WALPOLE AND HIS TIME.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1209, 21 October 1882, Page 2

WALPOLE AND HIS TIME.

th MatUrtoiilDt- .'• ■ ; ■■iMiniSocielji.) /■; ■■::'#■.■!' We are considering a. period in the history of ;England, ; bprdering on the despotism of the Stuarts, and just after- the Great Revolution, and the time of the introduction of. the Hanoverian Dynasty to the English throne, we have arrived at the culminating point, when the House of Commons had gained a victory over kingly power, and the time when the so called Whig families controlled that House and the period the first of the. great commoners who ruled England solong and so well, viz., 20 years. It is worth a passing thought; to briefly glance at the chief rulers of Europe who lived ahout this time'.Louis XIV of France; Peter the ; Greatofßussiaj Frederick the Great of Prussia, Charles : XII of Sweden, and our own William 111. We may ask ourselves the question—What did each one of these worthies do, that theirnames are here introduced? The answer is soon stated, Can five other names, who have had so much to do with the alteration oi the face of Europe as these live had, be adduced as being equal to them. It ia affirmed not. Most assuredly these potentates will ever be looked upon as being equal too, if not far above, any other Gve persons, whose names are found in the history of England, or in Europe; living about the same period, engaged in the most stupendous undertakings, as these five were. Who raised France to suoh a zenith nf fame, not only extending her boundaries, but waging war agaMßt almost the whole of Europe, almost a Napoleon, only more.lasting in his undertake ? Why Louis XIV. What man laid the foundation, or built up an Empire, the largest in Europe, extending iis borders in all directions 1 Only such a man as did it—a Peter the Great. Who raised Prussia from a small insignificant state, to become one of the great powers in Europe, which has gone on progressing till nearly.the whole of the German speakit)!,' people are under its rule. Whatother nian could have done it but a Frederick tho Great 1 And although Charles XII was not successful in founding another Empire,, yet his skill as a general far exceeded those previously mentioned, Had he only beeu ambitious in a moderate degree, and a little less inclined to wander'from home in his fighting expeditions, who can tell to what exalted degree of prosperity he might have raised Sweden. Ourown William 111 came to England just in tune to preserve the freedom of England. Perhaps it is not asser'.ing too much to say the freedom of a large part of Europe, aud he Eiiccbeded in defeating the schemes of Louis XIV, and compelled him to acknowledge William to be the kin? of England. These five names will ever bo remembered as being the five master spirits of this period, that is persons who lived at the latter end of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century. They have no compeers, and this is the reason why they are introduced into this paper, Now we come to what more especially relates to us units of a kingdom, the like of which is not known in the world, and 'if, unfortunately, it may be ever dismembered, no such kingdom can be raised up again equal to our glorious British nation in magnitude, freedom, and wealth. I just refer to the way in which the Commons wrested the power from the King at this time. First the rivalry between the partisans of the exiled Stuarts, and the supporters of tho House of Hanover, which rivalry threw all the power into the hands of the Whigs-tho Hanoverian supporters. Secondly, George I and II neither knew, nor cared to know, anything but the honor of being Kings of Eng" laud, and the wealth attached thereto, but still moro about the prosperity of Hanover and Germany, than about the constitutional Government of England Thus it became an easy task for Miniatora of this period, to deprive tho King of that power, which all previous Kings possessed up to the time of William 111, and to lock up that power in the secure embrace of tho House of Commons. It is true the Com.mons succeeded in William 111 time in extending its power over the King by the Act of Settlement, By this Bill no foreigner could sit in Parliament, or hold office under the Grown. It prevented the King from going to war in defence of |>f countries that did not belong to En-, land unless Parliament gave the Kin» permission, i.e., by providing the means for carrying on war, or the King to pardon anyone that the Commons might impeach; or to prevent the same power from bringing an impeachment against anyone, _ It may be said that which was begun in William's lima was firmly secured in the lime of Walpole. Now we come to the names of the great Whi° landed familes, who, guidod at the time" and in a great measure has guided down to our time the nation's councils. The Bentmcks', Manners', Campbells, Cavendish b Fitzroys', Lennoxes', Russells 1 , Granville's. Then we have men noted as politicians-Shrewsbury, Somerset, Arxyle, Cooper, Halifax, Townshend, Somers, Hirdwick, Marlborough, Ohostorfield, and Robert, Earl of Sunderland. All of these were celebrated men capable of directing or leading the House at this tuno. The Earl of Sunderland was the man who suggested to William lit, when he found it to be almost impossiblo to control all his Ministers, that William should choose his Ministers from the party which had the largest number of supporters in the House. This advice was acoepted. Although we have had a House of Commotiß since the time of Henry 111, it was not until the reign of William 111 that tho first English Ministry was formed, and which gaveto itself (tho House) the power of appointing a Ministry or dismissing it, independently of the King's power. Although such a host of men as those mentioned, who held responsible positions in the Ministry of the day, yet during the years of Walpole's administration the whole, with one exception, were driven out of office through Walpole's ambition; so that at the end of 20 yearn' rule, the only man of note left with Walpole was Chancellor lord Hardwick. The others were driven to join the " Patriots," as they were called, who formed an Opposition more factious and unprincipled than has ever disgraced the House of Commons. We now come to speak of Walpole. First, as a man; it is said that he had not his equal in hard riding, drinking, and swearing. When Premier, the first letters he would read were_ those written by his huntsman to let him know the condition «f his do°s and horses—plainly showing the character of this noted man. Here we might mention an incident whioh took place in the early political life of Walpole. On the 17th of January, 1711-12, Walpole was voted by the House of Commons to be guilty of a breach of trust and. notorious corruption in receiving a sum of and taking a note for £SOO more.on aocount of two contracts made' by him when Secretary, of War, pursuant to a power granted by the Lord' Treasurer. For this he was committed Mho Tower, and was expelled from the House by a majority of 170 to 118. As Boon as he was liberated, he was'reelected for Lyme Regis, and again he was expelled, only to ba again re-eleoted. He was now permitted to take his seat, and rose to the highest office in the State. It lß only-jual to state that tho offence for which ;he was Bent to the Tower, was, in Scotch-phraseology, '.' not proven,"' A oireomst'ance id connection, with his

expulsion is worthy of being inserted in this .paper. On Walpole being ordered (o withdraw while the House voted bU eoratnitial to prison, a friend (tit David Campy la Scotch member) withdrew with him, and accompanied him to the Tower gates, Walpole never forgot ibis kind act of his sympathetic friend, and when it was in his power to confer both honor and place on Mr Campbell, to the honor. of this Scotch gentleman, he would hot receive either the oneqrtheother from him. It is said ho was at times able to serve in" a' moderate mariner not unworthily a friend. A word, from Sir Robert's old oompsnion to the Tower gates,; carried with it r itronger recommendation, than one made: by the most powerful, of Walpole's euppnrters. How shall we contrast this instance with Sir Robert's cynical verdict that " every man has his i price" 1 It was a rather pleasant reproof j for the great men of that day formakijW;such an assertion. Sir Robert, likwis neighbors, was incapable of withstammiV' the desire to participate in dealing in shares of the South Sea Company, for it is generally considered that he was the only one to see through this prepoiterouc bubble, yet he admitted thai he not only bouglit,but likewiseaold at again of £IOOO per cent. From tins, it Beoms strange that, if he was the only one to ses the ruin it would (and did) cause to the shareholders, why he did not hand over the protitß he made to be divided among the unfortunate people, who were reduced to beggary when the Bcherae burst. It is not known that he refunded a tingle penny, yet he took a prominent part in bringing lo justice the directors of the scheme. It may be the profits went in the direction of his princely residence at Houghton, which expenditure cannot be accounted for, from any income he received as a Minister of the Crown, It has been nolioed how his ambition and jealousy drove from his miuistry the chief of the Whigs, and that they joined the Patriots. In connection with this word, Sir Robert used to say he had only to refuse some unreasonable request, and it produced a Patriot at once; but this way of manufacturing Patriots could never apply to the whole of those he forced to leave his ministry, and his ranks. A name is attached to him as being one of the most scandalous of ministers who aver held the reins of a Government. '" Corruption was older than Walpole, for it sprang out of the transfer of power to the House of Com. mons, which began with the Restoration, The transfer was now complete, and the Commons was supreme in the state; but while it was free from being controlled by the Crown, it was as yet, only imperfectly responsible to the people." This has been reserved for to be accomplished in our own days, At that time a voto was lo valuable to be given without a recompense. Parliamentary support had to bo bought by places, pensions, and bribes in hard cash. Walpole perhaps wis not bo corrupt as Danby, who preceded him, or the Pelhams who followed after him, but Sir Robert was far more cynical in his avosal of corrupt ion by the very character of his rule, Hence moat likely the reason.why he used tho expression "Every man has his price." We must give him credit for the manner, in which, he steered the state ship thiough a most trying and difficult time. How, on the one hand he kept the king of France in leading striugj, until the Hanoverian Dynasty was firmly established on the throne, and how, he refrained to interfere with chcrch matters, so that Jacobites, Churchmen, hudDisseiiters for the lime were lulled into peace and quietness. Walpnle'B wise policy, in not permitting Eng. land to get entangled in Continental squabbles, is very much to his oredit. Thus it was the country in his time became prosperous, aud with that prosperity, happy. _ No less than twenty millions were paid by him in reducing the national debt, Sir Robert, no doubt, had much trouble to satisfy the two Georges, that it was not England's interest to interfere with continental affairs, and it may be said, had all Ministers after him held the same views, England's national debt would bo very small now in comparison to what it is at present, Sir Robert on one occasion said, "That of the fifty thousand soldiers who had beau killed in one year on the Continent, thero was not an Englishman amongst them " That was, indeed, something of which to be proud, and happy men aro the Ministers who can truly make such an assertion. Here, we mention a few of the most important of the measures passed or rejected in his lime. The repeal of the' Triennial Bill and substituting for it the Septennial Bill, a wise step at that time towards the securing of the orown for Gcor«e I, A Bill was passed " that all proceedings in courts of justice should be in the English language." Walpole was the principal one who caused a Bill to bo thrown out, which, if passed, would have destroyed the power of the Commons. It was a Bill to prevent the king from increasing tho number of members in the House of Lords, Sir Robert was quite right in declaring that if.passed " it would have made the Houbb of Lords supremo in most all matters in the future." His Excise Bill was rejected. This was a measure in advance of tho times, Howevor, it has been adopted since that time. One of his reasons for desiring to carry it, I think will not be approved of by modern politicians, viz,, to relieve landholders from paying land tax. Now we come to tho ohief cause ■which led to Sir Robert's downfall. The prosperity, of the trading classes caused them to desire a larger trade with South America, and, unfortunately, they did not mind, by what means this was accomplished, if they only secured it. This ledto a war with Spain and France, which war Sir Robert strove with all h» power to prevent. He was compelled by the nation to doclare war against these two powers. It is recorded of him when ho heard the bells ringing when, war was declared.that he Baid, "They may ring their bells now, but they will soon be wringing their hands." A general election took place in 1741. Tho results of which were that Sir Robert was no longer able to prevent the patriots from ruling the House. He therefore resigned and was called to the House of Lords by the title of Lord Orford. He, however, took little or no part in the proceedings of that House. His son Horace in his ' Letters of these times," gives a griev« ous description of his father's fall, He writes thus: ,r He whose head was no sooner on the pillow than he was in a sound sleep; now seldom sleeps en hour. He who was the very life of a dinner party, now Bits for hours without uttering a word." What a pictureofadisappoiri'iig ambition I What an end to which great Commoner came I'