Meanwhile the King's personal attention had been as usual directed

rather to foreign than to home politics. The great question which at

once occupied the minds of diplomatists after the Peace of Ryswick was

the succession to the throne of Spain. It seemed very improbable that

Charles II., a miserable hypochondriac, should live much longer. At his

death there threatened to be a general scramble for his vast

possessions. Early in the year, an embassy of unusual grandeur had

attended Portland to France. The question had been there opened, and a

corresponding French embassy under Tallard had subsequently and with the

same object been sent to London. On the dissolution of Parliament the

scene of negotiation was transferred to Holland. The question was one of

great intricacy and difficulty.[2] It was not easy to point out the

legitimate successor, even had it been possible to allow the Spanish

monarchy to pass unbroken into the hands of any of the claimants. The

eldest of Charles's sisters had married Louis XIV., a younger sister had

married Leopold of Germany. Leopold was himself Charles's first cousin,

grandson of Philip III. In direct descent, therefore, the Dauphin stood

next to the Spanish king. Next to him came the offspring of Leopold's

first marriage with the Spanish Princess, namely, the Electress of

Bavaria, but she gave over her right to her son, the Electoral Prince.

The third in order was the Emperor Leopold. But the marriage of the

Infanta with Louis had been accompanied by a formal renunciation of her

rights, sanctioned by the Cortes. The marriage of the second Princess

with Leopold had been attended by a similar renunciation, not sanctioned

by the Cortes. The marriage of Leopold's mother with the Emperor had

been attended by no renunciation at all. Thus, if the renunciations were

valid, the claims in accordance with them came in exactly the opposite

order to the claims by order of descent. But the change in the balance

of Europe involved in the accession to the throne of Spain of a prince

of either the imperial house of Germany or the royal house of France was

of far graver importance than the mere legal rights to the throne. Both

Leopold and the Dauphin, conscious that Europe would not submit to their

acquiring Spain for themselves, had handed on their claims to

representatives, who might be considered as comparatively harmless.

Leopold had substituted for himself the Archduke Charles, his son by a

second marriage, the Dauphin his second son Philip. But, in spite of

this arrangement, France, England and Holland had considered it

dangerous that the Spanish dominions should pass entire into the hands

of either of the claimants, and the negotiations of this year were

directed to forming a plan for dividing them with some sort of equality

among the three. The product of these negotiations was the First

Partition Treaty, definitively signed at the Hague on the 11th of

October. By this the bulk of the Spanish dominions--Spain, the Indies,

and the Netherlands--was to pass to the least powerful of the three

claimants, the Electoral Prince. France was to receive Guipuscoa in the

north of Spain, and the Two Sicilies; the Austrian competitor was to be

satisfied with the Milanese. The treaty had been arranged as quietly as

possible, but the republican institutions of Holland were not favourable

to secresy. Rumours of what had been done reached Spain. The desire of

the King and the Castilians was to preserve at all hazards the integrity

of the Empire. Charles was therefore persuaded to make a will, and to

declare that candidate whom France and England seemed most to favour,

namely, the Electoral Prince, heir to his whole dominions; and thus for

a time the matter rested.

[Sidenote: New Parliament. Tory reaction. Dec. 6, 1698.]

[Sidenote: The Country Party.]

[Sidenote: Dismissal of the Dutch guards.]

Having thus temporarily settled his position abroad, William returned to

England with the hope of a peaceful session. The hope was singularly

falsified by the event. The great Whig party, so noble and united in

adversity, had fallen to pieces, and a Tory reaction begun. The

greatness and success of its measures had left room for faction. The

unpopularity both of William and Montague afforded opportunity for the

attacks of malcontents. On the assembling of Parliament after the new

elections (Dec. 6, 1698), it became evident that a large number of

unknown men who had been elected, although nominally Whigs, intended to

make common cause with the extreme Tories, and that this united faction,

under the title of the Country Party, would form an opposition against

the Crown. The last session had already marked out the lines this

opposition would take. The points at issue would be the maintenance of

the army, the distribution of Crown grants, and the conduct of

individual members of the ministry. On the first of these points the

King did not act wisely. Unable to understand the insular politics in

favour with the English, he insisted that the ministry should propose a

standing army of 20,000 men. Afraid to introduce a Bill which they knew

they could not carry, the ministry suffered the initiative to slip from

their grasp, and a private individual was allowed to propose that the

number of troops should be further lessened to 7000, and that all those

7000 should be born Englishmen. In spite of the efforts of the ministry

the Bill was carried, and William found himself compelled to order the

departure of his favourite Dutch guards. Hurt to the quick, he seriously

formed the intention of quitting England. He even drew up his farewell

speech, and was only moved to remain by the earnest prayers of Somers

and by his own returning wisdom.

[Sidenote: Rivalry between the two Houses.]

Assured of their majority, the Opposition proceeded to attack the late

ministry. Their favourite object was Montague, who had laid himself open

to their assaults by the pride and luxury which he had exhibited in his

good fortune, and still more by the indecent rapacity with which he

seized on the valuable place of the Auditorship of the Exchequer, worth

at least £4000 a year; this he placed in the hands of his brother, to be

held until he should want it. The next victim was Russell, Lord Orford,

whose administration only escaped censure by a single vote. And before

the session closed, the third point, that of grants of Crown lands, was

touched upon in a way which produced much after disaster. The method

used on this occasion illustrates a point deserving of notice. The

Revolution had placed the supreme power in the hands of Parliament; but

Parliament itself consists of two elements, of two Houses drawn from

different classes. Besides the general party struggles, besides the

frequent contests between King and Parliament, and subsequently between

Parliament and people, there was therefore a class rivalry between the

two Houses, which had shown itself already on more than one occasion

during the reign, and was rendered more prominent now by the fact that

the party feeling in the Upper House was on the whole decidedly Whig.

The weapon which the Commons intended to use in this strife was their

exclusive right of introducing money Bills. Those Bills the Upper House

had the power of rejecting entire, but not of amending. The Commons now

"tacked" or appended to the Bill for the Land Tax a clause appointing

seven Commissioners to inquire into the manner in which the forfeited

land in Ireland had been granted out. This obnoxious clause the Lords

were compelled to pass, or to reject the Bill entirely, and thus stop

the supplies. Though keenly feeling the coercion put upon them, by a

plan which would have proved fatal to the Upper House had not the good

feeling of the nation and the strength of popular opinion ultimately

compelled the Commons to abandon it, the Lords passed the Bill, feeling

probably that the present occasion was scarcely important enough for a

great constitutional struggle. The Money Bill having been passed, the

King, in some anger, prorogued the Parliament (May 4).

As usual, when Parliament was not sitting, William withdrew to Holland,

a habit which, now that the war no longer necessitated his presence

there, increased his unpopularity in England, and the session of

Parliament which he returned to meet in November 1699 was still more

stormy than the last.

[Sidenote: The Darien scheme.]

The discontent in England was backed up by more serious discontent in

Scotland. The whole of that nation might be now reckoned among the

enemies of the Court. For, during the recess, on the 5th of October,

certain news had reached England of the failure of the great Darien

scheme, and the complete destruction of those wild hopes of wealth and

greatness which had been for the last four years buoying up the Scotch

nation. Paterson, the same man whose scheme for the Bank of England had

in the hands of Montague proved so successful, was the originator of

this disastrous project. He had persuaded himself that the natural

wealth of a country has nothing to do with its prosperity. The

commercial cities of the ancient world, and Venice and Holland in modern

times, had risen to greatness and wealth without any territorial

possessions of importance. He believed that he could reproduce this

phenomenon in the case of Scotland. The scheme of Columbus had been to

introduce the wealth of the East by a short and direct route into

Europe, and thus to destroy the traffic of the Venetians. He had found

his plan thwarted by the interposition of America; and the discovery of

a passage round the Cape of Good Hope had turned all men's attention in

that direction, and had been the great source of wealth both to the

Dutch and Portuguese. But the plan of Columbus had never been quite

forgotten, and Paterson now thought to renew it by establishing a line

of communication across the Isthmus of Darien. The Scotch were to

colonize and occupy the isthmus, which would become, in the view of the

projector, the great emporium of the whole Eastern trade. Although he

did not explain the details of his scheme, it was listened to with

enthusiasm by his fellow-countrymen; and in 1695, an extraordinary Act

passed the Scotch Parliament, and received the assent of the Lord High

Commissioner, authorising the formation of a Corporation, half the

capital of which was to be held by Scotchmen, with the monopoly of the

trade with Asia, Africa, and America for thirty-one years. With the

exception of foreign sugar and tobacco, all its imports were to be duty

free. Every servant of the Company was free from imprisonment and

arrest. The Company was authorized to take possession of unoccupied

territories and exercise legal rights, and the King promised to obtain

satisfaction at the public charge if foreign powers assaulted it.

Subscriptions to the amount of £200,000 and upwards were speedily

forthcoming, and a branch of the Company established itself in London.

There, however, the absurdities of the plan were at once discovered, and

it met with a very cold reception. Any colony, to be useful, must be

either in America or in the Spice Islands; now interference in America

would not be tolerated by Spain, nor would Holland look on quietly at

the occupation of the Spice Islands; a maritime war was in fact

inevitable; Scotland, singlehanded, could scarcely hope to carry on such

a war, and England would almost infallibly be drawn into it, and this on

behalf of a Company which, by changing Scotland into a free port, would

virtually make it an enormous centre for smuggling to the extreme

detriment of English trade. The attention of the King was drawn to the

subject. He expressed his entire disapprobation of the scheme, and

dismissed the Lord High Commissioner and the Secretary; but the law was

made and could not be rescinded. In 1698, in the midst of wild

enthusiasm, 1200 colonists set out from Leith, with Paterson among them,

and reached Darien in safety, and there established their colony, but

almost immediately came into contact with the neighbouring Spanish

governor, and the inevitable war began. At first, however, the reports

were favourable, and in the following year a new armament of four ships

and 1800 colonists left Scotland for Caledonia, as the new settlement

was called. They had not been gone long before news arrived at New York

that the colony no longer existed, and that the wretched remnant of its

inhabitants had sought refuge in New England. In fact, the climate had

proved eminently unhealthy, in spite of the assertions of Paterson.

Provisions had failed, and, worn out and enfeebled, the colonists,

feeling themselves entirely unable to repell the assaults of Spain,

determined to withdraw. After miserable suffering, a few of them reached

New York, and the second expedition arrived in Caledonia to find only

uninhabited ruins. They determined upon reoccupying these, rebuilt the

fort, and during the few healthy months continued, though with heavy

losses, to carry out their operations. But before long a Spanish fleet

appeared before the town, and an army, marching across the isthmus from

Panama, blockaded it on the land side. Resistance was impossible.

Already 300 of the new-comers had died, the survivors promised to depart

within a fortnight, and on the 11th of April left the colony for ever.

The disaster was regarded by the Scotch as a national injury on the part

of England. The Company had throughout excited great anger in the

Southern kingdom; the colonial governors had done all they could to

discourage the colony when it arrived, and the Scotch were ready to

trace this opposition to national jealousy,--to attribute it even to

William's partiality for his Dutch subjects, whose trade might have been

injured. In truth, the whole business was a proof, as William pointed

out to the House of Lords, of the difficulty of managing two countries

with different interests under one Crown, and the necessity of a closer

union between the nations.

[Sidenote: New Parliament Nov. 16, 1699.]

[Sidenote: Irish forfeitures.]

[Sidenote: Resumption Bill passed. April 10, 1700.]

[Sidenote: Parliament prorogued. April 11, 1700.]

It was thus, supported by the discontent of Scotland, that the

malcontents of Parliament resumed the question of the management of the

royal property. After a fruitless attack upon Somers, who had indeed

received a grant, but one against which no reasonable complaint could be

made, they proceeded to follow up the work of the last session, and to

act upon the recommendation of the seven Commissioners who had been

appointed by the tacked clause of the preceding session. The Crown lands

had been constantly dealt with according to the King's pleasure, without

parliamentary interference. In early times, however, they had been

regarded as a trust. Parliament had frequently demanded that the King

should live upon his own revenues, and Acts for the resumption of grants

had been passed, the last being that immediately following the battle of

Bosworth. Since then the gift of the Crown had been considered a

perfectly sound title. Whatever dislike, therefore, William's lavish

grants to his Dutch favourites had excited, there would have been very

great difficulty in calling in question his right to make them. The use

to which the forfeited lands which had fallen into William's hands after

the Pacification of Limerick had been put was more open to objection. A

Bill ordering them to be applied to the public service had been

interrupted and left incomplete, and the King had promised that the

Commons should have another opportunity of considering the question. As

they had since taken no steps in the matter, he seems to have considered

himself free to act as he pleased. Of the forfeited lands, which

amounted to about 1,700,000 acres, a fourth had been restored to its

ancient possessors, according to the Limerick Pacification. Some of the

rest had been mercifully given back to Irishmen, some to men like Ginkel

and Galway, who had distinguished themselves in the Irish wars, but by

far the larger portion had fallen to the King's personal friends, such

as Woodstock, the eldest son of Portland, and Keppel, Lord Albemarle.

The Commission could not arrive at unanimity, and sent up two reports.

But that of the majority, which was very hostile to Government, was

alone accepted by the Commons. It ridiculously over-estimated the grants

at a sum of, £2,600,000, and at the same time declared that very undue

leniency had been shown to the Irish. Had these grants not been made,

and the confiscations properly exacted, much of the present heavy

taxation, they said, might have been spared. The Commons, longing to be

free from taxes and hating the Dutch favourites, took up the matter with

factious warmth, and the Resumption Bill was passed, vesting all the

forfeited lands in the hands of trustees, and offering large rewards to

informers who would point out lands which ought to have been

confiscated. They even, with palpable injustice, included in their

inquiry lands which had never been forfeited. Expecting opposition from

the Upper House, they again tacked this Bill to the Land Tax Bill. The

Lords now determined upon a struggle. Little as they liked the Dutch

favourites, they could not allow themselves to be thus overridden. Their

opposition was, however, unsuccessful; the nation felt with the Commons,

and foreign affairs had reached a crisis which rendered peace at home

necessary to the King. The quarrel was pressed so far as to threaten a

complete breach between the Houses, and a fatal blow to the

Constitution. By the influence of the King the Lords were induced to

yield, and the triumphant Commons were passing to fresh assaults on the

King's friends, when, having passed the Land Tax Bill and thus supplied

himself with money, William suddenly prorogued the Houses.

[Sidenote: Second Partition Treaty.]

The necessity which had driven him to this step was the reopening of the

question of the Spanish succession. In January 1699 the Electoral Prince

had died. The whole question thus assumed a new shape, and William's

undivided attention was required. For the same reason, probably, and to

allay the opposition in the House, he thought it necessary to remove

Somers from office, and to place the Great Seal in the hands of Sir

Nathan Wright. The Second Partition Treaty, which the King was now

engaged in arranging, was such as was rendered necessary by the death of

the third claimant. The bulk of the Spanish dominions was now to be

given to the Archduke. It was to him that now Spain, the Indies, and the

Netherlands were assigned, while Milan, which had formerly fallen to his

share, was to be transferred to France, to be ultimately exchanged for

Lorraine, a German fief, very important to round off the French

dominions. But again these arrangements were upset. Portocarrero, the

Spanish minister, was in the French interest, and supported by Harcourt,

the ablest French diplomatist. By playing upon national feeling, which

was strong against any partition, these statesmen excited the anger of

the Spaniards against William, who had already incurred their enmity by

his fancied support of the Darien scheme; and Charles was at length

impressed with the absolute necessity of making another will. The events

of the late session had given rise to the belief that William was not

really master of England, while the visible greatness of France seemed

to afford the best chance of keeping the Spanish monarchy undivided; the

will was therefore made in favour of the Dauphin's son Philip, Duke of

Anjou, who was declared heir to the whole of the Spanish dominions. The

treaty was not well received in England. While one party clamoured that

too much was given to France, another complained of the injustice of

forestalling the wishes of the Spanish people, and there was a general

feeling of anger at the secresy with which the treaty had been arranged,

a treaty which might easily draw England into a foreign war, and which

had been concluded entirely without consulting Parliament. This anger

reached its highest point when, in November, the King of Spain died, and

Louis, in defiance of all his treaties, accepted his grandson's great

inheritance. William had determined that the whole responsibility should

lie with himself, trusting in his own diplomatic skill; he had been

beaten at his own arts, and his great treaty was absolutely useless.

[Sidenote: William's unpopularity.]

[Sidenote: New ministry. Dec. 1700.]

[Sidenote: New Parliament. Feb. 1701.]

[Sidenote: Succession Act.]

In fact, there was no time when the King had been so unpopular or his

enemies so strong. Nearly every class, except his own immediate

followers among the Whigs, were alienated from him; the mass of the

people had suffered from heavy taxation, the nobles were sore at the

unwise preference given to foreigners; the whole nation shared in this

feeling, and disliked his constant absences from home; the scandal of

the Irish forfeitures had just been brought to light; the country gentry

remembered with anger the failure of their Land Bank, and saw with envy

the increasing importance of the moneyed interest. One thing was plain,

that nothing could be done with a Parliament so adverse as the last,

with a ministry so powerless as the late holders of power had proved.

William therefore dissolved the Parliament, summoning a new one for the

following February; and, freeing himself from the old ministry, called

to his councils Rochester, the late Queen's uncle and the head of the

High Church Tories, with Godolphin and Sir Charles Hedges. For the

present his only hope lay in the possibility of a general European war;

of this as yet there was but little sign. Austria had indeed refused to

acknowledge the new King of Spain, and withdrawn its ambassador from

Madrid, but in other countries it seemed as if the will of the late

Spanish King would be quietly accepted. William himself could do

nothing, and for the time was compelled to submit. His new ministry

entreated him to acknowledge Philip; his Parliament showed no

disposition to support him in any hostile steps against France. Two

questions which he placed before them in his opening speech were, the

succession of the throne of England, the settlement to which had been

rendered necessary by the late death of the Duke of Gloucester, the

young son of the Princess Anne (July 29, 1700), and the position which

England should assume in the face of the altered aspect of European

politics. It was in vain, upon this latter point, that he attempted to

urge them to energy. The King of France had driven the Dutch to

acknowledge Philip, by suddenly entering the Low Countries, and

capturing 15,000 of their troops who had been intended to garrison the

barrier fortresses. William and the Dutch States had in vain demanded

the withdrawal of the French troops and the surrender of the

strongholds. But even this act of aggression did not arouse the

Parliament to energy. They acknowledged the obligations of England under

the Treaty of 1677, and promised to send succours to the Dutch, but

there seemed no immediate prospect of any grants for the purpose. Nor

was the other point much more vigorously prosecuted. A Bill of

Succession was indeed produced, but nearly every clause seemed evidently

aimed against the King's former conduct. The new sovereign was not to

leave the kingdom without leave of Parliament; no person not a born

Englishman was to be capable of holding any position of trust, or of

receiving any grant from the Crown. England was not to be engaged in war

for the defence of any dominions not belonging to the Crown of England.

All matters relating to the Government were to be transacted in the

Privy Council, and countersigned by such members of that body as should

advise or consent to them. Having thus secured, as they thought, the

insular position of England, the House proceeded to settle the

succession upon the Electress Sophia of Hanover. Thus, though the

Protestant succession was secured, a Bill which William had hoped would

be a singular expression of popular sympathy with his own efforts was in

fact a vote of censure on many of the acts of his reign.

[Sidenote: Impeachments against the Whigs.]

A History of England, Period III. Constitutional Monarchy · 第 8 / 78 段