of Orange, Stuart, Wiliam III of 1714
afterward (the so- England, I
Wiliam III caled "Old 1689 George II
of England Pretender, I
b. 1688, Frederick, Prince of
d. 1765 Wales (died before
| coming to the throne)
Charles Edward I
Stuart (the so-caled ============================
"Young Pretender"), I I I
b. 1720, d. 1788 George IV Wiliam IV Edward,
Duke of Kent,
d. 1820
*Elector-Palatine: a prince ruling over the I
territory caled the Palatinate in Victoria
western Germany, on the Rhine. I
+Elector of Hanover: a prince ruling over the Edward VII
province of Hanover, a part of the German I
Empire, lying on the North Sea. The elector George V
received his title from the fact that he was
one of a certain number of princes who had
the right of electing the German Emperor.
533. Character of the New King.
The new sovereign was a selfish, coarse old man, who in private life would, as Lady Montagu said, have passed
for an honest blockhead. He neither knew anything about England, nor did he desire to know anything of it. He
could not speak a word of the language of the country he was caled to govern, and he made no attempt to learn
it; even the coronation service had to be explained to him as best it might, in such broken Latin as the ministers
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
213/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
could muster.
Laboring under these disadvantages he wisely declined to take any active part in the affairs of the nation. He
trusted everything to his Whig friends (S532) and let them, with Sir Robert Walpole at their head, manage the
country in their own way.
Forunately, the great body of the English people were abundantly able to take care of themselves. A noted
French writer said of them that they resembled a barrel of their own beer, froth at the top, dregs at the bottom,
but thoroughly sound and wholesome in the middle. It was this middle class, with their solid practical good sense,
that kept the nation right.
They were by no means enthusiastic worshipers of the German King who had come to reign over them, but they
saw that he had three good qualities: he was no hypocrite, he did not waste the people's money, and he was a
man of unquestioned courage. But they also saw more than this, for they realized that though George I might be
as heavy, dul, and wooden as the figurehead of an old-fashioned ship, yet, like that figurehead, he stood for
something greater and better than himself,— for he represented Protestantism, with civil and religious liberty,—
and so the people gave him their alegiance.
534. Rise of Cabinet Government; the First Prime Minister.
The present method of Cabinet Government dates in great part from this reign. From the earliest period of
English history the sovereign was accustomed to have a permanent council composed of some of the chief men
of the realm, whom he consulted on al matters of importance (SS144, 145). Charles II, either because he found
this body inconveniently large for the rapid transaction of business, or because he believed it inexpedient to
discuss his plans with so many, selected a smal confidential committee from it (S476). This committee met to
consult with the King in his cabinet, or private room, and so came to be caled "the Cabinet Council," or briefly,
"the Cabinet," a name which it has ever since retained.
During Charles II's reign and that of his immediate successors the King continued to choose this special council
from those whom he believed to be friendly to his measures, often without much regard to party lines, and he
was aways present at their meetings. With the accession of George I, however, a great change took place. His
want of acquaintance with prominent men made it difficult for him to select a Cabinet himself, and his ignorance
of English rendered his presence at its meetings wholy useless. For these reasons the new King adopted the
expedient of appointing a chief adviser, or Prime Minister, who personaly chose his own Cabinet from men of
the political party to which he belonged.
Sir Robert Walpole, who held this office of chief adviser for more than twenty years (1721-1742), is commonly
considered to have been the first actual Prime Minister, and the founder of that system of Cabinet Government
which prevails in England to-day. He was a master hand at managing his felow ministers in the Cabinet, and
when one of them, named Townshend, aspired to share the leadership, Walpole said to him, "The firm must be
Walpole and Townshend, not Townshend and Walpole." But later (1741) a minority in the Lords protested "that
a sole or even First Minister is an officer unknown to the law of Britain, inconsistent withthe Constitution of this
country, and destructive of liberty in any government whatsoever." Then Walpole thought it expedient to disclaim
the title; but many years later the younger Pitt declared (1803) that there ought to be "an avowed minister
possessing the chief weight in the Council" or Cabinet, and that view eventualy prevailed.[1] The Cabinet, or
"Government," as it is usualy caled,[2] generaly consists of twelve or fifteen persons chosen by the Prime
Minister, or Premier,[3] from the leading members of both houses of Parliament, but whose political views agree
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
214/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
in the main with the majority of the House of Commons.[4]
But this system, as it now stands, was gradualy developed. It had advanced to such a point under the dictatorial
rule of Sir Robert Walpole that George II, chafing under the restriction of his power, said bitterly, "In England the ministers are King." George III, however, succeeded, for a time, in making himself practicaly supreme, but
Cabinet Government soon came to the front again, and, under Wiliam IV, the Prime Minister, with his Cabinet,
ceased to look to the sovereign for guidance and support, and became responsible to the House of Commons
(provided that body reflects the public opinion of the nation).
[1] Feilden's "Constitutional History of England," Taswel-Langmead's "English Constitutional History," and A.L.
Lowel's "The Government of England," 2 vols. [2] "The Cabinet, the body to which, in common use, we have latterly come to give the name of Government." Encyclopaedia Britannica (10th edition, VIII, 297). [3]
"Premier": from the French premier, first or chief. [4] The existence of the Cabinet depends on custom, not law.
Its three essential characteristics are generaly considered to be: (1) Practical unanimity of party; (2) Practical
unity of action under the leadership of the Prime Minister; (3) Colective responsibility to the party in the House
of Commons which represents the political majority of the nation. Its members are never OFFICIALLY made
known to the public, nor its proceedings recorded. Its meetings, which take place at irregular intervals, according
to pressure of business, are entirely secret, and the sovereign is never present. As the Cabinet agrees in its
composition with the majority of the House of Commons, it folows that if the Commons are Conservative, the
Cabinet wil be so likewise; and if Liberal, the reverse. Theoreticaly, the sovereign chooses the Cabinet; but
practicaly the selection is now always made by the Prime Minister. If at any time the Prime Minister, with his
Cabinet, finds that his political policy no longer agrees with that of the House of Commons, he and the other
members of the Cabinet resign, and the sovereign chooses a new Prime Minister from the opposite party, who
forms a new Cabinet in harmony with himself and the Commons. If, however, the Prime Minister has good
reason for believing that a different House of Commons would support him, the sovereign may, by his advice,
dissolve Parliament. A new election then takes place, and according to the political character of the members
returned, the Cabinet remains in or goes out of power. The Cabinet, or Government, now invariably includes the
folowing officers:
1. The First Lord of the Treasury (usualy the Prime Minister).
2. The Lord Chancelor.
3. The Lord President of the Council.
4. The Lord Privy Seal.
5. The Chancelor of the Exchequer.
6. The Secretary of State for Home Affairs.
7. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.
8. The Secretary of State for the Colonies.
9. The Secretary of State for India.
10. The Secretary of State for War.
11. The First Lord of the Admiralty.
In addition, a certain number of other officers are frequently included, making the whole number about twelve or
fifteen.
535. The "Pretender"; "The Fifteen" (1715); the Septennial Act (1716).
The fact that George I exclusively favored the Whigs exasperated the opposite, or Tory, party. The Jacobites or
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
215/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
extreme members of that party (S495), in Scotland, with the secret aid of many in England, now rose, in the
hope of placing on the throne James Edward Stuart, the son of James II. He was caled the "Chevalier"[1] by his friends, but the "Pretender" by his enemies (SS490, 491, 512). The insurrection was led by John, Earl of Mar, who, from his frequent change of politics, had got the nickname of "Bobbing John." Mar encountered the royal forces at Sheriffmuir, in Perthsire, Scotland (1715), where an indecisive battle was fought, which the old balad
thus describes:
"There's some say that we won, and some say that they won,
And some say that none won at a', man;
But one thing is sure, that at Sheriffmuir
A battle there was, which I saw, man."
[1] The Chevalier de St. George: After the birth of the "Chevalier's" son Charles in 1720, the father was known by the nickname of the "Old Pretender," and the son as the "Young Pretender." So far as birth could entitle them to the crown, they held the legal right of succession; but the Revolution of 1688 and the Act of Settlement barred
them out (S497).
On the same day of the fight at Sheriffmuir, the English Jacobites
(S495), with a body of Scotch alies, marched into Preston,
Lancashire, and there surrendered, almost without striking a blow.
The leaders of the movement, except the Earl of Mar, who, with one or two others, escaped to the Continent,
were beheaded or hanged, and about a thousand of the rank and file were sold as slaves to the West India and
Virginia plantations (S487). The "Pretender" himself landed in Scotland a few weeks after the defeat of his
friends; but finding no encouragement, he hurried back to the Continent again. Thus ended the rebelion known
from the year of its outbreak (1715) as "The Fifteen."
One result of this was the passage of the septennial Act (1716), extending the duration of Parliament from three
years, which was the longest time that body could sit (SS439, 517), to seven years (since reduced to five years).
[2] The object of this change was to do away with the excitement and tendency to rebelion at that time, resulting
from frequent elections, in which party feeling ran to dangerous extremes.
[2] The Triennial Act (SS439, 517) provided that at the end of three years Parliament must be dissolved and a
new election held. This was to prevent the sovereign from keeping that body in power indefinitely, contrary,
perhaps, to the political feeling of the country, which might prefer a different set of representatives. Under the
Septennial Act the time was extended four years, making seven in al, but the sovereign may, of course, dissolve
Parliament at any time. In 1911 the Parliament Act (S631) limited the duration of Parliament to five years.
536. The South Sea Bubble, 1720.
A few years later a gigantic enterprise was undertaken by the South Sea Company, a body of merchants
originaly organized as a company trading in the southern Atlantic and Pacific oceans. A Scotchman named Law
had started a similar project in France, known as the "Mississippi Company," which proposed to pay off the
national debt of France from the profits of its commerce with the West Indies and the country bordering on the
Mississippi River.
Folowing his example, the South Sea Company now undertook to pay off the English National Debt (S503),
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
216/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
mainly, it is said, from the profits of the slave trade between Africa and Brazil.[1] Sir Robert Walpole (S534)
had no faith in the scheme, and attacked it vigorously; but other influential members of the Government gave it
their encouragement. The directors came out with prospectuses promising dividends of fifty per cent on al
money invested. Everybody rushed to buy stock, and the shares rapidly advaced from 100 pounds to 1000
pounds a share.
[1] Loftie's "History of London"; and see S512.
A speculative craze folowed, the like of which has never since been known. Bubble companies sprang into
existence with objects almost as absurd as those of the philosophers whom Swift ridiculed in "Guliver's Travel's,"
where one man was trying to make gunpowder out of ice, and another to extract sunbeams from cucumbers.
A mere list of these companies would fil several pages. One was to give instruction in astrology, by which every
man might be able to foretel his own destiny by examining the stars; a second was to manufacture butter out of
beech trees; a third was for a wheel for driving machinery, which once started would go on forever, thereby
furnishing a cheap perpetual motion.
A fourth projector, going beyond al the rest in audacity, had the impudence to offer stock for sale in an
enterprise "which shal be revealed hereafter." He found the public so gulible and so greedy that he sold 2000
pounds worth of the new stock in the course of a single morning. He then prudently disappeard with the cash,
and the unfortunate investors found that where he went with their money was not among the things to "be
revealed hereafter."
The narrow passage leading to the London stock exchange was crowded
al day long with struggling fortune hunters, both men and women.
Suddenly, when the excitement was at its height, the bubble burst, as
Law's scheme in France had a little earlier.
Great numbers of people were hopelessly ruined, and the cry for vengeance was as loud as the bids for stock
had once been. One prominent government official who had helped to blow the bubble was sent to the Tower.
Another committed suicide rather than face a parliamentary committee of investigation, one of whose members
had suggested that it would be an excelent plan to sew the South Sea directors up in sacks and throw them into
the Thames.
537. How a Terrible Disease was conquered, 1721, 1796.
But among the new things which the people were to try in that century was one which led to most beneficient
results. For many generations the great scourge of Europe was the smalpox. Often the disease was as violent as
the plague (S474), and carried off nearly as many victims. Medical art, seemed powerless to deal with it, and
even in years of ordinary health in England about one person out of ten died of this loathsome pestilence. In the
early part of George I's reign, Lady Mary Montagu, then traveling to Turkey, wrote that the Turks were in the
habit of inoculating their children for the disease, which rendered it much milder and less fatal, and that she was
about to try the experiment on her own son.
Later, Lady Montagu returned to England, and through her influence and example the practice was introduced
there, 1721. It was tried first on five criminals in Newgate who had been sentenced to the galows, but were
promised their freedom if they would consent to the operation. As it proved a complete success, the Princess of
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
217/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
Wales, with the King's consent, caused it to be tried on her daughter, with equaly good results.
The medical profession, however, generaly refused to sanction the practice, and the clergy in many cases
preached against it as an "invention of Satan, intended to counteract the purposes of an al-wise Providence." But through the perseverance and good sense of Lady Montagu, with a few others, the new practice gradualy gained
ground. Subsequently Dr. Jenner began to make experiments of a different kind, which led, late in the century
(1796-1798), to the discovery of vaccination, by which milions of lives have been saved; this, and the discovery
of the use of ether in our own time (S615), may justly be caled two of the greatest triumphs of the art of
medicine.
538. How Sir Robert Walpole governed.
We have seen that Sir Robert Walpole (S534) became the first Prime Minister in 1721, and that he continued in
office as head of the Cabinet, or Government, until near the middle of the next reign. He was an able financier,
and succeeded in reducing the National Debt (S503). He believed in keeping the country out of war, and also,
as we have seen, out of "bubble speculation" (S536). Finaly, he was determined at al cost to maintain the Whig party in power, and the Protestant Hanoverian sovereigns on the throne (SS515, 532).
In order to accomplish these objects, he openly bribed members of Parliament to support his party; he bought
votes and carried elections by gifts of titles, honors, and bank notes. He thus proved to his own satisfaction the
truth of his theory that most men "have their price," and that an appeal to the pocketbook is both quicker and surer than an appeal to the principle. But before the end of his ministry he had to confess that he had found in the
House of Commons a "boy patriot," as he sneeringly caled him, named Wiliam Pitt (afterward Earl of Chatham), whom neither his money could buy nor his ridicule move (SS549, 550).
Bad as Walpole's policy was in its corrupting influence on the nation, it as an admission that the time had come
when the King could no longer venture to rule by force, as in hte days of the Stuarts. It meant that the Crown no
longer possessed the arbitrary power it once wielded. Walpole was a fox, not a lion; and "foxes," as Emerson tels us, "are so cunning because they are not strong."
539. Summary.
Though George I did little for England except keep the "Pretender" (S535) from the throne by occupying it
himself, yet that was no smal advantage, since it gave the country peace. The establishment of Cabinet
Government under Sir Robert Walpole as the first Prime Minister, the suppression of the Jacobite insurrection,
the disastrous colapse of the South Sea Bubble, and the introduction of vaccination are the principle events.
George II—1727-1760
540. Accession and Character.
The second King George, who was also of German birth, was much like his father, though he had the advantage
of being able to speak English readily, but with a strong German accent. His tastes were far from being refined
and he bluntly declared, "I don't like Boetry, and I don't like Bainting." His wife, Queen Caroline, was an able woman. She possessed the happy art of ruling her husband without his suspecting it, while she, on the other
hand, was ruled by Sir Robert Walpole, whom the King hated, but whom he had to keep as Prime Minister
(SS534, 538). George II was a good soldier, and decidedly preferred war to peace; but Walpole saw clearly
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
218/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
that the peace policy was best for the nation, and he and the Queen managed to persuaded the King not to draw
the sword.
541. The War of Jenkins's Ear (1739).
At the end of twelve years, however, trouble arose with Spain. According to the London newspapers of that
day, a certain Captain Jenkins, while cruising, or, more probably, smuggling, in the West Indies, had been seized
by the Spaniards and barbarously maltreated. They, if we accept his tory, accused him of attempting to land
English goods contrary to law, and searched his ship. Finding nothing against him, they vented their rage and
disappointment by hanging him to the yardarm of his vessel until he was nearly dead.
They then tore off one of his ears, and bade him take it to the King of England with their compliments. Jenkins, it
is said, carefuly wrapped up his ear and put it in his pocket. When he reached England, he went straight to the
House of Commons, drew out the mutilated ear, showed it to the House, and demanded justice.
The Spanish restrictions on English trade with the Indies and South America[1] had long been a source of il
feeling. The sight of Jenkins's ear brought matters to a climax; even Sir Robert Walpole, the Prime Minister,
could not resist the clamor for vengeance, and contrary to his own judgment he had to vote for war (S538).
[1] By the Treaty of Utrecht one English ship was alowed to carry slaves once a year to the colonies of Spanish
America (S512, note 1).
Though Jenkins was the occasion, the real object of the war was to compel Spain to permit the English to get a
larger share in the lucrative commerce, especialy the slave trade, with the New World. It was another proof that
America was now rapidly becoming an important factor in he politics of Great Britain (SS421, 422).
The announcement of hostilities with Spain was received in London with delight, and bels pealed from every
steeple. "Yes," said Walpole," they may ring the bels now, but before long they wil be wringing their hands."
This prediction was verified by the heavy losses the English suffered in an expedition against the Spanish
settlement of Carthagena, South America. But later the British commander, Commodore Anson, inflicted great
damage on the Spanish colonies, and returned to England with vessels laden with large amounts of captured
silver.
542. War of the Austrian Succession, 1741; Treaty of Aix-la-Chapele, 1748.
On the death of Charles VI, of the House of Austria, Emperor of Germany, his daughter Maria Theresa
succeeded to the Austrian dominions. France now united with Spain, Prussia, and other European powers to
overturn this arrangement, partly out of jealousy of the Austrian power, and partly from desire to get control of
portions of the Austrian possessions. England and Holand, however, both desired to maintain Austria as a check
against their old enemy France, and declared war, 1741.
During this war George II went over to the Continent to lead the English forces in person. He was not a man of
commanding appearance, but he was every inch a soldier, and nothing exhilarated him like the smel of
gunpowder. At the battle of Dettingen, in Bavaria, he got down from his horse, and drawing his sword, cried:
"Come, boys, now behave like men, and the French wil soon run."
With that, folowed by his troops, he rused upon the enemy with such impetuosity that they turned and fled. This
was the last battle in which an English king took part in person. It was folowed by that of Fontenoy, in the
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
219/333
8/15/12
www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/17386/pg17386.html
Netherlands (Belgium), in which the French gained the victory. After nearly eight years fighting the treaty of Aix-
la-Chapele, 1748, secured a peace advantageous for England.
543. Invasion by the "Young Pretender"; "The Forty-Five."[1]
[1] "The Forty-Five": so caled from the Scotch rising of 1745.
While the War of the Austrian Succession was in progress, the French encouraged James II's grandson, Princle
Charles Edward, the "Young Pretender" (S535), to make an attempt on the English crown. He landed (1745) on
the northern coast of Scotland with only seven folowers, but with the aid of the Scotch Jacobites (SS495, 535)
of the Highlands he gained a battle over the English at Prestonpans, near Edinburgh. Emboldened by his success,
he now marched into Derbyshire, England, on his way to London. He hoped that as he advanced the country
would rise in his favor; but finding no support, he retreated to Scotland.
The next year he and his adherents were defeated, with great slaughter by "Butcher" Cumberland, as the Scotch caled him, at Culoden, near Iverness (1746). (See map facing p. 120.) The "Young Pretender" fled from the
battlefield to the Hebrides. After wandering in those islands for many months he escaped to France through the
devotion and courage of the Scottish heroine, Flora Macdonald. When he left the country his Highland
sympathizers lost al hope. There were no more ringing Jacobite songs, sung over bowls of steaming punch, of
"Wha'l be king but Charlie?" "Over the Water to Charlie," and "Wae's me for Prince Charlie"; and when (1788) Prince Charles Edward died in Rome, the unfortunate House of Stuart, which began with James I (1603),
disappeared from English history.[2]
[2] Devoted loyalty to a hopeless cause was never more truly or
patheticaly expressed than in some of these Jacobite songs, notably
in those of Scotland, in honor of Prince Charles Edward, the "Young
Pretender," of which the folowing lines from "Over the Water to
Charlie" are an example:
"Over the water, and over the sea,
And over the water to Charlie;
Come weal, come woe, we'l gather and go,
And live or die with Charlie."
Scott, "Redgauntlet"
544. War in the East; the Black Hole of Calcutta; Clive's Victories;
English Empire of India, 1751-1757.
The English acquired Madras, their first trading post in India, in the reign