DEBATE IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
The house of lords having taken into consideration the letters and memorials between the ministers of Great Britain, France, and Spain, and the papers relating to the accession of the states-general to the treaty of Hanover, a warm debate ensued. Lord Bathurst took notice that the accession of the states-general to the treaty was upon condition that this their act should be approved and ratified by the king of Great Britain, the most christian king, and the king of Prussia; but that the minister of his Prussian majesty had refused to sign the act of accession, which was therefore of no effect: that if the court of France should, for the same reason, think itself disengaged from the Hanover alliance, Britain alone would be obliged to bear the burden of an expensive war against two of the greatest potentates of Europe. He said he could not see any just reason for a rupture with Spain; that indeed the duke de Ripperda might have dropped some indiscreet expressions; he was known to be a man of violent temper; and he had been solemnly disavowed by his catholic majesty; that, in the memorial left by the Spanish ambassador, he imputed the violent state of affairs between the two crowns to the ministers of England; and mentioned a positive promise made by the king of Great Britain for the restitution of Gibraltar; that methods of accommodation might be tried before the kingdom engaged in a war which must be attended with dangerous consequences; that the nation was loaded with a debt of fifty millions; and, in order to maintain such a war, would be obliged to raise seven millions yearly; an annual sum by which the people would soon be exhausted. He observed, that in some papers laid before the house, mention was made of great sums distributed in divers places, to bring certain measures to bear. He declared, that for his own part, he had touched neither Spanish nor English gold; he was neither a Spaniard nor a Frenchman, but a true Englishman, and so long as he had the honour to sit in that house, he would speak and act for the good of his country. He therefore desired their lordships seriously to consider the matter before them, which was of the last consequence and importance to the whole nation. He said nothing could be gained by the war, should it prove successful: and every thing would be lost should it be unprosperous. He was answered by lord Town-shend, Who affirmed that his majesty had received positive and certain information with respect to the secret article of alliance between the courts of Vienna and Madrid, in favour of the pretender, though the safety of the state did not permit him to lay these advices before the parliament. After much altercation, the majority resolved, that the measures his majesty had thought fit to take were honourable, just, and necessary for preventing the execution of the dangerous engagement entered into in favour of the pretender; for preserving the dominions belonging to the crown of Great Britain by solemn treaties, and particularly those of Gibraltar and the island of Minorca; and for maintaining to his people their most valuable rights and privileges of commerce, and the peace and tranquillity of Europe. Seventeen lords entered a protest against this resolution. Disputes of the same nature arose from the same subject in the lower house. Lord Townshend had affirmed in the house of peers, that no promise of restoring Gibraltar bad been made: sir Kobert Walpole owned such a promise in the house of commons: a motion was made for an address, desiring these engagements might be laid before the house; another member moved for a copy of the memorial presented by Mr. Pointz to the king of Sweden, and for the secret offensive article between the courts of Vienna and Madrid; a third motion was made to address the king for such memorials and representations from the courts of Sweden and Denmark, as induced him, in the course of the preceding year, to send a squadron to the Baltic. In the account of the money granted for the service of the last year, there was an article of one hundred and twenty-five thousand pounds charged in general terms as issued out for other engagements and expenses, over and above such as were specified. Mr. Pulteney moved for an address on this subject; but each of these motions was rejected on a division: and the majority concurred in an address of thanks to his majesty, for the great wisdom of his conduct. They expressed the most implicit confidence in his goodness and discretion: they promised to support him in all such further measures as he should find necessary and expedient for preventing a rupture, as well as for consulting the honour and advantage of these kingdoms.
His majesty’s speech gave such umbrage to the court of Vienna, that Mr. Palms, the Imperial resident at London, was ordered to present a warm memorial to the king, and afterwards to publish it to the whole nation. In this bold remonstrance, the king was charged with having declared from the throne, as certain and undoubted facts, several things that were either wrested, misrepresented, or void of all foundation. The memorialist affirmed, that the treaty of Vienna was built on the quadruple alliance; that the treaty of commerce was calculated to promote the mutual and lawful advantages of the subjects of both parties, agreeably to the law of nations; and in no respect prejudicial to the British nation. He declared that there was no offensive alliance concluded between the two crowns; that the supposed article relating to the pretender was an absolute falsehood; that the insinuation with respect to the siege of Gibraltar was equally untrue, his master having made no engagements with the king of Spain, but such as were specified in the treaty communicated to his Britannic majesty. He said, however, the hostilities notoriously committed in the West Indies, and elsewhere, against the king of Spain, in violation of treaties, seemed to justify that prince’s undertaking the siege of Gibraltar. Finally, he demanded, in the name of his Imperial majesty, suitable reparation for the injury his honour had sustained from such calumnious imputations. Both houses of parliament expressed their indignation at the insolence of this memorial, in an address to his majesty; and Mr. Palms was ordered to depart the kingdom. Virulent declarations were presented by the ministers of the emperor and the king of Great Britain to the diet of the empire at Ratisbon; and such personal reflections retorted between these two potentates, that all hope of reconciliation vanished.
CONVENTIONS WITH SWEDEN AND HESSE-CASSEL.
King George, in order to secure himself against the impending storm, entered into more strict engagements with the French king; and agreed to pay fifty thousand pounds for three years to the king of Sweden, in consideration of that prince’s holding in readiness a body of ten thousand troops for the occasions of the alliance. He concluded a fresh treaty with the king of Denmark, who promised to furnish a certain number of auxiliaries, on account of a large subsidy granted by the king of France. The proportions of troops to be sent into the field in case of a rupture were ascertained. His Britannic majesty engaged for four-and-twenty thousand men, and a strong squadron to be sent into the Baltic. He made a convention with the prince of Hesse-Cassel, who undertook to provide eight thousand infantry, and four thousand horse, in consideration of seventy-four thousand pounds, to be paid by Great Britain immediately, and fifty thousand pounds more in case the troops should be required, besides their pay and subsistence. Such was the fruit of all the alliances so industriously planned since the accession of king George to the throne of Great Britain. In the day of his trouble the king of Prussia, who had espoused his daughter, deserted his interest; and the states-general stood aloof. For the security of his German dominions, he had recourse to the king of France, who was a precarious ally; to the kings of Sweden and Denmark, and the principality of Hesse-Cassel: but none of these powers would contribute their assistance without being gratified with exorbitant subsidies, though the danger was common, and the efforts ought to have been equal. Instead of allies, they professed themselves mercenaries. Great Britain paid them for the defence of their own dominions: she, moreover, undertook to maintain a powerful fleet for their safety. Is there any Britain so weak as to think, or so fool-hardy as to affirm, that this was a British quarrel?
1727