leaping the narrow bounds prescribed to them, and whenever they received a short indulgence, next claimed it as a constant right. Every artifice was employed to elude the Spanish regulations, and a vehement clamour raised whenever those regulations were enforced. It is admitted that the annual ship which the South Sea Company had been empowered to send, was always attended by other vessels which moored at a distance, and as it disposed of its cargo, supplied it with fresh goods; thus fulfilling the letter whilst violating the spirit of the treaty. It is admitted that other vessels, and even squadrons, frequently put into the Spanish harbours, under pretence of refitting and refreshing, but with the real object of selling English merchandise.* In some cases, again, the vessels did not enter the harbours, but hovered off the coasts; where the long-boats of smugglers repaired to them, and unshipped their cargoes. By such means was English merchandise largely poured into the Spanish Colonies: their revenue consequently suffered; and the annual fair of Panama, intended as the mart of South America, and once the richest in the world, became shorn of its splendour, and deserted by its crowds.

That the Spaniards should strive to prevent this illegal traffic was just; that they should do so with occasional violence and outrage, was natural and perhaps unavoidable. The Guarda Costas would sometimes exercise the right of search beyond their coasts, or in the open seas; in several cases men were severely treated, in several others ships were unjustly detained. "Upon the whole," writes Mr. Keene from Madrid, "the state of our dispute seems to be, that the commanders of our vessels always think that they are unjustly taken if they are not taken in actual illicit commerce, even though proof of their having loaded in that manner be found on board of them; and the Spaniards, on the other hand, presume that they have a right of seizing, not only the ships that are continually trading in their ports, but likewise of examining and visiting them on the high seas, in order to search for proofs of fraud which they may have committed; and, till a medium be found out between those two notions, the Government will always be embarrassed with complaints, and we shall be continually negotiating in this country for redress without ever being able to procure it."t

There is no doubt that though the English were most frequently to blame in these transactions, several cases of injustice and violence might be imputed to the Spaniards. These cases were carefully culled out, and highly coloured by the British merchants: these were held out to the British public as fair samples of the rest, while a veil was thrown over the general practice of illicit traffic in America. The usual slowness of forms at Madrid and the difficulty of obtaining redress, even in the clearest cases, added to the national indignation in England: it was also inflamed by a denial of the right to

Coxe's Bourbon Kings of Spain, vol. iii. p. 300. On this whole subject Macpher son's History of Commerce is very meagre and unsatisfactory. Compare vol. ii. p. 542, vol. iii. p. 215.

To the Duke of Newcastle, December 13, 1737.

cut logwood in the bay of Campeachy, and disputes on the limits of the new settlements which the English had lately formed in North America, and which, in honour to the King and Queen, had received the names of Georgia and Carolina.1

These grievances of the British merchants, embodied in angry yet artful petitions, were urged by the Opposition in repeated attacks and with combined exertions. First came a motion for papers, next the examination of witnesses, next a string of resolutions, then, a Bill for securing and encouraging our trade to America. The tried ability of Pulteney led the van on these occasions, and under him were marshalled the practical knowledge of Barnard, the stately eloquence of Wyndham, and the rising genius of Pitt. William Murray, the future Earl of Mansfield, also appeared at the bar as counsel for the petitioners, and thus commenced his brilliant public career. Every resource of oratory was applied to exaggerate the insults and cruelties of the Spaniards, and to brand as cowardice the Minister's wise and honourable love of peace. It was asserted that the prisoners taken from English merchant-vessels had been not merely plundered of their property, but tortured in their persons, immured in dungeons, or compelled to work in the Spanish dock-yards, with scanty and loathsome food, their legs cramped with irons, and their bodies overrun with vermin. Some captives and seamen who were brought to the bar gave testimony to these outrages, and were then implicitly believed. Yet our calmer judgment may remember that they were not examined upon oath, and had every temptation to exaggerate, which interest, party zeal, or resentment can afford; that to inveigh against the Spaniards was then considered a sure test of public spirit; and that they were told to expect, upon the fall of Walploe, a large and lucrative indemnity for their pretended wrongs.

But the tale that produced the most effect upon the House, and found the loudest echo in the country, was what Burke has since ventured to call "the fable of Jenkins' ears. "'* This Jenkins had

1

Thoughts on a Regicide Peace, p. 75.

[The name of "Carolina" had a much earlier and a very different origin." It was given in honour of Charles IX. of France, a century before the territory was colonized by the English, a settlement in America having been planned during that monarch's reign by the celebrated Admiral Coligny for the Huguenots. John Ribault, who commanded the expedition, erected a fort called after the French King Fort Charles; and Laudonnière, who led a second expedition, built another fort to which he gave the same name; from these the province took its name of Carolina. See Holmes's Annals, vol. i. pp. 82, 84, and note 14, at p. 566; and Bancroft's History of the United States, vol. i. chap. 11.

It is curious what variety of origin might plausibly be found for the name of Carolina. First, Spanish voyages during the reign of Charles V. are connected with that section of the American coast; then the French voyages during the reign of Charles IX., which give the true origin of the name. Again in the English reign of Charles I., Sir Robert Heath obtained a grant of territory south of Virginia, to which the name of Carolana was given, but no settlement was ever made. Again, Charles II. made a grant of the same territory to Shaftesbury and others, as proprietors, and John Locke prepared his well known plan of government for the province; the earlier name was no doubt retained in honour of the English King. The settlement of Georgia, in the reign of George II., seems to be the erroneous suggestion of Queen Caroline's name for another province.]

been master of a trading sloop from Jamaica, which was boarded and searched by a Spanish Guarda Costa, and though no proofs of smuggling were discovered, yet, according to his own statement, he underwent the most barbarous usage. The Spanish Captain, he said, had torn off one of his ears, bidding him to carry it to his King, and tell His Majesty that were he present he should be treated in the same manner. This story, which had lain dormant for seven years, was now seasonably revived at the bar of the House of Commons. It is certain that Jenkins had lost an ear, or part of an ear, which he always carried about with him wrapped in cotton to display to his audience; but I find it alleged by no mean authority, that he had lost it on another occasion, and perhaps, as seems to be insinuated, in the pillory.* His tale, however, as always happens in moments of great excitement, was readily admitted without proof; and a spirited answer which he gave enhanced the popular effect. Being asked by a Member what were his feelings when he found himself in the hands of such barbarians, "I recommended," said he, "my soul to God, and my cause to my country." These words rapidly flew from mouth to mouth, adding fuel to the general flame, and it is almost incredible how strong an impulse was imparted both to Parliament and to the public. "We have no need of allies to enable us to command justice," cried Pulteney; "the story of Jenkins will raise volunteers."†

On his part, Walpole did not deny that great outrages and injuries had been wrought by the Spaniards, but he expressed his hope that they might still admit of full and friendly compensation; he promised his strenuous exertions with the Court of Madrid, and he besought the House not to close the avenue to peace by any intemperate proceedings, and especially by denouncing altogether the right of search, which the Spaniards had so long exercised, and would hardly be persuaded to relinquish. The charge, that his love of peace was merely a selfish zeal for his own administration, he repelled with disdain: "I have always," said he, "disregarded a popularity that was not acquired by a hearty zeal for the public interest, and I have been long enough in this House to see that the most steady opposers of popularity founded upon any other views, have lived to receive the thanks of their country for that opposition. For my part, I never could see any cause, either from reason or my own experience, to imagine that a minister is not as safe in time of war as in time of peace. Nay, if we are to judge by reason alone, it is the interest of a minister, conscious of any mismanagement, that

Tindal's Hist. vol. viii. p. 372. Coxe expresses a doubt whether Jenkins was really examined at the bar of the House, because, as he states, "no traces of his evidence are to be found in the Journals." (Memoirs of Walpole, vol. i. p. 579.) Yet early in the Journals of March 16, 1738, appears the following entry: "Ordered that Captain Robert Jenkins do attend this House immediately." Later in the same day we find that the House went into committee on the Spanish grievances, with Alderman Perry in the chair, and that he reported to the House, "that they had heard counsel and examined several witnesses." Amongst these in all probability was Jenkins.

† Speech, May 15, 1738. Parl. Hist. vol. x. p. 850.

there should be a war, because by a war the eyes of the public are diverted from examining into his conduct; nor is he accountable for the bad success of a war, as he is for that of an administration." By the ascendancy of Walpole a large majority of the Commons continued to withstand the manifold proposals and attacks of Pulteney. But in the Lords, the eloquence of Carteret and Chesterfield, feebly stemmed by the ministerial speakers, carried some strong resolutions, which were presented as an address to the Crown.

But these Parliamentary difficulties, however great, were not the only ones that beset the Minister. He had also to struggle against the waywardness and falsehood of the Spanish Envoy. Thomas Fitzgerald, or, as he was commonly called, Don Thomas Geraldino, who caballed with the Opposition in private, and held most intemperate language in public. The whole progress of the negotiations, and several other state secrets, were disclosed by this agent to the party out of power, while he openly declared in all companies that the English Ministers were trifling with and imposing upon the people in pretending that the Court of Spain might yet be brought to any terms, or would recede in the slightest degree from its colonial rights and privileges. To such an extent did he carry this behaviour, that Walpole sent a formal complaint to the Ministers at Madrid. Geraldino, on his part, assured them that the views of Walpole, though professedly pacific, were in truth inconsistent with the security of the Spanish trade, and that they could not be more effectually served than by fomenting to the utmost the discontents and divisions in England; and by these representations he continued to retain their confidence and his employment.†

Another source of embarrassment to Walpole was the conduct of his own colleague, the Duke of Newcastle. Both of them loved power with their whole hearts, but with this difference- Walpole loved it so well that he would not bear a rival; Newcastle so well that he would bear anything for it. Under Stanhope's government he had professed unbounded admiration and friendship for that minister. Immediately on the death of Stanhope he had transferred the same sentiment and submission to the Walpoles, and became Secretary of State in 1724, as their deputy and agent. But though willing to accept even the smallest morsel of authority, it was only till he could grasp at a larger. A favourable conjuncture of circumstances seemed now to open to him by the death of Queen Caroline, the growing unpopularity of Walpole, and the loud clamour for a Spanish war. Such a war, he found, was congenial to the military spirit of the King: it was also, as we have seen, eagerly pressed in Parliament; and of these wishes, accordingly, Newcastle,

Speech of Walpole, May 12, 1738.

Tindal's Hist. vol. viii. p. 368.

Thus, for instance, he writes to Mr. Charles Stanhope from Claremont, July 29, 1720: "Pray send me what news there is, and particularly what comes from my dearest friend Stanhope. He is always doing good, and always successful," &c. Coxe's MSS. British Museum.

though still with great caution, made himself the mouthpiece in the Cabinet. With the consent or connivance of His Majesty, he sent angry instructions and memorials to the British Minister in Spain, which it required all the skill of Walpole to modify and temper; and which greatly aggravated the difficulties of the negotiations. The same leaning to warlike measures was likewise shown, but, as I believe, on more public-spirited grounds, by Lord Chancellor Hardwicke and by Lord Harrington. The former, on one occasion, speaking in the House of Lords, inveighed with so much vehemence against the Spanish depredations, that Walpole, who was standing behind the throne, could not forbear exclaiming to those around him, "Bravo! Colonel Yorke, bravo!" Nor durst Walpole at this crisis, with the inclinations of both King and people against him, pursue his usual haughty course, and at once cashier his wavering colleagues.

Through these and many other obstacles derived from the pride of Spain, did Walpole prosecute his negotiation with the Government at Madrid (for the court had now returned from Seville), and still endeavour to prevent an appeal to arms. He took care, however, to give weight to his pacific overtures by displaying his readiness for war. A squadron of ten ships of the line, under the command of Admiral Haddock, sailed for the Mediterranean; many single ships were despatched to the West Indies; letters of marque and reprisal were offered to the merchants; and the colony of Georgia was supplied with troops and stores to resist the Spaniards, who had threatened to invade it from St. Augustine.1 Directions were likewise sent to the British merchants in the several seaports of Spain, to register their goods with a notary public in case of a rupture. Such demonstrations were not lost upon the Spaniards, who, lowering their tone, gave orders that several prizes they had captured should be restored, and that seventy-one English sailors, taken by Guarda Costas, and confined at Cadiz, should be sent home. New instructions likewise came out to Geraldino, and he delivered a message purporting that his master was inclined to enter into terms for conciliating past differences, and for preventing them in future. The negotiations that ensued were carried on first between Geraldino and Walpole in London, and afterwards between Mr. Keene and the Spanish Minister, Don Sebastian de la Quadra, at Madrid. The mutual demands for damages sustained in commerce were compared and balanced, and those of England upon Spain, after the deduction, were fixed at 200,000l. On the other hand, the Spaniards urged a claim of 60,000l. for the ships taken by Admiral Byng in 1718, a claim which had been left doubtful during Stanhope's administration, but which was, at least in its principle, acknowledged in the treaty of Seville. The remaining balance in

1

[During these years, General Oglethorpe, with his own colonists, the Scotch emigrants especially, was actively engaged in defending the Southern frontier of British America against the Spaniards. See an account of his military enterprises, in Bancroft's History of the United States, vol. iii. chap. xxiv.]