Читать книгу A History of England, Period III. Constitutional Monarchy - J. Franck Bright - Страница 16

The Parliament reduces the standing army.

On the very day after the rejoicings to celebrate the Peace of Ryswick, on the 3rd of December 1697, the Parliament, which had hitherto shown itself so firm in support of the Crown, so unanimous and vigorous in its action, met for its third and last session. William had every right to expect a period of peace and prosperity. But, unfortunately, the very success for which England was rejoicing brought with it the seeds of faction and division. For at once a question had to be settled, on which the Whig party was itself divided, and on which the national feeling was on the whole strongly opposed to the King. The establishment of peace naturally involved the question of the fate of the great army, numbering more than 80,000 men, which England had kept up for the last nine years. The nation, suffering heavily from taxation, was not likely to be willing to continue in peace the efforts made during war. It was, moreover, a deeply ingrained feeling among the country gentry of both parties that a standing army in time of peace was an intolerable evil. The Tories had indeed already adopted the policy which long marked the party. They would have wished England to confine itself, even in war, to the pursuit of success upon the sea, which they regarded as her natural element, and to have withdrawn as far as possible from all the complications of Continental policy. But, even setting aside this view, the experience of both parties led them very naturally to regard an army in time of peace as the inevitable instrument of tyranny. While the Tories remembered with horror the triumphant Ironsides of Cromwell, the Whigs recalled with no less detestation the importation of Irish troops at the close of the last reign, and London overawed by the great camp at Hounslow. On the other hand, William, with his eyes fixed abroad, with a profound mistrust of France, and certain knowledge of the rapid approach of another great Continental quarrel, could not bring himself to approve of the breaking up of an army which he had brought to such perfection. The ministry, under his immediate influence, and guided by the far-sighted sagacity of Somers, believed, like the King, in the approach of fresh danger, and thoroughly disbelieved in the efficacy of half-drilled militia to withstand such well-trained troops as Louis had always at his disposal. The national feeling was, however, too strong to be withstood. A resolution was passed that the number of soldiers should be reduced to the same amount as had been kept on foot after the peace of Nimeguen, a resolution which was liberally construed by the Government to mean 10,000. On other points the ministry and the Parliament remained at one. It was in vain that an attack was directed against William's lavish grants of Crown lands, in vain that an accusation of peculation was directed against Montague, it resulted only in a formal declaration on the part of the Commons of the great services of that statesman.

Montague's success as a financier had indeed reached its culminating point in this session by the temporary settlement of the question with regard to the Indian trade which had so long excited the commercial The East Indian trade. public in England. It has been incidentally mentioned that the renewal of the charter to the East India Company in 1693 had produced the fall of Lord Caermarthen. The Company, originally consisting chiefly of Whigs and incorporated by royal charter, had, in the hands of Sir Josiah Child, who exerted an almost dictatorial authority in its management, allied itself closely to the Tories. Its monopoly had also become very unpopular, as the increase of capital and the great receipts of the Indian trade had excited a wish among the mercantile community to enter more largely upon that branch of traffic. As early as 1691 an association of its enemies had been formed, which, although it was not chartered, was commonly spoken of as the new Company, and had succeeded in obtaining a request from the Parliament to the King that he would give the old Company the three years' notice of the withdrawal of its charter which was legally required. An accidental illegality had in fact just then invalidated the charter. It was to procure its restoration that, in 1693, Cook, to whom Child had now relinquished much of his authority, had so lavishly expended the secret service money, some of which had been traced to Caermarthen. His bribery was successful. The charter was renewed by the King, but the Parliament, at the instigation of the new Company, took a different view of the question, and declared that every man had a right to trade, unless debarred by Act of Parliament. This declaration of the limits of the constitutional power of the Crown in matters of trade William could not venture to oppose. From that time onwards, therefore, the trade had been legally free, but the power of the Company had been so great in the Indian seas, and its conduct so oppressive, that it had been impossible for free traders to carry on their business with any success. Again, in 1698, the question was strongly pressed upon the attention of Parliament, and again the old Company found strong supporters in the Tory party, while the Whigs upheld the demands of those who wished to participate in its advantages. There was a division in the views of the opponents of the Company. Some were eager for perfect freedom of trade, while others joined in the general feeling of the nation, that, although the present monopoly was a bad one, some sort of restriction was still necessary. It was understood that to advance money to Government was the surest way to obtain its support, and the old Company offered £700,000, at four per cent., as the price of the renewal of its charter. But Montague, anxious for money to relieve the embarrassments of the Government, anxious to Formation of the General East India Company. 1698. establish a second great Whig society of capitalists, who would support him as the Bank had already done, believed that he saw his way to gaining those ends by opposing the Company, and brought forward a plan by which he hoped to secure the support of both sections of its opponents. He suggested the formation of a company, to be called the General Company, and proposed that a loan of £2,000,000, at eight per cent., should be advanced to Government, and that the subscribers should receive the monopoly of the Indian trade, but be free from the obligation of trading as a joint-stock society, unless they should afterwards wish it. He carried the Bill for its formation through Parliament, and, in spite of the forebodings of his enemies, found that the immense sum which had been promised was readily subscribed in two or three days. The Bill was carried on the 3rd of September, but, on the 5th of the same month, the greater part of the subscribers declared their desire to become a joint-stock company, which was therefore chartered by Act of Parliament by the title of the English Company trading to the East Indies. The struggle between the companies was found to be so destructive to English trade, that, in 1702, arrangements for their union were made. A The two Companies united. 1708. common court of managers was established, their stocks equalized, and trade carried on under the name of the United Company of Merchants trading to the East Indies. But each company still traded with its own separate stock. Many inconveniences still attended this division of interests, and at last, in 1708, upon the award of Lord Godolphin, a final and complete union was made; and, as the separate adventurers who had not joined either company were bought out, the monopoly again fell into the hands of the great United Company. But though his plan was thus ultimately a failure, for the moment Montague had all the credit of another great financial triumph, and the Whig party might reasonably expect that, in spite of the one single defeat with regard to the standing army, their position would be as good in the new Parliament as it had been in that which was just closing.

William's attention directed to the Spanish succession.

Meanwhile the King's personal attention had been as usual directed rather to foreign than to home politics. The great question which at once occupied the minds of diplomatists after the Peace of Ryswick was the succession to the throne of Spain. It seemed very improbable that Charles II., a miserable hypochondriac, should live much longer. At his death there threatened to be a general scramble for his vast possessions. Early in the year, an embassy of unusual grandeur had attended Portland to France. The question had been there opened, and a corresponding French embassy under Tallard had subsequently and with the same object been sent to London. On the dissolution of Parliament the scene of negotiation was transferred to Holland. The question was one of great intricacy and difficulty.[2] It was not easy to point out the legitimate successor, even had it been possible to allow the Spanish monarchy to pass unbroken into the hands of any of the claimants. The eldest of Charles's sisters had married Louis XIV., a younger sister had married Leopold of Germany. Leopold was himself Charles's first cousin, grandson of Philip III. In direct descent, therefore, the Dauphin stood next to the Spanish king. Next to him came the offspring of Leopold's first marriage with the Spanish Princess, namely, the Electress of Bavaria, but she gave over her right to her son, the Electoral Prince. The third in order was the Emperor Leopold. But the marriage of the Infanta with Louis had been accompanied by a formal renunciation of her rights, sanctioned by the Cortes. The marriage of the second Princess with Leopold had been attended by a similar renunciation, not sanctioned by the Cortes. The marriage of Leopold's mother with the Emperor had been attended by no renunciation at all. Thus, if the renunciations were valid, the claims in accordance with them came in exactly the opposite order to the claims by order of descent. But the change in the balance of Europe involved in the accession to the throne of Spain of a prince of either the imperial house of Germany or the royal house of France was of far graver importance than the mere legal rights to the throne. Both Leopold and the Dauphin, conscious that Europe would not submit to their acquiring Spain for themselves, had handed on their claims to representatives, who might be considered as comparatively harmless. Leopold had substituted for himself the Archduke Charles, his son by a second marriage, the Dauphin his second son Philip. But, in spite of this arrangement, France, England and Holland had considered it dangerous that the Spanish dominions should pass entire into the hands of either of the claimants, and the negotiations of this year were directed to forming a plan for dividing them with some sort of equality among the First Partition Treaty. three. The product of these negotiations was the First Partition Treaty, definitively signed at the Hague on the 11th of October. By this the bulk of the Spanish dominions—Spain, the Indies, and the Netherlands—was to pass to the least powerful of the three claimants, the Electoral Prince. France was to receive Guipuscoa in the north of Spain, and the Two Sicilies; the Austrian competitor was to be satisfied with the Milanese. The treaty had been arranged as quietly as possible, but the republican institutions of Holland were not favourable to secresy. Rumours of what had been done reached Spain. The desire of the King and the Castilians was to preserve at all hazards the integrity of the Empire. Charles was therefore persuaded to make a will, and to declare that candidate whom France and England seemed most to favour, namely, the Electoral Prince, heir to his whole dominions; and thus for a time the matter rested.

New Parliament. Tory reaction. Dec. 6, 1698.

Having thus temporarily settled his position abroad, William returned to England with the hope of a peaceful session. The hope was singularly falsified by the event. The great Whig party, so noble and united in adversity, had fallen to pieces, and a Tory reaction begun. The greatness and success of its measures had left room for faction. The unpopularity both of William and Montague afforded opportunity for the attacks of malcontents. On the assembling of Parliament after the new elections (Dec. 6, 1698), it became evident that a large number of unknown men who had been elected, although nominally Whigs, intended to make common cause with the extreme Tories, and that The Country Party. this united faction, under the title of the Country Party, would form an opposition against the Crown. The last session had already marked out the lines this opposition would take. The points at issue would be the maintenance of the army, the distribution of Crown grants, and the conduct of individual members of the ministry. On the first of these points the King did not act wisely. Unable to understand the insular politics in favour with the English, he insisted that the ministry should propose a standing army of 20,000 men. Afraid to introduce a Bill which they knew they could not carry, the ministry suffered the initiative to slip from their grasp, and a private individual was allowed to propose that the number of troops should be further lessened to 7000, and that all those 7000 should be born Englishmen. In spite of the efforts of theDismissal of the Dutch guards. ministry the Bill was carried, and William found himself compelled to order the departure of his favourite Dutch guards. Hurt to the quick, he seriously formed the intention of quitting England. He even drew up his farewell speech, and was only moved to remain by the earnest prayers of Somers and by his own returning wisdom.

Assured of their majority, the Opposition proceeded to attack the late ministry. Their favourite object was Montague, who had laid himself open to their assaults by the pride and luxury which he had exhibited in his good fortune, and still more by the indecent rapacity with which he seized on the valuable place of the Auditorship of the Exchequer, worth at least £4000 a year; this he placed in the hands of his brother, to be held until he should want it. The next victim was Russell, Lord Orford, whose administration only escaped censure by a single vote. And before the session closed, the third point, that of grants of Crown lands, was touched upon in a way which produced much after disaster. The method used on this occasion illustrates a point Rivalry between the two Houses. deserving of notice. The Revolution had placed the supreme power in the hands of Parliament; but Parliament itself consists of two elements, of two Houses drawn from different classes. Besides the general party struggles, besides the frequent contests between King and Parliament, and subsequently between Parliament and people, there was therefore a class rivalry between the two Houses, which had shown itself already on more than one occasion during the reign, and was rendered more prominent now by the fact that the party feeling in the Upper House was on the whole decidedly Whig. The weapon which the Commons intended to use in this strife was their exclusive right of introducing money Bills. Those Bills the Upper House had the power of rejecting entire, but not of amending. The Commons now "tacked" or appended to the Bill for the Land Tax a clause appointing seven Commissioners to inquire into the manner in which the forfeited land in Ireland had been granted out. This obnoxious clause the Lords were compelled to pass, or to reject the Bill entirely, and thus stop the supplies. Though keenly feeling the coercion put upon them, by a plan which would have proved fatal to the Upper House had not the good feeling of the nation and the strength of popular opinion ultimately compelled the Commons to abandon it, the Lords passed the Bill, feeling probably that the present occasion was scarcely important enough for a great constitutional struggle. The Money Bill having been passed, the King, in some anger, prorogued the Parliament (May 4).

As usual, when Parliament was not sitting, William withdrew to Holland, a habit which, now that the war no longer necessitated his presence there, increased his unpopularity in England, and the session of Parliament which he returned to meet in November 1699 was still more stormy than the last.

The Darien scheme.

The discontent in England was backed up by more serious discontent in Scotland. The whole of that nation might be now reckoned among the enemies of the Court. For, during the recess, on the 5th of October, certain news had reached England of the failure of the great Darien scheme, and the complete destruction of those wild hopes of wealth and greatness which had been for the last four years buoying up the Scotch nation. Paterson, the same man whose scheme for the Bank of England had in the hands of Montague proved so successful, was the originator of this disastrous project. He had persuaded himself that the natural wealth of a country has nothing to do with its prosperity. The commercial cities of the ancient world, and Venice and Holland in modern times, had risen to greatness and wealth without any territorial possessions of importance. He believed that he could reproduce this phenomenon in the case of Scotland. The scheme of Columbus had been to introduce the wealth of the East by a short and direct route into Europe, and thus to destroy the traffic of the Venetians. He had found his plan thwarted by the interposition of America; and the discovery of a passage round the Cape of Good Hope had turned all men's attention in that direction, and had been the great source of wealth both to the Dutch and Portuguese. But the plan of Columbus had never been quite forgotten, and Paterson now thought to renew it by establishing a line of communication across the Isthmus of Darien. The Scotch were to colonize and occupy the isthmus, which would become, in the view of the projector, the great emporium of the whole Eastern trade. Although he did not explain the details of his scheme, it was listened to with enthusiasm by his fellow-countrymen; and in 1695, an extraordinary Act passed the Scotch Parliament, and received the assent of the Lord High Commissioner, authorising the formation of a Corporation, half the capital of which was to be held by Scotchmen, with the monopoly of the trade with Asia, Africa, and America for thirty-one years. With the exception of foreign sugar and tobacco, all its imports were to be duty free. Every servant of the Company was free from imprisonment and arrest. The Company was authorized to take possession of unoccupied territories and exercise legal rights, and the King promised to obtain satisfaction at the public charge if foreign powers assaulted it. Subscriptions to the amount of £200,000 and upwards were speedily forthcoming, and a branch of the Company established itself in London. There, however, the absurdities of the plan were at once discovered, and it met with a very cold reception. Any colony, to be useful, must be either in America or in the Spice Islands; now interference in America would not be tolerated by Spain, nor would Holland look on quietly at the occupation of the Spice Islands; a maritime war was in fact inevitable; Scotland, singlehanded, could scarcely hope to carry on such a war, and England would almost infallibly be drawn into it, and this on behalf of a Company which, by changing Scotland into a free port, would virtually make it an enormous centre for smuggling to the extreme detriment of English trade. The attention of the King was drawn to the subject. He expressed his entire disapprobation of the scheme, and dismissed the Lord High Commissioner and the Secretary; but the law was made and could not be rescinded. In 1698, in the midst of wild enthusiasm, 1200 colonists set out from Leith, with Paterson among them, and reached Darien in safety, and there established their colony, but almost immediately came into contact with the neighbouring Spanish governor, and the inevitable war began. At first, however, the reports were favourable, and in the following year a new armament of four ships and 1800 colonists left Scotland for Caledonia, as the new settlement was called. They had not been gone long before news arrived at New York that the colony no longer existed, and that the wretched remnant of its inhabitants had sought refuge in New England. In fact, the climate had proved eminently unhealthy, in spite of the assertions of Paterson. Provisions had failed, and, worn out and enfeebled, the colonists, feeling themselves entirely unable to repell the assaults of Spain, determined to withdraw. After miserable suffering, a few of them reached New York, and the second expedition arrived in Caledonia to find only uninhabited ruins. They determined upon reoccupying these, rebuilt the fort, and during the few healthy months continued, though with heavy losses, to carry out their operations. But before long a Spanish fleet appeared before the town, and an army, marching across the isthmus from Panama, blockaded it on the land side. Resistance was impossible. Already 300 of the new-comers had died, the survivors promised to depart within a fortnight, and on the 11th of April left the colony for ever. The disaster was regarded by the Scotch as a national injury on the part of England. The Company had throughout excited great anger in the Southern kingdom; the colonial governors had done all they could to discourage the colony when it arrived, and the Scotch were ready to trace this opposition to national jealousy—to attribute it even to William's partiality for his Dutch subjects, whose trade might have been injured. In truth, the whole business was a proof, as William pointed out to the House of Lords, of the difficulty of managing two countries with different interests under one Crown, and the necessity of a closer union between the nations.

New Parliament Nov. 16, 1699.

It was thus, supported by the discontent of Scotland, that the malcontents of Parliament resumed the question of the management of the royal property. After a fruitless attack upon Somers, who had indeed received a grant, but one against which no reasonable complaint could be made, they proceeded to follow up the work of the last session, and to act upon the recommendation of the seven Commissioners who had been appointed by the tacked clause of the preceding session. The Crown lands had been constantly dealt Irish forfeitures. with according to the King's pleasure, without parliamentary interference. In early times, however, they had been regarded as a trust. Parliament had frequently demanded that the King should live upon his own revenues, and Acts for the resumption of grants had been passed, the last being that immediately following the battle of Bosworth. Since then the gift of the Crown had been considered a perfectly sound title. Whatever dislike, therefore, William's lavish grants to his Dutch favourites had excited, there would have been very great difficulty in calling in question his right to make them. The use to which the forfeited lands which had fallen into William's hands after the Pacification of Limerick had been put was more open to objection. A Bill ordering them to be applied to the public service had been interrupted and left incomplete, and the King had promised that the Commons should have another opportunity of considering the question. As they had since taken no steps in the matter, he seems to have considered himself free to act as he pleased. Of the forfeited lands, which amounted to about 1,700,000 acres, a fourth had been restored to its ancient possessors, according to the Limerick Pacification. Some of the rest had been mercifully given back to Irishmen, some to men like Ginkel and Galway, who had distinguished themselves in the Irish wars, but by far the larger portion had fallen to the King's personal friends, such as Woodstock, the eldest son of Portland, and Keppel, Lord Albemarle. The Commission could not arrive at unanimity, and sent up two reports. But that of the majority, which was very hostile to Government, was alone accepted by the Commons. It ridiculously over-estimated the grants at a sum of, £2,600,000, and at the same time declared that very undue leniency had been shown to the Irish. Had these grants not been made, and the confiscations properly exacted, much of the present heavy taxation, they said, might have been spared. The Resumption Bill passed. April 10, 1700. Commons, longing to be free from taxes and hating the Dutch favourites, took up the matter with factious warmth, and the Resumption Bill was passed, vesting all the forfeited lands in the hands of trustees, and offering large rewards to informers who would point out lands which ought to have been confiscated. They even, with palpable injustice, included in their inquiry lands which had never been forfeited. Expecting opposition from the Upper House, they again tacked this Bill to the Land Tax Bill. The Lords now determined upon a struggle. Little as they liked the Dutch favourites, they could not allow themselves to be thus overridden. Their opposition was, however, unsuccessful; the nation felt with the Commons, and foreign affairs had reached a crisis which rendered peace at home necessary to the King. The quarrel was pressed so far as to threaten a complete breach between Parliament prorogued. April 11, 1700. the Houses, and a fatal blow to the Constitution. By the influence of the King the Lords were induced to yield, and the triumphant Commons were passing to fresh assaults on the King's friends, when, having passed the Land Tax Bill and thus supplied himself with money, William suddenly prorogued the Houses.

The necessity which had driven him to this step was the reopening of the question of the Spanish succession. In January 1699 the Electoral Prince had died. The whole question thus assumed a new shape, and William's undivided attention was required. For the same reason, probably, and to allay the opposition in the House, he thought it necessary to remove Somers from office, and to place the Great Seal in the hands of Sir Nathan Wright. The Second Partition Treaty, which the King was now engaged in arranging, was such as was rendered necessary by the death of the Second Partition Treaty. third claimant. The bulk of the Spanish dominions was now to be given to the Archduke. It was to him that now Spain, the Indies, and the Netherlands were assigned, while Milan, which had formerly fallen to his share, was to be transferred to France, to be ultimately exchanged for Lorraine, a German fief, very important to round off the French dominions. But again these arrangements were upset. Portocarrero, the Spanish minister, was in the French interest, and supported by Harcourt, the ablest French diplomatist. By playing upon national feeling, which was strong against any partition, these statesmen excited the anger of the Spaniards against William, who had already incurred their enmity by his fancied support of the Darien scheme; and Charles was at length impressed with the absolute necessity of making another will. The events of the late session had given rise to the belief that William was not really master of England, while the visible greatness of France seemed to afford the best chance of keeping the Spanish monarchy undivided; the will was therefore made in favour of the Dauphin's son Philip, Duke of Anjou, who was declared heir to the whole of the Spanish dominions. The treaty was not well received in England. While one party clamoured that too much was given to France, another complained of the injustice of forestalling the wishes of the Spanish people, and there was a general feeling of anger at the secresy with which the treaty had been arranged, a treaty which might easily draw England into a foreign war, and which had been concluded entirely without consulting Parliament. This anger reached its highest point when, in November, the King of Spain died, and Louis, in defiance of all his treaties, accepted his grandson's great inheritance. William had determined that the whole responsibility should lie with himself, trusting in his own diplomatic skill; he had been beaten at his own arts, and his great treaty was absolutely useless.

William's unpopularity.

In fact, there was no time when the King had been so unpopular or his enemies so strong. Nearly every class, except his own immediate followers among the Whigs, were alienated from him; the mass of the people had suffered from heavy taxation, the nobles were sore at the unwise preference given to foreigners; the whole nation shared in this feeling, and disliked his constant absences from home; the scandal of the Irish forfeitures had just been brought to light; the country gentry remembered with anger the failure of their Land Bank, and saw with envy the increasing importance of the moneyed interest. One thing was plain, that nothing could be done with a Parliament so adverse as the last, with a ministry so powerless as the late holders of power had New ministry. Dec. 1700. proved. William therefore dissolved the Parliament, summoning a new one for the following February; and, freeing himself from the old ministry, called to his councils Rochester, the late Queen's uncle and the head of the High Church Tories, with Godolphin and Sir Charles Hedges. For the present his only hope lay in the possibility of a general European war; of this as yet there was but little sign. Austria had indeed refused to acknowledge the new King of Spain, and withdrawn its ambassador from Madrid, but in other countries it seemed as if the will of the late Spanish King would be quietly accepted. William himself could do nothing, and for the time was compelled to submit. His new ministry entreated him to New Parliament. Feb. 1701. acknowledge Philip; his Parliament showed no disposition to support him in any hostile steps against France. Two questions which he placed before them in his opening speech were, the succession of the throne of England, the settlement to which had been rendered necessary by the late death of the Duke of Gloucester, the young son of the Princess Anne (July 29, 1700), and the position which England should assume in the face of the altered aspect of European politics. It was in vain, upon this latter point, that he attempted to urge them to energy. The King of France had driven the Dutch to acknowledge Philip, by suddenly entering the Low Countries, and capturing 15,000 of their troops who had been intended to garrison the barrier fortresses. William and the Dutch States had in vain demanded the withdrawal of the French troops and the surrender of the strongholds. But even this act of aggression did not arouse the Parliament to energy. They acknowledged the obligations of England under the Treaty of 1677, and promised to send succours to the Dutch, but there seemed no immediate prospect of any grants for the purpose. Nor was the other point much more Succession Act. vigorously prosecuted. A Bill of Succession was indeed produced, but nearly every clause seemed evidently aimed against the King's former conduct. The new sovereign was not to leave the kingdom without leave of Parliament; no person not a born Englishman was to be capable of holding any position of trust, or of receiving any grant from the Crown. England was not to be engaged in war for the defence of any dominions not belonging to the Crown of England. All matters relating to the Government were to be transacted in the Privy Council, and countersigned by such members of that body as should advise or consent to them. Having thus secured, as they thought, the insular position of England, the House proceeded to settle the succession upon the Electress Sophia of Hanover. Thus, though the Protestant succession was secured, a Bill which William had hoped would be a singular expression of popular sympathy with his own efforts was in fact a vote of censure on many of the acts of his reign.

Impeachments against the Whigs.

While public business was thus proceeding languidly, the whole energy of the House was directed against the old Whig leaders and against the House of Lords. Impeachments were hurried on against Lord Portland, Lord Orford, Lord Somers, and Montague, who had now become Lord Halifax. Against each of these the main charge was the share they had taken in the Partition treaties. But, in the case of Portland and Montague, there were additional charges in reference to the grants and dilapidations of the royal revenue, for which they were said to be answerable; while against Somers and Orford was alleged a ridiculous story concerning their participation in the notorious exploits of Captain Kidd. This man had been sent out by private enterprise to destroy piracy in the Indian Sea, and had there himself turned pirate. Both Somers and Orford had subscribed to the original enterprise. Somers, as Chancellor, had sealed Kidd's commission. It was now ridiculously suggested that they had all along known of his piratical intentions. But, while sending up these impeachments, the Commons felt absolutely certain that the Whig majority of the Lords would at once acquit their victims, for it was well understood that the measure was not one of justice but one of faction; they therefore passed an unjustifiable address to the King, praying him to dismiss the four Peers from his Council, even before the impeachments were heard. The House of Lords produced a counter address. The Commons demanded longer time to complete their impeachments, but the Peers were determined to bring a matter on which their judgment was in fact foregone to a speedy issue, and had now both law and right on their side. They therefore positively refused to extend the time, and the 17th of June was fixed for Lord Somers's trial. Westminster Hall was fitted up with the usual preparations for impeachment. The Lords marched in all pomp to their judgment-seat. The Commons, declaring they had been denied justice, refused to appear. There were no accusers, and Somers was declared acquitted.

But many signs had begun to show themselves in the country which induced William to believe that the popular opinion was turning, and he ventured to put an end to the very dangerous fight The Kentish Petition. between the Houses by a prorogation (June 24). What is known as the Kentish Petition was the great sign of this changed feeling. This petition had been sent up by the Grand Jury of Kent. It hinted that public business had been neglected, and the pursuit of personal vengeance substituted, and humbly deprecated the least mistrust of the King, and implored the House to give effect to its loyal addresses by turning them into Bills of supply. So arbitrary was the House of Commons at this time in the assertion of its privilege, that it was only by consenting to remain outside the House, and be personally answerable for their document, that the five gentlemen who brought up this petition were able to get it presented at all (May 8). It raised a storm of anger, was voted scandalous, infamous and seditious, and the five gentlemen were dismissed to prison. But their cause was taken up by the whole Liberal party, and the desires expressed in the petition were brought before the public in much more forcible language in a The Legion Memorial. memorial written by Defoe, and called from its signature "The Legion Memorial." This expression of opinion could not but have been gratifying to the King.

Hope was indeed again opening before him. Not only could he feel certain of some support, however weak, at home, but the persistent retention on the part of Louis, in spite of all their clamours, of the Dutch barrier fortresses and the 15,000 troops he had captured had begun to rouse the war spirit of that people. Left more free to act now that Parliament was prorogued, William at once despatched 10,000 troops into Holland, under command of Marlborough, and before long went thither himself, to lay the foundation of a Grand The Grand Alliance. Alliance between England, Holland, and the Emperor. This treaty was completed in September. But the terms of it proved surely how low William's hopes still were. It only declared that it was desirable that satisfaction should be given to the Emperor on account of the succession of Spain, and pledges given for the security of England and her allies. It allowed two months for peaceful negotiations. After that time the contracting powers pledged themselves to attempt the recovery by force of arms of Milan for Austria, and of the barrier fortresses for Holland.

Death of James II.

At this moment James II. of England lay dying. With all Europe submitting with ill-dissembled dislike to the late acquisition of Spain by the Bourbons, and ready to take any opportunity for disturbing the newly-appointed King, to acknowledge, in contravention of the Treaty of Ryswick, the young Prince of Wales as King of England, was a step full of danger for the French King. It could not have been hidden from Louis, as it certainly was not hidden from his ministers, that the real strength of his present position was the depressed condition of William, thwarted by his factious Parliament; and Louis must have known that nothing was more likely to change that weakness into strength than a violation of the Peace of Ryswick—the destruction of the one great advantage which England had gained by nine years' expenditure of blood and treasure. But the Louis acknowledging the Pretender. Sept. 16. influence of Madame de Maintenon, who had been won over to the interest of the Stuarts, and a certain theatrical magnanimity which seldom deserted Louis, proved stronger than prudence. At the deathbed of James he promised to uphold the claims of his son, and three days afterwards the young Prince was formally acknowledged by the whole Court as King of England.

Rouses English patriotism.

No better news could have reached William. Again, as in the time of his first landing in England, his enemy had done more for him than any skill or diplomacy of his own could effect. The whole nation burst into a flame. Patriotic and loyal addresses came pouring in upon him. Public bodies in all parts of the country passed resolutions full of affection for him. The conduct of the late majority was denounced as factious wrangling, and the cause of the great insult which had been laid on the country; and the connection between the Tory party and Louis seemed to be rendered plain when the French ambassador was found seated at supper in a well-known Jacobite tavern surrounded by the most ardent members of the Tory party. The King seized the moment of excitement, and, though conscious of the delays it would entail, at once dissolved Parliament. A struggle such as has seldom been seen excited England from end to end, and everywhere it became evident that the reckless conduct of Louis had secured the restoration of the Whigs. London returned four Whig members, Wharton again won back his supremacy in Buckingham, even the virulent Howe was defeated and lost his seat in Gloucestershire. The flame of indignation still blazed high when William met his new Parliament New Parliament and Ministry. on the last day of the year, and, in words of unusual fire, bade them drop their factious disputes, and know no other distinction than that of those who were for the Protestant religion and the present Establishment, and of those who meant a Popish prince and a French government. The ministry was largely changed. Godolphin left the Treasury to make room for Lord Carlisle; Manchester was made Secretary instead of Hedges, and other Whig Lords were admitted to the Privy Council. It is true that the unanimity was by no means perfect. The Tories were still strong in the House. There was still some fear of the ultimate return of the Stuarts. But the Government was strong enough to pass a Bill for attainting the pretended Prince of Wales, and a still more important Bill abjuring the house of Stuart, and pledging those who took the oath to uphold in turn each successor named in the Act of Settlement. The acceptance of this oath was made requisite for every employment either in Church or State.

Death of William.

It was thus in the full flush of a new victory, with hopes high, and with a well-grounded belief that his life's work of opposition to the encroachments of the French would not after all be wasted, that William, broken down by disease and suffering, died. He had long been so ill that his life had been despaired of, but he was still able to ride. On the 20th of February, his horse, stepping upon a molehill, fell with him, and his collar-bone was broken. This accident rendered his recovery hopeless. He lived just long enough to express his strong desire for a Union with Scotland, and to appoint the Commission which gave the royal assent to the Abjuration Act. On the 8th of March, surrounded by his faithful friends, he breathed his last.