CHAPTER III.

PARLIAMENTS AND ELECTIONEERING UNDER JAMES II., WILLIAM III., AND QUEEN ANNE.

With the accession of James II. a fresh era of parliament commences. It was the first object of the newly proclaimed king to secure a liberal allowance, settled for life, such as would make him independent of “his faithful Commons.” His late brother having attempted to govern without that section of the legislature in which is vested the control of supplies, was, towards the close of his reign, getting to the end of his resources, derived from foreign pensions for the most part. Evelyn records that within a month of Charles’s death a parliament was summoned, and “great industry used to obtain elections which might promote the Court interest, most of the Corporations being now, by their new charters, empowered to make what return they pleased.” These liberties were, however, restored in the nature of bribes, the new charters granted by the Court being held as considerations for the election of such as were reckoned in the interests of that faction. Evelyn himself discloses this damaging fact: “It was reported that Lord Bath carried down with him into Cornwall no fewer than fifteen charters, so that some called him the ‘Prince Elector.’” This was an “electioneering job” on a gigantic scale, and the new parliament seems to have been returned on these corrupt principles where it was possible. On the same authority, we are enlightened concerning another piece of electioneering strategy, which proves that, as Praed has wittily told in verse, expediency has ever been proved the ruling policy on both sides. Under the 8th of April, 1685, the diary records--

“This day my brother of Wotton and Mr. Onslow were candidates for Surrey against Sir Adam Brown and my cousin Sir Edward Evelyn, and were circumvented in their election by a trick of the Sheriff’s,[30] taking advantage of my brother’s party going out of the small village of Leatherhead to seek shelter and lodging, the afternoon being tempestuous, proceeding to the election when they were gone, they expecting the next morning; whereas before and then they exceeded the other party by many hundreds, as I am assured. The Duke of Norfolk led Sir Edward Evelyn’s and Sir Adam Brown’s party. For this Parliament very mean and slight persons (some of them gentlemen’s servants, clerks, and persons neither of reputation nor interest) were set up; but the country would choose my brother whether he would or no, and he missed it by the trick above-mentioned. Sir Adam Brown was so deaf that he could not hear one word. Sir Edward Evelyn[31] was an honest gentleman, much in favour with his majesty.”

On the 22nd of May, 1685, the new king met his parliament (with his crown on his head), and the Commons being introduced to the House of Lords, read his speech, to the effect that he resolved to call a parliament from the moment of his brother’s decease, as the best means to settle all the concerns of the nation; that as he would invade no man’s property, so he would never depart from his own prerogative; and that as he would take care of _their_ religion and property,--

“so he doubted not of suitable returns of his subjects’ duty and kindness, especially as to settling his revenues for life, for the many weighty necessities of government, which he would not suffer to be precarious; that some might possibly suggest that it were better to feed and supply him from time to time only, out of their inclination to frequent parliaments; but that that would be a very improper method to take with him, since the best way to engage him to meet oftener would be always to use him well, and therefore he expected their compliance speedily, that this session being but short, they might meet again to satisfaction;”

a speech which, in spite of its palpable duplicity, was received with acclamation by the House. “So soon as the Commons were returned, and had put themselves into a Grand Committee, they immediately put the question, and unanimously voted the revenue to his Majesty for life.” This ready subserviency is explained, as it transpires, from Evelyn’s account, that the new members were not all that could be desired:--

“Mr. Seymour made a bold speech against many of the elections; and would have had those members who (he pretended) were obnoxious, to withdraw, till they had cleared the matter of their being legally returned: but no one seconded him. The truth is, there were many of the new members whose elections and returns were universally censured, many of them being persons of no condition, or interest in the nation, or places for which they served, especially in Devon, Cornwall, Norfolk, etc., said to have been recommended by the Court, and from the effect of the new charters changing the electors, as in Lord Bath’s famous western tour, when that nobleman is said to have quietly put down the names of all the officers of the Guards into the charters of the Cornwall boroughs; whence Seymour told the House in his speech that if this was digested, they might introduce what religion and laws they pleased, and that though he never gave heed to the fears and jealousies of the people before, he was now really apprehensive of Popery.

“By the printed list of members, of 505 there did not appear to be above 135 who had been in former Parliaments, especially that lately held at Oxford.”

Under the same date, 1685, Burnet mentions that complaints came up from all parts of England of the injustice and violence used in elections.

James II. got on no better with his parliaments than his predecessor; on his abdication at the Revolution, a convention parliament was assembled, which ratified the late changes, and offered the sovereignty to William of Orange and Mary his consort. The political squibs upon this topic are not wanting in point:--

“ON THE CALLING OF A FREE PARLIAMENT.

JANUARY 15, 1668-9.

“A Parliament with one consent Is all the cry o’ th’ nation, Which now may be, since Popery Is growing out of fashion. The Belgic troops approach to Town, The Oranges come pouring, And all the Lords agree as one To send the papists scouring.”

The Whigs, who had effected the Revolution which placed William III. on the throne, were now in the enjoyment of place and power, to the mortification of the discomfited Tories, whose vexation on the aspect of affairs, which gave them no prospect of a return to office, found expression in satirical attacks upon their more successful adversaries.

“THE WHIGS’ ADDRESS TO HIS MAJESTY.

“We who were never yet at quiet, Lovers of Change, Disorder, Riot, _Old Sticklers_ for a Common-wealth, (If you believe us) wish you Health, A long, a safe, a prosperous Reign. (The wicked _Tories_ think we feign.) We, who all Monarchy despise, Hope to find favour in your eyes; Think you a Protestant so hearty As not to disoblige our Party, And humbly beg, at any rate To be Chief Ministers of State, Or else your person we shall hate; For tho’ _Religion_ bears the name, It’s GOVERNMENT is all our aim. We’ll be as faithful and as just As to Your Uncle, Charles the First; Grant this request, your Cause we’ll own, And ease the burden of the Crown; Make it the easiest e’er was worn, You’ll scarcely know you’ve any on. But if (Great Sir) we find you slight us, Ourselves can tell which way to Right us; And, let you know, by sad disasters, Tho’ you are Lord, yet we are Masters. This truth you cannot choose but know, We prov’d it sixty years ago; Yet shall you find us now on Trial, Your faithful subjects, OR WE LIE ALL!”

Disappointment, and a long spell of disfavour at Court, embittered the Tory wits, and lent a barb to those satirical shafts which they freely launched at their powerful opponents, the Whigs in office and in parliament.

“THE PATRIOTS. 1700.

“Your hours are choicely employ’d, Your Petitions all lie on the Table. With Funds insufficient And Taxes deficient, And Deponents innumerable. For shame leave this wicked employment, Reform both your manners and lives; You were never sent out To make such a rout, Go home, and look after your wives.”

A poetic effusion, one of the relics of a parliamentary election in the reign of William III., was printed in 1701. It is entitled “The Election, a Poem,” and evidently describes an election for the city of London; the scene of the incident is the Guildhall, where the electoral struggle was fought out beneath the shelter of the civic guardians, Gog and Magog. This production, redolent of the savour of the seventeenth century, is interesting as displaying the nature of “election squibs” under an early guise. The poem opens with a brief introduction of the principal performers, and alludes to the scene of the contest.

“The day was come when all the folks in furs From sables, ermines, to the skins of curs, In great Augusta’s Hall each other rub’d And made it but one common powd’ring tub;

* * * * *

Ne’er was that Hall so throng’d in days of yore, Ne’er were there seen such numerous crowds before. From end to end the warm Electors thrust, And move like ants in heaps of straw and dust. Each busy mortal does his forces rally, And from one nook to t’other quarter sally. So close they prest, with such inhuman twitches; The _Civit Hogo_ did arise from breeches, Which thro’ the air increas’d into a breeze Made e’en the mighty Giants cough and sneeze. Here a fat spark could scarce his tallow save, And there a fool was jostled by a knave. Came to sweat out their venom ’gainst the State, Old feuds revive, and mischiefs new create.”

The bard describes the “City Godmother,” an obsolete mistress, whose traditions were with the Tories of the past:--

“She saw the temper of the noisy Hall, And wept the Churches’ stars that downwards fall.”

In vain does the antique beldame recall the “bad old times” of fanaticism and oppression (when in a former reign the civic charters were taken away perforce), and exhort the sympathies of the crowd to turn from Whiggism and embrace the abuses of the Stuarts:--

“Poor I, the city Sybil of renown, Am disrespected by the nauseous Town: Of Innovations daily I complain, But, like Cassandra, prophesy in vain.”

Next comes the hustings:--

“When on the _Rostra_, as upon a stage, The Candidates their partizans engage; You’d think the Hall an Amphitheatre And these the furious Gladiators were.”

The author first introduces the candidates who were obnoxious to him, and he certainly roasts them royally, and serves with a right pungent sauce. Priso, the first candidate to appear before the freeholders, had degraded himself as a tool of the late Court, and when in possession of the chair had basely surrendered the liberties of the city corporation.

“First Priso mounts the stage, and shows himself; The crowd unanimous did hiss the elf, And vow’d no Representative they’d have, Who to a Tyrant their old Charter gave.”

Candidate number two, Child, was, it is hinted, in the interests of the “prince over the water,” whom he was hopeful of converting from popery.

“Next him an infant comes, a Babe of Grace, And steps into his abdicated place, Where from his throne he, lisping out aloud, In words like these bespoke the noisy crowd. ‘You’re govern’d, sirs, but by uncommon rules, If you elect such men as are not fools. In hopes of this, this doubtful stage I enter, And at much cost on an election venture. I hope you’ve read the letter which I sent, Design’d each silly sot to circumvent. Tho’ I’m a Child,[32] my parts are come to age, And for my sense the monied men engage: Both kings and people have esteemed it fit, That those who have most money have most wit. Men they are pleas’d with great and manly toys, But baubles are the true delight of boys. I hate of Barons the renownèd Tales And recommend you to the Prince of Wales. Who in the Senate I will move to come Into our Church from the curst See of Rome; Where he shall hector like the Son of Priam, And be as wise a Protestant as I am.’”

The sentiments put into the mouths of the candidates contain enlightenment upon city matters, as well as upon prominent citizens, both under the reign of William III. and his predecessors from the Restoration. Another candidate is thinly disguised under the nickname of “the Czar.” He is made to thus candidly address the “medley voting crowd:”--

“This City fam’d for Aldermen and Mayors, The best intrusted with the public cares, In former ages have obtained renown, Great as the deeds our Ancestors have done. I, tho’ of mean descent, and void of fame, My ancestors obscure in birth and name, By gold ennobl’d, am come here to serve ye As once I did my master--that’s to starve ye. E’er I a representative commence, I’ll make confession here of all my sins; I _Judas_ first for my just pattern took, Betray’d my master, and his cause forsook. This made me rise, as other courtiers do, T’ attempt high Crimes, and Villainies pursue. _Jemmy_ a special Banker had in me, His coin lay safe as in his Treasury: It was no cheat his money to purloin, He knew not how, alas, to use his coin. My breach of promise is so small a fault, That no wise man can wonder at. But that you might not of my wit complain, I’ve been a cheat in every monarch’s reign. When paper was equivalent to gold, And paper-skulls their paper-credit sold, I, by my cunning and my wise designing, Soon got the modern art of paper-coining.”

The poetaster has nothing but good repute to shower on the late representatives of the city of London; he bids his Muse--

“Tell to _Augusta’s_ sons, the worth disclose Of those good patriots whom they lately chose. In front of these the aged Clito place, A better man did ne’er the City grace: Generous and brave, and true in former time, When Honesty was thought the highest crime. He in the _Oxford_ Senate bravely stood, Like some tall tree, the Giant of the Wood, O’ertopping all in courage and address, Invaded-Rights and Freedoms to redress; Brought in a Bill t’ exclude a Popish prince, The want of which we have lamented since. And when the Chair he did most justly fill, And tempted was to serve a Tyrant’s will, Would not his fellow-citizens disarm, But boldly did withstand th’ impending storm.

* * * * *

He in the Senate sits unbrib’d, and knows No cause--but where the common interest goes. He, unconcern’d, the dangerous path doth tread, Where Faction shakes its dire envenom’d head.”

Another favourite and patriotic candidate is “Asto,” who--

“early did his country’s cause embrace And opposed villains even to their face. The Charter he would not consent to yield, But did defend it in th’ open field. Gold never could his interest engage, The common vice of this polluted age; Whereby they villains into office vote, Such as would cut their King’s and country’s throat.”

The other candidates--“friends to their country all,” according to the bard--are christened “Witho,” “Hethban,” and “Pastor.”

With the death of William III. the Tory prospects revived, and their attacks became bolder. In alluding to the accident which caused the king’s end, the party lyrists showed no compassion for “a fallen foe.”

“Let’s ’em mourn on, ’twould lessen much our woe Had _Sorrel_ stumbled thirteen years ago.”

(B. HIGGONS, 1702: _The Mourners_.)

One of the ballads in the Bagford collection applies to the elections which took place in Queen Anne’s reign (the first parliament dissolved April 5, 1705); this High Tantivy effusion of the Tory Alma-Mater is rather long-winded, and we must be content with a brief extract:--

“THE UNIVERSITY BALLAD; OR THE CHURCH’S ADVICE TO HER TWO DAUGHTERS, OXFORD AND CAMBRIDGE.

“I have heard, my dear daughters, a story of late, Told for truth to the Commons, by a Minister of State, That the ‘Scotch Act’ was extorted; O England’s hard fate!

“If Whigs at this distance so terrible are, Such men in our bosom may make us all stare, And extort what they please, if we do not take care.

* * * * *

“If this be the case, pray what can you think? But that Church and State are now at the brink Of ruin, destruction, and ready to sink.

“But we have yet a time to save this poor nation, From fire and sword, and all desolation, By choosing such members as hate Decollation!

“And hence I take leave, both my daughters to press To give good examples, you can do no less, When the Church and the State are in so great distress.

“The eyes of the nation are fix’d upon you, Every city and borough will observe what you do, And if you’ll choose good members they’ll do so too.

“Each member that’s chose, serves for th’ whole nation, For that end you’re intrusted to vote in your station, Without any respect to friend or relation.

“The question before you is both plain and short-- Who is the best man, Church and State to support, From designs of the Whigs, and schemes of the Court?

“And in your next choice lay your hand on your heart, As if upon Oath, for if you do start From the rule above-mention’d, your conscience will smart.

“A good man is steady, and with safety may Be trusted with our Rights; he no tricks will play, He loves Church, and the Queen, and’s the same every day.

“But if a man be bred up a notorious Whig, Who because he was neglected begins to look big, And swears for old Friends he cares not a fig:

“O trust not to such in time of great danger; Who to mother Church is yet but a stranger, If Dissenter prevail he may vote for to change her.

“And as to the Tackers[33] that have tack’d the right way, For the Church and the Laws; to such I do say, I will give them my blessing, and for them I’ll pray.

* * * * *

“You are two great props of the Church and the Crown, Then be not like buckets, one up, t’other down, To expose your dear mother all over the Town.

“O no! Pray consider, this is the last squeak, Then choose we such men, as can both write and speak, Since all that we have, now lies at the stake.

“And when by your Daughters such patriots are chose, I may venture to say, that ‘under the Rose,’ You will spoil the new scheme, and wipe the Whig’s nose.”

One of the forty-nine verses of which “The University Ballad” consists contains an allusion to an important collision between the two Chambers upon disputed elections, which came about in Queen Anne’s reign:--

“O! how were we blinded with what some do write, Concerning the story of Ashby and White, Till Sir H[eneage] laid before us the fallacy, in sight.”

The names first given refer to the disputants, while Sir H---- in all probability is one of the University’s parliamentary representatives, Sir Heneage Finch, son of Finch, Lord Keeper and Chancellor. He was returned in 1678, 1688, 1695, and also in 1701 and 1702. The important dispute in question, which is not without interest, as it bears a special reference to election practices which were at one time prevalent, arose between the Lords and Commons on the occasion of the Aylesbury returns, and the case came before parliament in 1703-4. It seems to have been the tactics of those persons whose party held a majority in the House, to decide all disputed elections so as to strengthen their own side. “The majority,” meaning the government, legislated thus partially, conveniently ignoring the energetic protests against such flagrant injustice--the condonation of direct bribery and downright perjury, according to the allegations of the minority; who, it is said, when the turn of the wheel came which raised them to power, invariably endorsed the policy of their predecessors by repeating the same evil practices. The investigation brought to light the illegitimate nature of election returns, proving that it had long been the habit of constables and similar officials to secure for such candidates as would pay them sufficiently, their return for parliament by obtaining a majority of votes for the person who purchased their connivance: thus, after the seat was, in advance, put up to the highest bidder, pains were taken to ascertain in whose favour each vote was likely to be given; those burgesses who were not to be cajoled or bribed into voting for the candidate adopted by the constables were prevented from voting otherwise, under various pretexts by which they were disabled or disfranchised,--an oppression which reduced representative government to a mere pretence. Yet, although these glaring illegalities were patent, they had offered such temptations as to have been condoned successively by either party in power.

At length the evils of this system were forced upon the attention of the legislature, as certain burgesses of Aylesbury (Bucks) resisted the authority of the venal officers which had prevailed unchallenged hitherto, and at length brought a criminal action against William White and other constables of the borough. One Matthew Ashby had been permitted to vote at previous elections, but on the recent occasion was denied the privilege, as his vote happened to be in favour of the candidate who had not secured the official interest. The trial came on, and proved a complicated affair. The constables lost the day at the assizes, being cast in damages. Brought before the Queen’s Bench, a majority of two judges supported the constables, although the third, Chief Justice Holt, was opposed to them. The House of Lords reversed this judgment, confirming the award of the assizes. The Commons grew indignant with the Peers at threatened encroachments, and voted that Ashby, in prosecuting his action, had committed “a breach of privilege”--that delicate offence so swiftly and severely visited with condemnation. Lastly, the Lords fulminated their censures on the Commons for crying injustice; at their order the Lord Keeper sent “a copy of the case and of their resolutions to all the Sheriffs of England, to be communicated to all the Boroughs in their counties,” enlightening all concerned upon prevailing malpractices, and serving as a caution for the future--a proceeding highly provoking to the Commons, who were powerless to hinder it. They turned their indignant wrath upon the five burgesses of Aylesbury, who followed suit to Ashby, against White: when their actions were brought against the borough constables, as returning officers, for the refusal of their votes, “the House of Commons, on plea of breach of privilege, committed the five to Newgate, where they lay imprisoned three months.” By a curious turn of the tables, when their trial came on at the Queen’s Bench, Chief Justice Holt declared they ought to be discharged, but, being remanded, the prisoners were removed into the custody of the serjeant-at-arms, and the Commons were covered with disgrace by the after-proceedings. The dilemma was obviated by the queen interfering with a prorogation, followed by a dissolution on the 5th of April, 1705, which thus concluded the last session of Queen Anne’s first parliament.

The “loyal Tackers,” who fought so hard to get their own way under the easy sovereignty of their “gracious Anna,” were occasionally treated to hard rubs by their opponents, the stedfast Whigs, whose prospects again brightened at the close of Anne’s reign.

“THE OLD TACK AND THE NEW.

“The Tack[34] of old, was thought as bold As any Tack could be, Sir; Nor is the Age yet void of Rage, As any man may see, Sir.

“The Tack before was THIRTY-FOUR, Besides an even Hundred; But now, alas! So low it was, That people greatly wonder’d.

“If Tacks thus lose, It plainly shows, The Spirit of the Nation; That we may find, For Time, behind, They’ll lose their Reputation.

“Before the JACKS[35] were said to Tack Our loyal fine Pretences; But here folks say, The Humour lay To bring us to our Senses.

“Religious Laws, was then the Cause, OCCASIONAL CONFORMING; Did not agree with true Piety, And set the Church a storming.

“But now ’tis come, they Tack in fine, After a great Consumption; And therefore thought to have it brought In, by way of Resumption.

“Thus Projects, and thus Patriots chang’d, The House appear’d so civil; Both Tacks, which cost such Pains were lost, And thrown out to the Devil.”

In 1695, the legislature passed a severe act against bribery and treating, the first of a series of similar preventative measures which have been found requisite from time to time down to our own day.

That this act was needed is proved by the records of the immense sums expended in corrupting the suffrage. Addison’s patron, Thomas, Marquis of Wharton, is calculated to have spent eighty thousand pounds of his own fortune in electioneering. This spirited nobleman, who was one of the most energetic Whigs, and largely instrumental in bringing over the Prince of Orange, has been regarded as the greatest adept at electioneering which England ever saw, and, says Hannay, “may pass as the patriarch of the art in this country.” It is certain that his abilities were admirably adapted to the purpose of exercising this control. It was his policy “to forward the designs of an oligarch by the attraction of a demagogue,” a branch of higher art, which has had imitators in this age. He managed to return from twenty to thirty members, at an expenditure of thousands, backed by a happy persuasive knack of carrying all before him. Nor did he stop at an occasional duel by the way. In the general election of 1705 alone, he spent twelve thousand pounds. But cash, pluck, enterprise, and activity would have been less conspicuous had they not been supplemented by what has been called a “born genius for canvassing,” as is proved from the “Memoirs” which appeared shortly after his death in 1715. Wharton’s biographer introduces the subject of an electoral contest for the borough of Wicombe, at the beginning of Anne’s reign. His Whig lordship having recommended two candidates of his own choice, the staunch Church party, in a flutter of indignation, put up two High Tory candidates, and money was freely spent on both sides. A friend of one of the High Church candidates being desirous of witnessing the progress made by this canvasser, was invited down to Wicombe to watch the proceedings, and it was he who imparted the details to the compiler of the “Memoirs.”[36] The “Tantivy” party arrived to find my Lord Wharton before them, accompanied by his two _protégées_, going up and down the town securing votes for the Whig interest. The Tory candidates and a very few followers marched on one side of the street, Lord Wharton’s candidates and a great company on the other.

“The gentleman, not being known to my lord or the townsmen, join’d with his lordship’s men to make discoveries, and was by when my lord, entering a shoemaker’s shop, asked ‘where Dick was.’ The good woman said ‘her husband was gone two or three miles off with some shoes, but his lordship need not fear him--she would keep him tight.’ ‘I know that,’ says my lord, ‘but I want to see Dick and drink a glass with him.’ The wife was very sorry Dick was out of the way. ‘Well,’ says his lordship, ‘how does all thy children? Molly is a brave girl I warrant by this time.’ ‘Yes, I thank ye, my lord,’ says the woman: and his lordship continued--‘Is not Jemmy breeched yet?”

This conversation convinced the witness that his friend’s chances were hopeless in opposing a great Peer who could display such an intimate knowledge of the electors and their families. To the said marquis does Dr. Percy attribute the famous Irish ballad of “Lillibulero,” which is said to have had effects more powerful than the philippics of Demosthenes or the orations of Cicero, and certainly contributed not a little towards the revolution in 1688.

In the days of Queen Anne, the arrival of a popular candidate of the High Tory type was welcomed in a stately manner by the supporters of the “Church” cause, as appears from “Dyer’s Letters.”

“May 5th.--From Exon, we have an account of the honourable reception there of John Snell, Esq., one of the representatives in the late parliament, an honest, loyal, and brave _Tacker_, who arrived from London on the 1st inst., having been met some miles out of town by above 500 horse and some 1000 foot, composed of the neighbouring gentry, with the clergy, aldermen, and principal citizens; who conducted him to his own house with the city music playing before him, the streets echoing with these acclamations--‘GOD BLESS THE LOYAL TACKERS, AND SEND THE SNEAKERS MORE HONESTY AND COURAGE.’”

According to the Tories, all who were opposed to the “Tackers” of their order must be stigmatized to the public as “Sneakers.”

The Whigs were equally unscrupulous in the audacity of their assertions; the fatally damaging effect of a startling calumny, no matter how improbable, so that it be bold enough, exploded on an opponent by way of surprise--a resource much relied upon when matters looked desperate at these times of unsparing warfare--is illustrated in the next extract:--

“May 15th.--The Lord Woodstock, son of the Earl of Portland, has carried it at Southampton against Fred Tilney, Esq., a loyal and worthy gentleman, which was done by this trick:--that gentleman happening to pay his reckoning in that town with about 70 Loudores, which he had received there, _the Whig party immediately gave out he was a French pensioner, which calumny answered their purpose_.”

“May 29th.--Since my last, we have had an account of several elections, which I leave to the Gazette to enumerate: only the management of some of them is worth notice, particularly for the county of Worcester, where Sir John Packington and Mr. Bromley carried it gloriously against Mr. Walsh, who was set up by the Dissenters. Sir John Packington had a banner carried before him, whereon was painted _a church falling,_ with this inscription--‘_For the Queen and Church, Packington._’ It was observable, that while they were marching through the Foregate-Street, they met the Bishop’s coach, in which was a _Non-Con. teacher_, going to poll for Capt. Walsh, but the horses (at the sight of the church, as ’twas believed) turned tail, overturned and broke the same, and very much bruised the _Holder-Forth’s_ outward man; and this raised no small admiration that the Bishop’s horses should be afraid of a church.”

The commotion which in the days of Queen Anne was manifested in the public thoroughfares at an electioneering epoch is incidentally pictured by Dean Swift, in his “Journal to Stella:”--

“Oct. 5, 1710.--This morning Delaval came to see me, and went to Kneller’s, who was in town. On the way we met the electors for parliament-men, and the rabble came about our coach, crying, ‘A Colt! A Stanhope! etc.’ _We were afraid of a dead cat, or our glasses broken, and so were always of their side._”

Among the lost illustrations of the humours of elections is the ballad, “full of puns,” which Swift mentions having produced on that said Westminster election; for any trace of which we have vainly searched among the political pamphlets and poetical broadsides of the Queen Anne era.

It is Swift who relates the untoward catastrophe which awaited his friend, Richard Steele, the improvident “Tatler,” who, having a design to serve in the last parliament of Queen Anne, resigned his place of Commissioner of the Stamp Office in June, 1713, and was chosen for the borough of Stockbridge, in Hampshire, one of the snug constituencies swept away by the Reform Bill a century or so later. The Dean writes of Dick’s adventures on this errand:--

“There was nothing there to perplex him but the payment of a £300 bond, which lessened the sum he carried down, and which an odd dog of a creditor had intimation of and took this opportunity to recover.”

Steele’s parliamentary career was brief. He had not been long in the House before he contrived to get expelled, and gave deadly offence to the queen, by writing “The Englishman” and “The Crisis” against the Jacobite Tories. With the advent of his “Protestant hero,” George I., Steele secured patronage, knighthood, and a seat in the first parliament, where he sat for the since-notorious Boroughbridge, Yorkshire.

A deeply designed stroke of electioneering policy is credited to Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, who excelled in the subtle tactics invaluable in these emergencies, which raised her to the level of Wharton in election fame, while promoting the success of her nominees. Lord Grimston happened to oppose her grace’s candidates. Now, Lord Grimston, as is related by Johnson, had written a heavy play, “Love in a Hollow Tree,” having become ashamed of which bantling, he did his best to suppress it:--

“The leaden crown devolved on thee, Great poet of the hollow tree.”

“But the Duchess of Marlborough had kept one, and when he was against her at an election, she had a new edition of it printed, and prefixed to it, as a frontispiece, an elephant dancing on a rope; to show that his Lordship’s writing comedy was as awkward as an elephant dancing on a rope.”[37]

It was so much a matter of course that everything in a man’s life should tell against him, if he had the temerity to stand for parliament, that Johnson, when interrogated by Boswell, “whether a certain act of folly would injure a friend of theirs for life?” replied, “It may perhaps, sir, be mentioned at an election,”--the duchess’s feat probably presenting itself to Johnson’s mind at the time.

Hannay, in his sparkling essay on “Electioneering,” also relates the following:--“Mamma,” said a young candidate to his parent in deep confidence, one nomination day, “tell me truly, is there anything against my birth?”--an ingenious precaution in view of eventualities which the youth not imprudently employed to prepare himself for the worst, and that he might not he taken by surprise at the hustings.

The Tories were forced, after their failure to proclaim the Pretender as successor to Queen Anne, to subscribe their loyalty on the accession of George I. This they did with a reservation, as hinted by their opponents, who now held the good things of the administration:--

“Your fathers, like men, who had thoughts of a Heaven, Took the Oaths in the Sense in which they were given; But you, like your Brethren the Jesuits, can find A way to evade all the ties of mankind, So that nothing but Halters your faction can bind.”

It was not without reasonable suspicions of the Jacobite party that the ministers of George I. deemed it prudent to keep the Commons they had, rather than face a fresh election, since a general mistrust was abroad. From an effusion upon the bell-ringing in 1716, on the anniversary of Queen Anne’s coronation, it appears this tribute of respect to the memory of the late sovereign was regarded as a Tory manifesto:--

“’Tis Nancy’s Coronation Day By whom ye hop’d to bring in play Young George, the Chevalier. But Fate, who best disposes things, And pulls down Queens and sets up Kings, A better George sent here.”

According to the lyrist, the papists were tired of praying for Walpole’s abrupt end; but the conclusion exhibits the feeling then prevailing--and which was justified by after-events,--that the prolonged sessions of parliament under the new Septennial Act offered some defence against the schemes of their opponents; in fact, the tables were turned, and the Whigs of this parliament dreaded the machinations of the Tories, much as the Abhorrers and courtiers detested and feared the Whigs under Charles II.

“But now they utter loud complaints, And curse all male and female saints, Walpole still lives, their curb; And four long years, at least, must come, Ere French pistoles, and friends to Rome, Our Liberties disturb.”

The Pretender, whose cause looked hopeful at the time of his “dear sister’s” decease, was treated by the Whig satirists with all the ridicule their pens could command:--

“A FULL AND AMPLE EXPLANATION OF ONE KING JAMES’S DECLARATION.

“Had my dear Sister still been living, I might have hop’d for (the Crown) of her giving; But she, alas, is gone, and all Her latest servants--I should call My friends--disgrac’d and out of power, Nay some committed to the Tower, _Impeach’d_! Who then but must resent, To see a British parliament, With all the power of Arms and Laws, So zealously oppose my Cause, Pay Dutch, raise English troops and seamen, And may, perhaps, bring more from Bremen. Can my good subjects bear this still, And thus _be sav’d against their will_? However, if you’ll still consent, To damn that thing call’d _Parliament_, Burn _Magna Charta_, bring confusion On all things since the Revolution, Be governed by no other measure, But our own sovereign will and pleasure, I’ll pardon all, and what I’ve promis’d, grant ye, All ‘Oaths of Coronation’ _non obstante_.”

Whatever prospects the Pretender and his good friends the Tories might have cherished on the accession of George I., were abruptly put to flight after the abortive rising in 1715; this ill-advised attempt, and the consequences of its utter failure, are wittily set forth in the ballad:--

“THE RIGHT AND TRUE HISTORY OF PERKIN.

“Ye _Whigs_, and eke you _Tories_, give ear to what I sing; For it is about the _Chevalier_, that silly would-be King! He boasts of his nobility, and when his race began, Though his _arms_ they are two _trowels_ and his Crest a _warming-pan_. When first he came to Scotland, in ‘Our Dear Sister’s’ reign, He look’d, but did not like the Land, and so went home again. Soon after, ‘Our Dear Sister’ did make a peace with France, And then the _Perkinites_ did laugh to see the Devil dance. And then to please the growling Whigs, who Perkin could not brook, That slim young man was sent to graze as far as Bar-le-Duc. But yet when _D’Aumont_ hither came, to tie the League full close, Young Perkin tarry’d in Lorrain, or came to Som’set House. The Lords then did Address the Queen to do what she deny’d, Until Sir _Patrick_ and the _Prigg_ were safe on t’other side. Then came a proclamation out, to give five thousand pound To any one who Perkin took upon the English ground. Soon after _Semper Eadem_[38] this Mortal life departs Which thing almost broke _Chevalier’s_, and _Bona Fides’s_ hearts. Then Royal George of Hanover to happy Britain comes, With joyful noise upon the Thames, of trumpets, and of drums. The trait’rous Tory Tools then did cringe to seek for grace, And swore to be most loyal lads, if they were kept in place. But when the leaders found the King their Treason did espy, Away with speed they fled to France, the traitor’s sanctuary. This made the High-priest cry aloud,--the Danger of the Church, Because those pillars from her slipt, and left her in the lurch. Then _Bungay_[39] and his gang, harangu’d the senseless mob to win ’em; And rous’d ’em up to serve the Lord; as tho’ _the De’il was in ’em_. They ‘listed thieves, and jail birds, and rogues of ev’ry town, The Ladies chaste of Drury Lane, and _the w---- of Babylon_. Depending on this pious crew of ‘Non-Resisting’ Saints, They thought by plund’ring of the Whigs to make up all their wants. Then to begin the show,--Lord Mar,--that never was upright, To summon all his Bag-pipe-men, to Scotland took his flight. He sent his _baillie_ Jockey round to summon all his clans, With a concert of Bag-pipes--it should been _Warming-pans_! He told ’em they might all for mighty Honours look, For he that was before a Lord, was now become a Duke. They all (he said) should great men be, which was the way to win ’em. So he got an army of captains all, and scarce a soldier in ’em. And finding of his numbers great, he sent a brigadier, To join a band of Fox-Hunters, that were near Lancashire. These march’d into Preston town, the women for to frighten, And there they show’d their talent lay, in marching, not in fighting. They challeng’d Gen’ral Carpenter to run with them a race, And troth they beat him out and out, he could not keep ’em pace. But Wills with expeditious march these foot-pads did surround, And then they look’d like harmless sheep coop’d up within a pound. Then Forster got a posset, and gave his priest the Tythe, But posset could not make the priest nor general look blithe. Then Forster and his perjur’d crew surrender prisoners, And show’d they were no Whigs, for they did not delight in wars. Then as they march’d to London, Oh! ’twas a gallant show, The Whigs bid the music play ‘_Traitors all a-row_.’ About this time the said Lord Mar (depending on his number) March’d up against the brave Argyle, and thought to bring him under. But tho’ he had full four to one (which you may say is odds) Of Highland Loons dress’d dreadfully, with Bonnets, Dirks, and plads. Yet bold Argyle, with Britons brave, engag’d him near Dunblane, And soon with loss made him retire much faster than he came. Then Mar sent to the Chevalier, to hasten o’er to Scoon, And said, ‘He should not want a crown, tho’ the Ale-wives pawn’d their spoon.’ But Mar’s design was plainly, when next they went to fight, Only to show a _dismal thing_ which would like Death’s-head fright. At length the _pale-fac’d Hero_ came, and like an Owler lands, Indeed he had much reason, for the goods were contrabands. As soon as he arrived, a Scottish ague took him, And tho’ he swallow’d _Jesuit’s Bark_, Good Lady! how it shook him. The non-resisting Damsels believ’d the omen bad, When at first speech the _Baby_ cried, which made his Council mad. But when he heard Argyle approach’d with army in array, As Perkin came in like a thief, so again he stole away. So there’s an end of Perkin, and thus I end my Lays, With God preserve our Glorious George, and all his royal race!”