Page images
PDF
EPUB

CHAP. as May, 1711, we find Bolingbroke write to Lord

II.

66

Orrery,-"We who are reputed to be in Mr. Har1713. "ley's intimacy have few opportunities of seeing "him, and none of talking freely with him. As he is "the only true channel through which the Queen's pleasure is conveyed to us, there is and must be "a perfect stagnation, till he is pleased to open "himself, and set the water flowing." The feuds between the two ministers were frequently composed, more especially by Swift, their common friend. But as the subject matter of division still remained, it always broke out afresh with aggravated rancour.

Such was the state of parties when Parliament met in April 1713.

[ocr errors]

At this period the ministers were by no means apprehensive of defeat in either House. Of the Upper, Swift writes, on the day before the meeting, "Lord Treasurer is as easy as a lamb. They are "mustering up the proxies of the absent Lords, "but they are not in any fear of wanting a majority, which death and accidents have increased this year."* In the Commons their preponderance was even more secure. But that House being then under the operation of the Triennial Act, and in its third and last session, both parties showed great timidity in all their movements, and were anxious not to commit themselves to any measures

* Journal to Stella, April 8. 1713. Bolingbroke also expected that "the session will be quiet and short." To Lord Orrery, March 6. 1713.

that might impair their popularity at the ensuing CHAP.

elections.

On the 9th of May, the following message was presented from her Majesty to the House of Com

mons:

"Anne R. As it is the undoubted prerogative "of the Crown to make peace and war, I have "ratified the treaties of peace and commerce with France, which had been signed by my order, "and have concluded a treaty with Spain, which "will be signed at Utrecht as soon as the Spanish "ministers are arrived there." These treaties were then laid before the House. The stipulations being already well known, and a large majority of the Commons having shown a determination to support them, no debate was attempted on the general question. It would have been but poor generalship to have attacked the whole line with such inferior forces, instead of singling out the weakest points. The Opposition accordingly made a resolute stand on the 8th and 9th articles of the Treaty of Commerce, to which they knew that many of the Ministerial members were disinclined. 9th article provided that all laws made in Great Britain since 1664, for prohibiting the importation of any goods coming from France, should be repealed; and that, within two months, a law should be passed that no higher custom duties should be paid for goods brought from France than were payable for the like goods brought from any other country in Europe. Now the latter clause was a

E

This

II.

1713.

II.

CHAP. direct violation of the Methuen Treaty, according to which the duties on the Portuguese wines were 1713. always to be lower by one third than the duties on the French; and this violation would, of course,

have lost the English all their trade with Portugal, which was at this time by far the most thriving and advantageous they possessed. Their rising manufactures of silk, of linen, and of paper were, moreover, threatened with unequal competition and probable ruin. The merchants and practical men of business in that unenlightened age such men were usually preferred to theorists and speculators, with scarcely an exception, viewed this project with dismay; and it has been calculated, on apparently good grounds, that, had the project passed, the annual balance against, or loss to, Great Britain would have been not less than 1,400,000l. t: so that, on the whole, I think we may fully agree with Bishop Burnet, that "if even we had been as "often beat by the French as they had been by "us, this would have been thought a very hard "treaty. "+

The subject was debated in the House of Commons on the 14th of May, the day appointed to bring in a bill to make good the 8th and 9th articles of the Treaty of Commerce, when the Opposition put forth all their strength. Mr. Gould, an eminent merchant, Mr. Lechmere, an eminent lawyer,

* See the treaty in the Commons' Journals for 1713, p. 348. + Macpherson's History of Commerce, vol. iii. p. 31. ed. 1805. Burnet's History, vol. ii. p. 620. fol. ed.

II.

1713.

Sir Peter King, and General Stanhope, particu. CHA P. larly distinguished themselves on that side. They were ably answered by Sir William Wyndham and Mr. Arthur Moore (a person who, by his industry and abilities, had, much to his honour, raised himself from the station of a footman); and, though they were joined by several of the other party, such as Sir George Newland and Mr. Heysham, they were, on the division, outvoted by 252 against 130. Yet Bolingbroke himself admits that the treaties met with the coldest reception when they were laid before the Houses; "and those who were frightened out of their

[ocr errors]

66

senses, lest they should not be made, affected "to appear very indifferent to them when they "were made." * On the 9th of June, the House resolved itself into committee on the Bill, and heard several merchants at their bar argue and protest against it. A debate then ensued, remarkable for a singular burst of party feeling. General Stanhope, to confirm the statements of one of the merchants, had quoted in his speech some words from the preamble of an act passed in Charles the Second's reign. Upon this, the Speaker, supposing Stanhope to be mistaken, rose, and exclaimed, "There is no such thing in that Act!" The General hereupon desired the clerk at the table to read the Act in question, when it appeared that his quotation was right, and both he and se

• To Mr. Prior, July 4. 1713. Corresp. vol. ii. p. 437.

II.

1713.

CHAP. veral other members then inveighed with much passion on the Speaker's blunder. This little anecdote most strongly shows the mutual animosities and rancour of the times. In the House of Commons, any rude interruption from the Speaker, or any harsh invectives against him, are, perhaps, the very furthest extremity to which its party spirit

ever runs!

On the following days, some more mercantile petitioners were heard at the bar against the Bill; and the former speakers on that side renewed and enforced their arguments, thus backed by the testimony of practical men. Through these means, a powerful effect was made upon the Ministerial phalanx. Sir Thomas Hanmer, member for Suffolk, a man of great weight with the House on all occasions, and more peculiarly on this, because in his general politics a Tory, supported the objections of the Whigs; and at last, on the 18th of June, on the question that the Bill should be engrossed, it was decided in the negative by 194 to 185. Thus was warded off one at least of the dangers of the inglorious negotiations at Utrecht! *

Emboldened by this hard-won victory, the Whig leaders determined to try an address in both Houses, entreating the Queen "to use her most "pressing instances for removing the Pretender "from the Duke of Lorraine's dominions." This

* According to Bolingbroke, "The reason of the majority was, "that there had been, during two or three days' uncertainty, an "opinion spread that the Lord Treasurer gave up the point." To Lord Strafford, June 20. 1713.

« PreviousContinue »