Part 15

For some years the exhaustion of France had been great. The finance ministers had been reduced to the most ruinous expedients to maintain the war, and the whole people were suffering terribly. To crown their misery, the winter of 1708 was of extraordinary severity and duration. The corn crops were frozen in the ground, the very apple trees perished with cold. Famine threatened to destroy what the war had spared. Louis became very anxious to treat; and as for some years it had been supposed that the Dutch were inclined to accept a separate pacification, it was to them that Louis addressed himself. The war party was however for the present in the ascendant, and Heinsius, who, as Grand Pensionary of Holland, exercised a predominant influence in the Council of the Dutch, let it be clearly understood that the Republic would treat only in conjunction with the allies, and that the allied demands would be very high. Louis however despatched an ambassador to see what terms could be made, but he met with a cold reception. The Government in England, especially the Whig members of it, were indignant at the threatened invasion of Scotland in the previous year, and induced the Parliament to vote that the Queen's title and the Protestant succession, the dismissal of the Pretender from France, and the demolition of the fortifications of Dunkirk, should be necessary elements in any treaty: while the Dutch claimed a line of ten fortresses on the Flemish frontier (including some still in the possession of France), and the restoration of Strasburg and Luxemburg. Nor, in exchange for these high demands, was any specific promise of peace given. Such was the position of the French Government, that even these terms were taken into consideration, and Torcy the French minister offered, though he could get no proper passport, to go himself privately and see what could be done to ameliorate them. He found the allies determined to demand at least the resignation of the whole Spanish succession, together with the restoration of Newfoundland to England. This demand put Louis in a difficult position. It was no longer, he declared, in his power to surrender Spain, for his grandson King Philip had a will of his own, and, although he might have been induced to resign Spain for an Italian kingdom, did not choose to become altogether crownless. Louis now reaped the fruits of his former bad faith as a negotiator. The allies, believing that this excuse was fictitious, and alleged merely to gain time, drew up their demands in accordance with the preliminaries, and would promise in exchange for the great concessions demanded from Louis only two months' truce. If in that time Philip could not be induced to resign Spain, the French King was to pledge himself to join with the allies to expel him by force of arms. When Torcy returned with these terrible terms, a Council was held at Versailles, and amidst tears of indignation at the ignominious propositions, it was determined that, in spite of the necessity of the moment, it was impossible to accept them. Louis declared, if he had to fight, he would rather fight against his enemies than against his own children. And now at length, humbled by reverses, he threw himself on the patriotism of his people; a stirring proclamation was circulated through the provinces; the King set the example of patriotism by turning his plate and costly works of art into money; the whole nation was touched by his humility, and the war began again with renewed vigour. The allies had indeed pressed their demands beyond what was either generous or politic.

[Sidenote: Battle of Malplaquet.]

Villars, the only great French marshal as yet undefeated, was intrusted with the duty of checking the victorious advance of Eugene and Marlborough. His name, and the newly roused patriotism of the country, raised the spirits of the army, though they were in want of many of the necessaries of life. Villars, determined to act upon the defensive, saw Tournay fall without moving. Thence the conquerors advanced to Mons, the capital of Hainault. It seemed necessary, if possible, to prevent the siege of this town. The rapidity of the movements of the allies prevented Villars from attaining that object, but the investment was scarcely formed when he crossed the Scheldt at Valenciennes, and appeared with his army in the immediate neighbourhood. The corner of the country between the Haine river on the north, and the Trouille on the east, in which Mons stands, is crossed by a barrier of high ground, rendered more difficult by large woods and forests. To approach Mons from the south and west this ridge has to be crossed, and the only convenient passage is by the _Trouée_, or open gap, between the woods of Lanière towards the east, and Taisnière towards the west. Between these woods the high land falls by several ravines into the plain of Mons. On the crown of the ridge is the heath and village of Malplaquet. Marlborough and Eugene, supposing that the object of Villars would be to pass through this gap and attempt to raise the siege of Mons, brought their army to the foot of the ascending ravines. But Villars, under whom Boufflers, though his senior in rank, was serving as a volunteer, feeling certain that at all events a battle would be fought, determined to adopt a defensive position, and during the night and day after his arrival at Malplaquet strongly fortified the flanking woods and the crown of the hill. Marlborough was anxious to attack before the fortifications were complete, but Eugene thought it necessary to await the arrival of troops coming from the siege of Tournay. A day was thus lost, and time allowed to render the fortifications much stronger. The battle, which began upon the 11th of September, was the most bloody and hardly contested of the war. In their first assaults the allies were repeatedly driven back, but the pressure upon the wood of Taisnière was so strong, especially when it was outflanked and threatened from the extreme right of the allies under Withers, that Villars had to weaken his centre to hold his ground. Marlborough perceived the weakness and took advantage of it. The entrenchments in the centre of the line were broken through and captured, and thus the position forced. Villars had been severely wounded, and the command had devolved upon Boufflers, who brought off the French army in perfect order, and the fruit of the hard-earned victory was nothing but the field of battle. The English encamped the following night upon the French position, having lost in their disastrous victory 20,000 men. Mons fell, but the campaign had then to be closed.

[Sidenote: Summary of political parties from 1702.]

Thus far it has been possible to follow without interruption the general course of the war, but from this time forward the state of politics in England exercised so decided an influence upon it, upon the negotiations which were to bring it to a close, and upon the position and conduct of Marlborough, that it becomes necessary to turn back and trace the history of parties since the Queen's accession. Speaking quite generally, that history consists in the gradual substitution of a Whig for a Tory Government. Rochester and the extreme high Tories were disinclined to a great offensive war, and consequently directly opposed to Marlborough. The Duke, not wishing to break with any great section of English politicians, attempted, as William had done, to govern by means of the moderate men of both parties. But there was a second question which, even after the dismissal of the Tories who disliked the war, prevented the completion of his plan. The Tories were desirous that stringent measures should be taken to support the exclusive authority of the English Church, and in this point were strongly supported by the feelings of the Queen. The Whigs, on whom Marlborough was induced for the purposes of the war more and more to rely, were on the other hand inclined towards more liberal measures. It was upon this point that the second secession of the Tories took place, leaving Marlborough entirely in the hands of the Whigs, and in a certain degree in opposition to the Queen. It was the Whig determination when triumphant to suppress the expression of High Church feeling that produced the complete overthrow of Marlborough's ministry. At the same time, as in the former reign, disputes between the Houses continued, especially when a Tory majority in the Lower House came into collision with the constant Whig majority in the House of Lords.

[Sidenote: Tory Parliament. Oct. 1702.]

[Sidenote: Dismissal of Rochester. 1703.]

Already, before the Parliament called by the late King had been dissolved, Rochester and the extreme high Tories had shown their disinclination to the war, and had besides given proof of a more exclusive party spirit than suited the views of Marlborough, to whom, as to William, the affairs of Europe and the conduct of the war were all in all, and who had no taste for party conflict. As was to be expected from the character of the ministry, a strong Tory majority was returned in October to the first Parliament of the Queen's reign. But Rochester's views were not shared by the whole of his party; indeed, the strength of party feeling tended for the time to give Marlborough the support of the Tories. In their eagerness to throw blame upon the late King, they could not refrain from contrasting him with the Duke. Marlborough had by this time begun his successful career by capturing the towns of the Meuse, and the Commons proceeded to congratulate the Queen, saying, "The wonderful progress of your Majesty's armies under the conduct of Marlborough have singularly retrieved the ancient honour of the English nation." The word _retrieved_, intended to imply censure on the late King, was, in spite of the opposition of the Whigs, carried by a large majority. For the present then, if merely out of opposition to William, the Tories as a whole seemed pledged to support Marlborough, liberal grants were made, and shortly after the close of the session, the Government, resting upon the general feeling in its favour, felt itself strong enough to get rid of Rochester. Displeased at receiving no more important office than that of Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, he left his government there, and remained in England. He thus afforded an opportunity to his enemies to order him to return to his duties. On his refusing to do so, the command was repeated in a more peremptory manner, and in his anger he sent in his resignation, which was accepted.

[Sidenote: Occasional Conformity Bill thrown out.]

Before this, however, the question of Church government had been raised in the House, and the storm it excited had caused a somewhat hasty prorogation. It had been the habit of dissenting members of corporations so far to do violence to their conscience as to receive the Sacrament according to the law of the Church of England upon their appointment to municipal offices. Having thus duly qualified themselves, they had continued to hold office, but had gone back to their old forms of worship. This habit, known as occasional conformity, was viewed with great jealousy by the Tories. In the first session of the Parliament a bill was brought in to render occasional conformity illegal, and to inflict heavy fines upon those who held office on such terms. The chief supporter of the measure was Henry St. John, afterwards so well known as Lord Bolingbroke. The Bill passed the House of Commons, but its amendment by the House of Lords produced such violent altercations, that the Queen found it necessary to put an end to the session. It was during this session that the Commissioners for the Union with Scotland first held their sittings. The progress of the negotiations which produced the Union in 1706 will be given subsequently.

The Parliament reassembled in November 1703, a month rendered remarkable by the greatest storm ever known in England; it is calculated that no less than 8000 lives were lost in it, while 800 houses and 400 windmills were reduced to ruins. The devastation caused among the forests in the country may be estimated by the fact that Defoe, travelling through Kent, counted 17,000 uprooted timber trees, and then desisted from reckoning them from weariness.

[Sidenote: The Methuen Treaty.]

[Sidenote: Occasional Conformity Bill again thrown out.]

[Sidenote: Disputes on the Aylesbury election.]

The session was again the scene of a great contest between the Houses. The war was still well supported, and the grants were upon a very liberal scale, rendered necessary by the additional troops required for Portugal and Spain, since Portugal had joined the Great Alliance, first under a treaty with Austria, and subsequently under the well-known Methuen Treaty with England. This treaty, regarded as a triumph of diplomacy, was completed by Mr. Methuen, the English minister at Lisbon, at the close of 1703. It was in exact accordance with the commercial views of the time, and contained but two articles. By the first English woollen manufactures were admitted into Portugal, by the second it was arranged that the duty on Portuguese wines should always be less by one-third than that on the wines of France. It was supposed that this would not only secure the friendship of Portugal, but would also bring much gold and silver, of which the Peninsula was the great emporium, into England, an object regarded as of the first importance under the mercantile system. It was when the Bill against occasional conformity, which had been dropped in the preceding session, was reintroduced that the contest began. The ministers who had been eager the preceding year that the Bill should be carried, had, since the resignation of Rochester and the opposition offered by his friends, grown less eager in their Tory views. In spite of their very lukewarm support, the Bill again passed the House of Commons by a large majority. But again it met with great opposition from the Lords, and was finally thrown out by a majority of eleven. As no amendments had been proposed, there was no room for angry conferences between the Houses. But an opportunity for quarrel was found in questions arising from the Aylesbury election. The returning officers for that borough had been notoriously guilty of tampering with the returns in favour of their own friends. At the last election the vote of Matthew Ashby had been rejected. He brought an action against the returning officer, and a verdict was found in his favour. The case was removed into the higher court, and three of the four judges of the Queen's Bench decided that all decisions with regard to votes rested entirely with the House of Commons. Upon this Ashby brought his case by a writ of error before the House of Lords, where the decision of the Queen's Bench was set aside, and the case finally settled in favour of Ashby. On this the Commons engaged in the quarrel, and declared that Ashby, by appealing to the law, was guilty of a breach of privilege. The Lords replied, declaring that the right of voting, like any other right, might be maintained by an action at the common law. There for the present the quarrel was left. It seems tolerably clear that on this point the Lords were in the right, but the newly won position of the House of Commons inspired its members with most overweening views of their own importance. In February of this year (1704) the Queen celebrated her birthday by surrendering her claim to the first-fruits of ecclesiastical benefices, which were hereafter to be employed for the benefit of the Church, and which have since been administered under the well-known name of Queen Anne's Bounty.

[Sidenote: Dismissal of Nottingham, Jersey and Seymour. May, 1704.]

[Sidenote: Replaced by moderate Tories.]

It was with the knowledge and co-operation of Marlborough--though he had himself taken the opportunity afforded by the prorogation to go abroad to fight the great battle of Blenheim--that his friends in the ministry succeeded in relieving themselves of the rest of the extreme Tories. For the removal of Rochester in the previous year had by no means cleared the Government of the party opposed to the active prosecution of the war. His views were accepted and supported by Nottingham and Jersey in the Upper House, by Hedges and Seymour in the House of Commons. Nottingham, true to his principles, had thrown every obstacle in his power in the way of a plan which had come before the Council for utilizing for the general purposes of the war the insurrection of the Cevennes. Thwarted in his opposition, after the close of the session, he haughtily demanded of the Queen the immediate dismissal of all the Whigs in the Government, threatening in case of refusal to retire. The Queen, who loved the Tories, would probably have wished to retain him, but she was irritated at the tone of his demand. Her irritation was fostered by Godolphin and the Duchess of Marlborough, and she brought herself to dismiss both Nottingham and his followers, Jersey and Seymour. The ministry had to be reconstructed. But Marlborough and Godolphin were by no means disposed to put themselves into the hands of the Whigs; they therefore called to office another section of the Tories not adverse to the war. Harley, the Speaker of the House of Commons, was made Secretary of State, Mansell replaced Seymour, the Earl of Kent, a moderate Whig, succeeded Jersey, while the Secretary of War, an unimportant person, made room for St. John.

[Sidenote: Parliament. Oct. 29, 1704.]

These changes did not improve the position of the ministers, as the Tory Party had still a strong majority in the House of Commons. Marlborough's own popularity with the House was shaken, and in the autumn session of 1704, the prevailing feeling showed itself in the form given to the vote of thanks with which the Commons met the victory at Blenheim; this was so expressed as to place on a level with the great general who had saved the Empire the Tory Admiral Rooke, who had fought an indecisive battle in the Mediterranean, for which many men thought he deserved rather blame than praise, for though almost as strong as the enemy, he had withdrawn from the battle without effecting anything. The Tory temper of the House was again shown by the increased passion with which the Occasional Conformity Bill was introduced and supported. A considerable number of the most vehement Tories were eager to adopt their old method, and to tack it to a Bill for the Land Tax. The Government, and that section of the Tories who followed the newly-appointed ministers, were sufficiently strong to defeat this movement, and the Bill met its usual fate in the House of Lords. As in the preceding session, unable to quarrel with the House of Lords for exercising their undoubted right, the Commons found means of attacking them by renewing the question of the Aylesbury election. Resting upon the decision of the House of Lords, other inhabitants of Aylesbury had sued the returning officers. The House of Commons had committed them to Newgate. The Queen's Bench had refused to interfere; the prisoners demanded a writ of error. The Commons addressed the Queen against the writ, and put the prisoners into the custody of their own serjeant-at-arms. The heat of the dispute rendered a prorogation necessary (March 14).

[Sidenote: Gradual introduction of Whig ministers.]

[Sidenote: Marlborough's composite ministry. 1707.]

But the conduct of the Tory majority had tended still further to incline the ministry towards the Whigs. Rooke was superseded as commander-in-chief of the fleet, Sir Cloudesley Shovel, a Whig, put in his place, and as the three years of the Parliament were now run out, the Government influence was exercised at the elections against all those who had voted for tacking the Occasional Conformity Bill. Even stronger signs were visible of the intention of the Government to form a junction with the Whigs; the ministers began an intrigue with the Junto, promising before long to give the Great Seal to William Cowper (a promise which was shortly after fulfilled), and admitted the Duke of Newcastle to the ministry as Privy Seal in the place of the Tory Duke of Buckingham. Nor was it the Government only which was changing its views. The nation at large, thoroughly interested in the war and disgusted at the conduct of the Tories, returned at the new elections a large majority of Whigs. The growing influence of the Whigs was supplemented by a family tie which connected Marlborough with that party; as Godolphin, whose son had married one of his daughters, formed a link with the Tories, so Sunderland, who had married another, connected him with the Whigs. It seemed as though a bargain advantageous to both sides might be struck between the Duke and the Whig party. The accession of Sunderland to the ministry would on the one side strengthen Marlborough's personal position, and render it more possible for him to carry on his plan of government without parties; while, on the other, it would secure to the Whigs a means of at once influencing the character of the administration. It was determined therefore that Sunderland should enter the ministry, and as there was then no vacant office, he was employed at once as extraordinary ambassador to Vienna, and in the course of the following year (1706) was raised to the office of Secretary of State. His appointment, and the gradual inclination of the Government to the Whigs, was followed, at the beginning of the year 1707, by the creation of several Whig Peers, and by a final breach with the High Tories, when the names of Buckingham, Nottingham, and Rochester were struck from the list of the Privy Council. Marlborough seemed now to have gained his object. The administration was a thoroughly composite one. On the one side were a number of Whigs led by Lord Sunderland, on the other a section of more moderate Tories headed by Harley and St. John.

[Sidenote: Harley, seeing its weakness,]

[Sidenote: intrigues against Marlborough.]