The new parliament being assembled on the ninth day of October, his majesty made them acquainted with the nature of the conspiracy. He said the conspirators had, by their emissaries, made the strongest instances for succours from foreign powers, but were disappointed in their expectations. That nevertheless, confiding in their numbers, they had resolved once more, upon their own strength, to attempt the subversion of his government. He said they had provided considerable sums of money, engaged great numbers of officers from abroad, secured large quantities of arms and ammunition; and, had not the plot been timely discovered, the whole nation, and particularly the city of London, would have been involved in blood and confusion. He expatiated upon the mildness and integrity of his own government; and inveighed against the ingratitude, the implacability, and madness of the disaffected, concluding with an assurance that he would steadily adhere to the constitution in church and state, and continue to make the laws of the realm the rule and measure of all his actions. Such addresses were presented by both houses, as the fears and attachment of the majority may be supposed to have dictated on such an occasion. A bill was brought into the house of lords for suspending thehabeas-corpusact for a whole year, but they were far from being unanimous in agreeing to such an unusual length of time. By this suspension they, in effect, vested the ministry with a dictatorial power over the liberties of the people.
The opposition in the house of commons was so violent, that Mr. Robert Walpole found it necessary to alarm their apprehensions by a dreadful story of a design to seize the bank and exchequer, and to proclaim the pretender on the Royal Exchange. Their passions being inflamed by this ridiculous artifice, they passed the bill, which immediately received the royal assent. The duke of Norfolk being brought from Bath, was examined before the council, and committed to the Tower on suspicion of high-treason. On the sixteenth day of November, the king sent to the house of peers the original and printed copy of a declaration signed by the pretender. It was dated at Lucca, on the twentieth day of September, in the present year, and appeared to be a proposal addressed to the subjects of Great Britain and Ireland, as well as to all foreign princes and states. In this paper, the chevalier de St. George having mentioned the late violation of the freedom of elections, conspiracies invented to give a colour to new oppressions, infamous informers, and the state of proscription in which he supposed every honest man to be, very gravely proposed, that if king George would relinquish to him the throne of Great Britain, he would, in return, bestow upon him the title of king in his native dominions, and invite all Other states to confirm it; he likewise promised to leave to king George his succession to the British dominions secure, whenever, in due course, his natural right should take place. The lords unanimously resolved that this declaration was a false, insolent, and traitorous libel; and ordered it to be burned at the Royal Exchange. The commons concurred in these resolutions. Both houses joined in an address, expressing their utmost astonishment and indignation at the surprising insolence of the pretender; and assuring his majesty they were determined to support his title to the crown with their lives and fortunes. The commons prepared a bill for raising one hundred thousand pounds upon the real and personal estates of all papists, or persons educated in the popish religion, towards defraying the expenses occasioned by the late rebellion and disorders. This bill, though strenuously opposed by some moderate members as a species of persecution, was sent up to the house of lords; together with another obliging all persons being papists in Scotland, and all persons in Great Britain, refusing or neglecting to take the oaths appointed for the security of the king’s person and government, to register their names and real estates. Both these bills passed through the upper house without amendment, and received the royal sanction.
Mr. Layer being brought to his trial at the king’s bench, on the twenty-first day of November, was convicted for having enlisted men for the pretender’s service, in order to stir up a rebellion, and received sentence of death. He was reprieved for some time, and examined by a committee of the house of commons: but he either could not, or would not, discover the particulars of the conspiracy, so that he suffered death at Tyburn, and his head was fixed up at Temple-bar. Mr. Pulteney, chairman of the committee, reported to the house, that, from the examination of Layer and others, a design had been formed by persons of figure and distinction at home, in conjunction with traitors abroad, for placing the pretender on the throne of these realms: that their first intention was to procure a body of foreign troops to invade the kingdom at the time of the late elections; but that the conspirators being disappointed in this expectation, resolved to make an attempt at the time that it was generally believed the king intended to go to Hanover, by the help of such officers and soldiers as could pass into England unobserved, from abroad, under the command of the late duke of Ormond, who was to have landed in the river with a great quantity of arms provided in Spain for that purpose; at which time the Tower was to have been seized. That this scheme being also defeated by the vigilance of the government, they deferred their enterprise till the breaking up of the camp; and, in the meantime, employed their agents to corrupt and seduce the officers and soldiers of the army: that it appeared from several letters and circumstances, that the late duke of Ormond, the duke of Norfolk, the earl of Orrery, lord North and Grey, and the bishop of Rochester, were concerned in this conspiracy; that their acting agents were Christopher Layer and John Plunket, who travelled together to Rome; Dennis Kelly, George Kelly, and Thomas Carte, nonjuring clergymen; Neynoe the Irish priest, who by this time was drowned in the river Thames in attempting to make his escape from the messenger’s house; Mrs. Spilman, alias Yallop, and John Sample.
This pretended conspiracy, in all likelihood, extended no farther than the first rudiments of a design that was never digested into any regular form; otherwise the persons said to be concerned in it must have been infatuated to a degree of frenzy: for they were charged with having made application to the regent of France, who was well known to be intimately connected with the king of Great Britain. The house of commons, however, resolved, that it was a detestable and horrid conspiracy for raising a rebellion, seizing the Tower and the city of London, laying violent hands upon the persons of his most sacred majesty and the prince of Wales, in order to subvert our present happy establishment in church and state, by placing a popish pretender upon the throne: that it was formed and carried on by persons of figure and distinction, and their agents and instruments, in conjunction with traitors abroad. Bills were brought in and passed, for inflicting pains and penalties against John Plunket and George Kelly, who were by these acts to be kept in close custody during his majesty’s pleasure, in any prison in Great Britain; and that they should not attempt to escape on pain of death, to be inflicted upon them and their assistants. Mr. Yonge made a motion for a bill of the same nature against the bishop of Rochester. This was immediately brought into the house, though sir William Wyndham affirmed that there was no evidence against him but conjectures and hearsay. The bishop wrote a letter to the speaker, importing, that, though conscious of his own innocence, he should decline giving the house any trouble that day, contenting himself with the opportunity of making his defence before another, of which he had the honour to be a member. Counsel being heard for the bill, it was committed to a grand committee on the sixth day of April, when the majority of the tory members quitted the house. It was then moved, that the bishop should be deprived of his office and benefice, and banished the kingdom for ever. Mr. Lawson and Mr. Oglethorpe spoke in his favour.
1723
The bill being passed, and sent up to the lords, the bishop was brought to his trial before them on the ninth of May. Himself and his counsel having been heard, the lords proceeded to consider the articles of the bill. When they read it a third time, a motion was made to pass it, and then a long and warm debate ensued. Earl Paulet demonstrated the danger and injustice of swerving in such an extraordinary manner from the fixed rules of evidence. The duke of Wharton having summed up the depositions, and proved the insufficiency of them, concluded with saying, that, let the consequences be what they would, he hoped such a hellish stain would never sully the lustre and glory of that illustrious house, as to condemn a man without the least evidence. Lord Bathurst spoke against the bill with equal strength and eloquence. He said, if such extraordinary proceedings were countenanced, he saw nothing remaining for him and others to do, but to retire to their country houses, and there, if possible, quietly enjoy their estates within their own families, since the least correspondence, the least intercepted letter, might be made criminal. He observed, that cardinal Mazarin boasted, that if he had but two lines of any man’s writing, he could, by means of a few circumstances, attested by witnesses, deprive him of his life at his pleasure. Turning to the bench of bishops, who had been generally unfavourable to Dr. Atterbury, he said he could hardly account for the inveterate hatred and malice some persons bore the learned and ingenuous bishop of Rochester, unless they were intoxicated with the infatuation of some savage Indians, who believe they inherited not only the spoils, but even the abilities of any great enemy whom they had killed in battle. The bill was supported by the duke of Argyle, the earl of Seafield, and Lord Lechmere, which last was answered by earl Cowper. This nobleman observed, that the strongest argument urged in behalf of the bill was necessity; but that, for his part, he saw no necessity that could justify such unprecedented and such dangerous proceedings, as the conspiracy had above twelve months before been happily discovered, and the effects of it prevented: that, besides the intrinsic weight and strength of the government, the hands of those at the helm had been still further fortified by the suspension of thehabeas-corpusact, and the additional troops which had been raised. He said the known rules of evidence, as laid down at first and established by the law of the land, were the birth-right of every subject in the nation, and ought to be constantly observed, not only in the inferior courts of judicature, but also in both houses of parliament, till altered by the legislature; that the admitting of the precarious and uncertain evidence of the clerks of the post-office, was a very dangerous precedent. In former times, said he, it was thought very grievous that in capital cases a man should be affected by similitude of hands; but here the case is much worse, since it is allowed that the clerks of the post-office should carry the similitude of hands four months in their minds. He applauded the bishop’s noble deportment in declining to answer before the house of commons, whose proceedings in this unprecedented manner, against a lord of parliament, was such an encroachment on the prerogative of the peerage, that if they submitted to it, by passing the bill, they might be termed the last of British peers, for giving up their ancient privileges. The other party were not so solicitous about answering reasons, as eager to put the question, when the bill passed, and a protest was entered. By this act the bishop was deprived of all offices, benefices, and dignities, and rendered incapable of enjoying any for the future: he was banished the realm, and subjected to the pains of death in case he should return, as were all persons who should correspond with him during his exile. Dr. Friend, the celebrated physician, who was a member of the house of commons, and had exerted himself strenuously in behalf of the bishop, was now taken into custody on suspicion of treasonable practices.
The next object that excited the resentment of the commons was the scheme of a lottery to be drawn at Hamburgh in the king’s German dominions. The house appointed a committee to inquire into this and other lotteries at that time on foot in London. The scheme was published, on pretence of raising a subscription for maintaining a trade between Great Britain and the king’s territories on the Elbe; but it was a mysterious scene of iniquity, which the committee, with all their penetration, could not fully discover. They reported, however, that it was an infamous fraudulent undertaking, whereby many unwary persons had been drawn in, to their great loss: that the manner of carrying it on had been a manifest violation of the laws of the kingdom: that the managers and agents of this lottery had, without any authority for so doing, made use of his majesty’s royal name, thereby to give countenance to the infamous project, and induce his majesty’s subjects to engage or be concerned therein. A bill was brought in to suppress this lottery; and to oblige the managers of it to make restitution of the money they had received from the contributors. At the same time the house resolved, That John lord viscount Barrington had been notoriously guilty of promoting, abetting, and carrying on their fraudulent undertaking; for which offence he should be expelled the house. The court of Vienna having erected an East-India company at Os-tend, upon a scheme formed by one Colebrooke an English merchant, sir Nathaniel Gould represented to the house of commons the great detriment which the English East-India company had already received, and were likely further to sustain, by this Ostend company. The house immediately resolved, That for the subjects of this kingdom to subscribe, or be concerned in encouraging any subscription, to promote an East-India company now erecting in the Austrian Netherlands, was a high crime and misdemeanor; and a law was enacted for preventing British subjects from engaging in that enterprise. By another act, relating to the South-Sea company, the two millions of stock which had been annihilated were revived, added to the capital, and divided among the proprietors. A third law passed, for the more effectual execution of justice in a part of Southwark called the Mint, where a great number of debtors had taken sanctuary, on the supposition that it was a privileged place. On the twenty-seventh clay of May the session was closed, with a speech that breathed nothing but panegyric, acknowledgment, and affection to a parliament which had complied with all his majesty’s wishes.
GEORGE I, 1714—1727
His majesty having ennobled the son of Mr. Robert Walpole, in consideration of the father’s services, made a good number of church promotions. He admitted the imprisoned lords and gentlemen to bail; granted a pardon to lord Bolingbroke; and ordered the bishop of Rochester to be conveyed to the continent. Then he himself set out for Hanover, leaving the administration of his kingdoms in the hands of a regency, lord Har-court being one of the justices. The king was attended by the two secretaries, lords Townshend and Carteret, who were counted able negotiators. The affairs of the continent had begun to take a new turn. The interests and connexions of the different princes were become perplexed and embarrassed; and king George resolved to unravel them by dint of negotiation. Understanding that a treaty was on the carpet between the czar and the king of Sweden, favourable to the duke of Holstein’s pretensions to Sleswick, the possession of which the elector of Hanover had guaranteed to Denmark, his majesty began to be in pain for Bremen and Verden. The regent of France and the king of Spain had now compromised all differences; and their reconciliation was cemented by a double marriage between Philip’s sons and the regent’s daughters. The former proposed new treaties to England; but insisted upon the restitution of Gibraltar and Port-Mahon, as well as upon the king’s openly declaring against the Ostend company. His Britannic majesty was apprehensive, that, should the emperor be hard pressed on that subject, he might join the czar and the king of Sweden, and promote their designs in favour of the duke of Holstein. On the other hand, all the Italian powers exclaimed against the treaty of London. The pope had protested against any thing that might have been decided at Cambray to the prejudice of his right. Memorials to the same effect had been presented by the king of Sardinia, the dukes of Tuscany, Parma, and Modena. France and Spain were inclined to support these potentates against the house of Austria. Europe seemed to be on the eve of a new war. King George was entangled in such a variety of treaties and interests, that he knew not well how to extricate himself from the troublesome engagements he had contracted. By declaring for the emperor, he must have countenanced the new establishment at Ostend, which was so prejudicial to his British subjects, and incurred the resentment of France, Spain, and their allies of Italy. In renouncing the interest of the emperor, he would have exposed his German dominions. In vain he exhorted the emperor to relax in his disputes with Spain, and give up the Ostend company, which was so detrimental and disagreeable to his faithful allies; the court of Vienna promised in general to observe the treaties which it had concluded, but declined entering into any particular discussion; so that all his majesty’s endeavours ended in contracting closer connexions with Prussia and Denmark. All those negotiations carried on, all those treaties concluded by king George, with almost every prince and state in Christendom, which succeeded one another so fast, and appear at first view so intricate and unaccountable, were founded upon two simple and natural principles, namely, the desire of ascertaining his acquisitions as elector of Hanover, and his resolution to secure himself against the disaffection of his British subjects, as well as the efforts of the pretender.
Great Britain at this period enjoyed profound tranquillity. Ireland was a little ruffled by an incident which seemed to have been misrepresented to the people of that kingdom. William Wood had obtained a patent for furnishing Ireland with copper currency, in which it was deficient. A great clamour was raised against this coin. The parliament of that kingdom, which met in September, resolved, that it would be prejudicial to the revenue, destructive of trade, and of dangerous consequence to the rights of the subject; that the patent had been obtained by misrepresentation; that the halfpence wanted weight; that, even if the terms of the patent had been complied with, there would have been a great loss to the nation; that granting the power of coinage to a private person had ever been highly prejudicial to the kingdom, and would at all times be of dangerous consequence. Addresses from both houses were presented to the king on this subject. The affair was referred to the lords of the privy-council of England. They justified the conduct of the patentee, upon the report of Sir Isaac Newton and other officers of the Mint, who had made an assay and trial of Wood’s halfpence, and found he had complied with the terms of the patent. They declared that this currency exceeded in goodness, fineness, and value of metal, all the copper money which had been coined for Ireland, in the reigns of king Charles II., king James II., king William and queen Mary. The privy-council likewise demonstrated, that his majesty’s predecessors had always exercised the undoubted prerogative of granting patents for copper coinage in Ireland to private persons: that none of these patents had been so beneficial to the kingdom as this granted to William Wood, who had not obtained it in an unprecedented manner, but after a reference to the attorney and solicitor-general, and after Sir Isaac Newton had been consulted in every particular: finally, they proved, by a great number of witnesses, that there was a real want of such money in Ireland. Notwithstanding this decision, the ferment of the Irish nation was industriously kept up by clamour, pamphlets, papers, and lampoons, written by dean Swift and other authors; so that Wood voluntarily reduced his coinage from the value of one hundred thousand to forty thousand pounds. Thus the noise was silenced. The commons of Ireland passed an act for accepting the affirmation of the quakers instead of an oath; and voted three hundred and forty thousand pounds towards discharging the debt of the nation, which amounted to about double that sum.
In the month of October, England lost a worthy nobleman in the death of earl Cowper, who had twice discharged the office of lord-chancellor, with equal discernment and integrity. He was profoundly skilled in the laws of his country; in his apprehension quick and penetrating; in his judgment clear and determinate. He possessed a manly eloquence; his manner was agreeable, and his deportment graceful. This year was likewise remarkable for the death of the duke of Orleans, regent of France, who, since the decease of Louis XIV., had ruled that nation with the most absolute authority. He was a prince of taste and spirit, endowed with shining talents for empire, which he did not fail to display, even in the midst of effeminate pursuits and idle debauchery. From the infirm constitution of the infant king, he had conceived hopes of ascending the throne, and taken his measures accordingly; but the young monarch’s health began to be established, and all the duke’s schemes were defeated by an apoplexy, of which he died, in the fiftieth year of his age, after having nominated the duke of Bourbon as prime-minister. King George immediately received assurances of the good disposition of the French court, to cultivate and even improve the good understanding so happily established between France and Great Britain. The king arrived in England on the eighteenth day of December; and on the ninth day of January the parliament was assembled. His majesty, in his speech, recommended to the commons the care of the public debts; and he expressed his satisfaction at seeing the sinking fund improved and augmented, so as to put the debt of the nation into a method of being speedily and gradually discharged.
This was the repeated theory of patriotism, which unhappily for the subjects, was never reduced to practice; not but that a beginning of such a laudable work was made in this very session, by an act for lessening the public debts. This law provided that the annuities at five per cent, charged on the general fund by a former act, except such as had been subscribed into the South-Sea, together with the unsubscribed blanks of the lottery in the year one thousand seven hundred and fourteen, should be paid off at Lady-day of the year next ensuing, with the money arising from the sinking fund. The ministry, however, did not persevere in this path of prudent economy. The commons granted all the supplies that were demanded. They voted ten thousand seamen; and the majority, though not without violent opposition, agreed to maintain four thousand additional troops, which had been raised in the preceding year; so that the establishment of the land-forces amounted to eighteen thousand two hundred and sixty-four. The expense of the year was defrayed by a land-tax and malt-tax. The commons having despatched the supply, took into consideration a grievance arising from protections granted by foreign ministers, peers and members of parliament, under which profligate persons used to screen themselves from the prosecution of their just creditors. The commons resolved, That all protections granted by members of that house should be declared void, and immediately withdrawn. The lords made a declaration to the same purpose, with an exception to menial servants, and those necessarily employed about the estates of peers.*
* The duke of Newcastle was now appointed secretary of state; the duke of Grafton, lord-chamberlain; and lord Carteret, lord-lieutenant of Ireland.—The king instituted a professorship for the modern languages in each university.— In the month of May died Robert Harley, earl of Oxford and earl Mortimer, who had been a munificent patron of genius and literature; and completed a very valuable collection of manuscripts.—The practice of inoculation for the small-pox was by this time introduced into England from Turkey. Prince Frederic, the two princesses Amelia and Carolina, the duke of Bedford and his sister, with many other persons of distinction, underwent the operation with success.—Dr. Henry Sacheverel died in June, after having bequeathed five hundred pounds to the late bishop of Rochester.
1724
On the twenty-fourth day of April, his majesty closed the session in the usual manner, made some alterations in the disposition of the great officers of state, and sent Mr. Horatio Walpole as ambassador-extraordinary to the court of France.
In the beginning of this year, Philip king of Spain, retiring with his queen to the monastery of St. Ildefonso, sent the marquis of Grimaldi, his principal secretary of state, to his son Louis prince of Asturias, with a solemn renunciation of the crown, and a letter of advice in which he exhorted him to cultivate the Blessed Virgin with the warmest devotion, and put himself and his kingdoms under her protection. The renunciation was published through the whole monarchy of Spain; and the council of Castile resolved, That Louis might assume the reins of government without assembling the Cortez. The English minister at Paris was instructed to interpose in behalf of the French protestants, against whom a severe edict had been lately published; but his remonstrances produced no effect. England, in the meantime, was quite barren of such events as deserve a place in history. The government was now firmly established on the neck of opposition; and commerce flourished even under the load of grievous impositions.
The next parliament, which met on the twelfth day of November, seemed to be assembled for no other purpose than that of establishing funds for the expense of the ensuing year; yet the session was distinguished by a remarkable incident—namely, the trial of the earl of Macclesfield, lord-chancellor of England. This nobleman had connived at certain venal practices touching the sale of places, and the money of suitors deposited with the masters of chancery, so as to incur the general reproach of the nation. He found it necessary to resign the great seal in the beginning of January, 1725. On the ninth day of the ensuing month, the king sent a message to the commons, importing, That his majesty having reason to apprehend that the suitors in the court of chancery were in danger of losing a considerable sum of money, from the insufficiency of some of the masters, thought himself obliged, in justice and compassion to the said sufferers, to take the most speedy and proper method the law would allow for inquiring into the state of the master’s accounts, and securing their effects for the benefit of the suitors; and his majesty having had several reports laid before him, in pursuance of the directions he had given, had ordered the reports to be communicated to the house, that they might have as full and as perfect a view of this important affair as the shortness of the time, and the circumstances and nature of the proceedings, would admit.
These papers being taken into consideration, sir George Oxenden observed, that enormous abuses had crept into the high court of chancery; that the crimes and misdemeanors of the late lord-chancellor were many and various, but might be reduced to the following heads —that he had embezzled the estates and effects of many widows, orphans, and lunatics; that he had raised the offices of masters in chancery to an exorbitant price; trusting in their hands large sums of money belonging to suitors, that they might be enabled to comply with his exorbitant demands, and that in several cases he had made divers irregular orders. He therefore moved, That Thomas earl of Macclesfield should be impeached of high crimes and misdemeanors. Mr. Pulteney moved, That this affair might be left to the consideration of a select committee. Sir William Wyndham asserted, That in proceeding by way of impeachment upon reports from above, they would make a dangerous precedent; and seem to give up the most valuable of their privileges, the inquest after state criminals. The question being put, it was carried for the impeachment. The earl was accordingly impeached at the bar of the upper house; a committee was appointed to prepare articles; and a bill was brought in, to indemnify the masters in chancery from the penalties of the law, upon discovering what consideration they had paid for their admission to their respective offices. The trial lasted twenty days; the earl was convicted of fradulent practices; and condemned in a fine of thirty thousand pounds, with imprisonment until that sum should be paid. He was immediately committed to the Tower, where he continued about six weeks; but upon producing the money he was discharged; and sir Peter King, now created baron of Oakham, succeeded him in the office of chancellor.
His majesty, on the eighth day of April, gave the house of commons to understand, that having been engaged in some extraordinary expenses, he hoped he should be enabled to raise a sum of money, by making use of the funds lately established for the payment of the civil list annuities, in order to discharge the debts contracted in the civil government. Mr. Pulteney, cofferer of the household, moved for an address, That an account should be laid before the house of all monies paid for secret service, pensions, and bounties, from the twenty-fifth day of March, in the year one thousand seven hundred and one, to the twenty-fifth of the same month in the present year. This address being voted, a motion was made to consider the king’s message. Mr. Pulteney urged, that this consideration should be postponed until the house should have examined the papers that were the subject of the address. He expressed his surprise that a debt amounting to above five hundred thousand pounds should be contracted in three years; he said, he did not wonder that some persons should be so eager to make good the deficiencies of the civil-list, since they and their friends enjoyed such a share of that revenue; and he desired to know whether this was all that was due, or whether they should expect another reckoning? This gentleman began to be dissatisfied with the measures of the ministry; and his sarcasms were aimed at Mr. Walpole, who undertook to answer his objections. The commons took the message into consideration, and passed a bill, enabling his majesty to raise a sum, not exceeding one million, by exchequer bills, loans, or otherwise, on the credit of the deductions of sixpence per pound, directed by an act of parliament of the seventh year of his majesty, and of the civil-list revenues, at an interest not exceeding three pounds per cent, till repayment of the principal.
On the twentieth day of April, a petition was presented to the house by lord Finch in behalf of Henry St. John, late viscount Bolingbroke, praying that the execution of the law with respect to his forfeitures might be suspended, as a pardon had suspended it with respect to his life. Mr. Walpole signified to the house, by his majesty’s command, that, seven years before, the petitioner had made humble application and submission to the king, with assurances of duty, allegiance, and fidelity; that, from his behaviour since that time, his majesty was convinced of his being a fit object of his mercy, and consented to his petitioning the house. The petition being read, Mr. Walpole declared himself fully satisfied that the petitioner had sufficiently atoned for his past offences; and therefore deserved the favour of that house, so far as to enable him to enjoy the family inheritance that was settled upon him, which he could not do by virtue of his majesty’s pardon, without an act of parliament. Lord Finch moved, That a bill might be brought in for this purpose, and was warmly opposed by Mr. Methuen, comptroller of the household, who represented Bolingbroke as a monster of iniquity. His remonstrance was supported by lord William Paulet and Mr. Onslow; nevertheless, the bill was prepared, passed through both houses, and received the royal assent. An act being passed for disarming the highlanders of Scotland, another for regulating elections within the city of London, a third for reducing the interest of several bank annuities, together with some bills of a private nature, the parliament was prorogued in May, after the king had, in the warmest terms of acknowledgment, expressed his approbation of their conduct. Then he appointed lords-justices to govern the nation in his absence; and set out in June for his German dominions.*
* On the fifth day of December the princess of Wales was delivered of a princess, christened by the name of Lotvisa, and afterwards married to the king of Denmark. She died December the nineteenth, one thousand seven hundred and fifty-one.—Immediately after the session of parliament, the king revived the order of the Bath, thirty-eight in number, including the sovereign.—William Bateman was created baron of Calmore in Ireland, and viscount Bateman; and sir Kobert Walpole, who had been one of the revived knights of the Bath, was now honoured with the order of the Garter.
The tide of political interest on the continent had begun to flow in a new channel, so as to render ineffectual the mounds which his Britannic majesty had raised by his multiplicity of negotiations. Louis, the Spanish monarch, dying soon after his elevation to the throne, his father Philip resumed the crown which he had resigned, and gave himself up implicitly to the conduct of his queen, who was a princess of indefatigable intrigue and insatiate ambition. The infanta, who had been married to Louis XV. of France, was so disagreeable to her husband, that the whole French nation began to be apprehensive of a civil war in consequence of his dying without male issue; he therefore determined, with the advice of his council, to send back the infanta, as the nuptials had not been consummated; and she was attended to Madrid by the marquis de. Monteleone. The queen of Spain resented this insult offered to her daughter; and, in revenge, dismissed mademoiselle de Beaujolois, one of the regent’s daughters, who had been betrothed to her son don Carlos. As the congress at Cambray had proved ineffectual, she offered to adjust her differences with the emperor, under the sole mediation of Great Britain. This was an honour which king George declined. He was averse to any undertaking that might interrupt the harmony subsisting between him and the court of Versailles; and he had taken umbrage at the emperor’s refusing to grant the investiture of Bremen and Verden except upon terms which he did not choose to embrace. The peace between the courts of Vienna and Madrid, which he refused to mediate, was effected by a private negotiation, under the management of the duke de Ripperda, a native of the states-general, who had renounced the protestant religion, and entered into the service of his catholic majesty. By two treaties, signed at Vienna in the month of April, the emperor acknowledged Philip as king of Spain and the Indies, promised that he would not molest him in the possession of those dominions that were secured to him by the treaty of Utrecht. Philip renounced all pretensions to the dominions in Italy and the Netherlands, adjudged to the emperor by the treaty of London; Charles granted the investiture of the dukedoms of Tuscany, Parma, and Placentia, to the eldest son of the queen of Spain, in default of heirs in the present possessors, as masculine fiefs of the empire. Spain became guarantee of the Austrian succession, according to the pragmatic sanction, by which the dominions of that house were settled on the emperors’s heirs general, and declared to be a perpetual, indivisible, and inseparable feoffment of the primogeniture. By the commercial treaty of Vienna, the Austrian subjects were entitled to advantages in trade with Spain, which no other nation enjoyed. His catholic majesty guaranteed the Ostend East India company; and agreed to pay an annual subsidy of four millions of piastres to the emperor. Great sums were remitted to Vienna; the Imperial forces were augmented to a formidable number; and other powers were solicited to engage in this alliance, to which the court of Petersburgh actually acceded.
The kind of Great Britain took the alarm. The emperor and he had for some time treated each other with manifest coolness. He had reason to fear some attempts upon his German dominions, and projected a defensive treaty with France and Prussia. This alliance, limited to the term of fifteen years, was negotiated and concluded at Hanover in the month of September. It implied a mutual guarantee of the dominions possessed by the contracting parties, their rights and privileges, those of commerce in particular, and an engagement to procure satisfaction to the protestants of Thorn, who had lately been oppressed by the catholics, contrary to the treaty of Oliva. The king having taken these precautions at Hanover, set out on his return for England; embarked at Helvoetsluys in the middle of December; and after having been exposed to the fury of a dreadful storm, was landed with great difficulty at Rye, from whence he proceeded by land to London. The parliament meeting on the twentieth day of the next month, he gave them to understand that the distressed condition of some of their protestant brethren abroad, and the negotiations and engagements contracted by some foreign powers, which seemed to have laid the foundation of new troubles and disturbances in Europe, and to threaten his subjects with the loss of several of the most advantageous branches of their trade, had obliged him to concert with other powers such measures as might give a check to the ambitious views of those who were endeavouring to render themselves formidable, and put a stop to the further progress of such dangerous designs. He told them that the enemies of his government were already very busy, by their instruments and emissaries in those courts whose measures seemed most to favour their purposes, in soliciting and promoting the cause of the pretender. One sees, at first sight, that the interests of Germany dictated the treaty of Hanover; but, in order to secure the approbation of Great Britain, upon which the support of this alliance chiefly depended, it was judged necessary to insert the articles relating to commerce and the protestant religion, as if the engagement had been contracted purely for the advantage and glory of England. In a word, the ministry began now to ring the changes upon a few words that have been repeated ever since, like cabalistical sounds, by which the nation has been enchanted into a very dangerous connexion with the concerns of the continent. They harangued, they insisted upon the machinations of the disaffected, the designs of a popish pretender, the protestant interest, and the balance of power, until these expressions became absolutely terms of ridicule with every person of common sense and reflection. The people were told that the emperor and the king of Spain, exclusive of the public treaties concluded at Vienna, had entered into private engagements, importing that the Imperialists should join the Spaniards in recovering Gibraltar and Port-Mahon by force of arms, in case the king of England should refuse to restore them amicably, according to a solemn promise he had made: that a double marriage should take place between the two infants of Spain, and the two archduchesses of Austria; and that means should be taken to place the pretender on the throne of Great Britain.
When the treaties of Vienna and Hanover fell under consideration of the house of commons, Horatio Walpole, afterwards termed in derision, “the balance master,” opened the debate with a long unanimated oration, giving a detail of the affairs of Europe since the treaty of Utrecht. He enumerated the barrier-treaty, the convention for executing that treaty, the defensive alliance with the emperor, the other with the most christian king and the states-general, another convention, the quadruple alliance, the congress at Cambray, the treaty of Hanover, and that of Vienna. He explained the nature of each engagement. He said the main design of the treaty of commerce concluded between the emperor and the king of Spain, was to countenance and support the East-India company established at Ostend, which interfered so essentially with the East-India companies of England and Holland, and was directly contrary to several solemn treaties still in force. He enlarged upon the danger to which the balance of power would be exposed, should the issue male of this projected marriage between the houses of Austria and Spain ever possess the imperial dignity and the kingdom of Spain together. The reader will take notice that this very man was one of those who exclaimed against that article of the treaty of Utrecht, which prevented the power of those two houses from being immediately united in the person of the emperor. He did not forget to expatiate upon the pretended secret engagement concerning Gibraltar and Minorca, and the king’s pious concern for the distressed protestants of Thorn in Poland. In vain did Mr. Shippen urge that the treaty of Hanover would engage the British nation in a war for the defence of the king’s German dominions, contrary to an express provision made in the act of limitation. These arguments had lost all weight. The opposition was so inconsiderable, that the ministry had no reason to be in pain about any measure they should propose. An address was voted and delivered to his majesty, approving the alliance he had concluded at Hanover, in order to obviate and disappoint the dangerous views and consequences of the treaty of peace betwixt the emperor and the king of Spain: and promising to support his majesty against all insults and attacks that should be made upon any of his territories, though not belonging to the crown of Great Britain. An address of the same kind was presented by the house of lords in a body. A bill was brought in, empowering the commissioners of the treasury to compound with Mr. Richard Hampden, late treasurer of the navy, for a debt he owed to the crown, amounting to eight-and-forty thousand pounds. This deficiency was occasioned by his embarking in the South-Sea scheme. The king recommended his petition; and the house complied with his request, in consideration of his great-grandfather, the famous John Hampden, who made such a noble stand against the arbitrary measures of the first Charles.
GEORGE I, 1714—1727
RIOTS IN SCOTLAND.
The malt-tax was found so grievous to Scotland, that the people refused to pay it, and riots were excited in different parts of the kingdom. At Glasgow, the populace, armed with clubs and staves, rifled the house of Daniel Campbell, their representative in parliament, who had voted for the bill, and maltreated some excisemen who attempted to take an account of the malt. General Wade, who commanded the forces in Scotland, had sent two companies of soldiers, under the command of captain Bushel, to prevent or appease a disturbance of this nature. That officer drew up his men in the street, where they were pelted with stones by the multitude, which he endeavoured to disperse by firing among them without shot. This expedient failing, he ordered his men to load their pieces with ball, and at a time when the magistrates were advancing towards him in a body, to assist him with their advice and influence, he commanded the soldiers to fire four different ways, without the sanction of the civil authority. About twenty persons were killed or wounded on this occasion. The people seeing so many victims fall, were exasperated beyond all sense of danger. They began to procure arms, and breathed nothing but defiance and revenge. Bushel thought proper to retreat to the castle of Dumbarton, and was pursued above five miles hy the enraged multitude. General Wade being informed of this transaction, assembled a body of forces; and being accompanied by Duncan Forbes, lord-advocate, took possession of Glasgow. The magistrates were apprehended and conveyed prisoners to Edinburgh, where the lords justiciary having taken cognizance of the affair, declared them innocent; so that they were immediately discharged. Bushel was tried for murder, convicted, and condemned; but instead of undergoing the penalties of the law, he was indulged with a pardon, and promoted in the service. Daniel Campbell having petitioned the house of commons, that he might be indemnified for the damage he had sustained from the rioters, a bill passed in his favour, granting him a certain sum to be raised from an imposition laid upon all the beer and ale brewed in the city of Glasgow. The malt-tax was so sensibly felt in Scotland, that the convention of the royal burghs presented a remonstrance against it, as a grievous burden, which their country could not bear: petitions to the same purpose were delivered to the commons from different shires in that kingdom.
1726
On the twenty-fourth day of March, the king sent a message to the house by sir Paul Methuen, desiring an extraordinary supply, that he might be able to augment his maritime force, and concert such other measures as should be necessary in the present conjuncture. A debate ensued, but the majority complied with the demand. Some members in the upper house complained that the message was not sent to both houses of parliament, and this suggestion gave rise to another debate, in which lord Bathurst and others made some melancholy reflections upon the state of insignificance to which the peers of England were reduced. Such remarks, however, were very little minded by the ministry, who had obtained a complete victory over all opposition. The supplies, ordinary and extraordinary, being granted, with every thing else which the court thought proper to ask, and several bills passed for the regulation of civil economy, the king dismissed the parliament on the twenty-fourth day of May.