this Royal reasoning, were not convinced by it; and Philip, finding his threats as unsuccessful as his entreaties had been before, at length laid siege to the fortress, as I have already mentioned, in 1727. The siege failed, and he signed the preliminaries at the Pardo; but still, in discussing a definitive treaty, continued to claim the former promise, and to urge the expected cession.

The views of the English Cabinet at this period were still the same anxious to pacify the Spaniards, but afraid to lose their popularity at home. In 1728 we find a letter from Mr. Poyntz to his patron, Lord Townshend, observing that "after we carry the point of Gibraltar the Spaniards will "leave no stone unturned to hurt our commerce and to dis"tress us into compliance;" and that "the Catholic King "and all true Spaniards are animated against us by this "single consideration." Townshend, in answer, declares, "What you propose in relation to Gibraltar is, certainly, 'very reasonable, and is exactly conformable to the opinion "which you know I have always entertained concerning that "place. But you cannot but be sensible of the violent and "almost superstitious zeal which has of late prevailed among "all parties in this kingdom, against any scheme for the re“stitution of Gibraltar, upon any conditions whatsoever; "and I am afraid that the bare mention of a proposal which "carried the most distant appearance of lay ng England "under an obligation of ever parting with that place would "be sufficient to put the whole nation in a flame."*

Townshend had, indeed, good reason for his fear of Parliamentary or popular resistance. From the Spanish complaints the Opposition had obtained a clue to the letter of George the First, in 1721; and they now raised an outcry on two grounds; first, that there should be any idea of ceding the fortress at all -- and, secondly, because, as they alleged, the Ministry had disgraced the King and nation by breaking a solemn promise, however wrongly made, from

* Mr. Poyntz to Lord Townshend, June 9. 1728. Lord Townshend to Mr. Poyntz, June 14. 1728.

whence they inferred that the war was unjust on the part of England, and that Philip was merely claiming his due. A motion to produce King George's letter was brought forward by Mr. Sandys, in February, 1727, warmly supported by Wyndham and Pulteney. Walpole replied that such a promise had, indeed, been made in a former administration, but that he could assure the House it was only a conditional promise, and void by the refusal of Spain to comply with the terms required; and that as to producing the King's letter, he held that the private letters of Princes were almost as sacred as their very persons. The motion was rejected by a large majority.

In 1729, however, the onset was renewed in the other House. No resistance was then made by the Ministers to produce the Royal letter, probably because it had already been published abroad. This document being laid upon the table, the Opposition, in order to thwart the Government and perplex the negotiations as much as possible, moved, "That effectual care be taken in any treaty that the King of "Spain do renounce all claim to Gibraltar and Minorca, in plain and strong terms." But a large minority decided for a counter-resolution: "That the House relies upon His Ma"jesty for preserving his undoubted right to Gibraltar and "Minorca." This resolution was communicated to the Commons in a conference; in that House also, Lord Malpas obtained the production of the King's letter, and a similar proposal to that of the Lords in opposition was made, but with similar defeat. The minority, however, mustered no less than 111, a larger number than they usually could at that period.*

The agitation of the public mind on this question, and the rising clamour against Spanish depredations, rendered it more than ever necessary to come to some conclusion of the long pending negotiations. Scarcely, therefore, had the Session closed, and the King set out on his first Royal journey to Hanover, than the Ministers determined to send * Parliamentary History, vol. viii. p. 548. and 695.

once more to Spain the former ambassador, Mr. William Stanhope. His diplomatic skill was long tried; he was thoroughly acquainted with the Spanish nation; and his integrity was so highly esteemed by the Spanish monarch, that His Majesty used to say of him, "Stanhope is the only foreign Minister who never deceived me." The ambassador found the Spanish Court no longer at Madrid, nor in the stately palaces around it: their Catholic Majesties had wandered to the delicious plains of Andalusia, and now dwelt amidst the Moorish glories of Seville. The cause of this change was the same which influenced all others at that Court the ambition of the Queen. The King, her husband, was a prey to hypochondriac maladies, and often desirous of resigning his crown: he had effected that wish in 1724, and she had discovered, to her infinite alarm, that a similar scheme was nearly accomplished in 1728. It became, therefore, her great object to withdraw him from the neighbourhood of the Council of Castille, to which any abdication must be first addressed, and by whose intrigues it might be sometimes promoted.*

It was therefore in Andalusia that, on the 9th of November, William Stanhope, after innumerable difficulties, signed the celebrated treaty of Seville. The terms were highly advantageous to his countrymen. It was a defensive alliance between England, Spain, and France, to which Holland subsequently acceded. After a confirmation of preceding treaties, and a stipulation of mutual assistance in case of attack, Spain revoked all the privileges granted to Austrian subjects by the treaties of Vienna, re-established the English trade in America on its former footing, and restored all captures, with compensation for the loss sustained. The Asiento was confirmed to the South Sea Company. Commissioners were to be appointed to determine

* Mr. Keene to the Duke of Newcastle, August 1. 1733. According to Duclos: "Sans aucune incommodité apparente Philippe était quelquefois "six mois sans vouloir quitter le lit, se faire raser, couper les ongles, ni "changer de linge. Dans des momens il se croyait mort, et de"mandait pourquoi on ne l'enterrait pas!" &c. (Mém. vol. ii. p. 386.)

.....

the disputes as to the limits of the American trade, and as to the claims of Spain for restitution of the ships taken in 1718. Another article stipulated, that to secure the succession of Parma and Tuscany to the Infant Don Carlos, 6000 Spanish troops should be allowed to garrison Leghorn, Porto Ferrajo, Parma, and Placentia, instead of the neutral garrisons provided by the Quadruple Alliance. The question of Gibraltar was passed over in total silence, which, after the noisy pretensions of Spain, was equivalent to a public renunciation. Such, in fact, it was considered by Philip, who now, losing all hope of ever obtaining the fortress, attempted to cut off its communication with the main land, and constructed the strong lines of San Roque, across the isthmus. The Spanish people, however, still continued to look with indignation on the British banners floating from the summit of the inaccessible rock, and for above half a century longer nursed an ardent ambition for its conquest.

*

For the conclusion of this peace, and for his other services, William Stanhope was immediately created Lord Harrington, and soon afterwards, as we shall find, appointed Secretary of State. In proportion to the satisfaction in London was the rage and resentment at Vienna; and a further mortification to the Emperor ensued in the next Session of Parliament; for, being deprived of his Spanish supplies of money, he attempted to borrow 400,000 7. on his credit in London. The Ministry immediately brought in and carried through a Bill, prohibiting loans to foreign powers without licence from the King under his Privy Seal. It is quite certain that had the Government allowed the loan, the Opposition would afterwards have loudly inveighed against their supineness. Now, however, as loud a cry was raised

* Mr. Keene was afterwards instructed to remonstrate against these works. But he writes, May 20. 1731: "I was assured if the whole uni"verse should fall upon the King to make him desist, he would rather let "himself be cut to pieces than consent

"to Cadiz as to the spot where the line is." vol. iii. p. 240.

We might as well pretend See Coxe's House of Bourbon,

against "a Bill of Terrors," "an eternal yoke on our fel"low subjects,"—"an advantageous bargain to the Dutch."* "Shall British merchants," answers Walpole, "be per"mitted to lend their money against the British nation? "Shall they arm an enemy with strength, and assist him "with supplies?"

The treaty of Seville was followed in a very few months by Lord Townshend's resignation. I have already more than once mentioned the misunderstandings between the brother Ministers; and I need scarcely again advert to the jealousy of power in Walpole, to the violence of temper in Townshend. The former would brook no equal, and the latter no superior. Their constant bickerings were often appeased by the mediation of Walpole's sister Lady Townshend, or even of Queen Caroline; but unhappily the former died, and the latter, when she found a breach unavoidable, threw her whole influence into the scale of Walpole. Besides the general causes of coldness, there were, at this time, particular grounds of difference. In foreign affairs Townshend was much incensed against the Emperor, and would have pushed matters to extremity against him if not withheld by his colleague. At home he was disgusted with the timidity and captiousness of the Duke of Newcastle, and wished him to be removed in favour of Chesterfield. Another cause of irritation in the Session of 1730 was the Pension Bill a measure proposed by Mr. Sandys, and supported by the whole Opposition, to disable all persons from sitting in Parliament who had any pension, or any offices held in trust for them, and to require every member to swear that he had not. In the King's private notes this is termed "a villanous Bill" which should be "torn to pieces in every particular." But Walpole, though he entertained the same opinion of it, would not run the hazard of unpopularity by taking an active part against it, and he allowed it to pass the House of Com

Speech of Mr. Danvers. Parl. Hist. vol. viii. p. 788.

** The King to Lord Townshend, March, 1730. Coxe's Walpole, vol. ii. p. 537.