Chapter X: Part 10

Both these treaties were arranged in accordance with the pacific 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 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. 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 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.

[Sidenote: Walpole's home government.]

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.

[Sidenote: His financial measures. 1733.]

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 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 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.

[Sidenote: His pacific foreign policy.]

[Sidenote: Fresh European war.]

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 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 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.

[Sidenote: Definitive Peace of Vienna. Nov. 8, 1738.]

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.

[Sidenote: Increasing opposition to Walpole. 1734.]

[Sidenote: Wyndham's speech against Walpole.]

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," said Wyndham, "a man abandoned to all notions of virtue and honour, of no great family, and of but a mean fortune, raised to 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.

[Sidenote: Prince of Wales head of the Opposition. 1735.]

The leadership which Bolingbroke thus resigned fell in some 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.

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.

[Sidenote: Quarrel of the King and Prince. 1737.]

[Sidenote: Death of the Queen.]

[Sidenote: Walpole retains his influence with the King.]

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 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, 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 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.

[Sidenote: The Opposition attacks his pacific policy.]

[Sidenote: George desires war.]

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 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 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.

[Sidenote: Negotiations with Spain. 1739.]

Walpole attempted at first to pursue his established policy of peace. He opened negotiations with Spain, supported by such signs of coming hostilities as induced that Court to agree to a convention. Many English prisoners and some English prizes were restored, and 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.

[Sidenote: Walpole declares war rather than resign.]

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 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 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.

[Sidenote: Increased vigour of the Opposition. 1740.]

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 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.

[Sidenote: Ill success of the war.]

[Sidenote: Walpole resigns. 1742.]

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 Committees against the Government candidate, and when he found 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.

[Sidenote: Review of Walpole's ministry.]

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 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 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.

[Sidenote: The new ministry under Wilmington.]

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 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.

[Sidenote: Character of the new ministry.]

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 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 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.

[Sidenote: Pelham succeeds Wilmington. 1743.]

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.

[Sidenote: Question of the Austrian succession.]

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 these was the succession to the Austrian dominions, which Charles 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.

[Sidenote: Ambition of Prussia.]

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 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.

[Sidenote: Position of Maria Theresa.]

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 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.

[Sidenote: England supports Austria.]

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.

[Sidenote: The English army in Flanders.]

[Sidenote: Battle of Dettingen.]