페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

raine was a province she had taken and kept | possession of during every war in which she had been engaged.

As to the disputes with Spain they had not then reached such a height as to make it necessary for us to come to an open rupture. We had then reason to hope, that all differences would be accommodated in an amicable manner; and while we have any such hopes, it can never be prudent for us to engage ourselves in war, especially with Spain, where we have always had a very beneficial commerce. These hopes, it is true, sir, at last proved abortive; but I never heard it was a crime to hope for the best. This sort of hope was the cause of the late Convention. If Spain had performed her part of that preliminary treaty, I am sure it would not have been wrong in us to have hoped for a friendly accommodation; and for that end to have waited nine or ten months longer, in which time the plenipotentiaries were, by the treaty, to have adjusted all the differences subsisting between the two nations. But the failure of Spain in performing what had been agreed to by this preliminary, put an end to all our hopes, and then, and not till then, it became prudent to enter into hostilities, which were commenced as soon as possible after the expiration of the term limited for the payment of the £95,000.6

Strong and virulent censures have been cast on me for having commenced the war without a single ally; and this deficiency has been ascribed to the multifarious treaties in which I have bewildered myself. But although the authors of this imputation are well apprised, that all these treaties have been submitted to and approved by Parliament, yet they are now brought forward as crimes, without appealing to the judgment of Parliament, and without proving or declaring that all or any of them were advised by me. A supposed sole minister is to be condemned and punished as the author of all; and what adds to the enormity is, that an attempt was made to convict him uncharged and unheard, without taking into consideration the most arduous crisis which ever occurred in the annals of Europe. Sweden corrupted by France; Denmark tempted and wavering; the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel almost gained; the King of Prussia, the Emperor, and the Czarina, with whom alliances had been negotiating, dead; the Austrian dominions claimed by Spain and Bavaria; the Elector of Saxony hesitating whether he should accede to the general confederacy planned by France; the court of Vienna irresolute and indecisive. In this critical juncture, if France enters into engagements with Prussia, and if the Queen of Hungary hesitates and listens to France, are all or any of those events to be imputed to

This is the only point on which Walpole is tame and weak. It is exactly the point where, if he had acted a manly part eighteen months before, his defense would have been most triumphant. He knew there was no ground for a war with Spain; and he nght to have held to the truth in that point, even at the sacrifice of his office.

English counsels ? And if to English counsels, why are they to be attributed to one man?

II. I now come, sir, to the second head, the conduct of domestic affairs. And here a most heinous charge is made, that the nation has been burdened with unnecessary expenses, for the sole purpose of preventing the discharge of our debts and the abolition of taxes. But this attack is more to the dishonor of the whole cabinet council than to me. If there is any ground for this imputation, it is a charge upon King, Lords, and Commons, as corrupted, or imposed upon. And they have no proof of these allegations, but affect to substantiate them by common fame and public notoriety!

No expense has been incurred but what has been approved of, and provided for, by Parlia ment. The public treasure has been duly ap plied to the uses to which it was appropriated by Parliament, and regular accounts have been annually laid before Parliament, of every article of expense. If by foreign accidents, by the disputes of foreign states among themselves, or by their designs against us, the nation has often been put to an extraordinary expense, that expense can not be said to have been unnecessary; because, if by saving it we had exposed the balance of power to danger, or ourselves to an at tack, it would have cost, perhaps, a hundred times that sum before we could recover from that danger, or repel that attack.

In all such cases there will be a variety of opinions. I happened to be one of those who thought all these expenses necessary, and I had the good fortune to have the majority of both houses of Parliament on my side. But this, it seems, proceeded from bribery and corruption. Sir, if any one instance had been mentioned, ii it had been shown that I ever offered a reward to any member of either House, or ever threatened to deprive any member of his office or employment, in order to influence his vote in Par liament, there might have been some ground for this charge. But when it is so generally laid, I do not know what I can say to it, unless it be to deny it as generally and as positively as it has

This "critical juncture" was occasioned by the recent death of the Emperor Charles VI. Under the Pragmatic Sanction, his Austrian possessions fell to his daughter Maria Theresa, queen of Hungary; but were claimed in part by Spain, though chiefly by the Elector of Bavaria, supported by France. Frederick of Prussia, afterward called the Great, between France and the Queen; but offered to sup who had just succeeded his father, was fluctuating port the latter if she would cede to him Silesia. Walpole, who wished to defeat the plans of France, advised her to yield to this demand, though unjust. and thus prevent a general war. Her ministers were weak and irresolute, and the affairs of Europe were in utter confusion. The proud spirit of the Queer. soon decided the question. She refused the surren der of Silesia, was attacked by Frederick and the French, and was on the brink of ruin; when she made. seven months after this speech was deliver ed, her celebrated appeal for support to the Diet of Hungary, by which, in the words of Johnson, "Thi Queen, the Beauty, set the world in arms.

[ocr errors]

Deen asserted. And, thank God! til some proof be offered, I have the laws of the land, as well as the laws of charity, in my favor.

Some members of both Houses have, it is true, been removed from their employments under the Crown; but were they ever told, either by me, or by any other of his Majesty's servants, that it was for opposing the measures of the administration in Parliament? They were removed because his Majesty did not think fit to continue them longer in his service. His Majesty had a night so to do; and I know no one that has a right to ask him, "What doest thou ?" If his Majesty had a mind that the favors of the Crown should circulate, would not this of itself be a good reason for removing any of his servants? Would not this reason be approved of by the whole nation, except those who happen to be the present possessors? I can not, therefore, see how this can be imputed as a crime, or how any of the King's ministers can be blamed for ais doing what the public has no concern in; for If the public be well and faithfully served, it has no business to ask by whom.

8

As to the particular charge urged against me, I mean that of the army debentures, I am surprised, sir, to hear any thing relating to this affair charged upon me. Whatever blame may attach to this affair, it must be placed to the account of those that were in power when I was, as they call it, the country gentleman. It was by them this affair was introduced and conducted, and I came in only to pay off those public securities, which their management had reduced to a great discount; and consequently to redeem our public credit from that reproach which they had brought upon it. The discount at which these army debentures were negotiated, was a strong and prevalent reason with Parliament to apply the sinking fund first to the payment of those debentures; but the sinking fund could not be applied to that purpose till it began to produce something considerable, which was not till the year 1727. That the sinking fund was then to receive a great addition, was a fact publicly known in 1726; and if some people were sufficiently quick-sighted to foresee that the Parliament would probably make this use of it, and canning enough to make the most of their own foresight, could I help it, or could they be blamed for doing so? But I defy my most inveterate enemy to prove that I had any hand in bringing these debentures to a discount, or that I had any share in the profits by buying them up.

In reply to those who confidently assert that the national debt is not decreased since 1727, and that the sinking fund has not been applied to the discharge of the public burdens, I can with truth declare, that a part of the debt has been paid off; and the landed interest has been very much eased with respect to that most unequal and grievous burden, the land tax. I say so, sir, because upon examination it will appear, that within these sixteen or seventeen years, no

• Ono who held brasett bound to neither party.

less than £8,000,000 of our debt has been act ually discharged, by the due application of the sinking fund; and at least £7,000,000 has been taken from that fund, and applied to the ease of the land tax. For if it had not been applied to the current service, we must have supplied that service by increasing the land tax; and as the sinking fund was originally designed for paying off our debts, and easing us of our taxes, the ap. plication of it in ease of the land tax, was cer tainly as proper and necessary a use as could be made. And I little thought that giving relief to landed gentlemen, would have been brought against me as a crime.9

III. I shall now advert to the third topic of accusation: the conduct of the war. I have already stated in what manner, and under what circumstances, hostilities commenced; and as I am neither general nor admiral-as I have nothing to do either with our navy or army—I am sure I am not answerable for the prosecution of it. But were I to answer for every thing, no fault could, I think, be found with my conduct in the prosecution of the war. It has from the beginning been carried on with as much vigor, and as great care of our trade, as was consistent with our safety at home, and with the circumstances we were in at the beginning of the war. If our attacks upon the enemy were too long delayed, or if they have not been so vigorous or so frequent as they ought to have been, those only are to blame who have for many years been haranguing against standing armies; for, without a sufficient number of regular troops in proportion to the numbers kept up by our neighbors, I am sure we can neither defend ourselves nor offend our enemies. On the supposed miscarriages of the war, so unfairly stated, and so unjustly imputed to me, I could, with great ease, frame an incontrovertible defense. But as I have trespassed so long on the time of the House, I shall not weaken the effect of that forcible exculpation, so generously and disinterestedly advanced by the right honorable gentleman who so meritoriously presides at the Admiralty.

If my whole administration is to be scrutinized and arraigned, why are the most favorable parts to be omitted? If facts are to be accumulated on one side, why not on the other? And why

Here Walpole dexterously avoids the main point of the difficulty. In 1717, it was provided by law that all the surplus income of the government should be converted into what was called the Sinking Fund, which was to be used for paying off the public debt. This principle was strictly adhered to down to 1729, when more than a million of this fund was used for current expenses, instead of laying taxes to meet them. The same thing was done in six other instances, under Walpole's administra tion. Now it is true, as Walpole says, that by thus applying the fund, he lessened the land tax. Still, sign; and if the taxes had been uniformly laid for it was a perversion of the fund from its original de all current expenses, and the fund been faithfully applied to its original purpose, the debt (small as it then was) might perhaps have wholly been extir guished.

to see those honors which their ancestors have worn, restored again to the Commons.

would have followed? Have I acted wrong in giving the place of auditor to my son, and ir providing for my own family? I trust that their advancement will not be imputed to ine as a crime, unless it shall be proved that I placed them in offices of trust and responsibility for which they were unfit.

But while I unequivocally deny that I am sole and prime minister, and that to my influence and direction all the measures of the government must be attributed, yet I will not shrink from the responsibility which attaches to the post I have the honor to heid; and should, during the long period in which I have sat upon this bench, any one step taken by government be proved to be either disgraceful or disadvantageous to the nation, I am ready to hold myself accountable.

may not I be permitted to speak in my own favor? Was I not called by the voice of the King and the nation to remedy the fatal effects of the Have I given any symptoms of an avaricious South Sea project, and to support declining cred- disposition? Have I obtained any grants from. it? Was I not placed at the head of the treas- the Crown, since I have been placed at the head nry when the revenues were in the greatest con- of the treasury? Has my conduct been differ. fusion? Is credit revived, and does it now flour-ent from that which others in the same station ish? Is it not at an incredible height, and if so, to whom must that circumstance be attributed? Has not tranquillity been preserved both at home and abroad, notwithstanding a most unreasonable and violent opposition? Has the true interest of the nation been pursued, or has trade flourished? Have gentlemen produced one instance of this exorbitant power; of the influence which I extend to all parts of the nation; of the tyranny with which I oppress those who oppose, and the liberality with which I reward those who support me? But having first invested me with a kind of mock dignity, and styled me a prime minister, they impute to me an unpardonable abuse of that chimerical authority which they only have created and conferred. If they are really persuaded that the army is annually established by me, that I have the sole disposal of posts and honors, that I employ this power in the destruction of liberty and the diminution of commerce, let me awaken them from their delusion. Let me expose to their view the real condition of the public weal. Let me show them that the Crown has made no encroachments, that all supplies have been granted by Parliament, that all questions have been debated with the same freedom as before the fatal period in which my counsels are said to have gained the ascendency; an ascendency from which they deduce the loss of trade, the approach of slavery, the preponderance of prerogative, and the extension of influence. But I am far from believing that they feel those apprehensions which they so earnestly labor to communicate to others; and I have too high an opinion of their sagacity not to conclude that, even in their own judgment, they are complaining of grievances that they do not suffer, and promoting rather their private interest than that of the public.

To conclude, sir, though I shall always be proud of the honor of any trust or confidence from his Majesty, yet I shall always be ready to remove from his councils and presence when he thinks fit; and therefore I should think myself very little concerned in the event of the present question, if it were not for the encroachment that will thereby be made upon the prerogatives of the Crown. But I must think that an address to his Majesty to remove one of his servants, without so much as alleging any particular crime against him, is one of the greatest encroachments that was ever made upon the prerogatives of the Crown. And therefore, for the sake of my master, without any regard for my own, I hope all those that have a due regard for our constitution, and for the rights and prerogatives of the Crown, without which our constitution can not be pre. served, will be against this motion.

This speech had a great effect. The motion for an address was negatived by a large majority. But the advantage thus gained was only tem A spirit of disaffection had spread throughout the kingdom; and the next elec What have been the effects of the corruption, tions, which took place a few months after, ambition, and avarice with which I am so abund-showed that the power and influence of Walpole antly charged?

What is this unbounded sole power which is imputed to me? How has it discovered itself,porary. or how has it been proved?

Have I ever been suspected of being corrupted? A strange phenomenon, a corrupter himself not corrupt! Is ambition imputed to me? Why then do I still continue a commoner? I, who refused a white staff and a peerage. I had, indeed, like to have forgotten the little ornament about my shoulders [the garter], which gentlemen have so repeatedly mentioned in terms of sarcastic obloquy But surely, though this may be regarded with envy or indignation in another place, it can not be supposed to raise any resentment in this House, where many may be pleased |

were on the decline. Still he clung to office with a more desperate grasp than ever. He used some of the most extraordinary expedients ever adopted by a minister, to divide the Opposition and retain his power. He even opened a negotiation with the Pretender at Rome, to ob. tain the support of the Jacobites. But his ef forts were in vain. He lost his majority in the House; he was compelled to inform the King that he could no longer administer the govern ment; he was created Earl of Orford with a pension of £4000 a year, and resigned all hy offices on the 11th of February, 1742.

MR. PULTENEY.

WILLIAM PULTENEY, first Earl of Bath, was born in 1682. He was elected a member of Parliament in early life, and applied himself to the diligent study of the temper of the House, and the best mode of speaking in so mixed and discordant an assembly. He made no attempts to dazzle by any elaborate display of eloquence; for it was his maxim, that "there are few real orators who commence with set speeches." His powers were slowly developed. He took part in almost every important debate, more (at first) for his own improvement than with any expectation of matenally changing the vote. He thus gradually rose into one of the most dexterous and effective speakers of the British Senate.

His speeches, unfortunately, have been worse reported, in respect to the peculiar characteristics of his eloquence, than those of any of his contemporaries. The following one, however, though shorter than might be wished, is undoubtedly a fair specimen of the bold, direct, and confident, though not overbearing manner, in which he ordinarily addressed himself to the judgment and feelings of the House. The language is uncommonly easy, pointed, and vigorous. The sentences flow lightly off in a clear and varied sequence, without the slightest appearance of stateliness or mannerism. It is the exact style for that conversational mode of discussion which is best adapted to the purposes of debate.

Walpole, when displaced by the exertions of Pulteney in 1742, had the satisfaction of dragging down his adversary along with him. He saw that the Opposition must go to pieces the moment they were left to themselves; that a new administration ould never be framed out of such discordant materials; and that whoever should undertake it would be ruined in the attempt. He therefore induced the King to lay that duty upon Pulteney. The result was just what he expected. The King insisted on retaining a large proportion of Walpole's friends. Comparatively few offices remained for others, and both Whigs and Tories were disappointed and enraged. Pulteney shrunk from taking office himself, under these circumstances. He professed great disinterestedness; he had no desire for power; he would merely accept a peerage, which all parties regarded as the reward of his perfidy. He was created Earl of Bath; and the name of Patriot, as Horace Walpole tells us, became a term of derision and contempt throughout all the kingdom. When the newly-created earls met for the first time in the House of Lords, Walpole walked up to Pulteney, and said to him, with a mixture of pleasantry and bitterness, for which he was always distinguished, Here we are, my Lord, the two most insignificant fellows in England." Pulteney died on the 8th of June, 1764.

SPEECH

OF MR. PULTENEY ON A MOTION FOR REDUCING THE ARMY, DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

SIR,-We have heard a great deal about Paramentary armies, and about an army continued from year to year. I have always been, sir, and always shall be, against a standing army of any kind. To me it is a terrible thing, whether unler tha' of Parliamentary or any other designa

tion. A standing army is still a standing army, whatever name it be called by. They are a body of men distinct from the body of the people; they are governed by different laws; and blind obe dience, and an entire submission to the orders of their commanding officer, is their only principle

The nations around us, sir, are already enslaved, and have been enslaved by these very means: by means of their standing armies they have every one lost their liberties. It is indeed impossible that the liberties of the people can be preserved in any country where a numerous standing army is kept up. Shall we, then, take any of our measures from the examples of our neighbors? No, sir, on the contrary, from their misfortunes we ought to learn to avoid those rocks upon which they have split.

|

that case happens, I am afraid that, in place of Parliament's dismissing the army, the army will dismiss the Parliament, as they have done here. tofore. Nor does the legality or illegality of that Parliament, or of that army, alter the case. For with respect to that army, and according to their way of thinking, the Parliament dismissed by them was a legal Parliament; they were an army raised and maintained according to law; and at first they were raised, as they imagined, for the preservation of those liberties which they afterward destroyed.

It signifies nothing to tell me, that our army is commanded by such gentlemen as can not be It has been urged, sir, that whoever is for the supposed to join in any measures for enslaving Protestant succession must be for continuing the their country. It may be so. I hope it is so! army: for that very reason, sir, I am against I have a very good opinion of many gentlemen continuing the army. I know that neither the now in the army. I believe they would not join Protestant succession in his Majesty's most illusin any such measures. But their lives are un-trious house, nor any succession, can ever be safe certain, nor can we be sure how long they may be continued in command; they may be all dismissed in a moment, and proper tools of power put in their room. Besides, sir, we know the passions of men; we know how dangerous it is to trust the best of men with too much power. Where was there a braver army than that under | Julius Cesar? Where was there ever an army that had served their country more faithfully? That army was commanded generally by the best citizens of Rome-by men of great fortune and figure in their country; yet that army enslaved their country. The affections of the soldiers toward their country, the honor and integrity of the under officers, are not to be depended

on.

By the military law, the administration of justice is so quick, and the punishments so severe, that neither officer nor soldier dares offer to dispute the orders of his supreme commander; he must not consult his own inclinations. If an officer were commanded to pull his own father out of this House, he must do it; he dares not disobey; immediate death would be the sure consequence of the least grumbling. And if an officer were sent into the Court of Requests, accompanied by a body of musketeers with screwed bayonets, and with orders to tell us what we ought to do, and how we were to vote, I know what would be the duty of this House; I know it would be our duty to order the officer to be taken and hanged up at the door of the lobby. But, sir, I doubt much if such a spirit could be found in the House, or in any House of Commons that will ever be in England.

so long as there is a standing army in the country. Armies, sir, have no regard to hereditary successions. The first two Cesars at Rome did pretty well, and found means to keep their armies in tolerable subjection, because the generals and officers were all their own creatures. But how did it fare with their successors ? Was not every one of them named by the army, without any regard to hereditary right, or to any right? A cobbler, a gardener, or any man who happened to raise himself in the army, and could gain their affections, was made Emperor of the world. Was not every succeeding Empero raised to the throne, or tumbled headlong into the dust, according to the mere whim or mad phrensy of the soldiers?

We are told this army is desired to be continued but for one year longer, or for a limited term of years. How absurd is this distinction! Is there any army in the world continued for any term of years? Does the most absolute monarch tell his army, that he is to continue them any number of years, or any number of months? How long have we already continued our army from year to year? And if it thus continues, wherein will it differ from the standing armies of those countries which have already submitted their necks to the yoke? We are now come to the Rubicon. Our army is now to be reduced, or never will. From his Majesty's own mouth we are assured of a profound tranquillity abroad, and we know there is one at home. If this is not a proper time, if these circumstances do not afford us a safe opportunity for reducing at least Sir, I talk not of imaginary things. I talk of a part of our regular forces, we never can exwhat has happened to an English House of Com-pect to see any reduction. This nation, already mons, and from an English army; and not only from an English army, but an army that was raised by that very House of Commons, an army that was paid by them, and an army that was commanded by generals appointed by them. Therefore do not let us vainly imagine that an army raised and maintained by authority of Parliament will always be submissive to them. If an army be so numerous as to have it in their power to overawe the Parliament, they will be submissive as long as the Parliament does nothing to disoblige their favorite general; but when

overburdened with debts and taxes, must be load. ed with the heavy charge of perpetually supporting a numerous standing army; and remain forever exposed to the danger of having its liberties and privileges trampled upon by any future king or ministry, who shall take in their head to do so, and shall take a proper care to model the army for that purpose.

The bill for continuing the army on the same footing was passed by a large majority

« 이전계속 »