CHAPTER XVII.

WILLIAM AND MARY.

[Sidenote: William and Mary.]

From Louis XIV. we turn to consider the reign of his illustrious

rival, William III., King of England, who enjoyed the throne

conjointly with Mary, daughter of James II.

The early life and struggles of this heroic prince have been already

alluded to, in the two previous chapters, and will not be further

discussed. On the 12th day of February, 1689, he arrived at Whitehall,

the favorite palace of the Stuart kings, and, on the 11th of April, he

and Mary were crowned in Westminster Abbey.

Their reign is chiefly memorable for the war with Louis XIV., the

rebellion in Ireland, fomented by the intrigues of James II., and for

the discussion of several great questions pertaining to the liberties

and the prosperity of the English nation, questions in relation to the

civil list, the Place Bill, the Triennial Bill, the liberty of the

press, a standing army, the responsibility of ministers, the veto of

the crown, the administration of Ireland, the East India Company, the

Bank of England, and the funded debt. These topics make the domestic

history of the country, especially in a constitutional point of view,

extremely important.

The great struggle with Louis XIV. has already received all the notice

which the limits of this work will allow, in which it was made to

appear that, if Louis XIV. was the greater king, William III. was the

greater man; and, although his military enterprises were, in one

sense, unsuccessful, since he did not triumph in splendid victories,

still he opposed successfully what would have been, without his

heroism, an overwhelming torrent of invasion and conquest, in

consequence of vastly superior forces. The French king was eventually

humbled, and the liberties of continental Europe were preserved.

Under the wise, tolerant, and liberal administration of William, the

British empire was preserved from disunion, and invaluable liberties

and privileges were guaranteed.

[Sidenote: Irish Rebellion.]

Scarcely was he seated on the throne, which his wife inherited from

the proud descendants of the Norman Conqueror, when a rebellion in

Ireland broke out, and demanded his presence in that distracted and

unfortunate country.

The Irish people, being Roman Catholics, had sympathized with

James II. in all his troubles, and were resolved to defend his cause

against a Calvinistic king. In a short time after his establishment at

St. Germain's, through the bounty of the French king, he began to

intrigue with the disaffected Irish chieftains. The most noted of

these was Tyrconnel, who contrived to deprive the Protestants of Lord

Mountjoy, their most trusted and able leader, by sending him on a

mission to James II., by whose influence he was confined, on his

arrival at Paris, in the Bastile. Tyrconnel then proceeded to disarm

the Protestants, and recruit the Catholic army, which was raised in

two months to a force of forty thousand men, burning to revenge their

past injuries, and recover their ancient possessions and privileges.

James II. was invited by the army to take possession of his throne. He

accepted the invitation, and, early in 1689, made his triumphal entry

into Dublin, and was received with a pomp and homage equal to his

dignity. But James did not go to Ireland merely to enjoy the homage

and plaudits of the Irish people, but to defend the last foothold

which he retained as King of England, trusting that success in Ireland

would eventually restore to him the throne of his ancestors. And he

was cordially, but not powerfully, supported by the French king, who

was at war with England, and who justly regarded Ireland as the most

assailable part of the British empire.

The Irish parliament, in the interest of James, passed an act of

attainder against all Protestants who had assisted William, among whom

were two archbishops, one duke, seventeen earls, eighteen barons, and

eighty-three clergymen. By another act, Ireland was made independent

of England. The Protestants were every where despoiled and insulted.

But James was unequal to the task he had assumed, incapable either of

preserving Ireland or retaking England. He was irresolute and

undecided. He could not manage an Irish House of Commons any better

than he could an English one. He debased the coin, and resorted to

irritating measures to raise money.

At last he concluded to subdue the Protestants in Ulster, and advanced

to lay siege to Londonderry, upon which depended the fate of the north

of Ireland. It was bravely defended by the inhabitants, and finally

relieved by the troops sent over from England under the command of

Kirke--the same who inflicted the cruelties in the west of England

under James II. But William wanted able officers, and he took them

indiscriminately from all parties. Nine thousand people miserably

perished by famine and disease in the town, before the siege was

raised, one of the most memorable in the annals of war.

Ulster was now safe, and the discomfiture of James was rapidly

effected. Old Marshal Schomberg was sent into Ireland with sixteen

thousand veteran troops, and, shortly after, William himself (June 14,

1690) landed at Carrickfergus, near Belfast, with additional men, who

swelled the Protestant army to forty thousand.

[Sidenote: King James in Ireland.]

The contending forces advanced to the conflict, and on the 1st of July

was fought the battle of the Boyne, in which Schomberg was killed, but

which resulted in the defeat of the troops of James II. The

discomfited king fled to Dublin, but quitted it as soon as he had

entered it, and embarked hastily at Waterford for France, leaving the

Earl of Tyrconnel to contend with vastly superior forces, and to make

the best terms in his power.

The country was speedily subdued, and all the important cities and

fortresses, one after the other, surrendered to the king. Limerick

held out the longest, and made an obstinate resistance, but finally

yielded to the conqueror; and with its surrender terminated the final

efforts of the old Irish inhabitants to regain the freedom which they

had lost. Four thousand persons were outlawed, and their possessions

confiscated. Indeed, at different times, the whole country has been

confiscated, with the exception of the possessions of a few families

of English blood. In the reign of James I., the whole province of

Ulster, containing three millions of acres, was divided among the new

inhabitants. At the restoration, eight millions of acres, and, after

the surrender of Limerick, one million more of acres, were

confiscated. During the reign of William and Mary, the Catholic Irish

were treated with extreme rigor, and Ireland became a field for

place-hunters. All important or lucrative offices in the church, the

state, and the army, were filled with the needy dependants of the

great Whig families. Injustice to the nation was constantly exercised,

and penal laws were imposed by the English parliament, and in

reference to matters which before came under the jurisdiction of the

Irish parliament. But, with all these rigorous measures, Ireland was

still ruled with more mildness than at any previous period in its

history, and no great disturbance again occurred until the reign of

George III.

But the reign of William III., however beneficial to the liberties of

England and of Europe, was far from peaceful. Apart from his great

struggle with the French king, his comfort and his composure of mind

were continually disturbed by domestic embarrassments, arising from

the jealousies between the Whigs and Tories, the intrigues of

statesmen with the exiled family, and discussions in parliament in

reference to those great questions which attended the settlement of

the constitution. A bill was passed, called the _Place Bill_,

excluding all officers of the crown from the House of Commons, which

showed the jealousy of the people respecting royal encroachments. A

law also was passed, called the _Triennial Bill_, which limited the

duration of parliament to three years, but which, in a subsequent

reign, was repealed, and one substituted which extended the duration

of a parliament to seven years. An important bill was also passed

which regulated trials in case of treason, in which the prisoner was

furnished with a copy of the indictment, with the names and residences

of jurors, with the privilege of peremptory challenge, and with full

defence of counsel. This bill guaranteed new privileges and rights to

prisoners.

[Sidenote: Freedom of the Press.]

The great question pertaining to the Liberty of the Press was

discussed at this time--one of the most vital questions which affect

the stability of government on the one side, and the liberties of the

people on the other. So desirable have all governments deemed the

control of the press by themselves, that parliament, when it abolished

the Star Chamber, in the reign of Charles I., still assumed its powers

respecting the licensing of books. Various modifications were, from

time to time, made in the laws pertaining to licensing books, until,

in the reign of William, the liberty of the press was established

nearly upon its present basis.

William, in general, was in favor of those movements which proved

beneficial in after times, or which the wisdom of a subsequent age saw

fit to adopt. Among these was the union of England and Scotland, which

he recommended. Under his auspices, the affairs of the East India

Company were considered and new charters granted; the Bank of England

was erected; benevolent action for the suppression of vice and for the

amelioration of the condition of the poor took place; the coinage was

adjusted and financial experiments were made.

The crown, on the whole, lost power during this reign, which was

transferred to the House of Commons. The Commons acquired the complete

control of the purse, which is considered paramount to all other

authority. Prior to the Revolution, the supply for the public service

was placed at the disposal of the sovereign, but the definite sum of

seven hundred thousand pounds, yearly, was placed at the disposal of

William, to defray the expense of the civil list and his other

expenses, while the other contingent expenses of government, including

those for the support of the army and navy, were annually appropriated

by the Commons.

[Sidenote: Act of Settlement--Death of William III.]

The most important legislative act of this reign was the Act of

Settlement, March 12, 1701, which provided that England should be

freed from the obligation of engaging in any war for the defence of

the foreign dominions of the king; that all succeeding kings must be

of the communion of the Church of England; that no succeeding king

should go out of the British dominions without consent of parliament;

that no person in office, or pensioner, should be a member of the

Commons; that the religious liberties of the people should be further

secured; that the judges should hold office during good behavior, and

have their salaries ascertained; and that the succession to the throne

should be confined to Protestant princes.

King William reigned in England thirteen years, with much ability, and

sagacity, and prudence, and never attempted to subvert the

constitution, for which his memory is dear to the English people. But

most of his time, as king, was occupied in directing warlike

operations on the Continent, and in which he showed a great jealousy

of the genius of Marlborough, whose merits he nevertheless finally

admitted. He died March 8, 1702, and was buried in the sepulchre of

the kings of England.

[Sidenote: Character of William.]

Notwithstanding the animosity of different parties against

William III., public opinion now generally awards to him, considering

the difficulties with which he had to contend, the first place among

the English kings. He had many enemies and many defects. The Jacobites

hated him because "he upset their theory of the divine rights of

kings; the High Churchmen because he was indifferent to the forms of

church government; the Tories because he favored the Whigs; and the

Republicans because he did not again try the hopeless experiment of a

republic." He was not a popular idol, in spite of his great services

and great qualities, because he was cold, reserved, and unyielding;

because he disdained to flatter, and loved his native better than his

adopted country. But his faults were chiefly offences against good

manners, and against the prejudices of the nation. He distrusted human

nature, and disdained human sympathy. He was ambitious, and his

ambition was allied with selfishness. He permitted the slaughter of

the De Witts, and never gave Marlborough a command worthy of his

talents. He had no taste for literature, wit, or the fine arts. His

favorite tastes were hunting, gardening and upholstery. That he was,

however, capable of friendship, is attested by his long and devoted

attachment to Bentinck, whom he created Earl of Portland, and

splendidly rewarded with rich and extensive manors in every part of

the land. His reserve and coldness may in part be traced to his

profound knowledge of mankind, whom he feared to trust. But if he was

not beloved by the nation, he secured their eternal respect by being

the first to solve the problem of constitutional monarchy, and by

successfully ruling, at a very critical period, the Dutch, the

English, the Scotch, and the Irish, who had all separate interests and

jealousies; by yielding, when in possession of great power, to

restraints he did not like; and by undermining the intrigues and power

of so mighty an enemy of European liberties as Louis XIV. His heroism

shone brilliantly in defeat and disaster, and his courage and exertion

never flagged when all Europe desponded, and when he himself labored

under all the pains and lassitude of protracted disease. He died

serenely, but hiding from his attendants, as he did all his days, the

profoundest impressions which agitated his earnest and heroic soul.

[Sidenote: Sir Isaac Newton and John Locke.]

Among the great men whom he encouraged and rewarded, may be mentioned

the historian Burnet, whom he made Bishop of Salisbury, and Tillotson

and Tennison, whom he elevated to archiepiscopal thrones. Dr. South

and Dr. Bentley also adorned this age of eminent divines. The great

poets of the period were Prior, Dryden, Swift, and Pope, who, however,

are numbered more frequently among the wits of the reign of Anne.

Robert Boyle distinguished himself for experiments in natural science,

and zeal for Christian knowledge; and Christopher Wren for his genius

in architectural art. But the two great lights of this reign were,

doubtless, Sir Isaac Newton and John Locke, to whom the realm of

natural and intellectual philosophy is more indebted than to any other

men of genius from the time of Bacon. The discoveries of Newton are

scarcely without a parallel, and he is generally regarded as the

greatest mathematical intellect that England has produced. To him the

world is indebted for the binomial theorem, discovered at the age of

twenty-two; for the invention of fluxions; for the demonstration of

the law of gravitation; and for the discovery of the different

refrangibility of rays of light. His treatise on Optics and his

_Principia_, in which he brought to light the new theory of the

universe, place him at the head of modern philosophers--on a high

vantage ground, to which none have been elevated, of his age, with the

exception of Leibnitz and Galileo. But his greatest glory was his

modesty, and the splendid tribute he rendered to the truths of

Christianity, whose importance and sublime beauty he was ever most

proud to acknowledge in an age of levity and indifference.

John Locke is a name which almost exclusively belongs to the reign of

William III., and he will also ever be honorably mentioned in the

constellation of the very great geniuses and Christians of the world.

His treatises on Religious Toleration are the most masterly ever

written, while his Essay on the Human Understanding is a great system

of truth, as complete, original, and logical, in the department of

mental science, as was the system of Calvin in the realm of theology.

Locke's Essay has had its enemies and detractors, and, while many

eminent men have dissented from it, it nevertheless remains, one of

the most enduring and proudest monuments of the immortal and

ever-expanding intellect of man.

[Sidenote: Anne.]

On the death of William III., (1702,) the Princess Anne, daughter of

James II., peaceably ascended the throne. She was thirty-seven years

of age, a woman of great weaknesses, and possessing but few

interesting qualities. Nevertheless, her reign is radiant with the

glory of military successes, and adorned with every grace of fancy,

wit, and style in literature. The personal talent and exclusive

ambition of William suppressed the national genius; but the incapacity

of Anne gave scope for the commanding abilities of Marlborough in the

field, and Godolphin in the cabinet.

The memorable events connected with her reign of twelve years, were,

the war of the Spanish succession, in which Marlborough humbled the

pride of Louis XIV.; the struggles of the Whigs and Tories; the union

of Scotland with England; the discussion and settlement of great

questions pertaining to the constitution, and the security of the

Protestant religion; and the impulse which literature received from

the constellation of learned men who were patronized by the

government, and who filled an unusual place in public estimation.

In a political point of view, this reign is but the continuation of

the reign of William, since the same objects were pursued, the same

policy was adopted, and the same great characters were intrusted with

power. The animating object of William's life was the suppression of

the power of Louis XIV.; and this object was never lost sight of by

the English government under the reign of Anne.

Hence the great political event of the reign was the war of the

Spanish succession, which, however, pertains to the reign of Louis as

well as to that of Anne. It was during this war that the great battles

of Blenheim, Ramillies, and Malplaquet attested the genius of the

greatest military commander that England had ever sent into the field.

It was this war which exhausted the energies and resources of all the

contending states of Europe, and created a necessity for many years of

slumbering repose. It was this war which completed the humiliation of

a monarch who aspired to the sovereignty of Europe, which preserved

the balance of power, and secured the liberties of Europe. Yet it was

a war which laid the foundation of the national debt, inflamed the

English mind with a mad passion for military glory, which demoralized

the nation, and fostered those international jealousies and enmities

which are still a subject of reproach to the two most powerful states

of Europe. This war made England a more prominent actor on the arena

of European strife, and perhaps contributed to her political

aggrandizement. The greatness of the British empire begins to date

from this period, although this greatness is more to be traced to

colonial possessions, manufactures, and commercial wealth, than to the

victories of Marlborough.

[Sidenote: The Duke of Marlborough.]

It will ever remain an open question whether or not it was wise in the

English nation to continue so long the struggle with Louis XIV. In a

financial and material point of view, the war proved disastrous. But

it is difficult to measure the real greatness of a country, and solid

and enduring blessings, by pounds, shillings, and pence. All such

calculations, however statistically startling, are erroneous and

deceptive. The real strength of nations consists in loyalty,

patriotism, and public spirit; and no sacrifices can be too great to

secure these unbought blessings--"this cheap defence." If the

victories of Marlborough secured these, gave dignity to the British

name, and an honorable and lofty self-respect to the English people,

they were not dearly purchased. But the settlement of these questions

cannot be easily made.

As to the remarkable genius of the great man who infused courage into

the English mind, there can be no question. Marlborough, in spite of

his many faults, his selfishness and parsimony, his ambition and

duplicity, will ever enjoy an enviable fame. He was not so great a

moral hero as William, nor did he contend against such superior forces

as the royal hero. But he was a great hero, nevertheless. His glory

was reached by no sudden indulgence of fortune, by no fortunate

movements, by no accidental circumstances. His fame was progressive.

He never made a great mistake; he never lost the soundness of his

judgment. No success unduly elated him, and no reverses discouraged

him. He never forgot the interests of the nation in his own personal

annoyances or enmities. He was magnanimously indulgent to those Dutch

deputies who thwarted his measures, criticized his plans, and lectured

him on the art of war. The glory of his country was the prevailing

desire of his soul. He was as great in diplomacy and statesmanship as

on the field of Blenheim. He ever sacrificed his feelings as a

victorious general to his duty as a subject. His sagacity was only

equalled by his prudence and patience, and these contributed, as well

as his personal bravery, to his splendid successes, which secured for

him magnificent rewards--palaces and parks, peerages, and a nation's

gratitude and praise.

But there is a limit to all human glory. Marlborough was undermined by

his political enemies, and he himself lost the confidence of the queen

whom he had served, partly by his own imperious conduct, and partly

from the overbearing insolence of his wife. From the height of popular

favor, he descended to the depth of popular hatred. He was held up, by

the sarcasm of the writers whom he despised, to derision and obloquy;

was accused of insolence, cruelty, ambition, extortion, and avarice,

discharged from his high offices, and obliged to seek safety by exile.

He never regained the confidence of the nation, although, when he

died, parliament decreed him a splendid funeral, and a grave in

Westminster Abbey.

[Sidenote: Character of Marlborough.]

In private life, he was amiable and kind; was patient under

contradiction, and placid in manners; had great self-possession, and

extraordinary dignity. His person was beautiful, and his address

commanding. He was feared as a general, but loved as a man. He never

lost his affections for his home, and loved to idolatry his imperious

wife, his equal, if not superior, in the knowledge of human nature.

These qualities as a man, a general, and a statesman, in spite of his

defects, have immortalized his name, and he will, for a long time to

come, be called, and called with justice, the _great_ Duke of

Marlborough.

Scarcely less than he, was Lord Godolphin, the able prime minister of

Anne, with whom Marlborough was united by family ties, by friendship,

by official relations, and by interest. He was a Tory by profession,

but a Whig in his policy. He rose with Marlborough, and fell with him,

being an unflinching advocate for the prosecution of the war to the

utmost limits, for which his government was distasteful to the Tories.

His life was not stainless; but, in an age of corruption, he ably

administered the treasury department, and had control of unbounded

wealth, without becoming rich--the highest praise which can ever be

awarded to a minister of finance. It was only through the coöperation

of this sagacious and far-sighted statesman that Marlborough himself

was enabled to prosecute his brilliant military career.

[Sidenote: Whigs and Tories.]

It was during his administration that party animosity was at its

height--the great struggle which has been going on, in England, for

nearly two hundred years, between the Whigs and Tories. These names

originated in the reign of Charles II., and were terms of reproach.

The court party reproached their antagonists with their affinity to

the fanatical conventiclers in Scotland, who were known by the name of

the _Whigs_; and the country party pretended to find a resemblance

between the courtiers and the Popish banditti of Ireland, to whom the

appellation of _Tory_ was affixed. The High Church party and the

advocates of absolutism belonged to the Tories; the more liberal party

and the advocates of constitutional reform, to the Whigs. The former

were conservative, the latter professed a sympathy with improvements.

But the leaders of both parties were among the greatest nobles in the

realm, and probably cared less for any great innovation than they did

for themselves. These two great parties, in the progress of society,

have changed their views, and the opinions once held by the Whigs were

afterwards adopted by the Tories. On the whole, the Whigs were in

advance in liberality of mind, and in enlightened plans of government.

But both parties, in England, have ever been aristocratic, and both

have felt nearly an equal disgust of popular influences. Charles and

James sympathized with the Tories more than with the Whigs; but

William III. was supported by the Whigs, who had the ascendency in his

reign. Queen Anne was a Tory, as was to be expected from a princess of

the house of Stuart; but, in the early part of her reign, was obliged

to yield to the supremacy of the Whigs. The advocates for war were

Whigs, and those who desired peace were Tories. The Whigs looked to

the future glory of the country; the Tories, to the expenses which war

created. The Tories at last got the ascendency, and expelled

Godolphin, Marlborough, and Sunderland from power.

Of the Tory leaders, Harley, (Earl of Oxford,) St. John, (Lord

Bolingbroke,) the Duke of Buckingham, and the Duke of Ormond, the Earl

of Rochester, and Lord Dartmouth, were the most prominent, but this

Tory party was itself divided, in consequence of jealousies between

the chiefs, the intrigues of Harley, and the measureless ambition of

Bolingbroke. Under the ascendency of the Tories the treaty of Utrecht

was made, now generally condemned by historians of both Whig and Tory

politics. It was disproportioned to the success of the war, although

it secured the ends of the grand alliance.

[Sidenote: Dr. Henry Sacheverell.]

One of the causes which led to the overthrow of the Whigs was the

impeachment and trial of Dr. Henry Sacheverell, an event which excited

intense interest at the time, and, though insignificant in itself,

touched some vital principles of the constitution.

This divine was a man of mean capacity, and of little reputation for

learning or virtue. He had been, during the reign of William, an

outrageous Whig; but, finding his services disregarded, he became a

violent Tory. By a sort of plausible effrontery and scurrilous

rhetoric, he obtained the applause of the people, and the valuable

living of St. Saviour, Southwark. The audacity of his railings against

the late king and the revolution at last attracted the notice of

government; and for two sermons which he printed, and in which he

inculcated, without measure, the doctrine of passive obedience,

consigned Dissenters to eternal damnation, and abused the great

principle of religious toleration, he was formally impeached. All

England was excited by the trial. The queen herself privately

attended, to encourage a man who was persecuted for his loyalty, and

persecuted for defending his church. The finest orators and lawyers of

the day put forth all their energies. Bishop Atterbury wrote for

Sacheverell his defence, which was endorsed by a conclave of High

Church divines. The result of the trial was the condemnation of the

doctor, and with it the fall of his adversaries. He was suspended for

three years, but his defeat was a triumph. He was received, in college

halls and private mansions, with the pomp of a sovereign and the

reverence of a saint. His sentence made his enemies unpopular. The

great body of the English nation, wedded to High Church principles,

took sides in his favor. But the arguments of his accusers developed

some great principles--led to the assertion of the doctrines of

toleration; for, if passive obedience to the rulers of the state and

church were obligatory, then all Dissenters might be curbed and

suppressed. The Whig managers of the trial, by opposing the bigoted

Churchmen, aided the cause of dissent, justified the revolution, and

upheld the conquest by William III. And their speeches are upon

record, that they asserted the great principles of civil and religious

liberty, in the face of all the authority, dignity, and wisdom of the

realm. It is true they lost as a party, on account of the bigotry of

the times; but they furnished another pillar to uphold the

constitution, and adduced new and powerful arguments in support of

constitutional liberty. The country gained, if they, as a party, lost;

and though Sacheverell was lauded by his church, his conviction was a

triumph to the friends of freedom. Good resulted in many other ways.

Political leaders learned moral wisdom; they saw the folly of

persecuting men for libels, when such men had the sympathy of the

people; that such persecutions were undignified, and that, while they

gained their end, they lost more by victory than by defeat. The trial

of Sacheverell, while it brought to view more clearly some great

constitutional truths, also more effectually advanced the liberty of

the press; for, surely, restriction on the press is a worse evil, than

the violence and vituperation of occasional libels.

[Sidenote: Union of Scotland and England.]

The great domestic event of this reign was doubtless the union of

Scotland and England; a consummation of lasting peace between the two

countries, which William III. had proposed. Nothing could be more

beneficent for both the countries; and the only wonder is, that it was

not done before, when James II. ascended the English throne; and

nothing then, perhaps, prevented it, but the bitter jealousy which had

so long existed between these countries; a jealousy, dislike, and

prejudice which have hardly yet passed away.

Scotland, until the reign of James II., was theoretically and

practically independent of England, but was not so fortunately placed,

as the latter country, for the development of energies. The country

was smaller, more barren, and less cultivated. The people were less

civilized; and had less influence on the political welfare of the

state. The aristocracy were more powerful, and were more jealous of

royal authority. There were constant feuds and jealousies between

dominant classes, which checked the growth in political importance,

wealth, and civilization. But the people were more generally imbued

with the ultra principles of the Reformation, were more religious, and

cherished a peculiar attachment to the Presbyterian form of church

government, and a peculiar hatred of every thing which resembled Roman

Catholicism. They were, moreover, distinguished for patriotism, and

had great jealousy of English influences.

James II. was the legitimate King of Scotland, as well as of England;

but he soon acquired a greater love for England, than he retained for

his native country; and England being the greater country, the

interests of Scotland were frequently sacrificed to those of England.

Queen Anne, as the daughter of James II., was also the legitimate

sovereign of Scotland; and, on her decease, the Scotch were not bound

to acknowledge the Elector of Hanover as their legitimate king.

[Sidenote: Duke of Hamilton.]

Many ardent and patriotic Scotchmen, including the Duke of Hamilton

and Fletcher of Saltoun, deemed it a favorable time to assert, on the

death of Queen Anne, their national independence, since the English

government was neither just nor generous to the lesser country.

Under these circumstances, there were many obstacles to a permanent

union, and it was more bitterly opposed in Scotland than in England.

The more patriotic desired complete independence. Many were jealous of

the superior prosperity of England. The people in the Highlands and

the north of Scotland were Jacobinical in their principles, and were

attached to the Stuart dynasty. The Presbyterians feared the influence

of English Episcopacy, and Scottish peers deprecated a servile

dependence on the parliament of England.

But the English government, on the whole, much as it hated Scotch

Presbyterianism and Scotch influence, desired a union, in order to

secure the peaceful succession of the house of Hanover, for the north

of Scotland was favorable to the Stuarts, and without a union, English

liberties would be endangered by Jacobinical intrigues. English

statesmen felt this, and used every measure to secure this end.

The Scotch were overreached. Force, bribery, and corruption were

resorted to. The Duke of Hamilton proved a traitor, and the union was

effected--a union exceedingly important to the peace of both

countries, but especially desirable to England. Important concessions

were made by the English, to which they were driven only by fear. They

might have ruled Scotland as they did Ireland, but for the intrepidity

and firmness of the Scotch, who while negotiations were pending,

passed the famous Act of Security, by which the Scottish parliament

decreed the succession in Scotland, on the death of the queen, open

and elective; the independence and power of parliaments; freedom in

trade and commerce; and the liberty of Scotland to engage or not in

the English continental wars. The English parliament retaliated,

indeed, by an act restricting the trade of Scotland, and declaring

Scotchmen aliens throughout the English dominions. But the conflicts

between the Whigs and Tories induced government to repeal the act; and

the commissioners for the union secured their end.

It was agreed, in the famous treaty they at last effected, that the

two kingdoms of England and Scotland be united into one, by the name

of _Great Britain_.

That the succession to the United Kingdom shall remain to the Princess

Sophia, Duchess Dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being

Protestants; and that all Papists, and persons marrying Papists, shall

be excluded from, and be forever incapable of inheriting, the crown of

Great Britain;

That the whole people of Great Britain shall be represented by one

parliament, in which sixteen peers and forty-five commoners, chosen

for Scotland, should sit and vote;

That the subjects of the United Kingdom shall enjoy an entire freedom

and intercourse of trade and navigation, and reciprocal communication

of all other rights, privileges, and advantages belonging to the

subjects of either kingdom;

That the laws, in regard to public rights and civil government, shall

be the same in both countries, but that no alteration shall be made in

the laws respecting private rights, unless for the evident utility of

the subjects residing in Scotland;

That the Court of Session, and all other courts of judicature in

Scotland, remain as before the union, subject, however, to such

regulations as may be made by the parliament of Great Britain.

Beside these permanent regulations, a sum of three hundred and

ninety-eight thousand pounds was granted to Scotland, as an equivalent

to the augmentation of the customs and excise.

By this treaty, the Scotch became identified with the English in

interest. They lost their independence; but they gained security and

peace; and rose in wealth and consequence. The nation moreover, was

burdened by the growth of the national debt. The advantage was mutual,

but England gained the greater advantage by shifting a portion of her

burdens on Scotland, by securing the hardy people of that noble

country to fight her battles, and by converting a nation of enemies

into a nation of friends.

We come now to glance at those illustrious men who adorned the

literature of England in this brilliant age, celebrated for political

as well as literary writings.

Of these, Addison, Swift, Bolingbroke, Bentley, Warburton, Arbuthnot,

Gay, Pope, Tickell, Halifax, Parnell, Rowe, Prior, Congreve, Steele,

and Berkeley, were the most distinguished. Dryden belonged to the

preceding age; to the period of license and gayety--the greatest but

most immoral of all the great poets of England, from the time of

Milton to that of Pope.

[Sidenote: Wits of Queen Anne's Reign.]

The wits of Queen Anne's reign were political writers as well as

poets, and their services were sought for and paid by the great

statesmen of the times, chiefly of the Tory party. Marlborough

neglected the poets, and they contributed to undermine his power.

Of these wits the most distinguished and respectable was Addison, born

1672. He was well educated, and distinguished himself at Oxford, and

was a fellow of Magdalen College. His early verses, which would now be

pronounced very inferior, however attracted the notice of Dryden, then

the great autocrat of letters, and the oracle of the literary clubs.

At the age of twenty-seven, Addison was provided with a pension from

the Whig government, and set out on his travels. He was afterwards

made secretary to Lord Halifax, and elected a member of the House of

Commons, but was never able to make a speech. He, however, made up for

his failure as an orator by his power as a writer, being a perfect

master of elegant satire. He was also charming in private

conversation, and his society was much sought by eminent statesmen,

scholars, and noblemen. In 1708, he became secretary for Ireland, and,

while he resided at Dublin, wrote those delightful papers on which his

fame chiefly rests. Not as the author of Rosamond, nor of Latin

verses, nor of the treatise on Medals, nor of Letters from Italy, nor

of the tragedy of Cato, would he now be known to us. His glory is

derived from the Tatler and Spectator--an entirely new species of

writing in his age, original, simple, and beautiful, but chiefly

marked for polished and elegant satire against the follies and bad

taste of his age. Moreover, his numbers of the Spectator are

distinguished for elevation of sentiment, and moral purity, without

harshness, and without misanthropy. He wrote three sevenths of that

immortal production, and on every variety of subject, without any

attempt to be eloquent or _intense_, without pedantry and without

affectation. The success of the work was immense, and every one who

could afford it, had it served on the breakfast table with the tea and

toast. It was the general subject of conversation in all polite

circles, and did much to improve the taste and reform the morals of

the age. There was nothing which he so severely ridiculed as the show

of learning without the reality, coxcombry in conversation,

extravagance in dress, female flirts and butterflies, gay and

fashionable women, and all false modesty and affectation. But he

blamed without bitterness, and reformed without exhortation, while he

exalted what was simple, and painted in most beautiful colors the

virtues of contentment, simplicity, sincerity, and cheerfulness.

His latter days were imbittered by party animosity, and the malignant

stings of literary rivals. Nor was he happy in his domestic life,

having married a proud countess, who did not appreciate his genius. He

also became addicted to intemperate habits. Still he was ever honored

and respected, and, when he died, was buried in Westminster Abbey.

[Sidenote: Swift.]

Next to Addison in fame, and superior in genius, was Swift, born in

Ireland, in 1677, educated at Dublin, and patronized by Sir William

Temple. He was rewarded, finally, with the deanery of St. Patrick's.

He was very useful to his party by his political writings; but his

fame rests chiefly on his poetry, and his Gulliver's Travels, marked

and disgraced by his savage sarcasm on woman, and his vilification of

human nature. He was a great master of venomous satire. He spared

neither friends nor enemies. He was ambitious, misanthropic and

selfish. His treatment of woman was disgraceful and heartless in the

extreme. But he was witty, learned, and natural. He was never known to

laugh, while he convulsed the circles into which he was thrown. He was

rough to his servants, insolent to inferiors, and sycophantic to men

of rank. His distinguishing power was his unsparing and unscrupulous

sarcasm and his invective was as dreadful as the personal ridicule of

Voltaire. As a poet he was respectable, and as a writer he was

original. He was indifferent to literary fame, and never attempted any

higher style of composition than that in which he could excel. His

last days were miserable, and he lingered a long while in hopeless and

melancholy idiocy.

[Sidenote: Pope--Bolingbroke--Gay--Prior.]

Pope properly belongs to a succeeding age, though his first writings

attracted considerable attention during the life of Addison, who first

raised him from obscurity. He is the greatest, after Dryden, of all

the second class poets of his country. His Rape of the Lock, the most

original of his poems, established his fame. But his greatest works

were the translations of the Iliad and Odyssey, the Dunciad, and his

Essay on Man. He was well paid for his labors, and lived in a

beautiful villa at Twickenham, the friend of Bolingbroke, and the

greatest literary star of his age. But he was bitter and satirical,

irritable, parsimonious, and vain. As a versifier, he has never been

equalled. He died in 1744, in the Romish faith, beloved but by few,

and disliked by the world generally.

[Sidenote: Writers of the Age of Queen Anne.]

Bolingbroke was not a poet, but a man of vast genius, a great

statesman, and a great writer on history and political philosophy, a

man of most fascinating manners and conversation, brilliant, witty,

and learned, but unprincipled and intriguing, the great leader of the

Tory party. Gay, as a poet, was respectable, but poor, unfortunate, a

hanger on of great people, and miserably paid for his sycophancy. His

fame rests on his Fables and his Beggar's Opera. Prior first made

himself distinguished by his satire called A City Mouse and a Country

Mouse, aimed against Dryden. He was well rewarded by government, and

was sent as minister to Paris. Like most of the wits of his time, he

was convivial, and not always particular in the choice of his

associates. Humor was the natural turn of his mind. Steele was editor

of the Spectator and wrote some excellent papers, although vastly

inferior to Addison's. He is the father of the periodical essay, was a

man of fashion and pleasure, and had great experience in the follies

and vanities of the world. It is doubtful whether the writings of the

great men who adorned the age of Anne will ever regain the ascendency

they once enjoyed, since they have all been surpassed in succeeding

times. They had not the fire, enthusiasm, or genius which satisfies

the wants of the present generation. As poets, they had no greatness

of fancy; and as philosophers, they were cold and superficial. Nor did

they write for the people, but for the great, with whom they sought to

associate, by whose praises they were consoled, and by whose bread

they were sustained. They wrote for a class, and that class alone,

that chiefly seeks to avoid ridicule and abstain from absurdity, that

never attempts the sublime, and never sinks to the ridiculous; a class

keen of observation, fond of the satirical, and indifferent to all

institutions and enterprises which have for their object the elevation

of the masses, or the triumph of the abstract principles of truth and

justice.

* * * * *

REFERENCES.--Lord Mahon's History of England, which

commences with the peace of Utrecht, is one of the most

useful and interesting works which have lately appeared.

Smollett's continuation of Hume should be consulted,

although the author was greater as a novelist than as an

historian. Burnet's history on this period is a standard.

Hallam should be read in reference to all constitutional

questions. Coxe's Life of Marlborough throws great light on

the period, and is very valuable. Macaulay's work will, of

course, be read. See, also, Bolingbroke's Letters, and the

Duke of Berwick's Memoirs. A chapter in the Pictorial

History is very good as to literary history and the progress

of the arts and sciences. See, also, Johnson's Lives of the

Poets; Nichols's Life of Addison; Scott's Life of Swift;

Macaulay's Essay on Addison; and the Spectator and Tatler.

A Modern History, From the Time of Luther to the Fall of Napoleon For the Use of Schools and Colleges · 第 17 / 32 章