Читать книгу Biographical Memorials of James Oglethorpe - Thaddeus Mason Harris - Страница 22

Table of Contents

Parentage of Oglethorpe—Birth—Education—Christian Name—Education—Military Profession and Promotion—In the Suite of the Earl of Peterborough—Service under Prince Eugene of Savoy—Elected Member of Parliament—Visits a Gentleman in Prison—Moves in the House of Commons for a redress of the rigors of Prison Discipline—Appointed on the Committee—Extracts from his Speeches in Parliament.

James Oglethorpe, founder of the Colony of Georgia in North America—a distinguished philanthropist, general, and statesman—was the son of Sir Theophilus Oglethorpe, of Godalming, in the County of Surrey, Great Britain, by Eleanor, his wife, daughter of Richard Wall, Esq. of Rogane, in Ireland.[1] There has been, hitherto, great uncertainty with respect to the year, the month, and the day of his nativity; I have, however, what I deem good authority for deciding it to have been the twenty-first day of December, one thousand six hundred and eighty-eight.[2]

[Footnote 1: For some account of the Family, see Appendix I.]

[Footnote 2: Appendix II.]

It is asserted in Thoresby's History of Leeds, page 255, that "he had two Christian names, James-Edward, supposed to have been bestowed upon him in compliment to the Pretender;" and he is so named on his sepulchral monument. But, as he always used but one; as he was enregistered on entering College at Oxford, simply James; and, as the double name is not inserted in any public act, commission, document, printed history, or mention of him in his life time, that I have ever met with, I have not thought proper to adopt it.

When sixteen years of age, on the 9th of July, 1704, he was admitted a member of Corpus Christi College, Oxford,[1] where his brother Lewis received his education. It seems, however, that, after the example of that brother, as also of his brother Theophilus, he early relinquished a literary, for a military profession; and aspired to make his way in the world, "tam Marte quam Minerva."

[Footnote 1: The record of his admittatur, in the University Register, is—"1704, Jul. 9, term. S. Trin. Jacobus Oglethorpe, e C.C.C. 16. Theoph. f. Sti. Jacobi, Lond. Equ. Aur. filius natu minor." That is, "In Trinity Term, July 9, 1704, James Oglethorpe, aged 16, youngest son of Theophilus Oglethorpe, of St. James's, London, was admitted into Corpus Christi College."]

His first commission was that of Ensign; and it is dated in 1710; and he bore that rank in the army when peace was proclaimed in 1713[1]. In the same year he is known to have been in the suite of the Earl of Peterborough[2], ambassador from the Court of Great Britain to the King of Sicily and to the other Italian States; whither he was fellow traveller with the Rev. Dr. George Berkeley, his Lordship's Chaplain[3]. Highly honorable was such a mark of favor from his Lordship; and peculiarly pleasant and instructive, also, must have been such companionship with the amiable and excellent clergyman; and it afforded opportunity of concerting plans of usefulness, of beneficence, and of philanthropy, the object and tendency of which were apparent in the after life of each[4].

[Footnote 1: Biographical Memoir in the European Magazine, Vol. VIII. p. 13.]

[Footnote 2: NICHOLS, in the Literary Anecdotes of the XVIIIth Century, Vol. II. p. 19, says, "he was aid-de-camp;" but as that was the title of a military rank, rather than of an attendant on a diplomatic ambassador, I have substituted another term, which however may embrace it, if it be really proper.]

[Footnote 3: Dr. Berkeley, in a letter to Thomas Prior, Esq., dated Turin, January 6, 1714, n.s. says that he travelled from Lyons "in company with Col. Du Hamel and Mr. Oglethorpe, Adjutant General of the Queen's forces; who were sent with a letter from my Lord to the King's mother, at Turin." Works of GEORGE BERKELEY, D.D., with an Account of his Life. Dublin. 1704. 2 vols. 4to. Vol. I—p. xxx]

[Footnote 4: Appendix III.]

In 1714 he was Captain Lieutenant in the first troop of the Queen's guards. By his fine figure, his soldierly deportment and personal bravery, he attracted the notice of the Duke of Marlborough; whose confidence and patronage he seems long to have enjoyed, and by whom, and through the influence of the Duke of Argyle, he was so recommended to Prince Eugene, that he received him into his service, first as his secretary, and afterwards aid-de-camp. Thus near the person of this celebrated general, full of ardor, and animated with heroic courage, an opportunity was offered him in the warlike expedition against the Turks in which the Prince was engaged, to gather those laurels in what the world calls "the field of glory," to which he aspired; and, in several successive campaigns, he exhibited applauded proofs of chivalric gallantry and personal bravery. By his attentive observation of the discipline, manner of battle array, onset of the forces, and the instruction given him in military tactics, he acquired that knowledge of the art of war, for which he afterwards became so distinguished.

At the battle of Peterwaradin, one of the strongest frontier places that Austria had against the Turks, Oglethorpe, though present, was not perhaps actively engaged. It was fought on the 5th of August, 1716. The army of the Turks consisted of 150,000 men, of which 40,000 were Janisaries, and 30,000 Saphis, or troopers, the rest were Tartars, Walachians, and the troops of Asia and Egypt. The army of the Imperialists, under his Serene Highness, Prince Eugene, consisted of but little more than half that number. The onset began at seven in the morning, and by twelve Eugene was writing to the Emperor an account of the victory in the tent of the Grand Vizier[1].

[Footnote 1: Military History of Prince Eugene, of Savoy, (a superb work in two folio volumes, with elegant plates; compiled by CAMPBELL.) Lond. 1737. Vol. II. p. 215. From this, and from "The Life and Military Actions of Eugene," Lond. 1737, 12mo, the account of the battles is taken.]

After a sharp contest of about four hours, the Grand Vizier Hali, seeing the battle go against him, put himself at the head of his guard of horse, pushed through a defile, and made a very brisk charge; but his men could not sustain the contest; and he, having received two wounds, was carried off the field to Carlowitz, where he died the next day. The Aga of the Janisaries and Mahomet Bassa were also slain. The whole loss of the Turks in this action amounted to about 22,000; and of the Imperialists, 3,695 common soldiers, and 469 officers. There was found in the camp 164 pieces of cannon, and a prodigious quantity of powder, bullets, bombs, grenades, and various military equipments and stores; and the booty in other articles was great and rich beyond computation.

The Imperial army passed the Danube on the 6th of August, "in order to avoid the infection of the dead bodies." The same day a council of war was held, in which the siege of Temeswaer was proposed and resolved on. This is a town of Hungary, upon the river Temes, whence it has its name. It lies five miles from Lippa, towards the borders of Transylvania, and about ten from Belgrade. The Turks took it from the Transylvanians in 1552, and fortified it to a degree that they deemed it impregnable. After several severe conflicts, and a most desperate resistance, it capitulated on the 14th of October, 1716, and the Turks entirely evacuated the place on the 17th. Thus the capital of a region of the same name, was restored to its lawful prince after having been in the hands of the Turks 164 years. "The success of this victorious campaign filled not only Germany, but all Europe with joy." On this occasion, Oglethorpe acted as aid-de-camp; and his active service in attendance upon Prince Eugene; his prompt attention to the orders dictated to him, or transmitted by him; his alertness and fidelity in communicating them; and his fearless exposure to imminent peril in passing from one division of the army to another, gained him commendatory acknowledgments and the increased favor of his Serene Highness.

Notwithstanding these signal victories gained over them, the Turks were determined to continue the contest; and the next year the Grand Signior held a great Divan at Constantinople to take measures for its most vigorous prosecution. These purposes being put in train, Prince Eugene undertook the siege of Belgrade, their chief strong hold. "The Turks advanced to its relief, and besieged him in his camp. His danger was imminent; but military skill and disciplined valor triumphed over numbers and savage ferocity. He sallied out of his intrenchments, and, falling suddenly upon the enemy, routed them with great slaughter, and took their cannon, baggage, and everything belonging to their camp. Belgrade surrendered immediately after."[1] On the 16th of August, (1717) the capitulation was signed; and immediately afterwards the Imperialists took possession of a gate, and the out-works; on the 19th Te Deum was solemnly performed in the tent of the Grand Vizier, which had become occupied by Eugene, and on the 22d the place was evacuated. The Imperialists found prodigious riches in the camp of which they had become possessed; "for the Sultan had emptied his coffers to supply this army, which was by far the most numerous of any set on foot since the famous siege of Vienna."[2]

[Footnote 1: Russell's Modern Europe, Vol. V. p. 3.]

[Footnote 2: CAMPBELL'S Military History of Eugene, Vol. II. p. 233.]

"Such was the conclusion of the siege of Belgrade; a place of the last importance to the Imperialists and to the Turks; the bridle of all the adjoining country; the glorious trophy of the valor and conduct of his Serene Highness, Prince Eugene; and the bulwark, not of Germany only, but of all Christendom on this side."

"Oglethorpe was in active command at the siege and battle of Belgrade, on the south shore of the Danube, in 1717; where he acquired a high and deserved reputation."[1]

[Footnote 1: Gentleman's Magazine for 1785, p. 573.]

In the postscript of a letter from Alexander Pope, dated September 8th, 1717, to Edward Blount, Esq., is this remark: "I hope you will take part in the rejoicing for the victory of Prince Eugene over the Turks, &c." to which Dr. Warton subjoins this note; "at which General Oglethorpe was present, and of which I have heard him give a lively description."

The peace which took place in the following year between the Emperor and the Sultan, left Oglethorpe without any active employment; and he quitted, doubtless with reluctance, the staff of his friend and patron, prince Eugene, with whom he had so honorably served; and returned to England.

He was offered preferment in the German service; but it was, probably, a sufficient reason with him for declining the proffer, that "the profession of a soldier in time of peace affords but few opportunities of promotion, and none of distinction."

In the year 1722, succeeding his brother Lewis in the inheritance of the estate at Godalming, his weight of character and family influence secured to him a seat in Parliament, as Burgess, for Haslemere; and he continued to represent that borough, by successive elections, and through various changes of administration, for thirty-two years; and, "during this long period, he distinguished himself by several able speeches; and, in the laws for the benefit of trade, &c. many regulations were proposed and promoted by him."

In this august assembly, he was neither a dumb show, nor an automaton; nor the tool of party; but independent, intelligent, and energetic, delivered his opinions freely, spoke often, and always to the purpose.[1]

[Footnote 1: See Appendix IV.]

His first recorded speech was on the 6th of April, 1723, against the banishment of Dr. Francis Atterbury, the Bishop of Rochester, which he deemed injudicious and needlessly rigorous.[1]

[Footnote 1: History and Proceedings of the House of Commons, Lond. 1742, Vol. VI. p. 308.]

A few years after, his feelings of humanity were powerfully touched on finding a gentleman, whom he went to visit in the Fleet prison, loaded with irons, and otherwise cruelly used.[1] Shocked by the scenes he witnessed, he determined to expose such injustice; and, if possible, to prevent such abuse of power. With this view, he brought forward a motion in the House of Commons, "that an inquiry should be instituted into the state of the gaols in the metropolis." This met with such attention, that in February, 1728, the House of Commons assigned the subject to a Committee, of which he was chosen Chairman.[2] The investigation led to the discovery of many corrupt practices, and much oppressive treatment of the prisoners; and was followed by the enactment of measures for the correction of such shameful mismanagement and inhuman neglect in some cases, and for the prevention of severity of infliction in others.[3]

[Footnote 1: Sir William Rich, Baronet.]

[Footnote 2: Appendix IV.]

[Footnote 3: Appendix V.]

A writer, whose opinion was founded on the best means of knowledge, has declared that "the effects of this interposition have been felt ever since by the unhappy prisoners."[1]

[Footnote 1: Gentleman's Magazine for 1785, page 572.]

Oglethorpe thus became the precursor of HOWARD, the philanthropist, in the cause of humanity, as it regards the amelioration of prison discipline in general, especially the rigors of close confinement for debt or petty offences, and that among felons and convicts. The impression then made on his mind and heart, led him, afterwards, to other and more extensive and efficacious measures for the relief of poor debtors from the extortions and oppressions to which they were subjected by gaolers, and from the humiliation and distress in which they were often involved without any fault of their own, or by some conduct which deserved pity rather than punishment.

At the opening of the session of Parliament on the 12th of January, 1731, the King's speech was the subject of debate in the House of Commons. A motion was made for an address of thanks, in which they should declare their entire approbation of his Majesty's conduct, express their confidence in the wisdom of his counsels, and announce their readiness to grant the necessary supplies. There were some who opposed the motion. They did not argue against a general vote of thanks, but intimated the impropriety, and, indeed, ill tendency of expressions which implied an unquestioning approbation of the measures of the ministry. In referring to this, Smollet[1] says, "Mr. Oglethorpe, a gentleman of unblemished character, brave, generous, and humane, affirmed that many other things related more immediately to the honor and interest of the nation, than did the guarantee of the Pragmatic sanction. He said that he wished to have heard that the new works at Dunkirk had been entirely razed and destroyed; that the nation had received full and complete satisfaction for the depradation committed by the natives of Spain; that more care was taken in the disciplining of the militia, on whose valor the nation must chiefly depend in case of an invasion; and that some regard had been shown to the oppressed Protestants in Germany. He expressed his satisfaction, however, to find that the English were not so closely united to France as formerly, for he had generally observed that when two dogs were in a leash together, the stronger generally ran away with the weaker; and this, he feared, had been the case between France and Great Britain."

[Footnote 1: History of England, Book II. chap. iv. Section xxx.]

The motion, however, was carried, and the address presented.

Possessing a vein of wit, Oglethorpe was apt to introduce piquant illustrations and comparisons into his narratives, and sometimes with the view of their giving force to his statements; but, though they might serve to enliven conversation, they were not dignified enough for a speech in so august an assembly as that he was now addressing. They are, however, atoned for, on this occasion, by the grave tenor of his preceding remarks, which were the dictates of good sense, the suggestions of sound policy, and, especially, by the reference to the distressed situation of the persecuted German Protestants which was evincive of a compassionate consideration, truly honorable to him as a man and a Christian. And we shall find, that, in behalf of these, he afterwards exerted a personal and availing influence.

In 1732 he made a spirited and patriotic effort in Parliament to restore a constitutional militia; and to abolish arbitrary impressment for the sea-service; and, on this subject, he published a pamphlet entitled "The Sailor's Advocate," for which Mr. Sharpe obliged him with a sarcastic preface.

In the debate on the bill for encouraging the trade of the British sugar colonies, Oglethorpe took an active part, and manifested those liberal and patriotic views, and that regard for the colonial settlements in North America, which, afterwards, became with him a decided principle.

"In all cases," said he, "that come before this House, where there seems a clashing of interests, we ought to have no exclusive regard to the particular interest of any one country or set of people, but to the good of the whole. Our colonies are a part of our dominions. The people in them are our own people; and we ought to show an equal respect to all. If it should appear that our Plantations upon the continent of America are against that which is desired by the sugar colonies, we are to presume that the granting thereof will be a prejudice to the trade or particular interests of our continental settlements. And, surely, the danger of hurting so considerable a part of our dominions—a part which reaches from the 34th to the 46th degree of north latitude—will, at least, incline us to be extremely cautious in what we are going about. If, therefore, it shall appear that the relieving our sugar colonies will do more harm to the other parts of our dominions, than it can do good to them, we must refuse it, and think of some other method of putting them upon an equal footing with their rivals in any part of trade.

"Our sugar colonies are of great consequence to us; but our other colonies in that part of the world ought also to be considered. From them we have, likewise, yearly, large quantities of goods. We ought not to raise one colony upon the destruction of another. Much less ought we to grant a favor to any particular set of people which may prove to be against the public good of the nation in general."

To these, and other matters of general moment, Oglethorpe devoted his time, his talents, and his influence while in Parliament. He earnestly supported the cause of silk manufacture, which had then begun to spread in England by means of the improvement introduced by Sir Thomas Lombe, in the invention of his large engines, which are described as being of "a most curious and intricate structure,"[1] but which in our own day, when mechanical ingenuity has reached a high degree of excellence, and machinery seems itself almost an intelligent principle, would, probably, be regarded as merely "curious and intricate," without possessing any practical value.[2]

[Footnote 1: The 6th of the excellent Essays by the Rev. Jared Eliot, on Field Husbandry, & c., 1761, is devoted principally to recommendations of the culture of mulberry trees for the raising of silk-worms. In page 161, is a reference to Sir Thomas Lombe, "that eminent throwster, who erected the great engine in Derbyshire; a wonderful structure, consisting of twenty-nine thousand five hundred and eighty-six wheels, all set a going and continued in motion by one single water-wheel, for working silk with expedition and success." See also Appendix VII.]

[Footnote 2: Manuscript lecture of J. Willard, Esq.]

A Corporation was formed in London, in 1707, with the professed intention of lending money to the poor on small pledges, and to persons of better rank, upon an answerable security, for setting them up, or assisting them in business. Its capital was then limited to £30,000, but in 1730 increased to £600,000, and a charter granted to the Corporation, by act of Parliament. But in October 1731, two of the chief officers, George Robinson, Esq., member for Marlow, the Cashier, and John Thompson, the Warehouse keeper, disappeared on the same day. This gave the Proprietors great alarm; and an inspection of affairs led to the discovery that for a capital of about £500,000, no equivalent was found to the value of £30,000; the remainder having been disposed of by ways and means of which no one could give an account. In consequence of this defalcation, a petition of the Proprietors was presented to the Parliament alleging that some who had been guilty of these frauds had transported themselves to parts beyond the seas, and carried with them some of the books and effects of the Corporation; and that there was great reason to believe that such an immense sum of money could not have been embezzled without the connivance and participation of others who remained in the kingdom; but that the petitioners were unable to come at the knowledge of their combinations or to bring them to justice, unless aided by the power and authority of that House; and therefore prayed that it might be afforded.

On the reading of the petition, Mr. Oglethorpe rose and spoke as follows:

"Sir, I am persuaded that this petition will be received in a manner befitting the unhappy case of the sufferers and the justice of this House. I can hardly suspect that any gentleman that has the honor of being a member of this House will hesitate in giving all the relief which we can to the number of unfortunate persons, who have been so much injured. Yet, because I have heard it whispered out of doors, that we ought not to receive this petition upon account, as is pretended, that the common seal is not affixed to it, I deem it necessary to take some notice of that objection, in case it should be started here. Sir, I must say that if there be any irregularity as to the affixing the seal of the Company to this petition, it is, in my opinion, so far from being an objection to our receiving the petition, that it is a very strong reason for it. If there be any fault in form, it is the fault of those who had the keeping of the common seal; and, as they may, perhaps, be of those against whom the complaints are made, and who may, upon inquiry, be found more or less amenable for the wrong, we are, therefore, to suspect that the withholding the seal may be with a view of preventing the truth's being brought to light; at any rate, we ought to discountenance and defeat such indirect practices with regard to the use of a common seal.

"For my own part, sir, I have been always for encouraging the design upon which this corporation was at first established; and looked upon it as a provident act of charity to let necessitous persons have the opportunity of borrowing money upon easier terms than they could have it elsewhere. Money, like other things, is but a commodity, and in the way of dealing, the use of it is looked upon to be worth as much as people can get for it. If this corporation let persons in limited circumstances have the use of money at a cheaper rate than individuals, brokers, or money lenders, would be willing to do, it was certainly a beneficent act. If they had demanded more than was elsewhere given, they would not have had applicants, and the design would not have proved good and useful; but the utility of it was most evident; and the better the design, and the more excellent the benefit, the more those persons deserve to be punished, who by their frauds have curtailed, if not now wholly cut off, these sources of furnishing assistance to the industrious and enterprising, and disappointed the public of reaping the benefit which might have accrued by an honest and faithful execution of so good an undertaking."[1]

[Footnote 1: History and Proceedings of the House of Commons, Vol.

VII. p. 154.]

Another subject in the parliamentary discussions of Oglethorpe which I shall mention, is his defence of the magistracy and town-guard of the city of Edinburgh against an arraignment in the House of Lords, for what was deemed the neglect of prompt and energetic measures for suppressing the riotous seizure and murder of Captain Porteous by an exasperated mob. The circumstances were these.

After the execution in the Grass-market, on the 14th of April, 1736, of one Andrew Wilson, a robber, the town-guard, which had been ordered out on the occasion, was insulted by rude and threatening speeches, and pelted with stones, by the mob. John Porteous, the captain, so resented the annoyance, that he commanded his men to fire over their heads, to intimidate them; and then, as their opposition became violent, he directed the guard to fire among them; whereby six persons were killed, and eleven severely wounded. For this he was prosecuted at the expense of the city, and condemned to die. But, a short reprieve having been obtained, the mob, determined to defeat it, assembled in the night preceding the seventh day of September, whereon he was to have been executed pursuant to the sentence, and, in a very riotous manner, seized and disarmed the city-guard, and possessed themselves of the town-gates, to prevent the admission of troops quartered in the suburbs. They then rushed to the Tolbooth prison; the doors of which not yielding to the force of their hammers, they consumed by fire, and then brought forth Porteous by violence, and hung him on a dyer's post, or frame, in the Grass-market, nigh the spot where the unfortunate people were killed.

The magistrates, attended with several of the burgesses, attempted to quell the riot and disperse the mob, but were pelted with stones, and threatened to be fired upon if they did not retire.

This insult of the sovereign authority was too flagrant to be overlooked. Proclamations, with rewards of two hundred pounds sterling, were issued for apprehending the rioters, and, when the Parliament met, vigorous measures were taken in the affair. The Lord Provost was ordered up to London in custody; the magistrates summoned to answer the indictment, and a bill was introduced into the House of Commons "to disable Alexander Wilson, Esq., the principal magistrate during the riots, from ever after holding any office of magistracy in Edinburgh or Great Britain; to subject him to imprisonment for a year; to abolish the town guard, and to take away the gates of the nether Bowport of the city." Oglethorpe objected to the first reading of the bill, and it encountered his vigorous opposition. He engaged in a warm defence of the magistrates, and of the guard, declaring that there was no dereliction of duty on the part of the magistrates and of the guard, but they were overpowered by numbers, and thrown into actual jeopardy by the desperation of the mob. Hence the penalties of the bill would be the punishment of misfortune, not of crime.

In consequence of the stand which he thus took, and the interest made by others in the House of Commons, the bill was altered in its most essential circumstances, and, instead of the rigorous inflictions, "mercy rejoiced against judgment," and the city was fined the sum of two thousand pounds, to be applied to the relief and support of the widow of Porteous.[1]

[Footnote 1: See Appendix VIII.]

A petition was made to Parliament "to extend the benefit of a late act for naturalizing foreigners in North America, to the Moravian Brethren and other foreign Protestants who made a scruple of taking an oath, or performing military service." General Oglethorpe, in the spring of 1737, presented the petition to the House of Commons, with an ample speech, and was supported by many members. The opinion of the Board of Trade was required on this head. The Proprietor of Pennsylvania promoted the affair among the members of Parliament, and especially with the Secretary of State, the Duke of Newcastle, by his good testimonies of the brethren in Pennsylvania. The matter of the bill was properly discussed, formed into an act, and, having passed, with the greatest satisfaction, through both houses, received in June, 1747, the Royal assent.[1]

[Footnote 1: Cranz's History of the United Brethren, translated by La

Trobe, Lond. 1780, p. 331.]

On the 20th of February, 1749, another petition in behalf of the Moravians was presented to the House of Commons; and was supported by a long and highly impressive speech by Oglethorpe concerning the origin of their church, their constitution, their pious and benevolent labors, and particularly, what he was most apprized of, their peaceable and useful settlements in America. On the 18th of April, the engrossed bill was read the third time in the House, was passed, nemine contradicente, and ordered to be carried to the House of Lords. On the 21st of April, the bill was carried by sixteen members of the House of Commons to the House of Lords; and, after a short address by Oglethorpe, their leader, to Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, was accepted with great solemnity, and laid on the table. After due consideration, the act was passed, and on the 6th of June the Royal assent was given to it.