NEW PARLIAMENT IN GREAT BRITAIN.
While these transactions occurred on the continent, the king of Great Britain augmented his land-forces; and warm contests were maintained through the whole united kingdom in electing representatives for the new parliament. But in all these struggles the ministerial power predominated; and the new members appeared with the old complexion. The two houses assembled on the fourteenth day of January, and Mr. Onslow was re-elected speaker. The leaders of both parties in all debates, were the self-same persons who had conducted those of the former parliament; and the same measure were pursued in the same manner. The king in his speech at the opening of the session, gave them to understand, that he had concerted with the states-general of the United Provinces such measures as were thought most advisable for their common safety, and for restoring the peace of Europe; that they had considered on one side the pressing applications made by the Imperial court both in England and Holland, for obtaining succours against the powers at war with the house of Austria; and, on the other side, the repeated professions made by the allies of their sincere disposition to put an end to the present troubles upon honourable and solid terms; that he and the states-general had concurred in a resolution to employ their joint and earnest instances to bring matters to a speedy and happy accommodation; that their good offices were at length accepted; and in a short time a plan would be offered to the consideration of all parties engaged in the war, as a basis for a general negotiation of peace. He told them he had used the power vested in him by the last parliament with great moderation; and concluded a treaty with the crown of Denmark of great importance in the present conjuncture. He observed, that whilst many of the principal powers of Europe were actually engaged in a war, Great Britain must be more or less affected with the consequences; and as the best concerted measures are liable to uncertainty, the nation ought to be prepared against all events. He therefore expressed his hope, that his good subjects would not repine at the necessary means of procuring the blessings of peace and universal tranquillity, or of putting him in a condition to act that part which it might be necessary and incumbent upon him to take. The address of thanks produced a dispute as usual, which ended with an acquiescence in the motion The house, in a grand committee on the supply, resolved, That thirty thousand seamen should be employed for the service of the ensuing year; and that the land-forces should be augmented to the number of twenty-five thousand seven hundred and forty-four effective men. But these resolutions were not taken without dispute and division. The minister’s opponents not only reproduced all the reasons which had been formerly advanced against a standing army, but they opposed this augmentation with extraordinary ardour, as a huge stride towards the establishment of arbitrary power. They refuted those fears of eternal broils on which the ministry pretended to ground the necessity of such an augmentation; and they exposed the weak conduct of the administration, in having contributed to destroy the balance of power, by assisting Spain against the emperor in Italy, so as to aggrandize the house of Bourbon.
DEBATE ON A SUBSIDY TO DENMARK.
Sir William Wyndham moved, that the estimate of the navy for the ensuing year might be referred to a select committee. He expressed his surprise, that notwithstanding the vast sums which had been yearly raised, and the long continuance of the peace, the people had not been quite delivered of any one tax incurred in the preceding war. He said, he could not comprehend how it was possible to find pretences for exposing the nation to such exorbitant charges; and he took notice of some unconsionable articles in the accounts of the navy-debt that lay upon the table. He was seconded by Mr. Sandys, and supported by sir J. Jekyll and Mr. Pulteney; but after some debate, the motion was carried in the negative. When the new treaty with Denmark fell under consideration in a grand committee, Mr. H. Walpole moved, that the sum of fifty-six thousand two hundred and fifty pounds, should be granted to his majesty as a subsidy to the Dane, pursuant to the said treaty, for the service of the ensuing year. The demand did not meet with immediate compliance. All the leaders in the opposition exclaimed against the subsidy as unnecessary and unreasonable. They observed, that as the English had no particular interest of their own for inducing them to engage in the present war, but only the danger to which the balance of power might be exposed by that event; and as all the powers of Europe were as much, if not more, interested than the English in the preservation of that balance, should it ever be really endangered, they would certainly engage in its defence, without receiving any valuable consideration from Great Britain; but should the English be always the first to take the alarm upon any rupture, and offer bribes and pensions to all the princes in Europe, the whole charge of preserving that balance would fall upon Great Britain; every state would expect a gratification from her, for doing that which it would otherwise be obliged to do for its own preservation; even the Dutch might at last refuse to assist in trimming this balance, unless Britain should submit to make the grand pensionary of Holland a pensionary of England, and take a number of their forces into English pay. The debate having had its free course, the question was put, and the motion approved by the majority. The ministry allowed a bill to be brought in for limiting the number of officers in the house of commons; but at the second reading it was rejected upon a division, after a learned debate, in which it appeared that the opposition had gained a valuable auxiliary in the person of lord Pol-worth, son to the earl of Marchmont, a nobleman of elegant parts, keen penetration, and uncommon vivacity, who spoke with all the fluency and fervour of elocution.
PETITION OF SOME SCOTTISH NOBLEMEN.
The minority in the house of lords were not less vigilant and resolute in detecting and opposing every measure which they thought would redound to the prejudice of their country. But the most remarkable object that employed their attention during this session, was a very extraordinary petition subscribed by the dukes of Hamilton, Queensberry, and Montrose, the earls of Dundonald, Marchmont, and Stair, representing that undue influence had been used for carrying on the election of the sixteen peers of Scotland. The duke of Bedford, who delivered their petition to the house, proposed a day for taking it into consideration; and to this they agreed. It was afterwards moved, that the consideration of it should be adjourned to a short day, before which the petitioners should be ordered to declare whether they intended to controvert the last election of all the sixteen peers, or the election of any, and which of them. This affair was of such an unprecedented nature, that the house seemed to be divided in opinion about the manner in which they ought to proceed. The partisans of the ministry would have willingly stifled the inquiry in the beginning; but the petitioners were so strenuously supported in their claim to some notice, by the earls of Chesterfield, Abingdon, and Strafford, the lords Bathurst and Carteret, that they could not dismiss it at once with any regard to decorum. The order of the house, according to the motion explained above, being communicated by the lord-chancellor to the petitioners, they waited on him with a declaration, importing, that they did not intend to controvert the election or return of the sixteen peers for Scotland; but they thought it their duty to lay before their lordships the evidence of such facts and undue methods as appeared to them to be dangerous to the constitution; and might in future elections equally affect the right of the present sixteen peers, as that of the other peers of Scotland, if not prevented by a proper remedy. This declaration being repeated to the house, the duke of Devonshire made a motion, that the petitioners might be ordered to lay before the house in writing, instances of those undue methods and illegal practices upon which they intended to proceed, and the names of the persons they suspected to be guilty. He was warmly opposed by the country party; and a long debate ensued, after which the question was carried in favour of the motion, and the order signified to the petitioners. Next day their answer was read to the house to this effect: That as they had no intention to state themselves accusers, they could not take upon them to name particular persons who might have been concerned in those illegal practices; but who they were would undoubtedly appear to their lordships upon their taking the proper examinations: nevertheless, they did humbly acquaint their lordships, that the petition was laid before them upon information that the list of the sixteen peers for Scotland had been framed previous to the election, by persons in high trust under the crown; that this list was shown to peers, as a list approved by the crown; and was called the king’s list, from which there was to be no variation, unless to make way for one or two particular peers, on condition they should conform to measures; that peers were solicited to vote for this list, without the liberty of making any alteration; that endeavours were used to engage peers to vote for this list by promise of pensions, and offices civil and military to themselves and relations, as well as by offers of money: that sums were given for this purpose; that pensions, offices, and releases of debts owing to the crown, were actually granted to peers who concurred in voting for this list, and to their relations; that on the day of election a battalion of his majesty’s troops were drawn up in the Abbey-court of Edinburgh, contrary to custom, and without any apparent cause but that of over-awing the electors. This answer gave rise to another violent dispute; but the majority voted it unsatisfactory, and the petition was rejected, though the resolution was clogged with a vigorous protest.
1735
Notwithstanding this discouragement, the earl of Abingdon moved, that although the petition was dismissed, an inquiry might be set on foot touching an affair of such consequence to the liberties of the kingdom. The earl of Hay declaring his belief that no such illegal methods had been practised, the other produced a pamphlet, intituled, The Protests of a great Number of Noble Lords, entered by them at the last Election of Peers for Scotland. Exceptions being taken to a pamphlet, as an object unworthy of their notice, lord Bathurst exhibited an authentic copy of those protests, extracted from the journal of that election, signed by the two principal clerks, and witnessed by two gentlemen then attending in the lobby. These were accordingly read, and plainly demonstrated the truth of the allegations contained in the petition. Nothing could be more scandalous, arrogant, and shamefully flagrant, than the conduct and deportment of those who acted the part of understrappers to the ministry on this occasion. But all this demonstration, adorned and enforced by the charms and energy of eloquence, was like preaching in a desert. A motion was made for adjourning, and carried in the affirmative: a protest was entered, and the whole affair consigned to oblivion. Divers other motions were made successively by the lords in the opposition, and rejected by the invincible power of a majority. The uninterrupted success of the ministry did not, however, prevent them from renewing the struggle as often as an opportunity offered. They disputed the continuation of the salt-tax, and the bill for enabling the king to apply the sum of one million out of the sinking fund for the service of the current year, though success did not attend their endeavours. They supported with all their might a bill sent up from the commons, explaining and amending an act of the Scottish parliament, for preventing wrongous imprisonment, and against undue delays in trials. This was all the natives of Scotland had in lieu of the habeas-corpus act; though it did not screen them from oppression. Yet the earl of Hay undertook to prove they were on a footing with their neighbours of England in this respect; and the bill was thrown out on a division. The session was closed on the fifteenth of May, when the king in his speech to both houses declared that the plan of pacification, concerted between him and the states-general, had not produced the desired effect. He thanked the commons for the supplies they had granted with such cheerfulness and despatch. He signified his intention to visit his German dominions; and told them he should constitute the queen regent of the realm in his absence. Immediately after the prorogation his majesty embarked for Holland, in his way to Hanover.
MISUNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COURTS OF SPAIN AND PORTUGAL.
By this time the good understanding between the courts of Madrid and Lisbon was destroyed by a remarkable incident. The Portuguese ambassador at Madrid having allowed his servants to rescue a criminal from the officers of justice, all the servants concerned in that rescue were dragged from his house to prison, by the Spanish king’s order, with circumstances of rigour and disgrace. His Portuguese majesty being informed of this outrage, ordered reprisals to be made upon the servants of the Spanish ambassador in Lisbon. The two ministers withdrew abruptly to their respective courts. The two monarchs expressed their mutual resentment. The king of Spain assembled a body of troops on the frontiers of Portugal; and his Portuguese majesty had recourse to the assistance of king George. Don Marcos Antonio d’Alzeveda was despatched to London with the character of envoy-extraordinary; and succeeded in his commission according to his wish. In a little time after the king’s departure from England, sir John Norris sailed from Spithead with a powerful squadron, in order to protect the Portuguese against the Spaniards; and on the ninth day of June arrived at Lisbon, where he was welcomed as a deliverer. Mr. Keene, the British envoy at the court of Spain, had communicated to his catholic majesty the resolution of his master to send a powerful squadron to Lisbon, with orders to guard that coast from insults, and secure the Brazil fleet, in which the merchants of Great Britain were deeply interested. Don Joseph Patinho, minister of his catholic majesty, delivered a memorial to Mr. Keene, representing that such an expedition would affect the commerce of Spain, by intimidating foreign merchants from embarking their merchandise in the flota. But, in all probability, it prevented a rupture between the two crowns, and disposed the king of Spain to listen to terms of accommodation.
PRELIMINARIES SIGNED BY THE EMPEROR AND THE KING OF FRANCE.
The powers in alliance against the house of Austria having rejected the plan of pacification concerted by the king of Great Britain and the states-general, Mr. Wal-pole, ambassador at the Hague, presented a memorial to their high mightinesses, desiring they would, without loss of time, put themselves in a posture of defence by an augmentation of their forces by sea and land; that they might take such vigorous steps in concert with Great Britain, as the future conjuncture of affairs might require. But before they would subject themselves to such expense, they resolved to make further trial of their influence with the powers in alliance against the emperor; and conferences were renewed with the ministers of those allies. The affairs of Poland became more and more unfavourable to the interest of Stanislaus; for though a great number of the Polish nobility engaged in a confederacy to support his claim, and made repeated efforts in his behalf, the palatine of Kiow submitted to Augustus; and even his brother the primate, after having sustained a long imprisonment, and many extraordinary hardships, was obliged to acknowledge that prince his sovereign. In Italy, the arms of the allies still continued to prosper. Don Carlos landed in Sicily, and reduced the whole island almost without opposition; while the Imperialists were forced to abandon all the territories they possessed in Italy, except the Mantuan. The emperor being equally unable to cope with the French armies on the Rhine, implored succours of the czarina, who sent thirty thousand men to his assistance. This vigorous interposition, and the success of Augustus in Poland, disposed the court of Versailles to a pacification. A secret negotiation was begun between France and the house of Austria; and the preliminaries were signed without the concurrence or knowledge of Spain, Sardinia, and the maritime powers. In these articles it was stipulated that France should restore all the conquests she had made in Germany; that the reversion of the dukedom of Tuscany should be vested in the duke of Lorraine; that Lorraine should be allotted to king Stanislaus, and after his death be united to the crown of France; that the emperor should possess the Milanese, the Mantuan, and Parma; that the king of Sardinia should enjoy Vigevano and Novara; that Don Carlos should be acknowledged king of Naples and Sicily, and retain the island of Elba, with all the Spanish territories on the coast of Tuscany; and that France should guarantee the pragmatic sanction.
PROCEEDINGS IN PARLIAMENT.
The king of Great Britain returned from Hanover to England in the month of November; and on the fifteenth day of January opened the session of parliament. On this occasion he congratulated them on the near prospect of a general peace in Europe in consequence of the preliminary articles which the emperor and the king of France had agreed; and of which he had expressed his approbation, as they did not differ in any essential point from the plan of pacification which he and the states-general had offered to the belligerent powers. He told them that he had already ordered a considerable reduction to be made in his forces both by sea and land; but at the same time observed it would be necessary to continue some extraordinary expense, until a more perfect reconciliation should be established among the several powers of Europe. An address of thanks was unanimously voted, presented, and graciously received. After the house had received several petitions from different counties and gentlemen, complaining of undue influence in elections for members of parliament, it proceeded to consider of the supply, and sir Charles Wager moving that fifteen thousand seaman should be employed for the service of the ensuing year, the proposal was approved without opposition. But this was not the case with a motion made by Mr. Pulteney, “That the ordinary estimates of the navy should be referred to a select committee.” The ministry discouraged all such prying measures: a debate was produced, the house divided, and the motion was rejected. Such was the fate of a motion for raising the supplies within the year, made by Mr. Sandys, and supported by sir John Barnard, Mr. Willimot, and other patriots, who demonstrated that this was a speedy and practicable expedient for discharging the national debt, lowering the interest of money, reducing the price of labour, and encouraging a spirit of commerce.
BILL FOR THE RELIEF OF QUAKERS IN THE ARTICLE OF TITHES.
The bill for limiting the number of officers in the house of commons was again revived. The king was empowered to borrow six hundred thousand pounds, chargeable on the sinking fund, for the service of the ensuing year, though this power was not easily granted; and the house resolved to lay a duty of twenty shillings per gallon on all spirituous liquors, after it had appeared to the committee appointed for that purpose, that those spirits were pernicious to the health and morals of the people. To this resolution was added another, which amounted to a total prohibition, namely, that fifty pounds should be yearly paid to his majesty for a license to be annually taken out by every person who should vend, barter, or utter any such spirituous liquors. Mr. Walter Plummer, in a well concerted speech, moved for the repeal of some clauses in the Test act: these he represented as a species of persecution, in which protestant dissenters were confounded with the Roman catholics and enemies to the establishment. He was sustained by lord Polworth and Mr. Heathcote; but sir Robert Walpole was joined by Mr. Shippen against the motion, as dangerous to the established church; and the question being put, it was carried in the negative.
1736
When sir Joseph Jekyll presented to the house, according to order, a bill founded on the resolutions they had taken against spirituous liquors, sir Robert Walpole acquainted them, by his majesty’s command, that as the alterations proposed to be made by that bill in the duties charged upon all spirituous liquors might, in a great degree, affect some part of the civil list revenues, his majesty, for the sake of remedying so great an evil as was intended by that bill to be prevented, did consent to accept any other revenue of equal value, to be settled and appropriated in lieu of his interest in the said duties. The bill was read a second time, and consigned to a committee of the whole house; but that for limiting the number of officers in the house of commons was thrown out at the second reading. Petitions against the bill touching the retail of spirituous liquors, were presented by the traders to the British sugar colonies, by the merchants of Bristol and Liverpool, representing the hardships to which they would be exposed by a law which amounted to a prohibition of rum and spirits distilled from molasses. In consequence of these remonstrances, a mitigating clause was inserted, in favour of the composition known by the name of punch, and distillers were permitted to exercise any other employment. The sum of seventy thousand pounds was voted for making good the deficiencies that might happen in the civil list by this bill, which at length passed through the house, though not without reiterated disputes and warm altercation. Violent opposition was likewise made to a bill for the relief the people called quakers, who offered a petition, representing, that though from motives of conscience they refused the payment of tithes, church-rates, oblations, and ecclesiastical dues, they were exposed to grievous sufferings by prosecution in the exchequer, ecclesiastical, and other courts, to the imprisonment of their persons, and the ruin of them and their families. A bill being prepared for their relief, was read and printed; then petitions were preferred against it by the clergy of Middlesex, and of many other parts of the kingdom. Counsel was heard in behalf of those petitioners, and several alterations proposed in the bill, which after long and repeated debates surmounted all opposition, and was sent up to the lords.
GEORGE II. 1727-1760
MORTMAIN ACT.
In the month of February the king had sent two members of the privy-council to the prince of Wales, with a message, proposing a marriage between his royal highness and the princess of Saxe-gotha. The proposal being agreeable to the prince, the marriage was celebrated on the twenty-seventh day of April. Upon this occasion Mr. Pulteney moved for an address of congratulation to his majesty, and was supported by Mr. George Lyttleton and Mr. William Pitt, who seized this opportunity of pronouncing elegant panegyrics on the prince of Wales and’ his amiable consort. These two young members soon distinguished themselves in the house by their eloquence and superior talents. The attention of the house was afterwards converted to a bill for the preventing of smuggling; and another for explaining the act for the more effectual preventing bribery and corruption in the election of members to serve in parliament. Both made their way through the lower house, and were sent up to the lords for their concurrence. The number of land forces voted for the service of the current year was reduced to seventeen thousand seven hundred and four effective men. The supplies were raised by the malt-tax and land-tax at two shillings in the pound, additional duties on mum, cider, and perry, stamped vellum, parchment, and paper; and by an act empowering his majesty to borrow six hundred thousand pounds of the sinking fund. In this session the parliament repealed the old statutes of England and Scotland against conjuration, witchcraft, and dealing with evil spirit’s. The commons likewise prepared a bill to restrain the disposition of lands in mortmain, whereby they became unalienable. Against this measure petitions were presented by the two universities, the colleges of Eton, Winchester, and Westminster, and divers hospitals that subsisted by charitable donations. In favour of the universities and colleges a particular exempting clause was inserted. Several other amendments were made in the bill, which passed through both houses, and obtained the royal assent. Among the acts passed in this session, was one for naturalizing her royal highness the princess of Wales; and another for building a bridge across the Thames from New Palace-yard, in the city of Westminster, to the opposite shore in the county of Surrey. The points chiefly debated in the house of lords were the address of thanks for his majesty’s speech, the mortmain bill, the Quakers’ bill, which was thrown out, and that for the prevention of smuggling, which did not pass without division and protest. On the twentieth day of May the king closed the session with a speech, in which he told both houses that a farther convention, touching the execution of the preliminaries, had been made and communicated to him by the emperor and most christian king, and that negotiations were carrying on by the several powers engaged in the late war, in order to settle a general pacification. He expressed great concern at seeing such seeds of dissatisfaction sown among his people; he protested it was his desire, and should be his care, to preserve the present constitution in church and state, as by law established; he recommended harmony and mutual affection among all protestants of the nation, as the great security of that happy establishment; and signified his intention to visit his German dominions. Accordingly, the parliament was no sooner prorogued than he set out for Hanover, after having appointed the queen regent in his absence.
REMARKABLE RIOT AT EDINBURGH.
Such a degree of licentiousness prevailed over the whole nation, that the kingdom was filled with tumult and riots, which might have been prevented by proper regulations of the civil government in a due execution of the laws. The most remarkable of these disturbances happened at Edinburgh, on the seventh day of September. John Porteous, who commanded the guard paid by that city, a man of brutal disposition and abandoned morals, had, at the execution of a smuggler, been provoked by some insults from the populace to order his men, without using the previous formalities of the law, to fire with shot among the crowd; by which precipitate order several innocent persons lost their lives. Porteous was tried for murder, convicted, and received sentence of death; but the queen, as guardian of the realm, thought proper to indulge him with a reprieve. The common people of Edinburgh resented this lenity shown to a criminal, who was the object of their detestation. They remembered that pardons had been granted to divers military delinquents in that country, who had been condemned by legal trial. They seemed to think those were encouragements to oppression; they were fired by a national jealousy; they were stimulated by the relations and friends of those who had been murdered; and they resolved to wreak their vengeance on the author of that tragedy, by depriving him of life on the very day which the judges had fixed for his execution. Thus determined, they assembled in different bodies about ten o’clock at night. They blocked up the gates of the city, to prevent the admission of the troops that were quartered in the suburbs. They surprised and disarmed the town guards; they broke open the prison doors; dragged Porteous from thence to the place of execution; and, leaving him hanging by the neck on a dyer’s pole, quietly dispersed to their several habitations. This exploit was performed with such conduct and deliberation as seemed to be the result of a plan formed by some persons of consequence; it, therefore, became the object of a very severe inquiry.
RUPTURE BETWEEN THE CZARINA AND THE OTTOMAN PORTE.
During this summer a rupture happened between the Turks and the Russians, which last reduced the city of Azoph on the Black Sea, and overrun the greatest part of Crim Tartary. The czarina declared war against the Ottoman Porte, because the Tartars of the Crimea had made incursions upon her frontiers; and, when she complained of these disorders to the vizier, she received no satisfaction; besides, a large body of Tartars had, by order of that minister, marched through the Russian provinces in despite of the empress, and committed terrible havoc in their route. The emperor was obliged to engage as a party in this war, by a treaty offensive and defensive, which he had many years before concluded with the czarina. Yet, before he declared himself, he joined the maritime powers in offering his mediation to the sultan, who was very well disposed to peace; but the czarina insisted upon her retaining Azoph, which her forces had reduced; and this preliminary article being rejected, as dishonourable to the Ottoman empire, the court of Vienna began to make preparations for war. By this time all the belligerent powers in Italy had agreed to the preliminaries of peace concluded between the emperor and France. The duke of Lorraine had espoused the emperor’s eldest daughter, the archduchess Maria Theresa, and ceded Lorraine to France, even before he succeeded to Tuscany. Don Carlos was crowned king of Sicily; Stanislaus abdicated the crown of Poland; and Augustus was universally acknowledged sovereign of that kingdom. The preliminaries were approved and accepted by the diet of the empire; the king of Spain sent orders for his troops to evacuate Tuscany; and the provinces in Italy yielded to the house of Austria. Prince Eugene, who had managed the interest of the emperor on this occasion, did not live to see the happy fruits of this negotiation. He died at Vienna, in April, at the age of seventy-three, leaving behind him the character of an invincible hero and consummate politician. He was not long survived by count Staremberg, another Imperial general who ranked next to the prince in military reputation. About the same time Great Britain sustained a national loss in the death of lord chancellor Talbot, who, by his worth, probity, and acquired accomplishments, had dignified the great office to which he had been raised. He died universally lamented, in the month of February, at the age of fifty-two, and was succeeded on the bench by lord Hardwicke.
THE SESSION OF PARLIAMENT OPENED
The king being indisposed, in consequence of having been fatigued by a very tempestuous passage from Holland, the parliament was prorogued from the twenty-first day of January to the first of February, and then the session was opened by commission. The lord chancellor, as one of the peers authorised by this commission, made a speech in his majesty’s name to both houses. With respect to foreign affairs, he told them that the respective acts of cession being exchanged, and orders given for the evacuation and possession of the several countries and places by the powers concerned, according to the allotment and disposition of the preliminary articles, the great work of re-establishing the general tranquillity was far advanced; that, however, common prudence called upon them to be very attentive to the final conclusion of the new settlement. He said his majesty could not without surprise and concern observe the many contrivances and attempts carried on, in various shapes, and in different parts of the nation, tumultuously to resist and obstruct the execution of the laws, and to violate the peace of the kingdom. He observed, that the consideration of the height to which those audacious practices might rise, if not timely suppressed, afforded a melancholy prospect, and required particular attention, lest they should affect private persons in the quiet enjoyment of their property, as well as the general peace and good order of the whole. After the commons had agreed to an address, and heard counsel on some controverted elections, they proceeded to take the supply into consideration. They voted ten thousand men for the sea-service. They continued for the land-service the same number they had maintained in times of tranquillity, amounting to seventeen thousand seven hundred and four; but this measure was not adopted without opposition; the money was raised by the land and malt-taxes, reinforced with one million granted out of the sinking fund.
MOTION IN BOTH HOUSES FOR A SETTLEMENT ON THE PRINCE OF WALES.
The chief subject of contention that presented itself in the course of this session, was a motion which Mr. Pulteney made for an address to his majesty, that he would be pleased to settle one hundred thousand pounds a year upon the prince of Wales. He represented that such provision was conformable to the practice of ancient times; that what he proposed had been enjoyed by his present majesty in the life-time of his father; and that a settlement of this nature was reasonable and necessary to ascertain the independency of the apparent heir to the crown. The motion was vigorously opposed by sir Robert Walpole, as an encroachment on the prerogative; as an officious intermeddling in the king’s family affairs; and as an effort to set his majesty and the prince at variance. But a misunderstanding, it seems, had already happened in the royal family. The minister, in the midst of his harangue, told the house by his majesty’s command, that on the preceding day the king had sent a message to the prince by several noblemen of the first quality, importing, that his majesty had given orders for settling a jointure upon the princess of Wales, suitable to her high rank and dignity, which he would in a proper time lay before parliament, in order to be rendered more certain and effectual; that, although his royal highness had not thought fit, by any application to his majesty, to desire that his allowance of fifty thousand pounds might be rendered less precarious, the king, to prevent the bad consequences which he apprehended might follow from the undutiful measures which his majesty was informed the prince had been advised to pursue, would grant to his royal highness, for his majesty’s life, the said fifty thousand pounds per annum, to be issued out of the civil list revenues, over and above the prince’s revenues arising from the duchy of Cornwall, which his majesty thought a very competent allowance, considering his own numerous issue, and the great expense which did and must necessarily attend an honourable provision for the whole royal family; that the prince, by a verbal answer, desired their lordships to lay him with all humility at his majesty’s feet; to assure him that he did, and ever should, retain the utmost duty for his royal person; that he was very thankful for any instance of his majesty’s goodness to him or to the princess, and particularly for his majesty’s gracious intention of settling a jointure upon her royal highness; but that, as to the message, the affair was now out of his hands, and therefore he could give no answer to it; that his royal highness afterwards used many dutiful expressions towards his majesty; adding, “Indeed, my lords, it is in other hands, and I am sorry for it;” or words to that effect. Sir Robert Walpole then endeavoured to demonstrate, that the annual sum of fifty thousand pounds was as much as the king could afford to allow for the prince’s maintenance; and he expatiated upon the bad consequences that might ensue, if the son should be rendered altogether independent of the father.
These suggestions did not pass unanswered. Sir Robert Walpole had asserted, that the parliament had no right to interfere in the creation or maintenance of a prince of Wales; and that in the case of Richard II., who, upon the death of his father, the Black Prince, was created prince of Wales, in consequence of an address or petition from parliament, that measure was in all probability directed by the king himself. In answer to this assertion, it was observed, that probably the king would not have been so forward in creating his grandson prince of Wales, if he had not been forced into this step by his parliament; for Edward in his old age fell into a sort of love dotage, and gave himself entirely up to the management of his mistress, Alice Pierce, and his second son, the duke of Lancaster; a circumstance that raised a most reasonable jealousy in the Black Prince, at that time on his death-bed, who could not but be anxious about the safety and right of his only son, whom he found he was soon to leave a child in the hands of a doating grandfather and an ambitious aspiring uncle. The supporters of the motion observed, that the allowance of fifty thousand pounds was not sufficient to defray the prince’s yearly expense, without alloting one shilling for acts of charity and munificence; and that the several deductions for land taxes and fees reduced it to forty-three thousand pounds. They affirmed, that his whole income, including the revenues of the duchy of Cornwall, did not exceed fifty-two thousand pounds a-year, though, by his majesty’s own regulation, the expense of the prince’s household amounted to sixty-three thousand. They proved that the produce of the civil list exceeded nine hundred thousand pounds, a sum above one hundred thousand pounds a-year more than was enjoyed by his late majesty; and that, in the first year of the late king, the whole expense of his household and civil government did not much exceed four hundred and fifty thousand pounds a-year. They observed, that the parliament added one hundred and forty thousand pounds annually for acts of charity and bounty, together with the article of secret-service money; and allowed one hundred thousand pounds for the maintenance of the prince of Wales; that the article of secret-service money had prodigiously increased in the late reign; by an account which happened to be laid before the parliament, it appeared that vast sums of money had been given for purposes which nobody understood, and to persons whom nobody knew. In the beginning of the following session several members proposed that this extraordinary account should be taken into consideration; but the inquiry was warded off by the other party, who declared that the parliament could not examine any account which had been presented to a former session. The debate was fierce and long; and ended in a division, by which the motion was rejected. A motion of the same nature was made by lord Carteret in the house of peers, and gave rise to a very keen dispute, maintained by the same arguments, and issuing in the same termination.
SCHEME FOR REDUCING THE INTEREST OF THE NATIONAL DEBT.
The next remarkable contest was occasioned by a motion of sir Robert Walpole, who proposed the sum of one million should be granted to his majesty, towards redeeming the like sum of the increased capital of the South-Sea company, commonly called the South-Sea annuities. Several members argued for the expediency of applying this sum to the payment of the debt due to the Bank, as part of that incumbrance was saddled with an interest of six per cent., whereas the interest paid for the other sums that constituted the public debt did not exceed four per cent. Many plausible arguments were offered on both sides of the question; and at length the motion was carried in the affirmative. The house having resolved itself into a committee to consider of the national debt, sir John Barnard made a motion, for enabling his majesty to raise money either by the sale of annuities, or by borrowing at an interest not exceeding three per cent., to be applied towards redeeming the South-Sea annuities; and that such of the said annuitants as should be inclined to subscribe their respective annuities, should be preferred to all others. He said, that even those public securities which bore an interest of three per cent, only, were sold at a premium in ‘Change-alley: he was therefore persuaded, that all those who were willing to give a premium for a three per cent, security, would gladly lend their money to the government at the same interest, should books of subscription be opened for that purpose, with an assurance that no part of the principal should be paid off for fourteen years. He expatiated on the national advantages that would accrue from a reduction of interest. From easy and obvious calculations he inferred, that in a very little time the interest upon all the South-Sea annuities would be reduced from four to three per cent., without any danger to public credit, or breach of public faith; that then the produce of the sinking fund would amount to fourteen hundred thousand pounds per annum, to be applied only towards redeeming the capital of the several trading companies; he proved that this measure would bring every one of them so much within the power of parliament, that they would be glad to accept of three per cent, interest on any reasonable terms; in which case the sinking-fund would rise to one million six hundred thousand pounds per annum. Then the parliament might venture to annihilate one half of it, by freeing the people from the taxes upon coals, candles, soap, leather, and other such impositions as lay heavy upon the poor labourers and manufacturers; the remaining part of the sinking-fund might be applied towards the discharge of those annuities and public debts which bore an interest of three per cent, only, and afterwards towards diminishing the capitals of the several trading companies till the term of fourteen years should be expired; then the sinking-fund would again amount to above a million yearly, which would be sufficient for paying them off, and freeing the nation entirely from all its incumbrances. This salutary scheme was violently opposed by alderman Heathcote, and other partisans of the ministry; yet all their objections were refuted; and, in order to defeat the project, they were obliged to have recourse to artifice. Mr. Winnington moved, that all the public creditors, as well as the South-Sea annuitants, should be comprehended. Sir John Barnard demonstrated that it might be easy for the government to borrow money at three per cent, sufficient for paying off such of the proprietors of four-and-twenty millions as were not willing to accept of that interest; but it would be extremely difficult to borrow enough to satisfy the proprietors of four-and-forty millions, who might choose to have their principal rather than such an interest. Nevertheless, resolutions were founded on this and other alterations of the original scheme; and a bill was immediately prepared. It produced many other debates, and was at last postponed by dint of ministerial influence. The same venerable patriot, who projected this scheme, moved that, as soon as the interest of all the national redeemable debt should be reduced to three per cent., the house would take off some of the heavy taxes which oppressed the poor and the manufacturers: but this motion was rejected by the majority.
1737
BILL AGAINST THE CITY OF EDINBURGH.
The last disputes of this session were excited by a bill sent down from the lords for punishing the magistrates and city of Edinburgh, on account of the murder of John Porteous. In the beginning of the session, lord Carteret recapitulated the several tumults and riots which had lately happened in different parts of the kingdom. He particularly insisted upon the atrocious murder of captain Porteous, as a flagrant insult upon the government, and a violation of the public peace, so much the more dangerous, as it seemed to have been concerted and executed with deliberation and decency. He suspected that some citizens of Edinburgh had been concerned in the murder; not only from this circumstance, but likewise because, notwithstanding the reward of two hundred pounds which had been offered by proclamation for the discovery of any person who acted in that tragedy, not one individual had as yet been detected. He seemed to think that the magistrates had encouraged the riot, and that the city had forfeited its charter; and he proposed a minute inquiry into the particulars of the affair. He was seconded by the duke of Newcastle and the earl of Hay; though the last nobleman differed in opinion with him in respect to the charter of the city, which, he said, could not be justly forfeited by the fault of the magistracy. The lords resolved, That the magistrates and other persons from whom they might obtain the necessary information concerning this riot, should be ordered to attend; and that an address should be presented to his majesty, desiring that the different accounts and papers relating to the murder of captain Porteous, might be submitted to the perusal of the house. These documents being accordingly examined, and all the witnesses arrived, including three Scottish judges, a debate arose about the manner in which these last should be interrogated, whether at the bar, at the table, or on the woolsacks. Some Scottish lords asserted, that they had a right to be seated next to the judges of England; but after a long debate this claim was rejected, and the judges of Scotland appeared at the bar in their robes. A bill was brought in to disable Alexander Wilson, esquire, lord-provost of Edinburgh, from enjoying any office or place of magistracy in the city of Edinburgh, or elsewhere in Great Britain; for imprisoning the said Alexander Wilson; for abolishing the guard of that city; and for taking away the gates of the Netherbow-port, so as to open a communication between the city and the suburbs, in which the king’s troops are quartered. The duke of Argyle, in arguing against this bill, said he could not think of a proceeding more harsh or unprecedented than the present, as he believed there was no instance of the whole weight of parliamentary indignation, for such he called a proceeding by a bill ex post facto, falling upon any single person, far less upon any community, for crimes that were within the reach of the inferior courts of justice; for this reason he observed, that if the lord-provost and citizens of Edinburgh should suffer in the terms of the present bill, they would suffer by a cruel, unjust, and fantastical proceeding; a proceeding of which the worst use might be made, if ever the nation should have the misfortune to fall under a partial self-interested administration. He told them he sat in the parliament of Scotland when that part of the treaty of Union relating to the privileges of the royal burghs, was settled on the same footing as religion; that is, they were made unalterable by any subsequent parliament of Great Britain. Notwithstanding the eloquence and warmth of his remonstrance, the bill was sent down to the house of commons, where it produced a violent contest. The commons set on foot a severe scrutiny into the particular circumstances that preceded and attended the murder of Porteous; from the examination of the witnesses, it appeared that no freeman or citizen of Edinburgh was concerned in the riot, which was chiefly composed of country people, excited by the relations of some unhappy persons whom Porteous and his men had slain at the execution of the smuggler; and these were assisted by ‘prentice-boys and the lowest class of vagabonds that happened to be at Edinburgh; that the lord-provost had taken all the precautions to prevent mischief that his reflection suggested; that he even exposed his person to the rage of the multitude, in his endeavour to disperse them; and that, if he had done amiss, he erred from want of judgment rather than from want of inclination to protect the unhappy Porteous. It likewise appeared that Mr. Lindsay, member for the city of Edinburgh, had gone in person to general Moyle, commander of the forces in North Britain, informed him of the riot, implored his immediate assistance, and promised to conduct his troops into the city; and that his suit was rejected, because he could not produce a written order from the magistracy, which he neither could have obtained in such confusion, nor ventured to carry about his person through the midst of an enraged populace. The Scottish members exerted themselves with uncommon vivacity in defence of their capital. They were joined by sir John Barnard, lord Cornbury, Mr. Shippen, and Mr. Oglethorpe. Lord Polworth declared, that if any gentleman would show where one argument in the charge against the lord-provost and the city of Edinburgh had been proved, he would that instant give his vote for the commitment of the bill. He said, if gentlemen would lay their hands upon their hearts, and ask themselves, whether they would have voted in this manner had the case of Edinburgh been that of the cities of Bristol, York, or Norwich, he was persuaded they would have required that every tittle of the charge against them should have been fully and undeniably proved. Some amendments and mitigations being inserted in the bill, it passed the house, was sent back to the lords, who agreed to the alterations, and then received the royal assent.
GEORGE II. 1727-1760