1742. REVIEW OF WALPOLE'S ADMINISTRATION. 109 other hand, it may be thought that Stanhope's was the higher skill in all foreign affairs. Another marked distinction between them appears in the readiness of Stanhope to introduce measures, as he thought, of practical improvement; while Walpole, on the contrary, strove to leave, as nearly as possible, all things as he found them. When Stanhope died, at the age of only forty-seven, he had in preparation five great measures. The first, for the relief of the Roman Catholics, by the mitigation of the Penal Laws affecting their persons or property. The second, for the relief of the Protestant Dissenters, by the abrogation of the Test Act. The third, for the security of officers in the army, and the lessening of their dependence on the Government, by taking from the Crown the power of dismissal, except under the sentence of a Court Martial.* The fourth, for the limitation of the prerogative in the future creations of Peers. The fifth, not legislative, but administrative, for extending the popularity of the reigning family, widening the basis of the Government, and gradually gaining over the party in Opposition by employing several of its more moderate members. Every one of these measures was dropped by Walpole on succeeding to power. It may be maintained in his justification, that all these measures were mischievous; one of them, at least, the Peerage Bill, undoubtedly was so. But it will be found, that the same indifference or aversion of Walpole to any change, extended even to cases where the change was certainly and clearly beneficial. Thus, for example, in December 1718, Stanhope had moved for and appointed a Lords' Committee on the state of the Public Records; and its report, made after some months' inquiry, details the want of arrangement, classification, nay even of proper house-room, for the various national documents, and recommends that some of them, at least, may be digested into order that such of the loose papers as appear to be of * See on this subject in the Parliamentary History the speeches of Pulteney, February 13. 1734, and of Lord Chesterfield the same day in the other House. - value, may be bound up for their better preservation — that catalogues and indexes of them may be prepared without delay that better apartments may be provided for their custody. Here, then, what defence can be framed for Walpole in discarding these recommendations? Was not the evil real and undoubted, the remedy plain and easy, and have we not even in the present times seen reason for lamenting its neglect? And are we not justified in saying, from this and other such examples, that Walpole's dislike to innovation prevailed, even where the innovation was most evidently an improvement? The character of Walpole might also, as I conceive, be unfavourably contrasted with Stanhope's, in point of disinterestedness and political purity. I am very far — this must have been perceived in many former passages - from adopting the party suspicions and rancorous charges of corruption to which in his life-time Sir Robert stood exposed. I believe, on the contrary, that of such charges great part was falsehood, great part exaggeration. But still, looking only to proved and certain facts, and to the statements of his own partisans and panegyrists, we shall even on such testimony find cause to think that Walpole sometimes swerved from the straight path, and altogether lowered the tone of public morals. Thus, for instance, both he and Stanhope were in office together when the South Sea speculations reached their height. Stanhope thought it his duty to refrain altogether from any such source of profit. Walpole, on the contrary, plunged eagerly into the whirl, turned his own sagacity to good account, sold his shares of 100l. for 1000l., allowed his wife to gamble for herself, and gained a considerable fortune. The same absence - I do not mean of integrity, but of any nice scruples, prevailed, I fear, during his subsequent administration. If it be needful any further to exemplify my assertion, I will take the very words of his own affectionate and admiring son. In a letter, several years afterwards, Horace Walpole is inveighing *This Report is printed in the Lords' Journals, April 16. 1719. 1742. REVIEW OF WALPOLE'S ADMINISTRATION. 111 66 66 แ 66 against Keene, Bishop of Chester: "My father," he adds, gave him a living of 7007. a year to marry one of his natural daughters; he took the living, and my father dying soon after, he dispensed with himself from taking the wife, but was so generous as to give her very near one year's income "of the living."* I do not now inquire whether this accusation of Keene may not be unduly and untruly heightened. But I ask, could there be any stronger proof of a low tone of public morals than that Sir Robert should employ Crown livings as portions for his illegitimate daughters, and that his son should tell the story as bearing hard upon the Bishop, but without the slightest idea that it was also most discreditable to the Minister? It is possible indeed that a feeling of partiality may blind me, but I will own that I cannot discern in any part of Walpole's career a parallel to the disinterestedness of Stanhope in Spain, when offered by the Archduke and estate and title for his services, but refusing them, and adding that if any gratitude to him were felt, he hoped it might be shown in a readiness to conclude the Treaty of Commerce, which he was then negotiating.** How far less lofty was the course of Walpole on his resignation! Instead of withdrawing with a noble pride, asking nothing and accepting nothing, as one conscious of great services and resentful of popular ingratitude, he obtained the title of Earl of Orford, a further pension of 4,000l. a year***, and a patent of rank for his daughter by the mistress whom he had afterwards married. Was it wise for his own reputation to grasp immediate rewards for his services, and leave posterity no part of the debt to pay? Was it just to solicit such signal marks of Royal favour at the very moment when overwhelmed by national resentment, and thus to involve the Crown in his own unpopularity? So *To Sir H. Mann, December, 11. 1752. **War of the Succession, p. 177. *** The sinecures and places for life held by Walpole's three sons at this very time are enumerated by Coxe (Memoirs, p. 370.), and their yearly income amounts to 14,900l., besides the Rangership of Richmond Park, which was held by Sir Robert and one of his sons jointly, with benefit of survivorship, and which produced several thousands more per annum. fierce was the outcry against these favours to the fallen Minister*, that Sir Robert was induced to relinquish the pension, which however he again sued for and received two years afterwards. He would, also, probably have cancelled Lady Mary's patent had it not been too late. A letter at this period, from one of his friends, strongly manifests the imprudence of these grants, but at the same time displays his high and unconquerable courage in adversity. Lord Morton writes to Duncan Forbes, President of the Scottish Court of Session: "I cannot finish without a word about our honest "friend Sir Robert Walpole, for whom, I own, I am in some "fear. He this day went to Richmond, never again to return "to Court. The letter of rank for his daughter has raised "such a torrent of wrath against him, that God knows where "it may end. They now talk of a strict Parliamentary in"quiry; your Lordship knows how little any man can stand "such an ordeal after twenty years' administration. The last "time I saw him, which was on Sunday evening, I told him "of the clamour that was raised upon the subject of his "daughter, but the thing was then passed the offices, and "could not be recalled, though she had not been presented, "else I believe he would have stopped it. I would fain hope, "after he is fairly away, that the fury may subside; at pre"sent it is very violent. Last week there passed a scene be"tween him and me, by ourselves, which affected me more "than any thing I ever met with in my life, but it is too long "to trouble your Lordship with. He has been sore hurt by "flatterers, but has a great and undaunted spirit, and a tran"quillity something more than human.”** Before his departure for Richmond, Walpole had a considerable share in the choice of his successor. He was desirous to sow dissension in the ranks of his opponents, to * It had for many years been an Opposition taunt, that Sir Robert held in reserve a patent for some high title, to be taken out whenever he retired. Swift writes in 1731: "E'en quit the House, for thou too long hast sat in't, See Swift's Works, vol. x. p. 530. Scott's ed. ** Letter of February 11. 1742. Culloden Papers, p. 175. THE KING'S MESSAGE TO PULTENEY. 113 1742. continue the administration on the Whig basis, and, in case Pulteney should decline to be First Lord of the Treasury, to appoint Lord Wilmington. Such were his objects; his means were influence over his Royal master. In the same audience of the 1st of February, when he announced his own retirement, he prevailed over the King's aversion to Pulteney, and induced His Majesty to send him an immediate message, offering him full power, provided only he would screen Sir Robert from prosecution. This condition, suggested by Walpole at that crisis, is surely no proof of a generous and lofty mind. Am I wrong in believing that at such a juncture Clarendon or Chatham would have thought only of their country's, or, at the worst, of their party's benefit, and disdained to seek any safeguard for themselves, except from their own virtue and renown? The communication to Pulteney was intrusted to the Duke of Newcastle, who accepted it with peculiar pleasure. He had already some days before, though, as it seems, only on his own account, privately sent to Pulteney, requesting to have a secret meeting with him at the house of the Duke's Secretary, Mr. Stone. Pulteney had answered, that at the present juncture he could not comply with the request for a secret meeting, lest he should give umbrage to his friends, but had no objection to receive His Grace publicly at his own house. This not suiting Newcastle's underhand designs, the communication dropped. But the Duke, having now the Royal authority, no longer affected mystery, and wrote to Pulteney, stating that he and the Lord Chancellor had a message to him from the King, and were therefore about to wait upon him. A meeting accordingly ensued that same morning between Newcastle and Hardwicke on one side, and on the other Pulteney, attended by Carteret as his confidential. friend. The Duke opened the conference by saying that the King, convinced that Sir Robert Walpole was no longer supported by a majority in the House of Commons, had commanded them to offer the places held by that Minister to Mr. Mahon, History. III. 8 |