1714.

66

STANHOPE SENT TO VIENNA.

115

"Princess, our sister, of whose good intention towards us we could not for some time past well doubt." When published in England, this incautious declaration produced an impression most unfavourable to the late administration, as unveiling their secret and disavowed, because defeated, designs in favour of the Jacobites. Their adherents at first insisted upon this document being a base contrivance of the Whigs to reflect upon the memory of the Queen and of her Tory government, but were much disconcerted at finding its authenticity acknowledged. However, they soon rallied sufficiently to be able to pour forth with some effect a host of libels, whose tendency we may easily discover from their titles: "Stand fast to the Church!-Where are the Bishops now?- The Religion of King George.-No Presby"terian Government. - The State Gamester; or, the "Church of England's Sorrowful Lamentation. - Esop "in Mourning.-The Duke of Ormond's Vindication."The Lord Bolingbroke's Vindication.- No Lord Protector, or the Duke of Marlborough's Design defeated!" The hawkers who cried these and other such pamphlets were sent to the house of correction by the Lord Mayor, with the approbation of Lord Townshend; and some antidotes to the poison were put forth on the other side.*

66

66

On the day after the Coronation, Secretary Stanhope, and Sir Richard Temple, just created Lord Cobham, set out together on a secret mission to Vienna. It was of great importance to remove the jealousy and coldness

* Addison, in one short piece (Freeholder, No. 14., Works, vol. iv. p. 384. ed. 1761) very humorously exposes the inconsistencies of the High Church Jacobites, by drawing out the articles of what he calls A Tory's Creed. The three first are as follows:

I.

That the Church of England will be always in danger till it has a Popish King for its defender.

II.

That for the safety of the Church no subject should be tolerated in any religion different from the Established, but that the head of our Church may be of that religion which is most repugnant to it.

III.

That the Protestant interest in this nation, and in all Europe, could not but flourish under the protection of one who thinks himself obliged, on pain of damnation, to do all that lies in his power for the extirpation of it.

with which the Emperor Charles the Sixth had seen the accession of the House of Hanover, and to allay his apprehensions as to any encroachments in Germany. Nor was it of less moment to induce the Imperial and the Dutch Governments to conclude the Barrier Treaty, which was still under discussion, and presenting an obstacle to any renewed alliance or cordial co-operation between them. Lord Cobham was intended as the permanent ambassador; but the personal appearance of Stanhope, in the first instance, was considered most desirable, from his having formerly been so closely linked with the Emperor in Spain-obtained so large a share of his regard and confidence—and, since that period, continued in correspondence with His Majesty. Stanhope went first to the Hague, where he had a conference with Pensionary Slingeland, Fagel, Hop, and other leading Dutch statesmen. He found them not unreasonable as to the articles of the Barrier Treaty, nor averse to the idea of a defensive alliance with the Emperor for their mutual security, but timidly shrinking from any public declaration or immediate measures. On the whole, they seemed much more afraid of personal responsibility than of national loss; and "it is my decided opinion," adds Stanhope, "that if we do not help them to do their own business, it will never be done at all. There is "not one amongst them who dares to take anything upon "himself." Proceeding to Vienna, Stanhope was most graciously received by Charles, and represented in strong terms to His Majesty, and to Prince Eugene, that a speedy conclusion of the Barrier Treaty was most necessary to arrest the further progress of French intrigues in Holland; that the public mind in that country was becoming soured; and that the possession of one town, or a few thousand florins, more or less, was not to be put in competition by the Emperor with the advantage of a sincere friendship and close alliance with the Dutch. But he met with unexpected difficulties. "I found," he says, "Prince Eugene much irritated with the Dutch, "and very indignant at their last proposals; insomuch "that he declared he should never advise the Emperor "to accept the Low Countries on such terms. The Low "Countries, he observed, were of little value, either to

66

1715.

DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT.

117

"the Emperor or to the empire; they were only a burden "to the former; and, if he should consent to accept them, "it would be much more for the sake of his old allies "than for his own."

66

The English Minister remained at Vienna during several weeks, endeavouring to overcome these obstacles. In his opinion, "the Emperor is much more moderate "than most of his ministers. His views on the general system of European policy seem to me as just and rea"sonable as could possibly be expected; but all his "Government is so exasperated against the Dutch, that "I really cannot tell to what extremities they may not "proceed." Stanhope succeeded in lowering their pretensions as to several articles, but could not bring them to any positive and satisfactory adjustment. Setting out from Vienna on the 22d of December, New Style, he returned to confer with the statesmen at the Hague, and was again in England early in January.* His embassy, though it failed in several of its objects, tended to facilitate the subsequent negotiations; and the Barrier Treaty, after a long and well-matched struggle between Dutch and German obstinacy, was, at length, brought to a conclusion, and signed in November, 1715. The States were to receive 500,000 crowns yearly, and to garrison Namur, Tournay, Menin, Furnes, Warneton, Ypres, and Knoque, together with Dendermond, jointly.†

Immediately after Stanhope's arrival, the Ministers, meeting in Council, determined to publish two Royal proclamations-the one dissolving the Parliament, the other calling a new one. The terms of the latter gave

* Secretary Stanhope to Lord Townshend, Nov. 6. 24. Dec. 5, &c. 1714.

† See Lamberty, vol. ix. p. 24., and Coxes House of Austria, vol. iii. p. 25.; but the former strangely omits Namur and Tournay as they stand in Dumont's collection. Coxe also is by no means accurate in this portion of his history; and his treaty of Westminster of May 5. 1715 is quite imaginary. I should conclude it to be a misprint for May 25. 1716, but that he goes on to speak of the change of policy produced by the death of Louis XIV., Sept. 1. 1715.

A striking instance of blind and unreasonable party accusations is to be found in the Memoirs of Berwick, who charges the government of George the First, amongst other faults, with having "cassé "le Parlement qui venait de le reconnaitre si unanimement!" Yet

considerable, and, I think, very just offence. It severely reflected on the evil designs and miscarriages of the late Government, and advised the electors, in the choice of their representatives, to "have a particular regard to "such as showed a firmness to the Protestant Succession 66 when it was in danger." Such suggestions, however cautiously worded, are clearly unconstitutional; and appear least of all becoming in the mouth of a Prince so lately called over to protect our liberties and laws. Can it be doubted, also, that the Ministers, when using the name of Majesty, should have carefully avoided all approach to party violence and rancour?

The elections, however, went precisely as the framers of the proclamation could have wished.* How strange and sudden are the veerings of popular favour! In the House of Commons, which sat at the beginning of 1710, the Whigs had a very great majority. The elections of that autumn, and of 1713, sent up as large a majority on the side of the Tories. Now, again in 1715, the Whigs found themselves lords of the public mind, and victorious in nearly all their contests. Some grounds have elsewhere been given that will partly account for these revulsions; but to explain them altogether on any thing like reason, or without a liberal allowance for the caprice of popular assemblies, would, I believe, be found as impracticable as to say why the wind should blow from the north to-day, and from the south to-morrow.

The Houses met on the 17th of March, when the Whigs, without opposition, raised Mr. Spencer Compton to the Speaker's chair. A few days afterwards, the King came down to open Parliament in person; but, being unable to pronounce English, gave his speech to be read by the statutes 7 & 8 W. III. c. 15. and 6 Ann. c. 7. made it imperative that the Parliament should be dissolved within six months from the demise of the Crown. See Mém. de Berwick, vol. ii. p. 135., and Blackstone's Comment. vol. i. p. 188. ed. 1825.

* There is a curious account of some slight disturbances at these elections in a contemporary pamphlet, "Account of the Riots and "Tumults, &c.; printed for J. Baker, 1715." We are told that at Cambridge the under-graduates took an active part, and that " "a "right trusty body of passively obedient Johnians were mounted on "their College leads, under which the members were to pass, with good store of brick-bats to discharge on their heads!" (p. 20.)

66

1715.

THE NEW PARLIAMENT MEETS.

119

the Chancellor. Its tone was frank and affectionate. He thanked all his loving subjects for their zeal and firmness in defence of his succession. He gently lamented the unsatisfactory terms of the peace, and the incomplete fulfilment of even those; and he ended with assurances that the established Constitution in Church and State should be the rule of his government, and the happiness of the people the chief care of his life.

The Addresses in answer to His Majesty's speech raised warm debates in both Houses. The Duke of Bolton having moved that of the Lords, in which there were the words " recover the reputation of this kingdom," Lord Bolingbroke, in a masterly harangue (it was his last in Parliament), vindicated the memory of the late Queen, and proposed to change the word "recover" into "main"tain." The original Address was, however, carried against him by 66 to 33; and "I saw," he says, "to the "shame of the Peerage, several Lords concur to condemn, "in one general vote, all that they had approved of in a "former Parliament by many particular Resolutions." It is remarkable that Lord Townshend did not speak at all on this occasion, and that the Duke of Shrewsbury took part against the Court.

In the Commons, the Address moved by Walpole contained even stronger expressions: "It is with just "resentment we observe that the Pretender still resides "in Lorraine; and that he has the presumption, by de"clarations from thence, to stir up your Majesty's sub"jects to rebellion. But that which raises the utmost 66 indignation of your Commons is, that it appears therein "that his hopes were built upon the measures that had "been taken for some time past in Great Britain. It "shall be our business to trace out those measures "whereon he placed his hopes, and to bring the authors of them to condign punishment." This was the first authentic announcement of the intention of the Ministers to call their predecessors to account, and it was confirmed by Secretary Stanhope in the course of the debate. A report, he said, had been industriously spread about that the present Ministers never designed to bring the late to trial, but only to censure them in general terms; but he could assure the House that, notwithstanding all te

66