HENRY ST. JOHN (AFTERWARDS VISCOUNT BOLINGBROKE).

[[See larger version]]

Nor was the excitement less at home. The news was out—the preliminaries were before the public by the act of the Imperial ambassador, and the Whigs were in a fury of indignation. They accused the Ministers of being about to sacrifice the country, its power, and interests to a shameful cowardice at the very moment that the labours and sufferings of years had brought it to the verge of triumph, and when Louis XIV. was old and tottering into the grave, leaving his kingdom exhausted and powerless. But notwithstanding the violent opposition both at home and abroad, the Ministers persisted in their course. The queen wrote to the Electress Sophia of Hanover, entreating her and her son to use their exertions with the Allies for the peace of Europe. She sent over the Earl of Rivers to further her appeal; but the Electoral Prince, so far from dreading to endanger his succession, sent back a letter by Earl Rivers to the queen, strongly condemning the terms on which the peace was proposed, and he ordered his ambassador, the Baron von Bothmar, to present a memorial to the queen, showing the pernicious consequences to Europe of allowing Philip to retain Spain and the Indies. This bold and independent act greatly exasperated the queen and her Ministers, and was extolled by the Whigs. There had been attempts to influence the Elector by offering him the command of the army in Flanders, in case of the removal of Marlborough, but that also he declined.

Many of the Tories were as much opposed to the terms of the treaty as the Whigs, and it was proposed to unite in a strong remonstrance against the conduct of the Ministers in being willing to accept them; but the intention getting wind, the queen suddenly prorogued Parliament to the 7th of December, with the expectation of the arrival of absent Scottish peers, who were all Tories, and a determination, if necessary, to create a batch of English Tory peers. Notwithstanding all resistance, it was finally settled with the Allies that their representatives should meet those of England and France, to treat for a general peace, at Utrecht, on the 1st of January, 1712.

The Ministers, in the meantime, went on strengthening their position. Sir Simon Harcourt was created Baron Harcourt, and was raised from Lord Keeper of the Seal to Lord Chancellor; the Duke of Buckingham was appointed President of the Council in place of Lord Rochester, deceased, and was succeeded in his office of Steward of the Household by Earl Paulet, who had quitted the Treasury to make way for Harley's elevation to the Treasurership. The Duke of Newcastle dying, Robinson, Bishop of Bristol, was made Lord Privy Seal, a new thing since the days of Wolsey and Laud for a Churchman. In Scotland the Jacobites were so much elated by the proceedings of the Tories, and by whispers of what really took place, while Mesnager was in secret conference with the queen—namely, a zealous advocacy on his part of the setting aside the Protestant succession, and the re-admission of the Pretender's claims—that they proceeded to great lengths. They were in the end so daring as to induce the Faculty of Advocates of Edinburgh to receive a medal of the Pretender from the same ardent Duchess of Gordon who had sent him word to come when he pleased, and to what port he pleased, and that he would be well received. This medal had on the obverse side a head of the Pretender, with the words, "Cujus est?" and on the reverse the island of Britain and the word "Reddite." This they not only received, but sent hearty thanks to the duchess for it. The Hanoverian Ambassador was made aware of this incident, and presented a memorial on the subject, which, however, only served to bring Sir David Dalrymple, a zealous Whig and advocate for the Protestant succession, into trouble, on the plea that he ought to have prosecuted Mr. Dundas of Arniston for returning public thanks for the medal, whilst Arniston himself, who boldly published a vindication of his conduct, was suffered to escape.

On the opening of Parliament on the 7th of December, the queen announced that "notwithstanding the arts of those who delighted in war, both time and place were appointed for opening the treaty for a general peace." This was carrying into the Royal Speech the animus which the Tories had shown against the Whigs in all their speeches and pamphlets lately. They had endeavoured to make the Whigs odious to the nation as a faction bent on war solely for its own selfish interests, and regardless of the interests of the nation or the sufferings of mankind. Though the Speech contained other matters, everything else passed without criticism or notice. This declaration produced a vehement sensation, and roused all the party fire on both sides. The Ministers were astonished to see the Earl of Nottingham, who had hitherto gone with them, now adopt the Whig side in a very vigorous and telling speech. He denounced the preliminaries as basely surrendering the great objects of the war, and moved that a clause should be inserted in the Address to the effect that no peace could be safe or honourable to Great Britain or to Europe, if Spain and the Indies should be allotted to any branch of the House of Bourbon. In the discussion it was shown that the statement in the queen's Speech, that the Allies were all prepared to adopt the preliminaries, was utterly untrue. The Earl of Anglesey contended, on the other side, that it was high time to ease the nation of the monstrous burthens of the war; and he aimed some heavy blows at the Duke of Marlborough, affirming that a good peace might have been effected after the battle of Ramillies, but for the private interests of certain persons.

This called up Marlborough in his own defence. He bowed towards the place where the queen was listening to the debate incognita, and appealed to her, much to her embarrassment, whether, when he had the honour to serve her Majesty as plenipotentiary as well as general, he had not always faithfully informed her and her Council of all the proposals of peace which had been made, and had desired instructions for his guidance in such affairs. He appealed also to Heaven, whether he was not always anxious for a safe, honourable, and lasting peace, and whether he was not always very far from entertaining any design of prolonging the war for his own private advantage, as his enemies had most falsely insinuated. When the question was put, the amendment of the Earl of Nottingham was carried by a majority of sixty-two to fifty-four—that is, of only eight—notwithstanding all the exertions of the Court party, and much to its astonishment. In the Commons, however, the Ministry had a stronger party, and there they assured the queen in their Address that they would do all in their power to disappoint as well the acts and designs of those who for private views might delight in war, as the hopes of the enemy conceived from the divisions amongst themselves. Walpole moved an amendment similar to that of the Lords, and it was lost by a majority of two hundred and thirty-two to one hundred and six.

The Ministers were determined now to be rid of Marlborough. He not only stood at the head of the Whigs at home, and threw his great military reputation into the scale against the Tories in this question of peace or war, but whilst he retained his command of the army, he immensely strengthened the opposition of the Allies to the present terms of pacification. It was resolved that he should be dismissed, a measure which they felt would destroy much of his influence. The Whigs, moreover, at this crisis fell into a snare laid for them by the Earl of Nottingham, which extremely damaged them, and in the same proportion benefited the Tories. He persuaded them that if they would only consent to the passing of the Occasional Conformity Bill, there were numerous persons of influence ready to quit the ranks of Oxford and St. John; and though the Whigs were entirely opposed in principle to this illiberal and unjust measure, they were weak enough, in the hope of strengthening their party, to permit it to pass. The Dissenters, greatly exasperated at this treachery, abandoned the Whig cause; the promised proselytes did not come over, and Lord Dartmouth adds that "Lord Nottingham himself had the mortification afterwards to see his Bill repulsed with some scorn, and himself not much better treated."

In this state of affairs closed the year 1711. During the Christmas holiday the Ministry matured several measures for the advancement of their party. They were still in a minority in the Lords, and they sought to remedy this by inducing the queen to create twelve new peers. Lord Dartmouth, in his notes to Burnet, expresses his astonishment on seeing the queen suddenly take from her pocket a list of twelve new lords, and ordering him to bring warrants for them. Dartmouth, unprepared for so sweeping a measure, asked whether her Majesty intended to have them all made at once; and Anne replied, "Certainly; that the Whigs and Lord Marlborough did all they could to distress her; that she had made fewer lords than any of her predecessors; and that she must help herself as well as she could." Among these new peers were again two Scotsmen, but not peers, only the sons of peers, and the husband of her favourite, Mrs. Masham. The witty Lord Wharton did not spare a joke upon them at the time, by asking one of them, when the question was put, whether "they voted by their foreman?" as though they had been a jury.