794 “F. O.,” Russia, 15. Fraser to Carmarthen, 5th October 1787.
795 See Ewart’s Memorandum to Pitt in “Dropmore P.,” ii, 44–9 for an admirable survey of events; also Wittichen, 130–5, and Häusser, i, 223–5.
The surprise of Prussian statesmen at the outbreak of war seems quite sincere; and evidence is strongly against the statement of Sorel (“L’Europe et la Rév. franç.,” i, p. 524) that Hertzberg egged on the Turks, and later on Sweden, to war.
796 “F. O.,” Russia, 15. Carmarthen to Fraser, 18th March 1788.
797 Ibid. Fraser to Carmarthen, 9th May.
798 “F. O.,” Austria, 14. On 23rd September Ewart reported that Spain had “positively declined the pressing overtures of France to enter into a Quadruple Alliance with her and the two Imperial Courts” (“F. O.,” Prussia, 14).
799 “F. O.,” Austria, 14. Keith to Carmarthen, 6th October 1787. On 10th October he reported that France would acquiesce in Joseph’s eastern policy if he would help her against England and Prussia in the Dutch dispute. On 24th October he stated that Austria refused to do so. On 14th November Joseph II informed him privately that he must make war on Turkey.
800 Nisbet Bain, “Gustavus III and his Contemporaries,” ch. ix.
801 B.M. Add. MSS., 28063.
802 Greig and the other Britons had long been in the Russian service. I cannot find that they were recalled.
803 “F. O.,” Sweden, 7. Keene on 26th August 1788 reported to Carmarthen the facts so far as he knew them, and also in a later “Account.” His bias against the King is obvious, and leads me to discount his assertions, e.g., that of 9th September, that the war with Russia was at an end, owing to the offer of peace to Catharine by the Swedish officers, and had become merely “a domestic quarrel between the King and nation.” Doubtless it was for this and similar statements that Keene was recalled in December 1788, Liston taking his place.
804 “F. O.,” Turkey, 9. So, too, Lecky, v, 231.
805 See, too, Frederick William’s words on this topic in Dembinski, “Documents relatifs à l’histoire ... de la Pologne (1788–91),” i, 21.
806 “F. O.,” Prussia, 13. See, too, “Dropmore P.,” ii, 47.
807 “F. O.,” Prussia, 14.
808 “Dropmore P.,” i, 353.
809 “F. O.,” Prussia, 14.
810 “Memoir of Hugh Elliot” by the Countess of Minto.
811 “F. O.,” Denmark, 10. Elliot to Carmarthen, 2nd, 6th August 1788.
812 “F. O.,” Denmark, 10. Carmarthen to Elliot, 15th August.
813 Ibid. This draft, in Pitt’s handwriting, was copied and sent off without alteration.
814 “F. O.,” Prussia, 14. Ewart to Carmarthen, 16th September 1788.
815 “F. O.,” Prussia, 14. Elliot to Carmarthen, 17th September. He states that Ewart had strongly urged him to go and see the King of Sweden in person. So, once again, we note the daring and initiative of Ewart. For a sharp critique on Ewart’s excess of zeal see Luckwaldt, “Zur Vorgeschichte der Konvention von Reichenbach” (Berlin, G. Stilke, 1908), 237–9.
816 The statements of Keene (“F. O.,” Sweden, 7) imply that the King was at the end of his resources at Stockholm, and had but a limited success among the dalesmen. They rebut the statements in the “Memoir of Hugh Elliot,” 304.
817 Keene on 26th September wrote that the Allies’ offer of mediation had made a great impression at Stockholm. Count Düben, the Minister, thanked him for it, but said it would perplex the King, as he did not wish to disoblige France. A truce of eight months was necessary; but the King would not make peace with Russia unless Russian Finland were restored to him.
818 “F. O.,” Sweden, 7.
819 The rebuke may have been due to Elliot’s silence; for in a P.S. to a letter of 16th October to Ewart, Elliot said: “Write everything about me to London; I have never written myself, having acted hitherto without instructions” (“F. O.,” Prussia, 14). As we have seen, he had acted largely on the advice of Ewart; and Liston, on finding this out, suggested to Carmarthen the need of cautioning Ewart not to go too fast (Luckwaldt, op. cit., 238).
820 “F. O.,” Denmark, 10. Despatches of 30th November, 5th and 27th December. On 10th April 1789 Carmarthen assured Elliot of the desire of H.M. for a Danish alliance. He also commended him less coldly than before (“F. O.,” Denmark, 11).
821 “F. O.,” Sweden, 7. Keene to Carmarthen, 30th December, 1788.
822 “F. O.,” Denmark, 11. Elliot to the Duke of Leeds, 30th May 1789.
823 “F. O.,” Denmark, 11. Leeds to Elliot, 24th June.
824 Ibid., Leeds to Elliot, 21st August 1789.
825 “Vorontzoff Archives,” xvi, 258–67.
826 “F. O.,” Prussia, 15. Ewart to Carmarthen, 17th January 1789.
827 On 22nd May Ainslie reported the slothful preparations for war. He had stated earlier that Russian money was at work at Constantinople to bring about a mediation by the Bourbon Courts in favour of peace (“F. O.,” Turkey, 10).
828 See Häusser, i, 225–37, for its earlier developments; also for the more warlike plans at Berlin of a general alliance with Poland, England, Sweden, and Denmark for the humbling of Russia and Austria.
829 I quote from the instructions drawn up by Hertzberg on 26th May, for Dietz, which he imparted to Ewart, who sent them on to Whitehall on 28th May—a step which earned him the distrust of Hertzberg (“F. O.,” Prussia, 15). The Pitt Ministry knew of them earlier than other Courts.
830 Dembinski, i, 240.
831 “F. O.,” Prussia, 15. Leeds to Ewart, 24th June 1789.
832 “F. O.,” Prussia, 15. Ewart to Leeds, 12th July. In it he pointed out that the alternative Prussian plan, that of forcing Turkey to give up Moldavia and Wallachia to Austria, she giving up Galicia to the Poles, and they Danzig and Thorn to Prussia, was most objectionable; but Hertzberg felt able to force even that through. Leeds commended Ewart for opposing those extreme proposals.
833 Ibid. Ewart to Leeds, 10th and 11th August, 3rd September. It is not surprising to find from Ainslie’s letter of 22nd October to Ewart that the Porte distrusted all the Christian Powers (France and Spain were still offering their mediation) but England least (“F. O.,” Turkey, 10). Dietz held scornfully aloof from Ainslie, and played his own game.
834 “Corresp. of W. A. Miles,” ii, 142.
835 Letter of the Grand Pensionary of 1st August, in Ewart’s despatch of 10th August (“F. O.,” Prussia, 16).
836 “F. O.,” Prussia, 15. Leeds to Ewart, 14th September 1789.
837 “F. O.,” France, 33. Fitzgerald to Leeds, 22nd October 1789.
838 Pitt MSS., 102. The Count renewed his proposal early in 1790, but received a similar rebuff on 1st February 1790.
839 “F. O.,” Prussia, 16. Ewart to Leeds, 28th November and 8th December 1789.
840 “Leeds Memoranda,” 147.
841 “F. O.,” Prussia, 16. Leeds to Ewart, 13th December 1789.
842 “F. O.,” Prussia, 17. Ewart to Leeds, 18th February 1790. I can find neither in our archives nor in the Pitt MSS. any confirmation of the statement of Father Delplace (“Joseph II et la Rév. Brabançonne,” 148) that Pitt suggested to the “ambassador” of the Belgian Estates their election of the Duke of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, and that the ambassador demurred, because he was a Protestant. Pitt never recognized any Belgian envoy as having official powers, and took no step that implied Belgian independence.
843 “F. O.,” Prussia, 17.
844 “F. O.,” Prussia, 17. Ewart to Leeds, 22nd February 1790.
845 Lord Acton, “Lects. on Mod. Hist.,” 304.
846 Keith’s “Mems.,” ii, 257.
847 On 19th March Fitzgerald reported to Leeds (“F. O.,” France, 34): “M. Van der Noote has made a second application to His Most Christian Majesty and the National Assembly, which has met with a similar reception with [sic] the former, the letters having been returned unopened.” Lafayette moved an amendment, but it was shelved.
848 “F. O.,” Prussia, 17. Leeds to Ewart, 26th February. Several sentences of the draft of this despatch are in Pitt’s writing.
849 Dembinski, i, 62–73, 274–8.
850 Hertzberg, “Recueil,” iii, 1–8. Ewart reported on 4th January 1790 that Hertzberg was holding over the Polish treaty, and that it would be wholly “vague and ostensible.” Clearly Ewart thought that Hertzberg would leave the door open to coerce Poland into giving up Danzig and Thorn (“F. O.,” Prussia, 17). Article 2 of the treaty made this still possible. See, too, Frederick William’s letter of 11th April 1790 to the King of Poland, and the projected treaty of commerce, in Martens, iv, 126–35.
The statement of the “Ann. Reg.” of 1791 (p. 12), that the Triple Alliance became “a species of Sextuple Alliance,” by the inclusion of Poland, the Porte, and Sweden, is incorrect.
851 Dembinski, i, 281, 283, 285.
852 “F. O.,” Poland, 4. Hailes to Leeds, 6th and 7th January, 27th February, 29th March 1790.
853 Ibid. On 14th August Hailes reported a remark of Lucchesini, that Prussia could easily seize Danzig and Thorn at the next war. Lucchesini was replaced by the young and inexperienced von Goltz in October. For a sketch of Lucchesini see Keith’s “Mems.,” ii, 360.
854 “F. O.,” Austria, 20. Keith to Leeds, 3rd, 7th, and 14th April.
855 “F. O.,” Prussia, 17. Ewart to Leeds, 18th March.
856 B.M. Add. MSS., 35542. Auckland to Keith, 19th March and 6th April 1790.
857 B.M. Add. MSS., 35542. Leeds to Ewart, 19th and 30th March.
858 “F. O.,” Austria, 19. Leeds to Keith, 30th March; Ranke, “Fürstenbund,” ii, 375; Kaunitz to Leopold, 16th March.
859 Ibid. Keith to Leeds, 24th April, 1st and 15th May; Keith’s “Mems.,” ii, 261.
860 Dembinski, i, 279.
861 “F. O.,” Austria, 19. Keith to Leeds, 10th May.
862 Hertzberg, “Recueil,” iii, 58.
863 “F. O.,” Prussia, 17. Leeds to Ewart, 21st May. Gustavus had pressed Prussia to advance to him 8,000,000 Swedish crowns, and 7,000,000 more next year if the war continued. He urged her to attack Russia at once. Sweden must obtain the wider boundaries of the Peace of Nystadt (Ewart to Leeds, 10th May). Early in June Prussia advanced 100,000 as a subsidy to Sweden, and as many more on behalf of England, on condition that Gustavus would not make a separate peace with Russia (Ewart to Leeds, 4th June).
864 “F. O.,” Austria, 20. Leeds to Keith, 23rd May (“Secret and Confidential”). Frederick William’s plan of exchanges drawn up on 12th May was curiously similar (see Dembinski, i, 303, 305).
865 “F. O.,” Austria, 20. Leeds to Keith, 8th June.
866 Ibid. Keith to Leeds, 16th, 19th, 20th, and 30th June.
In face of these facts I reject the account given by Kaunitz on 24th July 1790 (in Vivenot, “Kaiserpolitik Oesterreich’s”) that Austria had consistently sought to treat at Reichenbach on the English basis of the status quo.
867 Pitt and Leeds thought it a device to evade England’s offer of mediation (Leeds to Ewart, 25th June).
868 “F. O.,” Prussia, 18. Ewart to Leeds, 11th June. He encloses a copy of the Prussian despatch of 5th May from Constantinople, sent by Knobelsdorff. (See also Hertzberg’s “Recueil,” iii, 76–8.)
869 “F. O.,” Prussia, 18. Ewart to Leeds, 27th June.
870 Ranke, “Fürstenbund,” ii, 376–85; Dembinski, 82–4, 314; “Bland Burges P.” 142–4.
871 “F. O.,” Prussia, 18. Ewart to Leeds, 16th July. See too Vivenot, 5.
872 For the protest of the Belgian Congress against the Reichenbach compromise, which dashed their hopes of independence, see Van der Spiegel, “Négociations ... des Pays Bas autrichiens,” 303–6.
873 Ranke, “Fürstenbund,” ii, 387.
874 On 7th September Bland Burges wrote to Lord Auckland that Russia had paid heavily for the Swedish peace (B.M. Add. MSS., 34433).
875 “F. O.,” Sweden, 11. Liston to Leeds, 17th and 24th August, 3rd, 7th, and 10th September.
876 Ibid. Liston to Leeds, 23rd November; Dembinski, i, 84.
877 “F. O.,” Sweden, 11. Liston to Leeds, 23rd November 1790.
878 Vivenot, 9, 10, 39–52; Hertzberg, “Recueil,” iii, 175–83; also 111–74 for correspondence on the Bishopric of Liége.
879 B.M. Add. MSS., 34435.
880 On 26th July 1791 Grenville, then Foreign Minister, wrote to Ewart that he hoped the sad straits of the Royal Family at Paris would induce Leopold to ratify the Hague Convention, and that the Allies must settle the Belgian constitution in such a way as to satisfy the rights of the sovereign and the just demands of that people (B.M. Add. MSS., 34438). See, too, Sybel, bk. ii, ch. vi.
881 It is too large a topic to discuss here why the Revolution did not break out in those lands; but I may hazard these suggestions: (1) Feudalism was there still a reality. The lords mostly lived on their estates, spent their money there, and performed the duties which the French nobles delegated to bailiffs, while they themselves squandered the proceeds at Paris or Versailles. Hence (2) a perilous concentration of wealth at those centres, which attracted thither the miserable, especially in times of distress like the severe winter of 1787–8. (3) In the other lands named above, the barriers of princely and feudal rule kept the people isolated in small States or domains and prevented common action. (4) Political and social speculations were brought home to the French as to no other people by the return of the French troops serving in the United States. (5) The mistakes of Louis XVI and Necker in May–June 1789, and the precipitation of the reformers at Versailles caused a rupture which was by no means inevitable, and which few if any had expected.
882 Rousseau, “Confessions,” bk. iv.
883 Prof. Aulard (“La Rév. Franç.,” chs. iv-vi) has proved that there was no republican party in France until December 1790, and that it had no importance until the flight of the King to Varennes at Midsummer 1791.
884 A. Young, “Travels in France,” 213 [Bohn edit.].
885 “Mems. of Fox,” ii, 361.
886 “Dropmore P.,” i, 353–5.
887 Stanhope, ii, 38.
888 Pitt MSS., 163.
889 Ibid. 102.
890 “Parl. Hist.,” xxviii, 226–31. For the tricks used in order to get corn exported to France, see “Auckland Journals,” ii, 367.
891 “Dropmore P.,” i, 549, 550; “Corresp. of W. A. Miles,” i, 739.
892 “F. O.,” France, 32. Mem. by Hippisley, 31st July 1789. Calonne for some time resided at Wimbledon House. He was received, though very coolly, at Court.
893 They were set forth in much detail in Paris newspapers of 25th July.
894 “F. O.,” France, 33. Leeds to Fitzgerald, 31st July. In B.M. Add. MSS., 28063, is a letter of the Duke of Richmond to the Marquis of Carmarthen of 21st September 1788, thanking him for sending to the Paris embassy his nephew, Lord R. Fitzgerald, in place of Daniel Hailes.
895 See the threats of Lafayette to the Duke of Orleans in Huber’s letter of 15th October 1789 to Lord Auckland (“Auckland Journals,” ii, 365).
896 Burke, “Corresp.,” iii, 211.
897 B.M. Add. MSS., 27914.
898 Pitt MSS., 102. No reason is assigned for this expatriation, which was probably due to the return of the prince from Geneva without permission. That the commander at Gibraltar, General O’Hara, received a hint to be strict with the young prince seems likely from his rebuke on a trifling occasion: “If you do not do your duty, I will make you do it” (“Napoleon and Sir Hudson Lowe,” by R. C. Seaton, 32).
899 Pitt MSS., 102. I have not found Pitt’s letter to Calonne, though there are two others of 1795 to him.
900 “Parl. Hist.,” xxviii, 351.
901 Dumont, “Souvenirs sur Mirabeau,” ch. x.
902 He calls it “a parent of settlement, not a nursery of future Revolutions.”
903 Burke’s “Works,” iii, 345 (Bohn edit.).
904 Burke, “Corresp.,” iii, 285–8.
905 “Parl. Hist.,” xxix, 364–88.
906 Burke’s “Works,” iii, 347–93 (Bohn edit.).
907 “Private Papers of Wilberforce,” 71.
908 Burke, “Corresp.” iii, 344.
909 “Life of Wilberforce,” i, 284.
910 Burke, “Corresp.,” iii, 238, 239, 255, 267, 274, 275, 278, 291, 302, 308, 336, 342.
911 The following narrative is founded mainly on documents in “F. O.,” Spain, 17, 18, 19; but I have found a monograph by Dr. W. R. Manning, “The Nootka Sound Controversy” (Washington, 1905), most serviceable.
912 I cannot agree with Dr. Manning (p. 360) that there were no signs of a British occupation of Nootka when Martinez arrived. The reverse is antecedently probable, and is asserted in Meares’ “Memorial.”
913 The “Memorial” is among the British archives in “F. O.,” Spain, 17. For a critique of it see Manning.
914 Liston to Auckland, 14th September 1790 (B.M. Add. MSS., 34433).
915 “F. O.,” Spain, 16.
916 Ibid. That this resolve was that of the whole Cabinet appears in the following letter in the Pitt MSS. It is from Pitt to Leeds:
“Downing Street, Tuesday morning, Feb. 23, 1790.
“I cannot help begging to remind your Grace of the wish expressed that the answer to the Spanish ambassador should if possible be circulated before our meeting to-day. I am the more anxious about this, as no one would like to give a final opinion on the terms of a paper of so much delicacy and importance without having had an opportunity of considering them beforehand.”
917 See del Campo’s note of 20th April, in Manning, 374, 375.
918 “Dropmore P.,” i, 579, 580; “F. O.,” Spain, 17.
919 “Journals of Sir T. Byam Martin” (Navy Records Soc.), iii, 381, 382.
920 “The Barham P.” (Navy Records Soc.), ii, 337–47.
921 Manning, 408.
922 “Parl. Hist.,” xxviii, 785.
923 “Wealth of Nations,” bk. iv, ch. vii, pt. 2.
924 B.M. Add. MSS., 35542. Miranda’s relations with Pitt were renewed in 1804. On 13th June 1805 he sought to dispel some suspicions which Pitt had formed of him, and added: “Je n’ai jamais départi un instant des principes politiques et moraux qui formèrent notre première liaison politique en 1790.” See, too, an interesting article on Miranda in the “Amer. Hist. Rev.,” vol. vi, for proofs of the dealings of Pitt with Miranda at that time. On 12th September 1791 Pitt wrote to him stating that he could not grant him the pension he asked for, or the sum of £1,000: £500 must suffice for the expenses incurred during his stay in London (Pitt MSS., 102).
925 “F. O.,” Spain, 17.
926 “Travaux de Mirabeau” (1792), iii, 319.
927 W. Legg, “Select Documents on the Fr. Rev.,” i, 226 and F. Masson, “Département des Affaires étrangères,” 79, 80.
928 B.M. Add. MSS., 29475.
929 Pretyman MSS.
930 “F. O.,” Spain, 17.
931 “Dropmore P.,” i, 585, 588. Auckland to Grenville, 15th May and 8th June 1790. On 22nd May Kaunitz, the Austrian Chancellor, assured Keith, our ambassador, that he heartily wished for the settlement of the Nootka Sound dispute. He blamed Floridablanca as rash (“F. O.,” Austria, 20).
932 “F. O.,” Spain, 17. Fitzherbert to Leeds, 16th June 1790. Earl Camden, a valued member of the Cabinet, wrote on 29th June to Pitt expressing grave concern at this answer from the Spanish Court. He added these words: “War, as I always thought, was inevitable, and to temporize impossible. The jealousy of that Court gave the first provocation, and their pride refuses satisfaction. The consequence is evident. We have no choice, for the outrage at Nouska [sic] cannot be a subject of discussion. I trust in the spirit of the Kingdom and your own wisdom and good fortune, and have no doubt this will terminate to your honour” (Pitt MSS., 119).