by exerting all our strength, in case a war becomes necessary. If my country should call me to account, I would willingly take upon me the blame of every step that has been made by the government, since I had the honour to enter into the administration. As to the common notion of a minister's being afraid to enter upon a war, I do not understand upon what it can be grounded. For my part, I could never see any cause, either from reason or from my own expérience, to imagine that a minister is not as safe in time of war, as in time of peace. Nay, if we are to judge by reason alone, it is the interest of a minister, conscious of any mismanagement, that there should be a war; because by a war, the eyes of the public are diverted from examining into his conduct; nor is he accountable for the bad success of a war, as he is for that of an administration."*

The Bill was negatived by a large majority on the 15th of May.†

A few days after this debate, the session was closed by prorogation.

Thus concluded this difficult session, in which the minister contrived to place the disputes with Spain on such a footing as to give an opening to an amicable negotiation, during the course of which, he trusted that a due mixture of vigour, moderation, and forbearance, would induce the court of Madrid to agree to such conditions, as would satisfy the English nation, restore harmony, and prevent a rupture. The resolutions * Tindal, vol. 20. p. 369 and 370. ↑ Journals.

of the house of commons were transmitted to Mr. Keene, to lay before the king of Spain; letters of reprisals were issued to the merchants; a squadron of ten ships of the line sailed for the Mediterranean, under the command of admiral Haddock; many single ships were sent to America, and the infant colony of Georgia was supplied with troops and stores for resisting the Spaniards, who threatened to invade it from St. Augustine. These precautions for defence and attack were obviously calculated to give weight to the negotiation with Spain, and had their due effect.

CHAPTER 52.

1738-1739.

Difficulties attending the Negotiation with Spain-Articles of the Convention-Protest of Spain-Parliamentary Proceedings-Debates on the Convention.

THE remainder of the year was passed in attempts to adjust the differences between Spain and England.

No negotiation ever commenced with more unfavourable appearances, or was attended with greater difficulties. These difficulties principally arose from the punctilious and inflexible spirit of the Spanish court, the high expectations of the English nation, the discordant resolutions of the lords and commons, and the disputes between the crown of Spain and the South Sea company.

The first difficulty arose from the Spanish court being tremblingly alive to all discussions on points which related to their American possessions; for although Philip appeared well inclined to give full satisfaction for past depredations, and full security for freedom of navigation, which did not favour the illicit commerce, carried on with his subjects in America, or which did not infringe on his sovereign rights; yet he could not be prevailed on to grant any specific

proposition for not searching ships, either in the open seas, or hovering on their coasts, under the pretence of trading to and from the British plantations.

The difficulty of managing so capricious a court was increased by the high expectations of the English nation. The people, fired with enthusiasm, and inflamed by exaggerated accounts of Spanish depredations, wildly and imperiously clamoured for redress. They laid their demands of reparation at a very high rate: they required ample satisfaction for past injuries, and full security against future depredations, which security was made to consist in an explicit renunciation of the right of searching ships, in all places except the Spanish ports and seas.

Walpole, well aware of the inflexibility of the Spanish court on this delicate question, had contrived to word the resolutions, which passed the commons, in such a manner as to omit the mention of the word Search. He had avoided, with great prudence, all specific claims, and confined the expressions of the house to general topics. But this design had been frustrated by the resolutions of the lords, which reduced the question to a specific proposition, and positively declared the illegality of searching English vessels on the open seas, and trading to and from the different parts of the British dominions. These discordant resolutions naturally produced numerous embarrassments, and would have occasioned insuperable obstructions, had not the minister resolved to adhere to the decision of the commons.

[1738

UNIVERSITY

CALIFORNIA

SIR ROBERT WALPOLE.

59

-1739.] But the negotiation encountered the greatest difficulty from the disputes of the crown of Spain with the South Sea company. The origin and progress of that company, and the fatal consequences arising from the project of commerce to South America, have been already related.*

Before the Asiento treaty, a very advantageous, though contraband trade, was carried on from Jamaica to the Spanish colonies. The Spanish governors connived at the introduction of negroes, and the importation of English manufactures. The profit of this traffic was certain and expeditious, and was still greater, because it was not attended with the payment of duties to the king of Spain, or other incumbrances,

But this branch of traffic was evidently diminished by the Asiento treaty. It then became the interest of Spain, for the sake of the duties, as well as of the South Sea company, who wished to monopolize the trade to the Spanish West Indies, to stop this commercial intercourse; and many remonstrances were made to government, as well as to the Spanish court, by the directors, who considered all British subjects, trading to the Spanish settlements, as interlopers upon their province. Hence disputes frequently arose between the South Sea company, and the traders of Jamaica; and the directors by their remonstrances, often occasioned the seizure and confiscation of vessels which were taken in the act of carrying on an illicit trade, or with illicit goods Chapter 19.