Page images
PDF
EPUB

1749.

GRANT TO THE TOWN OF GLASGOW.

3

Pelham applied himself to support the very grants which he disapproved, and to answer his own objections, when urged by his political opponents.

Another grant, proposed by the Government, and resulting from the war, was of 10,000l., to indemnify the Magistrates and Town-Council of Glasgow for the like sum levied upon them during what was termed "the "late unnatural Rebellion." * This grant was, however, resisted by Lord Egmont, Mr. Nugent, and Mr. Bowes. They urged that Glasgow was unduly favoured beyond Carlisle and Derby, which had also suffered, but were not also rewarded; that such indemnities were an ill precedent to set; that the citizens of Glasgow deserved no peculiar praise for their loyalty to the House of Hanover, since from the small numbers of the Highland army which marched into England it was easy to foresee its final failure. But this last objection was most ingeniously retorted by Pitt upon the objectors. “At the time "of the Revolution," said he, "when it was at first said "that the Prince of Orange was to invade England with an army of 30,000 men, and many of the then King's "friends seemed to be frightened at the news, a noble Lord, who was known to be a firm friend, seemed to "make light of the news, and said he apprehended no danger from such an army. But when it was after"wards reported that the Prince was to bring but 20,000, "he began to be afraid; and when he heard that the "Prince was to come with 14,000 only, then cries he, "We are undone!' When they asked him the reason why he was so much afraid of 14,000, when he seemed no way afraid of 30,000, he answered, 'An army of "30,000 could not conquer England; but no man would 66 come here with an army of 14,000 if he was not sure of finding a great many traitors amongst ourselves."† Thus Pitt contended that the smaller the numbers of the

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

66

66

66

66

Highland army the more cause had the citizens of Glasgow for alarm, the more temptation to disloyalty; and in the end a cry of Jacobitism being raised against all who

*See vol. iii. p. 247. and 282.
† Parl. History, vol. xiv. p. 505.

opposed the grant, it was allowed to pass without a division.

We may observe, in passing, how high, even at this period, before he had filled any Cabinet office, or done any great public service, Pitt stood in the estimation of his colleagues, and how frank and cordial had been his conduct towards them. "I think him," writes Pelham to Newcastle," the most able and useful man we have amongst us; truly honourable and strictly honest. He "is as firm a friend to us as we can wish for; and a "more useful one there does not exist."

66

A third measure, to which the recent war gave rise, was the foundation of a new colonial city. In the year after the peace the land forces in Great Britain were reduced to little more than 18,000 men; those in Minorca, Gibraltar, and the American plantations, to 10,000; while the sailors retained in the Royal Navy were under 17,000. † From the large number both of soldiers and seamen suddenly discharged, it was feared that they might be either driven to distress or tempted to depredation. Thus, both for their own comfort and for the quiet of the remaining community, emigration seemed to afford a safe and excellent resource. The province of Nova Scotia was pitched upon for this experiment, and the freehold of fifty acres was offered to each settler, with ten acres more for every child brought with him, besides, a free passage, and an exemption from all taxes during a term of ten years. Allured by such advantages, above 4,000 persons, with their families, embarked under the command of Colonel Cornwallis, and landed at the harbour of Chebuctow. The new town which soon arose from their labours received its name from the Earl of Halifax, who presided at the Board of Trade, and who had the principal share in the foundation of this colony. In the first winter there were but 300 huts of wood, surrounded by a palisade; but Halifax at present deserves to be ranked among the most thriving dependencies of

*Letter of August 3. 1750.-Coxe's Pelham.

+ Commons' Journals, November 23. 1749, and January 19. 1750.

1749.

THE HALF PAY OFFICERS.

5

the British Crown. It contained in 1839 not less than 2,000 houses and 20,000 people.*

But the legions of half-pay officers and soldiers still remaining at home suggested another measure of prudence and precaution; a clause, now for the first time added to the annual Mutiny Bill, subjected all such persons to martial law. This clause did not pass without most vehement opposition in both Houses. It was represented as a manifest and dangerous augmentation to the power of the Crown; as a fresh and irresistible argument on the perils from a standing army to constitutional freedom. Pitt, on the other hand, was stirred by these common-places into declaring that the best safeguard to liberty lies in the virtue of an army. "With“out this virtue," said he, "should the Lords, the Commons, and the people of England intrench themselves "behind parchment up to the teeth, the sword will find a passage to the vitals of the Constitution." In the House of Peers, Lord Bath, who had been Secretary at War during the Rebellion of 1715, and had ordered four half-pay officers taken prisoners at Preston to be tried and shot according to martial law, condemned his own conduct as proceeding from "heat and hurry," and declared his present opinion, "that order and discipline may “be kept up in the army without any Mutiny Bill at "all!"†

66

66

This clause, as affecting the army, being sanctioned by a great majority, a similar clause for naval officers was introduced into the Marine Mutiny Bill. But here the timidity and irresolution of Pelham were apparent. Admiral Vernon, and some other naval Members of Parliament, having opposed the clause with much warmth, the Minister took alarm at the spirit that might be raised out of doors, and relinquished his proposal; thus leaving in the law a most anomalous disparity between the two branches of public defence.

It was not, however, any such important debate that did then, or would now, attract the principal attention. The following entry, which I find in Dodington's Journal,

* Martin's Statistics of the British Colonies, p. 214.
+ Parl. History, vol. xiv. p. 397. 456. and 476.

66

is highly characteristic of the House of Commons. "January 29. 1750: Debate upon a turnpike Bill espoused "by the Duke of Bedford; the fullest House and greatest "division of any day of the Session; after which the "House thinned."

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

During this period the nation, little stirred by the struggles of party, was making silent, and therefore, perhaps, the more rapid, strides in prosperity. Our manufactures at home grew apace; while several branches of our foreign commerce, - such as the whale fishery off Spitzbergen the white-herring and cod fisheries-the trade to the Coast of Guinea the import of iron from the American plantations, and of raw silk from China,were cleared of restrictions or quickened by bounties.* But the contentment of the people with their Government bore no degree of proportion to their welfare or to its mildness. Where in a free state there are no great qualities nor glorious deeds in rulers to catch the public eye, it would almost seem as though the ease and pride of prosperity served only to impart more leisure and loudness to complaint. Wanting other grievances at this time, the nation more frequently saw and urged as such, the character of the King's two sons; the feeble character of Frederick, the violent character of William. Even Pelham owns in confidence to his brother: "I am "afraid the country is not so well disposed to some "branches of the Royal Family as they were upon the "late rebellion. The eldest loses esteem and confidence more and more every day; and the other does not con"duct himself so prudently with regard to the temper of "this country and constitution as to make amends for "the unfortunate turn of the other. Our whole dependence at present is upon the King." In reply, the Duke of Newcastle can only express a faint hope that

66

66

[ocr errors]

*We may gather, from a satirical touch in one of the novels of that day (Peregrine Pickle, which was written in 1750), how much the merchants and men of business had complained of "restrictions and" exorbitant duties," several of which were removed about this time. See chap. lxxiv. vol. iii. p. 6. ed. 1806.

† Secret letter from Mr. Pelham to the Duke of Newcastle, June 1. 1750.

1750.

PRINCE CHARLES STUART IN LONDON.

the spirit of Jacobitism is “ NOT MUCH increased." "That spirit was fomented by the King of Prussia, partly from personal dislike to his Royal kinsman at St. James's, partly from political resentment at the endeavours of England to promote the election of the Archduke Joseph as King of the Romans. A singular anomaly at this time, that a Protestant monarch should become the main hope of a Romish Pretender! As an overt mark of its ill intention, the Court of Berlin sent about this time the Earl Marischal as its Minister to Paris. Other signs of disaffection nearly as overt appeared in many of the English counties. One of these may claim especial notice from its singularity. In the neighbourhood of Lichfield the principal gentlemen clothed their hounds in tartan plaid, with which they hunted a fox dressed in a red uniform. The romantic adventures of Charles in his escape from Scotland were eagerly perused under the name of "the young Ascanius." His busts of plaster were commonly sold in London. The country ladies were proud to sing the ditties in his praise; the country gentlemen to drink his health in deep bumpers. Yet the Highlanders, ever faithful to their fancied allegiance, might look with some scorn on their Southern allies, who, in the cause for which they had freely shed their blood, would only pour forth their wine.

To turn to good account such returning gleams of public favour, the young Chevalier, in September 1750, came disguised and secretly to London. I have already had occasion to relate by anticipation, and on the respectable authority of Forsyth, his mysterious introduction to a meeting of his friends in Pall Mall, and the generous sentiments towards the reigning family which he there expressed. But I have also found in the State Paper Office a further account of this remarkable expedition from the statement of Charles himself. It is contained in a despatch of Sir Horace Mann, the British Minister in Tuscany, and the correspondent of Walpole, and is dated December 6. 1783. Sir Horace, after re*Letter, June 20. 1750. N. S.

Dr. King's Anecdotes of his own Times, p. 199.

Forsyth's Italy, p. 587., Geneva ed., and vol. iii. p. 169. of this History

« PreviousContinue »