in life; he died, but three years afterwards, at the age of fifty-two; and, even amidst the strife of parties, was universally lamented as a man of the highest legal talents, of irreproachable character, and most winning gentleness of manners.1

The year 1733 is also remarkable for the kindling of a new war, in which, however, England took no part, and of which, therefore, a slight sketch will be sufficient for my object. Augustus the Second, King of Poland and Elector of Saxony, having died in February, his kingdom was immediately exposed to the usual evils of an elective monarchy. One faction called to the throne King Stanislaus, who had already reigned over them; another proclaimed Augustus, son of the late sovereign. The former was supported by his son-in-law the King of France, the other by the Emperor Charles and the Czarina Anne of Russia. Stanislaus set out from France in disguise, attended only by a single officer, and, after a series of romantic adventures, arrived safe at Warsaw, and was again hailed the rightful King of Poland. He had certainly on his side the greater part of the nation; but a large Russian army entering Lithuania carried everything in favour of his rival. Stanislaus was compelled to shut himself up in Dantzick, where he was besieged by the Russian and Saxon troops, and from whence he made his escape with great difficulty, while the remainder of Poland submitting to the conqueror, proclaimed King Augustus the Third.

The Emperor had been withheld from taking any direct part in this struggle by the remonstrances of Walpole; but, in spite of that prudent and pacific minister, he had so warmly, though indirectly, befriended Augustus, as to become involved in a war with France and Spain. The great object, at this time, of the Queen of Spain (the King I need scarcely mention) was to obtain a crown for her son, Don Carlos. This young Prince was already Duke of Parma, having been brought over two years before, with the convoy of an English fleet, on the death of the last Duke; and though his accession was for some months delayed by the Duchess-Dowager declaring herself to be pregnant, she at length admitted her hopes to be groundless, and Don Carlos was installed.* Is was now contemplated by the Spanish Court to seize this opportunity of making him King of Naples; and Fleury having been reluctantly drawn into hostilities, was induced to co-operate in this design.

Spain and France, thus agreed, obtained the assistance of the King of Sardinia at the very time when he was promising it at the Court of Vienna; and their united armies, suddenly bursting into the Milanese, overran the whole of Austrian Lombardy.† Charles, on his part, found himself almost without allies. Russia, having

* See Boyer's Polit. State, vol. xlii. pp. 321 and 407. The English Admiral was Sir Charles Wager.

1

† Muratori, Annal. d'Ital. vol. xii. p. 189.

[See Campbell's Lives of the Chancellors, vol. iv. chap. cxxviii. for the character of Lord Talbot, and the contemporary eulogiums upon it.]

secured her own object, quietly withdrew from the quarrel. Denmark was insignificant; Holland timorous; and the Government of England, embarrassed by the approach of a general election, was less than ever inclined to plunge into foreign war.

Under these circumstances, the campaign of 1734 was anything but favourable to Charles, either in Italy or on the Rhine. At the battle of La Crocetta, near Parma, the Austrians lost several thousand men, and their commander, Count Mercy. A Spanish army assembling in Tuscany, under the Duke de Montemar, marched with Don Carlos to the conquest of Naples, where the Imperial troops were too few for effectual resistance, and where the natives, as usual, remained passive in the struggle. Montemar entered the capital without striking a blow, and afterwards completed his conquest by a victory at Bitonto, near Bari. Capua and Gaeta, into which the best Austrian troops had thrown themselves, surrendered. to him after a protracted siege; Sicily, almost without opposition, yielded to his arms; and the young Spanish Prince was crowned King, under the title of Charles the Third-the same with which, on the death of his brother, in 1759, he succeeded to the throne of Spain.*

On the Rhine, the Emperor had called from his retirement, and placed at the head of his army, that great General who had already humbled France and rivalled Marlborough. But even the genius of Eugene could not cope with the superior numbers opposed to him. He saw the French, who had crossed the Rhine under Marshal Berwick, invest and attack Philipsburg without being able to make an effort for its relief. The siege was still proceeding when the French sustained a loss which the gain of no fortress could compensate: their illustrious commander, Berwick, was killed by a cannon-ball. He died at nearly the same place, and in nearly the same manner, as the instructor in arms of his father, Marshal Turenne. "I have seen at a distance," says Montesquieu, "in the works of Plutarch, what great men were; in Marshal Berwick I have seen what they are!" He left, indeed, behind him a most brilliant military reputation; and though his whole career was passed in the service of France, yet may England, as his birthplace, and as his father's kingdom, claim some share of his glory as hers, and while she deplores the defeat of her arms at Almanza, proudly remember that the blow was struck by an English hand!1

Muratori, Annal. d'Ital. vol. xii. pp. 205-209. He adds, "Fra tanti soldati fatti prigioneri ne i Regni di Napoli e Sicilia, la maggior parte de gli Italiani, ed anche molte Tedeschi si arrolarono nell' esercito Spagnuolo." See also Campo Raso Coment. vol. ii. pp. 66-116.

1 [In his "History of the War of the Succession in Spain," Lord Mahon gives the following character of Berwick:-"The Duke of Berwick was a son of King James the Second, and also nephew of the great Duke of Marlborough, his mother being Arabella Churchill. A foreign education, his Catholic faith, and two campaigns in Hungary, in very early youth, had made him almost a stranger to his native country, even before the dethronement of his father compelled him to renounce it forever. With military talents

Berwick was 64 at the period of his death. Of late years he had wholly detached himself from the interest of his brother, the Pretender, who, so early as 1715, had been weak enough to treat him with coldness and suspicion.* In 1727 he had even hinted to the English ambassador his wish to visit England and pay his respects to George the First,† but the visit was never paid. He always remained, however, the warm friend and patron of the exiled Irishmen who had entered the French service. Once it is recorded of him, that Louis the Fourteenth having become weary of his applications for his countrymen, and saying, "I have more trouble with that Irish Legion than with all the armies of France!"-" Sir," immediately answered Berwick, "your enemies make the very same complaint."

Berwick was succeeded in his command by the Marquis d'Asfeld, the same who had formerly served under him in Spain, and had there displayed two qualities not often found together, great courage and great cruelty.§ Philipsburg was taken; but the skill of Eugene curbed any further progress, and he ended the campaign in safety at last, if not in triumph. This was almost his last military service: he died at Vienna two years afterwards, full of years and of honours.

The state of foreign affairs, and the "lamentable and calamitous situation," for so it was termed, "of England,"¶ were a fruitful theme of declamation when Parliament again met in January, 1734. It was the last session under the Septennial Act, and the patriots accordingly strained every nerve to gain the popular favour, and to heap imputations upon their adversaries. From external policy

Appendix, [especially letter from James to Bolingbroke, Oct. 10, 1715.]

† Horace Walpole to the Duke of Newcastle, April 28, 1727. Coxe's Lord Walpole of Wolterton.

See Wolfe Tone's Life, vol. ii. p. 574, American ed.

San Phelipe Coment. vol. i. p. 266.

"When Prince Eugene's servants went into his chamber this morning, they found him extinguished in his bed like a taper. He dined yesterday as usual, and played cards at night with his ordinary company." Mr. Robinson to Lord Harrington, April 21, 1737.

Coxe's House of Austria.

¶ Pulteney's Speech, January 23, 1734.

akin to those of his illustrious uncle, he embraced the opposite side, and gradually rose to the highest rank in the French armies. His courage, perseverance, and skill, proved on many occasions, were highly esteemed and often employed by Louis the Fourteenth, who, with little merit of his own, certainly possessed very great discernment of merit in others. His manners, however, were strongly marked with haughtiness and reserve: he avoided all party intrigues, and seldom thrust himself into the hurry and babble of the court. Never manifesting, and rarely feeling emotion, he had but little indulgence for the faults and frailties of his subalterns; and his severity, however effectual, might sometimes be censured as excessive. Accordingly, though much revered and confided in, he was but little beloved, and says of himself, in his Memoirs, that he never looked upon any one as a friend or as an enemy but for the good of the service. Such calculating coldness would, in most cases, have formed a merely selfish man; but the same principle which, in common minds, degenerates to selfishness, becomes, in noble natures, the love of fame. This aspiration never forsook him: it made him scrupulous in the performance of every civil or military duty, strictly honourable, contemptuous of money, generous and liberal; but all without that warmth and frankness which win their way into the heart."-Chap. iii. p. 80.]

they passed to events at home; they endeavoured to revive the clamours about the Excise, and justly inveighed against the tyrannical dismissal of the Duke of Bolton and Lord Cobham from their regiments. It was in allusion to them that Lord Morpeth, in committee on the Mutiny Bill, brought forward a motion "For the better securing the Constitution, to prevent officers, not above the rank of Colonels, from being removed unless by a Court Martial or by address of either House of Parliament." A warm debate ensued, maintained with especial ability by Pulteney. "We know," said he, "that the late King William was once applied to by some of his ministers to remove an officer of his army because of a vote he had given in this House, but that Prince, like a great and wise King, answered:-I suppose the gentleman voted according to what appeared to him just and right at that time; I know him to be a brave and a good officer, and one who has always done his duty in his military capacity; I have nothing to do with his behaviour in Parliament, and therefore will not remove him from his command in the army. His late Majesty was so sensible of the necessity of what is now proposed, that he approved of a bill of this very nature; the bill was actually drawn up, and was to have been brought into the other House by the late Earl Stanhope: this I know to be true. I do not know how it was prevented, but I know that his late Majesty cheerfully gave his consent for the bringing it into Parliament."* Yet neither the eloquence of Pulteney as a speaker, nor his authority as the late Secretary at War, could prevail; so far from it, that he and his party thought it prudent to shrink from a division.

In the Lords, a bill for the same object was brought in by Marlborough, a great name on all questions, but especially on such as this. The young Duke of Marlborough was the young Earl of Sunderland, and had succeeded to the former title, according to the limitations of the patent, in 1733, on the death of Marlborough's eldest daughter, Lady Godolphin.† A most brilliant speech for the Bill was made by Chesterfield, and "the House," says a contemporary, "was charmed but not convinced; for, on dividing, 49 Peers present voted for the motion, but 78 against it." The Duke of Argyle, who supported the ministry, reflected with much severity on the Duke of Bolton's want of service; "it is true," said he, "there have been two Lords removed, but only one soldier!"

But the great onset of the patriots was made for the repeal of the Septennial Act, a question well fitted to embarrass the Minister and please the mob, and which would have been urged at an earlier period had it not threatened a breach between the Tories and the Whigs in opposition. Many of the latter-Pulteney above all-had supported the Septennial Act in 1716, and were unwilling to incur the charge of inconsistency by now demanding its repeal. The skill

Parl. Hist. vol. ix. p. 312.

† Coxe's Marlborough, vol. vi. p. 390. The young Duke afterwards joined the Court party at the persuasion of Henry Fox. "There," said the old Duchess Sarah, pointing to him one day, "is the fox that has stolen my goose!" H. Walpole's Works, vol. iv. p. 315. Tindal's Hist. vol. viii. p. 223.

of Bolingbroke, however, discerned the value of this topic as an engine of faction, and surmounted every obstacle to its immediate application: he urged Sir William Wyndham and his party to persist; he used his own influence and theirs over Pulteney, and at length prevailed. In fact, though Bolingbroke seldom comes before the historian at this period; though his persuasive voice was hushed in the senate; though his powerful pen was veiled beneath another name; yet his was the hand, mighty though unseen, which directed all the secret springs of Opposition, and moved the political puppets to his will. Nor let us condemn them. So eloquent his language, that it almost wins us to his sentiments. When he thunders against "all standing armies, for whatsoever purpose instituted, or in whatsoever habit clothed-those casuists in red, who, having swords by their sides, are able at once to cut those Gordian knots which others must untie by degrees"*-who would still remember the necessity of national defence? Or who would suspect the many frailties of one who declares "no life should admit the abuse of pleasures; the least are consistent with a constant discharge of our public duty, the greatest arise from it!"†

The attack on the Septennial Act took place on the 13th of March, being moved by Mr. Bromley, son of the Secretary of State under Queen Anne, and seconded by Sir John St. Aubyn. The Whigs, in general, shrunk from speaking on this question, and even Pulteney was short and embarrassed. But the harangue of Wyndham was applauded, and not undeservedly, as a masterpiece of eloquence and energy, and could only be rivalled by the splendid reply of Walpole which concluded the debate. I shall not weary the reader with any quotation of arguments which he may still so often hear reechoed from the hustings or the House; I shall merely observe, that a large minority (184 against 247) supported the repeal of the act, and that Walpole, stung by the many taunts and insinuations thrown out against him, retorted in his speech with infinite spirit and readiness; and denounced Bolingbroke in no very covert terms, as the real head of the faction leagued against him. "When gentlemen talk so much of wicked ministers-domineering ministers-ministers pluming themselves in defiances-ministers abandoned by all sense of virtue or honour-other gentlemen may, I am sure, with equal right, and I think more justly, speak of anti-ministers and mock-patriots, who never had either virtue or honour, and are actuated only by motives of envy and resentment. Let me, too, suppose an antiminister who thinks himself a person of so great and extensive parts, and so many eminent qualifications, that he looks upon himself as the only person in the kingdom capable to conduct the public affairs, and therefore christening every other gentleman who has the honour to be employed by the name of Blunderer! Suppose this fine gentleman lucky enough to have gained over to his party some persons really of fine parts, of ancient families, and of great fortunes; * Oldcastle's Remarks on the History of England, Letter 8. On the Spirit of Patriotism.