party in power, that 280 voted with, and only 84 against them. Of a similar tendency was a treaty just concluded with the Duke of Brunswick, stipulating a subsidy of 25,000l. a year to him during four years, whilst, on his part, he was to furnish, if required, 5000 men. In this temper of the House a discussion between Walpole and Pulteney afforded a certain triumph to the former. Pulteney asserted that, in spite of the Sinking Fund, the public burthens had increased instead of diminishing since 1716. Such statements, enforced in an able pamphlet, and in several numbers of the "Craftsman," began to pass current upon the public. On the other hand, it was maintained by Walpole, in the House of Commons, that 6,000,000l. had been discharged since that year; and that, allowing for new debts, the decrease was still no less than 2,500,000l. Pulteney defended his calculations, adding, that he should be prepared to prove them in a few days, and would stake his reputation on their accuracy. Accordingly, on the 4th of March, there ensued a sort of pitched battle between the rival statesmen, when the statement of Walpole was affirmed by a large majority, and afterwards embodied in a Report, which was laid before the King. The Opposition hoped to be more successful in calling for a specific account of so large a sum as 250,000l., which was charged for Secret Service. Walpole gave the usual answer, that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure; and the debate was still proceeding when some important news arrived. The King of Spain, on learning the death of George the First, had determined not to ratify the preliminaries signed in his name, but without his authority, at Vienna. He hoped to see, not merely a change of administration but a change of dynasty follow the Royal decease in England; he expected, at least, great discord and divisions in the new Parliament: but finding the result quite otherwise, and unable to stand alone against the Hanover allies, his reluctance at length gave way. From his country palace he issued what was termed the Act of the Pardo, accepting the preliminaries with France and England, and referring further difficulties to a Congress, about to be held at Soissons. The express which brought this intelligence reached Walpole in the midst of his speech on the Secret Service; he immediately availed himself of this event, and having communicated it to the House, added, that the country would now be relieved from the burthen of its late expenses, and that he could assure the Members who clamoured for an account of the Secret Service money, that it had been expended in obtaining that peace of which the preliminaries were just signed. So much satisfaction did this news spread through the House, that the question was instantly called for, and passed without a division. In fact, to the end of this Session (I might almost say, of this Parliament) the Ministerial numbers continued steady, and even increasing; and verified the shrewd saying, that a good majority, like a good sum of money, soon makes itself bigger.* 66 At the Congress, which opened in the month of June, the English plenipotentiaries were William Stanhope, Poyntz, and Horace Walpole. The business at Paris was intrusted to Lord Waldegrave, whom Horace Walpole praises for "a good understanding:" but still more for what was most requisite under Sir Robert, a supple " and inoffensive disposition."† At the Hague our interests were most ably conducted by the Earl of Chesterfield, one of the most shining characters of this age; whom Smollett, though with much party spirit, goes so far as to call the only man of genius employed under Walpole.+ The Congress of Soissons, however, proved a worthy counterpart of the Congress of Cambray. It was a mere routine of forms-a dull accumulation of endless memorials and counter memorials, without leading to the decision of a single disputed point. A proposal for a provisional instead of a definitive treaty equally failed, and it became necessary to revert once more to separate negotiations. "It is evident to us all here," writes Townshend, "that this nation will not long bear this uncertain state "of things."§ It was lamented in the King's Speech, * Walpole's Letters to Mann, December 3. 1741. † Coxe's Walpole, vol. iii. p. 8. To Mr. Poyntz, February 21. 1729. when Parliament met again in January, 1729, "and I "am not insensible," said His Majesty," that some may "be induced to think that an actual war is preferable to "such a doubtful and imperfect peace; but the exchange "is very easy to be made at any time." Although the Session of 1729 was almost entirely engrossed with Foreign affairs, there are two other of its transactions that seem deserving of attention. The first was, the expression of the public joy and loyal congratulations to the King at the arrival of Frederick Prince of Wales. For some reason not very clear, but probably to gratify the Hanoverian party, the young Prince had never been allowed to visit England in the lifetime of George the First. He now came over at the age of twenty-one, a pledge of the Protestant Succession, and not without qualities to captivate the multitude, who are always apt to love an heir apparent better than a King. I shall have occasion to show how soon this fair prospect was clouded and darkened by faction, and how scrupulously Frederick followed his father's example in caballing against him. Another affair this Session, in which the Court was less honourably mingled, was a motion for granting His Majesty 115,000l. to supply a deficiency in the Civil List. It afterwards appeared that in truth there was no such deficiency, yet the Minister persevered and carried the Bill by a large majority. The transaction was very painful to Walpole, and no less injurious to his public character; and he is said to have used every argument with the Court to dissuade it from urging the demand. We are told also that the resistance to it in the House of Lords was very strong, although (so strictly were their Standing Orders enforced) no report at all, however meagre, appears of their debates in this and the foregoing Session. Indeed, had it depended on the wish of the House of Commons, their debates also would have remained wholly unrecorded. A complaint being made to the House of one Raikes, a printer of Gloucester, who had published some reports of their proceedings, they passed an unanimous resolution on the 26th of February, "That it is an "indignity to, and a breach of the privilege of, this "House for any person to presume to give in written or printed newspapers any account or minutes of the "debates or other proceedings of this House, or of any "Committee thereof." And, "that upon discovery of the "authors, printers, or publishers, this House will proceed "against the offenders with the utmost severity." The points on which it had been found most difficult to come to an understanding with the Spaniards were the possession of Gibraltar, and the claim of the English to cut log-wood in the Bay of Campeachy. The latter had, for some years, been contested by the Spaniards; in 1717 the Marquis de Monteleon had delivered a memorial against it, which was met by a representation from the Board of Trade, proving that the practice was of old standing, and of just right. This representation was now laid before the House of Commons, together with numerous petitions complaining of Spanish depredations, and every art was used to inflame the public mind, and to represent the Minister as tamely submitting to insult and careless of the national wrongs. Gibraltar was a question nearly touching the Spanish pride. . It is almost incredible what deep and deadly resentment had been raised in that haughty nation, who had extended their conquering arms so far, to see a fortress upon their own shores held and garrisoned by England, They viewed it with still more bitter feelings than the French had formerly our possession of Calais, and there was scarcely a Spanish statesman of this period who might not have applied to himself the saying of Queen Mary, and declared that when he died the word GIBRALTAR would be found engraven on his heart. They openly avowed, that until it was restored, there should be no amity with England-a truce, but no peace. Thus high is the spirit of the Spaniards, so keen are they to discern, and so fierce to resent, even the slightest approaches to an insult! The obstacles to a friendly intercourse with Spain, so long as we retained Gibraltar, were most strongly felt by General Stanhope on his coming to power, and he was also impressed with the idea that the fortress was of small value to England. The Opposition which afterwards urged the contrary arguments was at first not less 66 loud in inveighing against a "barren rock" and "useless charge." The garrison was the cause of an increase in our standing army. The expense of its establishment was great and ill regulated.* There was no English possession to protect in the Mediterranean except Minorca, which was fully adequate to its own defence. There was yet no precedent of one nation long retaining such a strong-hold on the shores of another. Under these circumstances, Stanhope formed a decided opinion as to the policy of yielding Gibraltar on certain conditions: he made this proposal to the King and to his colleagues, and obtained their acquiescence before he proceeded with it to Madrid in 1718. Yet, while allowing considerable weight to his arguments, I must maintain that our national glory demanded the preservation of this conquest; and it is evident that at a later period our national interests would have suffered by its loss. It must be observed, however, that Stanhope never proposed an unconditional surrender; the doubt is only whether in 1718 he asked for any territorial equivalent, or whether he would have been satisfied with the accession of Spain to the Quadruple Alliance, coupled with (as was then required) large commercial advantages to our traders in South America. Amidst the secrecy and obscurity of the negotiation, we cannot distinguish the exact terms of the offer. We find, however, that it was rejected by the Spanish Court; but that in the subsequent negotiations the French government, though without any express authority, again held out this tempting bait, and gave Philip hopes of prevailing on easy terms. Thus the honour of the Regent became in some degree engaged, and he warmly seconded the claim of Philip at the Court of England. But no sooner had Stanhope sounded the House of Lords upon the subject than the country caught the alarm. The cession on any terms became most unpopular-which in England is but another word for impossible. As Stanhope declares, in a letter to Sir Luke Schaub, from Paris, "We have made a motion "in Parliament, relative to the restitution of Gibraltar, * Lord Bolingbroke to Lord Portmore, March 29. 1712. |