"these gentlemen to withdraw, has now brought them "hither once more, to give their advice and assistance in "those measures which they then pointed out as the only means of asserting and retrieving them."

66

Sir Robert Walpole replied with great spirit. "After "what passed last Session, and after the repeated declara"tions of the honourable gentleman who spoke last, and "his friends, I little expected that this Session we should "have been again favoured with their company. I am "always pleased, Sir, when I see gentlemen in the way "of their duty, and glad that these gentlemen have re"turned to theirs; though, to say the truth, I was in no “ great concern, lest the service, either of His Majesty or "the nation, should suffer by their absence. I believe "the nation is generally sensible that the many useful "and popular Acts which passed towards the end of last "Session, were greatly forwarded and favoured by the "secession of these gentlemen; and if they are returned only to oppose and perplex, I shall not at all be sorry "if they secede again."

The debate on the King's Speech was not confined to this remarkable incident; a warning it contained against "heats and animosities," being construed by the Opposition as an insult to themselves, was warmly resented. In the Commons, however, the Address passed unanimously; but the Lords, stirred by eloquent speeches from Chesterfield and Carteret, divided, 68 for, and 41 against, the motion.

During the whole of this Session it is easy to observe the Minister's diminished strength. His supplies indeed passed without difficulty; the Land Tax was raised again to four shillings in the pound; and four millions were granted for the war. But on most other questions,

Parl. Hist. vol. ii. p. 89. Coxe's Walpole, vol. i. p. 626. Bolingbroke is remarkably cautious in forbearing to give any opinion as to the policy of the Seceders returning, but seems against it. To Sir William Wyndham, Nov. 1. and Nov. 18. 1739.

"Four millions of money have been raised on the people this year, yet in all probability nothing will be done. Our situa

"tion is very extraordinary. Sir Robert will have an army, will not have a war, and cannot have a peace!" Pulteney to Swift, June 3. 1740. (Swift's Works, vol. xix. p. 323.)

1740.

DIMINISHED STRENGTH OF WALPOLE.

5

66

finding that he could not stand his ground, he prudently preferred concession to defeat. When Wyndham moved a violent Address to the Crown that no peace with Spain might be admitted unless the Right of Search were renounced, the Opposition expected a great triumph, but were disappointed by Walpole declaring that he was the first to agree to the motion. When Pulteney brought in a Bill "for the encouragement of seamen," by which the public would be deprived of all share in prize-money, Walpole opposed it only in its first stage, but then sullenly and silently acquiesced. He agreed to an Address “that a sufficient number of ships may be appointed to cruize "in proper stations for the effectual protection of trade;" though the motion implied that the number of cruizers had hitherto been insufficient, and that the Ministers therefore had been neglectful of their duty. Still more evident was his sense of weakness when a Bill was introduced by himself for registering all seamen capable of service, and rendering them liable to summons on emergencies a measure which he thought absolutely needful for the speedy equipment of the fleet. According to official returns, only 21,000 seamen could be mustered in the Royal Navy during the year 1739*; while impressment from merchant shipping was an uncertain and invidious resource. Under these circumstances the Minister consulted Sir Charles Wager and Sir John Norris, the heads of the Admiralty, who declared that they could devise no other remedy but a general registry of seamen, according to the system which prevailed in France. But when the

measure thus framed was laid before the House it was received with general disapprobation, and even horror, as an introduction of French measures and French despotism; it was certainly open to very grave objections, and after a faint defence was speedily dropped by the Minister. A general embargo upon shipping, to which he had recourse, was encountered with scarcely less clamour by the merchants; they called it an intolerable oppression

* See the Accounts presented to the House of Commons (Journals, January 28. 1740). This calculation of 21,516 is the average of the months, the number being less in the first months, but more in the later.

upon commerce, and petitioned the House of Commons to be heard by counsel against it. Their request was supported by the Opposition, but withstood by the Government, and rejected by a large majority; however, the latter soon afterwards yielded to a compromise, by which the merchants agreed to carry one third of their crew of landsmen, and to furnish one man in four to the King's ships; while on the other hand, about the 14th of April, the embargo was removed. *. - Who in this cautious and conceding Session could recognise the imperious and allpowerful Prime Minister?

The Opposition which at this time had gathered against Walpole might well indeed dismay him, supported as it was by so much popular favour, and comprising as it did almost every statesman of lofty talents or brilliant reputation. In each House he saw arrayed before him the accumulated resentments of twenty years. In the Lords, Chesterfield had become the most graceful and admired debater of the day. With more depth of knowledge and more force of application, Carteret was equally powerful as a speaker: he was marked out by the public voice for office, and, like Galba, would ever have been deemed most worthy of power unless he had attained it. The lively sallies of Bathurst, and the solemn invectives of Gower, continued to support the same cause; and within the last year it gained a most important accession in the Duke of Argyle. He had very many times before turned round from one party to the other, and each of his former changes may be clearly traced to some personal and selfish motive. For this last change, however, no adequate cause is assigned. His enemies whispered that Argyle could always foresee and forsake the losing side ‡; yet in so long a life it is not impossible that for once he might deviate into disinterestedness. Thus much only we know, that after being a zealous supporter of Walpole's adminis

* Tindal's Hist. vol. viii. p. 457.

† Major privato visus dum privatus fuit, et omnium consensu capax Imperii, nisi imperâsset. (Tacit. Hist. lib. i. c. 49.)

"It is

"It is said that the Duke of Argyle is extremely angry. "a common saying that when a house is to fall the rats go away." 1738. (Opinions of the Duchess of Marlborough, p. 7.)

1740.

DISMISSAL OF ARGYLE.

tration during many years, he, in the Session of 1739, stood forth as one of its most bitter, most frequent, and most formidable assailants in debate. Yet Sir Robert, still wishing to keep measures with a man of such princely possessions, shining talents, and eminent services, left him in possession of every place, pension, office, or emolument, that had been lavishly heaped upon him as the price of his support. This forbearance was ere long taunted as timidity. Once in 1739, the Duke being present under the gallery of the House of Commons to hear the debate, Pulteney turned his speech to some officers who had voted against the Convention, and had in consequence been arbitrarily dismissed. "They who had the courage," cried Pulteney, "to follow the dictates of their own breasts were disabled from farther serving their "country in a military capacity. One exception, Sir, I "know there is, and I need not tell gentlemen that I have "in my eye one military person, great in his character, great in his capacity, great in the important offices he "has discharged, who wants nothing to make him still greater but to be stripped of all the posts, of all the "places he now enjoys. But that, Sir, they dare not "do." *

66

66

66

Want of daring, however, was seldom the fault of Walpole where his own colleagues were concerned. Next year, finding that his moderation had but emboldened instead of conciliating his enemy, he prevailed upon the King, by one order, to dismiss the Duke from all his employments. The news roused the Highland blood of Argyle. General Keith, brother to Earl Marischal, and a zealous Jacobite, was with his Grace when he received his dismission. "Mr. Keith," exclaimed the Duke," fall "flat, fall edge, we must get rid of these people!" which," says Keith, "might imply both man and master, or only the man!"†

66

In the Lower House, at nearly the same moment, Sir

*Tindal's Hist. vol. viii. p. 404.

† Letter of the Earl Marischal, June 15. 1740. Stuart Papers. I owe this extract to the kindness of the Right Hon. C. W. Wynn, who copied it at Carlton House. The original seems to have fallen from its right order, and I could not find it among the Stuart Papers of that year at Cumberland Lodge.

66

Robert Walpole was freed from one of his most powerful antagonists, Sir William Wyndham, who died at Wells after a few days' illness. His frame had always been delicate*, and he was only fifty-three years old; for nearly half that period had he been a leading member of the House of Commons. "In my opinion," says Speaker Onslow, "Sir William Wyndham was the most made for a great man of any one that I have known in this age. Every "thing about him seemed great. There was no inconsistency in his composition; all the parts of his charac"ter suited and helped one another." The same authority, however, admits him to have been haughty and arrogant in temper, and without any acquirements of learning. Pope extols him as "the master of our pas"sions and his own;" yet the latter praise, at all events, does not apply to his private life, since it appears that, though twice married §, he resembled his friends Bolingbroke and Bathurst as a man of pleasure. As a statesman, he wanted only a better cause, a longer life, and the lustre of official station (one more year would have brought it) for perfect fame. Born of an ancient lineage and inheriting a large estate, he dignified both his family and his fortune. The allurements which beguiled his lighter hours may have sometimes relaxed his public application; but the dangers which crossed his career and tried his firmness, left him unshaken and unchanged. His eloquence, more solemn and stately than Pulteney's, and perhaps less ready, was not less effective; and I cannot praise it more highly than by saying that he deserved to be the rival of Walpole and the friend of St. John.

*"When I was last among you, Sir William Wyndham was in a "bad state of health: I always loved him, and rejoice to hear from "you the figure he makes." Swift to Erasmus Lewis, July 23. 1737. † Speaker Onslow's Remarks (Coxe's Walpole, vol. ii. p. 562.).

This is confirmed by the Rev. Dr. King: "He was not eminent "in any branch of literature." (Anecdotes, p. 179.)

§ The first wife of Sir William was daughter of the Duke of Somerset, surnamed the Proud; and the influence of that family in 1749 obtained for Sir Charles Wyndham, son and heir of Sir William, the title of Earl of Egremont.

See for example the Duke of Wharton's letter of February 3, 1725. Appendix, vol. ii,