1714. PAMPHLETS BY SWIFT AND STEELE. 65 even set up on the other side; partly on account of the weight and merit of Sir Thomas, partly because Oxford and Bolingbroke had hopes of regaining him and the other moderate Tories, and partly from their difficulty in agreeing amongst themselves as to the choice of a candidate. The earliest attention of both Houses was turned to the public press, and to those pamphlets of which the preceding chapter gave a full account. Her Majesty's opening speech had contained a “wish that effectual care "had been taken, as I have often desired, to suppress "those seditious papers and factious rumours by which designing men have been able to sink public credit, and "the innocent have suffered. There are some who are "arrived to that height of malice as to insinuate that the "Protestant Succession in the House of Hanover is in danger under my government!" 66 66 66 It soon appeared that, as far as this system of libels was concerned, both Houses, though in very opposite directions, were smarting from its stings. The Tory House of Commons proceeded against the Crisis," a new pamphlet of Steele's.* The Whig House of Lords proceeded against an answer to that pamphlet, called "The "Public Spirit of the Whigs." Swift was well known to be the author, but had not affixed nor announced his name; so that the anger of the Peers could wreak itself only on the publisher and printer. These were immediately summoned to the bar. And here it may be observed that Swift, throughout his whole career, never showed the slightest scruple at allowing his underlings to suffer in his place, nor thought of relief to them by exposure of himself. The alleged ground of offence in "The Public Spirit of the Whigs" was a bitter and insulting attack upon the whole Scottish nation in treating of the Union; and the majority of the House took up the 66 * The "Crisis" is a very poor performance. Sir Walter Scott says of it, "It is chiefly a digest of the Acts of Parliament respecting the Succession, mixed with a few comments, of which the diction is "neither forcible, elegant, nor precise; while by the extraordinary "exertions made to obtain subscriptions it is plain that the relief of "the author's necessities was the principal object of the publication." Life of Swift, p. 185. matter warmly. The Lord Treasurer, on his part, protested he knew nothing of the pamphlet, exclaimed against the malicious insinuations contained in it, and readily joined in an order for committing the publisher and printer to the custody of the Black Rod. It may assist our judgment of Oxford's character to observe, that at the very time he was thus professing his ignorance of the author, and his detestation of the book, he wrote a letter to Swift in a counterfeit hand, expressing his sympathy, and enclosing a bill for 1001.* *Lord Wharton, however, still pressed to have Barber, the printer, closely examined, with a view of discovering the "villanous author." But the artifice of Oxford warded off the blow. He directed a prosecution againt Barber himself, which rendered his evidence as to the author no longer admissible in law. The Scottish Peers, headed by the Duke of Argyle, now went up in a body to the Queen, with a demand for vengeance on the insult they had suffered. At their request a proclamation was issued, which promised a reward of 3007. for discovering the author of the libel; but this and the other legal measures were skilfully dropped by the Lord Treasurer as soon as the clamour had abated. In the Commons, Steele having put his name to his pamphlet, and being a member of the House, suffered far more severely than Swift in the Lords. The party tone of his former essays in the Tatler, and the triumph of his late election, had made him peculiarly hateful to the Tories; and their animosity against him burst forth on the very first day of the Session. Sir Thomas Hanmer having been proposed as Speaker, Steele, somewhat presumptuously, perhaps, for a new member, rose to support the nomination. I rise up," he said, "to do him honour"-words which immediately drew from the majority 66 *The letter was as follows:- "I have heard that some honest 66 'men who are very innocent are under trouble, touching a printed pamphlet. A friend of mine, an obscure person, but charitable, puts "the enclosed bill in your hands to answer such exigencies as their "case may immediately require. And I find he will do more, this being only for the present." The name and the date are given in Swift's endorsement, and the letter is printed with his Works (vol. xvi. p. 126.). 1714. 66 SPEECH OF ROBERT WALPOLE. * 67 an ironical cry of "Tatler! Tatler!" and, as he afterwards came out, he was greeted with-"It is not so easy a thing to speak in the House”. "He fancies because "he can scribble”—; and other such sneering observations. These, however, were but the first mutterings of the impending storm. It burst on the 11th of March by a direct attack from Mr. Hungerford, (a lawyer, who had been expelled a former House of Commons for bribery,) seconded by Auditor Foley, a kinsman of the Lord Treasurer. They quoted some passages in the "Crisis," which implied that the Hanover Succession was in danger under Her Majesty's government, and took good care to apply to the Queen what was intended for the Ministry. So determined was the hostility of the Court party, that it was not without much demur.that a week was allowed to Steele to prepare for his defence; and on the appointed day Auditor Foley actually moved that he should withdraw without making any defence at all! The latter proposal was, however, too gross and glaring to be admitted. Steele, nevertheless, did not think proper to take his seat on the side-benches as a member, but stood at the bar as a culprit, with Stanhope on one side, and Walpole on the other. Addison also sat near, and prompted him upon occasion. Thus ably supported, he spoke for nearly three hours, with great eloquence and spirit, and then retired. It was now generally expected that Foley would sum up the case, and answer the defence paragraph by paragraph. But the Auditor, confident of his ready majorities, and thinking further trouble needless, contented himself with saying, "With"out amusing the House with long speeches, it is plain "that the writings that have been complained of are "seditious and scandalous, injurious to her Majesty's Go"vernment, the Church, and the Universities; and I "move that the question should be put thereupon." This motion occasioned a very warm debate, in which there were several powerful speeches on the side of Steele. But of these the most remarkable were those of Walpole and Lord Finch. "By the present mode of proceeding," * See Mr. Steele's apology, printed in the Parl. Hist. vol. vi. p. 1286. 66 .... said the former, "Parliament, which used to be the scourge only of evil Ministers, is made by Ministers "the scourge of the subject. . . . . Mr. Steele is only "attacked because he is the advocate for the Protestant "Succession. The cause which he so ably defends gives "the offence. Through his sides the Succession is to "be wounded. His punishment will be a symptom that "the Succession is in danger, and the Ministry are now "feeling the pulse of Parliament to see how far they may "be able to proceed. . . . . From what fatality does it "arise that what is written in favour of the Protestant "Succession, and countenanced by the late Ministry, is ❝ deemed a libel on the present administration?”* Lord Finch was son of the celebrated Tory leader, Nottingham. He owed some personal obligations to Steele, who had formerly refuted a libel on his sister. He now rose to defend her defender: but addressing the House for the first time, and overcome by the bashfulness usually felt on that occasion, he found all his attempts to express himself in vain, and sat down in confusion, merely saying, "It is strange I cannot speak for this man, though "I could readily fight for him." These words being overheard, produced a general feeling in his favour; the whole House rang with encouraging "Hear! Hears;" and thus called on, Lord Finch rose a second time, and delivered a speech fraught with high public spirit and natural eloquence. He particularly justified Steele in his reflections on the Peace of Utrecht. "We may,” he said, “give it all the fine epithets we please, but epithets "do not change the nature of things. We may, if we "please, call it here honourable; but I am sure it is "accounted scandalous in Holland, Germany, Portugal, "and over all Europe except France and Spain. We "may call it advantageous; but all the trading part of "the nation find it to be otherwise: and if it be really advantageous, it must be so to the Ministry that made it." 66 Such was the beginning of a public career which, though not illustrious, was long, useful, and honourable. As Earl of Winchelsea and Nottingham, Lord Finch *The notes of this speech were found amongst Sir Robert Walpole's papers, and are published by Coxe in his Life, vol. i. p. 44. 1714. CASE OF THE CATALANS. 69 formed part of several administrations, and held his last cabinet office above half a century from the time of his outset.* Of the speeches delivered against Steele no account appears. But when the question was put, that his publication should be declared a scandalous libel, and the author expelled the House, it was carried by 245 votes against 152- —a most fierce and unwarrantable stretch of party violence. Soon after this transaction, a generous effort was made in the House of Lords on behalf of the ill-fated Catalans. The treatment of that poor people by Oxford's administration is perhaps the foulest of all the blots upon its memory. They had first been roused to revolt at the instigation of England. In the name of the Queen had Lord Peterborough summoned them to arms, and solemnly promised to secure to them their ancient Fueros, or provincial liberties. Under this belief had they nobly fought and suffered. Through their aid had the Austrian cause been for several years maintained in Spain, and its standards twice seen to float from the towers of Madrid. That cause, it is true, was laid prostrate for ever in the burning streets of Brihuega and the bloody plain of Villa Viciosa. But it fell from no fault of the Catalans themselves. They had performed, and were even yet performing, their part of the contract, while ours, on the contrary, was shamefully withheld. At the Peace of Utrecht, their promised Fueros were utterly neglected by the English plenipotentiaries, and nothing beyond an amnesty (that is, mere personal pardon) was stipulated for them. We even find Lord Bolingbroke sneering at what he calls their "obstinacy," and attempting to prove that "it is not for the interest of England to preserve the "Catalan liberties!" The shamelessness of Lord Bolingbroke's conduct will *He resigned the Presidency of the Council in July, 1766, and died in 1769, aged 81. Lord Waldegrave says of him, that at the Admiralty, "his whole conduct was so unexceptionable, that faction "itself was obliged to be silent." (Memoirs, p. 139.) † Letter to the Queen, Dec. 17. 1713, in Lord Bolingbroke's Correspondence. Case of the Catalans, in Tindal's History, vol. vi. p. 258. |