Читать книгу The American Encyclopedia of History, Biography and Travel - Thomas H. Prescott - Страница 17

JAMES II—​EXPEDITION OF MONMOUTH.

Charles II, with all his faults, had conducted himself towards his subjects with so much personal cordiality, and had so well calculated his ground before making any aggressions upon popular liberty, that he might probably have pursued his arbitrary career for many years longer. But his brother James, though much more respectable as a man, more industrious, and more sincere, wanted entirely the easiness of carriage, pleasantry, and penetration, which were the grounds of the late king’s popularity and success. He was, moreover, an avowed Catholic, and inspired by an ardent desire of reforming the nation back into that faith. He began his reign by declaring before the privy-council his intention to govern solely by the laws, and to maintain the existing church; and such was the confidence in his sincerity, that he soon became very popular. Addresses poured in upon him from all quarters, professing the most abject devotion to his person. The Parliament called by him voted an ample revenue, and expressed the greatest servility towards him in all things. The doctrines of passive obedience, and the divine right of the sovereign, were now openly preached. The university of Oxford promulgated an elaborate declaration of passive obedience to rulers, which they declared to be ‘clear, absolute, and without any exception of any state or order of men.’

The remains of the Whig party still existed, though in exile, and there were some districts of the country where they were supposed to have considerable influence. The Duke of Monmouth and the Earl of Argyle (the latter of whom had been condemned to death in Scotland, for adding a qualification to the test-oath, but had escaped) met in Holland, and projected two separate invasions, for the purpose of expelling King James. The former soon after landed in the west of England with a small retinue, and quickly found himself at the head of 5000 persons, though irregularly armed. At several places he caused himself to be proclaimed king, which offended many of his principal adherents, as inconsistent with his previous engagements. Upon the whole, his conduct was not energetic enough for the management of such an enterprise. Being attacked by the king’s troops near Bridgewater, his infantry fought with some spirit, but being deserted by the cavalry, and by the duke himself, were obliged to give way. Monmouth was taken and executed. Many of his followers were hanged without form of trial by the royal troops, and others were afterwards put to death, with hardly any more formality, by the celebrated Chief-Justice Jefferies, whom the king sent down with a commission to try the offenders. The butchery of several hundred men of low condition, who were unable of themselves to do any harm to the government, was looked upon as a most unjustifiable piece of cruelty, even if it had been legally done; and the principal blame was popularly ascribed to the king.

The Earl of Argyle sailed in May with a corresponding expedition, and landed in that part of the West Highlands which owned his authority. Unfortunately for him, the government had received warning, and seized all the gentlemen of his clan upon whom he had chiefly depended. He nevertheless raised between 2000 and 3000 men, and made a timid advance to Glasgow, in the expectation of being joined by the persecuted Presbyterians of that part of the country. Being surrounded on the march by various parties of troops, he dispersed his army, and sought to escape in disguise, but was taken, brought to Edinburg, and executed. Thus terminated the last effort made by the Whig party to ameliorate the despotic sway of the Stuarts.

ARBITRARY MEASURES OF THE KING.

Encouraged by his success, James conceived that he might safely begin the process of changing the established religion of the country. On the plea of his supremacy over the church, he took the liberty of dispensing with the test-oath in favor of some Catholic officers, and thus broke an act which was looked upon, under existing circumstances, as the chief safeguard of the Protestant faith. His Parliament, servile as it was in temporal matters, took the alarm at this spiritual danger, and gave the king so effectual a resistance that he resorted to a dissolution. Transactions precisely similar took place in Scotland.

Heedless of these symptoms, he proclaimed a universal toleration, for the purpose of relieving the Catholics, and thus assumed the unconstitutional right of dispensing with acts of Parliament. The nation was thrown by this measure, and by the numerous promotions of Roman Catholics, into a state of great alarm; even the clergy, who had been so eager to preach an implicit obedience to the royal will, began to see that it might be productive of much danger. When James commanded that his proclamation of toleration should be read in every pulpit in the country, only two hundred of the clergy obeyed. Six of the bishops joined in a respectful petition against the order; but the king declared that document to be a seditious libel, and threw the petitioners into the Tower. In June 1688, they were tried in Westminster Hall, and to the infinite joy of the nation acquitted.

Blinded by religious zeal, the king proceeded on his fatal course. In defiance of the law, he held open intercourse with the Pope, for the restoration of Britain to the bosom of the Romish church. He called Catholic lords to the privy-council, and even placed some in the cabinet. Chapels, by his instigation, were everywhere built, and monks and priests went openly about his palace. A court of high commission—​a cruel instrument of power under Charles I—​was erected, and before this every clerical person who gave any offense to the king was summoned. He also excited great indignation, by violently thrusting a Catholic upon Magdalen College, at Oxford, as its head, and expelling the members for their resistance to his will. Public feelings was wound to the highest pitch of excitement by the queen being delivered (June 10, 1688) of a son, who might be expected to perpetuate the Catholic religion in the country, and whom many even went the length of suspecting to be a suppositious child, brought forward solely for that purpose.

The disaffection produced by these circumstances extended to every class of the king’s subjects, except the small body of Roman Catholics, many of whom could not help regarding the royal measures as imprudent. The Tories were enraged at the ruin threatened to the church of England, which they regarded as the grand support of conservative principles in the empire. The Whigs, who had already made many strenuous efforts to exclude or expel the king, were now more inflamed against him than ever. The clergy, a popular and influential body, were indignant at the injuries inflicted upon their church; and even the dissenters, though comprehended in the general toleration, saw too clearly through its motive, and were too well convinced of the illegality of its manner, and of the danger of its object, as affecting the Protestant faith, to be exempted from the general sentiment. But for the birth of the Prince of Wales, the people at large might have been contented to wait for the relief which was to be expected, after the death of the king, from the succession of the Princess of Orange, who was a Protestant, and united to the chief military defender of that interest in Europe. But this hope was now shut out, and it was necessary to resolve upon some decisive measures for the safety of the national religion.

THE REVOLUTION.

In this crisis, some of the principal nobility and gentry, with a few clergymen, united in a secret address to the Prince of Orange, calling upon him to come over with an armed force, and aid them in protecting their faith and liberties. This prince, who feared that England would soon be joined to France against the few remaining Protestant powers, and also that his prospects of the succession in that country, as nephew and son-in-law of the king, were endangered, listened readily to this call, and immediately collected a large fleet and army, comprising many individuals, natives of both Scotland and England, who had fled from the severe government of the Stuart princes. The preparations for the expedition were conducted with great secrecy, and James was partly blinded to them, by a rumor that their only object was to frighten him into a closer connection with France, in order to make him odious to his subjects. When he was at length assured by his minister in Holland that he might immediately expect a formidable invasion, he grew pale, and dropped the letter from his hands. He immediately ordered a fleet and large army to be collected, and, that he might regain the affections of his subjects, he called a parliament, and undid many of his late measures. The people justly suspected his concessions to be insincere, and were confirmed in their belief, when, on a rumor of the Prince of Orange being put back by a storm, he recalled the writs for assembling Parliament.

On the 19th of October, the Prince of Orange set sail with 50 ships of war, 25 frigates, 25 fire-ships, and 500 transports, containing 15,000 land troops. A storm occasioned some damage and delay; but he soon put to sea again, and proceeded with a fair wind along the British Channel, exhibiting from his own vessel a flag on which were inscribed the words, ‘The Protestant Religion and the Liberties of England,’ with the apposite motto of his family, ‘Je Maintiendrei—​‘I will maintain.’ As he passed between Dover and Calais, his armament was visible to crowds of spectators on both shores, whose feelings were much excited at once by its appearance and its well-known purpose. The English fleet being detained at Harwich by the same wind which was so favorable to the prince, he landed (November 5) without opposition at Torbay, and immediately proceeded to circulate a manifesto, declaring the grievances of the kingdom, and promising, with the support of the people, to redress them.

At the first there seemed some reason for fear that the prince would not meet with adequate support. On his march to Exeter, and for eight days after arriving there, he was not joined by any person of consequence. The nation, however, soon became alive to the necessity of giving him encouragement. The gentry of Devon and Somersetshires formed an association in his behalf. The Earls of Bedford and Abingdon, with other persons of distinction, repaired to his quarters at Exeter. Lord Delamere took arms in Cheshire; the city of York was siezed by the Earl of Danby; the Earl of Bath, governor of Plymouth, declared for the prince; and the Earl of Devonshire made a like declaration in Derby. Every day discovered some new instance of that general confederacy into which the nation had entered against the measures of the king. But the most dangerous symptom, and that which rendered his affairs desperate, was the spirit which he found to prevail in his army. On his advancing at its head to Salisbury, he learned that some of the principal officers had gone over to the Prince of Orange. Lord Churchill (afterwards famous as Duke of Marlborough), Lord Trelawney, and the king’s son-in-law, George, Prince of Denmark, successively followed this example. Even his daughter, the Princess Anne, deserted him. In great perplexity, he summoned a council of peers, by whose advice writs were issued for a new Parliament, and commissioners despatched to treat with the prince. A kind of infatuation now took possession of the king; and having sent the queen and infant prince privately to France, he quitted the capital at midnight, almost unattended, for the purpose of following them, leaving orders to recall the writs and disband the army. By this procedure, the peace of the country was imminently endangered; but it only served to hasten the complete triumph of the Prince of Orange, who had now advanced to Windsor. The supreme authority seemed on the point of falling into his hands, when, to his great disappointment, the king, having been discovered at Feversham, in Kent, was brought back to London, not without some marks of popular sympathy and affection. There was no alternative but to request the unfortunate monarch to retire to a country-house, where he might await the settlement of affairs. James, finding his palaces taken possession of by Dutch guards, and dreading assassination, took the opportunity to renew his attempt to leave the kingdom. He proceeded on board a vessel in the Medway, and after some obstructions, arrived safely in France, where Louis readily afforded him an asylum.

The same day that the king left Whitehall for the last time, his nephew and son-in-law arrived at St. James’. The public bodies immediately waited on him, to express their zeal for his cause; and such of the members of the late Parliaments as happened to be in town, having met by his invitation, requested him to issue writs for a convention, in order to settle the nation. He was in the same manner, and for the same purpose, requested to call a convention in Scotland. The English convention met on the 22d of January 1689, and during its debates the prince maintained a magnanimous silence and neutrality. The Tory party, though it had joined in calling him over, displayed some scruples respecting the alteration of the succession, and seemed at first inclined to settle the crown on the princess, while William should have only the office of regent; but when this was mentioned to the prince, he calmly replied, that in that event, he should immediately return to Holland. A bill was then passed, declaring that ‘James II, having endeavored to subvert the constitution, by breaking the original contract between the king and the people, and having withdrawn himself from the kingdom, has abdicated the government; and that the throne is thereby become vacant.’ To the bill was added a Declaration of Rights—​namely, an enumeration of the various laws by which the royal prerogative and the popular liberties had formerly been settled, but which had been violated and evaded by the Stuart sovereigns. William and Mary, having expressed their willingness to ratify this declaration, were proclaimed king and queen jointly—​the administration to rest in William; and the convention was then converted into a Parliament.

In Scotland, where the Presbyterians had resumed an ascendancy, the convention came to a less timid decision. It declared that James, by the abuse of his power, had forfeited all right to the crown—​a decision also affecting his posterity: and William and Mary were immediately after proclaimed. By a bill passed in the English Parliament, the succession was settled upon the survivor of the existing royal pair; next upon the Princess Anne and her children; and finally, upon the children of William by any other consort—​an arrangement in which no hereditary principle was overlooked, except that which would have given a preference to James and his infant son.

By the Revolution, as this great event was styled, it might be considered as finally decided that the monarchy was not a divine institution, superior to human challenge, as the late kings had represented it, but one dependent on the people, and established and maintained for their benefit.

RESISTANCE IN SCOTLAND AND IRELAND.

The new government was at first extremely popular in Scotland; but one portion of the people was much opposed to it. This consisted of the Highland clans—​a primitive race, unable to appreciate the rights which had been gained, prepossessed in favor of direct hereditary succession, and of such warlike habits, that though a minority, they were able to give no small trouble to the peaceful Lowlanders. When the Scottish convention was about to settle the crown on William and Mary, Viscount Dundee, formerly Graham of Claverhouse, and celebrated for his severity upon the recusant Presbyterians, raised an insurrection in the Highlands in favor of King James, while the Duke of Gordon, a Catholic, still held out Edinburgh Castle in the same interest. It was with no small difficulty that the new government could obtain the means of reducing these opponents. The castle, after a protracted siege, was given up in June (1689). General Macky was despatched by William, with a few troops, to join with such forces as he could obtain in Scotland, and endeavor to suppress the insurrection in the Highlands. He encountered Dundee at Killiecrankie (July 27), and, though his troops were greatly superior in number and discipline, experienced a complete defeat. Dundee, however, fell by a musket-shot in the moment of victory, and his army was unable to follow up its advantage. In a short time the Highland clans were induced to yield a nominal obedience to William and Mary.

In Ireland, a much more formidable resistance was offered to the revolution settlement. Since the accession of James, the Romish faith might be described as virtually predominent in that kingdom. The laws against Catholics had been suspended by the royal authority, all public offices were filled by them, and though the established clergy were not deprived of their benefices, very little tithe was paid to them. The viceregal office was held by the Earl of Tyrconnel, a violent and ambitious young man, disposed to second the king in all his imprudent measures, and resolved, in the event of their failing, to throw the country into the hands of the French. The people at large being chiefly Catholics, were warmly attached to the late sovereign, whose cause they regarded as their own.

Early in the spring of 1689, James proceeded from France to Ireland, where he was soon at the head of a large though ill-disciplined army. He immediately ratified an act of the Irish Parliament for annulling that settlement of the Protestants upon the lands of Catholics, which had taken place in the time of Cromwell, and another for attainting 2000 persons of the Protestant faith. The Protestants, finding themselves thus dispossessed of what they considered their property, and exposed to the vengeance of a majority over whom they had long ruled, fled to Londonderry, Inniskillen, and other fortified towns, where they made a desperate resistance, in the hope of being speedily succoured by King William. That sovereign now led over a large army to Ireland, and (July 1) attacked the native forces under his father-in-law at the fords of the river Boyne, near the village of Dunore, where he gained a complete victory.

James was needlessly dispirited by this disaster, and lost no time in sailing again to France. In reality, the Irish made a better appearance, and fought more vigorously, after the battle of the Boyne than before it. The Duke of Berwick, a natural son of James, and the Earl of Tyrconnel, still kept the field with a large body of cavalry, and the infantry were in the meantime effectually protected in the town of Limerick. William invested this town, and in one assault upon it lost 2000 men, which so disheartened him, that he went back to England, leaving his officers to prosecute the war. The Irish army afterwards fought a regular battle at Aghrim, when partly owing to the loss of their brave leader, St. Ruth, they were totally routed. The remains of the Catholic forces took refuge in Limerick, where they finally submitted in terms of a treaty which seemed to secure the Catholic population in all desirable rights and privileges.

REIGN OF WILLIAM III.

Though all military opposition was thus overcome, William soon found difficulties of another kind in the management of the state. The Tories, though glad to save the established church by calling in his interference, had submitted with no good grace to the necessity of making him king; and no sooner was the danger past, than their usual principles of hereditary right were in a great measure revived. From the name of the exiled monarch, they now began to be known by the appellation of Jacobites. James’ hopes of a restoration were thus for a long time kept alive, and the peace of William’s mind was so much embittered, as to make his sovereignty appear a dear purchase. Perhaps the only circumstances which reconciled the king to his situation, was the great additional force he could now bring against the ambitious designs of Louis XIV. Almost from his accession he entered heartily into the combination of European powers for checking this warlike prince, and conducted military operations against him every summer in person. The necessity of having supplies for that purpose rendered him unfit, even if he had been willing, to resist any liberal measures proposed to him in Parliament, and hence his passing of the famous Triennial Act in 1694, by which it was appointed that a new Parliament should be called every third year. In this year died Queen Mary, without offspring; after which William reigned as sole monarch.

The peace of Ryswick, concluded in 1697, by which the French power was confined to the limits, permitted William to spend the concluding years of his reign in peace. In 1700, in consideration that he and his sister-in-law Anne had no children, the famous Act of Succession was passed, by which the crown, failing these two individuals, was settled upon the next Protestant heir, Sophia, Duchess of Hanover, daughter of Elizabeth, the eldest daughter of James I.

The reign of King William is remarkable for the first legal support of a standing army, and for the commencement of the national debt. It is also distinguished by the first establishment of regular banks for the deposit of money, and the issue of a paper currency. Formerly, the business of banking, as far as necessary, was transacted by goldsmiths, or through the medium of the public Exchequer, by which plans the public was not sufficiently insured against loss. In 1695, the first public establishment for the purpose, the Bank of England, was established by one William Paterson, a scheming Scotsman; and next year the Bank of Scotland was set on foot by one Holland, an English merchant. The capital in the former case being only £1,200,000, and in the latter, the tenth part of that sum.

In the reign of King William flourished Sir William Temple, an eminent political and philosophical writer, to whom is usually assigned the honor of first composing the English language in the fluent and measured manner which afterwards became general. The most profound philosophical writer of the age was John Locke, author of an Essay on the Human Understanding, an Essay on Toleration, and other works. Bishop Tillotson stands high as a writer of elegant sermons. The greatest name in polite literature is that of John Dryden, remarkable for his energetic style of poetry, and his translations of Virgil and Juvenal.

QUEEN ANNE—​MARLBOROUGH’S CAMPAIGNS.

William was succeeded by his sister-in-law, Anne, second daughter of the late James II; a princess now thirty-eight years of age, and chiefly remarkable for her zealous attachment to the church of England. The movement against the king of France had not been confined to Great Britain; it was a combination of that power with the emperor of Germany and the states of Holland. Queen Anne found it necessary to maintain her place in the Grand Alliance, as it was termed; and the Duke of Marlborough was sent over to the continent with a large army to prosecute the war in conjunction with the allies. Now commenced that career of military glory which has rendered the reign of Anne and the name of Marlborough so famous. In Germany and Flanders, under this commander, the British army gained some signal successes, particularly those of Blenheim and Ramillies; in Spain, a smaller army, under the chivalrously brave Earl of Peterborough, performed other services of an important kind. The war, however, was one in which Britain had no real interest—​for it has been seen that Spain has continued under a branch of the House of Bourbon without greatly endangering other states.

A party, consisting chiefly of Tories, endeavored, in 1706, to put an end to the war; and France was so much reduced in strength, as to concede all the objects for which the contest had been commenced. But the people were so strongly inspired with a desire of humiliating France, which in commerce and religion they considered their natural enemy, that some ambitious statesmen of a contrary line of politics were enabled to mar the design of a treaty. Among these was the Duke of Marlborough, who, being permitted to profit not only by his pay, but by perquisites attached to his command, wished the war to be protracted, merely that he might make his enormous wealth a little greater. It was in consequence of these unnecessary interferences with continental politics, urged chiefly by the people, and by a class of statesmen popular at the time, that the first large sums of the national debt were contracted.

UNION OF ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND.

Since their religious enthusiasm had been laid at rest by the Revolution Settlement, the Scottish people had been chiefly animated by a desire of participating in the commerce of England. The treatment of their expedition to Darien had now inspired them with a bitter feeling against their southern neighbors, and they resolved to show their power of counter-annoyance by holding up threats of dissenting from England in the matter of the succession. In 1703, their Parliament passed the famous Act of Security, by which it was ordained that the successor of her majesty in Scotland should not be the same with the individual adopted by the English Parliament, unless there should be a free communication of trade between the countries, and the affairs of Scotland thoroughly secured from English influence. Another act was at the same time passed for putting the nation under arms. The English ministers then saw that an incorporating union would be necessary to prevent the Pretender from gaining the Scottish crown, and to protect England from the attacks of a hostile nation. For this purpose they exerted themselves so effectually in the Scottish Parliament, as to obtain an act, enabling the queen to nominate commissioners for the arrangement of a union. The men appointed, thirty on each side, were, with hardly an exception, the friends of the court and of the Revolution Settlement; and the treaty accordingly was drawn up without difficulty.

In October 1706, this document was submitted to the Scottish Parliament, and was found to contain the following principal points:—​That the two nations were to be indissolubly united under one government and legislature, each, however, retaining its own civil and criminal law; the crown to be in the House of Hanover; the Scottish Presbyterian church to be guaranteed; forty-five members to be sent by the Scottish counties and burghs to the House of Commons, and sixteen elective peers to be sent to the Upper House by the nobles; the taxes to be equalized, but, in consideration of the elevation of the Scotch imposts to the level of the English (for the latter people already owed sixteen millions), an equivalent was to be given to Scotland, amounting to nearly four hundred thousand pounds, which was to aid in renewing the coin, and other objects. These terms were regarded in Scotland as miserably inadequate; and the very idea of the loss of an independent legislature and a place among governments, raised their utmost indignation. Nevertheless, by dint of bribery, the union was carried through Parliament; and from the 1st of May 1707, the two countries formed one state, under the title of the Kingdom of Great Britain.

PEACE OF UTRECHT—​DEATH OF QUEEN ANNE.

The members of the cabinet applied themselves, though very secretly, to the business of bringing about a peace. When their plans were matured, the consent of the House of Commons was easily gained; but the Lords having shown some reluctance, it was found necessary to create twelve new peers, in order to overpower the sense of that part of the legislature. After a tedious course of negotiation, Britain and Holland concluded a peace at Utrecht (1713), leaving the emperor of Germany still at war. By this arrangement, Philip V was permitted to retain Spain and the Indies, but no other part of the dominions which his ambitious grandfather had endeavored to secure for him; and it was provided that he and his descendants should never inherit the kingdom of France, nor any future king of France accede to the crown of Spain. Britain obtained nothing tangible by all her exertions, except the possession of Gibraltar and Minorca, and the privilege of being exclusively employed to carry slaves to the Spanish American colonies. It has justly been considered a stain upon the nation, that it should have concluded a separate peace under such clandestine circumstances, as the interests of the other belligerent parties were thereby greatly injured. For the gratification of their High Church supporters, the ministers obtained an act for preventing dissenters from keeping schools, and another for establishing church patronage in Scotland, the former of which was repealed in the following reign.

It is believed that Queen Anne and her Tory ministers were in secret willing to promote the restoration of the main line of the Stuart family, and Harley and St. John are now known to have intrigued for that purpose. But before any plan could be formed, the queen took suddenly ill and died (August 1, 1714), when the ministers had no alternative but to proceed according to the Act of Settlement. The Electress Sophia being recently dead, her son, the elector, was proclaimed under the title of George I.

The reign of Queen Anne is not more distinguished by the wonderful series of victories gained by Marlborough, than by the brilliant list of literary men who now flourished, and who have caused this to be styled the Augustan age of English literature, as resembling that of the Roman Emperor Augustus. Alexander Pope stands unrivaled in polished verse on moral subjects. Jonathan Swift is a miscellaneous writer of singular vigor and an extraordinary kind of humor. Joseph Addison wrote on familiar life and on moral and critical subjects with a degree of elegance before unknown. Sir Richard Steele was a lively writer of miscellaneous essays. This last author, with assistance from Addison and others, set on foot the ‘Tatler,’ ‘Spectator,’ and ‘Guardian,’ the earliest examples of small periodical papers in England, and which continue to this day to be regarded as standard works. Cibber, Congreve, Vanburgh, and Farquhar, were distinguished writers of comedy; and Prior, Philips, and Rowe, were pleasing poets. In graver literature, this age is not less eminent. Dr. Berkeley shines as a metaphysician; Drs. Sherlock, Atterbury, and Clark as divines; and Bentley as a critic of the Roman classics.

ACCESSION OF THE HOUSE OF HANOVER—​REBELLION OF 1715–16.

The new sovereign lost no time in coming over to Britain, and fixing himself in that heritage which his family has ever since retained. He was fifty-four years of age, of a good, though not brilliant understanding, and very firm in his principles. Knowing well that the whigs were his only true friends, he at once called them into the administration. It was the custom of that period for every party, on getting into power, to try to annihilate their opponents. Not only were the whole Tory party insulted by the king, but a committee of the House of Commons was appointed to prepare articles of impeachment against Oxford, Bolingbroke, the Duke of Ormond, and the earl of Strafford. Bolingbroke, perceiving his life to be in danger, fled to the continent; and his attainder was in consequence moved and carried by his rival Walpole. Ormond suffered a similar fate. Oxford, after a protracted trial, was only saved in consequence of a differance between the Lords and Commons.

During the first year of King George, the Tories kept up very threatening popular disturbances in favor of High Church principles; but the Whigs, gaining a majority in the new House of Commons, were able to check this a little by the celebrated enactment called the Riot Act, which permits military force to be used in dispersing a crowd, after a certain space of time has been allowed. Disappointed in their hopes of office and power, and stung by the treatment of their leaders, the Tories resolved to attempt bringing in the Pretender by force of arms. With an eager hopefulness, which for a long time was characteristic of the party, they believed that all England and Scotland were ready to take up arms for the Pretender, when in reality there was but a limited portion of the people so inclined, and that portion unwilling to move if they saw the least risk or danger. Blind to these circumstances, and without design or concert, they commenced the unfortunate civil war of 1715.

The Earl of Mar, who had been a secretary of state in the late administration, raised his standard in Braemar (September 6), without any commission from the Pretender, and was soon joined by Highland clans to the amount of 10,000 men, who rendered him master of all Scotland north of the Forth. There, however, he weakly permitted himself to be cooped up by the Duke of Argyle, who with a far less numerous force, had posted himself at Stirling. Mar expected to be supported by an invasion of England by the Duke of Ormond, and a rising of the people of that country. But the Duke completely failed in his design, and no rising took place, except in Northumberland. There Mr. Foster, one of the members of Parliament for the county, and the Earl of Derwentwater, with some other nobleman, appeared in arms, but unsupported by any considerable portion of the people. Mar detached a party of 1800 foot, under Mackintosh of Borlum, to join the Northumbrian insurgents, who complained that they had no infantry. The junction was managed with great address; and at the same time some noblemen and gentlemen of the south of Scotland attached themselves to the southern army. The government was ill provided with troops but it nevertheless sent such a force against Mr. Foster, as obliged him to retire with his men into the town of Preston, in Lancashire, where, after an obstinate defense, the whole party (November 13) surrendered themselves prisoners at the king’s mercy. On the same day, the Earl of Mar met the Duke of Argyle at Sheriffmuir, near Dumblane, where a battle was fought, in which, after the manner of the battles in the civil war, the right wing of each army was successful, but neither altogether victorious. The Duke withdrew in the face of his enemy to Stirling, and the earl retired to Perth, resolved to wait for the news of an invasion from France, and for the arrival of the Pretender, whom he had invited to Scotland.

Mar did not for some time become aware how little reason he had to expect support from France. Louis XIV, upon whom the hopes of the party greatly rested, had died in September, leaving the government to the Regent Orleans, who had strong personal reasons for wishing to cultivate the good-will of the British monarch, and of course declined to assist in the present enterprise. The Pretender, nevertheless, sailed for Scotland, and on the 22d of December, arrived incognito at Peterhead, bringing nothing but his person to aid his adherents. Mar, who had already attempted to negotiate a submission to the government, brought him forward to Perth, where he was amused for some time with preparations for his coronation. But before he had been many days there, the Duke of Argyle found himself in a condition to advance against the insurgent force; and on the 30th of January 1716, this unfortunate prince commenced a retreat to the north, along with his dispirited army. On the 4th of February, he and the Earl of Mar provided for their own safety by going on board a vessel at Montrose, and setting sail for France: the army dispersed itself into the Highlands. For this unhappy appearance in arms, the Earl of Derwentwater, Viscount Kenmure, and about twenty inferior persons, were executed; forty Scottish families of the first rank lost their estates, and many excellent members of society became exiles for the remainder of their lives.

The suppression of this insurrection, and the ruin of so many Tory leaders, tended to increase the power of the Whig party, and the stability of the Hanoverian dynasty. The government, nevertheless, acted under considerable difficulties, as they were opposed by the majority of the clergy and country gentry, as well as by the whole of the mob feeling, except in the large commercial towns. To avoid the hazard of too often appealing to the people, they carried, in 1716, a bill for repealing King William’s Triennial Act, and protracting the present and all future Parliaments to a duration of seven years. The chief popular support of the government was in the dissenters, and in the middle classes of the community.

From the peace of Utrecht, Britain remained free from foreign war for nearly thirty years, excepting that, in 1719, the ministry was called on to interfere for the repression of an attempt on the part of Spain to regain her Italian territories.

GEORGE II—​WAR WITH SPAIN.

George I, at his death in 1727, was succeeded by his son, George II, a prince of moderate abilities, but conscientious, and free from all gross faults. In the early part of his reign, Walpole effected some useful measures, and upon the whole was a vigorous and enlightened administrator of public affairs, though nothing can justify the extensive system of bribery by which alone he pretended to manage the House of Commons. After a peace of extraordinary duration, he was urged, much against his will, into a contest with Spain, on account of some efforts made by that country to check an illicit trade carried on by British merchants in its American colonies.

REBELLION OF 1745–46.

The Pretender had married, in 1719, the Princess Clementina Sobieski of Poland, and was now the father of two sons in the bloom of youth, the the elder of whom has been distinguished in history by the title of Prince Charles Stuart. The misfortunes of the British arms on the continent, and the dissensions which prevailed among the people and the Parliament, encouraged this prince to make an attempt to recover the throne of his ancestors. In 1744, he had been furnished by France with a large fleet and ample stores to invade the British dominions, but had been driven back by a storm, and prevented from again setting sail by a superior fleet under Sir John Norris. Though the French monarch would not grant him any further supply, Charles resolved to make the proposed attempt, trusting solely to the generosity and valor of his friends in Britain. He therefore landed from a single vessel, with only seven attendants, on the coast of Inverness-shire, where the clans most attached to his family chiefly resided. By merely working upon the ardent feelings of the Highland chiefs, he soon induced several of them to take up arms, among whom were Locheil, Clanranald, Glengarry, and Keppoch.

On the 19th of August 1745 he raised his standard at Glenfinnan, within a few miles of the government station of Fort William, and found himself surrounded by about 1500 men. The government was at first inclined to disbelieve the intelligence of these proceedings, but was soon obliged to take steps for its own defense. A reward of thirty thousand pounds was offered for the head of the young prince, who with all his family, was under attainder by act of Parliament; and Sir John Cope, commander of the forces in Scotland, was ordered to advance with what troops he had into the Highlands, and suppress the insurrection. Cope proceeded on this mission with about 1400 infantry; but on finding the Highlanders in possession of a strong post near Fort Augustus, he thought it necessary to go aside to Inverness. Charles, taking advantage of this ill-advised movement, immediately poured his motley followers down into the Lowlands, gaining accessions everywhere as he advanced; and there being no adequate force to oppose him, he took possession successively of Perth and Edinburgh.

Cope now transported his troops back to Lothian by sea, and on the 21st September, a rencontre took place between him and Charles at Prestonpans. Seized with a panic, the royal troops fled disgracefully from the field, leaving the prince a complete victory. With the lustre thus acquired by his arms, he might have now, with four or five thousand men, made a formidable inroad into England. Before he could collect such a force, six weeks passed away, and when at length (November 1) he entered England, a large body of troops had been collected to oppose him. After a bold advance to Derby, he was obliged by his friends to turn back. At Stirling he was joined by considerable reinforcements, and on the 17th of January 1746, a battle took place at Falkirk between him and General Hawley, each numbering about 8000 troops. Here Charles was again successful; but he was unable to make any use of his victory, and soon after found it necessary to withdraw his forces to the neighborhood of Inverness, where he spent the remainder of the winter. The Duke of Cumberland now put himself at the head of the royal troops, which had been augmented by 6000 auxiliaries under the Prince of Hesse. During the months of February and March, the Highland army was cooped up within its own territory by the Hessians at Perth, and the royal troops at Aberdeen. At length, April 16, Prince Charles met the English army in an open moor at Culloden, near Inverness, and experienced a total overthrow. He had himself the greatest difficulty in escaping from the country, and the Highlands were subjected for several months to the horrors of military violence in all its worst forms.

GEORGE III—​BUTE ADMINISTRATION—​PEACE OF 1763.

Soon after his accession, George III espoused the Princess Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, by whom he had a large family. One of his earliest political measures was to confer one of the state-secretaryships upon the Earl of Bute, a Scottish nobleman of Tory or Jacobite predilections, who had been his preceptor, and possessed a great influence over his mind. This, with other alterations, infused a peaceful disposition into his majesty’s counsels, which was not much relished by Mr. Pitt. That minister, having secretly discovered that Spain was about to join France against Britain, and being thwarted in the line of policy, which he consequently thought it necessary to assume, retired with a pension, and a peerage to his wife; after which the ministry was rendered still less of a warlike temper. A negotiation for peace was entered into with France, which offered, for that end, to give up almost all her colonial possessions. The demands of the British were, however, rather more exorbitant than France expected, and not only was the treaty broken off, but Spain commenced those hostilities which Mr. Pitt had foretold. Nevertheless, Britain continued that splendid career of conquest, which, except at the beginning, had been her fortune during the whole of this war. In a very few months Spain lost Havana, Manilla, and all the Philippine Isles. The Spanish forces were also driven out of Portugal, which they had unjustly invaded. At sea the British fleets reigned everywhere triumphant, and at no former period was the country in so proud a situation. The ministry, however, were sensible that war, even with all this good fortune, was a losing game; and they therefore, much against the will of the nation, concluded a peace in February 1763.

By this treaty Great Britain gave up a certain portion of her conquests, in exchange for others which had been wrested from her; but she was nevertheless a gainer to an immense amount. She acquired from the French, Canada, that part of Louisiana east of the Mississippi, Cape Breton, Senegal, the islands of Grenada, Dominica, St. Vincent’s, and Tobago, with all the acquisitions which the French had made upon the Coromandel coast in the East Indias since 1749. From Spain she acquired Minorca, East and West Florida, with certain privileges of value. The continental states in alliance with Great Britain were also left as they had been. These advantages on the part of Great Britain had been purchased at the expense of an addition of sixty millions to the national debt, which now amounted in all to £133,959,270.

Since the accession of the Brunswick family in 1714, the government had been chiefly conducted by the Whig party, who formed a very powerful section of the aristocracy of England. Walpole, Pelham, Newcastle, and Pitt, had all ruled chiefly through the strength of this great body, who, till the period subsequent to the rebellion of 1745, seem to have had the support of the most influential portion of the people. After that period, when the Stuart claims ceased to have any effect in keeping the crown in check, a division appears to have grown up between the government and the people, which was manifested in various forms even before the demise of George II, but broke out in a very violent manner during the early years of his successor’s reign. George III, who had imbibed high notions of the royal prerogative from the Earl of Bute, showed, from the beginning of his career, an anxious desire to extend the power of the crown, to shake off the influence of the great Whig families, and keep popular force of all kinds within strict limits.

A stranger, with no connection in the country, a favorite, and, moreover, a man of unprepossessing manners, the Earl of Bute had neither the support of the aristocracy nor of the people. He was assailed in Parliament, and through the newspapers, with the most violent abuse—​the unpopular peace furnishing a powerful topic against him. To this storm he at length yielded, by retiring (April 8, 1763).

AMERICAN STAMP ACT.

The administration of Mr. Grenville is memorable for the first attempt to tax the American colonies. An act passed under his influence (March 1765) for imposing stamps on those countries, appeared to the colonists as a step extremely dangerous to their liberties, considering that they had no share in the representation. They therefore combined almost universally to resist the introduction of the stamped paper by which the tax was to be raised. Resolutions were passed in the various assemblies of the States, protesting against the assumed right of the British legislature to tax them. Partly by popular violence, and partly by the declarations issued by the local legislative assemblies, the object of the act was completely defeated.

The home government were then induced to agree to the repeal of the act, but with the reservation of a right to impose taxes on the colonies. Between the Stamp Act and its repeal, a change had taken place in the administration: the latter measure was the act of a Whig ministry under the Marquis of Rockingham, which, however, did not long continue in power, being supplanted by one in which Mr. Pitt, now created Earl of Chatham, held a conspicuous place. The second Pitt administration was less popular than the first: the Earl of Chesterfield, reflecting on the title conferred on the minister, at the same time that he sunk in general esteem, called his rise a fall up stairs. All the ministries of this period labored under a popular suspicion, probably not well founded, that they only obeyed the will of the sovereign, while the obnoxious Earl of Bute, as a secret adviser behind the throne, was the real, though irresponsible minister.

At the suggestion of Mr. Charles Townshend, a member of the Earl of Chatham’s cabinet, it was resolved, in 1767, to impose taxes on the Americans in a new shape; namely, upon British goods imported into the colonies, for which there was some show of precedent. An act for imposing duties on tea, glass, and colors, was accordingly passed with little opposition. Soon after this, Mr. Townshend died, and the Earl of Chatham, who had been prevented by illness from taking any share in the business, resigned. The Americans met the new burdens with the same violent opposition as formerly.

In 1770, the Duke of Grafton retired from the cabinet, and his place was supplied by Lord North, son of the Earl of Guilford. The new ministry was the tenth which had existed during as many years, but the first in which the king might be considered as completely free of the great Whig families, who, by their parliamentary influence, had possessed the chief power since the Revolution. This was the beginning of a series of Tory administrations, which, with few and short intervals, conducted the affairs of the nation down to the close of the reign of George IV.

THE AMERICAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE.

Meanwhile the remonstrances of the American colonists had induced the ministry to give up all the new taxes, with the exception of that on tea, which it was determined to keep up, as an assertion of the right of Parliament to tax the colonies. In America, this remaining tax continued to excite as much discontent as the whole had formerly done, for it was the principle of a right to impose taxes which they found fault with, and not the amount of the tax itself. Their discontent with the mother country was found to affect trade considerably, and the British merchants were anxious to bring the dispute to a close. The government was then induced to grant such a drawback from the British duty on tea, as enabled the East India Company to offer the article in America at a lower rate than formerly, so that the American duty, which was only three pence per pound, did not affect the price. It was never doubted that this expedient would satisfy the colonists, and large shipments of tea were accordingly sent out from the British ports. The principle of the right to tax still lurked, however under the concession, and the result only showed how little the sentiments of the Americans were understood at home.

The approach of the tea cargoes excited them in a manner totally unlooked-for in Britain. At New York and Philadelphia, the cargoes were forbidden to land; in Charleston, where they were permitted to land, they were put into stores, and were prohibited from being sold. In Boston harbor, a ship-load was seized and tossed into the sea. This last act was resented by the passing of a bill in Parliament for interdicting all commercial intercourse with the port of Boston, and another for taking away the legislative assembly of the state of Massachusetts. The former measure was easily obviated by local arrangements; and in reference to the latter, a Congress of representatives from the various States met at Philadelphia, in September 1774, when it was asserted that the exclusive power of legislation, in all cases of taxation and internal policy, resided in the provincial legislatures. The same assembly denounced other grievances, which have not here been particularly adverted to, especially an act of the British legislature for trying Americans, for treasonable practices, in England. The Congress also framed a covenant of non-intercourse, by which the whole utility of the colonies to the mother country, as objects of trading speculation, was at once laid prostrate. The colonists still avowed a desire to be reconciled, on the condition of a repeal of the obnoxious statutes. But the government had now resolved to attempt the reduction of the colonists by force of arms. Henceforth, every proposal from America was treated with a haughty silence on the part of the British monarch and his advisers.

The war opened in the summer of 1775, by skirmishes between the British troops and armed provincials, for the possession of certain magazines. At the beginning there seemed no hope of the contest being protracted beyond one campaign. The population of the colonies was at this time under three millions, and they were greatly inferior in discipline and appointments to the British troops. They possessed, however, an indomitable zeal in the cause they had agreed to defend, and fought with the advantage of being in the country of their friends. At Bunker’s Hill, near Boston (June 17, 1775), they had the superiority in a well-contested fight with the British troops, of whom between two and three hundred were killed. At the end of one year, the British government was surprised to find that no progress had been made towards a reduction of the Americans, and sent out an offer of pardon to the colonists, on condition that they would lay down their arms. This proposal only met with ridicule.

On the 4th of July 1776, the American Congress took the decisive step of a declaration of their independence, embodying their sentiment in a document remarkable for its pathos and solemnity. During the next two campaigns, the slender forces of the new republic were hardly able anywhere to face the large and well-appointed armies of Great Britain. Much misery was endured by this hardy people in resisting the British arms. Notwithstanding every disadvantage and many defeats, America remained unsubdued.

The first serious alarm for the success of the contest in America, was communicated in December 1777, by intelligence of the surrender of an army under General Burgoyne at Saratoga. In the House of Commons, the ministers acknowledged this defeat with marks of deep dejection, but still professed to entertain sanguine hopes from the vigor with which the large towns throughout Britain were now raising men at their own expense for the service of the government. Mr. Fox, the leader of the Opposition, made a motion for the discontinuance of the war, which was lost by 165 to 259, a much narrower majority than any which the ministry had before reckoned in the Lower House.

In proportion to the dejection of the government, was the elation of the American Congress. Little more than two years before, the British sovereign and ministers had treated the petitions of the colonists with silent contempt; but such had been the current of events, that, in 1778, they found it necessary, in order to appease the popular discontent, to send out commissioners, almost for the purpose of begging a peace. As if to avenge themselves for the indignities of 1775, the Americans received these commissioners with the like haughtiness; and being convinced that they could secure their independence, would listen to no proposals in which the acknowledgment of that independence, and the withdrawal of the British troops, did not occupy the first place. The ministers, unwilling to submit to such terms, resolved to prosecute the war, holding forth to the public, as the best defense of their conduct, the necessity of curbing the spirit of insubordination, both in the American colonies and at home, which they described as threatening the overturn of the most sacred of the national institutions.

The rise of Great Britain during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, in wealth and military and naval power, had been observed by many of the surrounding states with no small degree of jealousy. France in particular, had not yet forgiven the triumphant peace which Britain had dictated in 1763. The Americans, therefore, by their emissary, the celebrated Benjamin Franklin, found no great difficulty in forming an alliance with France, in which the latter power acknowledged the independence of the colonists, and promised to send them large auxiliary forces. Viewing the distressed state to which Britain was reduced by the contest, and concluding that the time had arrived to strike a decisive blow for the humiliation, Spain soon after declared war against her; and in 1780, Holland was added to the number of her enemies. Russia then put herself at the head of what was called an Armed Neutrality, embracing Sweden and Denmark, the object of which was indirectly hostile to Britain. So tremendous was the force reared against Britain in 1779, even before all these powers had entered into hostilities, that it required about 300,000 armed men, 300 armed vessels, and twenty millions of money annually, merely to protect herself from her enemies. Even her wonted superiority at sea seemed to have deserted her; and for some time the people beheld the unwonted spectacle of a hostile fleet riding in the Channel, which there was no adequate means of opposing.

It was now obvious to the whole nation that this contest, upon whatever ground it commenced, was a great national misfortune; and the Opposition in Parliament began to gain considerably in strength. After some votes, in which the ministerial majorities appeared to be gradually lessening, Mr. Dunning, on the 6th of April 1780, carried, by a majority of eighteen, a motion, ‘that the influence of the crown had increased, was increasing, and ought to be diminished.’ This was looked upon as a severe censure of the government, considering that the House of Commons was not altogether a popular body, but included many who had seats there only through the influence of the crown, or by the favor of the nobility and gentry.

In the year 1778, an act had been passed, relieving the Roman Catholics in England from some of the severe penal statutes formerly enacted against them. The apprehension of a similar act for Scotland caused the people of that country to form an immense number of associations with a view to opposing it; and in the early part of 1779, the popular spirit broke out at Edinburgh and Glasgow in several alarming riots, during which one or two Catholic chapels, and some houses belonging to Catholics, were pillaged and burnt. An extensive Protestant Association was also formed in England, to endeavor to procure the repeal of the English act. This body was chiefly led by Lord George Gordon, a son of the late Duke of Gordon, and member of the House of Commons. In June 1780, an immense mob assembled in London to accompany Lord George to the House of Commons, where he was to present a petition against the act, signed by 120,000 persons. His motion for the repeal of the act being rejected by a vast majority, he came out to the lobby and harangued the crowd in violent terms, suggesting to them similar acts to those which had taken place in Scotland. The mob accordingly proceeded to demolish the chapels of the foreign ambassadors. Meeting with no effectual resistance, for the magistrates of the city were afraid to take decisive measures against them, they attacked Newgate, released the prisoners, and set the prison on fire. The new prison at Clerkenwell, the King’s Bench, and Fleet Prisons, and the New Bridewell, were treated in like manner. At one time thirty-six fires were seen throughout the city. The mob had uncontrolled possession of the streets for five days, pillaging, burning, and demolishing; until the king in council determined to authorize the military to put them down by force of arms. Tranquillity was then restored, but not before upwards of 400 persons were killed and wounded. Many of the ringleaders were convicted and executed. Lord George Gordon was tried for high treason, but acquitted on a plea of insanity, which his subsequent life showed to be well founded. Similar outrages were attempted in other cities, but prevented by the vigor of the magistrates. The chief sufferers from these riots were the party who aimed at political reforms. On the other hand, the king obtained increased respect, in consequence of the firmness he had shown in taking measures for the suppression of the riots.

The states of North and South Carolina, which contained a larger proportion of persons friendly to the British crown than any of the northern states, had submitted, in 1780, to a British army under General Clinton. Next year the greater part of the troops which had been left in those states were conducted northward by Lord Cornwallis, in the hope of making further conquests; but the consequence was that General Greene, after a series of conflicts, in which he greatly distressed various parties of the British troops, regained both Carolinas, while Lord Cornwallis took up a position at Yorktown in Virginia. At this time, General Washington, the American commander-in-chief, to whose extraordinary sagacity and purity of motives the colonists chiefly owed their independence, was threatening General Clinton’s army at New York. Clinton tamely saw him retire to the southward, believing that he only meant to make a feint, in order to draw away the British from New York, when he in reality meant to attack Cornwallis. On the 29th of September (1781), Yorktown was invested by this and other corps of Americans and French; and in three weeks more, the British batteries being completely silenced, Lord Cornwallis surrendered with his whole army. With this event, though some posts were still kept up by the British troops, hostilities might be said to have been concluded.

At the next opening of Parliament many of those who had formerly supported the war, began to adopt opposite views; and early in 1782, a motion, made by General Conway, for the conclusion of the war, was carried by a majority of nineteen. The necessary consequence was, that, on the 20th of March, Lord North and his colleagues resigned office, after twelve years of continued misfortune, during which the prosperity of the country had been retarded, a hundred millions added to the national debt, and three millions of people separated from the parent state.

As usual in such cases, a new administration was formed out of the Opposition. The Marquis of Rockingham was made prime minister, and Mr. Fox one of the secretaries of state. The new ministers lost no time in taking measures for the restoration of peace. Unfortunately for their credit with the nation, Sir George Rodney gained an important victory over the French fleet of the island of Dominica, April 12, 1782, after the ministers had despatched another officer to supersede him in the command. On this occasion, thirty-seven British vessels encountered thirty-four French; and chiefly by the dexterous manœuvre of a breach of the enemy’s line, gained one of the most complete victories recorded in modern warfare. The triumph was eminently necessary, to recover in some measure the national honor, and enable the ministers to conclude the war upon tolerable terms. In November, provisional articles for a peace with the United States of America, now acknowledged as an independent power, were signed at Paris, and the treaty was concluded in the ensuing February. When the American ambassador was afterwards, for the first time, introduced at the British levée, the king received him kindly, and said with great frankness, that though he had been the last man in his dominions to desire that the independence of America should be acknowledged, he should also be the last to wish that that acknowledgment should be withdrawn. War was soon after concluded with France, Spain, and Holland, but not without some considerable concessions of colonial territory on the part of Great Britain.

The conclusion of this war is memorable as a period of great suffering, arising from the exhaustion of the national resources, the depression of commerce, and the accident of a bad harvest. The principles of prosperity were, after all, found to be so firmly rooted in the country, that immediately after the first distresses had passed away, every department of the state resumed its wonted vigor, and during the ensuing ten years of peace, a great advance was made in national wealth.

In 1786, Mr. Pitt established his celebrated but fallacious scheme for redeeming the national debt, by what was called a Sinking Fund. The revenue was at this time above fifteen millions, being about one million more than was required for the public service. This excess he proposed to lay aside annually, to lie at compound interest; by which means he calculated that each million would be quadrupled at the end of twenty-eight years, and thus go a great way towards the object he had in view. To this scheme Mr. Fox added the infinitely more absurd amendment, that, when the government required to borrow more money, one million of every six so obtained should be laid aside for the same purpose. The scheme was so well received as to increase the popularity of the minister, and it was not till 1813 that its fallacy was proved.

In the same year commenced the parliamentary proceedings against Mr. Warren Hastings, for alleged cruelty and robbery exercised upon the natives of India during his governorship of that dependency of Great Britain. These proceedings were urged by Mr. Burke and other members of the Whig party, and excited so much public indignation against Mr. Hastings, that the ministry were obliged, though unwillingly, to lend their countenance to his trial, which took place before Parliament in the most solemn manner, and occupied in the aggregate one hundred and forty-nine days, extending over the space of several years. The proceedings resulted in the acquittal of Mr. Hastings.

The king and queen had in the meantime become the parents of a numerous family of sons and daughters. The eldest son, George, Prince of Wales, had now for several years been of age, and exempted from the control of his father. He had no sooner been set up in an establishment of his own, than he plunged into a career of prodigality, forming the most striking contrast with the chastened simplicity and decorum of the paternal abode. He also attached himself to the party of the Opposition, though rather apparently from a principle of contradiction to his father, than a sincere approbation of their political objects. The result was the complete alienation of the Prince of Wales from the affections of his majesty.

In November 1788, an aberration of intellect, resulting from an illness of some duration, was observed in the king, and it became necessary to provide some species of substitute for the exercise of the royal functions. To have invested the Prince of Wales with the regency, appeared the most obvious course; but this would have thrown out the ministry, as it was to be supposed that his royal highness would call the chiefs of his own party to his councils. Mr. Fox contended that the hereditary nature of the monarchy pointed out an unconditional right in the prince to assume the supreme power under such circumstances; but Mr. Pitt asserted the right of Parliament to give or withhold such an office, and proposed to assign certain limits to the authority of the intended regent, which would have placed the existing ministry beyond his reach. The Irish Parliament voted the unconditional regency to the prince; but that of Great Britain was about to adopt the modified plan proposed by Mr. Pitt, when, March 1789, the king suddenly recovered, and put an end to the difficulty. The debates on the regency question exhibit in a very striking light how statesmen will sometimes abandon their most favorite dogmas and strongest principles on the call of their own immediate interests.

FRENCH REVOLUTION, AND CONSEQUENT WAR WITH FRANCE.

The country had for several years experienced the utmost prosperity and peace, when it was roused by a series of events which took place in France. The proceedings of the French nation for redressing the political grievances under which they had long labored, commenced in 1789, and were at first very generally applauded in Britain, as likely to raise that nation to a rational degree of freedom. Ere long, the violence shown at the destruction of the Bastile, the abolition of hereditary privileges, the open disrespect for religion, and other symptoms of an extravagant spirit, manifested by the French, produced a considerable change in the sentiments of the British people. The proceedings of the French were still justified by the principal leaders of Opposition in Parliament, and by a numerous class of the community; but they inspired the government, and the propertied and privileged classes generally, with great alarm and distrust.

When at length the coalition of Austria and Prussia with the fugitive noblesse had excited the spirit of the French people to a species of frenzy, and led to the establishment of a Republic, and the death of the king, the British government and its supporters were effectually roused to a sense of the danger which hung over all ancient institutions, and a pretext was found (January 1793) for declaring war against France. A comparatively small body of the people were opposed to this step, which was also loudly deprecated in Parliament by Messrs. Fox and Sheridan; but all these remonstrances were drowned in the general voice of the nation. At such a crisis, to speak of political reforms in England seemed the height of imprudence, as tending to encourage the French. All, therefore, who continued to make open demonstrations for that cause, were now branded as enemies to religion and civil order. In Scotland, Mr. Thomas Muir, a barrister, and Mr. Palmer, a Unitarian clergyman, were tried for sedition, and sentenced to various terms of banishment. Citizens named Skirving, Gerald, and Margarot, were treated in like manner by the Scottish criminal judges, for offenses which could only be said to derive the character ascribed to them from the temporary and accidental circumstances of the nation. An attempt to inflict similar punishments upon the English reformers, was defeated by the acquittal of a shoemaker named Hardy; but the party was nevertheless subjected, with the apparent concurrence of a large and influential portion of the people, to many minor severities.

After alliances had been formed with the other powers hostile to France, the British ministers despatched an army to the Netherlands, under the command of the king’s second son, the Duke of York, to coöperate in reducing the fortresses in possession of the French, while the town of Toulon, being inclined to remain under the authority of the royal family, put itself into the hands of a British naval commander. At first, the French seemed to fail somewhat in their defenses; but on a more ardently republican party acceding to power under the direction of the famous Robespierre, the national energies were much increased, and the Duke of Brunswick experienced a series of disgraceful reverses. The Prussian government, having adopted new views of the condition of France, now began to withdraw its troops, on the pretext of being unable to pay them; and though Britain gave nearly a million and a quarter sterling to induce this power to remain nine months longer upon the field, its coöperation was of no further service, and was soon altogether lost. On the 1st of June 1794, the French Brest fleet sustained a severe defeat from Lord Howe, with the loss of six ships; but the republican troops not only drove the combined armies out of the Netherlands, but taking advantage of an unusually hard frost, invaded Holland by the ice which covered the Rhine, and reduced that country to a Republic under their own control. The successes of the British were limited to the above naval victory, the temporary possession of Corsica and Toulon, the capture of several of the French colonies in the West Indies, and the spoliation of a great quantity of the commercial shipping of France; against which were to be reckoned the expulsion of an army from the Netherlands, the loss of 10,000 men and 60,000 stand of arms, in an unsuccessful descent upon the west coast of France, some considerable losses in mercantile shipping, and an increase of annual expenditure from about fourteen to nearly forty millions.

In the course of the year 1795, the lower portions of the community began to appear violently discontented with the progress of the war, and to renew their demands for reform in the state. As the king was passing (October 29) to open the session of Parliament, a stone was thrown into his coach, and the interference of the horse guards was required to protect his person from an infuriated mob. The ministers consequently obtained acts for more effectually repressing sedition, and for the dispersion of political meetings. They were at the same time compelled to make a show of yielding to the popular clamor for peace; and commenced a negotiation with the French Directory, which was broken off by the refusal of France to restore Belgium to Austria. In the ensuing year, so far from any advance being made towards the subjugation of France, the northern states of Italy were overrun by its armies, and formed into what was called the Cisalpine Republic. The celebrated Napoleon Bonaparte made his first conspicuous appearance as the leader of this expedition, which terminated in Austria submitting to a humiliating peace. At the close of 1796, a French fleet sailed for Ireland, with the design of revolutionizing that country, and detaching it from Britain; but its object was defeated by stress of weather. At this crisis, a new attempt was made to negotiate with the French Republic; but as the events of the year had been decidedly favorable to France, a renewed demand of the British for the surrender of Belgium was looked upon as a proof that they were not sincere in their proposals, and their agent was insultingly ordered to leave the French territory. To add to the distresses of Britain, while Austria was withdrawn from the number of her allies, Spain, by a declaration of war in 1797, increased in no inconsiderable degree the immense force with which she had to contend.

THREATENED INVASION—​SUBSEQUENT EVENTS.

For some time an invasion of Britain had been threatened by France; and, sacred as the land had been for centuries from the touch of a foreign enemy, the successes of the republicans had hitherto so greatly exceeded all previous calculation, that the execution of their design did not appear improbable. Just as the inteference of the neighboring powers had, in 1792, roused the energies of the French, so did this proposed invasion stimulate the spirit of the British people. The clamors of reformers, and of those who were friendly to France, were now lost in an almost universal zeal for the defense of the country; and not only were volunteer corps everywhere formed, but the desire of prosecuting the war became nearly the ruling sentiment of the nation. The ministers, perceiving the advantage which was to be derived from the tendency of the national spirit, appeared seriously to dread an invasion, and thus produced an unexpected and very distressing result. The credit of the Bank of England was shaken; a run was made upon it for gold in exchange for its notes, which it could not meet. On the 25th of February 1797, therefore, the Bank was obliged, with the sanction of the privy-council, to suspend cash payments—​that is, to refuse giving coin on demand for the paper money which had been issued. This step led to a great depreciation in the value of Bank of England notes; and was followed by a very serious derangement of the currency for a number of years.

In April, a new alarm arose from the proceedings of the seamen on board the Channel fleet, who mutinied for an advance of pay, and the redress of some alleged grievances. A convention of delegates from the various ships met in Lord Howe’s cabin, and drew up petitions to the House of Commons and the Board of Admiralty. Upon these being yielded to, order was restored; but the seamen on board the fleet at the Nore soon after broke out in a much more alarming revolt; and on the refusal of their demands, moored their vessels across the Thames, threatening to cut off all communication between London and the open sea. The reduction of this mutiny appeared at one time as if it could only be effected by much bloodshed; but by the firmness of the government, and some skillful dealings with the seamen, a loyal party was formed, by whom the more turbulent men were secured, and the vessels restored to their respective officers. The ringleaders, the chief of whom was a young man named Richard Parker, were tried and executed.