and buoyed up by an idle belief in the financial exhaustion of France, he determined still to carry on the[1182] war vigorously. As he was quite paramount in Parliament[12] in spite of an increased minority, he had no difficulty in getting leave to raise a loan of eighteen millions, and to guarantee another large loan to purchase the co-operation of Austria. He nevertheless slightly changed his tone, and confessed that he should be satisfied with a peace that gave him security, and allowed later in the session that there was a possibility of treating with the present Government of France.

Amongst other minor difficulties which he had to meet was the constant embarrassment of the Prince of Wales. Seven years before he had purchased the payment of his debts by a lie concerning his wife; he was now again £700,000 in debt; the only terms on which he could hope to get relieved were that he should marry legally, and the King had chosen for him a Princess of Brunswick whom he had never seen. Lord Malmesbury arranged the negotiation, but unwisely suppressed, what he saw clearly himself, the absolute unfitness of the lady for the position she was to occupy. He found her frivolous, slovenly, and quite deficient in tact. It was impossible but that she should be distasteful to any English gentleman. Very shortly after the birth of her child a formal separation took place, and a scandalous dispute arose, which afterwards turned into a great party conflict. For the present however, the Prince received the price of his unfortunate bargain. The royal message demanding the assistance of Parliament was couched in humble language, and asked only for some arrangement by which the debts should be ultimately paid; but even thus it excited a perfect storm in the House. None even of the Prince's old friends rose to defend him, and Pitt himself, though no friend of the Prince, intreated that the matter might not be examined by a Parliamentary Committee, for fear of the damaging effect of such an inquiry on the principle of an hereditary monarchy. It was finally arranged that the Prince's income should be raised from £72,000 to[1183] £125,000 a year, that the revenues of the Duchy of Cornwall should be set apart, which in twenty-seven years would extinguish the debt, and that £25,000 a year more should be devoted to pay the interest. To these enactments was added an extraordinary one, rendering the Prince's servants liable for any contract they should enter into on his behalf, and limiting legal remedy against the Prince to the term of three months.

Such demands upon the public purse seemed very badly timed, when the working classes were suffering very heavily from depression of trade, from famine produced by two bad harvests, and from a constantly increasing burden of taxation. Discontent was in fact increasing widely, great political meetings were held in London and elsewhere to expose the abuses of monarchy and aristocracy. Riots and seditious writings were constantly on the increase, and the Government thought the state of affairs so critical that they determined upon an autumn session. Three days before Parliament met a monster meeting was held under the auspices of the Corresponding Society in Copenhagen Fields. The excitement thus produced found vent in an assault upon the Assault on the King. King as he went to open Parliament, one of the windows of his state coach was broken by a stone or bullet; on his return his coach was again surrounded by an angry mob, with shouts of "Bread, bread! peace, peace!" and he only escaped with difficulty by driving rapidly in his private carriage from St. James's to Buckingham Palace. The King, who throughout showed great courage, showed himself in the evening at Covent Garden theatre, where he was on the whole well received. This act of violence produced two coercive Bills, one to suppress seditious meetings, the other to extend the law of treason. Every public meeting was to be advertised by a paper signed by resident householders, and all meetings were liable to be dispersed according to the Riot Act if any two justices thought them dangerous; while by the second law, writing, preaching, and speaking, were created overt acts, thus rendering the offender guilty of treason, and writing or speaking against the established Government was made a highly punishable crime. These Bills were commonly known as the Sedition and Treason Bills. They were not passed without strong opposition, and the use of language on the part of Fox so vehement as to excite still further the anger of the Tories. This party was now enjoying its selfish triumph to the utmost. It became necessary again to augment the taxes, and Pitt hit upon the expedient of levying duties[1184] upon legacies and successions. The country gentlemen had sufficient influence to confine the Bill to the succession of money and personal property only, and to exclude real property from the action of the Bill. This glaring injustice was not remedied till 1853.

The burden of taxation had much to do with the overtures for peace which were set on foot in 1796. Nearly all classes in the kingdom had become weary of the war. Pitt, as has been seen, had been forced into it against his natural tendencies, and though, when once embarked in the war of opinion, he had used language of the most overbearing character, he was eager, now that he found his hope of a speedy bankruptcy of France frustrated, to bring about an honourable peace. Such an opportunity was offered by the changed character of the French Government. The Directory had held its position for upwards of a year, and seemed to give promise of such stability as would render negotiation possible. This change in the Government of France had been the outcome of a series of revolutions which had followed each other in rapid succession.

The Girondins had, contrary to their conscientious opinions, voted for the death of the King. It was in fact an act of suicide. After this it was useless to oppose any demand of the Jacobins; the attempt only produced a violent struggle in the Convention, which ended in the complete overthrow of the Girondins by the insurrection of the 1st of June. In the place of the party thus annihilated the Jacobins found themselves supreme. Upon them henceforward lay the duty of saving the Revolution within and rescuing France from foreign assaults from without. The machinery of Government to which they trusted to obtain these ends was a Committee of Public Safety, in whose hands the full powers of the executive were lodged. As far as the external defence of France was concerned, the restless energy of the new rulers was completely The Committee of Public Safety. successful. La Vendée, Toulon, and Lyons, the centres of opposition within France, were all reduced. Carnot struck out a new plan of warfare, and found means to employ with success the masses with which an almost unlimited conscription supplied the army, and from this time onwards the French were everywhere successful. But while exhibiting this energy abroad, in France the government of the Committee was in the last degree cruel and tyrannical. Nor could the Jacobins agree among themselves. On the one side was a party atheistical in their religion, communistic in their political views, foul and blasphemous in their[1185] language. This party, which predominated in the Commune, took its name from Hébert, the editor of an infamous paper called Père Duchesne. It shocked the feelings of the world by its excesses, abolishing religion, closing the churches, and holding a blasphemous service in Notre Dame in honour of Reason. On the other side was a party, headed by Danton, intent chiefly on success abroad, and inclined to believe that the work of destruction had gone far enough. Between the two was the party of the Purists, headed by Robespierre and St. Just, who looked with equal hatred on the scandalous and anarchical conduct of the Hébertists and the indulgent and somewhat loose lives of the followers of Danton. Robespierre was able to attack and destroy both these parties in turn. The Hébertists were the first to fall, but very shortly after the same fate befell the Dantonists.

Atheists and indulgents being thus both removed, Robespierre and his party were virtually masters of France. Under them the Terror knew no relaxation. "The maxim of our policy," said Robespierre, "ought to be to guide the people by reason and the enemies of the people by terror." Whole batches of victims completely unknown to each other were sent off together to the guillotine under pretext of being accomplices in conspiracy. Between the 20th of June and the 27th of July 1400 people were executed. But Robespierre and his friends looked forward to some conclusion of this state of things, desiring to establish a purely moral, stoical, and deistical Republic. As a first step, the worship of the Supreme Being was decreed, and a great festivity held, where Robespierre, decked with flowers, officiated as priest. Thus, too, he began to shelter the priests and nobles. The idea of the cessation of the Revolution thoroughly frightened some of the worst among the Committee, and Robespierre's assumption of authority disgusted them. They contrived to form a coalition with all the discontented parties, Hébertists, Dantonists, Girondists, Royalists, were all ready to combine against the one man whose stoical purity seemed to insult them, and whose cold implacable cruelty gave them no hope if they should offend him. Robespierre was thus hated by the people, and at enmity both with the people and the Committee, but was still influential at the club of the Jacobins, the Convention, and the revolutionary Tribunal. Knowing that an assault would be directed against him, his wisdom would have been to strike first. To this course St. Just urged him, but he seems to have relied upon his influence in the Convention, and was astonished when he found his friends wholly outnumbered[1186] and a hearing refused him. On the 27th of July he was arrested Fall of Robespierre. with Couthon, St. Just, and his brother. He escaped and fled to the Commune. For a moment it appeared as if an insurrection would have reinstated him. But the richer sections of Paris rallied to the destruction of their tyrant, and on the following day Robespierre, with twenty members of the Commune, was dragged to the scaffold.

The party which had overthrown Robespierre were as cruel and far more depraved than he was. They would gladly have continued the Revolution in its most odious form. But the Terror once destroyed, it was impossible to check a reactionary movement. The revolutionary Committee and Tribunal were modified, the Commune destroyed, the club of the Jacobins dissolved, and the Girondins who had escaped execution recalled. Such measures did not please the mob of Paris, still further excited by the constant continuance of famine. On the 12th Germinal (April 1), and again on the 1st Prairial (May 20), they rose in insurrection, invaded the hall of the Convention, clamouring for bread and the constitution of 1793. For Establishment of the Directory. Oct. 1795. six hours a wild tumult raged within the walls. But soldiers had been collected, and with the aid of the troops of the more reactionary Paris sections order was restored. This was the deathblow of the democratic party. A new constitution was drawn up, the executive power was vested in five directors, and two councils, the one of 500, the other of 250, established. The hopes of the royalists had been raised by the late reactionary movement. Finding themselves thwarted by the new constitution, the richer sections and the partisans of reaction marched on the Tuileries. General Menou proved unequal to his place, and the task of defending the Assembly was given to Barras, who chose as his active lieutenant Bonaparte. With a vigour unchecked by fear of shedding the blood of citizens, this young officer brought up thirty cannon from the camp of Sablons, and received the advancing insurrectionists with such showers of grape, that, though not without a short resistance, they were completely defeated. This was the first step towards military despotism. The new constitution came into effect on the 27th of October 1795.

Thus, before it was understood how completely the army had got the upper hand in France, how completely from henceforward its interests would be military, the appearance of something more like a permanent and orderly government in the shape of the Directory seemed for the instant to give[1187] hopes of peace. Towards that point Pitt's feelings had been gradually tending. Even as early as December 1795 he had spoken of the possibility of an honourable peace should a more settled government ever be arrived at in France, and since then much had happened to induce him to lower his tone. In spite of all his efforts, he had seen his great coalition disappear at the Congress at Basle. He had seen the complete ruin of his Quiberon expedition. More than that, all his best tendencies had been shocked by the consequences of his own government at home. But the opening of his eyes to the fallacy of his belief in the speedy bankruptcy of France and its rapid conquest, with which in all his difficulties he had hitherto buoyed himself up, came too late. His application for peace through the Swiss minister (March 1796), which the King announced at the close of the session, met with a very cold reception. For the Government of France, having just been re-established on a new and more dangerous basis, would listen to no terms which implied the restoration of the Low Countries to Austria; and as it was impossible for Pitt, after his conduct to that country, to suggest any other terms, the negotiations speedily came to nothing.

Indeed, the French Republic had this year reached a pitch of glory unequalled in the palmiest times of the monarchy. Carnot, who was again in power as one of the Directory, had conceived a plan for a campaign of this year upon a gigantic scale. Three armies were to push out from France and strike all of them by the three different roads, of the Maine, the Danube, and the Po, at Vienna. Three young generals were intrusted with the task. Jourdan was given the army of the Sambre and Meuse, Moreau the army of the Rhine and Moselle, Bonaparte succeeded Schérer in the command of the army of Italy. The preceding year the battle of Loano had secured to the French the Riviera as far as Savona, but the troops Napoleon's Italian campaign. 1796. were destitute of every necessary. Napoleon aroused their enthusiasm by promises, and in a fortnight had separated the Austrians and Piedmontese, defeated the former at Montenotte and Dégo, and thrown them back into Lombardy, the latter at Millesimo, and again at Mondovi, as he pursued them towards Turin, and finally wrung from them a treaty which left him at liberty to pursue the Austrians. Another fortnight was hardly over before he had turned the Austrian position on the Ticino by the passage of the Po at Placenza, driven them from the Adda by the victories of Fombio and Lodi, and having[1188] chased them behind the Mincio, secured the whole of Lombardy to the French. Bonaparte completed the first act of the campaign by securing the line of the Adige and forming the siege of Mantua. He employed some weeks in conquering Italy as far south as Naples, but from this work he was recalled by the approach of an Austrian army to raise the siege of Mantua. Wurmser came down the Adige on one side of the Lake of Garda, Quasdanowich down the Chiesa on the other. Bonaparte, giving up every other object for the moment, placed himself between the armies, defeated Quasdanowich, at Lonato on the one hand, and Wurmser at Castiglioni on the other, and thus driving them into the Tyrol, resumed the siege of Mantua. Wurmser made one more effort to raise the siege; again he advanced with two armies, hoping to enclose the French. Davidowich descended the Adige, Wurmser the valley of the Brenta. The battle of Roveredo destroyed the former, while Bonaparte, turning rapidly into the valley of the Brenta in pursuit of Wurmser, came up with and defeated him at Bassano. Thus cut off from Germany, the Austrian general had no resource but to take refuge in Mantua (Sept. 12). The Austrians could not leave their army thus shut up in Mantua, and a fresh effort was made to save it. It was again a double attack, but after three days' fight, Alvinzi, coming from the east, was beaten at Arcola, and the attempt failed. Six weeks later he made one more desperate effort, but was defeated again on the plateau of Rivoli. Alvinzi's attack had been rendered the more dangerous, because upon the Maine and Rhine Jourdan and Moreau had been unsuccessful. There the Archduke Charles had in a certain degree followed the same plans as Bonaparte, and directing his whole force against Jourdan, had compelled the retreat of Moreau also. It was to this victorious general that the Austrians looked to continue their defence. But Bonaparte, in the beginning of the following year, repeatedly drove him backwards, defeated him on the Tagliamento, drove him into the mountains, and defeated him at Neumarck, and finally, having secured the pass of the Semmering, and being within eighty miles of Vienna, he obliged the Archduke to demand a suspension of arms, and opened negotiations known as the Preliminaries of Léoben (April 13), which were completed under the title of Campo Formio on the 17th of October 1797.

On the Rhine and the Maine the two other divisions of the general plan had not met with the same success as had attended the arms of Bonaparte. Great and astonishing as his progress had been, it did not therefore seem as yet to have closed all[1189] hope of peace, for which in fact it had only rendered Pitt more anxious; and as the establishment of the Directory seemed to promise that permanence to the Government which Pitt had declared to be the indispensable condition of any hopeful negotiations, it was determined in the autumn of this year (1796) to make a fresh effort, this time direct, to negotiate with the Directory. For this purpose Lord Malmesbury was despatched to Paris. The English believed that they had something they could offer in exchange for any restorations France might make. The Cape of Good Hope had been captured in the preceding year, and in the spring of the present year Moore and Abercrombie had done good service in the West Indies. Many of the islands there had been taken, Guadaloupe almost alone remained in French hands. These conquests they offered to restore. But if the French had been unwilling to treat in the preceding year, their successes in Italy had not rendered them more moderate; they were at this very time arranging, at the instigation of the malcontents in Ireland, represented by Wolfe Tone, a plan for the conquest of Ireland under the command of General Hoche, and probably a still greater plan for the invasion of England itself. In fact, there was still the same irremediable objection—the English still felt bound in honour not to resign the Netherlands to France. "On this point," writes Grenville in his instructions to Malmesbury, "your Lordship must not give the smallest hope that his Majesty will be induced to relax." There was also another point in the French diplomacy which rendered the negotiations difficult. They could not understand the position of a plenipotentiary who had not absolutely full powers to act without reference to his own Court, and taking umbrage at the repeated couriers who went to and fro from Paris, declared their belief that the effort at peace was not honest on the part of England, and that Malmesbury had not full powers at all; and finally, De la Croix, a somewhat stiff man of the red tape school, who had from the first behaved with considerable rudeness, wrote suddenly to Malmesbury bidding him leave Paris within eighteen hours. Thus closed the second effort on the part of Pitt to make peace, chiefly important because it clears him from the charge of inveterate determination to continue the war, because it throws the blame of that continuance completely on the French, and because it shows the effect which the lengthened efforts of England, especially the pressure on the finances, were having upon the naturally peaceful and economical mind of the minister.

The preparations for invasion from abroad could not be kept[1190] secret, and fresh and constant efforts had been made to meet them. Fresh levies were made both for the navy and for the army; supplementary bodies of militia were raised; plans suggested for the establishment of large bodies of irregular cavalry, and the enrolment as irregular infantry of all those who paid a gun license. More than this, in spite of the pressure on the finances, under which the funds had fallen as low as £53, a new loan of £18,000,000 was raised upon terms which, though we should now think very high, were not then considered remunerative. The loan, which bore a nominal interest of 5 per cent., was issued at £112, 10s.; that is, every £112, 10s. advanced was to represent £100, thus practically reducing the interest to less than 4½ per cent. Pitt found it necessary to make a distinct appeal to the loyalty of the people to raise the loan on these terms; but the temper of the wealthy classes and the amount of riches still existing in England were shown by the extraordinary rapidity with which the subscription list was filled. £1,000,000 was subscribed by the Bank in their corporate capacity, £400,000 by the directors individually; before the close of the first day £5,000,000 was subscribed by different merchants. At ten o'clock on the Monday the doors were opened, and by twenty minutes past eleven the subscription was declared to be full; hundreds were reluctantly obliged to go away. By the post innumerable orders came from the country, scarcely one of which could be accepted, and long after the subscription was closed persons continued coming, and were obliged to depart disappointed.[13] The Duke of Bridgewater sent a draft on sight of £100,000, a similar sum was even given by the Duke of Bedford, one of the staunchest opponents of the war. The Ministry subscribed £10,000 a piece.

Such an outburst of loyalty might have opened the eyes of the French as to the difference between the revolutionary temper of England and of their own country, but their ignorance of the temper both of England and Ireland was extreme; General Clark (subsequently Napoleon's War Minister) was at this very time asking Wolfe Tone whether he thought it probable that in case of a landing in Ireland the Irish Lord Chancellor would join the rebels. On the 15th of December the great expedition for Ireland set sail from Brest. Like so many invasions of England, it was thwarted by the uncertainties of the sea. After a stormy passage a few ships assembled in Bantry Bay; but[1191] the general had been driven in another direction; there were no signs of the eager Jacobin uprising which the French had expected, the commanders were afraid to proceed without orders from Hoche, and the expedition straggled back again to Brest, with the loss of four line of battle-ships and eight frigates. A similar untimely fate met a more desperate assault intended for the shores of England. Some 1500 men, two-thirds of whom were liberated galley-slaves, and from their character known as the "Légion noire," were sent under Colonel Tate with the intention of burning Bristol. They landed on the shores of Pembrokeshire, and it needed but the appearance of a few militia and yeomanry under Lord Cawdor (and it is frequently said of a few old Welsh women in their red cloaks and hats) to induce the crew of miscreants to take to flight. The expedition was probably only intended as a sort of forlorn hope to discover in what state of preparation England was, for the negotiations having entirely ceased, the French were thinking of a great attack on England itself.

The idea of invasion was a well-timed one; at no time in the war, either before or after, was England in so critical a condition or its existence so precarious. It had become plain by this time that the strength of England, at all events under the present management, lay in two directions—in its enormous resources and capacity for paying money, and in its fleet. Though such troops as had been employed had exhibited their usual bravery, though when well led, as in India, their efforts had met with great success, it was evident that the present ministry, hampered by their political relations and by the incessant interference of the King himself in the army, was unable to make any real show in the European war. But already in the last four years nearly eighty millions had been added to the National Debt, every variety of taxation almost had been tried both to cover the interest of the accumulating debt and to supply the yearly million to the sinking fund, and men began to think that the sources of money must shortly begin to fail. And yet the subsidized armies abroad had met with nothing but disaster. The North of Germany, including even the King's electorate of Hanover, had been driven to enter into a neutrality. Prussia had in the last year signed two conventions of the most amicable and friendly description with France; and the well-known selfishness of the Austrian Court did not allow it to be questioned that, if it saw its way to permanent advantage, it also would close its disastrous campaign by deserting the coalition. Worse even than that remained behind; it seemed[1192] as if the country was really upon the verge of a national bankruptcy, for the amount of specie was found insufficient to carry on the business of the country. At the same time that the financial strength of England seemed to have been fruitlessly exhausted, her permanent power upon the sea seemed on the point of disappearing also; for not only had the French been lately turning their attention to their own navy, but the successes of their arms had given them the command both of the fleets of Holland and Spain. Holland, formed into the Batavian Republic, had early purchased peace by promising thirty ships: in the July of the last year Spain had entered into a similar convention, and the whole of her naval resources, as many as forty line of battle-ships, were at the disposal of the French. It was with these combined armaments that the intended descent upon England was to take place. And just as the internal ruin had gone hand in hand with the failure of external financial influence, so it appeared that the new-born naval power of our enemies would go hand in hand with the total dissolution of our maritime force: for disaffection was widely spread among our sailors, and the year was marked by the mutinies of St. Helen's and the Nore.

In point of time it was the financial difficulty which first arose. The difficulty was not what is called a commercial but a monetary crisis. There was no want of credit, there was no want of solid wealth, but there was every chance of there being such a dearth of the circulating medium that the ordinary transactions of business would not be able to be carried on, that it would be impossible to meet engagements as they fell due, and that consequently many houses would be forced to stop payment, and a general bankruptcy be the result, more especially as it seemed probable that at the head of the banks that stopped payment would be the Bank of England itself. The causes of this state of things are not very difficult to understand. The same forces which had been at work to produce the necessary issue of Exchequer bills in 1793 had continued; the balance of trade had been constantly against the country. The position of Spain, Italy, France and Holland in the ranks of our enemies had of necessity curtailed the number of our purchasers. The necessity of war supplies and several poor harvests had rendered necessary the purchase of much food and of much raw material, consequently to restore the balance large payments in gold and silver had to be made. The great subsidies granted to foreign powers had necessarily been chiefly paid[1193] in specie. Large compensation had been given for the freights and cargoes of neutral ships which had been seized; and the Government for their special purposes had had to borrow upwards of ten millions in specie from the Bank. Threats of invasion had induced people throughout the country to realize their property as far as possible; this had produced a run upon the country banks, which had in turn demanded their deposits from the Bank of England. All these accumulated causes had so lowered the reserve, that on Saturday the 20th of February there was only £1,272,000 in the Bank cellars, and it was known that the demands of the next forty-eight hours would entirely empty them. In this crisis the Bank applied to the Suspension of cash payments. Government; a Council was immediately held, although it was Sunday, and a proclamation was issued forbidding payments in cash. A meeting of merchants next day sanctioned this step, promising to accept bank notes as legal tender. On examination the Bank was found solvent, but a Bill was passed prohibiting it to pay in cash more than twenty shillings, or to advance to Government more than £600,000. Though only intended as a temporary expedient, this Act continued in operation for twenty-two years, and during the whole of that time the depreciation of the paper money was comparatively slight.

The danger caused by the mutiny was still greater: it was the intention of the French Directory that the fleet of the Texel, composed entirely of the Dutch, the fleet at Brest which had been collected for the invasion of Ireland, and the great Spanish fleet, should combine. Thus, an armament of more than seventy ships of the line would sweep the English fleet from the Channel, and any operations against The threatened invasion checked by the victory of St. Vincent. the island would be rendered safe. But the check sustained by the Spanish fleet off Cape St. Vincent ruined the well-conceived plan. A few days before Tate landed in England, the great Spanish fleet set sail from Carthagena, intending to join the French fleet off Brest and the Dutch fleet off the Texel, and thus secure the mastery of the Channel. Sir John Jervis was Admiral in the Mediterranean, and with him was Commodore Nelson, and though the Spanish fleet had twelve more ships than he had, and 1200 more guns, he determined to fight. He contrived to separate nine Spanish ships from the main body, and took four of the remainder, and though the separated ships joined the line in the evening, and Jervis was still outnumbered, the Spanish fleet retired into Cadiz.

But though the combined invasion was thus thwarted, the whole[1194] danger for England, or rather for Ireland, was by no means at an end. Hoche had been removed from the army of the Ocean to the army of the Sambre and Meuse. His mind was constantly bent upon the invasion of Ireland, and, acting under his influence, the Dutch Government, wishing to do something to show that they were not entirely effaced from the list of nations, with great efforts strengthened and equipped their fleet at the Texel till it numbered fourteen sail of the line, and embarked in it their whole army, 15,000 men, for an attack upon Ireland. The Directory, taking umbrage at this independent action, insisted upon Hoche, with 5000 men, accompanying them, and on their refusal began again to get ready their Brest squadron for a similar expedition. To watch the Dutch became the duty of Admiral Duncan, the care of Brest was intrusted to Admiral Bridport with the fleet at Portsmouth. Fortunately for England, the sailing of the fleets was delayed; had they sailed in the summer, as intended, they would have found England without fleets.

Early in the year a conspiracy was discovered among the crews of the fleet at Spithead, with a view to demanding redress of certain grievances. These grievances were shared in by all the seamen in the navy and were very real. The pay and pensions had never been altered since the time of Charles II., though every necessary of life had risen from thirty to forty per cent.; this neglect was rendered particularly objectionable as the pay and pensions of the army had been increased to suit the times. Many officers were appointed by interest alone, and a system of barefaced peculation was carried on by those who had the duty of provisioning the fleet, for the ships were furnished in a great degree by contract through the purser; moreover, all the nautical arrangements were at this time remarkable for extreme roughness, almost brutality, for unjust severity of discipline, for arbitrary power vested in the hands of the captain, and frequent misuse of that power. When Lord Bridport, Lord Howe's second in command, signalled to put to sea, every ship in the fleet refused to obey; and the next day delegates from every ship met in the 'Queen Charlotte,' and the mutiny was organized. The men behaved with perfect decorum, and drew up a petition, asking that their wages should be raised to suit the rise of prices in every direction, and that some improvement should be made in their system of pensions. To the Admiralty they sent a petition, exposing the peculations of the pursers and the unwarrantable hardships to which the sailor was exposed. The[1195] Admiralty acknowledged at once the justice of the claim for advanced wages, but were silent upon the other abuses. This did not satisfy the men: three admirals were sent to treat with them; and when an outburst of anger on the part of one of them broke off the conference, the red flag of mutiny was hoisted and the guns loaded. However, when their demands were granted in full, and a free pardon was sent them from London, they at once returned to their duty. During the whole of the outbreak perfect order had reigned. But the folly of the Admiralty, who, wishing to save their credit, sent down a perverse order that the marines should be kept constantly ready to suppress mutiny, led the sailors to believe that they were being deceived, and a second outbreak was the result. An attempt to suppress it by force on board the 'London' ended in a real mutiny among all the ships then lying at St. Helen's, outside Spithead. Lord Howe, the most popular of the admirals, known among the sailors as "Black Dick," was intrusted with the difficult task of recalling the fleet to its allegiance. With great skill he contrived that while their requests were granted, they should seem to be receiving rather than demanding a favour. He persuaded them to write a letter of contrition to himself, and apparently as the fruit of his good offices, announced to them that an Act of Parliament had been passed securing to them the redress of grievances they had demanded, and that considerable changes were to be made among the officers.

This wholly unpolitical mutiny was followed by a more formidable movement among the ships at the Nore. It began on board the 'Sandwich,' the flagship of Admiral Buckner. As in the former case, delegates from the seamen met on board the 'Sandwich,' but the chief management of the mutiny fell absolutely into the hands of a seaman called Parker, a man of good education, and at one time an officer in the navy, but whose abilities as a leader were spoiled by his arrogant assumption of dictatorial power. Under his influence the demands of the mutineers assumed a political character; they required a revision of the Articles of War, an increase of prize-money, and the dismissal of officers not agreeable to the ships' companies. All efforts to bring the men to reason were unavailing. Lord Spencer himself, the First Lord of the Admiralty, had an interview with Parker, but was met with nothing but insult. After this the mutineers fired upon some frigates who would not join them, and blockaded the Thames. It became necessary to take vigorous measures. Bills were[1196] passed without opposition strengthening the hands of Government, and making it felony to hold intercourse with the mutinous ships. Ships were got ready, the navigation of the Thames was rendered difficult by the removal of marks, and batteries were erected along the river. Cut off from the shore, and finding no sympathy among the fleets at Portsmouth and Plymouth, nor among even the most advanced radicals on shore, although they were joined by the fleets of Admiral Duncan, the mutineers began to give way. Ship after ship slipped her cable and escaped from the mutinous fleet, and on the 15th of June the 'Sandwich' herself was brought within range of the batteries. Parker was at once apprehended, sentenced to death, and hanged. But though the firmness of the Government had secured them complete victory, they were too conscious of the real abuses in the navy to be severe. Only four or five executions followed.

The great peculiarity of the mutiny was the ease with which it was ultimately suppressed and the proofs of underlying loyalty which are visible throughout it. In the Channel fleet all the offers of the Admiralty, and even of Parliament, were regarded as delusive till the King's own sign manual was exhibited, upon which all signs of mistrust at once vanished. When one of the ships threatened to leave the fleet and join the French, the guns of the rest of the mutinous fleet were at once turned upon it, and it was carefully blockaded by guard-boats; and again, so far from sympathizing with the mutineers of the Nore, the sailors of the Channel fleet, after their return to allegiance, wrote to the delegates declaring that their conduct was a scandal to the British navy. Even at the Nore, where the mutiny had taken a more political form, every ship but one struck the red flag and hoisted the royal ensign on the King's birthday, and within a few weeks of the suppression of the disaffection, the battle of Camperdown, one of the severest engagements of the time, was chiefly won for England by the crews of the lately insurgent fleet.

It was well for England that the Government of France was at this time so disorganized that no vigorous effort could be made to take advantage of her deplorable condition. The place of the assignats had been taken by another form of paper money called "mandats," but these too had been rejected by the people, who could no longer be brought to believe in paper money of any description. Forced to have recourse to the use of specie, the Directory had also found itself compelled to have recourse[1197] to the old means of raising money; compulsory loans were established, the receipts of future years anticipated, the national goods sold for whatever they would fetch, and money raised at the most ridiculous interest. These financial arrangements gave rise to much nefarious speculation and stock-jobbing; the business of the army to still more; and the newly enriched speculators, emancipated from the pressure of the terror and devoid of all the nobler sentiments of republicanism, were a mere set of selfish voluptuaries. In such a dissolution of morality and public spirit it was plain that the royalists had their chance, and in the year 1797 sufficient members of their party were elected to change the majority of the two councils. The representative body immediately entered into a struggle with the executive Directory; and in that Directory were Barras, a revolutionary at heart though the leader of all the dissoluteness of the time, Barthélemy, the negotiator of Basle, who appears to have been royalist in his tendencies, and Carnot, an upright republican, but yet under the influence of the dread of the old terror. It was plain that if the Revolution was to be saved it must be done by violent means, and Rewbell and Laréveilière, the remaining directors, with the assistance of Barras, determined to save it at the cost of a coup d'état carried out by the army. On the night of the 18th Fructidor (Sept. 4, 1797), Carnot and Barthélemy, with fifty of the obnoxious majority, were arrested, and all chance of a royalist reaction was for the time over. Bonaparte was now convinced that the ultimate fate of France must be with the army, in other words, that it must lie with himself, but with great wisdom he determined to wait the turn of events.

While the parties were thus struggling in France, and there seemed a chance of an entire change of feeling, the English ministry, very seriously anxious for peace, again opened negotiations. The Preliminaries of Léoben had in fact removed what should have been the sole difficulty; it was ridiculous that England should continue to hold out on the subject of the Low Countries when Austria had herself entered into a private treaty to abandon them. A passport was therefore demanded, and, somewhat unfortunately, Lord Malmesbury was again fixed upon as the negotiator. He went to Lisle, presented his plan of a treaty, and had every reason to believe that all was going well. England consented to restore all her conquests with the exception of the Isle of Trinidad, the Cape of Good Hope, and Ceylon. But this was at the very moment when the quarrel was at its height in Paris; intent upon its own affairs, the Directory suffered the negotiations[1198] to drag on, and when at length the republican party won their victory on the 18th Fructidor, the negotiations were suddenly broken off on the old ground that Malmesbury had not got full authority. The real reason is obvious,—the party in power, who relied on the army, knew that the power of the army was immensely increased by a state of war.

The termination of the negotiations was at once followed by a vigorous continuation of the war. Lord Malmesbury had been but a few weeks in England when the Dutch fleet found itself ready at length to sail from the Texel. But the delay—caused by the weather, the absence of Hoche, and the factions of Paris—had almost deprived it of its terrors. Even when the greater part of his fleet had been in mutiny in the Thames, Duncan had maintained the appearance of a blockade; keeping his two faithful ships within sight of the land, he had kept up so regular a succession of signals, as though sending his orders to a fleet outside, that the Dutch never found out that there were only two ships watching them. When at length they sailed Duncan's fleet outnumbered theirs by one ship. He had withdrawn for an instant to Yarmouth roads to refit, but apprised in time, he was enabled to fall upon the Dutch fleet before it had left the coast of Holland. He contrived, although the enemy was in close order, to come between them and the shore, and after a close combat, which recalled the old days of the rivalry between England and Holland, by four o'clock on the 11th of October he had succeeded in capturing the flagship of Admiral Winter, together with seven other ships of the line, two 56-gun ships, and two frigates. The bold manœuvre of passing between the enemy and the shore was a source of some danger, as the fleets drifted close inland during the action, but Duncan skilfully saved both his own fleet and his prizes. The action was watched by crowds from the Dutch shore. This battle put an end to the danger of immediate invasion, though it seems to have inspired the French with a determination to carry on that invasion on a larger scale in the following year, when great preparations were made under the personal superintendence of Bonaparte.

The breach of negotiations at Lisle was followed on the 17th of October by the completion of the Peace of Campo Formio, which had been begun by the Preliminaries of Léoben. This peace secured to France the possession of Belgium, the left bank of the Rhine, and the Ionian[1199] Isles, and acknowledged the establishment of the Cisalpine Republic, consisting of the provinces conquered in Italy from the Austrians, the Pope, and Venice; while Austria received in exchange Venice itself and its eastern provinces, Friuli, Istria, and Dalmatia. France thus lay not only triumphant in Europe, but with the Rhine for its frontier, and for outposts four republics pledged to uphold its revolutionary ideas. But in acquiring this position the rights of peoples had been trampled upon, Switzerland had been appended to France, the occupation of Rome had seemed to give colour to the assertion that the Revolution was atheistical, and the whole turn of events was such as to justify, even to necessitate, subsequent European interference.

The peculiar manner in which Ireland has been conquered, peopled, and managed, renders questions regarding this country most intricate and difficult. There is seldom a single interest to be traced which is not crossed by numerous side winds, which render the development of political questions crooked and complicated. The Roman Catholic interest, the Protestant interest, the old Irish interest, the Anglo-Irish interest, the interest of the English ascendancy, the claims of the Presbyterians as contrasted with the National Church, are constantly crossing and recrossing. At no time was this complication so great or this difficulty so insoluble as in the years which followed the breaking out of the French Revolution.

There is one thing, however, which tends to throw a certain light upon the conduct of the Government of England during these years of difficulty. Pitt and his more intimate friends had already firmly decided in their own minds that one cure only was possible for Irish evils—a close and complete legislative union with England. The action of the Whig Government in 1782 had been ostensibly in exactly the opposite direction; the triumph of Grattan and the volunteers had been won when legislative disunion was granted, and what we should now speak of as Home Rule established. The party which triumphed on that occasion was not the Irish party, or the Catholic party, but the Protestant aristocracy. The anti-national character and exclusive nature of the party in power was shown by the rejection of all Pitt's efforts at parliamentary reform. The independent Irish Parliament was indeed full of able speakers; men who carried the art of rhetoric and of clothing little thought in magnificent language to the highest pitch. But it is not[1200] unfair to take as a sample of the practical excellence of the management of what we may speak of as the Home Rulers, the condition of the Foundling Hospital in Dublin. It was a noble institution; about £16,000 a year was spent on it; 120 noblemen and wealthy gentry were on its committee; yet after just ten years of Irish management, a committee of inquiry reported that out of upwards of 2000 infants yearly consigned to its care, the average that survived was 130. They were sent up in scores, in open baskets, from distant parts of Ireland, and arrived crushed and half lifeless, to be tossed aside, without care or inquiry, into the kennel. Twenty-one committee-men formed a quorum, yet never once, except when places were to be given away, had that quorum met, and for years the treasurer, to whom the management had been confided, had been absolutely bedridden. All that can be alleged in excuse for the bad management, of which this is a sample, is that the Constitution of 1782 had not been thoroughly tried. Deprived by law of its power in the Irish Parliament, yet conscious of the impossibility of allowing the country to act as if completely independent, the Government had had recourse to indirect influence for establishing its power. While the franchise and the representation, all official places and all professions, except the medical profession, were exclusively confined to the Protestants, who were also the possessors of nineteen-twentieths of the soil, Government had found it possible by bribery, direct or indirect, to command a constant majority in Parliament of those who were eager to uphold the English connection and the Protestant ascendancy. But the very fact of its thus acting had placed a considerable portion of the Protestant population in opposition to Government.

Among the Protestants themselves there were formed two great parties, who may be called roughly Whigs and Tories; on the one side those placemen and pensioners who supported the English Government, and on the other those aristocratic families and connections (probably by no means purer or higher-minded than their opponents) who wished, as the Whig aristocracy had wished in England, to be masters of the Government, and to rule Ireland almost as a separate nation. Of these great connections the typical men were, of the Tories, the family of the Beresfords, led by the ability of Fitzgibbon the Chancellor, and of the Whigs, the family of the Ponsonbys, led by the genius of Grattan. Around the Opposition party there naturally collected those men who were really reformers at heart, and the Opposition was thus enabled to use cries and watchwords which were not only specious and plausible, but[1201] which really touched the great evils of the country. The first of these evils was the preposterous amount of Government influence; and the obvious way in which that influence might be reached was by a reform of Parliament, for nothing could be more abominable than the arrangement by which members were elected. It was worse even than in England; by far the larger number of seats were either private or Government property, and nominees were appointed under distinct conditions, and their votes secured by distinct and well-understood bargains; every man's price and every man's expectation were actually entered like a list of merchandise in the Government books. A second point was the fact, that not only all political power, but till the year 1793 almost all social position was denied to the Roman Catholics. On the first of these points the opponents of Government were agreed; they were perfectly willing, for the sake of injuring Government, to press constantly for a large reform bill. On the second point there was a far greater difference of opinion. Grattan, though himself a Protestant and a friend to the Protestant ascendancy, was great enough to urge constantly the relief of his Catholic fellow-countrymen; but the great majority of his friends, however much they might from time to time for political purposes uphold the Catholic claims, were in fact thoroughly opposed to anything which would injure their own Protestant ascendancy. There was thus a sort of show of union between the Protestant nationalists and the Catholics, but at heart disunion and dislike.

Meanwhile, whatever effect upon the Protestant population Home Rule may have had, it had not in the slightest degree alleviated the position of the Irish peasants. Their landlords were still Englishmen, Protestants, conquerors, and harsh landlords. The Church of England still demanded its tithes. The aristocracy and gentry had neglected their duties till, as has been well said, they forgot they had duties to perform; they were hopelessly corrupt, both morally and politically. The independence which the peasantry were taught by the inflated language used in Parliament to believe they had already acquired seemed to them a bitter deception; and their belief in the villany of the rulers who had tricked them, and in the complete slavery and hardship of their own position as Roman Catholics, was envenomed by the expressions which the Opposition allowed itself to use in its assaults on Government. They were thus ripe for rebellion. Indeed, for many years they had been filling Ireland with outrages. All sorts of combinations had been made against rent-collectors and tithe-proctors. In[1202] Munster arose the Society of the White Boys and the followers of Captain Right. Combinations were also directed against the farmers of taxes, who most shamelessly abused their position. Absenteeism was the curse of Ireland. While the middleman of the absentee landlord racked the wretched cotter for his rent, the middleman of the absentee parson racked him for his tithes. They were in the habit of taking their payments in interest-bearing bonds, and when the wretched peasant was unable to meet those bonds, he became practically the slave of the tithe farmer, who compelled him to do his farm work for him as the price of his forbearance to put the law in execution.

The executive machinery of the Government in Ireland was not strong enough to keep order. The outrages of the Catholics had frequently to be met by the voluntary efforts of their enemies, which soon degenerated into counter-outrages. Thus there arose in Munster a constant cruel war between the two religions. In the north of Ireland it was worse, for the hatred between the religions was there more pronounced. In dread of outrages similar to those of the south, the Protestants began, in the roughest and most illegal manner, to deprive the Catholics of arms, which indeed they had no right to carry; and the Catholics were driven to form themselves into lawless societies under the name of Defenders, in opposition to which there arose, about the year 1790, the organization of the Orange Lodges; and there, too, a cruel civil war began to be waged.

While Ireland was in this miserable condition, while the liberty which the wretched peasantry had been promised had entirely disappeared, while the upper classes of all parties seemed in the last degree degraded, and the ascendancy of the useless and tyrannical Church fixed for ever, the great news of the French Revolution came. Even in more sober England men's hearts were stirred within them at the promise of the emancipation of the human race; among the suffering passionate Irish, with their impulsive and sanguine dispositions, the effect was far greater. But the class who were at first chiefly influenced by it were not the Roman Catholics—although, no doubt, for them too it seemed to promise at least a share in the franchise,—but the Northern Presbyterians and Dissenters, republican from their origin, and, from the very nature of their religious creed, equally oppressed with the Catholics by a proud and dominant Church, and more keenly alive to that abominable system of government which touched the Protestant more nearly than the Catholic, because he[1203] alone had any share in it. Ulster, and especially the town of Belfast, were the great centres of the republican and Jacobin feelings, together with Dublin, where, as was natural, the more lively, ambitious, and freethinking elements of society were chiefly to be found.

There were thus to be somehow handled and managed by Government a strong, vicious, reckless, constitutional opposition, in connection with a few men honestly desiring the legislative independence of Ireland, and, as a necessary step, thorough parliamentary reform;—secondly, a great body of Catholics, of which the higher and more respectable part desired the gradual alleviation of their position, and joined with the Opposition, not from dislike to the English connection, but because the supporters of Government influence seemed inclined to refuse every demand; and of which the lower part, in wild misery and excitement, was waging a lawless war both in the north and south;—and thirdly, a very considerable body of men, dissenters of the North, and freethinkers of Dublin, who, touched by the influence of the French Revolution, desired an entire overthrow of the Government, and were willing to throw themselves into the arms of France for the destruction of the English connection.

It is plain that of these sections two were chiefly dangerous—the Roman Catholic peasant, who hated the Protestant, and the republican Protestant, who hated the Government and hated the Catholic also. While these were separate it might be possible to play off one against the other. In this the few reckless men who desired a complete change of Government saw the cause of their weakness. The most prominent of these was Wolfe Tone, a young barrister, the son of a Dublin coachmaker, who for personal reasons as he openly confessed—because certain suggestions of his had not been well received in England—was the determined enemy of everything English. Nominally a Protestant, really a freethinker, to him, and to several others like him, religious disputes appeared merely ridiculous; and the brilliant idea seized him of uniting those two sections of people which were really dangerous to England—the Northern Republican and the National Roman Catholic—and of thus forming the great Society of the United Irishmen. It was plain that great difficulties must arise in realizing such a scheme. Much as the Protestants of Ulster hated England, they undoubtedly hated Catholics more; much as the Catholics hated England, undoubtedly they hated Protestants more. Still, it might be the policy of both parties to bury for a[1204] time their great hatred, and to make common cause on that point which they had in common. Wolfe Tone and his republican friends, entirely careless of religion, formed an excellent connecting link. It was with this view that he betook himself to Belfast, to take advantage of a great celebration to be held there in honour of the anniversary of the destruction of the Bastille, and there established his Society, as he seems already to have done in part in Dublin. Its ostensible views as put forward in the programme were, that the weight of English influence was so great as to require the cordial union of the people of Ireland to maintain liberty, that the only constitutional way of opposing that influence was reform of Parliament, and that no reform was practicable which did not include Irishmen of every religious persuasion. Tone hoped, by thus setting prominently forward the advantages which each party was desirous of gaining, to win the adhesion of both.

But the Catholics themselves were not a wholly united body. Unable to find any more legitimate means of making themselves heard, they had, since 1782, intrusted their interests to a central committee at Dublin, consisting of some of the most important nobility and gentry of their party, as well as of others of a more violent stamp. The temper of the English Government was such, that fairly friendly relations subsisted between it and the Bishops and more educated part of the Catholics. Pitt was himself a friend to the Catholic claims in England. Many of the restrictions had been already removed from the Catholics in England and in Scotland, and neither Pitt nor the chief members of his Cabinet thought it impossible that the emancipation of the Irish should proceed by the same steps as in England. This feeling was rendered much stronger by the French Revolution. It seemed impossible that the dogmatic and highly organized Roman Church should become the champion of disorder and atheism, and Pitt hoped by attaching them to himself to find in them a support against the spread of the revolutionary principles which were his great dread. The Catholics thus became an object of contention to the extreme parties; on the one side the Nationalists and United Irishmen sought to win them by holding out hopes of regaining their supremacy by reform of Parliament, and of a consequent alienation from English policy which might well involve a complete change in the Act of Settlement, and the restoration of much property to its old Roman Catholic owners; and on the other side the English Government attempted to outbid its rivals, and to attach the Catholics[1205] more closely to the English interests, by granting them immediately a large measure of relief. As was natural, this auction terminated in a split among the Catholics themselves. In 1791 a portion of the Committee sent up very reasonable demands in a petition, signed by upwards of sixty names. These petitioners represented the moderate and better part of the Catholics, who would have been willing to accept the legitimate offers of the English Government; but the majority, inspired by the revolutionary feelings of the time, and eagerly desirous for the complete restoration of their position, refused to acknowledge the petition as their own, and drove the sixty signatories from the Committee. They then proceeded to play directly into the hands of Wolfe Tone, entering into close connection with the revolutionary society at Belfast, which they no doubt intended to use as a cat's-paw only, until they should attain that complete Catholic ascendancy, which could scarcely fail to result from a thorough Reform Bill if connected with the removal of religious disabilities.

It may excite surprise that the Government did not, in the presence of the very obvious danger which had arisen, and when the country was full of disturbance, act vigorously in support of the Protestant ascendancy, or at least confine itself to giving such measures of relief as would have satisfied the seceders of the Catholic committee. The Lord Lieutenant, and those who had charge of the government in Ireland, perpetually urged upon the English Cabinet the necessity of supporting the English, declaring that the real contest would ultimately be between the Irish nationalists and the English settlers. But Pitt could not give up his idea that relief to the Catholics was necessary. He suffered Richard Burke, a foolish young man, to act apparently in his name, and to hold out hopes to the more advanced Catholic party. The Cabinet, indeed, subsequently denied having given him any authority, but as undoubtedly Pitt had given him a letter of introduction to the Secretary, it was very hard to prove this disclaimer. Consequently, in the session of 1792, both the Belfast republicans and the Catholic committee sent up petitions to Parliament of a very strong description. They were both rejected, and in their place a measure was introduced by Sir Hercules Langrishe, apparently with the consent of Government, admitting Catholics to the profession of the law, removing restrictions on their education, and repealing the Inter-marriage Act. It was only with considerable difficulty, and by Government influence, that this Bill was passed[1206] through the House, for the Protestant feeling in Parliament was very strong. Langrishe's measure was no doubt a righteous one; but it is a question whether at the moment concession to the Catholics was wise, especially when it was purchased by unpopularity among the Protestants. It seems probable, however, that both now and in his subsequent action, Pitt was influenced by a detestation of the iniquitous means by which Ireland was governed. He did not care much about shocking his majority of pensioners, or weakening English ascendancy, being fully determined that before long that ascendancy should give place to a wider and less provincial scheme of Government, produced by a complete union.

The effect of the measure at first was, however, certainly not salutary. Signs of concession on the part of the Government, and the foolish conduct of Richard Burke, excited the Catholics of the United Irish party to raise still higher claims, and to attempt to insist upon them by overawing the Government. Determined that there should be no mistake as to the real wishes of their party, the committee contrived to summon a general convention of Catholics in Dublin, each parish sending up its representatives. This Parliament met in what was called the Back Lane, under the presidency of Edward Burne, a well-known Catholic merchant of extreme views. The members drew up a petition, demanding the franchise for the Catholics, and sent it direct to England, attempting thus to overrule their own Irish Government. At the same time, Tone and Napper Tandy, the leader of the Dublin malcontents, attempted to arm their threatening counter-parliament with military power, by raising, in imitation of the old volunteers, a body whom they called the National Guards. The vigour of Fitzgibbon nipped this plan in the bud. He issued a proclamation against the assembling of men in arms, and as though to prove how much a little vigour would effect, and how easily the movement might at that time have been suppressed, the muster which should have taken place the following day was attended by three men only, of whom Napper Tandy was one. But the petition of the Convention had been well received in England; the Government there persisted in overriding the wishes of the Lord Lieutenant, and with every appearance of having yielded to pressure, in 1793, Major Hobart, the Chief Secretary, in accordance with instructions from Catholic Relief Bill passed. 1793. London, introduced, and by Government influence forced down the throat of an unwilling House of Commons, a second Catholic Relief Bill, admitting Catholics[1207] to the grand juries, magistracy, and, finally, to the franchise, at the same time repealing the Act which prohibited the bearing of arms. The Government had now gone as far as it intended to go. It had apparently made its concessions with a bad grace, and to the wrong people. As Lawrence Parsons, a singularly sensible member of the Irish Parliament, pointed out, the Bill gave the franchise, but still refused to the Catholics the right of sitting in Parliament. As the franchise was very low, it virtually threw the power into the hands of the lower Catholics, while excluding the Catholic gentry from their legitimate influence. It was, however, in vain that he urged the admission of the Catholics to Parliament, and the raising of the franchise. The United Irishmen were able to say, that as long as they could vote for Protestants alone the franchise was of little use; and further, that even had they been able to elect Catholics, the Government influence was too strong to make the change of any avail.

It was then nominally with the cry of reform of Parliament that they continued their agitation. And as the late concessions had been apparently granted under a system of threats, the same system of intimidation was pursued. Riots and outrages again broke out in all parts of Ireland. The Defenders again became active. House after house of the Protestants was robbed. Murders of all sorts were committed. In this year alone there were 180 houses attacked in Munster; while the success of the Convention had been such that the experiment was to be repeated at Athlone. Fitzgibbon indeed postponed the immediate danger by securing the passage of the Convention Bill, which forbade the assembling of such illegal meetings; and in other respects the hands of the executive were for the time so much strengthened, that although much outrage continued, and discontent was smouldering throughout the country, and the emissaries of the United Irishmen scarcely veiled their revolutionary intentions, their hopes sunk low, and Tone was himself thinking of joining the Government side. He even had an interview with the Chief Secretary, and there was some thought of giving him employment abroad. But just about this time, in 1794, the United Irishmen, losing hope of carrying out their revolution singlehanded, began to think of summoning the assistance of France. It was in this year that one Jackson went as an emissary to France with undoubtedly traitorous designs. One of his comrades, as so often happens in Irish treasons, turned informer; Jackson was apprehended, and took poison, and died in the dock as the sentence was being pronounced on him.

[1208]

Suddenly the hopes of the Irish party received an unexpected impulse. In the year 1794 the Duke of Portland and the Whigs joined the Cabinet. Their point of union was the war only, in other respects they clung to their old traditions. Portland, their chief, had been Prime Minister when the Act for legislative equality had been passed; and when, under pressure from this section of his party, Pitt consented to send Lord Fitzwilliam, the heir of Lord Rockingham, to Ireland as Viceroy, there seemed a great probability that a complete change of policy was intended. Such indeed was the view of Grattan, who had had a personal interview with Pitt, and such no doubt was Fitzwilliam's own view. Such in part was Pitt's view also, but he was half-hearted in the matter. He was displeased at having to yield anything to the new members of his Cabinet, and though desiring that the Catholic claims should be granted, he was so pledged to repression that he scarcely thought the present a desirable time for that measure; while his fidelity to personal friends, and his strong view of personal claims, made him determined that none of the existing officers or placemen should be removed. Besides this, the only statesman of great ability among the Irish, and the only one who possessed Pitt's ear, was Fitzgibbon the Chancellor, a bigoted upholder of Protestant ascendancy. It was then with very different views that Fitzwilliam and Pitt regarded the new appointment. How great this difference was seems to be absolutely proved by a reference to Grenville's letters. In fact, the way in which Pitt yielded can only be explained by his intending ultimately to produce the Union. Fitzwilliam's arrival was hailed with enthusiasm by the Irish, and acting upon his own view of his commission, which he believed that Pitt shared, he proceeded rapidly to introduce reforms. Fitzgibbon, it was clearly understood, he was not to touch; but the Attorney and the Solicitor-General, Wolfe and Toler, he removed, and replaced them by the far better known lawyers, Ponsonby and Curran. A great outcry was raised at this, but it was slight when compared with the opposition evoked when the Viceroy proceeded to lay his hands on Mr. Beresford, Commissioner of the Revenue. He was the head of one of those great families who obtained their influence by managing the country for the Government interest, without any claim on the score of talent. So great was his influence that a quarter of the places in Ireland were said to be his gift, though he himself occupied only the unimportant situation of Commissioner of the Revenue. Every underling and jobber in the country felt his[1209] position endangered, but it wanted more influence than theirs to remove Fitzwilliam. His discomfiture was completed by his own rash rapidity of action. A Bill was planned with the co-operation of Grattan for the immediate granting of the Catholic claims. Fitzgibbon at once took advantage of this, and well acquainted with the obstinacy and over-scrupulousness of the King's character, found means to have it suggested to him that to admit Roman Catholics to Parliament was a breach of his Coronation Oath. The suggestion fell on willing ears; from that time onward it became a fixed idea in the royal mind, from which no effort could remove it.

Fitzwilliam was recalled. Lord Camden, son of Chatham's friend Pratt, succeeded him as Viceroy, with the avowed intention of restoring the system of Government and the policy of Lord Westmoreland. His arrival was marked by riots in Dublin, in which Fitzgibbon's life was with difficulty saved. Grattan persisted in bringing in the Bill he had begun under Lord Fitzwilliam, but when, after a debate which lasted all through the night, it was finally rejected by a large majority, the rejection was held to be final.

A change came over the spirit of Ireland, Even the more patriotic members began to think that a complete separation from England was their only hope. The Catholic committee, feeling that it was no longer of any use, dissolved itself. The Catholics made common cause with the United Irish, and the bolder spirits, scarcely hiding their revolutionary intentions, sought assistance directly from France, whither Tone and Lord Edward Fitzgerald betook themselves; and an insurrection was planned, to be carried out in conjunction with a French army under Hoche. One effect of this was the separation of the Protestants of the North from the disaffected body. Among the townsmen of Belfast revolutionary principles still kept their hold; but the eagerness of the Catholic Defenders and their constant outrages to procure arms threw the great mass of the northern Protestants, whether Churchmen or Presbyterians, on to the Government side. The Orange Lodges were formed and organized. The opposite parties were divided, as seems inevitable in Ireland, by religion; and the first open fight between the two parties took place at the little village of Diamond in Armagh, a skirmish spoken of as the battle of the Diamond. At all events, interests now began to clear themselves. The fight was between Catholic revolutionary Irish and the Protestant upholders of English ascendancy.

[1210]

This piece of Irish history has been, and will ever be, the subject of the fiercest controversy. It is only by remembering that on one side the accumulated wrath of a half-savage and badly governed country was making itself terribly visible for an object which cannot be condemned, yet by means which were utterly odious; and that on the other side the instinct of self-defence, the stern necessity of upholding their rule at all hazards, fear of the ever-threatening horrors of a triumphant and savage foe, and revenge for the personal miseries already inflicted upon them, were driving men to cruel though perhaps necessary actions, that this period can be read in at all a judicial and unpartisan spirit.

With regard to the savage cruelty of the Irish, it can only be said, as affording some excuse for their conduct, that they had suffered much, that they had much to complain of. With regard to the real danger and lengthened organization of the conspiracy there is abundant proof, and was then abundant proof in the hands of the Irish Government, for as usual all the secret committees were full of traitors. With regard to the conduct of the Government—which, whatever may be said of it, did not drive the people to rebellion, for they had long settled upon that—it may be fairly asked what other means than severity could possibly have been used. Lord Camden deserves the greatest credit for his moderation, and for the care with which, through two years and upwards, he avoided bringing on an open outbreak. The only real question appears to be whether severity used much earlier might not have altogether frustrated the rebellion. The reason why this severity was not used is to be found in the conduct of the Whigs in England, and in the views of Pitt and the Liberal part of his Government, who sat apart from the scene and could not be brought completely to comprehend the danger.

To the Irish Government the state of the country was well known. It was known that Wolfe Tone had gone abroad, nominally to America, but with the intention of visiting France, with the full approbation of the United Committee at Belfast. It was known that in 1795 the plans of an insurrection had been almost perfected, and that to meet that insurrection there were in Ireland scarcely any English troops, about 10,000 invalids and fencibles, and a militia half of whom were among the conspirators. It was also known that assassinations and the swearing-in of conspirators were of constant occurrence. It is not[1211] surprising that in the year 1796 it was found necessary to pass an Indemnity Act to cover acts for the preservation of peace which broke the letter of the law done by the army and magistrates, or that a Bill should have been passed against assassination, or that an Insurrection Act, which allowed suspected districts to be declared beyond the law, and to be placed in military occupation and deprived of arms, should have been carried. The danger became still more threatening when it was known that Lord Edward Fitzgerald, the brother of Lord Leitrim, and Arthur O'Connor, the friend of all the Whigs in England, had gone abroad, had seen General Hoche in Switzerland, and arranged with him for a French invasion. At this time a trustworthy informant told the Government that there were 200,000 men ready officered, that there were pikes and muskets for 150,000, and that the militia were almost to a man members of the United Irish Society. It was then that it became absolutely necessary for security to raise a trustworthy force. This force, principally consisting of Protestants, who volunteered immediately to the number of 37,000, was the yeomanry. It did not, however, consist entirely of Protestants; and Camden, in spite of the pressure laid upon him by Parliament and by all who surrounded him, refused to recognize the Orange Lodges, which would at once have given him the power he wanted. As it was, the establishment of the yeomanry certainly saved Ireland, and yet it is here probably that the great error of the Government showed itself. English soldiers, if possible, alone should have been used. The traditional hatred between the religions was too fierce to allow the subjugation of the Catholics to be left in the hands of the Protestant yeomen.

The invasion which Hoche had planned, in accordance with the wishes of Lord Edward Fitzgerald and Wolfe Tone, was a very formidable one; nor, had it succeeded in landing, could it probably have been otherwise than successful. Fortunately the energy of the Government had just then struck a most damaging blow at the Arrest of the revolutionary committee. insurrectionary movement. Among the other illegal actions of the army of the North, which had been under the command of Luttrell, Lord Carhampton, had been the sudden apprehension of the whole revolutionary committee in Belfast. Neilson, Ore, Russell, and the two Sims, had been lodged in Dublin Castle. It was to allow of such arrests as these that almost at the same time the Habeas Corpus was suspended; for the Government was in the awkward position of[1212] knowing the treasonable practices which were going on, and of knowing the authors of them, but of yet being unable to produce proofs, as the information had been received under the seal of secrecy. The importance of this apprehension was much increased by the very complete organization of the United Society. A series of little societies, none of which exceeded eighteen, were linked together, and formed a complete hierarchy through baronial committees, district committees, provincial directories, up to a grand executive directory of five, elected secretly, and known to none but the provincial secretaries, who examined the votes. The military organization was almost as complete. The sudden destruction of the executive committee, whom nobody knew, in fact cut the head of the organization entirely away; till what had happened had been discovered, and a fresh committee elected, there was no power to issue any orders. It is probably to this that is to be traced, not only the apathy, but the apparent goodwill of the people of the South at the time of the French invasion.

The period during which the French expedition, thirty-eight ships of all sorts, was lying in Bantry Bay was one of extreme danger. The strange inactivity of the English navy would have allowed the French to complete their plans at perfect leisure. Fortunately Hoche himself had been separated from the expedition on its passage, and Grouchy, the second in command, shrank from the responsibility of leading without his superior's commands. A hurricane swept the bay, preventing landing, and the ships returned uselessly to Brest. But the apathy of the people was of very short duration. The evident possibility of assistance from France raised their temper. The disturbances General Lake's success in Ulster. in the North were speedily renewed; murder followed murder; Orange retributions followed in their turn, and at last, in March 1797, General Lake was ordered to disarm the conspirators of Ulster. He issued a proclamation ordering all persons to bring in their arms and surrender them, threatening to use force if they were refused. Well informed by his spies, Lake captured 50,000 muskets, 72 cannon, and 70,000 pikes, often, it must be confessed, with cruel severity on the part of the yeomanry, who were his agents. Frequently, but it is believed only when certain information had already been obtained of the existence of arms, flogging and picketing (that is, putting their feet upon sharp stakes) wrung from the wretched peasants the knowledge of their place of concealment. Such conduct, though cruel,[1213] had it been exercised throughout Ireland would probably have prevented the worst of the insurrection.

But the Government was hampered in Ireland by a very small, but very eloquent and noisy, opposition in Parliament, and in England by the whole of the Whig opposition in and out of Parliament, constantly crying out against any severity, or any use of other than the civil power; and by the Cabinet itself, which continued half-hearted, disliked severity, looking forward ultimately to a complete change of system, and desired, even by great concessions, to put off an outbreak till that change could be effected. But it was in fact impossible. The very existence of these champions for their cause, the secession from Parliament of Grattan and his friends, who declared that their voices were now useless, the supposition that the English Cabinet would not tolerate any extreme measures, the certainty that France was still thinking of assisting them, the opportunity for that assistance afforded by the mutiny at the Nore, in which traces of Irish influence are not wanting, drove the leaders to more and more extreme steps. Still more was their confidence raised by the ill-judged conduct of Sir Ralph Abercromby, who was appointed to succeed Carhampton as commander-in-chief. He was the friend of Lord Moira. An ardent Whig, and full of English Liberal views, and used to regular English soldiery, he was disgusted both at the stringent measures and disorderly conduct of the yeomanry he was called upon to command, and shocked its feelings by declaring that their state of disorganization was such as to make them a terror to none but themselves. He even declined to carry on in the South that work which Lake had done in the North, and to disarm Munster. Again General Lake was called to undertake the unpleasant duty. It was no doubt carried out there, in the midst of an almost purely Roman Catholic population, with even more severity, more religious intolerance, and more cruelty, than in the North. It must be observed, however, that at the worst these cruelties could have lasted but a month, for after Lake had held his command about that time the insurrection broke out. When it did break out the Government was partially prepared for it, for treachery at last put the whole secret of the conspiracy into their hands. A certain Mr. Reynolds, a man of small property, had joined the United Irishmen, but frightened at the extent of their schemes, gave information that the Leinster delegates would meet in March at the house of Oliver Bond, one of their chief[1214] associates. The whole committee was there seized, together with letters and papers of the utmost importance. Many arrests of leaders followed, but Lord Edward Fitzgerald, the chief military leader of the conspiracy, contrived to escape.