new King could not choose his advisers from among the leaders of a faction which was well known to be in deadly opposition to his claims. He therefore chose them from among the Whigs. The Lords Justices had in fact taken some steps in this direction before the arrival of the monarch from Germany, and George afterwards confirmed their acts. Excepting the Earl of Nottingham, who was removed within a year, the new Cabinet consisted entirely of Whigs, at the head of whom was Viscount Townshend, though the great directing intellect was that of his brother-in-law, Robert Walpole, at first Paymaster-General of the Forces, but afterwards Chancellor of the Exchequer and First Lord of the Treasury. Walpole belonged to an old family of landed proprietors in Norfolk, but, despite his remarkable genius as a statesman, never acquired the manners or look of a courtier. To the last he was the fox-hunting squire--big, burly, unpolished, coarse in habits and in speech, jovially good-natured, tolerant and placable, yet with so poor an opinion of human nature that he declared (or at least is said to have declared) that every one had his price, and laughingly disbelieved in all exalted motives in the field of politics.

Born in 1676, Walpole was about nine-andtwenty when, in 1705, he was appointed one of the council to Prince George of Denmark, then Lord High Admiral. The administrative capacity he displayed in this post brought him into favour, and from that time forth he rose with singular rapidity to very high positions in the State. When the Tories came into office, in 1710, he was accused of corruption in the public accounts, sent to the Tower, and expelled the House of Commons. The justice of this charge is doubtful; but it rather promoted than hindered the success of Walpole. At the dissolution in August, 1713, he again entered Parliament, and George I., on his accession in the following year, was glad of such tried and faithful services. As First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer, Walpole acquired, in 1715, an immense command over the resources of the country, the well-being of which he promoted by his liberal and masterly finance, and by a regard to commercial prosperity very unusual in those times. Under his guidance, England became rich, tranquil, and contented, and a degree of wealth was stored up, which, in the great wars of later days, made the nation almost invincible. Population increased with the growth of trade. Manchester and Birmingham doubled their numbers in thirty years. Liverpool, from very small beginhings, became the third port in the kingdom. Agriculture underwent an immense development,

and the value of land tripled within a very short period. At the same time, the finances of the country were strictly, though not parsimoniously, managed. All taxation in restraint of trade was diminished, and, before the death of George I., in 1727, the public burdens were reduced by twenty millions.*

These advantages, however, were accompanied by a degree of public corruption which has cast an indelible stain upon the epoch. Walpole himself was not an avaricious man, and it is recorded to his honour that he left office poorer than he entered it. But he was absolutely unscrupulous in the use of corruption as a means of influencing others. The circumstances of the time were such as to favour this discreditable agency. The authority of the King, as the head of the State, had greatly declined since the period of the Revolution, and it became even less under the sway of George I., who, as a foreigner, knew little of English politics, and doubtless felt that his interference would be regarded with jealousy by the people over whom he had been called to rule. There was consequently no effectual check on Parliament, and the power of Parliament meant simply the power of the House of Commons, since, if the Upper Chamber proved obstinate in any respect, it was submerged by a deluge of new members, who knew very well what they were sent to do. The House of Commons was nominally the popular Chamber; but its responsibility to the people was in truth very slight. The Act for Triennial Parliaments, passed in the reign of William III., was set aside in 1716 by a Bill appointing seven years as the duration of the national Legislature. The excuse for the Septennial Bill, the operation of which was extended to the existing Parliament, though it had been elected for only three years, was, that the agitated condition of the country, consequent on the recent rebellion of the First Pretender, and the known existence of a strong Jacobite feeling in influential quarters, rendered a greater fixity of representation necessary to preserve the existing dynasty, together with the principles sanctioned by the Revolution of 1688--9. There was in truth something to be said, on special grounds, in favour of a measure which was otherwise extremely objectionable. But, if the Septennial Act guarded the throne and the popular liberties, it also led to a vast increase of political corruption. A lease of seven years gave to every member a feeling of indefinite security against the displeasure of his constituents; and this protection

* Green's History of the English People.

new King could not choose his advisers from among the leaders of a faction which was well known to be in deadly opposition to his claims. He therefore chose them from among the Whigs. The Lords Justices had in fact taken some steps in this direction before the arrival of the monarch from Germany, and George afterwards confirmed their acts. Excepting the Earl of Nottingham, who was removed within a year, the new Cabinet consisted entirely of Whigs, at the head of whom was Viscount Townshend, though the great directing intellect was that of his brother-in-law, Robert Walpole, at first Paymaster-General of the Forces, but afterwards Chancellor of the Exchequer and First Lord of the Treasury. Walpole belonged to an old family of landed proprietors in Norfolk, but, despite his remarkable genius as a statesman, never acquired the manners or look of a courtier. To the last he was the fox-hunting squire--big, burly, unpolished, coarse in habits and in speech, jovially good-natured, tolerant and placable, yet with so poor an opinion of human nature that he declared (or at least is said to have declared) that every one had his price, and laughingly disbelieved in all exalted motives in the field of politics.

Born in 1676, Walpole was about nine-andtwenty when, in 1705, he was appointed one of the council to Prince George of Denmark, then Lord High Admiral. The administrative capacity he displayed in this post brought him into favour, and from that time forth he rose with singular rapidity to very high positions in the State. When the Tories came into office, in 1710, he was accused of corruption in the public accounts, sent to the Tower, and expelled the House of Commons. The justice of this charge is doubtful; but it rather promoted than hindered the success of Walpole. At the dissolution in August, 1713, he again entered Parliament, and George I., on his accession in the following year, was glad of such tried and faithful services. As First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer, Walpole acquired, in 1715, an immense command over the resources of the country, the well-being of which he promoted by his liberal and masterly finance, and by a regard to commercial prosperity very unusual in those times. Under his guidance, England became rich, tranquil, and contented, and a degree of wealth was stored up, which, in the great wars of later days, made the nation almost invincible. Population increased with the growth of trade. Manchester and Birmingham doubled their numbers in thirty years. Liverpool, from very small beginhings, became the third port in the kingdom. Agriculture underwent an immense development,

and the value of land tripled within a very short period. At the same time, the finances of the country were strictly, though not parsimoniously, managed. All taxation in restraint of trade was diminished, and, before the death of George I., in 1727, the public burdens were reduced by twenty millions.*

These advantages, however, were accompanied by a degree of public corruption which has cast an indelible stain upon the epoch. Walpole himself was not an avaricious man, and it is recorded to his honour that he left office poorer than he entered it. But he was absolutely unscrupulous in the use of corruption as a means of influencing others. The circumstances of the time were such as to favour this discreditable agency. The authority of the King, as the head of the State, had greatly declined since the period of the Revolution, and it became even less under the sway of George I., who, as a foreigner, knew little of English politics, and doubtless felt that his interference would be regarded with jealousy by the people over whom he had been called to rule. There was consequently no effectual check on Parliament, and the power of Parliament meant simply the power of the House of Commons, since, if the Upper Chamber proved obstinate in any respect, it was submerged by a deluge of new members, who knew very well what they were sent to do. The House of Commons was nominally the popular Chamber; but its responsibility to the people was in truth very slight. The Act for Triennial Parliaments, passed in the reign of William III., was set aside in 1716 by a Bill appointing seven years as the duration of the national Legislature. The excuse for the Septennial Bill, the operation of which was extended to the existing Parliament. though it had been elected for only three years, was, that the agitated condition of the country, consequent on the recent rebellion of the First Pretender, and the known existence of a strong Jacobite feeling in influential quarters, rendered a greater fixity of representation necessary to preserve the existing dynasty, together with the principles sanctioned by the Revolution of 1688--9. There was in truth something to be said, on special grounds, in favour of a measure which was otherwise extremely objectionable. But, if the Septennial Act guarded the throne and the popular liberties, it also led to a vast increase of political corruption. A lease of seven years gave to every member a feeling of indefinite security against the displeasure of his constituents; and this protection

Green's History of the English People.

A.D. 1717.]

was immensely increased by the absolute secrecy with which the proceedings of Parliament were shrouded. No report of the debates was permitted to be published; no elector knew how his representative had voted; and, in the dark chambers of Parliament, any job, however disgraceful, could be carried out with safety. Members were willing to be bribed; Walpole was perfectly content to br.be them. Thus the very sources of public virtue were poisoned; and yet the extraordinary genius of Walpole, and, on the whole, his honest devotion to the interests of the country, enabled him to use this dirty instrument with results which, in themselves, it is impossible to condemn. When the Septennial Act was passed, Walpole was so ill as to be in temporary retirement; but the Bill was well known to have his concurrence. It added largely to his power, and did not contradict any feeling that was dear to his nature. The Norfolk squire was a sincere and faithful Whig; but he was not a Whig of the Revolutionary epoch. He had no belief in what are known to modern times as Liberal principles. He always declared that he was no reformer: his great ideal was to take advantage of existing facts, that he might create a strong administration, and develop the, wealth and industry of the land.

The Ministry of Lord Townshend was broken up in April, 1717, by the dismissal of that statesman, and the consequent resignation of Walpole. The two political friends were out of office for the next three years; but Walpole distinguished himself by his exposure of the celebrated South Sea Bubble-a scheme for liquidating the National Debt by means of fictitious stock, issued by the South Sea Company. The infatuation was so prodigious that little heed was given to his arguments; but the event entirely confirmed his prescience and discernment. The terrible explosion consequent on a baseless mania caused the overthrow of the Administration formed by Stanhope and the Earl of Sunderland in succession to that of Townshend and Walpole. The latter statesmen now returned to power; but it was the genius and energy of Walpole which restored the public credit after the collapse and prostration consequent on the bursting of the gigantic Bubble. The result was seen in the speedy advancement of this great administrator to the highest position of the State. April, 1721, he became Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer, thus commencing a Premiership which lasted nearly twenty-one years. His earliest efforts were devoted to the interests of the national commerce. Several of the principal imports and exports of the kingdom he found

In

387

These were speedily

burdened with heavy taxes. removed, and the trade of Britain, delivered from its fetters, sprang up into wonderful vigour and prosperity. A hundred and six articles of British manufacture were allowed to be exported, and thirty-eight articles of raw materials to be imported, duty-free. In 1730, Walpole permitted the southern plantations of America to export their rice directly to any part of Europe, whereas formerly the commerce of those settlements had been restricted to the mother-country. This liberal measure led to a great increase in the trade of all those colonies which were concerned in the production of rice; and in other respects the policy of Walpole towards our American possessions was that of a wise and generous statesman. As regards England itself, however, the great Minister's Excise Bill, introduced in 1733, was so unpopular that he was compelled to withdraw it. The measure was essential to enable him to carry out his favourite idea that the necessaries of life, and the raw materials of manufacture, should remain absolutely untaxed. It is probable that the populace never clearly understood the objects of the Bill; but the general detestation of anything in the nature of Excise duties threatened an actual insurrection, and showed the imprudence of proceeding any further with the measure. "I will not," said Walpole, in words of noble feeling, "be the Minister to enforce taxes at the expense of blood."

Walpole knew that his strength lay in the House of Commons, and, although George I. conferred a peerage on his son in 1723, the Minister himself declined any similar honour until the close of his political career, when he was created Earl of Orford. In 1724, however, he was made a Knight of the Bath, and in 1726 a Knight of the Garter. The sudden death of George I., on the 10th of June, 1727, when absent on a visit to Germany, brought with it no difference in the position of Walpole, though he would probably have been deposed but for the powerful support of Queen Caroline, the consort of George II., who always regarded him with esteem. With respect both to the first and second Georges, we propose in this Chapter to consider merely the domestic incidents of their reigns the foreign wars and complications are detailed elsewhere. The younger George, while Prince of Wales, was at frequent enmity with his father; and after he came to the throne, the same species of vexatious opposition was shown towards himself by his own son, Frederick, the father of George III. These family differences occupy a conspicuous place in the Memoirs of the times; but they are not of sufficient importance to be