The junto

iH

c-c.c

¥

JOHN SOAERS.

THE JUNTO

BY

TEEESA MEEZ

(GLADSTONE PRIZE 1903),

WITH INTRODUCTION BY

W. F. LOED, M.A.,

Author of " The Development of Political Parties under Queen Anne,"

sometime Professor of Modern History in the Durham College of Science,

Newcastle-upon- Tyne.

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE :

ANDREW REID & COMPANY, LIMITED, PRINTERS AND PUBLISHERS,
PRINTING COURT BUILDINGS, AKENSIDE HILL.

1907.

DA

#£

A/

CONTENTS.

PAGE.

PBEFATORY NOTE v

INTRODUCTION vi

JOHN SOMERS 1

THOMAS WHARTON .' 75

EDWARD RUSSELL ... ... ... ... ... ... 108

CHARLES MONTAGU ... ... ... ... ... ... 128

CHARLES SPENCER 161

PORTRAITS.

JOHN SOMERS Frontispiece.

THOMAS WHARTON facing page 74

EDWARD RUSSELL „ „ 108

CHARLES MONTAGU ' „ „ 128

CHARLES SPENCER „ „ 160

PREFATORY NOTE.

IN venturing to send forth this little book I wish to claim
no originality. No new information is therein contained,
nor are the facts, already known, represented in a new light.
I have merely studied the works of the writers dealing with
the period, which I could reach in public and other libraries,
selecting those facts which I felt set forth the lives and char-
acters of the five men who formed the Junto. In doing so
I hoped that it might possibly be of some small use to
historical students.

To Mr. Frewen Lord my sincerest thanks are due,
not only for revision and for the Introduction, but for
inspiration in the first instance to attempt the ta.sk and
for encouragement all through.

TERESA MERZ.

THE QUAERIES, NEWCASTLE-TJPON-TYNE,
August, 1907.

VI INTRODUCTION.

INTRODUCTION.

REIGNING QUEENS, with one sad exception, have always
brought luck to England. Their Courts were, without ex-
ception, centres of intense political vitality. The reign of
Mary Tudor repels alike those who revere, and those who
detest, the Reformation. Its political significance is, as
yet, hardly appreciated. The passionate conservatism of
a Sovereign ruling a populace which was equally conserva-
tive, yet more than suspicious of the Queen's foreign prepos-
sessions— produced a tragedy with which we are familiar in
outline, but, as yet, only in outline. The reign of Queen
Elizabeth was an Age; the reign of Queen Victoria was
another Age. We appreciate the first with reasonable
accuracy ; but we are still too near to the second, which was
the complement of the first, to understand it.

There remains the Age of Queen Anne, which is hardly
long enough to merit the name of Age; neither can we
plausibly derive it from the past, or trace its active influence
on the history of its future. It stands alone ; rather a bril-
liant episode than an epoch. Yet so brilliant was it that for
two hundred years we have been content to admire without
analysing. Frenchmen, naturally perhaps, think less highly
than Englishmen of the political and social drama of these
twelve years. For them the Age of Anne was but a few
years in the Age of their own great Louis. The Queen her-
self was the " Reine Lune " to the " Roi Soleil " of France.

INTRODUCTION. Vll

For Victor Hugo the last Stuart Sovereign was but " la pre-
miere femme venue." A study on these lines would be valu-
able, if, indeed, it did not break down for want of evidence ;
or, perhaps, from the presence of strong evidence to the
contrary effect.

For English readers the detail of the picture is suffi-
ciently complicated and attractive. Contemplated in the
mass, the outline is imposing. We recall the public magni-
ficence of the reign contrasted with the harrowing private
sorrows of the Queen ; the irresistible might of Marlborough
the soldier, and the humility of Marlborough the man in
the presence of his terrific Duchess ; the grandeur of the
aims of both political parties, and the inconceivable paltri-
ness of their means to their ends ; above all, the stake it-
self— the Crown of England — and the ludicrous contrast of
the two claimants ; the one young, romantic, but Frenchi-
fied and hopelessly untrustworthy, the other grotesque, dull,
repulsively German, but solidly equipped with staying quali-
ties, and both, practically, foreigners. These are the more
obvious features of the twelve years that we can hardly study
too attentively. Withal the period is sufficiently near.
Hampton Court and Kensington Palace are still with us.
Newmarket is still the Newmarket of Queen Anne; only
the horses are changed.

It seems as if there were no second-rate men on this
crowded stage. Even those usually counted second-rate
acquired a tinge of greatness from their company. Of all
the actors in the momentous drama none seem worthier of
detailed study than the remarkable group of men known
as the Junto. It would be rash to say that they were all
first-rate men, but their activity is illuminated with the
glamour of success. Not the least interesting aspect of that
success is the reflection that it is an early (if not the first)
example of the victory of what we have in late years learnt
to call the " machine " or the " push." This slang —
(" Junto " and " Squadron " were once slang) — is the short-

Vlll INTRODUCTION.

hand of all our political convictions. In the twentieth cen-
tury the individual is nothing1; the party is everything.
In the seventeenth century a Monk or a Cromwell could be
a real leader ; could announce his principles, proceed to take
action upon them, and call upon those in the country who
agreed with them to rally round his standard.

In the twentieth century our leaders — or rather those
who sit in the leaders' seats — have long relinquished this
dignified practice. They prefer the tedious processes known
as " awaiting a mandate " or " feeling the pulse of the
nation." That these processes are ineffectual, as well as
tedious, is clear when we contemplate the monumental
blunders which result from following them.

Midway between the real leaders, with the hardly formed
" parties " of the seventeenth century and the shadowy figure
heads of the twentieth century nominally directing, but
really controlled by highly organized " parties," stands the
reign of Queen Anne. On the one hand we have a real
leader, St. John, a great man. On the other hand we have
a group of men who were not great ; but who, for that very
reason, comprehended the paramount importance of petti-
ness. For St. John, party organization was a novel incident ;
possibly — probably even — a useful contributory factor in the
triumph of his principles. For the Junto it was the domin-
ant factor. They could not hope to rival or even to match
the genius of St. John; but they might hope to beat him
at organization; and they did beat him by organization.

In politics, as in every other sphere except the humblest
and most obvious, it is not true that the greater includes the
less. On the contrary, the mind occupied with great things
cannot see the little things, or, if it sees them, it sees them
only in the relation to its own outlook, that is, it sees them
in their proper insignificance.

To cherish the insignificant is the secret of modern
success; with the result that the large-minded drop out
of the contest by process of natural exclusion : the meanest

INTRODUCTION. IX

alone survive. To say that the Junto cherished the insigni-
ficant would be an anachronism ; but they understood the
importance of making room for everybody in the party
organization. It is, therefore, not at all surprising that
St. John found his party dwindling. It was not a question,
of principle. The principles of both sides were equally
respectable. It was at least as reasonable that Queen Anne
should be succeeded on the throne of England by her half-
brother, as that she should be succeeded by her second
cousin. Neither candidate for the succession had claims
to the heroic. But the men who were in public life, or
who had any claims to be advanced, were assured of atten-
tion and support if they supported King George ; while, if
they supported King James, they did so at their own risk.
Thus we have expressions like " the party goes back rather
than forward," "the want of good and able men is incredible,"
and so forth. " The want of good and able men " might be
" incredible," but it was easily explicable. St. John was
far too great a man for the details of party organization,
Harley was entirely suited to the work ; but his energy
was wasted in other directions and his self-importance would
have stood in the way of his discharging efficiently the duties
of a party agent. There remained Kobinson — a diplomatist.
We can now turn with advantage to the five men whose
attention to detail secured the triumph of the House of
Hanover. Few studies can be more instructive than the
story of these five men's lives, told as separate episodes.
Wharton was born before the execution of Charles the First.
He acquired the tastes and the boisterous habits of the
Restoration, and was fifty-seven years of age when he defin-
itely joined the Junto. He had every claim to party con-
sideration— wealth, descent, ability. He would be voted
" impossible " to-day on account of his manners ; but these
did not interfere with his career in the days in which his
lot was cast. He even wrote. The political status of men
" who write " has varied in the history of England. Wharton

X INTRODUCTION.

was an early example of the contributor to political litera-
ture whose writings furthered his success. The reign of
Anne was, of course, the Age in which " writing " was a
recognised road to political success. This form of mental
activity rapidly fell into discredit. It returned to favour
with the rise to power of the cultured middle-classes, and
has once more fallen into discredit with the disappearance
of the serious reading public. Wharton's " hit " was made
with Lilliburlero — a typical performance. " Les pairs
d'Angleterre avaient la proie ; les pairs de France avaient
1'ombre." Wharton's career, and especially his author-
ship of Lilliburlero, is an excellent example of this sensible
habit of the aristocracy of England. To the French noble
of this epoch the King was all in all. For the English
noble — if the King stood in his way he might be " sung out
of his kingdom " if singing would conduce to that end.
" Opportunism " was the badge of all the Whig tribe ; but
Wharton was the coarsest, most unscrupulous and most suc-
cessful of them all. When George the First succeeded,
Wharton was old — as old age was then counted — and he
lived less than a year as a subject of the Hanoverian dynasty.
Seven reigns were included in the span of his intense and
successful life. The stages of his career from that of the
idle roysterer of 1670 to the Kingmaker, Marquis and Lord
Lieutenant of 1715, are here set forth. It is unnecessary
to do more than refer to the extraordinary compound of
vices which made up his character. Politics — the pursuit
of power — dominated all ; and to some extent dignified all,
even to his abusive good humour and his political horse-
racing.

It is hard to say whether anything could dignify the
career of Edward Russell, Lord Orford. The triumph of
the Junto being essentially the conquest of genius by medio-
crity, we must not expect to find first-rate talent in the
Councils of the Junto. In fact we find sordid scheming ;
~but immense industry ; a noble cause but ignoble methods ;

INTRODUCTION. XI

first-rate results, but second-rate* men. Russell, Lord
Orford, was a great contrast to Wharton. Wharton lived
sumptuously, and even extravagantly, lie spent lavishly
in the service of his party and kept a first-rate racing stable.
He held high posts, and no doubt drew large salaries, but
power and not money was his object. Russell was a younger
son who entered the Navy and followed it as a profession.
He wanted money and accumulated as much as possible in
the public service. Money to enable him to accept an Earl-
dom and then more money to enable him to support his
title — such was the driving force of Russell's career. He
was a stout party man, and considered that his services to
the party justified his extravagant claims ; in point of fact
he was insatiable. He was a good sailor, and considered
that his services to the Fleet ought to be handsomely re-
warded. Nor was his professional capacity shocked by the
union of the two posts of Treasurer of the Navy and First
Lord of the Admiralty when these two appointments were
concentrated in his own desirable person. " To the victors
the spoils " he would have said, anticipating Andrew Jack-
son by one hundred and thirty years. He worked inside the
party and exacted the most exorbitant rewards for his ser-
vices ; perhaps his only considerable service was the victory
of La Hogue. Wharton, though liberally rewarded, worked
first for his party and even financed it handsomely.
Russell worked first and last for himself. His massive
assertiveness and acquisitiveness were noticed, indeed, and
occasionally disapproved; but having none of Wharton's
genial blackguardism, he escaped the storms of hatred and
abuse that raged wherever Wharton's flamboyant person-
ality dominated public affairs. In fact, selfishness and
acquisitiveness being assumed as natural features of a public
career, Russell stood out as conspicuously respectable. All
the Junto were aristocrats ; and of Wharton and Russell we
have to observe that they brought to public life immense
vitality and hardly anything else. Russell, it is true,

Xll INTRODUCTION.

enjoyed whatever advantages might accrue to a young man
of good birth by being forced through the training of the
Navy. He was technically well-qualified aiS a sailor.

Halifax, as Charles Montagu, was educated at Westmin-
ster and Trinity. At Cambridge he was a pupil of Sir Isaac
Newton. He was eight years younger than Russell and
thirteen years younger than Wharton. Born, under the
Commonwealth, he was the grandson of the Protector's Earl
of Manchester. It is, of course, hardly necessary to recall
his verses, " The Town and Country Mouse," which brought
him fame and (what was much more important) patronage.
A younger son's younger son could be easily helped, and
Charles Montagu found himself at twenty-seven a Member of
Parliament and Clerk of the Privy Council with £500 a
year to secure his independence — or subservience — accord-
ing to the point of view.

It is evident that we are here in the presence of a totally
different, type from either Wharton or Russell. Russell,
bent upon " rising in the world," had no other object in
life, found the service of the Junto the easiest way to that
end, and vulgarised the respectable process of " rising in the
world " by his blindness to all other considerations. Whar-
ton grasped place and power and office by the force of his
vitality, and justified his insistence by his success.
Montagu's career was quite different. His was the case of
a very young man who had given evidence of such capacity
as a young man may be supposed to possess. — he was a
fellow of his College and could write tolerable English verse.
This is no evidence that he will develop into a great finan-
cier ; but his patrons assumed that talent was transmutable,
and were justified by the event: at thirty-three Charles
Montagu was Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The immense driving force of vulgarity cannot be over
estimated ; but, after all, vulgarity is blundering and often
blind. It was through Charles Montagu, and such men
as his sympathies might be supposed to engage in concert

INTRODUCTION. Xlll

with him, that the Junto acquired the reputation of intellec-
tual distinction, of sagacity and resource. These rescued
it from the fate of ordinary political combination for un-
worthy ends. Wharton served his party admirably;
Russell served himself admirably ; Montagu laboured for his
country through his party. His counsellors were Isaac
Newton, Locke and the great Lord Somers ; and his work
was nothing less than the foundation of the Bank of Eng-
land and the reform of the national currency. When we
add to these achievements the Presidency of the Royal
Society, and the re-organisation of the East India, Company,
it is clear that we are in the presence of a public servant
of the best English type. Montagu was no wire-puller.
Although it seems bold, perhaps, we may almost assert that
he was no self-seeker. " Neither to seek nor to spurn
honours " might have been his noble motto — it certainly
described his career. At thirty-nine he was raised to the peer-
age as Lord Halifax. After recounting his work as a com-
moner, it is perhaps unnecessary to record that his good work
had earned for him the hatred of the stupid. The particular
transaction selected a,s a ground of reproach — (the reserva-
tion of a well-paid post for himself) — seems to have been an
ordinary transaction when we consider the manners of the
age, and his impeachment progressed no further than the
Lords ; then, as often before and since, the guardian of the
nation's honour from the precipitate and partisan wrath of
the Commons.

We must never lose sight of the fact that the binding
force of the Junto was its devotion to the principles of 1688.
These principles were put to the severest test and achieved
their greatest triumph in 1714. In the latter year, Halifax
stood forth as their visible embodiment. There was much
— only too much — that was repulsive in the careers of the
individual members of the Junto; but Halifax represented
all that was best in their public conduct. Halifax stood
for moderation, for courtesy, for sagacity. He was culti-

XIV INTRODUCTION.

vated, industrious, an excellent financier (as we have seen)
and a zealous public servant. To say this, is not to depre-
ciate the services of others. Probably to drive the creaking
and, as yet, hardly developed machine of party organization
a force no less coarse and violent than the energy of Whar-
ton was indispensable. Halifax brought charm and dis-
tinction, and commended his party in directions where,
without his support, it would have been discredited.

The men who worked hardest for the pa.rty and who
deserved best at the hands of their party and their country
survived their triumph a few months only. King George
the First landed on the 18th of September, 1714. The
Marquis of Wharton died on the 12th of April, 1715. The
Earl of Halifax died on the 26th of May, 1715. Lord
Somers died on the 26th of April, 1716. Sunderland sur-
vived Queen Anne eight years and died on the 19th of April,
1722. Eussell lived on till the 26th of November, 1727,
but he had retired altogether from public affairs for ten
years before his death.

It is the possibility of Somers' existence that makes us
understand the greatness of the Junto. Whatever mean-
ness, whatever grossness, whatever blackguardisms were dis-
played by other members of the Junto, all the members of
that famous political committee had this touch of greatness
in common — they could appreciate Somers. The great Lord
Chancellor made enemies in abundance : he would not have
been great if he had not done so. Yet he was the trusted
Counsellor of William the Third, and as such did not arouse
unworthy suspicions in the minds of his political friends.
He was dismissed by William the Third, and did not forfeit
that great sovereign's regard. He was brow-beaten by
Queen Anne and not discredited. If he thought it worth
while to defend himself he could face anyone. Often he
did not think it worth while ; one does not bandy words with
a mocking street boy, or prosecute a rascal whose only
chance of distinction lies in the possibility of angering
important people.

INTRODUCTION. XV

No doubt the strength of Somers' position lay in the
fact that he was a lawyer. It is not with Law as it is with
other pursuits. One either knows the Law or one does not.
In finance, in letters, in politics, there are always two
and often many opinions which are possibly tenable. Not
so with the Law. It is true that anyone can become a
lawyer, and there have even been poor lawyers wrho have
sat on the Woolsack — Nathan Wright and Bathurst for
example. But a great lawyer is a great man; and when a
man presents the type of great lawyer with high principles
the credit of the age depends on the reception which is
accorded to him. If, as has happened, he is elbowed into
obscurity the age is a small one. The chief evidence of the
greatness of Queen Anne's reign is the immense influence,
and even authority, in the country at large of John, Lord
Somers. Within the party, whatever there might be of
gravity, of dignity, of profundity was contributed by
Somers. We have examined in some detail the political
attitude of the other members of the Junto — Somers was
distinct from them all. It was his fortune to be prominent
on the occasion of two changes of the dynasty, the first
separated from the second by twenty-five years ; on both
occasions he was the legal adviser to the more active agents.
The declaration of the vacancy of the throne and the
Declaration of Rights were two examples of highly com-
plicated questions of the first constitutional importance.
The influence of Somers was dominant on both occasions.
His immense learning, force of character and clearness of
vision saved his party from making blunders and commended
their resolutions to the country at large on these occasions
as on most others when he co-operated with the Junto.

To no member of the Junto did Somers stand in greater
contrast than to Sunderland. Somers was of respectable,
but somewhat humble extraction. Sunderland was of the
bluest blood of England. Somers was courteous and ingra-
tiating : Sunderland was stupidly and almost madly

XVI INTRODUCTION.

arrogant. Both were learned men, but whereas Somers'
learning enriched and dignified a character of natural
nobility, Sunderland's learning only added to insane pride of
birth an insaner pride of intellect. Somers was a great
strength to the Junto ; Sunderland, in spite — or rather in
consequence — of his energy, was a constant anxiety and
source of weakness. Somers accepted things as they were
and strove incessantly to better them ; Sunderland was full
of visionary talk. Somers was well balanced and sincere :
Sunderland presented the always ridiculous spectacle of a
noble pretending to regret his rank ; of. an aristocrat who
owed everything to his position, but who, nevertheless, chose
to masquerade as a Leveller.

It is to be observed, however, that Sunderland was never
to be seen except in the most distinguished company. His
demagogism, highly offensive as it was, and most offensively
expressed, never led him into action. He enjoyed the spoils
and the splendour of public life ; and, in fact, was unfitted
by nature for any other existence. Destitute of humour
as of manners he was at once detested and indispensable ;
not on account of his capacity or industry, but because
everybody, with one exception, was afraid of him. He
was bought sans marchander by his party as the best way
of muzzling him ; and the only person in the country
possessed of the necessary courage to suppress Lord Sunder-
land was Her Majesty Queen Anne.

THE JUNTO.

JOHN SOMERS.1

JOHN SOMERS was born at Worcester in. an old house
called " The White Ladies," on the east side of the Cathe-
dral,2 which it is supposed had formerly been part of a

THE JUNTO.

ERRATA.

Page 172, line 28, for " Sunderland " read " Lord Somers."
Page 70, line 8, and page 158, line 27, for " Prodesse quam
conspice" read " Prodesse quam conspia."

admiral who discovered the Bermudas — was a member of the

1 There is some doubt as to how Somers spelt his name. In all the entries
in the books of the Middle Temple, till he was called to the Bench in 1689,
his name is spelt Somer, and then Somers (Campbell, Lives of Chancellors,
vol. iv. p. 62). He himself sometimes signed his name Sommers, but usually
Somers, with a circumflex over the one "m" (Cooksey, Life of Somers,
p. 122). Somers, however, seems now considered the historical orthography.

2 Nash, History of Worcestershire, vol. ii. p. 320.

3 Valentine Green in his History of Worcestershire says 1650 (p. 218),
Macaulay and Campbell both say 1651.

4 Examiner, No. 26.

5 This estate was worth £300 a year, no inconsiderable estate at that
period. Haddock, Life of Lord Somers, p. 7.

6 For pedigree see Nash, History of Worcestershire, vol. ii. pp. 54, 55. In
the Diet. Nat. Biog. her name is given as Severne, and she is said to have
come from Powyck, Worcestershire.

XVI INTRODUCTION.

arrogant. Both, were learned men, but whereas Somers'
learning enriched and dignified a character of natural
nobility, Sunderland's learning only added to insane pride of
birth an insaner pride of intellect. Somers was a great
strength to the Junto ; Sunderland, in spite — or rather in
consequence — of his energy, was a constant anxiety and
source of weakness. Somers accepted things as they were
and strove incessantly to better them; Sunderland was full
of visionary talk. Somers was well balanced and sincere :
Sunderland presented the always ridiculous spectacle of a
nnhle Dretending to regret his rank ; of. an aristocrat who

was bought sans marcnanaer uy ui* p^^—

of muzzling him ; and the only person in the country
possessed of the necessary courage to suppress Lord Sunder-
land was Her Majesty Queen Anne.

THE JUNTO.

JOHN SOMERS.1

JOHN SOMERS was born at Worcester in an old house
called " The White Ladies," on the east side of the Cathe-
dral,2 which it is supposed had formerly been part of a
monastery. The exact date of his birth cannot be ascer-
tained, as there is no public register.2 During the civil
wars between Charles I. and his Parliament, the parish
registers were probably either lost or not kept; so it will
always be a matter of doubt as to whether he was born in
1650 or 1651. 3 Somers was by no means " sprung from
the dregs of the people,"4 as Swift pointed out, eager to
depreciate his political rival. His family was highly respect-
able though not wealthy ; and had for several generations
owned a small estate in the parish of Severnstoke in Glouces-
tershire.5 His mother was Catherine Ceavern, of a respect-
able family in Shropshire.6 Sir George Somers — the famous
admiral who discovered the Bermudas — was a member of the

1 There is some doubt as to how Somers spelt his name. In all the entries
in the books of the Middle Temple, till he was called to the Bench in 1689,
his name is spelt Somer, and then Somers (Campbell, Lives of Chancellors,
vol^iv. p. 62). He himself sometimes signed his name Sommers, but usually
Somers, with a circumflex over the one "m" (Cooksey, Life of Somers,
p. 122). Somers, however, seems now considered the historical orthography.

2 Nash, History of Worcestershire, vol. ii. p. 320.

3 Valentine Green in his History of Worcestershire says 1650 (p. 218),
Macaulay and Campbell both say 1651.

4 Examiner, No. 26.

5 This estate was worth £300 a year, no inconsiderable estate at that
period. Haddock, Life of Lord Somers, p. 7.

6 For pedigree see Nash, History of Worcestershire, vol. ii. pp. 54, 55. In
the Diet. Nat. Biog. her name is given as Severne, and she is said to have
come from Powyck, Worcestershire.

2 THE JUNTO.

same family.7 John Somers, the father of the future Chan-
cellor, was an attorney of considerable standing- in Worces-
ter. In the civil wars he was a vigorous supporter of Crom-
well, under whom he commanded a troop of horse. It is
related how he was so exasperated by the clergyman at
Severnstoke, who hurled from the pulpit violent invectives
against the Parliamentarians, that he fired a pistol above
his head which lodged a ball in the sounding board.8

During the civil wars the city of Worcester was zealous
for the King, but when buildings of the surrounding parts of
the town were destroyed for purposes of defence, White
Ladies was held in such veneration by both sides as to be left
uninjured.9 In this famous house Elizabeth had slept a
night in 1585, 10 and here it was that Charles II. stayed dur-
ing his short time in Worcester, just before the fatal fight
of September 3, 1651.1

After the decisive battle of Worcester, Captain Somers
resigned his commission and returned to his profession,
taking a small house within the city, as White Ladies was
occupied by his sister, who had married Mr. Richard
Blurton.2 In his infancy Somers was adopted by his aunt,
who had no son of her own, and he lived with her almost
entirely till he went to the University. His earliest educa-

7 The islands are called " Somer Islands" after him. They were cele-
brated for their beauty when explored, though long shunned for their supposed
dangers and enchantments, by Waller : —

" Heaven sure has kept that charming spot uncurst

To show how well things were created first."
See Campbell, Lives of Chancellors, vol. iv. p. 63, note.

8Cooksey, Life of Lord Somers, p. 7.

9 March 26th, 1646. "The citizens and soldiers in the town destroyed
St. Oswald's Hospital, but spared Mr. Somers's house at the White Ladies,
which was a strong stone building capable of holding 500 men with safety."
Extract from a MS. of Mr. Townshend of Elmley Lovel, who was in Wor-
cester during the siege and kept a diary. See Cooksey, pp. 7, 117. Also
Nash, vol. ii. p. 97, Appendix.

'"Maddock, Life of Lord Somers, pp. 4, 5.

1 Ibid. p. 5.

2 For pedigree see Nash, vol. ii. p. 54. Richard Blurton seems to have
been an eminent clothier of the city of Worcester. He greatly added to the
estate of the White Ladies. Maddock, p. 14.

JOHN SOMERS. 3

tion was received at the College School at Worcester, the
master of which, at that time, was Dr. Bright, a clergyman
of considerable classical attainments. At this school the
famous Samuel Butler,3 author of " Hudibras " and Chief
Justice Vaughan4 were said to have been educated. At a
later time Somers appears to have been a pupil at a private
school at Walsall in Staffordshire, and also at Sheriff Hales
in Shropshire, under a Mr. Woodhouse.5 Of this early
period of his life little is known. The young Somers seems
always to have been very studious and pensive. " He never
gave himself any of the diversions of children of his age ;
for at noon the book was never out of his hand/'6 He is
described by a schoolfellow as a " weakly fellow wearing
a black cap, and never so much as looking on when they
were at play."7 What Somers did on leaving school until he
went to the University in 1675 it is difficult to discover.
It has been surmised that he was placed in his father's
office, destined to follow in his profession.8 Whatever his
destination may have been, it is quite evident that the hours
were not wasted by the studious Somers. During this
important period of his life he acquired that profound
knowledge of history and constitutional law which formed
the groundwork of the mass of learning and accomplish-
ments by which he was afterwards distinguished.

In 1672 began his friendship with the Earl of Shrews-
bury.9 The estates and finances of his family — the Talbots
— were managed by Somers's father; and this brought the
young heir to White Ladies, where he resided for some
time. But of more importance, perhaps, was the acquaint-

3 Lives of Eminent Persons, 1833 ; Life of Lord Somers, p. 1.

4 See his life prefixed to his Reports.

5Roscoe, Eminent British Lawyers, p. 140. Buck's MSS. Brit. Mus.
No. 4223.

6 Seward's Anecdotes, vol. ii. p. 273. 7 Ibid. p. 275.

8 Campbell, vol. iv. p. 66.

9 Roscoe, p. 141. Charles Talbot, twelfth earl ; his father lost his life in a
duel with the Duke of Buckingham.

4 THE JUNTO.

anoe of Sir Francis Winning-ton,4 a distinguished prac-
titioner at the Bar, and afterwards Solicitor-General.1

He saw how much there was in young Somers. He
urged him to study for the Bar, recommending him to go
to the University and to direct his studies there with a view
to that profession.2 His account of Somers at this time is
" that by the exactness of his knowledge and behaviour
he discouraged his father and all the young men who knew
him. They were afraid to be in his company."3

Sir Francis "Winnington took the young Somers under
his patronage,4 and with the reluctant consent of his father
carried him off to London, where he was entered as a student
of the Middle Temple in 1669. 5 After a year's private
study at his father's house under the supervision of Win-
nington, Somers began to keep his terms.6 In the year
1675 he entered as a commoner of Trinity College, Oxford.7
He does not seem to have shown any great signs of ability
when there. On May 5, 1676, he was called to the Bar,8
but he continued to reside at Oxford, probably going up
to London from time to time to keep his terms at the Bar.
There is an entry in the Bursar's books of his having given
£5 in 1676 towards embellishing the chapel and in 1682
£100 for the same purpose.4 Somers took his M.A. degree
on June 14, 1681 ; 9 but it seems that he did not quit Oxford
until 1682, 10 when he 'removed to London. After the death

1 In 1674 he was made Solicitor General, and occupied the post till 1679.

2 Campbell, vol. iv. p. 68.

3 Seward's Anecdotes (4th ed.), vol. ii. p. 275.

4 Nash, vol. ii. p. 55.

5 Campbell, p. 68, note. May 24th, as in the books of the Middle Temple.

6 February 26th, 1669. Campbell, p. 69, note.

7 Nash, vol. ii. p. 55. He had matriculated in 1667 (Campbell, p. 66,
note). 8 Campbell, p. 72.

(P.

John

matriculated March 20th, 1674-1675, a native'of Exeter.
10 Campbell, pp. 83, 84.

JOHN SOMERS. 5

of his father in 16802 Somers succeeded to the estate at
Severnstoke. His mother survived her husband many
years. On her death in 1709 Somers erected a marble
monument in the church with a simple and beautiful
inscription to their memory.3

His time at Oxford must have been spent to the greatest
advantage, for he left with a sound knowledge of the civil
and common law, as well as a thorough knowledge and
appreciation of languages and literature. Two different
talents were seen to concur in his genius : to an exquisite
taste of polite literature was joined a turn to business in the
practice of the law. ' This," says a critic, " implied solidity
of judgment and prompted an industrious application,
whilst the other furnished delicacy of sentiment and an
elegant diction."4

On reaching London in 1G82 Somers had already made
many friends. Through the Earl of Shrewsbury and Sir
F. Winnington he had been introduced to the Earl of
Essex, Lord Shaftesbury, Sir Wm. Jones, Algernon Sidney,
and several other great patriots and leaders of the opposi-
tion to the arbitrary measures of the Court of Charles II.5
He was at once carried into the political world, and eager to
take his stand on the side of liberty and national freedom
which coloured his whole future career. Somers had already
employed his pen in the cause of liberty. He had published
several treatises on constitutional history and law. As it
was his custom, however, to publish such pieces without
his name, it is difficult to ascertain which really were his
production, and only some are now acknowledged to be his.
The first of these was the report of an election case entitled,

2 Nash, vol. ii. p. 345.

3 Ibid. Nash says that the parents of John Somers " well deserved the
character given to them by their son."

1 Biog. Brit. tit. Somers, p. 3744.

5 Somers did not become Whig merely because his friends were. He
became Whig by conviction, and eagerly joined this group of eminent
Whigs. It seems that Somers was also introduced to Dryden about this
time. Campbell, p. 70.

D THE JUNTO.

" The Memorable Case of Denzil Onslow, Esq., tried at the
Assizes in Surrey, July 20, 1681, touching his election at
Haslemere in Surrey."6 His next publication was one of
far greater importance : " A Brief History of the Succes-
sion,7 Collected out of the Records and the most Authentic
Historians."8 This tract was written in support of the
famous Exclusion Bill,9 by which the Duke of York was to
be excluded from the succession. By taking up his stand in
its defence Somers declared himself openly a Whig. The
different aims of the two parties of Whig and Tory, which
played such a large part in the history of the following
reigns, were brought to the fore in 1680. Both Whigs and
Tories were in favour of government by King and Parlia-
ment. But kt the Whigs wished to establish a system of
government in which the will of the people as expressed
in Parliament should bo supremo and the power of the
monarch should be subject to the limitations it imposed.
The Tories, on the other hand, held fervently to the divine
right of kings and of tho sinfulness of all resistance, and
regarded the power of Parliament as altogether subordinate
to that of a legitimate king."1 The object of Somers's tract
was to establish the authority of Parliament to limit, re-
strain or qualify the right of the succession.

Further pamphlets appeared from Somers in 1681.
Shortly after the sudden dissolution of the Parliament at
Oxford appeared a tract with the title " A Just and Modest

6 For this see Somers's Tracts, ed. by Walter Scott.

7 This tract was reprinted in 1714. Seward's Anecdotes, p. 276, note.

8 For this see Somers's Tracts, ed. by W. Scott, vol. xiii. p. 649. It went
through second and third editions.

9The Bill of Exclusion was defeated in the House of Lords by the
influence of the Prince of Orange. So long as Mary was to succeed Charles
the Prince had been eager for the Bill, but some of the extreme Whigs were
now pressing the claims of the Duke of Monmouth, an illegitimate son of
Charles, and this turned the Prince against it. But it had accomplished
much in spite of failure. Men's eyes were opened to the absurdness of the
doctrine " of divine, indefeasible hereditary right."

1 Lecky, History of England in the Eighteenth Century, vol. i. p. 2,

JOHN SOMERS. 7

Vindication of the two last Parliaments,"2 wliich is now
ascribed to Lord Somers, although at first Sir Wm. Jones
was supposed to have been the author.3 It is a clear argu-
mentation in favour of constitutional doctrines, showing to
what extent power was invested in the Commons. The
most important, however, was his celebrated tract, " The
Security of Englishmen's Lives : or the Trust, Power and
Duty of the Grand Juries of England explained/'4 called
forth by the attempt to prosecute Shaftesbury for treason.

Devoting so much of his time and energies to politics
did not induce Somers to put aside his love of the classics.
In 1681 he published a translation of some of Ovid's
" Epistles " into English verse,5 and became the translator of
the life of Alcibiades in the version of Plutarch. Altogether
he wrote several pieces in verse, but it did not add much to
his reputation. An amusing incident is told in connection
with one such piece, which Somers had written anony-
mously. An impudent pretender had the audacity to claim
it as his own. He happened to be introduced to Lord
Somers — when Chancellor — and was asked by him who wrote
the piece in question. " Yes, my lord," he replied, " 'tis
a mere trifle ; I did it offhand." At this his lordship
laughed heartily and the false poet withdrew in confusion.6

2 According to Burnet this pamphlet " had no great effect, the spirit of
the party being spent."

3 Lord Hardwicke says that there was a copy of this tract in the hand-
writing of Lord Somers among the MSS. which were destroyed in the fire at
the chambers of the Hon. C. Yorke. State Papers, vol. ii. p. 399.

4 This tract, likewise, was at first attributed to Sir William Jones and
other Whig leaders. Burnet says it passed as written by Lord Essex, though
he says, "I understood afterwards, it was written by Somers, who was
much esteemed, and often visited by Lord Essex, and who trusted himself to
him and writ the best papers that came out in that time." History of His
Own Time, ed. 1833, vol. ii. pp. 297, 298.

5 For extracts of his poetry see Haddock, Life of Somers, pp. 94-96.

6 Life of Lord Somers, 1716, p. 124. Seward's Anecdotes, p. 277. Mr.
Cooksey in his life of Somers asserts that " The Tale of a Tub " was at this
time written by Somers and Shrewsbury, "sketching from the life the
characters of Peter, Jack and Martin," and afterwards published by Swift.
It seems hardly probable. See Cooksey, p. 18 et seq.

8 THE JUNTO.

On settling in London in 1682 Somers immediately
began to practise at the Bar.7 It has been seen that he was
neither without friends nor reputation, and he very soon
found opportunities of showing his powers. It was not
long before he had a considerable practice.8 His wide
reading and his willingness to give his leaders the credit
of his researches soon made him a general favourite with
his seniors.

The circumstance which brought Somers into high repute
was the famous trial of the Seven Bishops in 1688, 9 when
he appeared as junior counsel for the accused.10 That he
should have been recommended by Pollexfen, one of the
most eminent lawyers of the day, as capable of taking part
in such an important case is proof enough that Somers was
already looked upon as no second-rate lawyer. Some of the
bishops were disinclined to employ so young an advocate,1
whose powers were so little known ; but " old Pollexfen2
insisted upon him and would not be himself retained with-
out the other, representing him as the man who would take
most pains and go deepest into all that depended on pre-
cedents and records." The event which led up to this
famous trial was the reckless act of James II. in April,
1688, when he put a further test upon the endurance of the
Church by issuing a second Declaration of Indulgence.3
He commanded the clergy of the Established Church to read

''Lives of Eminent Persons, 1833, tit. Somers, p. 4.

8 In a few years his professional profits amounted to £700 a year, a very
large sum for those times. Life, 1716, p. 15.

9 The first considerable case in which Somers was counsel was the trial of
Pilkington and Shute, the sheriffs of London, and others, who were accused
of having taken part in riots during the election of sheriffs in 1681. For this
see Howell, State Trials, vol. ix. p. 187.

10 For this famous trial see Howell, vol. xii. p. 317.

1 Mackintosh, Revolution of 1688, p. 260.

2 Pollexfen, Lord Chief Justice in 1689.

3 " The renewed Declaration of Indulgence which he issued in April, 1688,
was not only intended to win the Nonconformists by fresh assurances of the
King's sincerity, it was an appeal to the nation at large. ' His resolve,' he
said, 'was to establish universal liberty of conscience for all future time.'"
Green, History of the English People, vol. iv. p. 23.

JOHN SOMERS. 9

it- from their pulpits on two Sundays.4 This was more than
they could bear, so seven of the bishops, headed by Sancroft,
Archbishop of Canterbury, sent in a petition to the King
begging to be excused.5 They were at once sent to the
Tower, and remained there till three weeks later, when
they were tried for libel at the famous trial in question.
For the defence of the accused it was necessary to prove
that by the ancient constitution of the realm the King had
not the right to which he pretended, to suspend or dis-
pense with the execution of Acts of Parliament. Somers,
being junior counsel, spoke last; and his part in the
defence was less prominent than that of his colleagues.
But his speech, as reported in the " State Trials,"6 gives an
admirable summary of all the arguments which could be
gathered to support his clients. He did not speak for much
more than five minutes, but every word seems to have been
full of weight.7 His pleading was masculine and persua-
sive and made an impression on the jury. " When, he sat
down his reputation as an orator and a constitutional lawyer
was established."8 The bishops were acquitted, and the names
of their counsel9 became popular throughout the kingdom.

The importance of this trial was manifold.10 It con-
tributed not a little to hurry on the impending revolution.

4 The declaration was read in only four of the London churches. Green,
ul supra.

3 For the petition see Rapin, History of England, translated by Tindal,
ed. 1743, vol. ii. p. 762. The seven bishops were : Sancroft, Archbishop of
Canterbury ; Lloyd, Bishop of St. Asaph ; Kenn of Bath and Wells ;
Turner of Ely ; Lake of Chichester ; White of Peterborough ; and Trelawny
of Bristol. Ibid.

0 Howell, vol. xii. p. 317. 7 Macaulay, vol. ii. p. 382. 8 Ibid.

9 The counsel for the bishops was : Sir Robert Sawyer, Mr. Finch, Mr.
Pollexfen, Sir George Treby, Sergeant Pemberton, Sergeant Levinz and Mr.
Somers. "All of them," said Lord Camden, "lovers of liberty and the
greatest lawyers of that age." Birch's MSS. Brit. Mus.

10 « rp^ prosecut,ion of the bishops is an event which stands by itself in
our history. It was the first and last occasion on which two feelings, which
have generally been opposed to each other, and either of which, when
strongly excited, has sufficed to convulse the State, were united in perfect
harmony. Those feelings were love of the Church and love of freedom."
Macaulay, p. 392. Shortly after the trial of the Seven Bishops Somers was
elected Recorder of London, but declined the office. Diet. Nat. Biog. tit.
Somers,

10 THE JUNTO.

After the famous trial of the bishops there was not a
more unpopular man in England than the King. Everyone
was turned against him, and through his folly he had even
lost the support of the army.11 The Whig leaders were
driven to resist the tyranny of James ; even the Tories, " who
seriously disclaimed all thought of attacking the Govern-
ment, were yet by no means inclined to defend it."1

The Whigs saw that their time was come. Negotiations
with William of Orange were immediately set on foot.
Already, in May, Edward Russell2 had gone over to the
Hague to put before the Prince the urgency of immediate
action. William had at a glance seen the importance of the
crisis. " Now or never," he exclaimed in Latin.3

How great a share Somers had in this bold enterprise
of the Whig party, it is difficult to ascertain. Most of his
biographers say that his party was mainly guided by his
advice.4 He probably took no small part, for William
always had the greatest confidence in him. He is said
" to have been admitted into the most secret councils of the
Prince of Orange and to have been one of those who con-
cocted the measure od: bringing him over."5 It is certain
that his abilities and judgment made his advice very valu-
able to his colleagues, one of whom, Lord Sunderland,6
pronounced him to be " the life, the soul, the spirit of his
party."7

11 Green, vol. iv. p. 24.
1 Macaulay, vol. ii. p. 403.

'z Edward Russell (1653-1727), the famous admiral, and a member of the
celebrated Whig Junto, of which Somers, Montagu (Lord Halifax), Charles
Spencer (Lord Sunderland), and Lord Wharton were the other four.

3 " Aut nunc, aut nunquam." Macaulay, vol. ii. p. 404.

4 Vide Lord Campbell, Maddock, Cooksey, etc.

8Tindal's Continuation of Rapin's "Dissertation sur les Whigs et les
Tories," vol. ii. p. 770.

"Robert Spencer, earl of Sunderland, father of Charles, third earl of
Sunderland, who was a member of the Whig Junto.

7 Hardwicke, p. 446.

JOHN SOMERS. 11

If Somers had the merit of concocting the bold design,
he had in after life the modesty not to boast of it. His
name does not appear among the signatures of the " Associa-
tion," which was drawn up on June 30, 1688, the very
day on which the bishops were acquitted, and sent to
William, inviting him to come over to free the nation from
popery and tyranny. Even when the Prince first landed
Somers avoided " making himself conspicuous," though he
attended the meetings of the Whig leaders and undoubtedly
gave them much assistance.

In January, 1688-1689, he was elected to the Convention
Parliament as member for Worcester8 and he took a promi-
nent part in the long and difficult debates in that assembly
respecting the settlement of the government. The Commons
agreed to a resolution drawn up by Somers in the following
terms:9 "That King James II., having endeavoured to
subvert the constitution of this kingdom, by breaking the
original contract between the King and the people, and by
the advice of Jesuits and other wicked persons, having vio-
lated the fundamental laws and having withdrawn himself
out of this kingdom, has abdicated the government, and
that the throne has thereby become vacant."10

The Lords objected to this, and wished to insert the word
" deserted " in the place of u abdicated."10 Thereupon
followed the famous " Free Conference "l between the two
Houses (February, 1689), where Somers so brilliantly
defended the word " abdicated," using his wide-read know-
ledge of the classics to illustrate his point, by quoting from

8 Somers's Tracts, vol. x. p. 13. King in his Life of Locke (p. 234) savs
March 4th, 1689.

9 Parliamentary History, p. 50. Campbell, vol. iv. p. 91.
10Rapin, History of England, ed. 1743, 4to, vol. ii. pp. 786, 787.

1 " By far the most illustrious of those who now for the first time took
part in debate was Somers, a man to whom immediate precedence was
willingly yielded." Cooke, History of Party, vol. i. p. 478. "It was
Somers' object to make the restoration of a tyrant impossible, and to place
on the throne a sovereign under whom law and liberty might be secure."
Macaulay, vol. ii. p. 621'.

12 THE JUNTO.

Grotius, Calvin's " Lexicon Juridicum," Budseus, Pralejus,
Spigelius and Brisonius, de verborum' Significattione.2
Probably owing to Somers's arguments, the Lords gave
way.3 The Whig party prevailed, and the throne was
declared vacant.

Somers was the leading member on the Committee which
drew up the celebrated " Declaration of Eights,"4 which,
with some slight alterations, was accepted by both Houses.
After enumerating one by one the chief unconstitutional
acts of James II., it declared that the dispensing power
did not exist ; that without grant or consent of Parliament
no money could be exacted by the Sovereign and no army
kept up in time of peace. It also affirmed the right of
petition, the right of free choice of representatives, the
right of Parliament to freedom of debate, the right of the
nation to a pure administration of justice, and the necessity,
in order to secure these things, of frequent Parliaments.
This was read to William and Mary before the Crown was
offered to them. They accepted under these conditions, and
were proclaimed King and Queen of England. The Declara-
tion of Rights,5 which afterwards formed the basis of the
Bill of Eights, is one of the most important documents in
English history. It destroyed for ever the Stuart theory
of the divine right of kings, and it reasserted the principles
of the English Constitution, which it had been the aim of
the Stuarts to set aside. The name of the man who had

2 Rapin observes that this conference was "the most remarkable ever
known in England, as well for the importance of the thing itself as for the
ability of the managers." Rapin, vol. ii. p. 787. For Somers's speech see
Kennet, History, vol. ii., or Haddock, p. 214, or Macintosh, Revolution of
1688, p. 607, or Rapin, 4to ed., vol. i. p. 787.

3 Campbell, vol. iv. p. 94.

4 Green, vol. iv. p. 34. Macaulay says Somers was chairman to the
Committee (vol. ii. p. 657). " That he was chosen to so honourable and
important a post in a Parliament filled with able and experienced men only
ten days after he had spoken in the House of Commons for the first time
proves the superiority of his abilities." Ibid.

5 For Declaration of Rights see Hallam, Constitutional History, vol. iii.
p. 103.

JOHN SOMERS. 13

the largest share in drawing it up ought always to be
counted as one of the great names in the annals of England.8

Somers's political services, together with his reputation
as a sound and accomplished lawyer, naturally pointed him
out as a subject of promotion. On the accession of William
and Mary he was rewarded for his exertions by being, on
May 4, 1689,7 made Solicitor-General. He was immedi-
ately made a Bencher of the Middle Temple,8 and a few
months later he was knighted, though by no means willing
to receive honours of any kind.9

In the debates on the Bill for recognizing the new
Sovereigns and ratifying the Act of Convention, Somers took
a very prominent part, and distinguished himself by the able
manner in which he supported the principles of the Revolu-
tion.1 The legality of the Convention was questioned by
the opposition because it had not been summoned by writ,
whereupon Somers answered with much spirit : " If it were
not a legal Parliament," he said, " they who had taken the
oaths exacted by that Parliament were guilty of high
treason; the laws repealed by it were still in force; all
concerned in levying, collecting or paying taxes under its
statutes were highly criminal, and the whole nation must
presently return to King James."2 " This," says Burnet,3
" he spoke with much zeal and such an ascendant of author-
ity that none was prepared to answer it, so the Bill passed
without any more opposition. This was a great service

* ' ' The country is mainly indebted to him for the happy settlement. "
Foss, Lives of Eminent Judges, p. 621. " His famous speech about the word
' abdicated,' one of those deathless monuments of the important services
done by his lordship to his country." Biog. Brit. p. 3747.

7 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 23. " These appointments were not announced in
the Gazette till May 6th, but some of them were made earlier." In the
Biographical History of England Noble says May 9th, see tit. Somers.

8 Campbell, p. 98, note. • Ibid.
1 His first official speech.

-Roscoe, p. 151, tit. Somers. Also Campbell, p. 99, and Macaulay,
vol. iii. p. 568.

3 Burnet, Own Times, vol. iv. p. 75.

14 THE JUNTO.

done in a very critical time and contributed not a little
to raise Somers's character."

Somers was from this time without doubt the leader of
the Whig party, whose supremacy he laboured to secure.
As long as William placed in him the confidence he did,
the Whigs were safe, but William was beginning to see the
difficulties of his position between the jealousies of the two
parties. The Tories were forced to bo content with
William, for they saw that there was no choice between
him and ruin. But William could hope for no support
from them. " If he persecuted them their sulkiness would
infallibly be turned into fury. If he showed favour to them
it was by no means certain that he would gain their good-
will, and it was but too probable that he might lose his hold
on the hearts of the Whigs."4 Whig and Tory had been
united by the tyranny of James; both parties had shared
in the revolution, and William strove to prolong their union
by joining the leaders of both in his first ministry. Except
in the face of some common danger, union was impossible,
as William was soon to discover.

During the period that Sir John Somers occupied the
post of Solicitor-General he helped to carry through the
Toleration Act,5 and he took part in the important debate
as to whether the revenue granted during the life of King
James had expired. His argument that it expired with the
abdication of the King carried the day, and by his suggestion
an Act " granting a present aid to their majesties " was
passed.6 Somers also supported an amendment to the
Coronation oath, which was not carried ; 7 and helped in the

4 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 12.

5 The Nonconformists had played an important part in the Revolution,
and were now rewarded by a Bill, the Toleration Act, which allowed freedom
of worship to Protestant Nonconformists.

6 See Grey, Debates, p. 93.

7 If Somers's amendment had been carried " it would have saved much
unnecessary pain to royal consciences, and would have deprived bigotry of
an unfair weapon." Vide Campbell, p. 100. "This amendment, if carried,
would have relieved George III. of one of his scruples in regard to the
emancipation of his Catholic subjects." Diet. Nat. Biog. tit. Somers.

JOHN SOMERS. 15

important reform of appropriating the revenue to the public
service, besides many other constitutional changes, which
it is impossible to enumerate here. In all Somers held to
his principles and worked for liberty. Only one instance,
says Lord Campbell,8 can be found where " he maintained an
unconstitutional and dangerous doctrine." This was on
the occasion when he argued that Parliament could judici-
ally declare new treasons.

In the absence of the Attorney-General it fell upon
Somers to conduct the case for the Crown in the prosecution
of Lord Preston for high treason in January, 1691.9 Lord
Preston, James II. 's last Secretary of State, with several
others,10 was discovered to have been leader of a plot to
overthrow the Government and restore the exiled King.
He was declared guilty before the Lord Chief Justices Holt
and Pollexfen and the Lord Chief Baron, Sir Robt. Atkyns.1
On the recommendation of Somers, however, Lord Preston
received a free pardon.2

On May 2, 1692, Somers succeeded Sir George Treby as
Attorney-General,3 and in the following March he was

8 Campbell, p. 101. "Somers's action has been censured by Lord
Campbell on inadequate grounds. The chief point to which he took excep-
tion in the amendments was a limitation of ten days for the presentment of
the indictment, to run not from the discovery but from the commission of
the offence. Such a rule would have rendered it in many cases impossible
to lay an indictment at all, and the measure as eventually passed (7
William III. c. 3) justified Somers's opposition by fixing the period of
limitation at three years." Diet. Nat. Biog.

9Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 17 et seq. This was the first State prosecution
since the Revolution.

10 Of which the chief were Ashton and Elliott. For account of this plot
see Tindal's Continuation of Rapin, 4to ed. vol. i. p. 166 et seq.

1 Howell, vol. xii. p. 645.

2 " The Solicitor General, Somers, conducted the prosecutions with a
moderation and humanity of which his predecessors had left him no example.
' I did never think,' he said, * that it was the part of any who were of
counsel for the King in cases of this nature to aggravate the crime of the
prisoners or to put false colours on the evidence'." See Macaulay, also
Howell.

3 Sir Henry Pollexfen, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, died in April,
1692. Sir George Treby was raised to his office, which left the post of
Attorney General vacant.

16 THE JUNTO.

appointed Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, at the same time
being sworn one of "William's Privy Council.4 The rapid
promotion of Somers to such an important post gave satis-
faction to all except the violent Tories, who were afraid
of his influence over William. They could now no longer
deny his ability, and from henceforth their jealousy grew
more and more pronounced. Burnet remarks on the general
satisfaction : " All people were now grown weary of the
Great Seal's being in commission : it made the proceedings
in Chancery to be both more dilatory and more expensive. .
Sir John Somers had now got great reputation, both
in his post of Attorney-General and in the House of
Commons : so the King gave him the Great Seal. He was
very learned in his own profession, with a great deal more
learning in other professions, in divinity, philosophy and
history. He had a great capacity for business, with an
extraordinary temper; for he was fair and gentle, perhaps
to a fault, so that he had all the patience, as well as the
justice and equity becoming a great magistrate. He had
always agreed in his notions with the Whigs, and had
studied to bring them to better thoughts with the King, and
to greater confidence in him."5

Somers presided in the Court of Chancery as Lord

4 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 375. He was sent for to Kensington, and called
into the Council Chamber. Caermarthen spoke in the King's name. " Sir
John," he said, "it is necessary for the public service that you should take
this charge upon you ; and I have it in command from His Majesty to say
that he can admit of no excuse." Somers submitted. The seal was
delivered to him, with a patent which entitled him to a pension of £2,000 a
year from the day on which he should quit the office ; and he was immedi-
ately sworn in a Privy Councillor and Lord Keeper. Ibid. " The Attorney
General, Somers, made Lord Keeper, a young lawyer of extraordinary
merit." Evelyn's Diary, March 19th, 1693. "The great seal, the highest
legal office, now given to Somers, a discerning and moderate man, but at the
same time a declared Whig, whose excellence all lay in his own department —
the law." Ranke, vol. v. p. 66. " No appointment could be more popular or
more judicious. Somers was a man of strict integrity, of great capacity for
business, of the mildest and most engaging manners, of the most generous
and liberal principles." Belsham, History of Great Britain, vol. i. p. 272.

5 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 193. This exceedingly high praise, we must remem-
ber, comes from a man with very strong Whig bias. But it nevertheless
seems to have been the general opinion of Somers.

JOHN SOMERS. 17

Keeper for seven years, and all contemporary authorities,
even from unprejudiced men of the Tory section, concur in
praising his energy, his patience and his upright and con-
scientious adherence to his principles.6 Of many cases
brought before him during the seven years by far the most
important was the Banker's Case.7 On this occasion he
delivered his celebrated judgment, which Mr. Hargrave
describes as one of the most elaborate arguments ever
delivered in Westminster Hall. It is said that Somers
bought several hundred pounds' worth of books and pam-
phlets in order to obtain material for his argument.8

The career of Somers as a judge was a brilliant one;
but it was his career as a member, and a very active
member,9 of the Government that attracted most public
notice.

Almost immediately after receiving the Great Seal,
Somers had a dispute with the King concerning the choice
of an Attorney-General, and some other legal appointments.
The Lord Keeper had promised the post of Attorney-General
to Sir T'h. Trevor, but William had given instructions that
it should be bestowed upon Mr. Ward.10 Somers, there-
upon, wrote a, very respectful letter1 to the King, urging the
ancient custom with regard to these appointments, stating
that it was to the best interest of His Majesty that they
should be dependent on the Great Seal. He finally stated
that he could not hold the Great Seal unless under the

'"One of the ablest lawyers of the day, and the most impartial judge
that ever presided in the Court of Chancery." Trevor, Life of William ///.,
vol. ii. p. 343.

7Howell, vol. xiv. p. 1 et seq. This case arose out of the infamous
shutting up of the Exchequer in the reign of Charles II., whereby the King
intercepted, for his own private uses, nearly a million and a half of money
which should have been applied to the repayment of loans to the Government.

»Ibid. p. 39.

9 He had been returned member for Worcester.

" See letter from Nottingham to Somers dated March, 1693. Hardwicke,
vol. ii. p. 426.

1 For letter see Hardwicke, ut supra, p. 426. Letter dated March 27th, 1693.

18 THE JUNTO.

proper conditions. William refused to accept his resigna-
tion of the Seal, and promised that in future all such
appointments should be in the hands of the Lord Keeper.
This dispute only tended to create an even better under-
standing- between the King and his great minister, which
was never again destroyed.

On May 2, 1693, Somers took his seat on the Woolsack
as Speaker of the House of Lords.2 In this capacity he took
no part in the debate, but he very largely regulated the
decisions of the Upper House, and the King consulted him
on everything, particularly on the question of giving the
royal assent or vetoing bills.3

During all these discussions on home policy, William's
attention was constantly turned to the Continent. England
had been at war with France since 1G89, and James and
Louis were together planning to invade England. This
scheme, which was James's last hope, was entirely destroyed
by the famous Battle of La Hogue on May 19, 1692.4
William often crossed over to, the Continent and left Mary
to rule, trusting a good deal, no doubt, to the able advice
of Somers, the minister on whom he most relied.

To meet the expenses of the French war some important
steps with regard to finance were taken in the beginning of
1693; on which occasion the abilities of Charles Montagu,5
a young and rising Whig, were called into play. He origin-
ated the National Debt, and through his important services
to the State he and Somers came into close contact. In

2 Under date May 2nd, 1693, there is an entry in the journals of the Lords :
"This day Sir John Somers, Knight, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal of
England, first sat as Speaker in the House of Peers."

• Campbell, p. 122.

4 Edward Russell, afterwards one of the Whig Junto, was commander-
in-chief. This decisive victory considerably helped to raise his reputation.
For the details of the struggle see Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 225 et seq.

5 Charles Montagu (1661-1715), afterwards one of the Whig Junto. He
and Somers took their seats for the first time together, Macaulay, vol. ii,
p. 623.

JOHN SOMERS. 19

1694, the Triennial Act,6 limiting the duration of Parlia-
ment to three years, was passed. Somers persuaded
William to give his assent, pointing out to him that its
provisions were quite consistent with the full exercise of the
prerogative in a limited monarchy. Very soon after this
was settled William was struck down by the death of Mary
from smallpox on December 20, 1G94.7

Somers immediately saw the necessity of reconcil-
ing William to the Princess Anne, who by the Bill of
Eights was his successor. She had, owing to a quarrel,8
been for long a stranger at the Court. He approached the
King in his royal closet, where he found him prostrate with
grief. When Somers broke the silence by saying he so
regretted the dissensions in the royal family, William
answered, " My lord, do what you will ; I can think of no
business." Somers arranged an interview between the King
and the Princess which ended in a complete reconciliation.9

6 ''The enormous duration of 17 years, for which Charles II. protracted
his second Parliament, turned the thoughts of all who desired improvements
in the Constitution towards some limitation on a prerogative which had not
hitherto been abused. The term of 3 years appeared sufficient to establish a
control of the electoral over the representative body without recurring to the
ancient but inconvenient scheme of annual Parliaments which men enamoured
of a still more popular form of government than our own were eager to recom-
mend." The Triennial Bill was brought up in 1689, 1693, and finally received
the royal assent in 1694. See Hallam, Constitutional History, vol. iii. pp. 148,
149. Also Macaulay, vol. iv. pp. 477, 529.

7 Ibid. pp. 530, 531, 532. Also Tindal, Continuation of Rapin, vol i. p.
260. Also Burnet.

s In 1691, uncertain of the stability of the new Government, three of the
greatest of the ministers, Russell, Godolphin, and Marlborough, determined
to be safe on either issue. They succeeded in obtaining written pardons from
James, Marlborough promising in exchange, when he should be in command
of the English troops, to bring them over to the enemy. William heard of
their treachery and deprived Marlborough of all offices (Jan. 10th, 1692).
Anne, who knew well the reason of his disgrace, persisted in ignoring it and
in bringing the Duchess of Marlborough to Court. This led to a bitter
quarrel between the Queen and her sister, Princess Anne. See Macaulay,
vol. iv. pp. 158-170.

9 Macaulay, vol. iv. pp. 562-566. Tindal (vol. i. p. 223) in Continuation
of Rapin says Sunderland had the chief hand in the reconciliation. William
did not at first include the Churchills in the peace which he had made with
their mistress. But they were permitted once more to dwell under the royal
roof. Macaulay, p. 565. For further account of this reconciliation see
Memoirs of Duchess of Marlborouyh, vol. i. p. 254 j Coxe, Life of Marlborough,
vol. i. p. 74.

20 THE JUNTO.

Somers further gained the confidence of the King. In
1695 he was appointed one of seven lord justices10 who were
to form a council of Regency during William's absence on
the Continent, when he took command of the army in the
Netherlands.1 Of the seven only one — Grodolphin — was
Tory; so Somers, being the head of his party, became
practically supreme in the absence of the King.

The most important work in the Parliament of 1695 was
the re-establishment of the currency. The evil practice
of clipping2 had by slow degrees grown to a dangerous
magnitude. To no purpose severe laws against clipping
were rigorously executed. On one morning seven men were
hanged and one woman burned.3 But clipping still went
on. So far had the evil gone that the coinage was no more
than half its proper weight. In 1695 the Government saw
that something must be done at once.4 Fortunately the
transaction of this business was entrusted to four able and
determined men,5 Somers, Locke6 the philosopher, Montagu
the financier, and Sir Isaac Newton the mathematician,
who was made Master of the Mint. They decided upon
immediate action.7 Somers made a very ingenious sugges-

18 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 562. The seven Lord Justices were : Tenison,
Archbishop of Canterbury ; Somers, Keeper of the Great Seal ; Pembroke,
Keeper of the Privy Seal ; Devonshire, Lord Steward ; Dorset, Lord Cham-
berlain ; Shrewsbury, Secretary of State ; and Godolphin, First Commis-
sioner of the Treasury. " They had no rank or character except when four
of them were together, and when together they had regal authority vested
in them." Burnet, vol. iv. p. 269. See also Tindal, Continuation of Rapin,
vol. i. p. 281.

1 Somers filled this post again in the years 1697, 1698.

2 In those days the coin was not made with a serrated or milled edge as
it is now, but with a smooth edge, so it was not easy to see whether a little
had been cut off the edge or not.

3 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 623. 4 Ibid. p. 629. 5 Ibid. p. 630.

* For Locke's share in this important service to the State, see his life by
Fox Bourne, vol. ii. p. 325 et seq.

7 Montagu, in particular, is said to have expressed in strong language
his determination to kill or cure. During the first fortnight of November
(1695) Locke, Somers and Montagu were in constant communication, dis-
cussing the terms of the proposal to be submitted to Parliament. They were
all agreed as to the madness of any attempt to adulterate the coinage. They
were also agreed as to the necessity of calling in the clipped money, and
rendering its use, after a short time, illegal.

JOHN SOME&S. 21

tion8 that a proclamation should be prepared with great
secrecy, saying that in three days the hammered coin should
pass by weight only but that every possessor of such coin
might bring it to the Mint, where it should be counted
and weighed and immediately restored with a written
promise of a future payment of the difference between the
actual quantity of silver in the pieces and the real value
of the coin. The King agreed with Somers in this bold
plan,9 but the other politicians shrank from the responsi-
bility. It was therefore abandoned and another plan was
adopted. They called in the bad coins and gave others of
the same name but of the full value to those who brought
them. The nation paid the cost of difference.10 By this
entire renewal of the coinage a great boon was conferred on
trades of all kinds.11

In May, 1G95, William offered Somers a peerage. There
was a great desire among the peers that he should be able
to take part in the debates of the House of Lords, and the
King sent the offer through the Duke of Shrewsbury, who it
was thought could persuade Somers to accept it. He wrote
the following letter, enclosing the warrant of a baronetcy : —

MY LOKD,— I had his Majesty's commands last night to have waited on
your Lordship this morning with the enclosed ; but being informed that you
are not at home, I take the liberty to send it to you. I had directions to
have said everything I could imagine to persuade you to accept of a title, and
the King is really convinced it is for his service you should. I beg the
answer I may have may be a Bill for the King's signing. As for arguments,
I have used all I have already ; and by your objections, you may give me
leave to tell you, that you are partial and unreasonable with too much

8 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 635.

9 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 264. The course Somers recommended was indeed
the safest for the country, but by no means the safest for him and his col-
leagues. Macaulay, ibid. p. 636.

'* £1,200,000 was required to meet the expense. This was borrowed from
the Bank of England on the security of a window-tax. Locke, vol. ii. p. 337.

11 "The reformation of the currency was only one of the great services
that Somers and Montagu, as the ablest and most active members of the
Government that was re-shaped in the spring of 1695, rendered to their
country." Ibid. p. 346.

22 THE JUNTO.

modesty, as some are with too much ambition. I hope you will not only par-
don me for telling you your fault, but that you will correct it and believe me
with great truth, My Lord, your Lordship's most faithful and obedient
servant,— SHREWSBURY. 12

In spite of this pressing letter, Somers still modestly
refused, declaring that he had not sufficient fortune to
support the dignity.13

A plot to assassinate the King was discovered at the
beginning of 1696. Somers's treatment of the conspirators
was not much complained of at the time, but it was brought
up later when his enemies were anxious to find some charge
against him.1 The trial and infamous attainder of Sir
John Fenwick really became a question of party2 and does
not reflect much credit on the memory of Somers, who was
mainly responsible for the decision.3

On April 22, 1697, Somers surrendered the Great Seal,
but William returned it to him immediately with the title of
Lord Chancellor,4 at the same time raising him to the
peerage with the title of Baron Somers of Evesham.5
William granted him an annuity of £2,100 and the manors
of Reigate and Howleigh in Surrey,6 which would enable
him to support his new dignity. By making Somers Lord
Chancellor William had bestowed on him the very highest
mark of honour and respect at his disposal. The world
now saw Lord Somers at the height of his power.7 His

12 This letter dated May 8, 1695. Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 429.

13 Lives of Eminent Person* , tit. Somers, p. 7.
1 Campbell, p. 128.

2Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 740. "In truth party spirit had seldom been
more strongly excited." "The Whigs had a decided superiority in argu-
ment, but on the main question the Tories were in the right." Ibid. p. 745.
See also Hallam, vol. iii. p. 131.

< Campbell, p. 128.

1 " His Majesty in Council received the Seals from the hands of the Right
Honourable Sir John Somers, Knight, Lord Keeper thereof, and was pleased
to return it to him again, with the title of Lord Chancellor of England."
London Gazette, April 22nd, 1697.

5 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 776. 6 Vernon, Correspondence.

1 His influence was now as great in the House of Lords as in the Cabinet.
Cooke, History of Party, vol. i. p. 534.

JOHN SOMERS.

party triumphed with him. The chief offices of the Crown
were given to Whigs — Russell became Lord Ori'ord,
Montagu, First Lord of the Treasury.8

It is necessary to glance over the years of William's
reign in order to understand the manner in which the
Whigs gained their ascendency. It has been seen that
William began his reign by forming a government from
members of both parties, hoping thereby to reconcile them.
This plan had, however, been a complete failure ; every Par-
liament had been characterized by violent feuds. William
had, at the very outset, displeased the Whigs by appointing
a few Tories and Trimmers9 to high positions.10 The Whigs
showed their indignation by growing more and more vio-
lent, which behaviour by no means added to their popu-
larity. Seeing that they were growing less popular with
both King and nation, they resolved to make a bold attempt
to become independent of both and to secure their own
personal supremacy in Parliament. In October, 1689, on
the opening of Parliament, they introduced a Corporation
Bill1 for restoring all the charters2 that had been forfeited
in James II. "s reign, to which were added two clauses,3 the
result of which, if passed, would have been to give the
Whigs an overwhelming influence in borough elections.

8 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 776. The Whig policy at this moment was the
policy of the nation. As the Whigs drove their rivals out of the field they
at the same moment entered on a still closer community of interests with
the King. Ranke, vol. v. p. 126.

9 Amid the clamours of Whigs and Tories and during the storm of their
hostilities, a middle or moderate party gradually and silently arose, and,
fostered by circumstances, attained a powerful ascendency. These were
called "Trimmers." Robert Harley was leader of this new and powerful
schism from the Tory school of politics.

10 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 404. ' Ibid. p. 517.

• Somers had been chairman of a select committee to consider their
restoration.

3 These two clauses were the work of Sacheverell and Howard. The one
provided that all who had taken part in the surrender of the charters should
be incapable of holding office for seven years ; the other added that all who

E resumed to take office should be fined £700 and debarred from public office
>r life. " This was no doubt intended to maintain their own superiority by
keeping the Church or Tory faction out of corporations." Hallam, vol. iii.
p. 114.

24 THE JtJNTO.

This the Whig's tried to pass in haste, at a time when the
greater part of the opposition were not in the House. So
violent a measure, however, called forth all the energies
of the Tories, and the Whigs were defeated. " That Somers
disapproved of the violence of the party to which he
belonged may be inferred, both from the whole course of
his public life, and from the very significant fact that,
though he had charge of the Corporation Bill, he did not
move the penal clauses, but left that ungracious office to
men more impetuous and less sagacious than himself. He
did not, however, abandon his allies in this emergency, but
spoke for them, and tried to make the best of a very bad
case."4

Further disputes followed, until William, weary of the
Crown, threatened to retire to Holland. To put an end to
difficulties, he abruptly dissolved the Parliament which he
could not bring to reason.5

In the Parliament of 1690 the Tories had a majority,6
which exasperated the Whigs; but during- the next two
years the Whigs, to a certain extent, regained their position.
This unsettled state of affairs continued till 1693, when
Sunderland,7 the able but unscrupulous minister of James

4 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 522. Hallam says that this clause (Sacheverell's),
which modern historians generally condemn as oppressive, had the strong
support of Somers. See Hallam, vol. iii. p. 114.

5 "The Tories hated him for protecting the Dissenters, and the Whigs
hated him for protecting the Tories." Macaulay, vol. iii. pp. 528, 531.

6 "The Whig element had decidedly predominated in 1689. The Tory
element predominated, though not very decidedly, in 1690." Macaulay, vol.
iii. p. 537.

7 Robert Spencer, Earl of Sunderland, father of Charles, third Earl of Sun-
derland, afterwards member of the Junto. He was a man whose political
character was of the lowest type. " He had been a minister in the later days
of Charles II., and he had remained minister through almost all the reign of
James II. He had held office at last only by compliance with the worst
tyranny of his master and by a feigned conversion to the Roman Catholic
faith, but the ruin of James was no sooner certain than he had secured
pardon and protection from William by the betrayal of the master to whom
he had sacrificed his conscience and his honour. Since the Revolution he had
striven only to escape public notice in a country retirement, but at this
crisis he came secretly forward to bring his unequalled sagacity to the aid of
the King." See also Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 438 et seq. Green, vol. iv. p. 59.

JOHN SOMERS. 25

II., advised William to form a united Whig ministry by
gradually weeding out the Tories. In this manner the first
English ministry was formed.8 By the end of 1696, except
for Godolphin, the able financier, who did not precisely
belong to either party, all the chief offices of the Crown
were filled by Whigs.9 William decided to give the prefer-
ence to them for three reasons.10 In the first place, the
"Whigs were, on principle, attached to the reigning dynasty.
The Revolution had been the triumph of their political
theory. In the second place, they were prepared to support
William while the Tories were rather inclined to thwart
him ; and in the third place, the Whigs were the stronger
party in Parliament. Ever since 1690, when they had been
in the minority, they had been steadily gaining ground. In
energy, alertness and discipline they were decidedly superior
to the Tories.1 The reason of the strength of the Whig
party lay in the fact that they had already begun to look for
guidance to that small group of men, afterwards known as
the Junto.2

Sooner even than 1697 four3 of those five distinguished
men, Soiners, Russell, Montagu and Wharton,4 had begun
to take the lead of their party. As the years went on they

8 " The first ministry was the work, partly of mere chance, and partly of
wisdom, not however of that highest wisdom which is conversant with great
principles of political philosophy, but of that lower wisdom which meets daily
exigencies with daily expedients. Neither William nor the most enlightened
of his advisers fully understood the nature and importance of that noiseless
revolution — for it was no less— which began about the close of 1693 and was
completed about the close of 1696." Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 437.

9 " As the Whigs drove their rivals — the Tories— out of the field, they at
the same time entered on a still closer community of interests with the King."
Ranke, vol. v. p. 126.

10 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 444 el -se</.
1 Ibid. p. 446.

- It was not until the reign of Queen Anne that this name was given to
the group of men which lead the Whig party.

3 The fifth was Charles Spencer, third Earl of Sunderland (1674-1722), who
afterwards became son-in-law to Marlborough. He was the youngest of the
Junto.

4 Thomas Wharton, eldest son of Philip, Lord Wharton, afterwards first
Marquis of Wharton (1648-1715).

2G THE JUNTO.

gradually gained more and more power and authority, and
continued to possess it, whether in office or out of office,
during twenty years. Their strength lay in union. They
acted in close concert, and rose and fell together. What-
ever the members of the Junto could be accused of, they
could never be accused of treachery one to another. At
the head of this united body stood Somers. He was chief of
his party.

Very different was the state of the Tory party. It could
boast of no such able leaders, nor of any such cohesion.
The most eminent of their men was, perhaps, Robert
Harley,5 who in the next reign was to play such an import-
ant part. Although he came from a Whig Puritan family,
and, on first taking his seat in Parliament, displayed pro-
nounced and violent Whig principles,6 he gradually took
his stand on the side of those whose principles were dia-
metrically opposite to those which he himself professed.
Soon after the general election of 1690 he began to turn
Tory, until finally, under Anne, his name came to be
inseparably associated with the High Church party.

Godolphin, the able financier, who had been in high
office throughout the late reign, continued one of the chief
ministers when William came to the throne. In 1690 he
was made First Lord of the Treasury, and scruples about
serving one King while secretly sending professions of
loyalty to another seemed easily overridden. He was the
only Tory of note whom William kept in office when he
formed the ministry of 1696. Godolphin, however, did not
very much care what principles he professed, so long as
he could remain in power. He gradually came under the
influence of Marlborough,7 to whom he was afterwards

5 In Anne's reign created Earl of Oxford.

6 His name appears on the
he Corporation Bill (supra,

1 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 58.

6 His name appears on the list of those who voted for Sacheverell's clause
in the Corporation Bill (supra, p. 48).

JOHN SOMERS.

27

closely bound by domestic ties ; 8 and these two unprincipled
men concocted schemes for their own advancement.

Somers, when first made Lord Chancellor, seemed emin-
ently popular. He was the favourite of the King; he
was the favourite of both Houses of Parliament, 'The
High Church party expressed a wish that he was theirs.
The Tory fox-hunters could say nothing against him except
that he was " a vile Whig " ; and the merchants celebrated
him as the only Lord Chancellor who had ever known any-
thing of trade or finance."9 But his situation in the
ministry was difficult and critical; and he was soon to
learn, like many other eminent men, that no public services,
however conscientiously pursued, can secure the lasting
gratitude of the multitude, or protect the author of them
from the fluctuations of party feeling. At no period,
perhaps, in the history of England did the inconsistencies
and absurdities of party spirit run so high or the interests
of the rival factions lie so wholly in the struggle for power
as they did at the end of the seventeenth and the beginning
of the eighteenth centuries.

William, torn between the parties, had several times
threatened to resign the Crown and return to his own
country. " The only difference," he declared to Halifax,
kk that he knew between the two parties was that the Tories
would cut his throat in the morning and the Whigs in
the afternoon."10

Lord Somers tried to check the violence of his party,
and acted altogether with such moderation as to become of
the very greatest importance to the King as adviser and
friend. After the resignation of the Earl of Sunderland
in 1697,1 the chief power of the Government rested in the

8 He married Maryborough's daughter. 9 Campbell, vol. iv. p. 133.

10 Lives of Eminent Persons, tit. Somers, p. 8.

1 In 1697 he was made Lord Chamberlain in place of Dorset, who resigned,
and took his place as one of the Lord Justices. Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 777.
This appointment was strongly resented, even the Whig Junto, though they
owed him much, shrank from his defence. He was attacked and in great
fright resigned. For this see Macaulay, vol. v. p. 18 et seq.

28 THE JUNTO.

hands of the Lord Chancellor. From that date his troubles
began. A letter written by Somers to Shrewsbury2 in that
year shows how he himself realized the instability of the
administration : — " At the present he (the King) is without
anything which has the appearance of a ministry. The
plain consequence of which is, that everybody (seeing the
little credit those have who serve him) is in a manner
united to endeavour to ruin or expose them. If one could
have his wish, it is very hard to find men to supply even
present vacancies ; especially considering the King's pre-
judices to some, and his fondness for others, and the power
which my Lord Sunderland still has. There is nothing to
support the Whigs but the difficulty of his piecing with the
other party, and the almost impossibility of finding a
set of Tories who will unite." But the Tories were deter-
mined to unite, and to unite for the purpose of ousting
Somers from his influential position. They realized that as
long as he possessed the entire confidence of the King, they
could never hope for power ; 3 and they grew more and more
indifferent to the means they employed to recover their
power.

Seven years of war and war-taxes had made the English
nation discontented with the Whigs, to whom the war was
a matter of party principle. The first incident in their
favour was the dispute about a standing army, which
followed the Peace of Eyswick4 in 1697. The Commons

2 This letter is not dated, but Hardwicke supposes it to have been
written towards the close of 1698. Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 435.

3 " It was reckoned that the chief strength of his party lay in his credit
with the King." Burnet, vol. iv. p. 442.

* Signed in October, 1697. Green, vol. iv. p. 65. This peace was a
defeat for the grasping king of France, Louis XIV., and a triumph for
William and the European coalition, in spite of failure and defeat in the
field. Louis, making terms with England, Holland, Spain and Austria,
surrendered all that he had gained since 1678, with the single exception of
the town of Strasburg. He also was compelled to recognize William as lawful
king of England, though he refused to expel James II. and his family from
St. Germains, where they had been living since 1691. Green, ut stipra ; also
Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 801 ; also Tindal, Continuation of Rapin, 4to ed. vol. i.
p. 3b'0.

JOHN SOMERS. 29

voted " that all the land forces of the kingdom that had
been raised since September 29, 1G80, should be paid
and disbanded." In answer to this an anonymous pam-
phlet appeared entitled : " A Letter5 Balancing the Neces-
sity of Keeping a Land Force in Time of Peace, with the
Dangers which may follow therefrom " ; which was thought
by all to come from the Lord Chancellor.6

Tories, and even the majority of Whigs, were very reluct-
ant to see the establishment of a standing army.7 The
King, with his eyes fixed abroad, with a deep distrust of
France, and the fear of another approaching continental
quarrel, was loth to break up his well-trained army.8
Somers, with his far-sighted policy, thought the same and
urged the retention of a body of well-trained troops. The
antipathy of the nation to a regular army was, however,
too strong. Somers was defeated.9 William,10 prevented
from appearing to the Continent in a state of preparation
for future emergencies, grew disgusted with the Whig party,
which could not give him what he most desired. As the
Tories hoped, their party grew more and more in the favour
of the King. Several high offices were given to them in
the place of eminent Whigs.

Lord Somers, however, still retained the confidence of the
King. His enemies could find nothing in him to attack.

5 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 11.

6 " In vain Somers strove by skilful pamphleteering to convince the
people that in face of the continental armies the nation could not be safe
without regular troops, and that the militia on which patriots relied, what-
ever might be its native valour, would not stand against trained soldiers."
Goldwin Smith.

7 "The word 'standing army' had an odious sound in English ears."
Burnet, vol. iv. p. 375. " The Whigs in the House of Commons were much
divided about this point of the army." Hardwicke's note, ibid. p. 376.

8 "The king resisted desperately the proposals for its disbanding."
Green, vol. iv. p. 68.

9 The army was reduced to 10,000 men. Hallam, vol. iii. p. 139.

10 "It was surmised that he would abandon the government rather than
hold it with a force that was too small to preserve and protect it." Ralph
says that this was probably only a threat, but Somers in a letter to Shrews-
bury confirms it ; see Burnet, vol. iv. p. 400, note.

30 THE JUNTO.

It was his share in the Partition Treaties — the first of which
was signed on October 11, 1698 — that gave them their first
opportunity.

After the elections of 1098, which resulted in a decided
thinning of the ranks of the staunch ministerial Whigs,1 the
statesmen of the Junto, disappointed and anxious but not
hopeless, dispersed to rest and to prepare for future parlia-
mentary struggles. Somers went to Tunbridge Wells.2

Before the King had departed to Holland in the summer
of 1697, he had communicated to Lord Somers a proposi-
tion made by Count Tallard3 to prevent a war about the
succession to the crown of Spain upon the death of the
reigning monarch, Charles II., who, it seemed probable,
would not live much longer, and who had no direct heir.
The claimants to the Spanish throne were Philip of France,4
Joseph, the Electoral Prince of Bavaria, and the Archduke
Charles of Austria. William, anxious at all costs to pre-
vent the union of the French and Spanish colonies and to
check the menacing aggrandisement of France in Europe,
eagerly entered into negotiations5 by which the largest share
would be given to the Electoral Prince, whom no one feared.
He wrote home to Somers, informing him that fresh offers
had been made, desiring to have his opinion on the treaty.
The particulars of the propositions were sent to Yernon,
Secretary of State, " to whom " (wrote William to Somers6)
" I have given orders not to communicate them to any others
besides yourself, and to leave to your judgment to whom
else you would think proper to impart them, to the end that
I might know your opinion upon so important an affair, and
which requires the greatest secrecy. If it be fit this negotia-

1 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 130. • Ibid. p. 131.

3 French ambassador ; in England in 1698.

4 The Dauphin's second son.

5 The contracting parties were England, Holland and France.

6 For letter see Trevor, Life of Wi/liam III. vol. ii. p. 350. For
William's letter and Somers's reply, see Tindal, Continuation of Rapin, 4 to ed,
vol. i. pp. 383, 384.

JOHN SOMERS. 31

tion should be carried on, there is no time to be lost, and
you will send me the full powers under the Great Seal, with
the names in blank, to treat with Count Tallard. I believe
this may be done so secretly that none but you and Yernon,
and those to whom you shall have communicated it may
have knowledge of it," etc.

Somers immediately consulted his colleagues, Lord
Orford, the Duke of Shrewsbury and Montagu, all of whom
very much doubted the wisdom of sanctioning such pro-
posals. Somers despatched their joint opinion to the King.7
He remarked on the evil consequences with which the pro-
posal would be attended should the French not be sincere,
though at the same time they were anxious to have the
question of the Spanish succession speedily settled, for
there was great danger that the immense power of the
French King and the commanding position of his dominions
would enable him to take immediate possession of Spain
when Charles II. might die. But there was one important
point which he laid before the King: England was dis-
contented with the heavy taxes and very averse to another
war.8 With these cautionary remarks, Somers concluded
by saying that they were all assured that William would
consider all points, feeling confident that he understood all
the conditions and would not act rashly. The Commission
was sent off with the powers demanded by the King, blanks
being left for the names of the Commissioners. The King
paid no attention to the Lord Chancellor's suggestions,9 but

7 For Somers's letter to the King, see Trevor, vol. ii. p. 352.

8 " So far as concerns England, it would be a want of duty not to give
your majesty this account, that there is a deadness and want of spirit uni-
versally in the nation, so as not at all to be disposed to the thoughts of
entering into a new war ; and that they seem to be tired with taxes to a
degree beyond what was discerned." Somers to King William, dated
August 28th, 1698. Rapin, vol. iii. p. 383.

9 " If King William was guilty of any fault in the negotiation, it was the
relying too little on the sentiments of his English ministry, and managing
the treaty too much through private channels. However, the necessity of
keeping the secret, and the fluctuating state of parties at that time, will
furnish some apology for his conduct in that particular." Hardwicke, vol. ii.
p. 334,

32 THE JUNTO.

hastily completed the treaty which afterwards proved so
unpopular to the country. The question of the Spanish
succession was re-opened by the unexpected death of the
Electoral Prince in January, 1G99. A second Partition
Treaty10 was, with equal secrecy and irresponsibility,
negotiated and ratified by the King and Lord Somers,
whereby the bulk of the Spanish dominions was to be given
to the Archduke Charles. These arrangements may have
been prudent, but they were unpopular among the Tories,
who disliked England's meddling on the Continent. When
all became known a storm of indignation burst from their
party. In the next session of Parliament which met in
November, 1699, J great complaints were made in the Lower
House against the Lord Chancellor.2 Their anger reached
its height when in November3 the King of Spain died, and
Louis, in defiance of all his treaties, accepted his grandson's4
great inheritance.5 Vigorous attacks were made on Lord
Somers. The first charge brought against him was that of
being guilty of piracy on the high seas by assisting Captain
Kidd.6 In 1096 the colonists of America had been greatly
annoyed by the attacks of certain pirates, who swarmed the
seas. It seemed very urgent to send an English ship of
war to cruise against them, but there was no money to bear
the expense, " for Parliament had so appropriated the
money given for the sea that no part of it could be applied
to this expedition."7 It was finally done by private sub-
scription to which Somers contributed «£1,000,8 thinking
** it became the post he was in to concur in such a public
service."9 Unfortunately it turned out that Captain Kidd,

10 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 191. Also Green, vol. iv. p. 68.

1 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 252. 2 Ibid. pp. 254, 257-259.

3 November 1st, 1700.

4 Philip, Duke of Anjou, second son of the Dauphin.

5 Coxe, Life of Marlboro iifjh, vol. i. p. 109.

* Macaulay, vol. v. p. 246. Goldwin Smith, vol. ii. p. 122.

7 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 433.

8 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 248. • Burnet, vol. iv. p. 434.

JOHN SOMERS.

who was sent with orders to " sink, burn and destroy "
any pirates, finding himself in the command of a well-
appointed vessel, thought it would be more profitable to turn
pirate himself. He did so and after a few years ended his
career by execution for murder and piracy.10

The charge against Somers for having assisted this pirate1
was so outrageous that it was rejected by a large majority.
He was attacked a second time in connection with the
estates of Ireland.2 Unfortunately he was ill and unable
to be present at the debate, which his enemies immediately
put down to a want of courage.3 The Commons, ill-content
with their success, now sent a humble address to the King
begging " that His Majesty will remove John, Lord Somers,
Lord Chancellor of England, from his presence and councils
for ever."* (April, 1700.) The debate on this is lost, but
the result was a defeat of the motion by a majority of
167 to 106.4

The next day Parliament was prorogued ; but the Tories
were none the less eager for the dismissal of the Lord
Chancellor.5 First they tried to induce him to join their
party in a new ministry, but Somers rejected their overtures
by the simple answer, " This is neither my custom nor con-
sistent with my honour."6

William was well aware of his own unpopularity, and
also of that of his favourite minister.7 He began to think

10 Ho well, vol. xiv. p. 123 et seq. l Ranke, vol. v. p. 203.

2 A Bill was introduced to resume the grants of forfeited Irish estates,
which William had very lavishly distributed among his favourites. Being
once thrown out by the Lords, it was tacked to a Bill of Supply. The Court
still stoutly resisted, but it passed both Houses. See Burnet, vol. iv. p. 436
et seq.

3 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 439.

* Campbell, p. 148. Also Tindal, Continuation of Rapin, 4to ed. vol. i.
p. 401. 4 Ibid.

5 Mackintosh, History of England. Harley was particularly eager for his
dismissal. " The just reputation and high rank which he had justly acquired
were intolerable to Harley's envious heart." Birch's MSS. 4,223, Brit. Mus.

6 Cunningham, vol. i. 183.

" Stanhope, Queen Anne, vol. i. chap. i. (Tauchnitz ed.).

3

34 THE JUNTO.

that he must give in to the nation's wish to see Somers
removed from the Chancellorship. Wearied with the inces-
sant broils of faction he determined to try what an accom-
modation with the Tories would do,8 and consented to
remove Lord Somers from office. Summoning him to his
presence he told him that " it seemed necessary for his
service that he should part with the seals, and he wished
that he would make the delivering1 them up his own act."9
Somers declined to do this, thinking it would imply fear
and consciousness of guilt.10 He told the King, however,
that whenever His Majesty should send a warrant under his
hand, commanding him to deliver them up, he would
promptly obey it. Accordingly, on April 17, an order was
brought to him by the Earl of Jersey and the seal was sent
by him to the King1.1 In this manner Lord Somers was
removed from that post2 the duties of which he had for seven
years discharged with integrity and ability, though, perhaps,
not altogether as judicially as he might have done.

8 Stanhope, Queen Anne, vol. i. chap i. (Tauchnitz ed.).

9 Trevor, vol. ii. p. 389. Burnet, vol. iv. p. 444.

10 «T.he Whigs successively withdrew their situations ; Orford retired in
disgust in 1699, and Montagu quitted the Treasury in November, with the
promise of being called to the peerage. Somers was indignant at the
timidity of his colleagues and persisted in retaining the seats till he received
his formal dismission in May, 1700." Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. i.
p. 105 ; also Bel sham, History of Great Britain, vol. ii. p. 49.

1 Evelyn writes in his diary, April 24th, 1700: "The scale was taken
from the Lord Chancellor Somers, though he had been acquitted by a greate
majority of votes for what was charged against him in the House of Commons.
This being in term time put some stop to business, many eminent lawyers
refusing to accept the office, considering the uncertainty of things in this
fluctuating conjuncture. It is certain that this Chancellor was a most
excellent lawyer, very learned in all polite literature, a superior pen, master
of a handsome style, and of easy conversation, but he is said to make too
much haste to be rich, as his predecessor, and most in place in this age did,
to a most prodigious excesse that was ever known."

2 Thus the Lord Somers was discharged from this great office which he
had held for seven years, with a high reputation for capacity, integrity and
diligence ; he was in all respects the greatest man I had ever known in that
post." Burnet, vol. iv. p. 446. For Somers's dismissal see also Vernon,
Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 37 et seq. and Tinclal, Continuation of "Rapin,
4to ed, vol. i. p. 403 et seq.

JOHN SOMERS.

35

Somers's friends retired with him, and a new administra-
tion composed of moderate Tories, with Lords Rochester3
and Godolphin as its leading members, took their place.

The Whigs were highly indignant at the behaviour of
the King. But Somers was too great a man to cherish ill-
feeling towards his Sovereign. When he> had recovered his
health at Tunbridge Wells he retired to his villa, and once
more turned his mind to literary pursuits. He was not
sorry to bid farewell for awhile to the unrestful life of a
politician.

In November, 1698, he had been elected President of
the Royal Society,4 and he occupied the chair till 1704 when
he retired to give place to Newton. During his retirement
from public life his duties as President of this Society were
peculiarly grateful to him. An ardent lover of literature
and science he had as a Fellow long been in the habit of
frequenting the meetings. As President he regularly
attended, doing all in his power to further the reputation
and usefulness of the Society.

But Somers was not beyond reach of attack. The Tories
were not satisfied with his dismissal ; they still remembered
his part in the unpopular and disastrous Partition Treaties.
In 1701 a proposal was made in the Commons " to impeach
Lord Somers, late Chancellor of England, for the share he
had had in these treaties, and for other high crimes and
misdemeanours."5 While the debate touching his impeach-

3 Lawrence Hyde, Earl of Rochester, was the younger brother of Anne
Hyde, wife of James II. He had been made Lord Treasurer by James II.
(1681). In 1687 he was deprived of his office because he refused to become
Roman Catholic.

4 Weld, History of the Royal Society, vol. i. p. 338. Evelyn writes,
December 7th, 1698 : "Being one of the Council of the Royal Society I was
named to be one of the Committee to wait on our new President, the Lord
Chancellor." Also, November 30th, 1700: "At the Royal Society Somers,
the late Chancellor, was continued President."

5 This proceeding caused great excitement. Prior, still a Whig, wrote
to the Duke of Manchester : "I must congratulate your happiness that you
are out of this noise and tumult, where we are tearing and destroying every
man his neighbour. To-morrow is the great day when we expect my Lord
Chancellor will be fallen upon, though God knows what crime he is guilty of
but that of being a very great man and a wise and upright judge."

36 THE JUNTO.

ment was proceeding in the Commons, Somers, with his
usual fearlessness, sent a message down to the House in
which " having heard that the House was in a debate con-
cerning him he desired that he might be admitted and heard
in his own defence." This was granted and a chair was
set for him a little within the Bar. He addressed the
House in his usual calm and dignified manner.6 He
admitted7 " that the King had asked the advice of his con-
fidential servants upon this occasion ; and that His Majesty
had even informed him, that if he and his other ministers
thought that a treaty ought not to be made upon such a
project, that the whole matter must be let fall, for he could
not bring the French to better terms." He further told
the House " that when he received the King's letter from
Holland, with an order to send over the necessary powers,
he conceived that he should be assuming too much upon
himself if he caused any delay in the progress of so import-
ant a treaty, considering the precarious state of the health
of the King of Spain ; for if the Spanish King died before
the treaty was completed, he would not have been justified
in delaying the transmission of the powers, as the King's
letter amounted in fact to a warrant . . . that at all
events he did not think it became him to endanger the public
interest by insisting on a point of form, at a very critical
time, and when the greatest despatch was requisite; that,
nevertheless, he had written his own opinion very fully to
His Majesty, objecting to several particulars in the treaty,
and proposing other articles which he thought were for the
interest of England ; that he thought himself bound, by
the duty of his office, to put the Great Seal to the treaty
when it was concluded ; and that in the whole course of the

6 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 507.

7 For proceedings of impeachment in full see Howell, vol. xiv. p. 233 et
seq. For impeachment of Somers see Memoirs of Botingbroke, p. 76 ;
Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol i. p. 113 ; Luttrell, State Affairs, vol. v. p. 39
et seq. ; Burnet, vol. iv. p. 475 et seq. ; Tindal, Continuation of Rapin, 4to ed.
vol. i. p. 458 et seq.

JOHN SOMERS. 37

transaction, he had offered his best advice to his Sovereign
as a Privy Councillor, and as Chancellor had executed his
office according to his conception of his duty."8 After
having thus spoken, he withdrew. His defence, delivered
in his simple and earnest manner, is said to have made so
deep an impression that if the question had immediately
been put, the prosecution would have been withdrawn.9 Sir
llobert Walpole, then a very young member, took Somers's
part warmly and opposed the motion, but with his usual
tact he did not speak, fearing to weaken the ex-Chancellor's
arguments by a discussion. iu But Somers had other friends
who were less considerate, and the debate was carried on till
midnight.1 When the House divided a majority of ten out
of nearly 4002 present, voted that " John, Lord Somers, by
advising His Majesty in the year 1698 to the Treaty of
Partition of the Spanish monarchy, whereby large terri-
tories of the King of Spain's dominions were to be delivered
up to France, was guilty of a high crime and mis-
demeanour."3

Notwithstanding this vote, the zeal of the Commons
seemed to have cooled down. They passed a resolution of
censure, in the form of an address to the King " to remove
the Lords Somers, Orford, Portland, Halifax, from his pres-
ence and councils for ever;"4 but after that they seemed
indifferent as to the progress of the impeachment. Yiolent
and continuous disputes went on between the two Houses,
until finally the Lords named their own day for the trial,
sending word to the Commons that they would proceed
with the trial should the prosecutors appear or not.5 The
Commons, either offended by the way in which they had

8 Burnet, vol. iv. pp. 490-491.

9 Coxe, Life of Sir £. Walpole, vol. i. p. 22. J0 Ibid. ' Ibid. p. 23.
2 198 to 188. Stanhope, Queen Anne, chap. i. Ranke, vol. v. p. 255.

3 Ralph, History, vol. ii. p. 943, or Burnet, vol. iv. p. 492, note. Also
Somers's Tracts, vol. xi. p. 337.

4 Similar resolutions were passed against these lords as against Somers for
their share in the Partition Treaty.

6 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 516.

38 THE JUNTO.

been treated, or not displeased to have an excuse for letting
the matter, which appeared not over popular, drop, decided
not to attend on the day appointed.6 June 17, 1701, the
day of the trial, came. The Lord High Steward's Court
was convened with all due solemnity; the judges took their
seats, the a,udience thronged the Hall and the accused
answered to his name. No one appearing to prosecute,7
the Lords pronounced, by a majority of 56 to 31, " that
John, Lord Somers, be acquitted8 of the articles of impeach-
ment against him exhibited by the House of Commons and
all things therein contained, and that the said impeach-
ment be dismissed." Whatever may have been Somers's
misconduct in the affair of the treaties, his impeachment
was little more than an outbreak of party violence.9 The
Tories, by their foolish and impetuous behaviour made
themselves decidedly less popular. William came to see
what a mistake he had made in changing his ministry at
such a critical period. The promises of the Tories had come
to nothing; they had neither made it easier for him to
manage the unruly Commons nor had they tried to promote
peace abroad and quiet government at home ; they had sim-
ply pursued their own private interests.10 The whole of the
summer of the year 1701 the King spent in Holland. In
September he wrote home to the Earl of Sunderland1 ex-
pressing a desire to change his ministry. " He is undeter-.

6 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 516. 7 Ibid. p. 517.

8 Stanhope, vol. i. p. 30. Also Luttrell, vol. v. p. 62. Evelyn writes,
June 20th, 1701 : "The Commons demanded a conference with the Lords
on the trial of Lord Somers, which the Lords refused, and proceeding with
the trial, the Commons would not attend and he was acquitted. "

9 "I cannot help referring to my old opinion, which is now supported
with more weight than I ever expected ; and wonder that a man can be found
in England who has bread, that will be concerned in public business. Had I
a son I would sooner breed him a cobbler than a courtier, and a hangman
than a statesman." Duke of Shrewsbury to Lord Somers, June 17th, 1701.
Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 441.

10 The year when Rochester was at the head, William is reported to have
said, was the most stormy. See Burnet, vol. iv. p. 518. Cooke, Hist, of
Party, vol. i. p. 540.

1 For letter see Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 443. It is dated Sept. 1st.

JOHN SOMERS. 39

mined whether he shall call a new Parliament; the Tories
giving him great hopes, and making him great promises."
Sunderland's reply (dated September 11, 1701) gives a clear
account of the state of England. " The ministry grows
more hated every day and more exposed,"2 so his advice to
the King was to dismiss the Tories and once more rely on the
Whigs.

kk The Tories will not be satisfied without ruining my
Lord Somers, nor the Whigs without undoing the ministers ;
in which the latter think they have the whole nation on
their side. But at last what can the King do? He must
certainly do what may determine him to take his measures.
For example, let him come into England as soon as he can,
and immediately send for my Lord Somers. He is the life,
the soul and the spirit of his party, and can answer for it;
not like the present ministers, who have no credit with
theirs, any further than they can persuade the King to be
undone. When His Majesty speaks to my Lord Somers,
he ought to do it openly and freely ; and ask him plainly,
what he and his friends can do, and will do, and what they
expect, and the methods they would propose. By this the
King will come to make a judgment of his affairs, and he
may be sure that my Lord Somers will desire nothing for
himself or any of the impeached lords, but will take as
much care not to perplex the King's business as can be
desired ; and if he can do nothing His Majesty shall like,
he will remain still zealous and affectionate to his person
and government."3

Further correspondence went on between William,
Sunderland and Somers, with the object of undertaking a
change of ministry in favour of the Whigs. William wrote
to Lord Somers on October 10, 1701. 4 " J'ai charge Mr.

2 "The Whigs, though hated in power, became the favourites of the
nation when in disgrace ; the Tories excited general disgust. Coxe, Life
of Marlborough, vol. i. p. 130.

3 Hardwicke, voL ii. p. 446. 4 Hid. p. 452.

40 THE JUNTO.

Gallway de vous parler de ma part, avec beaucoup de
franchise. J'espere que vous ajouterez une entiere creance
a ce qu'il vous dira ; et que vous voudrez bien en user avec
la mesme franchise, sans aucune reserve, et estre persuade
de la continuation de mon amitie."

Lord Somers, after receiving this letter, drew up some
u heads of argument "5 in favour of a return to a Whig
administration and the immediate dissolution of the Parlia-
ment, which were later communicated to the King.

While these negotiations were proceeding, King James
II. died at St. Germains, and immediately after his death
his son was acknowledged by Louis as James III., King
of England.6 No better news could have reached England.
Once more his enemy had done for William what skill and
diplomacy could not effect. The whole nation burst into a
tiame of patriotism. The King's return to England was a
scene of general rejoicing. At Hampton Court most of the
ministers were assembled to congratulate William on his
safe return and the chiefs of the Whig party, though not
in power, were also there. It was noticeable that Somers
and Halifax, who had so recently been attacked by the
Commons, were received by the King with even more marks
of attention than he was in the habit of usually showing to
his courtiers. This alarmed the Tories, while it gave fresh
hope to the Whigs.7 William seized the moment of excite-
ment and dissolved Parliament.8 A general election followed.
Four Whig members were returned for London. In the
country the Whigs recovered part, at least, of the ground

5 Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 453.

6 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 294. Louis had acknowledged William as King of
England in the peace of Ryswick and pledged himself to oppose all attacks
on his throne, but in September, 1701, he entered the bedchamber at St.
Germains where James II. was breathing his last and promised to acknow-
ledge his son at his death as King of England, Scotland and Ireland. Green,
vol. iv. p. 76.

7 " The Whigs, lately vanquished, were full of hope and ardour. The
Tories, lately triumphant and secure, were exasperated and alarmed."
Macaulay, vol. v. pp. 300, 301.

8 November 10. Green, vol. iv. p. 76.

JOHN SOMERS.

41

which they had lost.9 Various changes were made in the
ministry to the disadvantage of the Tories.10 Lord Somers
did not become a member of the government,1 though he
was on the point of being restored to office.2 But there is
little doubt that he drew up William's last address3 to his
Parliament, which Burnet4 called " the best speech that he,
or perhaps any other prince ever made to his people." In
words of fire and eloquence he bade them drop their factious
disputes and know no other distinction but that of those who
were for the Protestant religion and the present Establish-
ment, and of those who meant a Popish Prince and a
French Government.5

Before the final formation of the Whig ministry was com-
pleted, the death of William on March 8, 1702, put an end
to the project. Just in the full excitement of victory,
just when he pictured himself about to carry out the dream
of his life by leading a victorious army to the invasion of
France,6 a fall from his horse broke his collar bone, and, in
his shattered state of health, proved fatal.7 His death
meant farewell to the hopes of the Whigs. The sympathies

9 Wharton regained his ascendency in Buckinghamshire. Macaulay,
vol. v. p. 303.

10 Godolphin left the Treasury to make room for Lord Carlisle. Man-
chester was made Secretary instead of Hedges.

1 "Lord Somers, by whose advice William had been principally guided,
was sensible of the critical state of affairs, and not only declined to accept an
office but induced the chief members of his party to withdraw their pretensions
and give a disinterested support to government. " Coxe, Life of Marlborough,
vol. i. p. 137.

- Ralph says the Seals were offered to him again. See Lives of Eminent
Persons, tit. Somers, p. 15.

3 Hardwicke saw it in draft in Somers's handwriting at the fire at
Lincoln's Inn in 1752. See also Stanhope, vol. i. p. 35, and Coxe, ut tupra,
vol. i. p. 137.

4 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 546.

5 " The issue Louis had raised was no longer a matter of European politics,
but a question whether the work of the Revolution should be undone and
whether Catholicism and despotism should be replaced on the throne of
England by the arms of France." Green, vol. iv. p. 76.

6 The Tories were as much for war as the Whigs. Green, p. 77.

7 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 309.

42 THE JUNTO.

of the new Sovereign were entirely with the Tories. Anne
had been brought up from childhood to regard the Whigs
as Republicans at heart and enemies of the Church. She
had therefore always had a strong dislike for them and had
looked upon them as her enemies, for, of all the passions of
her nature, the strongest and deepest was her attachment
to the English Church.8

It was soon obvious which party was to be the favourite
with the Queen. Six days after William's death Marl-
borough was made a Knight of the Garter and Captain
General of the forces.9 Godolphin, Marlborough's son-in-
law, became Lord of the Treasury.10 The Earl of Notting-
ham1 and Sir Charles Hedges2 were made Secretaries of
State in the place of the Duke of Manchester and Yernon.
The Marquess of Normanby was appointed Lord Privy
Seal and soon after created Duke of Buckingham.3 The
Great Seal was put into commission.4 Somers, Halifax and
Orford were omitted from the Privy Council.5 The triumph
of the Tories was complete,6 though in the peculiar position
of being bound to carry out the Whig policy — the policy of

8Lecky, vol. i. p. 31. "The Queen had from her infancy imbibed the
most unconquerable prejudices against the Whigs. She had been taught to
look upon them all, not only as Republicans, who hated the very shadow of
regal authority, but as implacable enemies to the Church of England."
Marlborough's Conduct, p. 123.

9 Lecky, vol. i. p. 32.

10 Ibid. Marlborough would, therefore, have supreme control of the
finances.

1 " Of all statesmen most dear to the High Church party." Lecky, vol. i.
p. 32.

2 " The Tories would trust none but the Earl of Nottingham, and he
would serve with none but Sir Charles Hedges." Tindal, 4to ed. vol. i.
p. 545.

3 Lecky, vol. i. p. 33.

4 The Great Seal, after it was taken from Lord Somers, was offered to Sir
Thomas Trevor and Chief Justice Holt, both of whom refused. " For no one
thought himself worthy to succeed Somers in his high office." Cunningham,
History, vol. i. p. 183.

5 Lecky, vol. i. p. 33. Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. i. p. 147.

6 " The Tories were double the number of Whigs in the House." Burnet,
vol. iv. p. 45. On the accession of Anne they were content to follow in the
wake of Marlborough and Godolphin." Stanhope, Queen Anne, vol. i. p. 92.

JOHN SOMERS.

43

war with France — which Marlborough had the strongest
personal motives for promoting.7 Of the Whigs, Somers
seemed particularly disliked by the Queen.8 He had been
the friend and adviser of her late brother-in-law, of whom
she had no very pleasant recollections, and she suspected him
of having been against her in her wish to be a member of
the Council of Regency and to have a separate establish-
ment as next heir to the throne.9 Being so little a favourite
at the new Court, Lord Somers withdrew from public life,
and spent much of his time at his seat in Hertfordshire in
the study of histoTy, antiquities and -polite literature. He
had, when he was made Lord Chancellor, become the patron
of Addison, enabling him to complete his education abroad
and procuring for him a pension of £300. Perhaps the
slight which he felt most from the new Sovereign was the
order that this sum should be discontinued.10 Somers,
however, remained the poor poet's friend ; he introduced
him into the Whig Kit-Cat Club,11 of which he himself was
one of the original members, and visited him in his poor
dwelling in the Hay market.

Though banished from the Court, Somers did all in his
power to support and further his principles of liberty. He
attended the House of Lords regularly, his name being

7 W. F. Lord, Political Parties in Reign of Queen Anne, p. 76. Lecky,
vol. i. p. 33.

8 His name was even struck out of the Commission of Peace in every
county. Vernon, Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 257. "This aversion to the
whole party had been confirmed by the ill-usage she had met with from her
sister and King William. Tories had served Anne in the affair of her settle-
ment, so it was natural that Tories were in favour." Marlborough's
Conduct, p. 123.

9 Campbell, p. 173. "Ibid. p. 174.

11 This club is said to have been founded by a bookseller, Jacob Tonson.
It derived its name from meeting at the house of Christopher Cat, close by
Temple Bar, famous for his mutton pies : —

" Immortal made as Kit-Cat by his pies,"
and

" Hence did th' assembly's title first arise,

And Kit-Cat wits sprung first from Kit-Cat pies."

Other accounts state that "Cat" was not the surname of the master, but
was taken from the sign of his house, " The Cat and Fiddle."

44 THE JUNTO.

rarely absent from the list of those present in their places.2
He took a leading part in the debates on the Bill against
Occasional Conformity3 which took place in the first Parlia-
ment of Queen Anne. By the introduction of this famous
Bill the Tories were working for their own ruin. If they
thought thereby to extinguish the influence of the Whigs
they were doubly mistaken.* The Bill had precisely the
opposite effect ; it gave the Whigs4 a ground of contention,
which otherwise it would have been difficult for them to
create.5

The Test Acts prevented anyone from holding office
under the Crown or from being a member of a Corporation
who had not taken the Sacrament according to the rites of
the Church of England. It had, therefore, come to be the
practice that many who were really Dissenters qualified
themselves for office by obeying the Act and then returning
to their own places of worship. These, the Occasional Con-
formists, were highly obnoxious to the Tories and High
Church party, who by this Bill hoped to exclude such people
altogether.6 The Bill quickly passed the Commons by a
considerable majority, but it met with sturdy opposition in
the Lords.7 In 1702, when it was first introduced, it was
supported by all the weight of the Crown and even Prince
George, the Queen's Consort, a Lutheran and Occasional
Conformist himself, was persuaded to vote for the Bill.8
In consequence of this opposition from the Whigs, various

2 Campbell, p. 174, and note.

3 Burnet, vol. v. p. 49 et seq. See also Tindal, vol. i.

* Somerville, Queen Anne, p. 25.

4 Burnet says the terms "High Church" and "Low Church" came into
use at this time of division among the Church parties. See Own Times, vol.
v. p. 70.

* Lord, p. 76. 6 Ibid. p. 79.

7 Lecky, vol. i. p. 36. Lord, p. 79. See Cobbett, Parliamentary History >
vol. vi. p. 61 et seq. Burnet writes : ' ' The Court put their whole strength to
carry the Bill."

8 " My heart is vid you," he is said to have whispered to Wharton in the
lobby. Oldmixon, p. 219, quoted in Burnet, vol. v. p. 109, note.

JOHN SOMERS. 45

alterations were made to which, the Commons objected.
A free conference was demanded, in which Lord Somers8
was one of the managers for the Lords. He strongly
supported the amendments. In 1703, when it was brought
forward again, the support of the Crown was only luke-
warm,9 owing to the influence of Maryborough and his
wife.10 Marlborough and Godolphin were beginning more
and more to rely on the Whigs. They had seen how offen-
sive the Bill was to that party, and they were reluctant to
take any steps which were distasteful to it, for it had con-
tributed most to the war, which it was their own ambition to
conduct. Therefore, without separating themselves from
their party, they did all they could to dissuade them from
bringing the Bill in again, but failed. It was again
defeated in the Lords. When brought up a third time in
the following session1 the Court was wholly opposed to the
Bill. Some Tories had proposed to "tack" it to the Bill
of Supply,2 so that if the Lords threw it out they would have
the responsibility of cutting off the supplies of the Govern-
ment.3 This was a false move which only damaged the
party.4 In the Lords, Marlborough and Godolphin voted
against it. The Whigs obtained a majority and the Occa-
sional Conformist Bill was dropped. But it had done its
work for the Whigs.5 Changes in the ministry took place
almost immediately. Finding himself thwarted by the
extreme High Tories, who would not support him in his war
policy, Marlborough obtained their dismissal. Harley took
Nottingham's place. The Tory Lord Chamberlain, the Earl

8 Memoirs of Lord Bolingbrolce, p. 99.

9 Lecky, vol. i. p. 37. Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 153 et seq.

10 Lord, ut supra, -p. 79. Also Stanhope, vol. i. p. 123.
1 Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 359 et seq. 2 Ibid.

3 Lecky, vol. i. p. 37. Lord, ut supra, p. 79.

* "This attempt destroyed their reputation as respecters of the Consti-
tution." Lord, p. 81.

5 Popularity of the Tories diminished. Cooke, vol. i. p. 552.

46 THE JUNTO.

of Jersey, was succeeded by a Whig, the Earl of Kent,
and St. John was admitted to the ministry for the first
time.6

Marlborough grew more and more disgusted with his
party,7 and sought to come to good terms with the Whigs.
The war must be continued and without their support he
could not manage it. Consequently the Junto gained an in-
crease of power. The elections of 1705 went in many cases
against the Tories, with the result of a large majority for
the Whigs.8 Marlborough and Godolphin, seeing it was all
so much in the Whigs' favour, were eager to make a further
conciliation with them.9 The first object of the Junto, at
that time, was to procure an office for Lord Sunderland, who
was one of their staunchest members. The Duchess of
Marlborough eagerly supported his promotion ; 10 Godolphin
and Marlborough gave in and Sunderland was appointed
Envoy to Vienna1 on the occasion of Joseph's accession to
the throne. Other changes in the ministry took place. The
Duke of Newcastle became Lord Privy Seal instead of the
Duke of Buckingham,2 who had resigned. Walpole entered
the Admiralty,3 his first office, and the Great Seal was taken

G Lecky, vol. i. p. 38.

: He was attacked by pamphleteers. The Queen raised him two steps in
the peerage, but the Tory Commons refused a grant to accompany the duke-
dom. Lord, ut supra, p. 81.

8 Stanhope, vol. i. pp. 199, 229.

9 "It was indeed to the Whigs that Marlborough and Godolphin were by
slow degrees inclining. They had been in some negotiation more or less
direct, through the winter, with the knot of five Whig peers, the Junto as it
was commonly called, which governed the Whig party at that time." Stan-
hope, vol. i. p. 197. The ministry of Marlborough and Godolphin in 1705
lasted till 1710, and was one of the most glorious in English history. Lecky,
vol. i. p. 39.

10 Sunderland had married her daughter.

1 " Marlborough, when the elections of 1705, as he hoped, returned a
majority in favour of the war, brought about a coalition between the
moderate Tories, who still clung to him, and the Whig Junto, whose support
was purchased by making a Whig, William Cowper, Lord Keeper, and by
sending Lord Sunderland as envoy to Vienna. " Green, vol. iv. p. 89.

2 Formerly Marquis of Normanby.

8 " He was appointed one of the Council to the Lord High Admiral, at the
special recommendation of Marlborough." Stanhope, vol. i. p. 198.

JOHN SOMERS. 47

from Nathan Wright4 and given into the charge of the
able Whig, Lord Cowper.5

During these unquiet years Somers, though out of office,
had been supporting the Government and doing his best
to bring his party back to power. He cordially favoured the
appointment of Cowper, although a man so much his
junior. In 1705 he was once more restored to the post of
Commissioner of the Peace, and sworn of the Privy Council.6
Though not a member of the Cabinet, he was, neverthe-
less, consulted on all questions of administration.7 In the
preceding* year he had been largely responsible for the
project of appropriating the revenue of first fruits and
tenths8 to the increase of the incomes of the poorer clergy.
Bishop Burnet had long endeavoured to increase their in-
comes in this way, and the following letter,9 from Lord
Somers, proves him to have been an enthusiastic and dis-
interested supporter of the scheme : —

November 22, 1701.

MY LORD, — I acknowledge the honour of your lordship's letter of the
17th with much thankfulness ; I wish it may lie in my power to contribute
to the excellent design you propose ; no man will enter into it more willingly,
nor shall labour in it more heartily. The point of the first-fruits and tenths
is what I have proposed several times, with much earnestness but without
success. When I have the happiness of seeing your lordship, we shall, I hope,
discourse at large upon the whole subject. In the meantime allow me to
assure you that I am, with great and sincere respect, my Lord, your Lordship's
most obedient humble servant, — SOMERS.

4 Who had been Lord Keeper in the Tory Cabinet of 1701. An incom-
petent lawyer. "The proved incompetency of Sir Nathan and the rising
genius of Cowper made this a welcome change, independently of its party
motive." Stanhope, vol. i. p. 229. Also Lecky, vol. i. p. 38.

5 Cowper, William, first earl, a brilliant man. Lecky, vol. i. p. 38. "In
their negotiations with the Junto Marlborough and Godolphin had been drawn
into a promise to take an opportunity of dismissing Nathan Wright from the
office of Lord Keeper and transferring the Great Seal to William Cowper,
who was endeared to the Whig chiefs by eminent qualities no less than by
party ties." Stanhope, vol. i. p. 198.

6 In 1704 Somers had written to Shrewsbury : "I find that in any reign,
and with any success, there will be little cause to envy any one who has a
share of the ministry of England." Quoted in Mahon, vol. i. p. 52.

7 Campbell, ut supra, p. 186.

8 Afterwards adopted under the name of " Queen Anne's Bounty."

9 Burnet, vol. vi. p. 318. Tindal, vol. i. p. 642.

48 THE JUNTO.

All the changes in the elections of 1705 in favour of the
Whigs caused the Queen the deepest grief.10 Instead, how-
ever, of trying to reconcile her, the Tories brought forward
the motion for an address to the Queen11 begging her to
invite the Princess Sophia, the presumptive heir to the
throne, to reside in England. Of all things this was the
most distasteful to Anne, who hated the idea of having a rival
Court in her country. The Whigs, among them Lord
Somers, saw the difficulties this would entail, and he and
his colleagues saved the Queen1 and themselves from these
dangers. Somers induced her to consent to the Regency
Bill, by which a Commission of Lord Justices2 should be
empowered, on the Queen's death, to assume the administra-
tion of government in the name of the absent successor. It
was passed.3 The Electorate party were fully reconciled by
another Bill which naturalized the Princess Sophia and her
issue. Somers wrote to the Elector, afterwards George I.,
to tell him what had taken place and to assure him of his
zeal in securing the Protestant succession. The reply from
his Electoral Highness shows the esteem he had for Somers,
and gives much encouragement to the hopes of the Whigs
for the new reign : —

'• Her ideal was a government in which neither Whigs nor Tories possessed
a complete ascendency, but above all things she dreaded and hated a
supremacy of the Whigs. She had the strongest conviction that they were
the enemies of her prerogative and still more the enemies of the Church.
Lecky, vol. i. p. 43.

11 Lecky, vol. i. p. 38.

1 The Queen was present at the debate, but only to hear herself insulted.
" The Duke of Buckingham urged it as an argument for inviting the Princess
Sophia, who was now in the 76th year of her age, that the Queen might live
till she did not know what she did, and be like a child in the hands of
others." Marlborough's Conduct, p. 159.

2 The Lord Justices were to be : Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Chan-
cellor, Lord Keeper, Lord Treasurer, Lord President, Lord Privy Seal, Lord
High Admiral and the Chief Justice of the Queen's Bench. Lecky, vol. i.
p. 39.

* For debate concerning Regency Bill see Cobbett, Parl. History, vol. vi.
p. 469 et seq.

JOHN SOMERS. 49

June 20, 1706.

MY LORD, — The Lord Halifax delivered to me the letter which you was at
the trouble of writing to me. I am much obliged to you for the light it gives
concerning the affairs of England, but especially for the part which you have
had in all that has been done there in favour of my family. The testimony
of my Lord Halifax was not necessary to inform me of this. He could give
you no other in this respect, but that which is due to you by all good
Englishmen who love their religion and their country. I am not ignorant of
what influence you may have amongst them, nor of the manner in which you
have employed it. Nothing can give me a better opinion of the English
nation than the justice they do your merit. My sentiments concerning the
invitation of the successor are entirely conformed to yours, and I put all the
value I ought upon the acts which the Lord Halifax brought us. He has
convinced us of their importance, and hath discharged his commission as a
man equally zealous for the prosperity of England, and for the interests of
my family. I shall always look for opportunities of showing you how much
I am, etc.*

Thus once more the Tory tactics had proved a total
failure. Instead of embroiling their rivals with the Queen
or the Electress, they had offended Anno by the disrespectful
way in which some of the Tory lords had spoken of her.
From this time, according to the Duchess of Marlborough,
she began to express a wish to become reconciled with the
Whig leaders.4 Having failed so completely in this, the
Tories fell back on their last resource : the cry of " the
Church in danger" was raised. A debate followed,5 Her
Majesty being present, which Lord Rochester opened and
Lord Somers closed. But this also went against the Tories.6
It was resolved that " under the happy reign of Her Majesty
the Church was in a most safe and flourishing condition."7
The Queen published a Proclamation declaring that with
the advice of her Privy Council she would " proceed with the
utmost severity the law would allow of against the authors
and spreaders of the said seditious and scandalous reports."8

* Campbell, p. 191.

4 Memoirs of Duchess of Marlborough, vol. ii. p. 56.

5 For debate see Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 479 et seq.

6 61 to 30 votes. Stanhope, vol. i. p. 234.

7 For debate see Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 479 et seq.

8 Lecky, vol. i. p. 39. Parl. History, p. 510.

50 THE JUNTO.

Although in a weak state of health,9 Somers gave all his
thought and energy to the great work of the Union of Scot-
land.10

William had recommended his Parliament to proceed
with the measure; his successor, in her first speech, had
strongly urged her Parliament to give their minds to it, and
accordingly Commissioners had been appointed to conduct
the treaty.1 In March, 1705, an Act had been passed with
the title, " An Act for the effectual securing of the Kingdom
of England from the apparent dangers that may arise from
several Acts lately passed in the Parliament of Scotland."2
By one of the provisions of this Act the Queen was author-
ized to appoint Commissioners for England to treat with
those of Scotland. She accordingly appointed those whom
she thought suitable to manage the affair. Somers3 was
among the selected ; and, in fact, he became the leading
spirit in the negotiation.4 Its success was largely due to
his sagacity.5 When the question of the abolition of the
Scottish Privy Council came to be discussed, Somers opposed
the existence of a separate administration. It is interesting
to look at his arguments in favour of a total union, which
are preserved in the Hardwicke collection of papers.6 His

9 In the year 1706.

10 Burnet says he had the chief hand in projecting the scheme. This
cannot be wholly the case, for it had already been many times proposed since
the Stuarts came to the throne. It was largely owing to him, though, that
it was successfully carried through. See Burnet, vol. v. p. 281.

1 Stanhope, vol. i. p. 238. " 3 and 4 Anne, cap. vii.

* Biog. Brit. tit. Somers, p. 3752. For full list of Commissioners see
Cobbett, vol. vi. pp. 534, 535. For debate in Lords concerning Union see
ibid. p. 561 et seq.

* "His ctear and pervading genius proved to be the master spirit of the
whole." Stanhope, vol. i. p. 238.

5 " The need of a union became apparent to every statesman, but it was
only after three years' delay that the wisdom and resolution of Lord Somers
brought the question to an issue." Green, vol. iv. p. 91.

* " True concern for preserving the public peace— Heartily desirous of
the Union — No less desirous to make it entire and complete— Not at all
perfect while two political administrations subsist . . . —Worse State after
the Union, if a distinct administration continue. . . . — I wish North Britain
as happy as England; I meant it should be so in the Union, and I will

JOHN SOMERS. 51

one desire was to make it entire and complete,7 and so
enthusiastic was he8 that he corresponded with the ministers
and leaders of party in Scotland, which largely helped to
reconcile them to the change.9 The Act of Union, as it was
completed in 1706, though not finally passed till the fol-
lowing year, provided that the two kingdoms should be
united into one under the name of Great Britain and that
the succession to the Crown of this United Kingdom
should be ruled by the provisions of the English Act of
Settlement. The Scotch law and the Scotch Church were
left unaltered, but all rights of trade were opened to both
countries, a common system of taxation was adopted and a
uniform system of coinage. This lasting benefit to the two
kingdoms will always reflect credit on the name of Somers.
Till the end of 1708 Lord Somers remained in the same
position, without office, but consulted on all occasions by
the ministers, and putting all his energies into any measure
that he thought was for the good of his country. At the same
time he was seeking* to restore the power of his party, and
he watched with eminent satisfaction the success of the
Whig policy.

Marlborough and Godolphin were now almost entirely
with the Junto, and were eagerly working for more influ-
ence and power. The only hindrance in the Cabinet was
Harley. They determined to remove him ; if he were gone
the strength of the Tories would be broken. They tried to

always do what lies in my little power that it shall be really so. - Not
capable of judging of the circumstances or dispositions of Scotland; but I
should think the true way to make the Union well relished, is to let the
country see plainly, that England means no otherwise than fairly by them,
and desires they should be in the same circumstances they are themselves,
etc." Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 473.

7 The Bill for rendering the Union more complete, by subjecting the
affairs of both nations to one Privy Council, was carried in the Lords by a
majority of 5 votes. Somerville, 4to, p. 298.

8 "Lord Somers exerted himself with uncommon ardour and diligence in
promoting a measure so essential to the liberty of Scotland." Ibid.

8 Letters to Lord Leveu, then Commander-in-Chief in Scotland, given in
Campbell, p. 192 et seq.

52 THE JUNTO.

persuade Anne to dismiss him.10 She remained firm;
Harley was a zealous High Churchman, whom she trusted1
and esteemed, and she would not part with him.
Godolphin and Marlborough, therefore, threatened to resign.2
Godplphin the Queen would have allowed to resign but she
could not possibly dispense with Marlborough.3 There was
no choice left her, so Harley was dismissed.4 At the same
time retired his friends, who had come in with him, St.
John, Secretary at War, Sir Thomas Mansell, Comptroller
of the Household, and Sir Simon Harcourt, Attorney-
General.5 But the ambition of the Whigs was by no means
satisfied with these dismissals.6 They pressed for the ap-
pointment of Somers to the Presidency of the Council. This
much distressed the Queen, who in a letter to Marlborough
" declared that it would be utter destruction to her to bring
Lord Somers into her service and was what she would never
consent to."

In the autumn of 17088 the death of Prince George of
Denmark changed the conditions. The Prince, for reasons
unknown,9 seemed to have taken even a stronger dislike to

10 " Somers had resolved never to take office while Harley continued
in the administration." Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. iv. p. 53. Also
Stanhope, vol. ii. p. 50.

1 The trial and sentence of guilt pronounced on Greg, Harley 's con-
fidential clerk, made Harley much distrusted by others. Greg had been
employed by Harley as a spy in Scotland and elsewhere, and had been
found conducting a treasonable correspondence with M. de Chamillart, the
French Secretary of State. Somers was one of the committee to try him ;
he was found guilty and condemned to death. He would not accuse his
chief, so died. Stanhope, vol. ii. pp. 54-56. For the circumstances in
relation to Greg, see W. F. Lord, p. 100 et seq.

2 Lord, p. 85.

3 Ibid. For fall of Harley, its cause and reason, see W. F. Lord,
p. 100 et seq.

4 Swift, Change in Queen's Ministry, ed. 1883, vol. iii. p. 171 (on
February llth).

5 Somerville, p. 270. Also Cunningham, vol. ii. p. 133.

6 "The Whig lords were determined to force themselves into power."
Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. iv. p. 317- Also Stanhope, vol. ii. p. 90.

8 October 28th, 1708.

9 This antipathy might possibly be traced to two causes (see Lecky,
vol. i. p. 43) :—

1. The Whigs, and Somers at the head of them, had continually been
pointing to the maladministration of the Prince at the head of the Admiralty,
and had incessantly urged putting Orford in his place.

JOHN SOMERS. 53

Somers than the Queen.10 As a result of their combined
prejudice Somers had been strenuously kept out of office.1
Although totally incompetent, Prince George had been Lord
High Admiral. At his death the Earl of Pembroke suc-
ceeded him, thereby vacating the office of Lord President
of the Council, which was given to Somers,2 although the
Queen was still very much against having him in the
administration. The triumph of th.e Whigs now seemed
complete.3 All the highest offices of the Crown were filled

2. In 1703 a bill was brought forward to enable the Queen to settle a
revenue upon the Prince, in case he should survive her, and it was also
proposed to add a clause exempting him from the condition (in the Act of
Succession) that no foreigners might sit in Parliament, the Privy Council, or
hold any high offices of the Crown. It was carried, but Somers, who had
taken an active part in the debate, with several other Whigs signed a
protest against the decision of the House. See Lords' Journals, Jan. 19th,
1702-1703.

10 Coxe, id supra, vol. iv. p. 314.

1 Vanburgh writes to the Earl of Manchester, July 27th, 1708 : " Things
are in an odd way at Court ; not all the interests of Lord Treasurer (?)
and Lady Marlborough, backed and pressed warmly by every man of the
Cabinet, can prevail with the Queen to admit my lord Somers into anything,
not so much as to make him Attorney General. She answered little to
them, but stands firm against all they say." Manchester, Court and Society
from Elizabeth to Anne, vol. ii. p. 376.

- Burnet writes on the appointment of Lord Somers (Own Times,
vol. v. p. 393): "The great capacity and inflexible integrity of this lord,
would have made his promotion to this post very acceptable to the Whigs at
any juncture, but it was most particularly so at this time ; for it was
expected, that propositions for a general peace would be quickly made ; and
so they reckoned that the management of that, upon which not only the
safety of the nation, but of all Europe depended, was in sure hands when he
was set at the head of the Councils, upon whom neither ill practices nor false
colours were like to make any impression."

Somers writes to the Duke of Marlborough, Nov. 30th, 1709 : " I do
not pretend to acquaint your Grace with the honour the Queen has been
pleased to do me, in admitting me into her service, but rather to return my
humble thanks to you on that account, since I am well assured, without
your Grace's concurrence, nothing of that nature had been done. I hope
your Grace will believe, that according to my poor capacity, I will serve
Her Majesty diligently and faithfully and that I shall always be with the
utmost truth and respect, etc. Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. iv. p. 320.
See also Luttrell, State Affairs, vol. vi. p. 373.

1708. Somers kissed the Queen's hand as President of the Council.
Nov. 27. Somers took his place as President. Also Swift, edition by
Sir Walter Scott, vol. iii. p. 182.

3 Orford had taken Pembroke's place at the Admiralty after his resigna-
tion. Lecky, vol. i. p. 42. " The Whig Ministry, one of the most glorious
in our annals." Cooke, vol. i. p. 564.

54 THE JUNTO.

by members of the Junto. The Queen, although she never
really overcame her dislike for Lord Somers, was content to
retain him in her councils, although she came into fre-
quent contact with him ; on all which occasions he behaved
with his usual polished and deferential manners. She con-
tinued, however, to have secret meetings with her favourite
Harley,4 who, according to the Duchess of Marlborough,
advised her to treat Somers as if he were her favourite
minister. She writes : 5 "I remember to have been at
several of Lord Somers's conversations with Queen Anne to
fill out their tea6 and wash their cups. 'Tis certain that as
soon as he got into his post, to obtain which I so often
urged the Queen, he made his court to Abigail, and very
seldom came to me ; and it is true that Lord Oxford and
_ St. John used to laugh in their cups (which came out by
Duke Devonshire), that they had instructed the Queen to
behave so as to make Lord Somers think he should be her
chief minister. She could act a part very well when her
lesson was given her, and in a little time it appeared very
plain to the Duke of Marlborough and Lord Godolphin, that
Somers thought of nothing so much as to flatter the Queen
and went to her personally in private."

Somers had made himself odious to the Duke and
Duchess of Marlborough by advising7 Lord Chancellor
Cowper to refuse to put the Great Seal to the Commission
appointing the Duke Commander-in-Chief for life,8 which

1 Campbell, p. 203. 5 Correspondence of Duchess.

6 Pope, in the Rape of the Lock, says : —

"Where thou, great Anne, whom three realms obey,
Dost sometimes counsel take, and sometimes tea."

7 Even Somers thought Marlborough had power enough. " Lord Somers,
who had no mind to be his Grace's subject, acquainted the Queen with it
(viz., Maryborough's scheme to have it proposed in the Commons) and the
danger she ran, if it succeeded. Which put an effectual stop, and gave the
Queen a grateful sense of Lord Somers's fidelity and integrity ever after."
Note by Dartmouth, Burnet, ed. 1833, vol. i. p. 416, note e.

8 "It is possible and by no means improbable that his motive was
mainly to secure himself from disgrace and to disentangle himself from
party politics." Lecky, vol. i. p. 49.

JOHN SOMERS. 55

act of the Duke's had seriously alarmed the Queen.9 In
spite of the foolish and tactless behaviour of the Tories,
Anne was indignant at the Whigs grasping the whole power
of the State.10 But their monopoly of power1 was to be
only a short one ; almost exactly at the time when they had
filled the Cabinet with their leaders, the causes which led
to their ruin began to work. The alienation of the Duchess
from the Queen was almost complete.

The war was wholly unpopular and hateful to the coun-
try ; but the Whigs were forced to continue it for purely
party reasons.2 This gave the Tories a cry which was
welcome to the nation, the cry for peace.3

The love of power took a stronger hold on the Whig
leaders; their actions came more and more to be directed
merely to their own personal interests; the interests of
the State took a second place.

Their unpopularity reached its height in 1710 with the
trial of Sacheverell, on which occasion they showed them-
selves overbearing and indiscreet.

A certain Dr. Sacheverell,4 a strong upholder of the
doctrine of non-resistance, preached in London two
sermons,5 in which he attacked the Revolution, maintaining

" " It contributed much to the unpopularity of the Whigs." Lecky, vol. i.
p. 50. Also Lord, ut supra, p. 86.

10 Coxe, Life of Marlborouyh, vol. v. p. 103.

1 Maryborough and Godolphin were principally directed by Somers.
Ibid. vol. iv. p. 371.

• Lord, p. 87. ' Ibid.

4 " He was an eloquent preacher, and his fame as a pulpit orator drew him
to the metropolitan flock of St. Saviour's in South wark. He left no testimony
to his capacity as an author save sermons printed after delivery and casual
pamphlets. These are far above the level of the contemporary literature of
that class, both in their good English composition and their good taste."
His career later in life showed him in a very different light. "But in fact
his career was none of his own making ; it was a creation of imperious
political forces. ... A certain personal quality, not of an exalted kind, made
him master of the situation when he found himself in it. That quality was
vanity. In him this passion was obsorbing and supreme," etc. For further
characteristics of Sacheverell see Burton, Reign of Queen Anne, vol. ii. p. 179
et seq. For full account of the impeachment see Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 805 et seq.

5 The famous "Gunpowder Treason Sermons," because the second was
preached on November 5th, 1709 (see Burton, vol. ii. p. 180). The first was
preached at the Assizes of Derby, the second in London. For the sermons
see Burton, vol. ii. p. 193 et seq. ; and in full, State Trials, vol. xv. pp. 71-94.

56 THE JUNTO.

that resistance to the King was never justifiable, and declar-
ing that the Church was in danger " even in Her Majesty's
reign/' The Whigs were naturally angry at this semi-
official production of doctrines subversive to the principles
of the Revolution.6 The matter was brought before the
Cabinet, when its wisest members,7 such as Somers, were in
favour of letting the sermon alone. Others, however, and
most strongly of all, Godolphin, who was indignant at being
nicknamed " Volpone "9 or the " Fox," urged impeach-
ment1 before the House of Lords.2 Somers and Marl-
borough, only too well aware of the unstable condition of
the Whig party, were strongly opposed3 to an impeach-
ment, but their arguments were in vain. A storm of pas-
sion burst on the Whigs. The trial became a pure party
struggle.4 It lasted three weeks. Lord Somers attended
daily, but he does not appear to have taken much active
part until the Lords came to consider the verdict. When it
was debated whether or no a question should be put on each
of the four articles of the impeachment, Somers strongly
supported the proposal, which was adopted, that there should

6 The dedication to it pointed to the Dissenters as sinners and to the
Whigs who gave the Dissenters countenance and support as the communicators
and propagators of sin. Ibid. p. 198.

7 " Somers and Eyre, the Solicitor-General, from the beginning opposed
the impeachment, and there is reason to believe that both Marlborough and
Walpole joined in the same views." Lecky, vol. i. p. 53.

9 " Volpone " was a character in the Fox of Ben Jonson.

1 Swift says: "About this time happened the famous trial of Dr.
Sacheverel, which arose from a foolish passionate pique of the Earl of
Godolphin, whom this divine was supposed, in a sermon, to have reflected
on under the name of Volpone, as my Lord Somers, a few months after,
confessed to me ; and at the same time, that he had earnestly, and in vain,
endeavoured to dissuade the earl from that attempt." Change in Queen's
Ministry, ed. 1883, vol. iii. pp. 173, 174.

2 Burton, vol. ii. p. 199.

3 " Somers and Marlborough strongly counselled a prosecution before the
ordinary tribunals, to avoid making the culprit a martyr." Alison, Life of
Marlborough, vol. ii. p. 75. Also Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. v. p. 123.

4 Sacheverell himself said : "It has been owned by some of the managers
for the honourable House of Commons, that though I am the person im-
peached, yet my condemnation is not the thing principally aimed at. I am,
it seems, an insignificant tool of a party, not worth regarding," etc. He was
pretty near the truth. Burton, vol. ii. p. 213.

JOHtf SOMERS.

57

be but one question : " Is Henry Saclieverell, Doctor of
Divinity, guilty of high crimes and misdemeanours, charged
on him by impeachment of the House of Commons ? "5
Though Somers gave his vote against Sacheverell, Swift
declares that he heard him profess that his opinion was
against this foolish and violent prosecution, and that he
foresaw it would end in the ruin of his party.6 Dr.
Sacheverell was declared " guilty," and as Somers predicted,
with the declaration of the verdict the Lord Chancellor was
pronouncing the doom of the Whigs.7 Though found
guilty, the slight sentence8 of three years' suspension was
regarded as a virtual acquittal and celebrated as a party
triumph. Sacheverell became the hero of the nation. The
Queen9 was utterly disgusted with the violence of the Whigs
and only waited for a favourable opportunity to dissolve
Parliament and free herself from the party which had always
been so obnoxious to her.1 Marlborough still looked to the
Whigs for support, but they, knowing that his union with
them had simply been forced on him by the war, did nothing
in his defence. The Queen broke with the Duchess alto-
gether2 and transferred her friendship to Mrs. Masham,3 a

'"Impeachment of Sacheverell which shattered the Whig Ministry."
Lecky, vol. i. p. 51.

6 Swift, History of the Four Last Years of the Queen, works ed. 1883,
vol. v. p. 25.

7 " It was, perhaps, the most potent of several causes to drive their party
from office." Burton, vol. ii. p. 290. " The Whigs took it into their heads
to roast a parson, and they did roast him ; but their zeal tempted them to
make the fire so high that they scorched themselves." Memoirs of Lord
Bolingbroke, p. 142.

8 Burton, vol. ii. p. 257. ' She had been present at the trial.
1 " The Queen's intentions to make a change in her ministry now began

to break out." Burnet, vol. vi. p. 8.

- The story of their quarrel is a long one. That their strong friendship
broke was no doubt partly owing to the Duchess's imperious temper. She
carried everything with a high hand, and as time went on presumed upon
the Queen's friendship for her. The Duchess was neither a Tory nor a High
Churchwoman, and sought to bring the Queen over to her views. For the
quarrel see Burton, vol. iii. p. 51 et $eq.; also Marlborough^ Conduct; also
Somerville, p. 259.

3 Abigail Hill, whom the Duchess of Marlborough herself introduced to
Queen Anne as suitable to fill a vacancy in the bedchamber staff. They were
low and worthless people. See Burton, vol. iii. p. 53,

58 THE JUNTO.

cousin of Harley; Maryborough's two sons-in-law,
Godolphin and Sunderland, were dismissed.4

The last and most fatal blow to the Whigs was the
dismissal of Lord Somers. This bold act the Queen carried
out at the end of September.5 She was in Council with the
Lord Chancellor on her right hand and Lord Somers on
her left. After some routine business was over she called
upon Sir Simon Harcourt, the Attorney-General, to pro-
duce a Proclamation, which she had commanded him to
prepare for dissolving Parliament. When it had been read,
the Lord Chancellor rose to dissuade her from such a step.6
She, however, interrupted him, saying "that she had
considered the matter well, that she would admit of no
debate and that the writs for a new Parliament must im-
mediately issue." She thereupon signed the Proclamation
and declared her uncle, the Earl of Rochester, President of
the Council instead of Lord Somers.7

Other Whigs were thrown out. Harley was made Lord
Treasurer ; Harcourt became Lord Chancellor and St. John
Secretary of State. " So sudden and so entire a change of
the ministry," says Burnet,8 " is scarce to be found in our
history. . . . The Queen was much delighted with all
these changes and seemed to think she was freed from the

1 August 8th. Lord Dartmouth succeeded Sunderland as Secretary of
State. The Treasury was put into commission. Burnet, vol. vi. pp. 8, 10.
For Godolphin's letter to the Queen, see Burton, vol. iii. p. 65.

5 Burnet says October, but the London Gazette and other documents
showing the new appointments prove him to have been mistaken. In
Cobbett's Parliamentary History it is September (see vol. vi. p. 909).

6 For account of this see ibid. Swift writes in his journal to Stella :
" Sept. 20th. To-day I returned my visits to the duke's daughters ; . . . then
I heard the report confirmed of removals ; my lord president Somers ; the
Duke of Devonshire, lord steward ; and Mr. Boyle, Secretary of State, are
all turned out to-day. I never remember such bold steps taken by a
court," etc.

7 Burnet, vol. vi. p. 12. " The Queen dismissed Somers and made
Rochester Lord President of the Council, assuring him that she had not
lessened her esteem for him, and designed to continue the pension and should
be glad if he came often to her " (ibid. ). Luttrell, vol. vi. p. 632. Cooke,
vol. i. p. 577.

8 Burnet, vol. vi. pp. 13, 14.

JOHN SOMERS. 59

chains the old ministry had held her in ; she spoke of it to
several persons as a captivity she had been long under."

By this courageous and decisive step Anne had shown
that she was no mere tool with which her ministers could
play as they pleased. On the contrary, she had abundantly
proved that if her ministers behaved to her in a way she
disliked, and if they tried to monopolize all the power of
the State, she would have nothing more to do with them.9

The Tories were exultant — the Whigs were prostrate.
Somers retired from public life and continued one of the
opposition till Queen Anne's death.

The last act of the Whigs while in office had been to
reject the overtures which Louis XIV. made at Gertruyden-
berg.10 Somers, as eager as he always had been to prevent
the union of France and Spain, did not take into account the
reduced state of France and strongly supported Marlborough
in his desire to break through the last line of the French
defences on the side of Flanders and to march upon Paris.
This continuance of the war was looked upon by the nation

9 The view of Anne's character taken by Mr. W. F. Lord (vide "Develop-
ment of Political Parties during the Reign of Queen Anne ") seems to be the
fairest and most correct. To make a stand against the great men of the
Junto,* to dismiss the violent Lord Sunderland and the great Lord Somers
as she did, without either consulting or asking aid from anyone, surely shows
much force and determination of character ; and contradicts altogether the
accepted opinion of Anne as being a mere puppet, entirely under the influence
of the Duchess of Marlborough, entirely absorbed in court gossip and luxuries
of toilet and table. The mere outline of her career ought to confute this
unjust verdict. (See Lord, p. 103, note.) Ranke, perhaps, recognizes more
than English historians the independence of the Queen's character when he
says: "The Queen breaks the chain, which through Maryborough's union
with the Junto, his authority over the Whigs and the predominance of the
Whigs in Parliament, had hitherto surrounded the Queen and restrained her
freedom. That she attempted to break it and succeeded in doing so gives
her reign a very strongly marked character in English history." See Ranke,
vol. v. p. 337.

10 The conferences at Gertruydenberg were opened on March 20th and
lasted till July 13th. Somerville, p. 386. For what took place see ibid.
pp. 386-390.

* Anne writes, September 12th, 1907, to Godolphin : "Whoever of the
Whigs thinks I am to be hectored or frighted into a compliance, though I am
a woman, is mightily mistaken in me. I thank God I have a soul above
that, and am too much concerned for my reputation to do anything to forfeit
it." Quoted by Stanhope, vol ii. p. 285.

60 THE JUNTO.

as merely a device of Marlborough to enable him to keep
the command of the army abroad.1 Though Somers may
have taken a larger view of the situation and acted for
what he thought the general good of the country, the other
members of his party had no doubt grown so to thirst for
power as to be willing to sacrifice religion or the prosperity
of the nation for the sake of their own individual advance-
ment.

As soon as Lord Somers was removed from office, he was
attacked on all sides by the Tory Press; and most merci-
lessly of all by Swift. Somers had made Swift's acquaint-
ance in 1702, 2 at which time he was a zealous Whig. He
expressed a great admiration for Somers and as a proof of
this dedicated to him " The Tale of a Tub."3 When the
Whigs returned to power he hoped for promotion in the
Church, and wrote a " Discourse on the Contents and
Dissensions between the Nobles and the Commons in Athens
and Rome, with the consequences they had upon both those
States," in which he flattered the impeached lords in the
character of Athenians. Somers he represented as Aristides.
" Their next great man was Aristides. Besides the mighty
service he had done his country in the wars, he was a person

1 See Hallam, Constitutional History, vol. iii. p. 212. " The obstinate
adherence of Godolphin and Somers to the preliminaries may possibly have
been erroneous ; but it by no means deserves the reproach that has been
unfairly bestowed on it ; nor can the Whigs be justly charged with protract-
ing the war to enrich Marlborough or to secure themselves in power." On
the other hand, Lecky says : " There are few instances in modern history of
a more scandalous abuse of the rights of conquest " (History of the Eighteenth
Century, vol. i. p. 47, ed. 1879). Cooke, in his History of Party, says
Marlborough was responsible for this injudicious step (ed. 1836, vol. i.
p. 574). See W. F. Lord, p. 106.

• Memoirs of Swift, works ed. 1883, vol. i. p. 72.

3 Mr. Cooksey, in his Life of Lord Somers, says that " The Tale of a
Tub " was written by Somers and his friend Shrewsbury, when they spent
many days together at White Ladies, and he says he has no doubt the
characters were drawn from real life (p. 19). It is, however, usually
attributed to Swift, and there are many allusions in other authors to
contradict Cooksey's statement, as for instance : Sheridan, in his life
of Swift, says that soon after the publication of " The Tale of a Tub," a
Mr. Waryng, a chamber fellow of Swift's, declared he had read the first
sketch of it in Swift's handwriting when he was only nineteen. See Sheridan,
Life of Swift, p. 6. Space does not allow following this out further.

JOHN SOMERS. 61

of the strictest justice, and best acquainted with the laws
as well as forms of their government, so that he was in a
manner Chancellor of Athens. This man, upon a slight and
false accusation of favouring arbitrary power was banished
by ostracism ; which, rendered into modern English, would
signify that they voted he should be removed from their
presence and council for ever. But, however, they had the
wit to recall him, and to that action owed the preservation
of their State by his future services."4

In spite of all this, Swift did not obtain the promotion he
looked for. Somers and Montagu had been eager to do
something for him, but being in orders he could not very
well be made Under Secretary of State, and Anne had
determined that he should not hold any high place in the
Church.5 Swift was highly indignant, and joined the
Tories, forming an alliance with Harley and St. John.
From that time he was violently opposed to Somers and
abused him in a most spiteful manner in his writings.6

Somers still regularly attended the sittings of the House
of Lords, and seems to have taken an active part in com-
mittees and debates. In January, 1711, the manner in
which the war in Spain had been conducted by the Earl of
Peterborough was inquired into.7 Somers strongly sup-
ported the Earl of Galloway8 and Lord Tyrawley, who
begged for time and allowance to be heard in their own
defence for certain charges brought against them. He
declared " that the Lords Galloway and Tyrawley had a
right to be heard and clear the matters of fact as subjects
of Great Britain, and that it was but natural justice that
men in danger of being censured should have time to justify

4 Works ed. 1883, vol. iii. p. 211. ' Campbell, p. 212.

6 Mahon, England, vol. i. p. 48. Swift, works ed. 1883, vol. i. p. 48.
See also what he writes in his Journal: "As for my old friends, if you
mean the Whigs, I never see them, as you may find by my journals, except
Lord Halifax, and him very seldom ; Lord Somers never since the first visit,
for he has been a false, deceitful rascal. My new friends are very kind, and
I have promises enough," etc. Journal to Stella, ibid, vol. ii. p. 155.

7 Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 936 et seq. 8 Spelt also Galway.

62 THE JUNTO.

themselves."9 His arguments, however, were of no avail;
a vote of censure was passed on the two lords ; but a strong
protest was entered upon the journals against the resolution
signed by thirty-six peers, amongst whom were Somers,
Marlborough and Cowper.10

At the beginning of the next session of Parliament1
there was a rumour that the Queen was about to recall the
Whigs. Even Swift grew alarmed and wrote in his
journal,2 December 9, 1711 : "I was this morning with
Mr. Secretary;3 we are both of opinion that the Queen is
false. I told him what I heard, and he confirmed it by
other circumstances. I then went to my friend Lewis who
had sent to see me. He talks of nothing but retiring to his
estate in Wales. He gave me reasons to believe the whole
matter is settled between the Queen and the Whigs ; he
hears that Lord Somers is to be Treasurer, and believes
that sooner than turn out the Duchess of Somerset she will
dissolve the Parliament and get a Whiggish one. Things
are now in the crisis, and a day or two will determine.
I have desired him to engage Lord Treasurer, that as soon as
he finds the change is resolved on, he will send me abroad
as Queen's Secretary somewhere or other, where I may
remain till the new ministers recall me ; and then I will be
sick for five or six months till the storm has spent itself.
I hope he will grant me this ; for I should hardly trust
myself to the mercy of my enemies while their anger is
fresh."

But Swift had no need for all this alarm ; the Queen had
no intention of recalling the Whigs. The negotiations
for peace were begun ; the nation grew more and more
weary of the war and the " Grand Alliance." Unfortunately,

9 Chandler, Lords' Debates, vol. ii. p. 309 ; also Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 962.

10 Cobbett, vol. vi. p. 985.
1 December, 1711.

8 Journal to Stella, works ed. 1883, vol. ii. p. 426.
3 St. John — Bolingbroke.

JOHN SOMERS. 63

according to Lord Campbell,4 no part of Lord Somers's
speeches in connection with, the peace negotiations leading
up to the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713 are extant, although
from the Lords' Journals it is seen that he was always
present.

Marlborough, on his return to England in 1711, induced
the House of Lords to denounce the proposed peace, but
the Queen and St. John, who were resolute for peace,5 with
the support of the nation were determined to secure a
peace. They set their minds to a bold stroke. In the
41 Gazette " of December 31, it was announced that the Queen
had dismissed the Duke of Marlborough6 from all his em-
ployments; and the creation of twelve new Tory peers
swamped the Whig majority in the Lords. The Duke
withdrew from England and with him all opposition to the
peace was gone. The Treaty of Utrecht7 was concluded on
March 31, 1713.

In 1712 Somers's strength began to fail him. In the
early part of the year he had had a severe illness, from
which he never quite recovered.8 Although he still sat in
Parliament, his active life in the world of politics may be
said to have ended at this time.

In June, 1713, a debate took place on the question of
the Union,9 on which occasion the Earl of Finlater moved
that the Union should be dissolved. As a result of the
extension of the Malt Tax to Scotland and various other
grievances, a cry had been raised in Scotland for a " Repeal

4 Campbell, p. 214. 5 Green, vol. iv. p. 99.

6 For fall of Marlborough see Burton, vol. iii. pp. 95-98 ; also Coxe,
Life of Marlborough, vol. vi. He was succeeded by the Duke of Ormond.

7 For treaty see Lecky, vol. i. pp. 122, 123. Hallam, vol. iii. pp. 214-219.

8 In a letter written by an adherent of the exiled family, there is the
following disguised passage : " All friends here are well except Rowley
(Lord Rivers), who is dying ; and poor Sanders (Somers), who cannot live
long, and is already dead in effect, to the great grief of Harry (Hanover), who
depends more on him than on any friend besides." Macpherson, State
Papers, vol. ii. p. 332.

9 For whole debate see Cobbett, vol. vi. pp. 1214-1220.

64 THE JUNTO.

of the Union." Lord Campbell10 declares that Somers be-
came a " Repealer," the only excuse for this behaviour
being' " that his mind was debilitated." He, however, also
states that Somers took no part in the debate,1 so there
is just as much reason for believing that Somers would not
work against the measure which he had carried through
with such zeal and trouble.2 Anyhow, the proposition was
lost, and the Union was not repealed, though only by the
small majority of four.3

Though still remorselessly attacked by Swift, Lord
Somers was shown every respect by Addison and Steele.
Addison dedicated " the Spectator," that paper which had
such a remarkable influence, to " John, Lord Somers, Baron
of Evesham," followed by an appreciation which is almost
too eulogistic. But the manner in which Somers bore his
" retirement " is very cleverly alluded to : " It is in vain
that you have endeavoured to conceal your share of the
merit in the many national services which you have effected.
Your lordship appears as great in your private life as in
the most important offices which you have borne. I would
rather choose to speak of the pleasure you afford all who are
admitted into your conversation, of your elegant taste in
all polite arts of learning, of your great humanity and
complacency of manners, and of the surprising influence

10 Lives of the Chancellors, vol. iv. p. 215.

1 Ibid.

2 In his life in Lives of Eminent Persons the author says Somers was one
of the few who negatived the dissolution (see p. 23). See Onslow's note on
Burnet(0w7i Times, vol. vi. p. 160, note t.), where he says the Whig lords sup-
ported the Bill for dissolving the Union. "How much to their honour, I will
not say. I believe they meant only the distressing of the ministry, but
surely there was too much of party violence to make so tender a point an
instrument of opposition. I had it from good authority (the late Sir Robert
Monroe, then of the House of Commons) that at a meeting upon it at my
lord Somers' house, where Monroe was, nobody pressed this motion more than
that lord. Good God ! " In Cobbett's Parliamentary History Somers's
name is not mentioned in connection with this debate ; but the Lords
Sunderland and Halifax are mentioned as having spoken for the "repeal"
(vol. vi. pp. 1214-1220).

» Ibid.

JOHN SOMERS.

65

which is peculiar to you in making everyone who converses
with your lordship prefer you to himself, without thinking
the more meanly of his own talents."

When the Queen was seen to be dying, a great stir took
place as to the succession. Somers, in spite of infirmities,
went to Kensington,4 and learning from her physician that
the recovery of the Queen was hopeless, he promptly carried
out the order of the Council that a troop of Life Guards
and the Heralds-at-Arms should be ready to proclaim the
Elector of Brunswick King of Great Britain. At the same
time a despatch was sent to the Elector, urging him to go
with all speed to Holland, whence, on the death of the Queen,
he would be brought over by a British squadron to his new
kingdom.5

On the morning of Sunday, August 1, 1714, Queen Anne
died.6 Her last act had been to dismiss Harley.7 A split
had taken place in the Tory party as a result of the policy
of St. John.8 To this end he had brought in the " Schism
Act,"9 a persecuting measure to which Harley10 could not
give his support. The Queen, in a weak state of health,
had been persuaded to give her patronage to the Bill.
Thereby Harley lost the favour of the Queen and was
dismissed on July 27. l

After the death of Anne a meeting of the Lords
Justices, appointed under the Regency Act, was immedi-

4 Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. vi. p. 291. 5 Lecky, vol. i. p. 165.

c Green, vol. iv. p. 102. 7 Ibid. pp. 102, 103.

8 He was in communication with the Pretender. Hallam, vol. iii. p. 223.

9 This Act allowed no one to keep a public or private school unless he was
a member of the Church of England and licensed by the bishop of the diocese.
Green, p. 102. For debate concerning "Schism Act" see Cobbett, vol vi
p. 1349 et seq.

10 Harley, it must be remembered, was by birth a Nonconformist. Though
his principles were Tory, he had the Whig love of compromise, and latterly
"he had drawn to himself the alienated sympathies of the Dissenters."
W. F. Lord, p. 91.

1 Bolingbroke wrote on August 3rd to Swift : " The Earl of Oxford was
removed on Tuesday, the Queen died on Sunday ! What a world is this
and how does fortune banter us ! " Swift, Correspondence, works ed. by
Sir W. Scott, vol. xvi. p. 173.

5

66 THE JUNTO.

ately held. Owing to his weak state of health, Somers had
not been named one of them, but he was present as Privy
Councillor and took the oaths of allegiance to the new
Sovereign.

George I. showed decided favour to the party which had
always supported him.2 All the high offices were once more
bestowed upon the Whigs.3 Townshend, Walpole and
Stanhope became the leaders of the new administration.
Lord Somers was too feeble to take any office, but he was
sworn of the Privy Council4 and a seat in the Cabinet was
given to him, together with Marlborough, Sunderland,
Halifax, Townshend, Cowper and Stanhope.5 He promised
to attend whenever he was able, and also to give private
advice when consulted by his colleagues. As a mark of
gratitude from the King and the nation he received an
additional pension of £2,000 per annum for life.6

Of the last two years of his life very little is known.
They were darkened by illness and suffering, for he had
frequent attacks of paralysis.7

At intervals his mind seemed to be quite clear. One of
these bright times, when he could take interest in what
was going on around him, occurred just as the Septennial
Bill was being fully discussed.8 While the Bill was in
agitation, Dr. Friend, the celebrated physician, called on
Lord Townshend and informed him that Lord Somers was
at that moment restored to the full possession of his facul-
ties, by a fit of gout, which suspended the effect of his
paralytic complaint. Townshend immediately waited on
Lord Somers, who, as soon as he came into the room, em-
braced him and said, "I have just heard of the work in
which you are engaged and congratulate you upon it. I
never approved the Triennial Bill, and always considered

2 Hallam, vol. iii. p. 230. Mahon, England, vol. i. p. 102.

3 Lecky, vol. i. p. 168.

4 Roscoe, p. 161, tit. Somers. Also Coxe, Life of Marlborouyh, vol. vi.
p. 361.

5 Ibid. 6 Mahon, vol. i. p. 104. 7 Campbell, p. 220. • April, 1716.

JOHN SOMERS. 67

it in effect the reverse of what it was intended. You have
my hearty approbation in this business and I think it will
be the greatest support possible to the liberty of the
country."9

A few days after this interview Lord Somers had a fresh
paralytic seizure, from which he never recovered. He died1
on April 26, the very day on which the Septennial Bill was
passed. He was buried in the parish church at Mymms in
Hertfordshire, where his sister, Lady Jekyll, placed a simple
monument with the short inscription : —

THE RT. HONBLE. JOHN LORD SOMERS,

BARON OF EVESHAM,

LORD HIGH CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND IN THE REIGN OF KING WILLIAM III.,

TO WHOSE MEMORY THIS MONUMENT WAS ERECTED BY

DAME ELIZABETH JEKYLL.

Lord Somers was never married. His estates descended
to his two sisters, one of whom was married to Sir Joseph
Jekyll, the Master of the Rolls, and the other to Charles
Cocks of Worcester.2

After his death his MSS. and valuable collection of
tracts came into the possession of Lord Chancellor Hard-
wicke, who had married his niece. This collection was put
in keeping in the chambers of the Hon. Charles Yorke, in
Lincoln's Inn, where it was unfortunately destroyed by fire
in 1752.3 Nearly all were lost; the few that were saved
were collected into one folio volume, of which Hardwicke
gives a selection in his State Papers. In the preface he
says : 4 " The world will, however, do that justice to the col-

9 For this account, which is quoted, see Coxe, Memoirs of Sir Robert
Walpole, vol. i. p. 139. This Septennial Bill effectually supported the House
of Brunswick on the throne, and was no doubt brought forward in order to
avoid the danger of an election, which would otherwise have taken place in
1717, before the Whigs were enabled to consolidate their power. It was a
bold plan, and was probably only intended to be a temporary measure. It
has, however, never been repealed. See Hallam, vol. iii. pp. 235-238.

1 Green, vol. iv. p. 129.

2 Nash, History of Worcestershire, vol. ii. p. 54.
8 Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 399.

68 THE JUNTO.

lection, as not to suppose that these specimens from it,
immitis ignis reliquice, will afford an adequate idea of its
merit. It filled upwards of 60 volumes in quarto and did not
contain a paper from Lord Somers's pen which the most
intimate friend would have wished to secrete, or the bitterest
enemy could have fairly turned to his prejudice."5 Many of
the valuable pamphlets which Somers had written and col-
lected were published in the " Somers's Tracts "6 under the
supervision of Sir Walter Scott. Except for these there is
little from which to gather information of Lord Somers, and
hardly anything of his personal history and character.

Contemporary historians give very different accounts of
the character of Lord Somers. Perhaps the best way, says
Lord Macaulay,7 to come to a just judgment would be to
collect all that has been said about him by Swift and by
Addison, who were the two keenest observers of their time,
and both knew him well. But the opinion of a man who,
simply out of spite and revenge, suddenly turned against
him whom he had extolled as the most accomplished and
virtuous of men, and ended by calling him "a false, deceitful
rascal," counts for little if anything. On the other hand,
if left to form our judgment of his character from the pen
of Addison, a very exalted character will be the result. His
sketch of Somers in " The Freeholder "8 is, perhaps, almost
too eulogistic and flattering to be wholly accepted. Putting
Swift, who is hardly to be trusted, and Addison, who is
too partial, aside, we still find that the almost universally
accepted verdict is entirely in Somers's favour.

He was, without doubt, a great and a brilliant man of
upright character. Born and reared in the corrupt age of
the Eestoration, he had contracted nothing of the baseness

5 Hardwicke, vol. ii. p. 399.

6 These tracts were published in four divisions of four volumes each,
in the years 1748, 1750, 1751, 1752; the second edition by Sir Walter Scott
in 1809.

7 Vol. iv. p. 450, note. 8 No. 39,

JOHN SOMERS.

69

and venality of his age.9 He stood above all his colleagues.
In the words of Horace Walpole,1 he was one of those
divine men, who, like a chapel in a palace, remain unpro-
faned, while all the rest is tyranny, corruption and folly."

Lord Macaulay says2 he was, in some respects, the great-
est man of his age. He certainly was the greatest member
of the Junto. " Marlborough " is the name which plays the
largest part in the history of the years in consideration, and
justly, for his achievements abroad were great, but the
name of Somers is too little known. The reigns of "William
III. and Anne cannot be fully understood without taking
into consideration the doings and character of Somers, and
the very important and influential position he held.

Even Swift,3 in his depreciatory account of Somers,
says that " he may very deservedly be reputed the head and
oracle of that party " (the Whig party). This he was,
without doubt. He had a moderating and restraining influ-
ence over his colleagues. He disapproved of their violence
and tried to check it, but he never forsook his friends, even
when their obstinate neglect of his advice brought ruin upon
them.

Perfect patriotism, pure and undefiled by any mixture of
self-interest and faction were not the characteristic of his
age. The chief aim of the parties — Whig and Tory alike —
was to obtain power and when they had obtained it to keep
it. Of personal ambition Somers cannot be accused, but
ambition for his party he did possess. He was eager that
his party should be in power, because he was convinced that
the measures it put forward, the security of freedom and
liberty for the nation, were the best for his country. That

9 Lord Mahon says: "He had touched pitch and was not defiled."
England, vol. i. p. 209.

1 Catalogue of Royal and Noble Authors, works ed. 1798, 4to. vol. i. p. 430.

2 History of England, vol. iv. p. 447.

3 History of the Four Last Years of the Queen, works ed. 1883, vol. v. p. 23.

70 THE JUNTO.

the means by which he carried out his beneficent ideas
in the direction of freedom were not always the most
direct and honest cannot be denied. But it must not be
forgotten that the political morality of the time he lived
in was on a very much lower level than it is now. It was
by no means easy to steer a straight course through the
seas of party jealousies and intrigues.5

His motto, "Prodesse quam conspice," is not an unjust
summary of his character. Somers was never eager for
fame ; he seldom put his name to his publications, and he
was very loth to be raised to the peerage, many times
refusing the honour before he finally gave in to William,
who was so anxious to show him some mark of his esteem.

His generosity has already been remarked upon. He was
always willing to give to anything he thought a worthy
object. We have seen his munificence to his college,6 and
his liberal contribution to the expedition of Captain Kidd,
which at the time he thought to be a benefit to his
countrymen.7 Evelyn tells us that in 1G96 he subscribed
£500 to Greenwich Hospital.8 The kindness he showed to
Addison proves at the same time his love of letters and his
liberality. He was always ready to protect merit in what-
ever form. Locke9 owed opulence to Somers. He was the

5 Lord Campbell (vol. iv. p. 226) remarks that the greatest blot on his
public character was the persecution of the Roman Catholics in his time,
which if he did not prompt he fully sanctioned. Several Acts were passed
while Lord Somers was in office, which it is surprising to think he permitted.
They were chiefly directed against the Irish Roman Catholics, and as they
were all supposed to be Jacobites, it was probably his eagerness to support
the king he had largely helped to bring over that led him to adopt a
course so opposed to his usual attitude of toleration.

' Supra, p. 4. 7 Supra, p. 32.

9 Evelyn, Diary, vol. iii. p. 356.

"Locke had great respect for Somers. See his letter dated Feb. 1st, 1696- 1697.
" I know nobody that can with so much right promise himself to bring me
over to his sentiments as your Lordship, for I know not anyone that has
such a master-reason to prevail as your Lordship, nor anyone to whom,
without attending the convictions of that reason, that I am so much
disposed to submit to with implicit faith." King, Life of Locke, p. 245.
Locke was on Somers's recommendation nominated a Lord of Trade.

JOHN SOMERS.

benefactor of Leclerc.10 He was the friend of Filicaja.1
Neither political nor religious differences prevented him
from giving his support. He gained for Hickes,2 the fiercest
and most intolerant of all the non-jurors, allowance to
study Teutonic antiquities in quiet. He raised Vertue,3 a
staunch Roman Catholic, from poverty and obscurity, who
by his aid became one of the first engravers of his time.
The distinguishing property of his character was, per-
haps, its dignity, a dignity arising1 from self-respect and
inspiring respect in others,4 a dignity which made him shun
what he thought to be dishonourable or cowardly ; a dignity,
which made him retire quietly, when dismissed by the
King, without giving any signs of ill-will or spite.

Of his abilities as a lawyer, of his intellectual brilliance
and of his great learning there is no dispute. Even his
detractors are forced to admit the superiority of his powers.
Swift5 says "he has raised himself by the concurrence

10 Leclere (1657-1736), theologian and man of letters.

1 Italian was one of the seven languages with which Somers was familiar
without ever having been out of England. Filicaja wrote a Latin ode in
praise of Lord Somers. See Opere di Vincenzio da Filicaja, torn. ii. p. 50.
Also Campbell, vol. iv. p. 223, where part is quoted.

2 George Hickes (1642-1715), deprived for refusing to take oath of
allegiance to William and Mary in 1690. See Diet, of Nat. Biog. vol. xxvi.
p. 350.

3 George Vertue (1684-1756) worked for Michael Van der Gucht ; en-
graver and antiquary ; set up for himself 1709. See Diet, of Nat. Biog.
vol. Iviii. p. 285.

4 The Duke of Bolton writes to Lord Somers, Sept. 1700 : "I tell your Lord-
ship this out of the unalterable friendship and respect I have for you. . . .
I beg continuance of your friendship ; and you may depend on all the
faithful services that your humble servant is capable of." Hardwicke,
vol. ii. pp. 439, 440. Tindal, in his Continuation of Rapin, remarks on the
esteem in which Somers was held by others. See vol. i. p. 230.

5 Four Last Years of the Queen, works ed. 1883, vol. v. p. 23. Somer-
ville, in his Reign of Queen Anne, p. 257, says : " No person stood higher in
the public opinion than he did for abilities, probity, and a steady adherence
to the principles which he possessed at his outset in public life. ... As a
judge he was distinguished for his gentleness, patience and impartiality.
None ever excelled him in discriminating and arranging the essential
branches of a cause ; in placing intricate points in a perspicuous light, and
levelling them to ordinary comprehension. A clear understanding, and a
profound knowledge of the history and laws of England, stamped a superior
authority upon his opinions relative to affairs of State, which did not escape
the discernment of King William, who confided more in him than in any
other counsellor."

72 THE JUNTO.

of many circumstances to the greatest employments of the
State without the least support from birth or fortune. He
has an excellent understanding, adorned by all the polite
arts of learning."

The Tory Smollett5 cannot deny his merits : " He was
well skilled in the law, as in many other branches of polite
and useful literature. He possessed a remarkable talent for
business, in which he exerted great patience and assiduity."

Ralph,6 who is inclined to abuse every man of liberal
principles, recognizes the greatness of Somers : " In his
capacity of Chancellor, Lord Somers is undoubtedly irre-
proachable; and he that did not acknowledge his abilities
in State affairs, must either have none of his own, or,
through prejudice and perverseness, must have forfeited the
use of them. It was to his abilities as a statesman as well
as a lawyer, he owed his advancement. Whether advising
as a minister, or standing in the circle as courtier, pre-
siding in the House of Lords as Speaker, conferring or
altercating with foreign ministers, giving despatch to
suiters, or doing the honours of his table, where he ' became
all things to all men,' he was the most extraordinary man
of his time."8

There is no means of discovering whether Somers deserved
the name of a " master orator," which Walpole9 gives him.
Addison says10 " his oratory was masculine and persuasive,
free from everything trivial and affected." As his speeches
have perished, and of the parliamentary proceedings of that
time only scanty reports are given, it will always remain
mere conjecture. His State papers, which are preserved, are

3 Smollett, vol. i. p. 166. H Ralph, vol. ii. p. 784. 8 Ibid.

9 Horace Walpole (afterwards Lord Orford) in his Lives of Noble Author*.

10 In the Freeholder, No. 39. De Foe in his Jure Divino (Book xii. )
praised Somers : —

" Somers by nature great and born to rise,
In counsel wary and in conduct wise,
His judgement steady and his genius strong,
And all men own the music of his tongue."

JOHN SOMERS. 73

models of terse, luminous and dignified eloquence.1 His
speeches probably had these same qualities, and if we
remember that his speech at the famous trial of the Seven
Bishops, though quite short, was said to have largely led
to the final result, there must have been something remark-
able about his oratory, which was convincing and to the
point.

His courtesy2 and refined manners seem to have attracted
attention. Even Queen Anne, who had such a great and
unnatural dislike for him, had a great personal regard for
Somers.3 Swift, even after he had deserted the Whigs,
says : " I have hardly ever known any man with talents
more proper to acquire and preserve the favour of a prince ;
never offending in word or gesture, in the highest degree
courteous and complaisant ; wherein he set an excellent
example to his colleagues, which they did not think fit to
follow ; but this extreme civility is universal and undis-
tinguished; and in private conversation, where he observes
it as inviolably as if it were in the greatest assembly, it is
sometimes censured as formal.'*4

By nature impetuous, Somers had his temper absolutely
under control. 4k Of all the leading statesmen at the time
of Anne," says Lord Mahon,5 " the two who appear to have
possessed the greatest mastery of temper and powers of
self-control are Marlborough and Somers."

To the accusation against Lord Somers of having offended
the laws of society, and of his moral character having
shared in the general contamination of the age, which the

1 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 447.

2 Memoirs of Duchess of Marlborougli, vol. i. p. 337.

3 "For whom she had as great a personal regard and esteem as her
nature was capable of admitting." Swift, The Behaviour of the Queen's
Last Ministry, works ed. 1888, vol. v. p. 274. "He blamed the rough
demeanour of some persons to the Queen as a failure in prudence. " Swift,
Four Last Years of the Queen, works ed. 1883, vol. v. p. 25. Also Burnet,
vol. vi. p. 12, and Stanhope, Queen Anne, vol. ii. p. 173.

* Swift, vol. v. p. 24. 5 Mahon, vol. i. p. 51.

74 THE JUNTO.

Duchess of Marlborough remarked upon in her private cor-
respondence,6 there is no testimony. It is the wiser course,
therefore, to pass it over, for there seems little truth attached
to it. Whatever his behaviour in private life may have
been, in his public career he was immeasurably more up-
right than those around him. " Everything," writes a
contemporary,7 " was easy and correct, pure and proper.
He was unwearied in the application of all his abilities for
the service of his country. As a writer, he greatly assisted
the cause of liberty in the days of its utmost peril. As an
advocate, a judge, a senator, a minister, the highest praises
and the most grateful remembrance are due to his merit.
He was invariable and uniform in the pursuit of right paths.
As he well understood, he was equally firm in adhering to
the interest of his country while in its service and when in
a private station. To this uniformity the calumnies and
reproaches of his enemies may be ascribed. They envied
him his superiority, and as their wishes and designs were
far from being engaged for the real welfare of society, a man
so upright and able naturally became the object of their
hatred ; and they had too easy and too much credit."

Of Lord Somers's energy and devoted service to his
country,8 and of his rigid adherence to his principles there
is ample illustration. The statesman who first modelled a
constitutional in opposition to an absolutist monarchy, who
secured the Protestant Succession to the throne of England,
and to whose exertions the Union with Scotland was princi-
pally due, will always claim the gratitude and admiration of
this country.

"Vol. ii. p. 148.

7 Seward's Anecdotes, vol. ii. pp. 274-275.

s Marlborough writes to Lord Somers from the Hague, June 7th, 1709 :
" I know the best way to cultivate your friendship is by continuing to do my
duty to the utmost for the public good ; and as none can value it more, I
shall always make it my endeavour to preserve it, of which your lordship
cannot give me a greater instance than by affording me sometimes your good
advice in this critical juncture." Marlborough Despatches, vol. iv. p. 503.

THOAAS WHARTON

THOMAS WHABTON. 75

THOMAS WHARTOK

" THE most universal villain I ever knew."1 " Intrinsic-
ally void of moral or religions principles, the mischievous
Wharton."2 " A man of great talents, but profligate
character."3 " The most skilful and the most unscrupulous of
the Whig party managers."4 " The scavenger of his party."5
These damaging remarks on the character of Thomas
Wharton — which could easily be trebled — sum up in a few
words what seem to have been the chief characteristics of the
man. He had ability — of a certain kind — no want of
courage, no lack of energy or ardour : but he was unscrupu-
lous, without conscience, coarse and violent, possessing an
abandoned profligacy of principle which he took no pains
to hide from the world. The reputation he has left behind
him is that of being the greatest rake and the truest Whig
of his time.

Born in 1648, Wharton was a companion of Charles II.
and took part in the revels of his dissolute Court. The cor-
rupt morals of that day left their stamp on the mind of
Wharton, as they did on the minds of so many others. He
grew up in vice and rather than try to disguise it he gloried
in it — he defied its effects, either as to his interest or to his
constitution ; oaths, falsities and profaneness of all kinds
were familiar to him; he scoffed at religion and made no
concealment of his infidelity. Of shame he knew nothing.

1 Swift. - Lord Macpherson.

3 Lord Mahon. 4 Lecky.

s Bolingbroke.

76 THE JUNTO.

The most deliberate of liars,6 the grossest insulter, he seemed
untouched by insults and invective hurled at himself. His
enemies — and he was hated by many with a perfect hatred —
assailed him with cutting irony or insolent reproaches,
but found that none could draw from him anything but a
smile or a good-humoured curse.

Yet, with all these vices Wharton was destined to play
an important part in the history of his country. His one
redeeming feature was intense devotion to his party. Im-
bibing as he did all that was most corrupt at the Court of
Charles II., his political principles remained uncontamin-
ated ; he grew up with a strong attachment to constitutional
freedom and an active enemy to Popery and arbitrary power.
Born a Whig — a Whig as true as steel he remained to his
death. Into the game of politics he threw all he had : talent,
energy and money ; he freely sacrificed all to the objects of
the Whig party. Even in his pastimes this devotion showed
itself; horse-racing — and he had the finest stud in England
— had twice the charm to him if it meant winning a plate
from the Tories or beating the- horse of a High Church
squire. At elections Wharton's skill and energy were notori-
ous : in the management of mobs, in converting waverers to
his views — whether by bribery or corruption — he had no
equal; he was a master of the arts of electioneering and
political management. In his own county, Buckingham-
shire, he was supreme. Other counties also, Yorkshire,
Wiltshire, Cumberland, Westmorland, had his support.

6 In "A Dialogue of the Dead between the very eminent Signer Gilbertini
(Burnet?) and Count Thomaso (Wharton) in the vales of Acheron " (London,
1715), Signor Gilbertini is made to say : " There is the same brow of anger,
the same inexorable fierceness of look, the same hatred of honour, honesty
and religion ! It must be he ( Wharton) ! " (p. 10. ) Count Thomaso says : "In
the upper world I laid myself down on the bed of lust without these secret
calls for restitution " (p. 11). . . . "I never accounted lying a sin " (p. 30).
Lord Dartmouth tolls this story of Wharton's practice of open lying (Burnet,
Own Times, vol. v. p. 234, note t). "I asked him once, after he had run on
for a great while in the House of Lords upon a subject that both he and I
knew to be false, how he could bring himself to do so. He answered me,
' Why, are you such a simpleton as not to know that a lie well believed is
as good as if it were true ? '"

THOMAS WHARTON. 77

Sometimes twenty or even thirty Whigs were named by
him, for he spared neither time nor money. That such a man
as Wharton, with his coarse, corrupt nature, should run
in harness with Somers, who was cultured and refined and
gentle, might seem well-nigh impossible. Yet it was so ;
for many years they acted in concert. They both had the
interests of their party at heart and Wharton was too useful
to his party to be spared.7 Obnoxious as his habits and
mode of living were, he was nevertheless affable, good
humoured and, to a large extent, popular. In his own
county he was welcomed by the people wherever he went and
his journeys to the Quarter Sessions resembled those of a
royal prince. In the House he was no less useful. A bold,
able and fluent, though a coarse and turbulent, speaker, he
possessed a ready eloquence with a quick imagination, a biting
satire and a wit — coarse but fertile ; he possessed the knack
of appealing to the passions and prejudices of those whom he
addressed and he had no fear of saying what he thought.
Of such use, therefore, was Wharton to his party that he
was encouraged even by the more conscientious of the Whigs.
In spite of his defects he stood high in their estimation,
for they appreciated his talents and his activity, and above
all they admired his unswerving adherence to their princi-
ples and to their cause. He was " Honest Tom " to them.
Of Wharton's youth hardly anything is known. The most
probable date of his birth seems to be 1648. 8 The Whartons,
if the writer of the Memoirs of 1715 is to be relied upon,
seem to have been an ancient and honourable family of
the North of England. Before the union of the two king-
doms under one king the Whartons and the Musgraves were
looked upon as the champions of the Border, which the Scots

7 "He was extremely odious to the Tories and as much regarded by the
Whigs, to whom he was always very firm and of great use from his abilities,
especially in Parliament." Burnet, vol. v. p. 118, note c.

8 Zedler, Universal Lexicon ; Nat. Biog. ; Ency. Brit. ; Chalmers, Biog.
Diet., and Cunningham give 1648 as the date of his birth ; Macaulay gives
1646.

78 THE JUNTO.

seldom violated with impunity. An ancestor of Sir Thomas
Wharton's — Sir Philip Wharton — had been governor of the
city and castle of Carlisle in the 33rd year of Henry VIII.,
and had distinguished himself by a gallant defence against
the invaders. Philip II., fourth Baron Wharton, father
of Thomas, first Marquis of Wharton, seems to have been
a " peer of virtue, honour and piety,9 one of the greatest
" beaux "10 of his time. He fought on the side of Parliament
during the Civil Wars, but besides being an ardent Coven-
anter he was well known as a staunch Calvinist,1 entertaining
and patronising numbers of Calvinist divines. During the
first years of the Long Parliament Wharton supported the
policy of the popular leaders in the Commons, and so deep
in their secrets was he supposed to be that Charles I. sug-
gested naming him as a witness against the five members.2
He seems to have been on quite intimate terms with Crom-
well, from whom he received several letters. Among these
the most interesting is that written on September 2, 1648,
announcing to him the victory of Preston — •" this great
mercy " — and congratulating him on the birth of a son —
which must have been Thomas, the man whose career it is
proposed to follow here.3 In 1652 a marriage between
Henry Cromwell and Lord Wharton's eldest daughter, the
Lady Elizabeth, seems to have been entertained. But
apparently " the just scruples of the lady " proved insur-
mountable and it came to nothing.4 Thomas was Philip
Wharton's third but eldest surviving son by his second wife,

9 Memoirs of 1715.

10 A story is told of him in the Memoirs oj 1715, p. 5. " He had particu-
larly very fine legs and took great delight to show them in dancing. I
remember to have seen him in his old age when those tine legs of his were
shrunk almost to the bone, to point to them in that worn and decrepit
condition and say : ' Here are the handsome legs which I was so proud of in
my youth, see what's the beauty of man that he should take pride in it'."

1 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 456. He seems to have gone through periods of
great doubt, judging from Cromwell's letters to him. See letters 118, 146, 18 1 .

2 Gardiner, vol. x. pp. 16, 130. 3 Carlyle, Cromwell Letters, letter 68.
4 Ibid. Appendix No. 26.

THOMAS WHARTON. 79

Jane, daughter and heiress of Arthur Goodwyn, of Upper
Winchendon, in Buckinghamshire.5 Brought up in an
atmosphere of the strictest and most austere discipline, in a
house where many pleasures were denied him, Wharton
seems to have flung himself with double ardour into the
voluptuous gaieties of the Restoration Court, when he was
old enough to leave home for London. The years 1663 and
1664 seem to have been spent in foreign travel through
France, Italy and Germany with a companion, probably his
brother Goodwin.6 He reaped little if any benefit from this
tour other than a strengthening of his love for his mother
country. He returned with the opinon that the administra-
tion of government in England, with all its drawbacks, was
far more likely to bring happiness to the subject than that
of any other nation.

He entered Parliament as member for Wendover in 1673,
and retained this seat till 1679, when he was returned for
Buckinghamshire together with Richard Hampden, son of
the celebrated patriot. He continued to represent his county
until 1696, when his father died.7 Soon after entering Par-
liament Wharton was married to Anne,8 daughter of Sir
Henry Lee, fifth Baron of Ditchley. The only advantage of
the union, and to Wharton an advantage of the highest im-
portance, was the dowry she brought him, £10,000 and
£2,500 a year.9 Anne was a rigid Presbyterian, condemning
every sort of enjoyment or gaiety, and there was little love
lost between them.

Wharton's active interest in politics is first noticeable
in the year 1679. The year previous had witnessed the fall
of Danby,10 to whom Charles had given his whole confidence,

5 Chalmers, p. 326.

6 In Memoirs of 1715 it is said he went with a tutor. " Zedler.

8 Date of their marriage was September 16th, 1673.

9 We are told that the lady's person was not " so agreeable to the bride-
groom as to secure his constancy." There were no children to the marriage.

10 To Danby England owed much, for he arranged the marriage of Mary
with the Prince of Orange. For full account of Danby's administration see
Hallam, vol. ii. chap, xii.

80 THE JUNTO.

and England thrown into a state of popular panic by the
" great national delusion of the Popish Plot"1 — a conspiracy
to slay the King and introduce a French army into the
realm in order to place the Duke of York, the King's
Romanist brother, on the throne. The Parliament which
followed brought in the Exclusion Bill2 and Wharton joined
his friends, Lords Russell, Cavendish and Colchester, in
supporting it. He does not appear to have spoken,3 but
he gave his vote in its favour and was one of those who
carried it up to the Lords.4 The feeling of the nation and
of the House of Commons was so strongly in favour of the
exclusion of the Duke of York that but for the opposition
of the Lords, largely influenced by Halifax,5 a man of great
ability, the Bill must in the end have been carried. This
would have dispensed with the necessity for the Revolution
of 1688. As it was, the Bill was thrown out, Parliament
was dissolved and the promoters of the Bill had little hope
of gaining their point except by insurrection. Wharton's
name also appears as one of those who signed a presentment
to the Grand Jury of Middlesex in 1680 with reasons for
indicting the Duke of York for not attending church.

In 1685 Charles II. died, and the Duke of York, whom
the promoters of the Exclusion Bill would have proscribed,

1 Called so by Hallam, vol. ii. p. 423. For an account of the Popish Plot
see Green, vol. iii. p. 410 et seq.

- For Exclusion Bill see Macaulay, vol. i. p. 258 et seq. ; Cooke, vol. L
p. 153 ; Green, vol. iii. p. 430.

3 Memoirs of 1715, p. 13 ; Lives of Eminent Englishmen, p. 68 ; and in
Cunningham. It is supposed he did not speak for fear of being branded a
fanatic, Nat. Biog.

4 He voted for the Bill in November, 1680. It was carried up to the
Lords, November 15th. It was at this time that the germs of the two great
parties, Whig and Tory, showed themselves. The nation became divided
into two factions of "Petitioners" and " Abhorrers." Numberless petitions
were sent from all parts of the country for the assembling of Parliament in
order to renew the attack upon the Crown, and numerous counter petitions
came from those who expressed their " abhorrence" at the idea of the Crown
being touched. These factions began to be known by the names, each
originally a term of reproach, of Whig and Tory, which ever since have been
accepted terms.

5 Known as " the Great Trimmer."

THOMAS WHARTON. 81

became King James II., a Roman Catholic Sovereign. With
the death of the King the royal revenue ceased and
Parliament was immediately called. The country, full of
hope that James would keep his word " to preserve this
government both in Church and State as it is now by law
established,"6 voted for the settlement of the revenue upon
James for life. Wharton was one of the very few who
opposed this measure, fearing that a portion of it would be
spent on the maintenance of a standing army, for which he
thought there should be a limited sum : 7 " Mr. Speaker,
kings in old times used not only to send an account of their
revenues, but of the charge they were going to be as to the
Parliament when they demanded aids. Henry Y. had but
£56,000 and Queen Elizabeth had £160,000 and odd pounds
yearly. I am for a Bill for making the Militia useful and
would know if we give money thus whether it be not setting
up a standing army; I am for good Guards/'8

The Duke of Monmouth, an illegitimate son of Charles
II. and having no claim to the Crown whatever, gathered
together a body of men and invaded the realm.9 Wharton
was suspected of being in league with him and his house at
Winchendon was unsuccessfully searched.

During the reign of James II. Wharton lived quietly at
his seat at Winchendon, which he preferred to Wooburn,10
and took little active part in Parliament. He worked, how-
ever, for the rejection of the old dynasty and for bringing
over the Prince of Orange to be King. He corresponded
with the Prince during 1688 and is supposed to have had
much to do with the framing of the invitation which induced
William to land in England.1 Wharton was among the

e Green, vol. iv. p. 6. James very soon, however, showed himself a
Romanist heart and soul.

~ The same source says that he was for £400,000 to be given to the use of
a standing army. Memoirs of 1715, p. 17.

8 Ibid, p. 16. 9 For Monmouth's rising see Green, vol. iv. p. 8.

10 Memoirs of 1715, p. 21.

1 Memoirs of Kit- Cat Club, p. 73. He is supposed to have drawn up the
first sketch of the invitation of the Prince to come to England, which was
carried over to Holland by the Earl of Shrewsbury. Chalmers, p. 326.

82 THE JUNTO.

first to go to meet the future King at Exeter and to welcome
him to his new kingdom.2 But, perhaps, his satirical poem
" Lilliburlero," which Wharton wrote in 1687, helped as
much as anything to turn public feeling against the Stuarts.
It was a ballad on the administration of Tyrconnel, in which
an Irishman congratulates a fellow on the approaching
victory of Popery and the Irish race. These verses, which
were no more than the ordinary street poetry of the day,
set to a quick lively tune by Purcell, caught the fancy of
the nation. It was sung by all, far and wide, and became
especially the song of the army. " The whole army," says
Burnet, " and at last all people in city and country, were
singing it perpetually. And perhaps never had so slight a
thing so great an effect."3

Ho ! broder Teague, dost hear de decree ?

Lilli burlero, bullen, a-la,
Dat we shall have a new deputie,

Lilli burlero, bullen, a-la.

The English confusion to Popery drink,
Lilli burlero, bullen, a la, etc., etc.*

Wharton is said to have boasted that he had sung a king
out of three kingdoms.

It was in the Convention Parliament of 1688-9 that
Wharton's political career may be said to have begun. He
strongly supported Lord Somers and other Whigs in their
view that the " throne was vacant " and that no one so fitted
as the Prince of Orange could be found to fill the throne.
" Abdication and dereliction are hard words to use, but I
would have no loophole to let in the King; for I believe
not myself nor any Protestant in England safe, if you admit

2 Boyer, History of William III., 1702 ed. vol. i. p. 242.

1 Burnet, vol. iii. p. 336.

* It was first printed in 1688 on a single sheet as "A New Song " with
the air above the words (Brit. Mus. Cat. 38, vol. i. p. 25). Its effect was
emphasised in " A Pill to Purge State Melancholy 1715." Sterne introduces
it into Tristram Shandy as the favourite air of "my Uncle Toby" who had
fought at the Boyne and at Namur. It is in the State Poems and in the
Percy Reliques, ed. by R. A. Willmott, p. 367.

THOMAS WHARTON.

him. Consider of it a thousand years, and you cannot cast
your eyes upon a person so well to fit it as the Prince and
Princess of Orange. To them we owe all our safety ; most
of us, by this time, must either have been slaves to the
Papists, or hanged."4 In February, 1689, a few days after
the Proclamation of William and Mary as King and Queen
of England, Wharton was appointed a Privy Councillor5
and Comptroller of the Household,6 which post he occupied
during the whole of the reign. In that capacity the King
sent through him a message to the House in relation to the
remission of the Hearth Tax.7 He delivered the message
with these words : " I cannot but say this is the greatest
hoaour the King can do me, to make me a messenger of his.
I have seen messages for money, but it is the first I ever
heard of this kind for the King to part with a revenue. I
am to acquaint you further, a little more fully than in this
paper, viz., that the King was the first that moved this in
Council. He did it for the ease of the people and would
always do so ; he and only he, is to have the honour of it."8
William showed consideration for his subjects by abolish-
ing this tax. It was one of the most unjust and obnoxious of
the taxes for it pressed most heavily upon the poor.9 The
revenue was settled on a peace footing at £1,200,000 a year,
the hereditary taxes being given to William for the support
of his Crown. This, at the present day, constitutes the
Civil List.10 The following year Wharton accompanied
William to the Hague1 to attend the Congress, where there
was a large assembly of princes from all parts. William
presided over a meeting, and his speech setting forth the

4 Par!. Hist. vol. v. pp. 39, 52.

5 Cooke, Hist, of Party, vol. i. p. 495. Boyer, ut supra, vol. ii. p. 1.
u Boyer, ut supra, vol. ii. p. 2. 7 Hid. p. 13.

8 ParL Hist. vol. v. p. 152. 9 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 36.

10 For Civil List see Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 558. Hallam, Constif. Hist ,
vol. iii. p. 116.

1 Memoirs of 1715, p. 22. They set out Jan. 6th, 1690. Lords' and
Commons Journals, Jan. 5th, 1690.

84 THE JUNTO.

necessity of strong union and vigorous action against the
growing power of France was received with respect by his
German allies.2 Wharton, however, in spite of being the
holder of the White Staff, never really gained the confid-
ence of the King. William personally disliked him, and in
spite of his activity as one of his followers and in spite of his
eager ambition for promotion, William never advanced him
to any post of great importance.

Wharton took a small part in the debate on the Habeas
Corpus Suspension Bill3 and in the discussion on the supply
in 1690,4 when he declared £1,500,000 to be the smallest sum
that could be voted for the purpose of carrying on the war.
He is likewise mentioned as having spoken on the important
question concerning an abjuration of King James. All the
Whigs were for it, arguing that it was merely intended to
be a security to the government during the war; the main
body of the Tories were dead against it and much to the
disgust of the Whigs persuaded the King to order the
House to let the matter drop.5 The East India Company,
which had been incorporated by Queen Elizabeth, exercised
a considerable sway in the city of London ; the trade with
that country was always on the increase and this Company,
which had the monopoly of the trade, was making enormous
profits. After the Revolution the power of granting
monopolies in trade had been withdrawn from the Crown,
but the old East India Company had succeeded in retaining
its privileges by corruption, Sir Joshua Child, its president,
being the chief agent in these low practices.6 In 1695,
Parliament7 enquired carefully into the corruption of

- Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 8.

3 Parl. Hist. vol. v. p. 272. This was in the year 1689. ^ Ibid. p. 569.

3 For this debate in full see Parl. Hist. vol. v. p. 594 et seq. ; Burnet,
vol. iv. pp. 78-81 ; Ralph, Hist. vol. ii. p. 198.

' For career of the Company, see Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 129 et seq. ;
Townsend Warner, Landmarks in English Industrial History t p. 202 et *eq.
The importance of this Company lies in the fact that it brought is our
Indian Empire.

~ Macaulay, vol, iv. p. 545,

THOMAS WHARTON. 85

different public offices, and the East India Company was
accused of having been guilty of bribery. Trevor, Seymour
and Leeds were named as having received bribes at their
hands. A committee was appointed to inspect the books of
the Company and to enquire into the matter, and Wharton
was placed in the chair.8 He, with his usual quickness and
boldness, had grasped the opportunity which he saw could
be turned to the advantage of his party. He, a man. who
would have thought nothing of taking bribes himself, who,
in fact, thought it an everyday occurrence to corrupt some
one if it could serve his purpose, now boldly appeared in
public as being grieved at the baseness of the age. He
moved that Danby, now Duke of Leeds, should be im-
peached of high crimes and misdemeanours.9 Leeds tried
to excuse himself, but the verdict of the nation, though
never more than an informal one, was against him. For
Wharton this was enough. Leeds was disgraced and no
longer in power; the Whigs were triumphant. By this
time, it must be remembered, William had definitely shown
his preference for the Whigs. Since the general election
of 1690 that party had been gradually gaining ground; it
was now the predominating party both in numbers and in
strength. The leading Whigs had found that strength lay
in union, and a union of the closest began to exist between
the five men of the Junto.10

On the death of his father in 1696, Thomas Wharton
succeeded to the barony with a clear income of £8,000 a
year. On February 24, he took his seat in the House of
Peers.1 Four years prior to this he had married for a

H Memoirs of 1715, p. 26; Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 554; Boyer, William III.,
vol. iii. p. 16.

9 For this in full see Journals of the two Houses, April 27th, 1695 ; and
Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 551 et seq.

19 Somers was Lord Keeper of the Great Seal.
1 Lords' Journals, vol. xv. p. 679.

86 THE JUNTO.

second time, Lucy, daughter of Lord Lisburne, who brought
him £5,000 a year. By this marriage there were three
children2 — Philip, afterwards Duke of Wharton, who carried
profligacy and profanity even to a higher pitch than his father,
and two daughters. Although strongly supported by the
Whigs who had put him on the throne, William never
really held a secure seat. Jacobite plots were rife, plots to
assassinate the King and bring back James, with the help
of France. In 1696 one such plot was discovered and a
search for the conspirators was made. Sir John Fenwick,
a man who had worked with energy against the government
and who had treated the late Queen3 with personal insolence,
became the subject of a famous State Trial,4 when a Bill of
Attainder was brought against him. Wharton, one of the
Lords Temporal, was in favour of the Bill, and pushed it
forward with vigour. " Here is a Bill to attaint Sir John
Fenwick of high treason ; if I do reject the Bill I do
declare him not guilty, and if I do think him guilty I do
declare against my own judgment, for my judgment here
is not bound up as a man's judgment upon a jury, for his
judgment is bound up to proof according to law, and my
judgment is bound up by my own belief. This is the proof
I must go by ; and I think every man is bound in justice and
duty to his country, as he believes Sir John Fenwick to be
guilty, to be for the commitment of this Bill, and till any
gentleman will convince me that this is not a rule I am to
go by, I must continue in this opinion."5

It became a heated party controversy and the condemna-
tion and execution of Fenwick,6 infamous as it was, was wel-
comed by the Whigs as a victory to them.7

2 Chalmers, p. 330.

s She died from smallpox on Dec. 28th, 1694, aged 33 years.

4 Howell, State. Trials, vol. xiii. p. 75o. See also Macaulay, vol. iv.
p. 740 et seq. ; Burnet, Own Time*, vol. iv. p. 327 et seq. ; ParL Hint. vol. v.
p. 998 et seq. ; Hallam, Conttit. Hist. vol. iii. p. 131.

5 ParL Hist. vol. v. p. 1088. " Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 768.
7 Supra , Somers, p. 22.

THOMAS WHAETON. 87

It was felt by Wharton, who was now a peer of no small
income and who was eager for power and distinction, as
felt by his friends, that he should be given some important
place in the ministry. In 1G9T the Secretaryship was
vacated by the retirement of Trumbull8 and the Whigs
pushed Wharton forward as a suitable successor.9 Much
to their disappointment, Vernon was chosen. The appoint-
ment of Vernon disconcerted the Whig chiefs,10 for the pro-
motion of Wharton seemed thereby rendered more remote
than ever. The resignation of Shrewsbury would be neces-
sary before he could be pushed into office. Shrewsbury had
for long expressed a wish to resign, but William, who had
a personal regard for him and who foresaw with dread the
domineering Wharton taking his place, spared no effort to
retain him in the administration. A compromise was made
by which Shrewsbury retained the seals and Wharton was
partially gratified by being made Chief Justice in Eyre, in
the place of the Earl of Abington,1 and Lord Lieutenant for
Oxfordshire. As Lord Lieutenant Wharton showed his zeal
for pure Whig principles by removing five heads of colleges
from the Commission of Peace and putting in twenty-four
new ones.2 The Whigs were heartily indignant at the frus-
tration of their hopes, and vented their anger upon Robert,
Lord Sunderland, who was suspected of having had most
influence in the matter. He was openly attacked in Parlia-
ment ; fear of being discovered in connection with some
of his many past machinations obliged him to resign
his office3 as the only escape from impeachment. This
helped largely to alienate William from the Whigs. Sun.

"Cooke, Hist, of Party, vol. i. p. 534.

9 Burnet, vol iv. p. 325, note u.

10 Somers to Shrewsbury, Dec. 9th-19th, 1697. Coxe, Shrewsbury Corre-
spondence, p. 505.

1 April 22nd, 1697. " The Lord Wharton has kissed the King's hand for
the place of Chief Justice in Eyre in room of the Earl of Abington. " Luttrell,
vol. iv. p. 215.

2 Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 298. 3 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 377.

88 THE JUNTO.

derland, his favourite, persecuted, as he thought unjustly,4
and the Whigs still clamouring for the advancement of
Wharton, filled him with disgust. He left England for the
Continent, with little hope of ever reconciling Sunderland to
the Whig party. In the following March5 the King and
the Duke of Shrewsbury were the guests of Lord Wharton
at Wooburn,6 and a year later they stood godfathers to his
son while the Princess of Denmark was godmother.7

The elections of 1698 showed that the tide had turned
and the popularity of the Whig party was no longer what it
had been. To their mortification they found themselves
censured as the advocates of a standing army, accused of
partiality and oppression in support of their bold project of
the new East India Company,8 accused of imposing the
burdens which the war had rendered necessary, and in addi-
tion rapidly losing the confidence of the King.9 Many
disappointments were in store for them. Even Wharton,
the champion of the art of electioneering, was disgusted to
find himself beaten where he had hitherto exercised uncon-
trolled influence. He failed at Brackley, at Cockermouth
and at Malmesbury. He lost possession even of his own
strongholds, Wycombe and Aylesbury; he was defeated in
Oxfordshire; and his own county of Buckinghamshire, up
till now so loyal, rejected one of his candidates.10 This
sudden and decided reverse to the fortunes of the Whigs was
the forerunner of even worse times for them, for they were
to witness their leading men undergo the humiliation of
public impeachment. During all these years the question

4 Ibid. p. 379. 5 March, 1698.

6 Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 359. 7 Ibid. p. 469. Jan. 5th, 1699.

8 See Montagu, post, p. 140.

9 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 383.

'•Macaulay, vol. v. p. 129. See Somers to Shrewsbury, Aug. 16th-26th,
1698. Coxe, Shrewsbury Correspondence, p. 553. Also Vernon, Correspondence,
vol. ii. p. 152. " My Lord Wharton has been run down in all places ; it was
thought he might make a stand in Oxfordshire, but that failed like the rest."

THOMAS WHARTON, 89

of the succession to the Crown of Spain had been much
exercising the minds of William and his ministers. Anxiety
to avert a war and at all costs to prevent the further en-
croachment of France had induced William, with the advice
of Somers, to sign the First Partition Treaty.2 Foreign
politics, with which Somers had so much to do, did not
touch Wharton very closely. An offer of the Spanish Em-
bassy had been made to him, but he declined it with his
usual want of grace.3 Consequently he escaped impeach-
ment, which Somers, Orford and Halifax had later to under-
go, the main charge made against them being their share in
the Partition Treaties.4

Horse racing, duelling, and other interests of a similar
kind were carried on by Wharton with vigour throughout
the whole of his parliamentary career. In 1699 his famous
horse "Careless " beat one backed by the Duke of Devon-
shire for £1,900 at Newmarket.5 To go on a few years, his
horse "' Chance " won the Plate, £150, at the Quantain
race,6 he won the Duke of Maryborough's Plate at Wood-
stock7 and even as late as 1715, the year of his death, he
ran a horse and won his Majesty's Plate, value 100 guineas.8
For his famous horse " Gelding " Louis XIV. in vain
offered 1,000 pistoles.9 Wharton was equally successful
at duelling. In the years 1G99 and 1703 he took
part in election duels. " Some days since," notes Luttrell
in his diary, " a duel was fought in Bucks between
the Lords Wharton and Cheney and the latter disarmed."10
A dauntless swordsman, with constant presence of mind and

- October llth, 1698. See supra, p. 30, Somers.

3 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 410. Coxe, ut supra, p. 547.

4 For Partition Treaties see Somers, supra, pp. 30, 31.

5 Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 505. Saturday, April 15th, 1699. Muir, Newmarket
Calendar, p. 29.

6 Luttrell, vol. v. p. 588. 7 Ibid. p. 595.

8 Newmarket Calendar, p. 44. 9 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 458.

10 July, 1699. Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 539. Vernon, Correspondence, vol. ii.
p. 324.

90 THE JUNTO.

great agility of body, his skill was the envy of duellists of
the time. He is said to have declared that he vowed to
himself never to give or refuse a challenge and that it had
been his particular happiness that in several duels in which
he was engaged he had never killed an antagonist or him-
self been worsted.11

In spite of his exertions and devotion to England,
William never really gained the love of his subjects. Com-
plaints \vere continually being made against him ; lavish
grants of land to his personal favourites, many of whom
were foreigners,1 excited much jealousy and a heated debate
on the subject took place between the Houses.2 The Crown
lands had been constantly dealt with according to the
King's pleasure, without the interference of Parliament. In
giving these away William was simply doing what his pre-
decessors had done; but the case of estates recently for-
feited in Ireland was quite different. In 1690 a Bill order-
ing them to be applied to the public service had not passed
into law, owing to the King's departure for the Continent,
but he had promised the Commons another opportunity of
settling the question. No steps having been taken since that
date, William evidently considered himself entitled to act
as he wished. The Commons had had their opportunity
many times over and not used it. The forfeited lands
amounted to about 1,700,000 acres, a fourth of which had
been restored to its ancient holders, according to the
Limerick pacification.3 At the end of the session of 1699
the Commons had tacked to the Land Tax Bill a clause ap-
pointing seven Commissioners to enquire into the matter.4
They visited Ireland and presented their report.5 Unable

11 Memoirs of 1715, pp. 32, 33.

1 The Earl of Portland and the Countess of Orkney were among the
favoured ones. Hallam, vol. iii. p. 141.

2 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 261. Burnet, vol. iv. p. 404.

3 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 264.

4 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 405. 5 Ibid. p. 436.

THOMAS WHARTON. 91

to arrive at any decision, the Commons brought in a
Resumption Bill,6 which vested all the forfeited lands in the
hands of trustees and oft'ered rewards to any discovering
lands which ought to have been confiscated. Prepared for
opposition, they again tacked this Bill to the Land Tax Bill.7
But the Lords were determined not to accept it without a
struggle ; little as they liked the foreigners, they could not
allow themselves to be so easily overridden. It passed,
nevertheless, the second reading. On the third reading
many amendments were proposed and carried. Wharton
was the leader of the Whigs on this occasion8 and boldly
proposed amendments which were accepted, and in its new
form the Bill was sent down to the Lower House. The
Commons were at one — the amendments were rejected, and
added to this the nation supported them.9 Threatening to
become a serious breach between the two Houses, in danger
of breaking the peace at home, which, to William, was so
necessary, he urged the Lords to give way. The Bill was
passed without amendments.10 The great men of the Junto
were far too clear-headed not to foresee that to continue in
opposition any longer would be mere rashness. It was
obvious that the Lords could not have the nation with them
and that if a general election were to take place it would be
greatly to their disadvantage. Somers, in his room of sick-
ness, had pronounced this opinion, and his colleagues agreed

"Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 631.

7 This practice of tacking a Bill to a Money Bill so as to render it im-
possible for the Lords even to modify them without depriving the King of
his supply tended to subvert the Constitution and annihilate the rights of a
co-equal House of Parliament Hallam, vol. iii. p. 142.

s Somers was absent owing to illness. Macaulay, vol. v. p. 275. Burnet,
vol. iv. p. 439.

" Whilst the Bill was in suspense the whole city of London was in an
uproar." Burnet, vol. iv. p. 431), note g.

10 To be obliged to pass this Bill without amendments was a precedent
infinitely dangerous to the legislative power of the Lords. Hallam, vol. iii. p.
142. " The whole of the business relating to these forfeitures, as carried on
by all parties, was a great reproach to the times. There was neither justice
nor public spirit in it, of either side." Burnet, vol. iv. p. 441, note 1.

92 THE JUNTO.

with him. Some abstained from voting. Wharton, who
had exerted himself so strenuously in favour of the amend-
ments, beat a retreat and left hurriedly for Newmarket.1

Meanwhile the question of the Spanish Succession, which
had been at any rate for a time settled by the First Partition
Treaty, was reopened in 1699 by the death of the Electoral
Prince,2 to whom the bulk of the Spanish dominions had
been allotted. This had driven William to suddenly pro-
rogue Parliament.3 For some reason, probably to quiet
the opposition in the House, he had removed the great Lord
Somers from office and placed the Great Seal in the hands
of an unworthy successor, Sir Nathan Wright. The death
of the third claimant made a Second Partition Treaty neces-
sary. It was thereupooi agreed that the Spanish dominions
should pass to the Archduke Charles.4 A debate took
place in the Lords,5 in which House the Partition Treaty
was much disapproved of. After three days' debate they
resolved to frame an address to the King, complaining both
of the treaty and of the method in which it had been
carried on. Lord Wharton moved an addition to this
address. " That, whereas the French King had broke that
treaty they should advise His Majesty to treat no more
with him, or rely on his word, without a real security."6
This was opposed by all who were against a new war, but
the majority of the House approved of it, agreeing that the
treachery of the French negotiations made some pledge
necessary.

The Tories were dissatisfied with the Partition Treaties ;
being against an increase of the standing army, they objected

1 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 281. Ranke, vol. vi. p. 212. Also Vernon, Corres-
pondencet vol. iii. p. 16. " And now he is railed at in both Houses."

2 He, being the least powerful of the three claimants, was to receive most.

3 April llth, 1700. 4 Son of the Emperor Leopold.

5 March 14th, 1700-1701. Parl. History, vol. v. p. 1238.

6 Parl. History, vol. v. p. 1241. Rapin, vol. i. p. 452. Burnet, vol.
iv. p. 482.

THOMAS WHARTON.

93

to England's interference on the Continent. Out of mere
revenge they impeached those Whig lords who had had a
chief share in their formation. But with a total failure in
their object, instead of gaining, they lost the approval of the
country. The death of Charles III. of Spain in 1700 and of
James II. in 1701 wholly altered the situation. The Crown of
Spain was offered to and accepted by Louis XIV.'s grandson
Philip, and on the death of James, Louis, regardless of the
Treaty of Byswick,7 recognized the Prince of Wales as
James III. of England. At this critical juncture William
needed more than the support of the Whigs, the upholders
of the principles of the Revolution and the Act of Settle-
ment. Parliament was dissolved.8 An excited general elec-
tion took place, at which the country answered the call of the
King. Whigs were returned ; they once more got the upper
hand in the capital9 and in the country they gained much of
the ground which they had lost. Wharton again reigned
supreme in Buckinghamshire ; 10 the University of Cam-
bridge, which hitherto had favoured the Tories, defeated
their candidate and brought in the Whig, Isaac Newton,
with flying colours.1 Supplies were willingly voted by the
new Parliament. Europe was arming and England was
preparing to check the daring encroachment of France, when
William suddenly died2 and the work which it had been his
ambition to perform passed into other hands. But it is to
no new epoch when we pass from William to Anne. The
same principles are at work, the same influences are to be

7 By which Louis recognised William as King of England.

8 The English were indignant at being dictated to by Louis. "This
gave a universal distaste to the whole English nation ; all people seemed
possessed with a high indignation upon it, to see a foreign power, that was
at peace with us, pretend to declare who ought to be our King. . . . The
city of London began, and all the nation followed, in a set of addresses,
expressing their abhorrence of what the French king had done." Burnet
vol. iv. p. 543.

9 Four Whig members were returned. Macaulay, vol. v. p. 302.

10 Ibid. p. 303.

1 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 303. y Ibid. p. 305.

94 THE JUNTO.

seen ; the same characters, with the exception of the Sover-
eign, are on the stage. William, whose one policy abroad
had been to keep France from becoming predominant in
Europe, bequeathed his policy to Marlborough, in whom he
had a competent successor. It had been entirely through
the persistent energy of William that the Grand Alliance,
the only chance of resistance to Louis, has been formed,
and though his death followed almost immediately, his work
did not cease with him ; he had set the machine in motion
and it continued to move even after the death of the prime
mover. In the sympathies of the new Sovereign, however,
there was a very noticeable change. The High Church
Tory party were soon in evidence and the government of
the country was soon transferred from the hands of the
Whigs, whose representative had been William, into those
of the Tories, who looked up to the new Queen as their chief.
The new reign began with the Tories in full power but in
the somewhat inconsistent attitude of being forced to con-
tinue the Whig policy which William had begun, the policy
of consistent opposition to France.3 From words uttered in
her first speech from the throne the Whigs could fully see
that they need hope for little sympathy from Anne : " As I
know my own heart to be entirely English, I can very
sincerely assure you there is not anything you can expect of
me which I shall not be ready to do for the happiness and
prosperity of England, and you shall always find me a
religious and strict observer of my word."4 Her stress on
the fact that she was " entirely English " could, perhaps,
be hardly anything but a reflection on William, who had
never succeeded in making his subjects entirely forget that
he was a Dutchman. The Comptrollers' Staff was taken from
Wharton to be given "to that bully of the party, Sir Edward

3 It had always been Marlborough's desire to form an administration
composed of the moderate men of both parties, but Anne was against this
seemingly when she came to the throne. See Coxe, Memoirs of the Duke.

* Parl, Hittory, vol. vi. p. 5.

THOMAS WHARTON.

95

Seymour,"5 and his name was struck out of the list of Privy
Councillors.6 Loss of office, however, did not damp the
vigour of the Lord Wharton. In the Conference with the
House of Commons with regard to the Occasional Conformity
Bill he was one of the managers for the Lords and an
opposer who showed much untiring zeal. His exertions
resulted in the acceptance of the amendments and the Bill
was dropped for the session. Wharton was personally
attacked in connection with his apparently atheistical atti-
tude, and, in replying, confessed that though " he was by
education a Dissenter he was a Churchman by choice," and
as a proof of this he declared that he kept a chaplain, the
Rev. Mr. Kingford, at Winchendon, who read the Church
of England prayers in his house twice a day in the presence
of his servants.7 Nevertheless his open contempt for all
religion remained a well-known fact.

Later an amended Bill was passed by the Commons but
again thrown out by the Lords. Wharton urged the Lords to
give their attention to the state of Scotland and Ireland
instead of wasting their time in annoying the Dissenters at
home.8 His success in preventing the Bill from being
passed did not add to his already diminishing popularity
with the majority in the Lower House. The attitude which
he took up in the Aylesbury franchise case rendered him
even more peculiarly disliked. This case9 was one in
which the freedom and dignity of Englishmen were at stake.
The returning officers for the borough of Aylesbury had
been known to reject the vote of Mathew Ashby in favour

5 Memoirs of 1715, p. 36. Cunningham, History of Great Britain, says
that Anne took Wharton 's staff and handed it to Seymour before his face.
Sir G. Seymour was a special foe of Wharton's, whom he had done hard to
injure over the East India enquiry. Nat. Biog. article Wharton.

6 Memoirs of 1715, p. 36. 7 Ibid. p. 38.

8 In this motion Wharton was supported by the Tory Haversham.
Wyon, vol. i. p. 217.

9 For Aylesbury franchise case see Hallam, vol. iii. pp. 273-276 ; Part.
History, vol. vi. p. 225 et seq. ; Howell, vol. xiv. p. 695 et seq. ; Wyon, vol. i.
p. 227 et seq. ; and Burton, Queen Anne, vol. i. p. 118,

96 THE JUNTO.

of their own friends. Ashby brought an action against the
returning officer, who happened to be the mayor, William
White; after a. long dispute in the Court of the Queen's
Bench, Ashby received no support. Wharton, who recognized
that Ashby had a perfect right to exercise the franchise, and
who also saw in the dispute a means of furthering Whig
influence, gave his firm support to Ashby and helped him to
bring his case before the House of Lords in February, 1704.
In this court Ashby was the victor and there was no small
significance in the fact, for by it the franchise of English-
men had been put under the protection of the common law.10
The prisoners, Ashby and his fellow burgesses, are said to
have been kept and managed by Wharton when at Newgate.1
Wharton's indefatigable energy in the cause of his party
had further opportunity of showing itself in the elections
of 1705. He spared neither time nor money; he is said to
have spent upwards of £12,000 and to have insured the
return of more than thirty Whig members.2 The new
House, which met in October, whether a result of Wharton's
efforts or not, showed a distinct change in favour of the
Whigs. Their influence was undoubtedly growing and it
seemed to be the wish of the Government to form a coalition
with them, for several high offices were given or promised

w It may perhaps be added that Wharton was the first person to teach
his countrymen that their votes possessed a pecuniary value, and to divert
the golden stream which had formerly flowed into the pockets of returning
officers into the pockets of electors. Wyon, vol. i. p. 228.

1 Rapin, vol. i. p. 682. Burnet, vol. v. i. p. 195, note 1. The writer of the
Memoirs of 17 75 says that it was largely owing to the zeal and management
of Wharton that his borough was saved from the hands of the Jacobites.
He was put to a vast expense to prosecute the suit, in doing which he
asserted the right of every elector in England. ' ' To prosecute a suit
attended with so much cost, fatigue and vexation against the opinion of the
Court of the Queen's Bench, against the votes of the House of Commons,
and to do it successfully, must be the effects of the utmost greatness and
vigour of mind" (p. 55). Also Burnet, vol. v. p. 118, note o: "It
was made a party contest and carried on for the sake of that. Lord
Wharton was much concerned in it personally, the borough of Aylesbury
being one of those he had election interests in and which he applied himself
to whenever he could, and with all sorts of management in which he was
very dexterous."

2 Memoirs of 1715, p. 41.

THOMAS WHARTON. 97

to Whigs.3 Marlborough's connection with that party be-
came closer through the marriage of his daughter to Sunder-
land ; his sympathies seemed to be drifting over to the Junto,
in which body he recognized the chief talent and strength
of the country lay. Wharton's ardour and loyalty gained
for him a considerable influence with the leaders of the
Whigs. In April of 1705 the Queen visited the University
of Cambridge and dined in the Hall of Trinity College.
Wharton accompanied her and was admitted, with others of
position, to an honorary degree of LL.D.4

On the debate concerning a Regency being resumed it
was opened by Lord Wharton in a manner that, according
to Bishop Burnet,5 charmed the whole house, and the Earl
of Dartmouth adds a note in which he says : " This charm-
ing Lord Wharton had the most provoking insolent manner
of speaking that I ever observed in any man, without any
regard to civility or truth."6 It is a little difficult to dis-
cover wherein the charm lay !

The following year Wharton became Yiscount Winchen-
don in the county of Bucks, and Earl of Wharton in the
county of Westmorland.7 But these honours by no means
satisfied his ambition ; he aspired to an important position in
the Government, to have some office where he could exercise
his power, and he was continually clamouring for some
such appointment. Marlborough was able to quiet him to
some extent by promising to give him the Yiceroyalty of
Ireland when it should become vacant.8 To be named an
English Commissioner9 for the Treaty of Union with
Scotland, which took place in April of 1706, was no small

3 Rooke was superseded by a Whig as Commander-in-Chief of the Fleet.
The Duke of Newcastle was admitted as Privy Seal in place of the Tory
Duke of Buckingham.

* Nat. Biog. 5 Burnet, vol. v. p. 234. B Ibid, note t.

7 Memoirs of 1715, p. 56. 8 Boyer, ut supra, p. 311.

9 For full list of Commissioners see Cobbett, vol. vi. pp. 534, 535. For
debate in the Lords see ibid. p. 561 et seq. See also Mackinnon, Union of
England and Scotland ; Burnet, vol. v. p. 295 ; Luttrell, vol. vi. p. 127 ;
Wyon, vol. i. p. 442.

7

98 THE JUNTO.

gratification to Wharton, for he had the Union much at
heart.10 All the five members of the Junto worked for the
Union. Lord Somers, as we have already seen,1 devoted
much time and thought to effect it and Wharton was no less
ardent: his name always figures in the debates on this all
important measure and he contributed his share to the great
task of getting it through.2 The year 1706 may, perhaps, be
taken as the time in Wharton's political career when he
first began to act deliberately in junction with the Whig
Junto.3 On May 10, he sent by Halifax a complimentary
letter to the Elector of Hanover4 in which he put forward
his endeavour to serve his country as much to his credit,
He received a gratifying reply from the Elector.5 It was
not till 1708, however, that Wharton's services to his
country received, as he himself thought, full recognition.
The death of the Prince6 meant a shuffling of the higher
offices in the State. Pembroke was declared Lord High
Admiral of Great Britain and Ireland in the place of the
Prince; of the posts which he had already held he was
deprived. The Presidency of the Council was given to
Somers and Wharton was named Lord Lieutenant of Ire-
land.7 The Whigs seemed now for a brief period con-
tented and the storm of the new session, which had been
looked forward to with dread by Godolphin, subsided into a

10 Memoirs of 1715, p. 45.

1 Supra, pp. 50, 51.

2 Sir Paul Chamberlen, An Impartial History of the Life and Reiyn of
Queen Anne, p. 221. Boyer, Queen Anne, 4th ed. 1735, p. 281.

3 Nat. Biog. < Stowe MS. 222, f. 394.

s Dated June 20th. Several others among whom were Somers, Sunder-
land and Orford received similar answers.

• October 28bh, 1708.

7 Memoir* of 1715, p. 57 ; Boyer, Queen Anne, 4th ed. p. 358 ; Lecky, vol. i.
p. 42 ; Stanhope, vol. ii. p. 98. November 16th, 1708. " Last night the Lord
Wharton kissed her Majesty's hand in order to be Lord Lieutenant of Ireland."
November 27th. Wharton declared Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Luttrell,
vol. vi. p. 373. Also Burnet, vol. v. p. 392, note h : "Lord Wharton pro-
fessing himself a Whig, but intrinsically void of moral or religious principles,
who with mischievous abilities had long been a thorn in the ministers' sides,
was appointed Lord Lieutenant of Ireland."

THOMAS WHARTON.

99

surprising calm. What the real motive of the Queen was
when she nominated Wharton to be her Lieutenant in Ire-
land it is difficult to decide. She always had a dislike for
the rough, coarse man, with his shameless, lying and inso-
lent behaviour, that it seems hardly conceivable that she
deemed him worthy to represent her in the sister island.
That he was a man of power she could not fail to recognize,
and perhaps she thought this power would not be as danger-
ous in Ireland as it might be in England now that he had
definitely joined forces with the formidable Whig Junto.
The object of this body of men was not difficult to discover.
They were obviously determined to gain the government of
the country and complete mastery over Anne. The Queen,
supported by Harley, was anxious to resist this as long as
she could. Harley may not improbably have advised her to
send Wharton to Ireland; this would mean at least one
Whig out of the way whom they feared might prove trouble-
some.8 Having chosen Joseph Addison to be his Secretary
of State,9 Wharton left England to take up his new duties in
Ireland. He landed at Kingsend on April 21, 1709, and
took the oaths10 as Lord Lieutenant. Almost immediately
he opened a session of Parliament with an excellent speech,
the keynote of which was his great desire to reconcile the
Church of England to the Dissenters in Ireland, so as by
union to form a stronger resistance to Popery, which he
earnestly wished to see altogether rooted out. " My Lords
and Gentlemen, I am obliged and directed to lay before you
another consideration of infinite consequence, and that is
to put you in mind of the inequality there is in respect of
numbers between the Protestants and Papists of this king-
dom, and of the melancholy experience you have had of the

8 This view is taken by Gibson in his Memoirs of Queen Anne, p. 86.

9 December 21st, 1708. " The Lord Wharton has made Joseph Addison
Ex-Secretary of State for Ireland, Alex. Denton, Esq., M.P. for Bucking-
ham, his private secretary, and Dr. Lambert his first chaplain." Luttrell,
vol. vi. p. 386.

10 Luttrell, vol. vi. p. 436. Memoirs of 1715, p. 58,

100 THE JUNTO.

good nature of this sort of men whenever they have had it in
their power to distress or destroy you. These reflections
must necessarily lead you to think of two things. The first
is seriously to consider whether any new Bills are wanting
to enforce or explain those good laws which you have al-
ready for preventing the growth of Popery. And in the next
place it makes evident the necessity there is of cultivating
and preserving a good understanding amongst all the Pro-
testants of this kingdom. What the most proper methods
are to compass so desirable and necessary an end yourselves,
who have the opportunities of knowing the uneasiness that
any of your fellow subjects may lie under, are the fittest to
judge. I will only add that the Queen, who is all goodness,
never had anything so much at her royal heart as the bring-
ing to pass and perfecting the union of her subjects to
Great Britain, and I may venture to say that she looks upon
her success in that great undertaking to equal if not to
exceed any other of the glories of her reign. Her Majesty
now with the same earnestness, and with the same hopes of
success, recommends to you a perfect union and friendship
among yourselves ; and it is therefore to be hoped that every
good subject and good Protestant will endeavour to follow
so great an example, and to procure so general a blessing."1

The Papists soon learnt that they would receive no
favour from Wharton, and during the session a Bill to
prevent the growth of Popery was passed enacting " that
the estates of the Irish Papists should descend to their
Protestant heirs."

Of Wharton's life in Ireland during his two years of
office little is known. The writer of the " Memoirs," which is
almost the only source giving anything but the merest facts,
says that he made himself eminently popular and beloved.
He lived in a manner which pleased the Irish ; his Court at
Dublin was easily approached, everything was carried on in

1 Memoirs of 1715, p. 60,

THOMAS WHA&TON. lOl

a free and easy manner; business was finished off in the
morning, the evenings were spent in balls, gambling and
other diversions to which aldermen, citizens and their wives
were invited. The result of this was an address from the
Irish House of Lords to Queen Anne when Wharton left
England : " We return our most humble thanks to your
Majesty for sending His Excellency the Earl of Wharton,
a person of so great wisdom and experience to be our chief
governor."2 All who renounced allegiance to the Papacy
had been received by Wharton at his Court. By this and
other methods he is said to have done more " in rooting out
Popery in three months than the most popular of his pre-
decessors in three years."3 His sympathies were entirely
for the Dissenters and in his speech at the end of the session
he urged them to unite against the common foe and con-
cluded by declaring it to be the Queen's intention " that
Dissenters should not be persecuted or molested in the exer-
cise of their religion."4

It was during Wharton's Lieutenancy in Ireland that
the crisis of 1710, the utter rout of the Whig party, took
place. The trial of Dr. Sacheverell consummated the grow-
ing unpopularity of the Whigs and the whole aspect of the
political situation was changed. The Whigs had gone one
step too far; they had touched a sensitive chord and the
nation rose with one accord against the party which they
were now convinced was Republican at heart, in religion
atheists, or what was still worse — Dissenters. Wharton left
Ireland when the trial of Dr. Sacheverell began and was
present at the proceedings. He spoke and voted against
Sacheverell ; he urged impeachment,5 maintaining the neces-
sity of resistance in such cases in order to vindicate the
honour of the Revolution. He showed none of the modera-

2 Memoirs of 1715, p. 64. 3 Ibid. p. 62.

4 Ibid. p. 68.

5 Parl. Hist. vol. vi. p. 805 et seq. Boyer, Queen Anne, 4th ed. 1735,
p. 429.

102 THE JtJNtO.

tion displayed by the great Lord Somers, and there is little
doubt that the vigour with which he pushed forward the
impeachment helped to bring on the defeat of his political
allies. So disliked did he make himself thereby that his
private house in Dover Street was attacked.

He returned to Ireland on May 7, 1710. 6 In opening
Parliament7 he once more urged union among the Pro-
testants and loyalty to the Queen " who so gloriously
espoused and vindicated not only the rights of her own
people but the liberties of all Europe."8

If one can judge from the addresses which Wharton
received at the hands of the Irish House, there is little doubt
that his administration during the two years was highly
appreciated and gave complete satisfaction.9 One eminent
historian, Mr. Lecky, says he distinguished himself in
Ireland by his rapacity and oppression ; 10 other views are
that his removal from Ireland was a great act of justice to
that country, for he had been uniformly obnoxious to both
parties1 and that Somers, and even Sunderland, showed
their dissatisfaction at his behaviour.2

The great Whig administration of Queen Anne fell and
Tories filled the places which the Whigs had looked upon as
so decidedly their right to have and which they were
reluctant to leave. Wharton retired to his seat at Winchen-
don, with the intention of doing all he could to oppose new
measures and to prevent what he thought would be the ruin

6 Perhaps Harley thought it expedient to have Wharton away while the
general elections were approaching. See Somerville, Queen Anne.

7 May 19th.

8 Memoirs of 1715, p. 76 ; also Kennet, Wisdom of Looking Back, p. 37.

9 Memoirs of 1715, p. 81 et seq.

10 History of Eighteenth Century, vol. i. p. 42.

1 Macpherson, James, History of 1775, vol. ii. p. 456.

• Godolphin to Marlborough, June 27th, 1709. Private Correspondence of
the Duchess of Marlborough, vol. ii. p. 340. Some of Wharton's appointments
were said to be scandalous. A story was going round about him that he had
recommended one of his companions to a bishop for ecclesiastical preferment
as " of a character faultless but for his damnably bad morals " (Nat. Biog.).

THOMAS WHARTON.

of his country. He worked hard at the elections and suc-
ceeded in obtaining a seat in the new Parliament for a
friend, Sir Edmund Denton, as member for Buckingham-
shire. Soon after his retirement from Ireland Wharton was
severely attacked3 in " The Examiner " and other political
papers, chiefly with regard to his oppressive administration
as Lord Lieutenant. No writer was so unmerciful in his
remarks as Swift; he tried to expose him under the name
of " Verres," and his paper in " The Examiner," No. XIV.,
entitled " The Art of Political Lying," was directed against
Wharton. Swift's bitter hatred was not improbably a vent
to his disappointed hope, for he had expected promotion
when Wharton was Lord Lieutenant of Ireland.4 In 1714
Wharton made a complaint against u a scandalous anony-
mous libel" entitled "The Public Spirit of the Whigs";5
he tried his utmost to discover who was the author. Swift
managed at the time to keep secret his authorship of all
these spiteful attacks through the Press. He even tried to
urge on a scheme to impeach Wharton, of which he writes,
" I have reason to know that it would be acceptable to the
Court " ; 6 but it fell through. Swift's character of "Wharton
given at length7 is, perhaps, the most bitter satire ever
written of any man, but his notoriously bad morals gave
a good vantage ground for Swift's attack. On the other
hand the author of " The Spectator," in dedicating a volume
of his work to Wharton, speaks very favourably of his con-
duct in public life. But it must not be forgotten that
personal and party prejudices influenced to a large extent the

3 Memoirs of 1715, pp. 87, 88. Swift writes of one of his own productions
(Journal, to Stella, vol. ii. p. 99), December 8th, 1710 : "Here is a damned
libellous pamphlet come out against Lord Wharton, giving the character
first and then telling some of his actions ; the character is very well but
the facts indifferent."

1 There is a story that Somers recommended Swift to Wharton, but that
Wharton refused with the reply, " Oh, my lord, we must not prefer or
countenance these fellows ; we have not character enough ourselves." Swift,
Works, vol. i. p. 90.

5 Ibid. vol. iv. p. 215. 6 Ibid. vol. xv. p. 391.

'' Ibid. vol. iv. pp. 1-28, and vol. v. pp. 29, 30.

104 THE JUNTO.

writings of both these men ; Swift was a hot Tory and Sir
Richard Steele a staunch Whig. Whether in office or out
of office, Wharton was of immense use to his party. During
the last years of Queen Anne's reign he continued a vigor-
ous opposer to the measures of the Court, and it was this
continual and active interest that helped to keep alive every
element of discontent and to keep his party prepared for
the first opportunity of grasping power. Prince Eugene,
when he visited England, was almost royally entertained by
Wharton, which won the hearts of the people who thought
the Tories were not showing nearly enough attention to the
great captain. Wharton was one of the Lords who pro-
tested against the orders given to the Duke of Ormond for
not fighting ; 9 he seconded Halifax when moving for an
address to desire Her Majesty to order the Duke of Ormond
to act offensively in concert with the allies. In June, 1713,
he moved an address to the Queen, urging her to exercise
" her influence " with the Duke of Lorraine so as to effect
the expulsion of the Pretender from Nancy ; he moved that
" Her Majesty might be desired to issue a Proclamation,
promising a reward to any person who should apprehend
the Pretender, dead or alive."10 After a lengthy debate
the motion was carried and Wharton was one of the Lords
who carried the address up to the Queen. His speech against
the Schism Bill1 was very nearly the last he was destined
to utter and it was one of no small consequence. The
object of the Bill2 was to revive a clause in the Act of
Uniformity, which forbade schoolmasters from giving any
instruction before signing a public declaration of uniform-
ity with the Established Church. The Bill now brought

9 Parl. History, vol. vi. p. 1136.

10 Ibid. p. 1337 ; also Boyer, Political State, vol. vi. p. 1, and Wyon,
vol. ii. p. 456.

1 June 4th, 1714.

2 For Schism Bill see Boyer, Political State, vol. vii. p. 479 ; Paul
Chamberlen, p. 498 ; Boyer, Queen Anne, p. 704 ; Parl. History, vol. vi.
p. 1351 ; and Mahon, England, vol. i. p. 81.

THOMAS WHARTON. 105

forward advocated severe fines for teaching1 without a licence
from a bishop. This cruel and tyrannical measure enraged
the Whigs, who had always supported the Dissenters, whom
the Tories had done all in their power to oppress. Wharton
spoke with bitterness and indignation, aiming most of his
thrusts at Bolingbroke, the chief promoter of the Bill, who
had himself been educated in his youth by a Dissenting
minister and whose subsequent behaviour was known to have
been that of a libertine. This gave Wharton ample scope
for cruel satire and coarse wit, which he was never inclined
to spare in the House. The Bill eventually passed, but not
without a protest signed by thirty-three Peers.3 Fortunately
for the country, the Bill never came into operation. The date
fixed for its introduction was August 1, 1714; on that
very day the Queen died and the Government which sup-
ported the new King was Whig and not likely to tolerate
any such persecution of the Dissenters. The Act was
repealed.

During Anne's last illness Wharton, with many other
Whig Lords belonging to the Privy Council, made a point of
asserting their right to attend at the Council Board. See-
ing that the Queen's death was not far oft', Wharton was one
of the Whigs who helped to ensure the peaceable accession
of George I. to the throne. His name was not on the list
of Ilegents, possibly owing to the extreme dislike the Queen
showed for him, but when George I. became King he was
appointed Lord Privy Seal,4 and oil February 15, 1715,
he was created Marquis of Wharton and Malmesbury in
England, Baron of Trim, Earl of Rathfarrnum and Marquis
of Catherlogh in Ireland, and Lord Lieutenant of the County
of Westmorland.5 For two short months only was he to

3 Rogers, vol. i. p. 221. The Bill was carried by 77 to 72. It was
supported by Bolingbroke, Anglesey, North and Grey, and opposed by
Cowper, Wharton, Halifax, Townshend and Nottingham.

4 Mahon, vol. i. p. 103.

5 Memoirs of 1715 1 p. 105 ; Ranke, vol. v. p. 363 ; Boyer, Political State,
vol. ix. p. 11.

106 THE JUNTO.

enjoy these honours, nor was he to witness the Whig ascend-
ency which, by his unceasing labours for his party, he had
so largely helped to advance. He died at his house in
Dover Street on April 12, 1715, and was buried quietly at
Winchendon.

That his death meant a severe loss to his party there can
be no doubt. His passion for pure Whig principles,6 his
zeal for the Protestant interest and for the Protestant suc-
cession, his great natural abilities and fund of good sense
were invaluable at the time in which he lived. Though far
from being wholly disinterested in his partisanship, he was
nevertheless at heart a true Whig and his loyalty was sin-
cere.7 Perhaps his skill as a party organiser proved to be
the quality which his colleagues of the Junto found most
indispensable ; in this direction it would have been hard to
find his equal.8 His immoralities, his profaneness and his
open contempt for religion are incontestable. The follow-
ing poem, written in 1712,9 gives some idea of the hatred
and disgust which his behaviour excited : —

Industrious, unfatigued in Faction's Cause,
Sworn Enemy to God, his Church and Laws :
He doats on Mischief for dear Mischief's sake ;
Joins contradictions in his wondrous make ;
A flattering Bully and a stingy Rake.
Joins depth of Cunning with Excess of Rage,
Lewdness of youth with Impotence of Age.
Descending, though of Race illustrious born,
To such vile actions as a slave wou'd scorn.
A Vice-y once, by unpropitious Fate,
The Ruler and the Robber of the State.

8 See Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 298.

7 Cunningham, in his Lives of Eminent and Illustrious Englishmen (183t5),
says : " His political life, if not brilliant, had the merit of consistency, and
he freely sacrificed both his time and money to the objects of the Liberal
party. There was about him a rugged force of character which enabled him
to surmount many difficulties which to minds of less energy and endurance
would have often proved insurmountable."

8 Lecky, vol. i. p. 209. The Whigs lost Wharton, " the most skilful and
unscrupulous of their party managers," talking of his death.

9 " The character of a certain Whigg," 1712. Brit. Mus. Cat. 11,630, h.

THOMAS WHARTON. 107

His dignity and Honour, he secures

By Oaths, Prof anen ess, Ribaldry and Whores.

Kisses the man, whom just before he bit,

Takes Lies for Jests, and Perjury for Wit,

To great and small alike extends his Frauds,

Plund'ring the Crown and bilking Rooks and Bauds.

His mind still working, mad, of Peace bereft,

And Malice eating what the P — x has left.

A monster, whom no Vice can bigger swell,

Abhor'd by Heaven and long since due to Hell.

A Tory probably being the author of these bitter lines
warns us that they cannot be taken too severely, for party
antagonism was capable of producing any quantity of such
invective.

Swift, who hated Wharton as an " atheist grafted on a
Dissenter," was, nevertheless, probably somewhat correct
when he summed up Wharton's career as " wholly occupied
by vice and politics." His untiring energy was used in the
cause of both.

The nicknames of " Honest Torn " and " Let-'em-be-
damiied Wharton " put in a nutshell his character as ex-
hibited in his conduct to others. "Honest" he was, to those
with whom he sympathised ; anxious to do all he could to help
them and promote their interests. On the other hand, any-
one who held views contrary to his own, anyone who ven-
tured to oppose him, he dismissed with the vulgarest
invective. He was the boldest of men and the most
unscrupulous. A few virtues and, above all, unquestionable
talents were sufficient to make his party tolerate his vulgar
and abandoned character which, to his friends, proved so
often distasteful and which gave to his two wives such a
wretched married life. There was some cause for Queen
Anne's personal dislike for Wharton and for her anxiety to
keep him at a distance. She realized that he was a danger-
ous man to have in office, and the fact that she did realize
this is but another instance of the soundness of her
judgment.

108 THE JtJNTO.

EDWARD RUSSELL.

IN following the career of Edward Russell we are to a
great extent tracing the naval history of England during the
reigns of William III. and Anne. There was but one aim
of any real importance to naval and military politicians
alike — resistance to France. England had good cause for
her anxiety. The monarchs of England, and William III.
most of all, recognised the danger which lay in that direc-
tion, and the keynote of the foreign policy during the reigns
of William III. and Anne may be summed up in that one
sentence — resistance to France. It was not, however, only
the Sovereigns of England who realized the danger which
Louis' ambition might be to their country, the nation was
at one with its ruler in this common dread.

The fact that Russell's career exemplified the national
antipathy to France may largely account for his popularity ;
for there was little, if anything, in his character that was
commendable. His conduct, his secret intrigues, his falsi-
ties, his insolent pride were little known to the nation, or, at
any rate, if known were concealed by his public services which
were universally notorious. Russell was a man of consider-
able capacity for war and administration, but without a spark
of genius. He was no statesman, no orator; he had no
power as a politician ; he made no mark in the House. There
was a bluntness and coarseness about his behaviour which
was distasteful and made him disliked by Anne and even
by William, who nevertheless owed much to him as one
of the supporters of the Revolution. Moreover, he was
ambitious to an insatiable degree. His greed for high

EDWARD RUSSELL.

EDWARD KUSSELL. 109

office, for distinction of any kind and for recognition could
never be satisfied. His one object always seemed to be his
own advantage.1 Yet lie was a member of the Junto, and
highly considered by his party. He had at least, if none
other, the merit of loyalty to his party ; he was a staunch
Whig throughout his life, and next to his own interests
those of his party were very dear to him. He had a strong
party spirit, and never for a moment, not even when he
turned Jacobite, did he think of proving false to the Whigs.
His discontent was not only for his own disappointed pride;
if the Whigs did not get the full recognition they deserved
he grumbled, and his spirit of revenge was aroused. It
must be remembered that in aspiring to high places in the
State, Russell was no great exception. Nearly all the lead-
ing men on both sides can be accused of self-seeking. It
was Russell's zeal for his party which made him useful to
the Junto ; it was his public services in the struggle against
France and, above all, the check he gave to her power at the
battle of La Hogue, which made him popular to the nation.
But this is to anticipate.

Edward Russell was born in 1658. 2 He was a younger
brother of William Russell, first Duke of Bedford. Being
destined at an early age for the sea, his education was such
as would fit him for this career. He entered the navy as a
volunteer when quite young,3 and when nineteen years old
he was appointed lieutenant of the " Advice." He attracted
the attention of the Duke of York, who was High Admiral,
and became one of the Gentlemen of his Bedchamber. He
took part in the second Dutch war, and after the battle of
Southwold Bay he was promoted to be captain of the
" Pho3nix." In the following year — the year which saw
the downfall of the great Cabal ministry — Russell was away
as commander of the " Swallow," attached to the fleet under

1 Macpherson.

" National Biography. Coxe, in Shrewsbury Correspondence, says 1652.

3 David Hannay, Short History of the Royal Navy, 1217-1688, p. 456.

110 THE JUNTO.

Prince Rupert. In 1676 lie went with the squadron to
the Mediterranean under Sir John Narbroug-h, and he stayed
there with Herbert, Earl of Torrington, till 1682, when he
quitted the navy, and seems not to have joined it again until
after the Revolution.4 The execution of his cousin5 William,
Lord Russell, may probably have been the cause of his dis-
content. The deaths of Russell and Sydney were most un-
justifiable, and a severe blow to the whole Whig faction. A
plot, it is true, had been brewing, a plot to murder the
King at the Rye House on his way from Newmarket to
London.6 The whole Whig party were suspected of having
been privy to it, but it was really the scheme of an old
Cromwellian soldier, Rumbold, and a few desperate fol-
lowers whom he had urged to support him. The plot was
discovered, and the King, eager to strike a blow at the
Whigs, had Russell and Sydney tried at the same time as
the conspirators, as if they had been in close league with
them. The evidence against them was absurdly trivial,
and their execution infuriated the Whigs. Sydney and
Russell were looked upon as martyrs to the Whig cause.
For the next six years Russell gave himself up to political
life. Thoroughly disgusted with the government and at
enmity with James and his household, partly on public and
partly on private grounds, and above all anxious to avenge
the death of his near kinsman, he threw all his energy into
the cause of the Prince of Orange. In May, 1688, while
there was still grave doubt as to whether the Declaration
would or would not be read in the churches, Russell went
over to the Hague7 and put his scheme before William of
Orange. Now, he said, was the time for the Prince to land
in England with a strong force and to summon the people
to arms ; even the Tories, or, at all events, a very large sec-

4 Charnock, Biographia Navali*, 1794, vol. i. p. 355.

'Hannay, p. 456. Coxe, ut supra, pt. iii. p. 390, says William was
Edward's brother.

6 Hence called the Rye House Plot.

7 Burnet, Own Times, vol. iii. p. 240.

EDWARD RUSSELL. Ill

tion of them, were alarmed and affronted by the King's treat-
ment of the Church. They dreaded the peril which it was
in, and they were asking- themselves whether resistance to
such a prince as James could properly be called rebellion.
The prosecution of the bishops,8 and later the birth of the
Prince of Wales, produced a very great change in the feel-
ings of many Tories. The Whigs saw the advantage which
this change in the minds of their opponents gave to their
cause. William of Orange had been watching the turn of
events in England ; he saw the importance of the crisis.
But before he would venture to land in England, he desired
some assurance of support, some few signatures of statesmen
who were loyal to his cause.9 With this answer Russell
hastened back to London. He, together with Henry Sydney,
brother of Algernon Sydney, who had been executed, and
who, like Russell, was embittered against the household of
James and anxious to avenge his brother's death, at once
began to sound the chiefs of both parties. Secret meetings
were held and the outcome was an invitation sent to William
from the seven chiefs of the conspiracy : Shrewsbury, Devon-
shire, Dauby (minister of Charles II.), the Torf Lumley,
Compton (Bishop of London), Russell and Sydney.10

About the middle of August Shrewsbury and Russell
crossed over to the Hague; Shrewsbury with £12,000l to
help William with his enterprise. The facts of William's
invasion of England, of his landing at Torbay, of his march
on London and of the flight of James are too well known
to call for narration. Russell was with the Prince in a
private capacity on his voyage to England and on his march
to London.

On the accession of William to the throne of England,
Russell once more resumed his naval career. In 1689 he

8 For the prosecution of the Bishops see supra, p. 8 et seq.

'Burnet, vol. iii. pp. 241, 277.

10 Macaulay, vol. ii. p. 411. Ranke, vol. iv. p. 399.

1 Macaulay, vol. ii. p. 443. Raised by a mortgage on his estates.

112 THE JUNTO.

was appointed Treasurer of the ^N"avy2 and in July he was
made Admiral of the Blue Squadron in the fleet under Lord
Torrington. A few months later he was ordered3 to convey
the Queen of Spain from Holland to the Groyne. In 1690
he was appointed Admiral of the Fleet and William made
him one of the " Council of the Nine,"4 who were to act as
advisers to Mary in his absence. The nine were four
Whigs: Devonshire, Dorset, Monmouth and Russell; and five
Tories: Caermarthen, Pembroke, Nottingham, Marlborough
and Lowther.

Jealousy of Torrington, who held the command of the
fleet, which Russell thought belonged to himself by right
for his political services, urged him to do all he could to oust
Torrington from his post. In spite of being in command of
the Blue Squadron Russell spent many months in London
intriguing against him. Torrington was ordered to give
battle to Tourville, but refused to do so because his fleet
was the smaller and poorer of the two. Probably owing to
advice given by Russell, Torrington was commanded to fight
and the disastrous defeat at Beachy Head was the result.5
Torrington was dismissed and Russell was appointed to suc-
ceed him. During the summer of 1G91 he commanded the
fleet without having an opportunity of bringing the French
to action.

In March of the following year William went abroad to
carry on the continental war. As hitherto, his absence meant
an increase of danger from France. An invasion of England
had long been in the minds of the enemy, for James, the titu-
lar King, had urged Louis to make an attack, which, partly
by the treachery of his adherents, he had been made to believe
would be almost certain of success. William's absence from

2 April 4th.

3 Nov. 24th, 1689. Josiah Burchett, Memoirs of Transactions at Sea, 1688-
1697, pp. 34, 35. Also Lediard, Naval ffittory, book iv. p. 629.

4 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. 597. Tindal, Continuation of Rapin, vol. i. p. 139.
3 Macaulay, vol. iii. p. fiOS.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 113

England, and more especially the death of Louvois, the
French War Minister, in 1691, who had always made a
strong stand against any such rash enterprise, furthered the
scheme and a plan for an invasion of England was actually
devised. An army was secretly gathered together on the
coast of Normandy ; two fleets were assembled at Brest and at
Toulon, together numbering eighty ships of the line, under
the command of Tourville and d'Estrees. James, wholly
deceived by Russell and others, believed, and made Louis
believe, that the English fleet was much weaker, and was
moreover in an undisciplined and disordered state. They
were unconscious of the preparations being made by Eng-
land, by the Queen of England, and by William in Holland,
until they witnessed a combined fleet of Dutch and English
vessels, ninety in all,7 in the Channel under the command of
Russell. Tourville's squadron, numbering forty-five ships,
made an appearance. He was under a fatal misapprehension,
for it was supposed, weak as it was, that his fleet was quite
strong enough for all necessary purposes ; it could beat the
Dutch fleet, and the English fleet under Russell was not likely
to fight. Relying on this false hope, Louis had commanded
his admiral to fight whatever the force of the enemy might
be.8 Meanwhile James had issued a declaration9 which helped
very much to damage his own position. In this injudicious
document he announced to his subjects what he intended to
do when he should once more be in their midst. A long list
of those who were to receive no mercy showed with what a
spirit of revenge his doings were to be actuated. Even the

7 There seems some difference of opinion about the number of ships in
the allied fleet. See Hint. MSS. Com. 14th Report, App. pt. 6. " Actual
strength of fleet which fought the French at La Hogue, on 15th May,
Russell's line of battle, gives a total of 64 ships of the line, but only 57 of
these appear to have been available, for he writes saying, ' The Dutch that
are now with me are 22 in number, which is all we expect in any time, so
that with those of our own we make up 79 sail ; ' instead of the 99 which has
commonly been represented by historians as the combined strength of the
allied fleet."

8 See Sue, Histoire, de la Marine Franqaise, vol. v. pp. 17-48.

9 Ralph, p. 350. Somers's Tracts, vol. x. p. 211.

114 THE JUNTO.

Jacobites were amazed and forced to own that it was absurd,
and Russell was not only amazed but angered and ashamed
of the Prince whom he had been helping to restore. His
whole position suddenly changed. He realized that it was
futile trying to punish William, and he had wished to
punish William for what he thought ungrateful neglect of
his party,10 by bringing back a King who would be even more
harsh and ungrateful. He saw the folly of trying to serve
two masters and, ever a true Whig at heart and a devoted
lover of his profession, he no longer hesitated fighting the
hostile fleet. He confessed to Lloyd1 that he had changed
his view. " I wish," he said, " to serve King James. The
thing might be done, if it were not his own fault. But he
takes the wrong way with us. Let him forget all the past ;
let him grant a general pardon, and then I will see what
I can do for him." On Lloyd suggesting that Russell would
miss the honours which James would give him as a reward
for his help, Russell replied, " I do not wish to hear anything
on that subject. My solicitude is for the public. And do
not think that I will let the French triumph over us in our
sea. Understand this, that if I meet them I fight them, ay,
though His Majesty himself should be on board."

Then followed the Battle of La Hogue,2 a battle so full
of significance to England and to France. Russell urged on
his men so that when Tourville arrived there was no sign of
the disaffection and half-heartedness in the English fleet
upon which James and Louis had counted. Tourville was
overpowered by numbers,3 the fleet fled and was utterly

10 Ranke, vol. v. p. 42. l Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 232.

2 For the battle of La Hogue, see Burton, History of King William and
Queen Mary, pp. 131-133 ; Ranke, vol. v. p. 49 ; Tindal, Cont. of Rapin,
vol. i. p. 201 et seq.

3 Speaking of the battle, Russell writes (May 23rd) : " The enemy's
ships did not exceed 50 ships of war, of which number 18 of them had 3
decks and but two so small as 56 guns. Tho' their number was inferior to
ours yet I can positively affirm that the ships of their Majesties which beat
them did riot exceed 40, for the weather being so thick and quite calm,
the Dutch, who led the van, could not come in to fight and the Blue, who
were in the rear, could not come up, except in the night about 8 o'clock,"
Hist, MSS, Com, 14th Report, App, pt. 6, vol. vii.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 115

destroyed. Tourville, with twelve of the largest vessels,
took refuge in the Bay of La Hogue. Russell ordered an
attack, and under the command of Admiral Rooke two
attacks were made; the enemy were powerless, their ships
were taken and burnt.4 The significance of this battle was
threefold. It was a serious check to the power of France;
it gave the command of the seas to England : it declared
that, in spite of faction and party strife at home, the navy
was the " wall and fence of the kingdom," and that, whether
Jacobites or no, the admirals and captains of the navy were
not unpatriotic enough to allow the French to " triumph
over us in our seas " without striking a blow ; and, thirdly, it
once and for all crushed the hopes of the exiled King and
proved that a Restoration would never be tolerated.5
Russell's share in the victory can hardly be called a noble
one.6 It was more a matter of chance than of will. He
had tried to play a double game.7 He had tried to remain on
good terms with both William and James ; by underhand
dealings he had been preparing to act traitor to William,
and probably because of this he had not brought the French
to action in the preceding year in spite of considerable
superiority of force. Of the two admirals, Tourville was
probably the more able. Russell's position as admiral had
not been so much a reward of ability as of intrigue. Tour-
ville had won his position by slow degrees and by hard
fighting ; he was a good seaman and, what Russell could
never be called, he was an honest man.

Notwithstanding the advantage the English had had
over her foe, the victory was looked upon as a cause for great
rejoicing. But in order really to understand the nature of
this public joy we must remember that it was the first

4 Luttrell, vol. ii. p. 464. 5 Dalrymple, Memoirs, vol. i. p. 61.

6 Hallam says Russell, though compelled to win the battle of La Hogue
against his will, took care to render his splendid victory as little advan-
tageous as possible. Constit. History, vol. iii. p. 126.

7 Dalrymple, vol. i. p. 497.

116 THE JUNTO.

great check given to Louis' power and the first great victory
that England had gained over France since the long past fight
at Agincourt.

The Commons, on opening the session, had passed a
unanimous vote of thanks to Russell for his conduct at the
Battle of La Hogue,8 and at the time he had been eminently
popular as the victor of the French, a popularity which he
so little deserved. But as soon as the first flush of victory
had subsided, it came to be thought that more might have
been made of the victory if Russell had followed it up.
An enquiry took place ; the doings of Russell and the other
admirals were severely scrutinized. But the Commons chose
to support one who was secretly a traitor, possibly because
the real nature of his intrigues was unknown to them and
partly, too, because he bore the name of Whig. They
resolved that he had behaved with " courage, fidelity and
conduct."9 The popular feeling had nevertheless turned
against Russell for the moment, and his dismissal from the
command of the fleet took place in the spring of 1693. At
the same time he resigned the Treasurership of the Navy,
which office he had held ever since 1689. He retired into
the country and built himself a house at Everton.10

The summer of 1693 proved a disastrous one for the fleet
and a cry was raised for the recall of Russell, who alone
seemed capable of managing the naval operations with
success. In November he was reinstated as admiral and
in addition was made First Lord of the Admiralty.1

The naval operations of the next few years show the
importance attached to the mastery of the Mediterranean,
firstly as a means of protecting British trade and secondly
as a means of holding France in check. Further, they are a
proof that the fleet was beginning to be recognized as a
power able to arrest and prevent territorial aggression.2

8 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 303. 9 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 185.

10 Memoirs relating to Lord Torrington, p. 66.

1 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 470.

2 Colomb, Naval Warfare, pp. 271-272.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 117

William's attention was particularly directed to the fleet in
the Mediterranean under the command of Russell. If we
read the correspondence between Shrewsbury and Russell
we gather some idea of the hardships which fell to the lot
of the admiral3 and also of the King's difficulties in dealing
with such a man.

The Battle of La Hogue had severely repulsed but not
crushed the French power. The object of the French
Court seemed now to consist in conquering or intimidating
the Spaniards and the princes of Italy and thereupon to
form an alliance which would strengthen her position as
opposed to England. It planned the design of uniting the
fleets of Brest and Toulon and with this combined force to
threaten the coasts of Spain and Italy. William dreaded
the junction of the two fleets and determined to do all he
could to prevent it. He ordered an attack on Brest, but his
plan received little encouragement from the Cabinet and
vigorous opposition from Russell. This may account for
the failure of the expedition ; the preparations for the attack
were so half-hearted and so inadequate, and carried out in
such a leisurely way that a failure was anticipated,4 and took
place. The dilatoriness of the Admiralty and the inability
of the Treasury to furnish the requisite supplies disgusted
Russell ; this, together with ill-health and a feeling that
William did not fully appreciate his services, will explain
the peevish and complaining character of his letters to
Shrewsbury at this time. " With probable hopes of success
I would venture a great deal. ... I suppose I shall be
blamed for not fighting the French, whether they will or no.
. . . I long to be rid of this troublesome affair. I have
neither head, body nor temper to undergo all I do."5

8 Russell writes : " The fighting part is by much the least trouble that
an admiral of the English fleet meets with." Hist. MSS. Com. 14th
Report, App. pt. 6, vol. ix.

4 Russell to Shrewsbury, May 3rd, 1694.
* Shrewsbury Correspondence, pt. ii. p. 199.

118 THE JUNTO.

The failure of the expedition against Brest made William
doubly anxious to oppose the designs of France in the
Mediterranean and he ordered Russell to winter with the
fleet at Cadiz.6 Shrewsbury thereupon writes to Russell,
" The doctrine you used to preach to me that public good
ought to be considered before private ease will now come to
your share to practise in a more tedious and troublesome
manner than you could foresee," and Russell, though he
complained bitterly of the orders he had received from the
King, wrote to Shrewsbury that he would obey them, though
contrary to his judgment and inclination.7 The winter at
Cadiz brought forth continual complaints from Russell,
complaints that his expenses exceeded his stipend, that his
ships were in a rotten condition, that the supplies were in-
sufficient. " I am Admiral, Commander of the Navy, vic-
tualler, storekeeper, in short, everything but a happy man."
The winter was employed in preparing his fleet for an
attack as soon as the spring should make action possible.8
But the summer of 1695 was unable to boast of any really
useful naval operations, partly owing to the fact that
Russell found the French much better prepared for defence
than he had expected and partly owing to considerable
damage being done to his ships by a storm. In the spring
Russell had received the Commission of General, which put
him into a much more happy state of mind. In February
he wrote, " Order the fleet and me to do as you please, I
will cheerfully obey. ... I may say without vanity no
man ever took more pains than I have done, and in some
measure I have been successful in making the fleet as
much as possible interrupt the French trade."9 But when,
though undoubtedly master of the Mediterranean,10 he failed

6 Shrewsbury Correspondence, pt. ii. pp. 200, 202. ' Ibid. p. 205.

8 " The wintering of the fleet at Cadiz in 1694, a measure determined on
by William's energetic mind, against the advice of his ministers and in spite
of the fretful insolence of the admiral, gave us so decided a pre-eminence both
in the Atlantic and Mediterranean seas." Hallam, vol. iii. p. 136.

9 Shrewsbury Correspondence, pt. ii. p. 224.

10 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 600.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 119

to achieve anything decisive during the summer, and
William desired him to remain a second winter at Cadiz,
Russell declined to do so.1 Towards the end of 1695 he
returned to England exhausted, in ill-health and disgusted
by what he thought a very cold reception from William, who
could not well ignore his continual complaints and want of
respect.

A crisis was, however, at hand. The Assassination Plot
was rife and the French were preparing forces by land and
sea to attempt a second descent on England. Russell was
called into action again, and the mere fact that it was
always he that was needed in the hour of danger shows
that his ability as a commander was recognized. His tone
is cheerful : u You may depend upon my executing His
Majesty's pleasure, and I hope to be of strength sufficient to
oppose with success any design that may be attempted on
England."2

He was able to check the attempt on the part of France
to attack our island, and he left Sir Cloudsley Shovel to
cruise about the coast of France in order to prevent any
ships from coming out of the harbours. William thereupon
reluctantly gave up his idea of destroying the French arma-
ments in their harbours and granted Russell leave to with-
draw from his temporary command and return to England.
He .did so, and from that date he retired from active service
and devoted his energies to the management of the Admir-
alty and the direction of public affairs. He remained at the
Admiralty till 1699.

During his time in command Russell's achievements fell
far short of that which had been hoped from him; but he
had at least checked the aggression of France. Louis, rather
than James, was the enemy against which William and
Mary had to defend their crown, and William, from necessity
as well as from desire, took up the role of champion of

1 Shrewsbury Correspondence, pt. ii. p. 226.
- February 25th, 1696. Ibid. pt. ii. p. 247.

120 THE JUNTO.

Protestantism and of the liberties of Europe against French
ascendency, against Popery and arbitrary power. Though
often omitting to do what he might have done, Russell did
help William in this stand against his formidable foe.

The Battle of La Hogue can hardly be called great, but
it was highly significant. It was scarcely very decisive, yet
it proved a turning point in naval history. Russell had
shown to the nations of Europe the inferiority of the
French naval power as compared to our own. Hitherto
France had been the superior naval power. Colbert had
aimed at, and almost reached, the highest naval efficiency.3
La Hogue is the high watermark of this ascendency. Hence-
forward, in the long maritime struggle between the two
countries, England was to be the first power. The Battle of
Beachy Head, though a defeat for England, may be regarded
as the opening of that long rivalry which ended at Trafalgar.
Russell was neither a great man nor a great admiral, but his
name will always be closely connected with La Hogue, the
battle which stands out as a landmark in the course of
British naval history.

In 1697 William appointed Russell one of the Lords
Justices during his absence and at the same time raised him
to the peerage as Baron of Shingey, Viscount Barfleur and
Earl of Orford.4

The year before a search had been made for those who
had taken part in the Jacobite plots. Sir John Fenwick
was captured and thought to be a fitting victim. In his
confession he openly accused Shrewsbury and Russell5 of
treason and exposed Marlborough and Godolphin. It had
little effect upon the King except astonishment at " the
fellow's effrontery."6 Russell flew into a towering rage
and vowed revenge on the base informant. Shrewsbury, the

3 See Seeley, British Policy, vol. ii.

4 Campbell, Naval History. Burnet, vol. iv. p. 356.

5 Ranke, vol. v. p. 127- Memoirs of Duchess of Marlborough, vol. i. p. 263.

6 William to Shrewsbury, September 10th, 1696.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 121

least guilty of them all, was deeply grieved, confessed the
whole nature of his offence to the King and declared his
intention of resigning the seals. When Parliament came to
discuss how to deal with Fen wick's confession, Russell rose
and with his usual courage demanded that justice should
be shown to Shrewsbury and himself. " If we are innocent,
clear us ; if we are guilty, punish us as we deserve. I put
myself on you as on my country and am ready to stand or
fall by your verdict."7 Fenwick was brought forth, but on
his refusal to divulge to the House what he said were secrets
only for the King's ear, his information was pronounced to
be false and he was attainted of high treason. The following
year he was executed and died bravely, loyal to King
James.8

In 1699 Hussell, as already mentioned, resigned all his
employments. A vigorous attack had been directed
against him when enquiring into the conduct of the navy.
Orford had offended many by his grasping the two lucrative
posts of First Lord of the Admiralty and Treasurer of the
Navy.9 He was induced to give up the inferior but more
lucrative one of the two. This roused his uncontrollable
temper and he began a heated dispute with Sir George
Hooke, a Tory admiral, who had also a seat on the Board.
Orford insisted on the right of nominating a new Board,
by which means he could exclude his rival ; and threatened
to resign if he could not have his way. Somers was much
harassed by his unaccommodating spirit. He wrote to
Shrewsbury.10 u My Lord Orford's mortifications this session
in both Houses are got pretty well over. I hope he will be

7 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 738.

s See Shrewsbury Correspondence, pt. iii., for an insight into the feelings
of Shrewsbury, Russell ami the others concerning Fen wick's accusation. For
the trial see Howell, State Trials, vol. xiii. p. 538.

9 " Edward Russell united in his own person two offices which ought
never to be held by one man : First Lord of the Admiralty and Treasurer of
the Navy. He seems to have been the most grasping, avaricious and
intractable of the Ministers." Vernon, Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 279.

10 March oOth to April 9th, 1699. Shrewsbury Correspondence, pt. iii. p. 583.

122 THE JUNTO.

of opinion to part with his Treasury place and to keep in
the Admiralty ; otherwise I think he will quite lessen his
character if he should aim at parting with neither or
both."

The King, too, was displaying a want of accommodation ;
he was gradually losing popularity by insisting on the
maintenance of a large standing army, and the Whigs were
losing favour with him by not supporting him in this
measure as much as he expected them to do. The new
Parliament in 1G98 showed that a Tory reaction had set in.
In 1099 great changes took place in the ministry. Orford
was persuaded, much against his will, to resign the Trea-
surership and to remain at the Admiralty.11 Vernon, in one
of his letters, realized what a difficult temper Lord Orford
had to deal with when he wrote, " I should think the grand
affair would be to keep my Lord Orford in temper. Those
who have persuaded him to quit the Treasurership and
stick to the Admiralty have consulted his honour more than
his inclinations, which perhaps would still draw him aside."

But when Orford realized that he was not to have auto-
cratic power, he took offence and resigned his office. He
retired into the country feeling much slighted and heartily
indignant with the King.1

The new government took the first opportunity of attack-
ing the Whig leaders. Orford shared the impeachment which
the great Lord Somers had to undergo, the main charge
against them both being their share in the Partition Treaties
and their knowledge of and participation in the piratical
exploits of Captain Kidd.2 They had both subscribed to

11 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 184.

1 Ibid. p. 185. Coxe, Life of Murlborough, vol. i. p. 105. Vernon writes
(Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 280 1 : "I understand it was in this manner. He
told the King he had heard that choice was made of a set of men to be
Commissioners of the Admiralty which he was very well satisfied with and
the rather since he might now retire as being no longer useful, etc., etc.
Note. — Russell had been vehemently attacked in Parliament, but it is evident
that the cause of his going out was that Sir G. Rooke had a seat at the
Admiralty notwithstanding his efforts to exclude him."

2 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 488 et seq. Tindal, vol. i. p. 459 et seq. Coxe, Life of
Marlborough, vol. i. p. 113.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 123

Captain Kidd's original expedition, the object of which had
been to destroy piracy in the Indian Sea, but they had not
reckoned on Kidd himself turning pirate. Orford was
further charged with taking grants from the King and with
mismanaging the fleet.3 In his answer he denied any share
in the Partition Treaty, and in the matter of Captain Kidd
he maintained he had acted " legally, with good intentions
to the public and to his own loss."4 While impeaching the
Whig Lords the Commons felt quite sure that the Whig
majority of the Upper House would at once acquit their
victims, for it was obviously a question merely of party
feeling and animosity. The trial5 took place, with the ex-
pected result.

In the new reign Orford had little chance of concern-
ing himself in public business. The direction of all naval
affairs was given by Queen Anne to her husband, Prince
George of Denmark, who was wholly unsuited to be Lord
High Admiral, the post which he occupied till his death.
" I have tried him drunk," said the shrewd Charles II.,
" and I have tried him sober, and there is nothing in him."6
A fond and affectionate husband he may have been, but
manifestly incompetent. To give him the supreme command
of all her forces by land and sea, with the title of
" Generalissimo,"7 was a rash move on the part of the Queen,
but it might have been more disastrous if his incapacity had
not necessitated the nomination of a Council to help him.
This Council comprised competent men, such as Sir George
Rooke, and in reality administered the navy. Russell prob-
ably witnessed with whole-hearted disgust the appointment
of his rival to this Council which was to have such power
in the direction of naval affairs. There is little to indicate
what he did during these years of the Prince's administra-
tion. The incompetence of the Prince and his reckless
expenditure often made the ministers, especially the Whigs,

3 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 505. * Ibid. p. 506.

3 Vernon, vol. iii. p. 149. 6 Oman, p. 461. 7 Wyon, vol. i. p. 62.

124 THE JUNTO.

ardently wish to have Russell back at the head of the
Admiralty.8 This fact probably rendered Russell particu-
larly disliked by the Queen ; not only was he a Whig, but
he was a nobleman whose professional ability and popularity
made him the rival, and often the censor, of her husband in
the management of the Admiralty.9

The years 170G and 1707 saw an inclination of the
government to favour the Whigs. Marlborough's scheme of
a composite ministry, composed of the leading men of both
parties, came into existence for a short time. It was during
the session of this Parliament10 that the maladministration
of the navy was discussed at length, much to the displeasure
of the Queen, for this implied an attack on Prince George.
Somers spoke of what seemed the glaring faults in the
administration of the navy and th'e appointment of a new
Council was urged.1 It soon became apparent that pure
patriotism was not the only motive on the part of the Whigs
when they censured the conduct of the Admiralty. They
were aiming at high posts, and the appointment of Somers as
President of the Council was pressed upon the Queen. She
held out firmly against it, for she felt that it would displease
her Consort, who regarded Somers as the chief instigator of
the recent attacks upon naval measures. Finally, as a last
resource, the Whigs threatened to bring a direct attack by
name against Prince George for his mismanagement of
affairs at the Admiralty. This decided Anne ; anything
rather than see her husband discredited during his last days
of life. On October 20 she gave way and admitted Somers.
On the 28th the Prince, who had been for some time
slowly sinking, died ; and his death cleared up many diffi-

8 Duke of Maryborough to Duchess (Private Correspondence, p. 179),
June 13th: "As to 104 (Admiralty), since everybody desires 15 (Orford)
should be at the head, I wish him there with all my heart, but I fear nobody
has power to get it done."

9 Coxe, ut supra, vol. ii. p. 85. lo It began on October 23rd, 1707.

1 For the design on the part of the Whigs to get Orford at the head of
the fleet again, see Burnet, vol. v. p. 343.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 125

culties in public affairs. The stricken Queen felt unable
to resist; the administration was completed upon a Whig
basis and her husband's successor at the Admiralty was
Orford, the very man whom she least wanted to see in
his place. Only for one year, however, was he to enjoy the
much coveted post. The fall of the Whigs in the follow-
ing year2 produced an entirely Tory ministry, and Russell
once more retired from public life.

Much as the war abroad had occupied the attention of
ministers during the first years of Queen Anne's reign, there
were home affairs which were almost, if not quite, as absorb-
ing. The Union with Scotland had been negotiated and
finally completed in 1707. In 1706 Russell had been one
of the Commissioners3 to discuss and settle it. Though
at one with his party, and with his colleagues of the Junto
in particular, in urging the Union, Russell does not seem to
have taken much active part in the debates. He had little,
if any, power as a speaker and consequently his voice was
seldom heard either in the House or in Committee.

" Since the Queen's accession to the throne he hath
been little taken notice of, nor is he pitied by people of his
own profession ; he hath purchased a vast estate and knows
very well how to improve it."4 In this manner writes Mr.
Macky, a contemporary of Russell, and this, judging from
the lack of information concerning him during Queen
Anne's reign, must be the accepted conclusion. Little is
heard of him again till the accession of George I.

After the death of Queen Anne, Russell was appointed
to be one of the Lords Justices to manage affairs till the
arrival of the new Sovereign. On King George's arrival in
England a new ministry was selected and all the high offices
given to Whigs. The Admiralty was put into Commission
under the Earl of Orford, and the Treasury under Lord

2 Burnet, vol. vi. p. 13. 3 Parl. Hist. vol. vi. p. 535.

4 ,S^ Memoirs of the Secret Services of John Macky, etc., p, 76 et seq.

126 THE JUNTO.

Halifax; Lord Sunderland obtained the Lord Lieutenancy
of Ireland, Lord Wharton the Privy Seal. Somers alone of
the Junto, as we have already seen, had no post in the new
government, having retired altogether from public life owing
to failing health. Orford was, in addition, appointed Lord
Lieutenant of Cambridgeshire. In 1717 he finally resigned
all his employments and retired altogether from public
life. He lived on till 1727, the last survivor of the great
Whig Junto. One by one his colleagues passed away, until
he died on November 26, 1727,5 at his house in Covent
Garden. Of his wife there is little mention. She was the
Lady Mary, third daughter of "William Russell, Duke of
Bedford. They had no issue, so the title of Earl of Orford
became extinct in the house of Russell.

It remains only to quote a part of a poem written to the
memory of Edward Russell. By whom it was penned is not
known, but judging from its highly eulogistic character
throughout, one can fairly safely conclude that it was the
work of a Whig, and of one who saw not the obvious failings
of Lord Orford, or, if aware of them, refused to expose him
after death.

. . . Thy virtues, Orford, which shall ever shine

Till the Muse dies ; while harmony divine

Subsists in song —

To speak whose actions might demand a tongue

Like those which Rome or Greece's Heroes sung,

Worthy of Virgil's never dying lines,

Where, pompous verse, in nervous numbers shines,

Or Pindar's strong, inimitable strains.

In youth, in manhood, in declining age,
Belov'd, admir'd, rever'd. Surpass'd by none
In old or modern days ; by one alone
Perhaps compeered.

5 Nat. Biog. Campbell, Naval Hint. p. 169. Coxe, Life of Marlborough,
vol. vi. p 361.

EDWARD RUSSELL. 127

In him Colligny's firm religion shone,
Colligny, by a treacherous queen undone.
Blake's prowess and felicity of days,
He amply shared, with virtues worthy praise,
Which all de Ruyter's Pourtrait strong display
In the full light of Glory's endless day,
Renowned for conduct and his faithful zeal,
To serve his country and the Commonweal.

128 THE JUNTO.

CHARLES MONTAGU.

OF the five men who together formed the Junto, and
whose lives and characters we are shortly considering here,
Charles Montagu, Earl of Halifax, was perhaps the one who
had the most genius and the most brilliance of intellect.
Besides possessing striking abilities as a statesman, an elo-
quence which was both convincing and elegant, he had sound
judgment and a clear knowledge of finance. He was a great
master of detail and perhaps the first Finance Minister of
note that England ever had. But this was not all. He was
also a man of letters of no mean standing, according to the
standard of the time ; and besides being an ardent and liberal
encourager of literature, he was himself an author. He can
hardly be said to have had a gift of poetic genius ; this we
shall see later when we come to consider his poetry, but that
he was a lover of the Muses there is little doubt, and he
stands out as one of the great patrons of poetry in the
Augustan age. Added to all these gifts, he had social quali-
ties which largely accounted for his popularity ; his manners
were captivating,1 he was courteous, obliging and good-
natured. With King William, after the great Lord Somers,
Montagu certainly came next in favour.

Having gained some slight idea of the character of the
man, nothing will more truly display his many-sided talents
than to follow him briefly through his brilliant career.
Born on April 16, 1661,2 at Horton, in Northamptonshire,

1 Coxe, Shrewsbury Correspondence.

-Modern British Biography, vol. i. p. 531. Weld, History of Royal
Society vol. i. p. 331. Chester, Westminster Abbey Register, 1876, p. 283.

CHARLES AONTAGU

CHARLES MONTAGU. 129

Charles Montagu was the fourth son of the Hon. Mr. George
Montagu, who was the son of Henry, first Earl of Man-
chester.3 He was the one out of nine children who showed
signs at a very early age of great ability ; at fourteen he was
sent to Westminster School, where unusual success in his
work and a gift for extemporary epigrams attracted the at-
tention of the famous Dr. Busby. Two years later Montagu
was nominated a King's Scholar, and when twenty-one was
sent to Trinity College, Cambridge. Judging from his sub-
sequent career, this was a fortunate move for him. At that
time there was very little choice for the younger sons of
families other than the army and the Church. Not expect-
ing to get anything like a good post in the army, the only
prospect before Montagu seemed the Church. He went to
Westminster School with this intention uppermost in his
mind. It was, however, owing to his school friendship with
George Stepney that he went to Cambridge instead of to
Christ Church, Oxford, where he would undoubtedly have
fallen under the influence of Dr. Fell, Dean and Bishop of
the See of Oxford, a High Churchman with very decided
views.4 George Stepney and Charles Montagu were very
attached friends, and when the former was sent to Trinity
College, Cambridge, Montagu solicited to be sent to the
same college rather than wait another year with the prob-
ability of being sent to the sister university, and thus be
separated altogether from his friend.5 As it was, he became
the pupil of Sir Isaac Newton, with whom he formed a
warm friendship which continued through life. Finally he
became the patron of the great philosopher, who at his
death left him a legacy " as a mark of the honour and
esteem he had for so great a man."6 At Cambridge his gift

3 Life of 1715, p. 2 ; Parliamentary History, vol. vi. p. 481 ; also Diet. Nat.
Biog. art. Montagu. He was baptized at St. Margaret's, Westminster, on
May 12th. Chester, Abbey Register.

4 Thorold Rogers, p. 18.

5 Life, pp. 4, 5, 6 See copy of his will at end of Life.

130 THE JUNTO.

for versemaking, which had already shown itself at school,
did not desert him. It was perhaps more a trick than a gift,
but it seems to have been a favourite pastime for Montagu all
through his life.7 At thei best it was but poor stuif, hardly
worth reading, except for the interest of seeing how low
English verse could sink and yet at the time be considered
by many, if not by all, as worthy of the name of poetry.
His earliest poem was that on " The Death of his most sacred
Majesty, King Charles II.,"8 written, it seems, at the request
of the College authorities, Trinity College being a royal
foundation and therefore obliged to go into mourning at the
death of royalty. All poems of eulogy to deceased celebrities
at that time contained the same flattering words, the most
flattering that could be found, and Montagu's were no excep-
tion to this rule. The opening lines are sufficient to illustrate
this:-

Farewell, Great Charles, Monarch of Blest Renown,

The best good man that ever filled a throne,

Whom Nature, as her highest pattern, wrought,

And mixed both Sexes' Virtues in one Draught.

Wisdom for Councils, Bravery in war,

With all the mild goodnature of the Fair.

The woman's sweetness, temper'd manly wit,

And loving power, did crown'd with meekness sit.

His awful person Reverence engag'd,

Which mild Address and tenderness assuag'd ;

Thus the Almighty Gracious King above

Does both command our Fear and win our Love.

Continuing in the same style, the poet compares the dead
King even to the Almighty and King David —

To bridle Factions, stop Rebellion's course,
By easy methods, vanquish without force,
Relieve the good, bold stubborn foes subdue,
Mildness in wrath, meekness in anger show,
Were Arts Great Charles' prudence only knew.

7 See Walpole.

8 See Life of 1715.

CHARLES MONTAGU.

131

In conclusion, taking- " the Thames, the ocean's ' darling,
England's pride,' as the pleasing emblem of the reign," he
maintains that —

James is our Charles in all things but in name

Thus Thames is daily lost, yet still the same.

Five years later, after William's victory of the Boyne,
Montagu once more wrote flattering lines of congratulation,
quite as poor, if not worse, than his first attempt. They were
" An Epistle to the Eight Hon. Charles, Earl of Dorset and
Middlesex."

But William's Genius takes a wider scope
And gives the injured in all kingdoms, hope.
Born to subdue insulting Tyrants' rage
The ornament and terror of the age.
The refuge, where afflict'd nations find
Relief from those Oppressors of mankind
Whom laws restrain not and no oaths can bind.

The whole poem is in the same exalted strain, and is
monotonous reading. It hardly deserves the attention of
any reader. There is, however, one production9 of
Montagu's, written in conjunction with Mathew Prior, a man
possessing more poetic power, as infinitely more wit, which
will always live and be bracketed with the poem of which
it is a parody. Dryden, it will be remembered, published in
1G84 his "Beligio Laici," a defence of the Church of
England against the Dissenters, but which expressed some
doubts with regard to revealed religion. These doubts were
soon after dispersed by his joining the Roman Catholic
Church. The first result of his change in creed was his alle-
gorical poem " The Hind and the Panther,"10 published in
1687, in which he stated the traditions and arguments in
favour of the Catholic faith. Montagu and Prior parodied
this poem, "transversed it to the story of the ' Country Mouse
and the City Mouse,' much malice mingled with a little wit."

•Written in 1687.

"The Hind being the Church of Rome, the Panther the Church of
England.

132 THE JUNTO.

In the preface1 the authors defend the design : " Is it not as
easy to imagine two mice bilking coachmen and supping at
the devil as to suppose a hind entertaining the panther at a
hermit's cell, discussing the greatest mysteries of religion?"
Dryden's po'em is full of caricature, and the parody is none
the less so. Whatever its merit, it gained for Montagu the
friendship of Lord Dorset, which led to his finally abandon-
ing the idea of taking orders in favour of a political career.
This poem was written in 1687 ; two years previously Mon-
tagu had tried with Newton to found a Philosophical Society,
but with no success. The same year saw him created Master
of Arts and made a Fellow of his college.

The young Montagu soon revealed his political views by
signing the letter of invitation to William of Orange and
joining a rising in Northamptonshire in favour of the Prince.
In the Convention Parliament o>f 1688, which met at West-
minster on January 22, and which declared the throne
vacant, Montagu took his seat, and helped in the final settle-
ment of William and Mary as King and Queen. His friend,
the Earl of Dorset, was made Lord Chamberlain to the new
Sovereign, and it was not long before he took the opportunity
of introducing the promising young Montagu to King
William. The story of this interview is almost too well
known to need repetition. The Earl of Dorset presented him
with the words, "May it please your Majesty, I have brought
a mouse to have the honour of kissing your hand," at which
the King smiled. When he had learnt the reason of this
nickname, he replied, " You will do well to put me in the way
of making a man of him," and ordered him a pension o-f £500
per annum.2 Having finally abandoned the idea of taking
orders, Montagu definitely gave his mind to politics, and be-
came, by purchase, for the sum of <£1,500, Clerk of the Privy
Council.3 A short time before this he had married the

1 See Life of 1715, p. 33 et seq.

*IUd. p. 17.

3 February, 1689. See Modern British Biography.

CHARLES MONTAGU.

133

Dowager Countess of Manchester,4 which further increased
his position in the eyes of the world. It was not long before
he obtained a seat in the Lower House and he rapidly made
himself noticed by his eager support of the Whigs and by
his talent in debate.

It was in the discussion concerning the regulation of
trials in cases of high treason,5 on which occasion Montagu
was placed at the head of the Committee, that ho made his
first speech of importance. Though only thirty years of age,
he managed the debate with such decided skill and made his
arguments so convincing that it was much commented upon
and even mentioned by the Earl of Dorset to the King. It
is related how during his speech, which up till this point
had been fluent, Montagu suddenly hesitated and seemed un-
able to go on. Recovering himself, he, in a very clever way,
made use of this misfortune to emphasize his argument " to
enforce the necessity of allowing counsel to prisoners who
were to appear before their judges ; since he, who was not only
innocent and unaccused, but one of their own members, was
so dashed when he had to speak before that wise and illus-
trious assembly."6 " How can I, Sir," said the young
orator, " produce a stronger argument in favour of this Bill
than my own failure ? My fortune, my character, my life
are not at stake. I am speaking to an audience whose
kindness might well inspire me with courage. And yet,
from mere nervousness, from mere want of practice in
addressing large assemblies, I have lost my recollection :
I am unable to go on with my argument. How helpless,
then, must be a poor man who, never having opened his lips
in public, is called upon to reply, without a moment's
preparation, to the ablest and most experienced advocates in

4 Biog. Diet. art. Montagu.

5 December, 1691.

6 Walpole mentions this anecdote in his Catalogue of Royal, and Noble
Authors of the Earl of Shafteslmry. The story is first mentioned in the Life
of Montagu (1715), also in Cunningham, Lives of Eminent Englishmen, vol. iv.
p. 71.

134 THE JUNTO.

the kingdom, and whose faculties are paralysed by the
thought that, if he fails to convince his hearers, he will in
a few hours die on the gallows, and leave beggary and in-
famy to those who are dearest to him."7 The outcome of
this display of ability was an important one for the nation.
He was appointed to the Treasury in March of the following
year on the resignation of Thomas Pelham. His skill as
a Minister of Finance was soon apparent, and his activity led
to rapid promotion, until in 1G94 he became Chancellor
of the Exchequer, one of the highest and most important
offices in the kingdom.8 Only a man with a singularly
clear head and a genius of no small order could have accom-
plished what Montagu did during the years 1692 onwards.
The currency of the realm, as already has been seen,9 was
in a very bad way ; public credit was in a deplorable state ;
the expenses of the kingdom, largely owing to the war, were
enormous, and the revenue, in spite of heavy taxes, was
quite inadequate. To add to all these inconveniences, the
clipping of the coinage was carried on to such an extent
as to render its value exceedingly low. It was the govern-
ment of Charles II. that was really to blame for this hope-
less state of things. It had brought the credit of the
English State to the lowest possible ebb. The fatal mistake
of depositing the reserve of the treasure in the Exchequer
had been made, and Charles, who had the control of the
Exchequer, had refused to pay out. Consequently the
credit of William III.'s government was exceedingly low,
which made it wholly impossible to borrow any large sum.
How was the reform of the currency to be achieved ? How

7 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 644.

8 See Burnet, vol. iv. p. 194. " A young man, Mr. Montagu, began to
make a great figure in the House of Commons. He had great vivacity and
clearness, both of thought and expression. His spirit was at first turned to
wit and poetry, which he continued still to encourage in others when he
applied himself to more important business. He came to have great notions
with relation to all the concerns of the Treasury and of the public funds and
brought these matters into new and better methods."

9 See Somers, supra, p. 20.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 135

could credit be re-established? How was the scarcity af
money to be met ? These were the problems which Montagu
set himself to solve.

The war with France, which to the King was the most
urgent matter, could only be carried on by loans, which
loans were raised by appeals to the wealthy in London, with
very great difficulty. The extraordinary expenses of
government had in early times been met by subsidies. These
subsidies were levied both on movables and on land, but
the bulk of the money came from an assessment on the land
at the nominal rate of 4s. in £. The great increase in the
value of land had altered this and during the Common-
wealth a different method had been adopted. In 1692, how-
ever, the Land Tax was re-introduced and re-organized, so
that it brought in about £2,000,000. This sum, even, was
considerably less than the sum required. The question in
the minds of all, King and subjects alike, was : Will the war
have to be dropped for lack of funds or can credit be
obtained? Russell writes in despair to Shrewsbury,10

" Money or credit we must speedily have or all will be lost.
If in England they could see as clearly as I do here, I am
sure they would employ every means in their power, with-
out too closely examining the difficulties. The greatest
difficulty is ruin, and that we must encounter if wre cannot
speedily obtain credit to pay the troops in these parts. . .
There is no alternative but to perish or find credit."

Montagu was alive to the situation. He acted with
promptitude and with boldness. He recognized the neces-
sity of restoring the currency and giving to the coinage its
legal value. Fortunately for the country, the considera-
tion of this difficult task was in the hands of four of the
ablest men in the kingdom, Lord Somers, Locke the philoso-
pher, Montagu and Sir Isaac Newton, who was made Master
of the Mint. Locke, Montagu and Somers had for some time
been in constant consultation as to how best to reach the

10 Coxe, Shrewsbury Correspondence, p. 121 (1696).

136 THE JUNTO.

desired goal. Montagu, in particular, was emphatic that
the method must be a thoroughly effective one.1 Lord
Somers2 suggested that a proclamation should be given out
that in three days the hammered coin should pass by weight
only but that persons bringing it to the Mint should have the
promise of a future payment of the difference between it
and the real value of the coin. This was thought too bold
and Montagu's2 plan was adopted: all those who deposited
their clipped money in the Mint should have new money of
full weight in exchange. A date was fixed by which time
all the money was to be handed in. It was an expensive
way of doing it and it had certainly very distinct drawbacks,
but it achieved its purpose;3 the clipped depreciated coins
were removed and new ones of legal weight put in their
place.

This transaction was an obvious loss to the nation ; be-
sides this, the evils were temporarily aggravated, a check to
the circulation followed which hindered trade, and the col-
lection of public supplies was suspended. By whom was
this loss to be borne ? Part at any rate of the difficulty was
met by the establishment of the Bank of England,4 an
institution which will ever be coupled with the name of its
founder, Montagu ; and which ever since its foundation has
played such a prominent part in the financial and com-

1 Ruding, Annals of Coinage, vol. ii. p. 398.

2 See Somers, supra, pp. 20, 21. Also Fox Bourne, Life of Locke, vol. ii.
p. 325 et seq. ; Burnet, vol. iv. p. 290 ; Dalrymple, Memoirs, vol. iii. bk. 4,
p. 62 ; Rogers Ruding, vol. ii. p. 404.

3 See Burnet, vol. iv. p. 288. " The state of the coin was considered,
and there were great and long debates about the proper remedies ; the motion
of raising the money above its intrinsic value was still much pressed ; many
apprehended this matter could not be cured without casting us into great
disorders ; our money, they thought, would not pass, and so the markets
would not be furnished, and it is certain that if there had been ill-humours
then stirring in the nation this might have cast us into great convulsions.
But none happened, to the disappointment of our enemies, who had their
eyes and hopes fixed on the effects this might produce." See also Rev.
Rogers Ruding, Annals of Coinage, 1817, vol. ii. p. 387 et seq. ; Continuation
of Rapin, pp. 305, 308.

4 The Tories hit on the idea of setting up a National Land Bank in
opposition to the Bank of England. Ranke, vol. v. pp. 122, 123.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 137

mercial history of the country. The actual originator of the
scheme of a National Bank was a Scotchman, William
Paterson, who had wished to copy those already existing in
Holland and Genoa. He never carried it through, and
wrecked himself, as well as many others, in the fatal Darien
Expedition.5 In its origin the Bank of England was not
only a finance company but a Whig finance company. The
City, being Whig, supported it. Montagu's plan was this :
£1,200,000 should be raised at what was then a moderate
rate of interest, 8 per cent.6 It was made a loan thrown
open to public subscription. In order to induce the public
to advance the money they were elected subscribers of a
chartered company, the company of the Bank of England.
It was a great success. In ten days the sum was subscribed.7
All loans were placed in the keeping of this new company.
Henceforward the Bank of England had the privilege of
being the exclusive possessor of the government balances.

Prior to the establishment of the Bank of England,1
banking with private goldsmiths had been the fashion ;
the convenience of cheques in the place of ready money
payments had already become evident, and the advantage
to the banker who could make use of the ready money was
equally evident. The fault of this system had been its in-
security. This insecurity was now removed ; the lenders
were allowed to treat their loan to Government as part of
their capital, the interest of which gave them the necessary
supply of ready money.

The origin of the National Debt was another of
Montagu's achievements. The Committee of Ways and
Means met, with Somers in the chair. Montagu proposed
to raise £1,000,000 by way of loan; the proposal was carried

5 The Darien Company, although a failure, was highly significant, for it
demonstrated the growth of a commercial ambition in the Scottish nation.

6 Green, vol. iv. p. p. 62. Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 499.

7 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 502. Burnet, vol. iv. p. 223.

1 The foundation day of the Bank of England may be said to be April
18th, 1694, the day on which the Bill passed the Commons.

138 THE JUNTO.

and it was ordered that a Bill should be brought in. By this
law the lenders became life annuitants and the interest of the
loan was secured on new duties on beer and other liquors.
This was the origin of the National Debt, which has existed
ever since and which during the last few years has grown
to such a prodigious size.

Immediately after the Bill which established the Bank
of England had been passed, Montagu was appointed to be
Chancellor of the Exchequer.2 The following month he
was sworn a member of the Privy Council and the next
year he was returned for the City of Westminster.3

In 169G public credit was again at its lowest ebb ; tallies
on the Exchequer were at from 30 per cent, to GO per cent,
discount ; bank notes at 20 ; and financiers predicted a general
bankruptcy. Montagu was not disturbed. With his usual
foresight he devised a simple and bold plan of remedy which
was popularly called the General Mortgage. New taxes were
imposed, old taxes were increased ; the Bank of England was
enlarged by a new subscription, which was managed in such
a way as to raise the value both of the notes of the Corpora-
tion and of the public securities. By this means confidence
was restored, credit revived and with it grew the popularity
of Montagu among the Whigs, for they realized that it was
owing to the genius and firmness of him alone that the
State was restored to health and security. The Tories, too,
were forced to admit that all his schemes had succeeded, that
his influence thereby in the House of Commons was un-
equalled, and that even in the Cabinet his power was daily
increasing.4 The Bill of Attainder against Sir John Fenwick
received his support and Macaulay gives us a rude outline

2 Lords1 Journals, April 25th, 1694. Cooke, History of Party, vol. i.
p. 530. Ranke, vol. v. p. 84.

3 Macaulay, vol. iv. pp. 614, 615. Luttrell, vol. iii. p. 543.

4 " In the House of Commons Mr. Montagu had gained such a visible
ascendant over all that were zealous for the King's service, that he gave the
law to the rest, which he did always with great spirit but sometimes with
too assuring an air." Burnet, vol. iv. pp. 397, 398.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 139

of what must have been a most effective peroration : — 5
" Gentlemen warn us not to furnish King James with a
precedent which, if ever he should be restored, he may use
against ourselves. Do they really believe that, if that evil
day shall ever come, this just and necessary law will be the
pattern which he will imitate ? No, Sir, his model will be,
not our Bill of Attainder, but his own ; not our Bill, which,
on full proof, and after a most fair hearing, inflicts deserved
retribution on a single guilty head ; but his own Bill, which,
without a defence, without an investigation, without an
accusation, doomed near three thousand people, whose only
crimes were their English blood and their Protestant faith,
the men to the gallows and the women to the stake. That
is the precedent which he has set, and which he will follow.
In order that he never may be able to follow it, in order
that the fear of a righteous punishment may restrain those
enemies of our country who wish to see him ruling in
London as he ruled at Dublin, I give my vote for the Bill."
In 1G95 Montagu's connection with the Royal Society
began. Among many other honours bestowed upon him, he
was elected President of this Society and he acted in that
capacity from November, 1695, until November, 1698. 6

Prior, to wrhom perhaps more than to Montagu the suc-
cess of the poem " The City Mouse and the Country Mouse "
was due, was indignant at his friend's preferment and his
own neglect.

My friend Charles Montagu's preferr'd,

Nor would I have it long observ'd

That one mouse eats while t'other's starv'd.

The posts he obtained were certainly not so important as
those which fell to Montagu, but he was not altogether for-
gotten by the Earl of Dorset. He was appointed secretary
to the Earl of Berkeley, ambassador to the Hague. After
many other temporary honours, he was made a Commissioner

5 Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 752.

6 Weld, History of the Royal Society, vol. i. p. 331.

140 THE JUNTO.

of Trade. In 1T01 he entered the House of Commons as
representative for the borough of East Grinstead, and
abandoning his former friends, the Whigs, joined the Tories
in impeaching Lord Somers. His subsequent career was in
opposition to the Whig party, and it was not until death
that the two who had been friends in their youth were re-
united in the Abbey.

For many years the friends of Newton, Montagu especi-
ally, had been anxious to get Newton a post. Among others,
the office of Provost of King's College was suggested. They
repeatedly failed and Newton put their failure down to
insincerity. In 1692 he told Locke " that he is fully con-
vinced that Mr. Montagu upon an old grudge, which he
thought had been worn out, was false to him, and that he
had done with him, intending to sit still unless my Lord
Monmouth was still his friend."7 This was a misjudgment
of Montagu ; he had not forgotten his friend, and when, in
1G99, the post of Master of the Mint became vacant he used
his influence as First Lord of the Treasury to secure the
post for Newton. It was worth £1,200 to £1,500 per
annum, and Newton held it for the rest of his life. Mon-
tagu's friendship was extended to Newton's niece, Mrs.
Catherine Barton, who was said to be a " lady of wit, beauty
and accomplishments." His relationship with this woman is
a disputed point. Some allege there was a private marriage
between them, others that it was merely a warm friendship.
Whatever it was, he left very large bequests to her at his
death " as a token of the sincere love, affection and esteem
I have long had for her person, and as a small recompense
for the pleasure and happiness I have had in her conversa-
tion."8

Further scope for Montagu's genius as a financier was
found in the formation of the General East India Company.

7 Brewster, Life of Sir Isaac Neivton, vol. ii. p. 117.

8 See Life of 1715, Appendix vi. See also Notes and Queries, first series,
vol. viii. p. 429 et seq. ; second series, p. 162 et seq. for relationship between
Montagu and Catherine Barton.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 141

It was in the session of 1698 that the important question of
the Indian trade was settled, and with it, perhaps, the
zenith of Montagu's success as a Finance Minister was
reached. Elizabeth had granted a charter to the East India
Company and since that time it had passed through many
and diverse phases. The company, originally consisting of
Whigs, had passed into the hands of Sir Josiah Child, and
under his regime it became closely allied to the Tories. In
the years 1691 and 1693 the question had been strongly
pressed upon the attention of Parliament. In 1698 Montagu
undertook to reorganize the company, when the old company
offered £700,000' at 4 per cent, as the price of the renewal of
its charter. Montagu, anxious to procure more money and
thus diminish the embarrassing position of the government,
anxious also to establish a second great Whig society of
capitalists, who could support him as the Bank already had
done, opposed the company and brought forward a scheme
of his own. He suggested forming a general company,
and proposed that a loan of £2,000,000 at 8 per cent, be
advanced to government, and that the subscribers should
receive the monopoly of the Indian trade, but not necessar-
ily be bound to trade as a joint stock company, unless they
desired it. He carried the Bill with triumph through
Parliament and in two or three days the required sum was
forthcoming. On September 3 the Bill was carried, the
original company in vain making a belated offer of the same
sum to their opponents. On September 5 most of the sub-
scribers expressed a desire to be a joint stock company,
which was consequently chartered by Act of Parliament by the
title of " The English Company trading to the East Indies."8
It is exceedingly interesting to read Montagu's correspond-
ence with the Earl of Shrewsbury9 for it gives an insight
into the jealousy felt for Montagu and all the Whigs who
were so successful ; a sentiment which ultimately pro-

8 For the East India Company, see Macaulay, vol. iv. p. 129 et seq. ;
vol. v. p. 62 et seq.

9 Shrewsbury Correspondence, p, 529 et seq.

142 THE JUNTO.

duced the fall of the Whigs. Montagu felt the strength of
his position when he wrote, " The malice of my friends has
been very remarkable, but I can assure you it has not given
me an unquiet hour, and before many days are past you
will hear I have carried the war into their own country."10

Montagu was well aware of his own influence in the
House, but he was not perhaps so fully aware that that year,
1698, was the high water-mark of his power and that the
decline was close at hand. In the following year his influ-
ence showed signs of waning, and together with it the Whig
ministry was hurrying to dissolution. In the elections Mon-
tagu was again returned for Westminster but in other con-
stituencies his party was less successful. Wharton had to
face one defeat after another. The tide had turned and the
Whigs knew it. It is the fate of almost any man who works
reforms and leaves thereby some mark on the history of his
country to make enemies. Montagu shared this common
fate of men such as he was. By the Tories he had long
been hated as a Whig, but the power of his influence and
the rapidity of his rise had brought him many enemies even
among his own party. He owed everything to his own
merit ; by sheer dint of industry he had worked himself up
to the highest posts in the kingdom ; his gift for debate liad
won him the ear of the House; his skill in financial and
commercial matters had won him the confidence of the
city. But this exceptional success had turned his head;
he became proud,1 and unpopular. He hastened his decline
by an act which appeared grasping, whatever his real motives
may have been. Realizing that his party would soon be
defeated, and anxious to secure for himself some lasting post,
he set his eye on the Auditorship of the Exchequer, which
was vacant owing to the death of Sir Eobert Howard. His

10 June 18th-20th, 1698.

1 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 398, note c. " For assuming an air which did him
infinite hurt and lowered at last his credit very much in the House of
Commons."

CHARLES MONTAGU. 143

own office in the Treasury and this post were incompatible ;
he therefore devised the scheme of vesting the latter in his
brother, Christopher, with the object of keeping it for him-
self.2 This singular act astonished his friends. Somers
wrote to Shrewsbury : 3 " The business of Mr. Montagu gives
me great disquiet. It was done much on the sudden, with-
out the advice or knowledge of many of his friends. I
wish it may turn well for himself, but I do not see how it
can turn well for the public. If he quits the Treasury,
somebody wholly of another sort will succeed. If he keeps
both places, I fear it will be a new story of envy."

Manchester wrote to Montagu with much the same note
of astonishment : 4 " I am far from considering my own
interest alone, when I wished you had done otherwise in
relation to the Treasury. I can easily imagine a step of this
nature would not be made without consulting your friends ;
but I am sorry to find my Lord Chancellor does not wholly
approve of it, and him I take to be one of the best you
have."

Discontent was rife in 1699. Montagu, affronted by the
events of the preceding session, resolved to* withdraw from
the position of Chief Minister of Finance. The Auditor-
ship, which he had made sure some months ago, was ready
for him. He took it and resigned his other posts.5 This
did not give him the peace he hoped. The Tory chiefs con-
tinued to assail him, but the attempt to impeach him in
1701 and 1702 failed, just as the similar attempt on Somers
and Orford failed. In 1700 Montagu had been created
Baron Halifax6 and so was removed from the Commons,
where he was growing more and more unpopular, to the

1 Macaulay, vol. v. p. 161. Vernon, vol. ii. pp. 165, 166. Burnet, vol.
iv. p. 406, note h.

3 October 25th-November 4th, 1698. Shrewsbury Correspondence) p. 557.

4 Paris, Dec. 8th, 1699. Cole, Memoirs of A/airs of State, 1733, p. 82.

5 Nov. 18th, 1699. Luttrell, vol. iv. p. 583.

6 Vernon, Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 143. Burnet, vol. iv. p. 470. Cooke,
History of Party, vol. i. p. 536.

144 THE JUNTO.

Upper House. But this was not enough to guard him
against the fury of his enemies. In 1701 a plan of im-
peachment was devised7 by the Commons, his share in the
Partition Treaty being made the ground of accusation. He
was charged with having advised the two treaties and also
of having held two offices that were incompatible, those of
Commissioner of the Treasury and Auditor of the Exchequer.
Montagu was ready with his answer, however, and was
acquitted by the Lords.8

But the Whig chiefs recognized the insecurity of their
position, which with the death of William and the accession
of Anne was amply realized. The members of the Junto all
lost office9 and the new ministry was almost entirely Tory.
One cause, perhaps, of this decisive change from a Whig
government to a large Tory majority was that the nation
was utterly weary of the war. The panic about an invasion
of England by France had subsided; the recent events on
the Continent had been sufficient to satisfy the pride of the
nation ; and all were beginning to wonder when the war
would really close and when heavy taxes would cease to be
levied. Resistance to France had been the steady policy of
the Whigs; they consequently received the brunt of the
nation's displeasure and were hopelessly outnumbered at
the elections.

In opposition the Junto were still united and powerful.
Halifax still swayed the Lords by his convincing oratory,
and the knowledge of this angered his enemies, who had
hoped to lessen his power in the Upper House. In all the
important measures of Anne's reign his name stands out as
an active and interested member. The first of these occa-
sions was the free conference between the two Houses on

7 Burnet, vol. iv. p. 485 et seq. Ranke, vol. v. p. 256.

8 Impeachment in full, Howell, State Trials, vol. xiv. pp. 233-250. See
also Burnet, vol. iv. p. 508 et seq. Continuation of Rapin, p. 459 et seq. Coxe,
Life of Marlborough, vol. i. p. 113.

'Somerville, Queen Anne, p. 3. Ranke, vol. v. p. 311. Wyon, vol. i.
p. 65.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 145

the Bill of Occasional Conformity. The Lords sent a most
able committee to represent them : the brilliant Earl of
Peterborough; Burnet, the most learned Bishop on the
Bench ; Somers, the greatest lawyer and the most scrupulous
of men ; and Montagu, who was undoubtedly the greatest
financier of the age.10 Halifax played a leading part in the
opposition to this Bill.1 The Tories, it must be remembered,
were the High Church party, to whom the rites and doc-
trines of the Established Church were very dear. They
were very hostile to the Dissenters and Roman Catholics
and were jealous of their pretensions to equality. The
Whigs, on the other hand, favoured toleration. Occasional
conformity, by which was meant Dissenters complying with
the provisions of the Test Act in order to qualify them-
selves to hold office or join the Corporation, was regarded by
the Tories and by the Queen, who was a Tory to the back-
bone, as a most outrageous thing. The Whig peers stoutly
resisted the Bill and it was rejected. In November of the
same year, 1703, the measure was brought up again. It
did not, however, receive the same support from govern-
ment, for the two leading spirits, Maryborough and
Godolphin, were already beginning to waver and were gradu-
ally inclining to the side of the Whigs. It was again
defeated in the Lords. The following year it was again
introduced. As before, it passed through all the readings
in the Commons, but it was thrown out in the Upper House
by an increased majority. Maryborough and Godolphin gave
silent votes against the Bill. The result of the elections of
1705 was a Whig majority and for the time the much vexed
question slept. It was not till 1711, under the government
of Harley and Bolingbroke, that the Bill was passed, and
then almost without opposition.2

10Luttrell.

1 Halifax and Somers were managers on behalf of the Lords. Rapin, vol.
iii. p. 581. Paul Chamberlen, Impartial History, p. 67.

2 ParL Hist. vol. vi. pp. 481, 482. Stanhope, Queen Anne, vol. ii. p. 246
(Tauehnitzed.).

10

146 THE JUNTO.

With, regard to this measure, the Junto were at one,
and similarly with regard to the next important and, per-
haps, the most weighty one of the reign, the union of
Scotland and England. If it had not been for the united
efforts of the Junto it is doubtful whether this great work
of the reign would have been carried through. In England,
perhaps, the mind of the nation was made up. To her the
necessity of union with Scotland had become much more
urgent since the year of the Darien Expedition. This Scotch
colony had failed, but not before it had changed the whole
aspect of the relations between the two countries. Scotland
had shown that her ambition lay in the direction of a com-
mercial state, and England from that time began to regard
her as a commercial rival. Trade could therefore be made
an argument either in favour of or against union. England
had it in her power to close or to open the trade of the
world to Scotland. She chose the latter course, recognizing
the advantage of union with Scotland — in time of war.
William III. had declared strongly in favour of it more
than once, nnd he may be said to have paved the way for
the completion of the union, which took place in the reign
of his successor. It was in Scotland that the opposition was
vital. A natural pride in her independent monarchy and
her independent parliament made her very reluctant to see
them obliterated. In Edinburgh, the capital, public anger
became intense; its citizens were indignant at the thought
of their beautiful city ceasing to be a capital. Religion,
was, however, the question which they took most to heart;
the Scotch feared that a union of the two kingdoms would
mean danger to the Presbyterian Scotch Church. This
point was settled by each nation passing Acts of Parlia-
ment to secure for each its constitution and independence.
There was to be one State but two Churches. Another point
of difficulty, the law, was decided; the Scotch law and
administration of justice was to remain unaltered.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 147

The Commissioners3 appointed by the Queen, of which
body all the Junto were important and active members, drew
up these decisions in 1706 and in 1707 they were carried.
Lord Somers and Lord Halifax were the leading spirits
of the Commission and it was largely owing to their en-
thusiasm and their wise persuasion that the matter was
decided in so satisfactory a manner. In 1708 a Bill " to
render the Union more secure " was passed. From that
time the two countries became one under the name of
Great Britain ; the Scotch Church and the Scotch law were
left untouched ; a common system of taxation and a common
system of coinage were adopted, and to both nations the
rights of trade were on an equal footing. A single Parlia-
ment was henceforth to represent both, forty-five Scotch
members being fixed as the relative representation of the
population of Scotland.

When the Bill for the naturalization of the House of
Hanover and for the better security of the succession of the
Crown in the Protestant line was passed into an Act, Halifax
was .selected to proceed as ambassador to the Court of Han-
over.4 He carried over the Act, with the insignia of the
most noble Order of the Garter, to the Electoral Prince in
his capital. During his residence at the Court he was
treated with much ceremony and courtesy. It was in this
same year, 1706, that Halifax set on foot a project for which
all lovers of books and learning can never cease to thank
him. He started the idea of a public library. The records
of the kingdom were mostly lodged in the Tower, where
they were in a lamentable state of confusion and disorder.
He had these seen to, but he did more than this. The
famous library of manuscripts collected by Sir Eobert Cotton
was one of the greatest collections in Europe; it had been

3 For full list of Commissioners see Parl. Hist. vol. vi. p. 534. Lockhart
Papers, vol. i. p. 141.

4Somerville, Queen Anne, p. 126. Macpherson, Original Papers, 1775
vol. ii. p. 36. Letter from Sunderland to Elector. Ibid. p. 40.

148 THE JUNTO.

left to the public at his death but in such a way as to be
of little use. Halifax preserved this valuable collection and
made it accessible to the public, a nucleus round which has
gathered the famous library of the British Museum. Every
subsequent student owes a very large debt to Halifax for
this.

In the year 1709 Halifax was made keeper of Bushey
Park and Hampton Court ; in 1710 he was joint plenipotenti-
ary to the Hague, to be present at the congress for the
negotiation of peace.5

During the years 1705 to 1707 the gradual introduction
of Whigs to high posts, and the gradual and increasing
unpopularity of the Tory ministry, had been the trend of
public opinion. It was not only the Government that was
changing its views, but the nation at large. An interest in
the war was reviving ; this, and disgust at the conduct of
the Tories, produced a change in favour of the Whigs.
Marlborough's long cherished plan of a composite ministry
had its trial, but only a short one. In 1708 Harley and his
colleagues were forced to resign; the Whigs had shown
their strength; they were once more at the head of affairs.
Somers was President of the Council, Wharton was Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, Sunderland was Secretary of State
and before long Orford was at the head of the Admiralty.

This triumph of the Whigs was a brief one. Greed for
high office and distinction had, to some extent, swamped
their motives for the good of their party; they had bullied
the Queen till she was forced into accepting them and it
was only with the very greatest reluctance that she would
consent to Orford and Sunderland receiving such respon-
sible posts. The persistence of the Whigs, and of the Junto
in particular, had turned many against them. They had
shown their power, they had grasped the control of the
kingdom, but they had at the same time lost the support

5 Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. iv. p. 357 ; vol. v. p. 295. Burnet,
vol. v. p. 252,

CHARLES MONTAGU. 149

of the nation. The trial of Dr. Sacheverell, in which the
Whigs showed indignant and unrelenting judgment against
the man, marked their downfall.

Dr. Henry Sacheverell, of Low Church parentage, a
strong upholder of the doctrine of non-resistance, had latterly
won a name for extreme High Church views. It was two
sermons of his, in which he attacked the Revolution and
declared the Church in danger " even in Her Majesty's
reign," that angered the Whig party. The preacher, at the
recommendation of the Mayor, who sympathised entirely
with his views, had the sermons printed and they had a
large circulation throughout the kingdom. The matter was
brought up at a Cabinet meeting ; Somers and the wiser of
the members advocated letting it alone, or at best merely
prosecuting the preacher in a court of law.6 That was
not the opinion of the majority; they urged impeachment
before the House of Lords. This carried the day, and the
sermons became the subject of a great State trial, becoming
in its turn a party question of much intensity.

The trial lasted for three weeks. The Queen appeared
in her box nearly every day. By his friends and supporters
Sacheverell was regarded as a hero, shamefully and un-
justly persecuted. Halifax took a very active part during
the trial; he was one of the judges and he was one who
pleaded for a mild sentence, that it should be " content "
or " not content " instead of " guilty " or " not guilty."7
By a majority of 69 a verdict of " guilty " was eventually
given.8 The sentence was, however, a mild one : three
years' suspension from preaching and the burning of the
obnoxious sermon. Mild as the sentence was, it was dearly
purchased by the Whigs; it was impossible to conceal the
feeling of the nation. Ably and eloquently as the Whigs

6 Stanhope, vol. ii. p. 135. Wyon, vol. ii. p. 170 et seq.

7 Parl. History, vol. vi. p. 882. For the trial in full see ibid. p. 805 et seq.

8 Ibid. p. 884. For list of those who voted for and against see ibid»
p. 886.

150 THE JUNTO.

explained the necessity of the trial in order to vindicate
the Revolution and to secure the Protestant Succession,
they had utterly failed to convince the nation that their real
object was nothing more than a destruction of the Church in
the person of Dr. Sacheverell. The elections which followed
in twelve months showed at one stroke the unpopularity of
the Whig party. A Tory ministry, with Harley and St.
John as leaders, was once more at the head of aifairs.

It was with this Tory ministry that Louis attempted to
continue the interrupted peace negotiations of 1709.
Harley's policy seems to have been directed towards a
restoration of the Stuarts and alliance with France. The
Whigs, always advocates of the war, were strongly opposed
to this, and lost no opportunity in showing that they would
not move an iota from their policy of war and support of
the Protestant Succession. Steps were taken by Harley to
get Marlborough on to his side. Marlborough was for peace,
but only for peace ; he did not wish to see a Stuart restora-
tion. Learning this, Harley's one object was the complete
ruin of Marlborough. On his return from the campaign of
1711 he was attacked in Parliament and stripped of all his
oitices, the command of the army being given to the Duke
of Ormond, a Jacobite of the strongest type. He received
secret orders to do nothing, and his refusal to attack the
French called forth much indignation from the Whigs.

On May 28, 1712, to a full House, Halifax urged the
necessity of carrying on the war with vigour,9 and moved an
address to the Queen, " desiring her to lay before the House
the orders she had sent to the General and to order him
to act oifensively in concert with the allies." A stormy
debate followed; the spirits of the Whigs were roused. The
Tories, and the Treasurer in particular, urged the folly of
risking a battle when the terms of peace were so nearly
arranged. Halifax's motion was pressed to a division and

8 Part. History, p. 1136. Coxe, Life of Marlborough, vol. vi. p. 190.

CHARLES MONTAGU.

151

was lost by 68 votes to 40. 10 The following year, March 31,
171c5, the peace was signed at Utrecht, the terms of which
are too well known to need repetition here. The great war
was at an end, and the question of the Succession, now made
more urgent by the failing health of the Queen, was that
which occupied the attention of the nation. It was a very
great question and one in which the members of the Junto
took a very decided and very united position. They were
one and all for the House of Hanover, and their zeal in the
cause led them even sometimes to forget all consideration for
the reigning Sovereign, to forget that the Pretender and
Anne were children of the same father. Halifax moved that
an address be presented to the Queen to renew her effort
to have the Pretender removed by the Court of Lorraine;
Wharton went even further, and moved that the Queen
should issue a proclamation offering a reward to any person
taking the Pretender alive or dead.1

The Whigs, who had always been staunch supporters of
the principles of the devolution, bearing in mind how
much it had done for England, were determined that its
work should not be undone. During William's reign there
had been no fear of this ; even as long as Anne should live
there was no danger; it was the question of her successor
that gave them trouble.

The Bill of Rights, the first statute of William and
Mary, had settled the crown on the heirs of Mary; failing
them, on Anne and her heirs. Should Anne die without
heirs the crown was to pass to those of William by any
subsequent marriage. Mary died childless, William did
not marry again, and when Anne's only child who reached
manhood, the Duke of Gloucester, died in 1700, the Whigs
grew anxious as to who should succeed, and immediately
began to work for the Hanoverian House. In 1701 the Act
of Settlement settled the Succession upon the Electress

10 Parl. History, vol. vi. p. 1138.
1 Lecky, vol. i. p. 114.

152 THE JUNTO.

Sophia of Hanover2 and her heirs, and as a further security
stipulated that the Sovereign of England must be a member
of the National Church. This would have been satisfactorily
carried through without opposition if a "Whig ministry had
been in power during the last few years of Anne's reign.
But it was a strong Tory ministry, and whether wholly
Jacobite at heart or not, its opponents felt confident that the
aim of the Tories was to restore the Pretender and the
Stuart line. It is not easy to discern how far the Tory party
corresponded with the Jacobite party, though very many
Tories were Jacobites, and all Jacobites were Tories. One of
the men at the head of the State, Bolingbroke, had con-
stantly been in correspondence with the Pretender. A hope
of office in the next reign made him support the Stuart Pre-
tender. The question of the Church did not concern him,
for he had no belief in Christianity; he knew well that
the part he had already played had made him very unpopu-
lar with the Elector of Hanover; his only hope of office
lay in support of the Pretender. How far Harley helped in
the plot of Bolingbroke it is even more difficult to ascertain.

2 The Electress Sophia was a descendant of Elizabeth, sister of Charles I.,
who married the Elector Palatine : —

James I. = Anne of Denmark.

|

Henry. Charles I. = Henrietta Elizabeth = Frederick, Elector

Maria.

Palatine.

Charles. Sophia = Ernest Augustus, Elector of Hanover.

George I.

II I i

Jharles Mary = William. Anne = James = Mary of Henrietta = Philip,

II. Hyde. II.

Modena. Maria. Duke of
Orleans.

"William III. = Mary. Anne. James Francis Edward ("Old

Pretender ").

| I

Charles Edward (" Young Pretender "). Henry, Cardinal of York.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 153

He had frequently made expression of friendliness to the
Pretender, but his constant wavering of opinion, his char-
acteristic indolence and, above all, his love of intrigue and
" backstairs policy," prevented him from taking any very
prominent part in the conspiracy. Bolingbroke had suppor-
ters in the Cabinet, but he realized that hasty action would
be fatal. The new Parliament of 1714 was again Tory. The
Whigs were resolved to use arms, if necessary, to secure
the throne for the Hanoverian Elector. But they were
saved from this necessity. A schism within the ministry
was gradually weakening its power. Harley, still undecided,
and still strongly in sympathy with the Low Church interest,
would not wholly support Bolingbroke' s vigorous policy.
The Schism Act,3 an extreme Hign Church measure, brought
their difference to a head. This Act maintained that no
one, unless a member of the Church of England, should keep
a school or teach the younger generation. Harley, a Dis-
senter by birth, could not support this Bill. With his usual
indecision and love of deception, he played with it, angered
the Queen and brought about his own dismissal from office.
This gave Bolingbroke more hope of success. He lost no
time in forming a purely Jacobite ministry and, had it not
been for the Queen's sudden illness, his plan might have
succeeded. The last week of Anne's life was one of strife
and excitement. Who was to succeed Oxford as Lord
Treasurer? Fortunately for the Whigs and for the country,
her choice fell upon Shrewsbury, in whom she was inclined
to trust. He, it will be remembered, had been Secretary of
State in William's reign ; he was a Protestant by conversion.
He had been at one time suspected of treasonable communi-
cation with the Stuarts, but William had refused to believe
it. When he received the White Staff from Anne on her
dying bed with the words, almost the last she uttered, " Use
it for the good of my people," the question of the Protest-

3 For debate in Lords on Schism Act, see Parl. History, vol. vi. p, 1353,

154 THE JUNTO.

ant Succession was safe. Whatever lie may have done in
the past, Shrewsbury was now thoroughly loyal to the
Protestant Succession. The Whigs gave a sigh of relief;
they felt that the Jacobite party had no chance. They
immediately made ready, for the (Queen's death could not be
long delayed; troops were collected, and the Elector sum-
moned over to England. When Anne died on August 1,
1714,4 he was quietly proclaimed King of Great Britain and
Ireland as George 1., and there was no need for the use of
arms. Contrary to all expectation, this great change was
carried through without bloodshed and almost without any
difficulty.

Halifax had been one of the strongest supporters of the
Hanoverian succession. The scheme for bringing the
Elector over to England was formulated in his house ; he
had been selected to carry the Act and the insignia of the
Order of the Garter to the Electoral Prince, and in 1714 he
succeeded in procuring a writ to summon the Elector to the
House of Peers as Duke of Cambridge. This loyal devotion
attached him to the House of Hanover and in the new reign
he was rewarded.5 He was one of the Lords Justices till
the arrival of the King, who did not land in England till
September 18. 6 Even before he had set foot in his new
kingdom it was clear which way things were going. Boling-
broke was dismissed from his office of Secretary of State ;
Lord Townshend was his successor and soon rose to the
rank of Prime Minister. Ormond and Oxford were treated
with cold indifference. A Whig ministry was soon called
together. At the elections the Whigs obtained an immense
majority, and the Parliament which met in 1715 ushered
in the period of Whig ascendency which lasted till the
accession of George III. to the throne. Halifax was ap-

4 Lecky, vol. i. p. 165.

5 Life of Newton, vol. ii. p. 269. Biog. Brit. p. 3155.

6 Lecky, vol. i. p. 168.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 155

pointed First Lord of the Treasury7 on October 11,

1714. On the 16th, he received the Order of the Garter ;
on the 19th, he was raised to the dignity of an Earl, as
Viscount Sunbury and Earl of Halifax. In December, he
was made Lord Lieutenant of Surrey, and on March 21,

1715, he took his seat once more in the Lords.8

He was to be permitted only just to see the complete
triumph of his party and of the Whig policy before his
vigorous and notable life was brought to a close. On
May 15 he was taken suddenly ill with inflammation of
the lungs, and died on the following Thursday,9 the 26th.
He was buried in the Abbey in General Monk's vault,10 on
the north side of King Henry VII. 's Chapel, according to
his own wish; in his will he desired " to be buried privately
in Westminster Abbey and to have a handsome plain monu-
ment."1 He died without issue. His superior title expired;
the barony reverted to his nephew, George Montagu. With-
in a few months of each other died two of the greatest Whig
statesmen, the two who had worked hardest for the cause of
the Revolution, the two who had most earnestly desired to
see the Protestant Succession secured. They were permitted
to see it and no more. There is a similarity between these
two, Somers and Montagu. Both great statesmen, both
orators, both magnificent patrons of genius and learning,
they took their seats in the House for the first time on the
same day, both rose rapidly to the highest posts in the State,

7 Coxe and Lord Mahon say that Halifax was mortally disappointed at
not being made Lord High Treasurer and began negotiations with the Tories.
Of this there is no evidence and it seems that he was too sincerely loyal to
Whig principles to have allowed of that. See Coxe, Life of Sir Robert
Walpoie, vol. i. p. 81. Mahon, England, vol. i. p. 133.

8 Journal of the House of Lords, vol. xx. p. 26. Nat. Itiog.

9 Life of 1715, p. 260. Calamy, Historical Account of His own Life,
vol. ii. p. 312.

10 Stanley, Historical Memoirs of Westminster Abbey, p. 219. Chester,
Westminster Abbey Registers, 1876, p. 283. Neale, Westminster Abbey, vol. i.
pt. ii. p. 634.

1 Life of Halifax, Appendix i. Copy of will.

156 THE JUNTO.

weathered storms of faction, and both retained the esteem
of their party. The influence which Montagu won over
his party was second to that of Somers alone.

Halifax was one of the original members of the Kit-
Cat Club, which was established in the year 1703. It being
the custom of the time to inscribe lines on the toasting
glasses, his facility for versifying was put to good use. It
is interesting to read them, not because they are poetical
productions of any value, but rather as examples of the
custom, and as indicating which ladies of high rank enjoyed
the most popularity. This is one to the Duchess of
Beaufort : —

Offspring of a tuneful sire

Blest with more than mortal fire,

Likeness of a mother's face

Blest with more than mortal grace.

You with double charms surprise,

With his wit and with his eyes.

Or again to Lady Sunderland : —

All nature's charms in Sunderland appear
Bright as her eyes and as her reason clear ;
Yet still their force, to men not safely known,
Seems undiscovered to herself alone.

There is also one to a foreigner, Mile. Sparheime: —

Admired in Germany, adored in France,
Your charms to brighter glory here advance ;
The stubborn Britons own your beauty's claim,
And with their native toasts enrol your name.

One could add many more,2 as for instance to Lady Mary
Churchill, the Duchess of Richmond. It required small
poetic skill to pen them. One of his biographers says " they
are far the completest of his writings," but like the rest
of his verse there is nothing admirable in them, yet they
gave every satisfaction to the period for which they were
written. Dr. Johnson, who included the poems of Halifax
in his edition of the British poets, observes that " it would

2 See Memoirs qf Kit-Cat Club, p. 107 et seq.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 157

now be esteemed no honour by a contributor to the monthly
bundle to be told that in strains, either familiar or solemn,
he sings like Montagu." As a patron of literature and
encourager of writers of the day he stands out in a more
striking way. Addison, Congreve, Newton, Prior and
Stepney were all indebted to him for preferment. He was
praised and flattered by nearly all the poets of the day, all,
perhaps, except Swift and Pope. Pope writes of his patron-
age with the bitterest scorn in his Prologue to the
"Satires":-

Proud as Apollo on his forked hill,

Sate full blown Bufo pufFd by every quill

Fed with soft dedication all day long,

Horace and he went hand and hand in song.

His library (where busts of poets dead

And a true Pindar stood without a head)

Receiv'd of wits an undistinguished race,

Who first his judgment ask'd and then a place :

Much they extolled his pictures, much his seat,

And flattered every day, and some days'eat.

Till grown more frugal in his riper days,

He paid some bards with port and some with praise,

To some a dry rehearsal was assign'd,

And others (harder still) he paid in kind.

Dryden alone (what wonder?) came not nigh,

Dryden alone escaped this judging eye ;

But still the great have kindness in reserve,

He helped to bury whom he helped to starve.*

Swift declares that Halifax only gave encouragement
in the form of " good words and good dinners," yet he adds
that " he is a great encourager of learning and learned
men and the patron of the Muses."3 There was a friend-
ship between Swift and Halifax ; and very probably Halifax
made many an effort to keep Swift on the side of the Whigs.
Swift was asked to dine,4 to stay at his country house; he
saw more of Halifax than any other Whig. Swift writes,
" I told him he was the only Whig in England I loved or

* Pope, Works, vol. ii. p. 153. 3 Swift, Works, vol. xii. p. 226.

4 Ibid. vol. ii. pp. 30, 44, 91 ; October 2nd, 1710 ; October 13th ;
November 28th.

158 THE JUNTO.

had any good opinion of " ; 5 and again, " I love the young
fellow and am resolved to stir the people to do something
for him."6 Swift, no doubt, hoped for preferment through
Halifax, and Halifax had even given him cause to hope for
a canonry of Westminster. A letter from Halifax to Swift,
written on October 6, 1709, is worth quoting, being as it is
a perfect example of a courtier's letter to a man of literary
standing ; condescending, courteous and probably utterly
insincere : —

SIR, — Our friend Mr. Addison telling me that he was to write to you to-
night, I would not let his packet go away without telling you how much I
am concerned to find them returned without you. I am quite ashamed of
myself and my friends to see you left in a place so incapable of testing you ;
and to see so much merit and so great qualities unrewarded by those who
are sensible of them. Mr. Addison and I are entered into a new confederacy,
never to give over the pursuit, nor to cease reminding those, who can serve
you, till your worth is placed in that light it ought to shine in. Dr. Smith
holds out still, but he cannot be immortal. The situation of his prebend would
make me doubly concerned in serving you, and upon all occasions that shall
offer I will be your constant solicitor, your sincere admirer and your unalter-
able friend. I am your most humble and obedient servant. *

Swift himself wrote on the back of this letter : "I kept this letter as a
true original of courtiers and court promises."

In his " Present State of Wit " Swift compares Steele
and Addison " to the two famous statesmen in a late reign
whose characters are very well expressed in their two
mottoes, ' Prodesse quam conspice ? (that of Somers) and
' Otium cum dignitate ' (that of Halifax). Accordingly, the
first was continually at work behind the curtain, drew up
and prepared all those schemes and designs, which the latter
still drove on ; and stood out exposed to the world, to receive
its praises or censures."7 This criticism of Somers and
Halifax is not altogether untrue. Somers was of a much
more retiring nature than Halifax. Halifax liked publicity
and public acknowledgment of his services and, consequent-
ly, he was open to the praise or blame of the country, and

5 Swift, Works, vol. ii. p. 30. 6 Ibid. p. 44.

* Ibid. vol. xv. p. 331. 72bid. vol. vi. pp. 162, 163.

CHARLES MONTAGU. 159

he received his full share of each. At his magnificent house,
which is now the British Museum, a variety of foreigners
and distinguished people met.8 He lived in style and
dignity and entertained a great deal. His vivacity, his
good taste and his captivating manners, all helped to make
him a charming host, whose hospitality many were
delighted to enjoy. Besides books he made a fine collection
of prints, medals and coins. These were sold in 1740, and
his collection of manuscripts relating to public affairs in
1760.

Although sitting on opposite sides of the House there
was a bond of friendship between Harley and Montagu.
They had been friends in their youth and they remained
lifelong friends in private life. There was even a common
political bond; both earnestly desired religious toleration,
both were keenly interested in the finances of the country.
But each was bound closely to his party, so their union
could never be a public one; indeed Halifax ultimately
became a member of the ministry which impeached his
friend. But there is good reason to believe that during the
latter part of Harley's official life there was a serious
scheme between him and Halifax for a union of the moder-
ate of the Whig party and a small number of Tories on
whom Harley could rely.9 Halifax might justly be called
one of the moderate Whigs ; he was loyal to his party but
he was not so aggressively Whig as Wharton, Sunderland
and Russell.

The age in which Halifax and his colleagues of the
Junto lived is a peculiarly interesting one to study because
in it one sees the real beginnings of our own age. The
reign of William III. witnessed a great internal change and
the birth of many new institutions, the Army, the Bank
and the National Debt. The old state of things was gone
for ever, the new institutions were to take root. The reign

9 Memoirs of Duchess of Marlborough, vol. ii. p. 12.
9 See Harley by E. S. Roscoe.

160 THE JUNTO.

of Anne witnessed the settlement of one of those larger
internal questions concerning the relationship between
Scotland and England. To quote an eminent historian,10
" When Anne had been peaceably succeeded by George I.
a most comprehensive settlement of all affairs which came
under the head of policy had been reached. Not only was
dynastic policy at an end but it had been abandoned with
full conservation of monarchical government, so that a
dynasty had begun to reign to which the 18th and 19th
centuries were to belong. The two parts of Britain had
also been united in a manner which was to prove permanent.
. . . . For the first time Protestant Powers had taken
the lead in a great settlement of Europe."

The period of growth was at an end, British policy was
henceforth fixed and permanent. The reign of Anne finished
the work which William had begun, and which owing to
death he had been unable to complete. Marlborough was in
a way the disciple of William and carried on his policy.
The Irish problem, it is true, proved too difficult for William
and Anne to settle ; it was left to a later period. The union
with Scotland was achieved, and achieved successfully. It
prospered because England had an invaluable privilege to
offer the Scotch, the free admission into the commerce of a
great Trade Empire.

In letters, in the life of the day, journalism began to
play an important part ; commerce was growing to be a
large factor in the life of the nation and the finances of
the realm were, for the first time, put on to a sure and
practical basis. For this important step in the progress of
the nation, the financial settlement, England is indebted to
Halifax. His name may be forgotten among the minor
poets, although according to the standard of his age his
achievements in that direction were not to be despised;
but as a financier he achieved permanent distinction. If a
reminder of his genius is necessary one need do no more
than recall the foundation of the Bank of England.

10 Seeley, Growth of British Policy.

CHARLES SPENCER,

CHARLES SPENCER.

161

CHARLES SPENCER.

CHARLES SPEXCER, afterwards Earl of Simderland, whom
we consider last, was tlie youngest member of the Junto.
To that body he was, perhaps, a necessity rather than an
acquisition. Through his insolent temper and tortuous poli-
tics he often endangered the safety of his party and even
his colleagues were exasperated at his behaviour.

He was son of Robert, the great Earl of Sunderland,
who held so prominent a position during the reign of Charles
II., James II. and William III. Robert Sunderland's one
object all through the turnings of his long career had been
to be himself great, rich and safe. To secure his own
safety he had wavered from one opinion to another, from
one principle to another, and from one faction to another
faction. So far as he could be said to have convictions they
were Whiggish. By careful manoeuvring he had carried
himself unhurt through all the vicissitudes of his day.
Very different was his son, Charles Spencer; his only son
after the death of his eldest son in 1688, who succeeded him
as Earl of Sunderland. There was no question as to which
party he belonged. He was a Whig unhappily for the Whig
party, but his Whiggism was of a very different character to
that of his father. It was no mere wavering inclination
towards one party ; it was a violent and domineering passion.
Ardent it was, but unfortunately it was a Whiggism corrupt
and narrow, a Whiggism which he carried almost to the

11

162 THE JUNTO.

verge of Republicanism, a Whiggism which, to his party,
was little better than a degraded form of Toryism. Robert
Spencer, the father, had been an intriguer, and Charles
Spencer, the son, was an intriguer after him; only there
again there was a vital difference in the nature of their
intrigue. Where the father cringed and crept, the son
raged and stormed, regardless of whom he might hurt or
even trample underfoot. Charles Spencer had a large fund
of courage and a large fund of ambition, but it was a
personal, selfish ambition rather than a patriotic one. His
politics were of a purely party character ; his horizon reached
no further than party triumphs and party defeats ; there was
no lofty aspiration, no nobility about his politics as there
was about that of Somers. He was indifferent honest; no
qualms of conscience troubled him if to secure his end he
must needs abandon principles or injure a friend. He was a
man whom no one, unless of the same stamp, could accept
as colleague without repugnance; and his rough insolence,
and arrogant priggishness made him particularly obnoxious
to Queen Anne, in whose presence, according to Dartmouth1
" he amused himself by deriding royalty." Notoriously dis-
agreeable, he was at the same time unquestionably clever.
Already in 1688, at the early age of 14, Evelyn remarked
that he was a youth of extraordinary hopes, very learned
for his age and ingenious.2 He showed a great love of
books when a boy, and to collect them was his favourite
hobby all through life. When 19, he made a beginning
which ultimately formed a library of no mean size and
repute. He had a considerable knowledge of ancient litera-
ture and his imagination was fed and fascinated by the
ideas of liberty which he found in the Latin poets. The
one danger to liberty, as it appeared to him, looking through
their glasses, was to be feared from monarchy. He wished
to see the prerogatives enjoyed by the Sovereign given to a
select few of the nobility; later on in his career he even

1 Burnet. 2 Diary, August 16th.

CHARLES SPENCER. 163

attempted to realize this ideal.* With such views, openly
proclaimed, it can easily be believed that he was disliked
by the Queen. Added to his youthful love of books and
learning his moral character gave great promise for the
future ; instead of fallowing the youth of the period and
spending both time and money on horse-racing, betting at
cock-fights or following attractive actresses, he was ever to
be found in pursuit of old editions of the classics, such as the
Yirgil of Zarottus for which he gave £46. 3 No wonder
that great hopes were raised for the career of such a youth,
who " in person was favoured by nature, in intellect was
considerably above the average, and who had a sedateness
above his years. Even the most observant men of his time
failed to detect the vices which lay concealed under this
early show of wisdom and dignity." His love of books
remained, but this quiet hobby did not prevent him from
growing into the most rudely insolent Whig of his time,4 a
constant danger to his party.

Born in 1674, Charles Spencer was the second son of
Robert, second Earl of Sunderland, by Lady Anne Digby,
who was the youngest daughter of George, second Earl of
Bristol. The eldest son died in 1688 when Charles became
Lord Spencer.

In 1688, with wife and children, Lord Sunderland fled
to Holland. During the period of general confusion which
followed the flight of James, Sunderland made his escape.
It was none too soon. He was known to be guilty of
many crimes but few knew that he had voted for the prosecu-
tion of the seven Bishops, that he had sat in the High
Commission, that he had even turned, or pretended to turn,
Eomanist. The Whigs hated him for the knowledge that

* Post, p. 186.

3 Evelyn saw many of these old editions of Tully, Statius, Virgil, etc in
1699. Nichol, Literary Anecdotes, vol. i. p. 90.

4 Lord Sunderland was always a violent Whig, very violent in the House
of Cominons during his father's lifetime and continued so in the House of
Lords after his death." Wentivorth Papers, ed. 1883, p. 135.

164 THE JUNTO.

he had served James and his government, the Jacobites hated
him for the knowledge that by his base treachery he had
helped to overthrow James and the Stuart dynasty. He
was wise to fly from England where his life was not safe for
a day.* In banishment Sunderland again changed his reli-
gion, made a humble apology for his behaviour and begged
to be allowed to return to his country house at Althorpe. It
was not until the Act of Grace had been taken up to the
Lords that he felt it safe to venture once more on English
soil. He returned, and with his irresistible manners and
his power of fascination he even won some measure of influ-
ence over William, to whom he promised faithful service.
When in Holland with his parents Charles Spencer had as
tutor Charles Trimnell (afterwards Bishop of Winchester)
and with him studied the laws and religion of the Dutch.
In 1691 they were back at Althorpe and two years later
Charles Spencer had begun to form the library, which he
hoped to make one of the finest in the country. He travelled
about England picking up books, very often exceedingly rare
ones.5 By 1699 he is said to have had " an incomparable
library, wherein, among other rare books, were several that
were printed at the first invention of that wonderful art, in
particular Tully's ' Offices ' and a Homer, and Suidas almost
as ancient."6

It was in the year 1695, at the age of 21, that Spencer
first entered public life, when he took his seat in the Com-
mons as member for Tiverton.7 He continued to represent

* See Macaulay, History of England.

5 In 1695 he bought Sir Charles Scarborough's mathematical collection.

6 Evelyn writes this ; he saw the library in 1699.

~ Macaulay, vol. v. p. 6. In the Atterbury Memoirs, vol. i. p. 133, the
following remarks give the impression he made: "He was accomplished,
possessed of much literary taste, a lover of books, a patron of authors and
apparently in every way gifted so as to ensure for himself a brilliant career ;
nevertheless there could be little doubt that his ideas of government were
based on classical recollections rather than on a study of the English Con-
stitution. He went with the Whigs in all their experiments on Church and
State, but was too thoroughly an aristocrat to forget the privileges of rank."
December 31st.

CHARLES SP£NCE&. 165

that borough until 1702, when, on the death of his father, he
was called up to the House of Lords. During his first two
sessions he seems to have proved himself nothing more than
a decided AVhig, who supported his party with zeal. But he
aired his Republican views from the beginning. His favour-
ite cry was " Down with the Lo>rds " ; and he would often,
according to Swift, " among his familiar friends refuse the
title of ' Lord,' swear he would never be called otherwise
than ' Charles Spencer,' and hoped to see the day when there
should not be a peer in England."8 He professed to desire
the exclusion of the Lords from all questions of importance,
and yet as soon as he himself had the chance of entering the
Upper House he did so, and conducted himself in anything
but a moderate way. In 1695 he had married Lady Ara-
bella Cavendish, fifth daughter of the second Duke of
Newcastle. Their married life was cut short by her death
three years later, and it was at this point that a step was
taken which turned out to be one of very great importance
to the Whig party. It was proposed, largely due to Godol-
phin, that he should marry the Lady Anne, second daughter
of the Earl of Marlborough. Sunderland, Spencer's father,
was very anxious for the marriage ; he and Marlborough had
long been friends, friends intimate and helpful to each
other, and to see his son united to the Lady Anne was,
perhaps, his greatest wish now that his life was drawing
to a close. He wrote to Mrs. Boscawen, Godolphin's sister,
through whose agency he first of all tried to achieve it, " If
I see him so settled I shall desire nothing more in this
world but to die in peace, if it please God. I must add
this, that if he can be thus happy, he will be governed in
everything public and private, by Lord Marlborough. I
have particularly talked to him of that, and he is sensible
how advantageous it will be to him to be so."9

8 Swift, Works, vol. v. p. 28. Four Last Years of the Queen.

9 Marlborough Papers. Lord Sunderland to Mrs. Boscawen.

166 TH£ JUNTO.

The parents of the lady in question were not, however,
so anxious for the marriage. The Countess of Marlborough,
accustomed to flattery and polished manners, did not consider
him a suitable son-in-law. Marlborough himself disliked
the Republicanism and violence already displayed by
Spencer. Neither of them urged the matter. The Sunder-
lands persisted and Lady Marlborough soon gave way. She
was much less hostile to Whiggism than her husband, and
seeing that the charms of her daughter had captured the
young Spencer,10 she joined the promoters of the match and
used her power to win her husband over to their way of
thinking. Reluctantly he consented, but with strong appre-
hensions that his new son-in-law was not so tractable as his
father was inclined to think. He was right ; his fears were
soon to be realized. The marriage was one which was to
bring much trouble to both parties. They were married in
January, 1700, the ceremony taking place at St. Albans.
Two years later Spencer took his seat in the House of Lords
as successor to his father1 and at this period the importance
of his political life may be said to have begun.

And yet 1702 was the year which saw the death of
William III., the Whig King, and the accession of Anne,
whose sympathies were entirely with the Tories. In the
Parliament of 1702 they found themselves in a majority of
two to one.2 With the Sovereign's support they might have
kept this ascendency if it had not been for the disastrous
policy of introducing the Bill against Occasional Conformity.
They lost the confidence of the nation by their endeavour to
force conformity by tacking their Bill to a Bill for Supply.3
But in opposition, as well as in power (and therein, perhaps,
lies the secret of the Junto's success), the activity of the Junto
was unresting. In the House of Lords, too, the Whigs were
the stronger party. They did not relax their energy, realiz-

10 For this marriage see Coxe, Marlborough, vol. i. chap. 7.

1 October 27th, 1702. Luttrell, vol. v. p. 230.

2 W. F. Lord, Queen Anne, p. 78. 3 See page 45.

CHARLES SPENCER. 167

ing that it would not be long before they once more gained
power. They observed the tactics of the Tories with intelli-
gent interest, and they watched, perhaps, even more closely
the change in the attitude of Marlborough and Godolphin,
the great Tory ministers. At the accession of Queen Anne,
the Marlboroughs were in high favour ; she gave responsible
places in the Royal Household to the Duchess and very high
offices in the State to the Duke. Godolphin, too, was
favoured; he was appointed Lord High Treasurer, which
corresponded to the position of Prime Minister at the present
day. Marlborough and Godolphin were Tories ; they might
even have been called " High Tories " at that time. Never-
theless they supported the war according to the plans and
wishes of King William. Marlborough, indeed, to whom
the late King had bequeathed his war policy, to carry on
and complete, could hardly have done otherwise. But this
war policy, being William's policy, was very dear to the
Whigs ; and Marlborough and Godolphin thereby received
more support from their opponents than from their own
party. This position of affairs led to a gradual change in
the attitude of the two Tory Ministers. At the second
introduction of the Occasional Conformity Bill they were
already beginning to look to the Whigs for support4 and
made attempts to dissuade their party friends from re-
introducing the measure. In the division they voted, how-
ever, in its favour.5 When the Bill was brought forward
for a third time, unscrupulously tacked on to the Bill of
Supply, Marlborough and Godolphin gave silent votes
against it. This somewhat rapid change which came over
the two great ministers was highly significant. In the elec-
tions of 1705 they used their influence against the " tackers,"
the result being that the Whigs once more gained a
majority.

Sunderland gave the Queen and the Duchess an early
taste of his roughness and his disregard of their feelings.

4 Stanhope, vol. i. p. 123. 5 Ibid. p. 124.

168 THE JUNTO.

One of his first acts as a peer was to oppose the granting of
an annuity on the Prince. In 1702, at the opening of the
Session, the question was introduced as one of great import-
ance by a message from the Queen, urging that further
provision be made for her husband, should he survive her.
In Committee a member of the Lower House, Mr. Howe,
voted a grant of the enormous sum of £100,000 per annum.6
The extravagance of this proposal will be understood when
it is known to be double the sum any Queen of England
ever had in jointure. Dread of offending the Queen allowed
it to pass the Commons. Very different was its reception in
the Upper House. The Lords stoutly opposed it, but the
Court party and Marlborough prevailed in spite of them.
The Queen's great gratitude to Marlborough for the victory
is seen in a letter to the Duchess : " I am sure the Prince's
Bill, passing after so much struggle, is wholly owing to the
pains you and Mr. Freeman have taken, and I ought to say a
great deal to both of you in return, but neither words nor
actions can ever express the true sense Mr. Morley and I
have of your sincere kindness on this and all other occa-
sions ; and therefore I will not say any more on this subject,
but that to my last moment your dear unfortunate, faithful
Morley will be most passionately and tenderly yours."7

This letter shows forth the close and affectionate relat-
tionship between the Queen and the Duchess. " Dear Mrs.
Freeman " was the Lady Marlborough, to the Queen ; the
Duchess likewise addressing the Queen as " dear Mrs.
Morley." They had been friends of the closest intimacy
before the Queen's accession and this connection continued
during the first years of her reign and was only broken by
the Duchess obviously going over to the side of the Whigs.

In the Tipper House Sunderland was one of the Lords who
stoutly opposed the Bill granting an annuity to Prince
George. Much to the chagrin and disgust of his parents-

' Coxe, Marlboroiigh, vol. i. p. 209. Wyon, vol. i. p. 145.
7 Coxe, ut supra, vol. i. p. 210.

CHARLES SPENCER.

in-law he not only voted against, but signed a protest.8
The imperious hot-tempered Duchess took great offence at
his behaviour, and the Queen naturally took a very great
dislike to the bold young Lord who took such a decided stand
against her husband. This incident, perhaps, sealed the
dislike for him which the Queen could never throw oft'.9
It also, possibly, laid the seed of alienation between the
Queen and her favourite, the Duchess. Through the amiable
efforts of her daughter, the Lady Sunderland, the impetuous
Duchess was reconciled to her son-in-law and she forgot her
irritation. Sunderland was, after all, the Duchess' son-in-
law and she, eager for distinction and power, was equally
anxious to obtain the same for him. Through her efforts
and those of Godolphin, Sunderland, the youngest member
of the Junto, was the first to attain office under Anne.
The war, the Whig policy, as we have seen, was supported
by Marlborough and Godolphin. This fact put the Tory
ministers in an awkward position. Godolphin gradually
came to realize that the existence of the Government and the
continuance of the war depended upon the Whigs ; they
alone supported the war and passed votes of supply : the
Whigs alone protected the country from religious intoler-
ance and political chaos. Their goodwill must be preserved
or else their support would be withdrawn and in order to
achieve this end the Whigs must be given a share in the
Government. This was the fact that stared Godolphin in the
face and which he, in vain, tried to impress upon Marl-
borough. He approached Marlborough through the Duchess :
" As to what you say of the Whigs I am to learn that till
they have the power in their hands they will be against
everything that may be an assistance to the Queen and the
Government."10

8 Signed also by Wharton and Orford. Thorold Rogers, Protests of the
Lords, vol. i. p. 163.

9 Wyon, vol. i. p. 146. Stanhope, vol. i. p. 89.

10 Godolphin to Duchess, January 14th, 1706-1707.

170 fHE JUNTO.

Not until the year 1705 did Maryborough begin to realize
the need of Whig support. He then began to see that the
war would terminate unless a Whig was placed in the
Cabinet.1 The Whigs clamoured for office, and office for
the Earl of Sunderland seemed to be their one desire.2
As son-in-law to Marlborough they thought if once in office
he would gain considerable influence for their party, and
make way for other Whigs to follow. They proposed him
as Secretary for State and would take no refusal. Of all
the Whigs, Sunderland was, perhaps, the least likely to be
acceptable. Godolphin had little esteem for him and Marl-
borough disliked his rough politics and feared the opposition
of the Queen, whose antipathy for him was so apparent.
His faults were already to some extent known, but it must
be remembered that at this date his capacity in office had
not been tested. In 1705, however, he had been sent as
envoy extraordinary to Vienna on the accession of Joseph I.
This appointment had been pressed by the Whig leaders,
who intended it to be merely an introductory step to a place
of trust in the State. They had already, with the help of
the Duchess, tried to secure for him the post of Comptroller
of the Household, but owing to firm opposition from Marl-
borough, had failed.3 At Vienna, the negotiations he had
to carry through were of the highest importance; he had
to arrange a difference between the Emperor and the
Hungarians.4 He displayed diplomatic skill, but he looked
upon his mission with no seriousness ; he desired to be back
in the midst of the political strife in London, and only two
months after his departure he wrote home to Godolphin that

1 October 14th, 1706. Marlborough writes to Duchess (the Whigs were
determined to oppose the Government if Sunderland was not appointed) : " I
see no remedy but patience, for if it were not God's pleasure to punish us for
our sins this way he would never suffer wise men to be so unreasonable ; for
it is certainly the part of madmen to hurt oneself in order to be revenged of
others, especially when they are our best of friends."

2 Private Correspondence of the Duchess, xxvii.

3 Coxe, Marlborough, vol. ii. p. 87.
Boyer, Annals, vol. iv. p. 94.

CHARLES SPENCER.

lie would rather be buried alive than stay any longer in
Vienna.5 This was hardly the attitude for one about to
take high office : and yet Godolphin felt it was necessary to
put Sunderland into the Cabinet. He urged this point upon
Marlborough who finally gave way. The Queen's dislike for
the man was the next obstacle. Herein the Duchess proved
useful. She, eager to see her son-in-law promoted, exerted
all her influence. The moment, too, for urging the appoint-
ment was not unfavourable. For the first time, in 1705,
was the Queen displeased with the Tories, for they had
tried, during the previous parliamentary session, to establish
her successor in England. She began to realize, too, that
it was necessary for the safety of the Government to grant
some share to the Whigs. But why admit the very man she
most abhorred ? She would not consent to his promotion
and offered a firm refusal ; she declared the Whigs' demand
unreasonable and Sunderland's temper insufferable. The
Marlboroughs had, at the beginning of her reign, frequently
cautioned her against placing herself in the hands of a party.
Was it not, argued the Queen, a strong proof that she was
in the hands of a party, being forced to choose for her
servants men whom she disliked ? " Why," she wrote to
Godolphin, u for God's sake, must I, who have no interest, no
end, no thought but for the good of my country, be made
so miserable as to be brought into the power of one set of
men."6 The Queen had plenty of character and she knew
her own mind ; she was resolved to resist the appointment of
Sunderland as long as she possibly could. She was in an
extremely difficult position, she implored Godolphin to save
her from it; this by no means simplified Godolphin's posi-
tion, for the Whigs attacked him and accused him of in-
sincerity in not giving them what they demanded.7 How

5 Add. MSS. 28,056, f. 321. Brit. Mus.

6 Anne to Godolphin, August 30th, 1706. Coxe, Marlborough, Septem-
ber 10th.

1 1bid. vol. ii. p. 7.

172 THE

was the situation to be saved? Godolphin adopted the
measure of threatening to resign the White Staff.8 " I
came this moment from opening and reading the letter
which your Majesty gave yourself the trouble to write to
me last night. It gives me all the grief and despair imagin-
able, to find that your Majesty shows inclination to have me
continue in your service, and yet will make it impossible for
me to do so. I shall not, therefore, trouble your Majesty
with fruitless repetitions of reasons and arguments. I can-
not struggle against the difficulties of your Majesty's busi-
ness and yourself at the same time ; but I can keep my word

to your Majesty I have worn out my health,

and almost my life, in the service of the Crown. I have
served your Majesty faithfully to the best of my under-
standing, without any advantage to myself except the honour
of doing so, or without expecting any other favour than to
end the small remainder of my days in liberty and quiet.9

The Queen was seriously embarrassed. She could not
lose him, who was a tried and apparently faithful servant;
her only other course was to admit Sunderland. But she
remained firm, even though the Duchess pleaded in his
favour. Between these two alternatives the Queen wavered
until Maryborough's return to England. She tried to con-
ciliate both parties by offering to create Sunderland a Privy
Councillor with a pension. This alternative was treated
with scorn by the Whigs; Sunderland rejected the offer,
and Somers and Halifax persisted. In a letter to the
^Duchess, Sunderland expressed their view : " Lord Sunder-
^v. land, Lord Halifax and I have talked very fully over all
1 1S* this matter, and we are come to our last resolution in it,

that is, what other things have been promised must be done
or we and the Lord Treasurer must have nothing more to
do together about business."10 But Marlborough had pledged
himself to secure the post for his son-in-law, in return

8 Coxe, Marlborough, vol. iii. p. 92. 9 Ibid. p. 93.

"Ibid. vol. iii. p. 94.

CHARLES SPENCER. 173

receiving the necessary support of the Whigs to carry on the
war. The Queen could no longer hold out when both
Godolphin and Maryborough, were firm. She was obliged to
reluctantly yield and to see the man who was intolerable to
her created Secretary of State, December 3, 1706. n The
Whigs were satisfied for the time but the appointment was
not destined to bring peace to the Queen or to the political
world. In spite of his unquestionable ability, his impetu-
osity and his ungovernable temper made him a thorn in the
side of even his own party. Somers, for whom Sunderland
had the greatest esteem and to whose word he would alone
pay attention, was fearful lest he should injure his party
more than help it.

Sunderland's entry into the Cabinet was highly signifi-
cant. It marked a distinct change in the ministry from
Tory to Whig. The important step of admitting Sunderland
to office having been taken, other promotions rapidly fol-
lowed. Chiefs of the Tory party such as the Duke of
Buckingham and the Earls of Nottingham, Rochester and
Jersey, Lord Gower and Sir George Rooke were removed
from the Privy Council. The Administration was established
on a Whig basis and Harley and St. John were the only
Tories of any note who retained positions of responsibility.
It also marked a distinct change at Court. The Duchess'
staunch support of the Whigs in their desire to push
Sunderland into office alienated her from the Queen. The
fact of the matter was that the Duchess had changed her
political views, she was no longer a Tory, and she wished
to make the Queen follow her. The Queen was and always
would remain a Tory. This difference of political opinion
menaced the close friendship which had hitherto existed
between the Queen and the Duchess.

The Duchess, quite innocently, had promoted a cousin of
her own, who was poor and in need, to a place of trust in
the Household. She never for one moment thought it would

11 Ranke, vol. v. p. 326. Coxe, ut supra, vol. iii. p. 132. Boyer, Annals.

174 THE JUNTO.

work towards her own dismissal. This woman, Abigail
Hill, was of quiet, pleasant manners, a great contrast to
her cousin, the stormy Duchess. She became Mrs. Masham,
marrying a gentleman of the Household, the Queen herself
being present at the ceremony. A cousin also of Robert
Harley, Mrs. Masham was of decided Tory conviction and of
the High Church party ; she became a favourite with Anne,
and as she grew in favour the Duchess was superseded.
The fact that Sunderland, who was making himself intoler-
able to the Queen, was son-in-law to the Duchess, did not
help matters.

This connection of Anne with Mrs. Masham was of great
importance. Through her as medium, Harley strengthened
his position with the Queen ; this growing intimacy roused
the jealousy of Marlborough and Godolphin who determined
to get Harley dismissed from office. This was achieved
with no great difficulty; they placed their resignations in
the Queen's hands. She could not for a moment think of
losing Marlborough; Harley must therefore go. A large
Whig majority in the elections and the death of her hus-
band filled the Queen's cup of bitterness. But she remained
true to her Tory and High Church principles even though
the Tories had proved themselves so distasteful to her. It
required a woman of no small amount of courage and con-
stancy to endure so great trials. Time after time she was
put at the mercy of the great men around her, but she
held her ground firmly. She was not a weak woman. To
follow her through her career and see how she rose above
difficulties and met opposition is enough to contradict this
view at the outset. The appointment of two high Tories as
bishops without consulting her ministers was an early asser-
tion of her independence and her rights. " I cannot think
my having nominated Sir W. Dawes and Dr. Blackhill to be
bishops is any breach, they being worthy men ; and all the
clamour that is raised against them proceeds only from the
malice of the Whigs."1 The will of the Queen was, in fact,
1 Coxe, Marlborough, vol. iii. p. 371.

CHARLES SPENCER. 175

the main factor in determining important changes of policy.
By her own will she made and unmade ministers.2 She had
a great belief in the importance of the prerogative and this
she was determined to make clear to the strong characters
around her. Even the strongest of them felt her influence.
Queen Anne was a woman of character as well as of personal
dignity, and until that is realized it is difficult to understand
the intricacies of her reign.

The moment Sunderland entered the Cabinet troubles
began : his promotion was certainly not calculated to gain
popularity for the Whig party. He raised contentions
amongst the nobility, he showed an indifference to character
in those whom he took as associates ; he began to dictate to
the Queen ; he showed himself harsh, ungovernable and head-
strong. In 1708 he vexed Marlborough and Godolphin by
his tactless zeal in interfering in the Scotch elections.3 He
accused Harley of having been privy to the crimes of his
secretary Gregg, and at the conference held to consider the
dismissal of Mrs. Masham, who, together with Harley, was
intriguing and seeking to undermine the Whig party at
Court, he was violent and overbearing. He supported his
father-in-law in urging that the Queen be asked to remove
Mrs. Masham, but Somers, with his usual moderation,
opposed the course as without precedent, and he was sup-
ported by Godolphin and the other Whig leaders. Sunder-
land did not hesitate to differ openly in Parliament from
his senior and more steady colleagues, of whose lukewarm-
ness he complained to the Duchess. His behaviour, indeed,
roused the Queen and the High Church party to seek
steps to procure his removal from office.4 The Whigs, to
their disgust, felt that although in some ways extremely
useful to them, he was certainly gaining for them dis-
credit and unpopularity. What, perhaps, brought things

2 Seeley, Political Science.

s Burnet, vol. v. p. 389. Wyon, vol. ii. p. 88.

4 Atterbury, Memoirs,

176 THE JUNTO.

to a crisis was his attitude in the affair of Dr. Sacheverell.
When this man's injudicious sermons were brought before
the Cabinet, the wiser members, such as Somers, advocated
that the sermons should be passed over. Sunderland, how-
ever, moved they should be brought to the knowledge of the
legislature with a view to the impeachment of the offender.5
Unfortunately for his party his proposal was carried; Dr.
Sacheverell was impeached and sentenced. The doom of
the Whig Cabinet was imminent. The High Church party,
highly indignant at the treatment of Dr. Sacheverell, were
bent on Sunderland's dismissal. Harley and his friends
saw that their time to strike had come. The significance of
the trial was to be seen in the intense feeling in favour of
Sacheverell which really amounted to a condemnation of
the principles of 1688. It also showed the very great power
of the Church. Robert Walpole wrote to Marlborough,
June 6, 1710 : " I think our affairs at home in a most un-
accountable situation. Lord Sunderland, it is agreed by all,
is to be removed and by none endeavoured to be saved. I
don't know what this means, but I am sure it must end in
the dissolution of this Parliament and in the destruction of
the Whigs. The saving Lord Sunderland deserves the
utmost industry, which alone can preserve the Parliament
upon which the Whigs entirely depend, and I am afraid
your Grace has no surer friend."

Walpole was right in his predictions. Even his col-
leagues were bound to acknowledge that Sunderland had
done them more harm than good. Marlborough, however,
urged that at any rate his removal should be deferred until
the end of the campaign.6 He sent a letter to Godolphin to
be shown to the Queen urging that the step might be post-
poned. The Whig ministers made a last attempt to keep
him in office, realizing that his removal would mean their
loss of power. A conference was held at Devonshire House7

*Coxe, ut supra, vol. v. p. 124. Wyon, vol. ii. p. 159.

6 Marlborough, Conduct, p. 253. 7 Coxe, Marlborough, vol. v. p. 263.

CHARLES SPENCER. 177

to protest, but too late. Anne, who had hesitated taking
such a bold step as to dismiss one of the all-powerful Junto,
was determined to hesitate no longer. She had already
drawn up the form of dismissal commanding him to deliver
up his seals and had warned Marlborough and Godolphin
that should they resign they alone would be responsible for
any consequence to the public. " If he and you (writing
to Godolphin) .should do so wrong a thing, at any time, as to
desert my service, what confusion might happen might lie
at your door, and you alone would be answerable, and no-
body else."

There being no actual charge against Sunderland Anne
offered him a pension of £3,000. This he haughtily and
indignantly refused, pointing out " if he could not have the
honour of serving his country he certainly would not
plunder it."8

Although to some extent anticipated the "Whigs felt it
a slap in the face. The Queen had yet again shewn that
she would not be treated by her ministers as they chose,
but that she demanded respect and obedience. ;t We are
all," wrote Robert Walpole to Lord Townshend, " under the
greatest consternation at the removal of Lord Sunderland
which tho' expected when the blow was struck gave the
greatest alarm to all the town (June 16)." Horace Wal-
pole wrote from the Hague : " The consternation that the
removal of Lord Sunderland occasions here is as great as it
can possibly be at London (July 1)." Swift wrote : " The
circumstances of the Earl of Sunderland's removal, and the
reasons alleged, are known enough. His ungovernable
temper had ever swayed him to fail in his respects to Her
Majesty's person."9

8 For dismissal of Sunderland see : Burnet, vol. vi. p. 9. Stanhope, vol.
ii. p. 157. Lecky, vol. i. p. 59. Somerville, p. 412. Marlborough, Conduct,
p. 257. Boyer, vol. ix. pp. 228-230. Luttrell, vol. vi. p. 594. Wyon, vol. ii.
p. 209.

9 Swift, Works, vol. iii. p. 178. Changes in Queen's Ministry.

12

178 THE JUNTO.

Tlie Whigs' time of power in office was at an end. What
had, some eighteen months before, been an entirely Whig
Cabinet became through the elections of November, 1710,
an entirely Tory one. The Tory party retained the major-
ity and exercised almost undisputed power during the last
four years of Anne's reign. The anticipation that Sunder-
land's fall would be speedily followed by Godolphin's was
soon realized. The Queen was tired of dictation from the
Whigs ; Godolphin, and even Marlborough, who had served
her so loyally abroad, were ignominiously dismissed. The fall
of the Marlboroughs took place in 1712; the haughty
Duchess was disgraced, and had to leave her apartments
at St. James' Palace. Lady Sunderland ceased to be Lady
of the Bedchamber. A new government was formed under
Harley and St. John. The extremists o>f the new Govern-
ment attacked the retiring administration, and against
Sunderland many darts were thrown. He was blamed for
bringing over the Palatines. The Act of Naturalization,
which induced herds of homeless aliens to come to- England
had been a pet scheme of his, and had unmistakably proved
a very mischievous one. The Tories had witnessed with
indignation this influx of foreigners, which swelled the
ranks of pauperism, and even threatened the Church of Eng-
land. The extreme Tories considered this ample ground
upon which to impeach Sunderland ; but Harley, with his
usual disinclination to be extreme on any point, with his
usual caution and love of procrastination, contrived to stifle
the enquiry.10

During these years in opposition, Sunderland's character
as an intriguer was fully displayed. He joined a small
clique of Tories formed by Nottingham in opposition to the
ministry ; in 1711, when Nottingham urged a motion against
the proposed peace, Sunderland supported him;11 while in
return Sunderland moved the introduction of the Occa-

10 Wyon, vol. ii. p. 281. " Ibid. p. 337.

CHAELES SPENCER. 179

sional Conformity Bill directed against his own friends,
the Dissenters. He voted in favour of dissolving the Union
with Scotland if some measure could be found to secure the
Protestant Succession1 and " if it had not the good results
expected." Harley failed to understand by what legal
power the Union, which had been enacted by two distinct
Parliaments, could be dissolved, whereupon Sunderland and
Harley interchanged recriminating personalities.2

Fortunately for the Whigs they were saved from the
disrepute which the introduction of a Bill to dissolve the
Union, that Union for which the Junto, and Sunderland
himself, had worked so hard, would have brought them. The
House divided, an equal number of Lords were for and
against the motion ; proxies being counted, the thin majority
of five negatived the Bill. It was a narrow escape.3

After the signing of the Peace of Utrecht in March, 1713,
the one question which occupied all statesmen alike was
the question of the Succession. With anxious eyes the
nation watched the chances. The state of the Queen's health
urged no delay in the matter. All the leading Tories were
in correspondence with the Pretender, all the leading Whigs
were in constant communication with the Court of Han-
over. The Junto were determined to secure the cause of
the Revolution, for which they had worked so hard ; they
were bent on the continuation of constitutional government.
They, partly, no doubt, through real devotion to the prin-
ciples of 1688, but also largely because they saw no chance
of office for any of them during the Queen's lifetime, or after
it, should the Pretender succeed, threw all their weight into
the scale of the House of Hanover. Sunderland proved use-
ful to his party at this juncture. He was in constant touch
with the Court of Hanover and their agents in England and
Holland. He rendered great service to the House of Han-

1 Wyon, vol. ii. p. 454.

-Parl. Hist. vol. vi. pp. 1219-1220.

3 Mahon, vol. i. p. 39.

180 THE JUNTO.

over, and he looked for his reward. In 1706, on his return
from Vienna, he had passed through Hanover and had his
first interview with his future Sovereign, and afterwards had
written to the Elector assuring him of his loyal attachment.4
In 17135 he was consulted, together with Somers, Halifax
and Townshend as to the course to be pursued at the Queen's
death. Sunderland's advice was that the Electoral Prince
should at once be sent from the Hague to England where
he could appear without the consent of Parliament, being a
peer of the realm. Throughout the year he continued to
urge expedition in carrying this out ; and also urged the
supply of money for the use of the Whigs in the coming
elections. He and the Duke of Argyll did their utmost to
reconcile the Hanoverian Tories and the Whigs. Accord-
ing to Macpherson,6 Bothmar declared when he arrived in
London that Sunderland's zeal for, and devotion to, the cause
of George I. was greater than that of any other man.

But in spite of so much hard work for the cause, the
Succession still hung in the balance. Bolingbroke, Secre-
tary of State,7 whose ambition knew no bounds, was sure of
office if James III. could be placed upon the throne. The
Pretender had a good many supporters, but he would have
secured a great many more if he had been content to change,
or even make a pretence of changing, his religion. In that
event there is little doubt that the Tory party would have
accepted him as King. But the Pretender played his hand
badly, he remained rigidly and narrowly Romanist. When
this fact was realized the Tory split was the result. Boling-
broke was unscrupulous and prepared to go any length to
attain his end. The cautious Harley hesitated to follow
him ; refused to support the Schism Act and was conse-

4 Macpherson, Original Papers, 1775, vol. ii. p. 36.

5 Ibid. p. 475.

6 Ibid. p. 640.

7 St. John had been raised to the peerage by the title of Viscount
Bolingbroke, July, 1712.

CHARLES SPENCER. 181

quently dismissed.8 Bolingbroke, as chief minister to Anne,
tried to form a Cabinet of Jacobites, but the sudden illness
and death of Anne ruined his plans. Hardly could the
most resolute action have saved the situation, even if the
means of action had been ready to his hand. The Whigs,
however, were more fortunately situated and struck their
blow. The Elector became King of England and Boling-
broke's ambition was foiled.

Sunderland, who expected certain reward for his services
under the new King, saw, with disgust, that his name was
omitted from the list of Lord Justices. " It was a surprise
to me, and I fancy will not be less so to himself, not to see
my Lord Wharton's name in the list ; and my Lord Sunder-
land looked very pale when the names were read."9 All
the Junto were put in the Privy Council but Sunderland,
who was only named Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,10 an ap-
pointment which in his eyes amounted to nothing but a
banishment from England. He was disgusted at the appar-
ent slight he had received, and, in consequence, took prac-
tically no part in the Government ; during the years 1714-
1717 his name hardly ever appears in the transactions of the
Upper House.

'' We are as full in the House of Commons as at any
time, we are gaping and staring to see who is to rule us.
The Whigs think they shall engross all. We think we
shall have our share." So wrote Lewis to Swift in August,
1714.

8 Bolingbroke and Harley had slowly drifted apart. They were entirely
opposite natures, and could not co-operate. Bolingbroke, active and de-
cisive, plunged fearlessly into intrigue ; Harley, ever cautious and lacking in

freely with him. As he is the only true channel through which the Queen's
pleasure is conveyed to us, there is and must be a perfect stagnation till he is
pleased to open himself and set the water flowing." Mahon, vol. i. p. 34.

9 Wentworth Papers, p. 409.

10 Boyer, Political State. Coxe, Marlborough, vol. viii. p. 266.

182 THE JUNTO.

The Whigs did think they would " engross all." Given
office and power by the new King, the new ministry was a
triumph for their party. Bolingbroke was succeeded by
Townshend as Secretary of State. Townshend had been
recommended by Bothmar as a suitable person and was
appointed, much to Sundeiiand's chagrin.1 Bolingbroke,
deeply mortified, nevertheless took his dismissal philosophi-
cally, but he was wounded to see the utter defeat of his
party. " To be removed was neither matter of surprise nor
of concern to me. But the manner of my removal " (the
seals were taken from him and the doors of his office locked)
" shocked me for at least two minutes. ... I am not
in the least intimidated from any consideration of the
Whig malice and power; but the grief of my soul is this,
I see plainly that the Tory party is gone."2

He was to a great extent right. The Whigs were all-
powerful. The new Sovereign was acceptable to them, he
thoroughly trusted his ministers. George's one idea seemed
to be that the Tory party were pledged to Jacobitism and
that the only course for him to pursue, if he wished to retain
the throne, was to throw himself entirely into the hands of
the party which had placed him where he was. His reign
was, therefore, the undisturbed rule of the Whigs. The
system of party government, which had gradually been
taking root during the two former reigns, now became a
recognized principle of the English Constitution.

In the elections of 1715 the Whigs gained one victory
after another. Three members of the Junto, however,
Somers, Halifax and Wharton, were not destined to see
much more than the successful establishment of the Pro-
testant King with a powerful Whig ministry around him.
The year 1715 saw the deaths of Halifax and Wharton, the
following year Somers passed away. Russell lived on till
1727, but during the reign of George I. he had quitted the

1 Macpherson, vol. ii. p. 650.
*Ibid. p. 651.

CHARLES SPENCER. 183

field of political life. Simderlund alone (and he survived till
1722) of the members of the Junto played a part, an
important but an ignoble part, during the first years of the
new reign.

The Whig party had completely changed its characters,
nearly all the old chiefs had dropped out. Godolphin had
died in 1712, Somers, Wharton and Halifax, as we have
seen, were also gone. Marlborough, although he had re-
turned to England, was not returned to power. The power
was almost entirely in the hands of four men, Lord Town-
shend, First Secretary of State, Stanhope, Second Secretary,
Sir Robert Walpole and Lord Sunderland.

Townshend, an honest but rough man, was not brilliant.
He had good business qualities and he was conscientious.
Stanhope had, as a general, been popular in Spain, and had
displayed both skill and valour. As a politician he was
fearless, almost too outspoken, at the same time he was
haughty and hot tempered. Walpole, who at first had only
the minor post of Paymaster, soon proved himself to be an
abler man than Stanhope. In October, 1715, he was pro-
moted to be First Lord of the Treasury.

All four were men of great ability, and it was hardly to
be expected that any one of them would be content to act
under another. Intrigue split the party up into factions ;
and factions separated from one another not so much in
principle as through personal grudges. The only point,
perhaps, on which they were absolutely at one was their
determination to keep the Tories out of power. Certain
considerations told in their favour. Firstly, throughout
England the Protestant feeling ran high; secondly, they
gained the support of the mercantile classes, and thirdly,
they had great Parliamentary influence. In the Lords they
had a majority; they controlled the Commons by adroit
party administration.

To return to Sunderland. In October of 1714 he had
been made a Privy Councillor; in 1715, on the death of

184 THE JUNTO.

Wharton, he exchanged the viceroyalty for the office of
Lord Privy Seal with a seat in the Cabinet ; the following
year he became Vice-Treasurer of Ireland for life. No
longer having his wiser and more moderate colleagues of
the Junto to restrain him, he plunged headlong into in-
trigue. Townshend was his enemy, and Townshend he was
therefore determined to overthrow. The apparent security
of affairs at home ; the passing of the Septennial Act, which
put aside the fear of an election in 1717; and the consoli-
dated power of the Whigs, left the King free to visit Han-
over. With considerable reluctance King George left the
kingdom in the hands of the Prince of Wales, limiting his
power as much as possible,* by conferring upon him the
title of Guardian of the Realm and Lieutenant, not Regent.
The King's jealousy of his son was to become an instru-
ment of Sunderland's intrigue. The absence of the King
was a likely time to damage Townshend. In the autumn
of 1716 Sunderland obtained leave to go to Aix-la-Chapelle
for his health. His real object was to have an interview
with the King, who was in Hanover, to urge him to get
rid of Walpole and Townshend and to put in their place
friends of the Duke of Marlborough. Previous to his depar-
ture, Sunderland had gone so far as to meet his colleagues
and to profess himself whole-heartedly loyal to them. Wal-
pole reported these professions of faith to Stanhope : 3 " Lord
Sunderland talks of leaving England in a fortnight, and, to
be sure, will not be long from you . . . his professions
for an entire reconciliation and a perfect union are as
strong as words can express and you may be sure are recipro-
cal. When I consider that common interest should pro-
cure sincerity among us, I am astonished to think there
is reason to fear the contrary."4

* Cooke, vol. ii. p. 54.

3 Walpole to Stanhope, July 30th, 1716.

4 Cooke, vol. ii. p. 55.

CHARLES SPENCER. 185

Simderland, though by no means a favourite with the
King, did, through the influence of Stanhope, obtain a hear-
ing at Gohre. He found Stanhope, through his successful
negotiations with France, in high favour with King George,
and so at once determined to enlist him on his side against
their colleagues. He had already several supporters in
England in those Whigs who were dissatisfied with the
treatment which they had received — Lord Cadogan,5 Hamp-
den, Lechmere and others ; with these, and, if possible to
secure his co-operation, with Stanhope, Sunderland began to
make every attempt he could to overthrow the Cabinet of
which he was still a member. There is, perhaps, some doubt
as to how he won over Stanhope, and at which exact point he
attained this object. Sir Robert Walpole, in his " Memoirs,"6
thinks Simderland convinced Stanhope that the Cabinet
secretly counteracted the conclusion of the alliance with
France. Simderland gained the confidence of the King, and
found little difficulty in selecting from the numerous trans-
actions in which Townshend had taken part some apparent
instances of neglect or lack of respect. Although Town-
shend was known to have worked zealously for the French
treaty, Simderland influenced the King until it was alleged
as a crime against Townshend that he had purposely delayed
its signature. Simderland went even further. He per-
suaded George I. that Townshend and Walpole were cabal-
ling with the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Argyll and
that their one object was to keep him, the King, out of
England as long as they could. This alarm was increased by
Townshend's asking the King to grant further powers to
the Prince during the King's absence.7 The King's jealousy
could not brook such suggestions, and in spite of Horace
Walpole's endeavours to reconcile the inharmonious party,
the dismissal of Townshend8 seemed the inevitable conse-

5 Coxe, Memoirs of Sir Robert Walpole, vol. i. p 150.

6 Ibid. vol. i. p. 179.

1 Ibid. vol. i. p. 182. " Cooke, vol. ii. p. 72.

186 THE JUNTO.

quence of Sunderland's intrigues. Townshend received the
news of his dismissal with surprise and wrath. He declined
the offer of the Lord Lieutenancy of Ireland, which the
King made to him in place of the Secretaryship of State.

His removal from office was received with an outburst
of disapprobation. The majority of the Whigs were highly
indignant and many of the leading Cabinet ministers sided
wholly with the fallen minister. Walpole, the Duke of
Devonshire and the Earl of Orford retired. Not until named
Secretary of State9 was Sunderland's greed for office satis-
fied. Stanhope became First Lord of the Treasury and
Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sunderland and Stanhope
were supreme, but they had weakened their party by losing
men of talent whom they could not replace. Their ill-won
power was not to be one of long duration.

Lord Stair wrote to James Craggs, January 14, 1717 : 10
" I look upon what had happened as the most dangerous
thing could befall us, both as to the matter and to the
manner. What the devil did Lord Sunderland and Stan-
hope mean to make such a step without concerting it (i.e., the
removal of Townshend from being Secretary of State) . .
God knows how it will end. I fear very ill ... 'Tis
a dangerous and critical juncture."

The first aim of these two ambitious men was to secure
the power of their party by a constitutional change. Sun-
derland introduced his Peerage Bill.* By its agency he
hoped to curtail the power of the Prince of Wales, when he
should become King; and to prevent the Hanoverians from
giving peerages to foreigners. Also to make impossible a
device resorted to by Harley to override the majority in the
Upper House, namely, the creation of a number of new peers.

9 Mahon, vol. i. p. 263.

10 Hardwicke, State Papers, vol. ii. p. 556.

* For Peerage Bill see Parliamentary History, vol. vii. pp. 590-607 ; Cooke,
History of Party, vol. ii. p. 88 ; Coxe, Memoirs of Sir Robert Walpole, vol. i.
p. 222 ; Cunningham, Lives.

CHARLES SPENCER. 187

The Bill provided that only six more peers, beyond the exist-
ing number of 178 could be named, and these six Sunder-
land was determined should be adherents of his own.
This unpopular Bill passed the Lords with no difficulty ;
but in the Commons it received stout opposition. Walpole
defeated the Bill. It was thrown out and, in consequence,
he was not a member of the Cabinet when the South Sea
schemers undertook to reduce the National Debt. Had the
Bill been passed, representative government would have
been impossible and the power of the Upper House impreg-
nably placed in the hands of the Whig oligarchy.

Meanwhile Sunderland had advanced in power step by
step. Very soon after his appointment as Secretary of
State he became President of the Council1 and finally First
Lord of the Treasury.2 Only at the rejection of his Peerage
Bill did he realize that his position was not so secure as he
had thought. Then came the death of Stanhope in February,
1721. It was a blow which destroyed the predominance of
that section of the Whig party, which had rested on the
personal favour of the King. The year 1721 was an ill-
omened one for Sunderland. The death of his colleague
was followed by an even greater and more significant event.
The Stanhope Cabinet was eventually overthrown, not by
the strength of its enemies, but by its fatal connection writh
that great financial panic, the South Sea Bubble.

Sunderland's position grew insecure. AValpole and Town-
shend appeared so formidable to him that he thought it
wiser to divide his power and partially coalesce with them.
He resigned the Presidency of the Council, but was on the
same day appointed Groom of the Stole and First Gentle-
man of the Bedchamber. His influence with the King was
still very considerable. In May, 1719, and again in 1720,
he was appointed one of the Lords Justices during the
King's absence ; but the bursting of the South Sea Bubble
proved fatal to his political supremacy.

1 March 16th, 1718. 2 Four days later.

188 THE JUNTO.

The South Sea Company had been founded in 1711 by
an Act of Parliament with the object of developing trade
with Spanish America and the islands of the Pacific. It
had been given the exclusive right of trading in the Pacific
Ocean and along the coast of America from the Orinoco to
Cape Horn. It had proved very successful ; the shares were
in great demand at a heavy premium. The directors became
over-daring and sought to extend their operations. They
promoted a great scheme for offering the Government the
sum of £7,000,000 for the privilege of taking over from
the Bank of England the management of the National Debt.
At that time the National Debt was the cause of much
agitation ; it was very large and it had been borrowed at a
very high rate of interest at a time when the Government
security was bad. Any plan likely to reduce the Debt was
welcomed with eager interest. The directors of the Com-
pany hoped to recoup themselves by persuading the holders
of the State loans to exchange them for new stock of the
South Sea Company which would thus bring in a capital
large enough to develop its trade all over the world.* Sun-
derland and Stanhope, on whose minds the National Debt
weighed heavily, were glad to accept the offer, little think-
ing, perhaps, at the time of the risk they were running in
transferring the public creditors into the hands of a grasp-
ing trade company. For a time things went well ; the
spirit of speculation was strong ; the shares rose from 130 to
1,000. But this apparent prosperity was pure delusion;
the Company's profits were not a quarter large enough to
bear the burden. Nevertheless the apparent success led to
the starting of many other rival companies, some genuine,
some mere bogus companies. Many of these burst before
they were two months old and numbers of people were
ruined in consequence. Finally a general panic ensued, and
the South Sea Company suffered more than any. The shares
fell from 1,000 to 135, everyone was anxious to sell and

* For South Sea Scheme, see Part. Hist. vol. vii. pp. 697-698.

CHARLES SPENCER. 189

none to buy. The collapse brought ruin to countless num-
bers, and to a few, who had been cautious enough to sell
early, came large profits. Among these was Walpole. The
Bubble burst, and the Company was quite unable to pay
Government the £7,000,000 promised for the purchase of
the National Debt. A cry of indignation arose, the nation
believed that it had been swindled and that the Stanhope
ministry was wholly to blame. Many of the ministers were
accused of underhand connivance with the schemes of the
Company. An enquiry was demanded ; Craggs, the Post-
master-General, committed suicide ; Stanhope, though prob-
ably innocent, in defending himself, fell down in a fit and
died ; the Chancellor of the Exchequer was expelled from
the House.

The only course for Sunderland was to resign, a step
which he immediately took.

As Sunderland fell Walpole rose. All eyes were turned
on him, for clearly no vestige of suspicion was attached to
him. He became First Lord of the Treasury3 and Prime
Minister, with Townshend as one of his chief colleagues.
The Stanhope ministry fell and Walpole inherited its power.
His talent for finance was recognized, he gained the con-
fidence of the nation; his proposals were approved by all
parties and by degrees trade settled down and the public
credit was restored. But for Walpole's ability and influence
the Tories would undoubtedly have had a good chance of
gaining power. Walpole saved the Whig party and entered
upon his long and remarkable administration. He saved
all he could from the wreck of the South Sea Company; it
was excused the payment of the £7,000,000, but the manage-
ment of the National Debt was taken out of its hands.

Sunderland had, at one swoop, lost all his high offices in
the State; but as Groom of the Stole and First Gentleman
of the Bedchamber he continued to exercise considerable
influence over the King. The appointment of Lord Carle-

3 April 3rd, 1721.

190 THE JUNTO.

ton as President of the Council, although Walpole pressed
the candidature of the Duke of Devonshire, was advocated
and obtained by Sunderlaiid ; and Carteret's nomination as
Secretary of State is said to have been due to him.

Jealousy at the growing power of Walpole and Town-
shend urged Sunderland to intrigue. He secretly made
overtures to the Tories. Carteret was his accomplice and
forwarded his schemes in the Cabinet. With the help of
Carleton and Cadogan they worked for the dismissal of the
two rivals. Their means were corrupt, but how far Sunder-
land's personal feelings were responsible for this is uncer-
tain.4 Coxe states that he made proposals to Bishop Atter-
bury, the most influential leader of the decaying Jacobite
faction. Doubtless he would not have hesitated at any
step that would have secured his end. His plans, however,
whatever they may have been, were cut short by death,
April 19, 1722. It occurred at a peculiarly critical moment
during the progress of the general election, and raised the
suspicion of poison. This was dispelled by a post-mortem
examination.

" I see by the ' Freeholder,' as well as by your lord-
ship's letter, that Sunderland had some form of religion at
his death. But I cannot see for what reason men of his
opinion, in which he was so open when he lived, as well as
of his manners, should affect to act such a farce at that
moment. The best that can be said is that possibly then
they may have fears which they never felt before and are
willing to catch at any twig."

The general feeling was not one of regret. Even among
his colleagues he could never have been said to command
respect or admiration. His was a life destitute of fine or
noble feelings ; his actions were devoid of good motives ;
he had a lust for personal aggrandisement and personal
authority, and, especially towards the latter part of his
life, these alone prompted his career.

4 Rapin, Continuation, vol. ii. p. 657.

CHARLES SPENCER. 191

Yet even he became the subject of a eulogistic elegy,
handed down to us as another example of the bad verse
of the day. Whether written by a genuine admirer, or
merely by a second rate poet wishing to try his hand at
verse, will remain doubtful. It runs as follows: —

Long since the pacquet brought the dismal news,

Yet for our loss sits silent every muse.

Let no vile pen lament our public woes,

No Grub Street poet dare to interpose.

See how this drooping nation hangs its head

For grief to hear great Sunderland is dead.

Chief of the Spencers' race, by merit known,

and so on for some two dozen lines.
Then came the epitaph : —

Here underneath this marble sleeps

An earl for whom this marble weeps,

Sincerely weeps, as if it knew

His worth as well as I or you.

This marble speaks him good and wise,

Speaks without tongue, weeps without eyes,

And surely marble never lies.

Then look on every tombstone round,

You'll think all virtue underground,

Whate'er men be above, we know

They're Saints and Heroes here below.5

At his death all Sunderland's papers relating to politics
were examined, in spite of the remonstrance of the Duke of
Marlborough.

During the latter years of his life Sunderland had no
longer been on good terms with the Duke and Duchess of
Marlborough. His third marriage and also his connection
with the South Sea Bubble had discredited him with the
haughty Duchess and through her persuasion Marlborough
had opposed the South Sea Bill.

Sunderland's third marriage (in 1717) was to Judith,
daughter of Benjamin Tichborne ; a lady of Irish extraction
and of great fortune. In spite of this he died greatly em-

5 Brit. Mus. Cat. 11,602, vol. i. 1.

192 THE JUNTO.

barrassed, owing, among many other debts, £10,000 to his
father-in-law. A taste for gambling had proved even more
costly than book collecting.

His library was, however, one of the very finest. It
was on the site of the Albany that he first housed it; of the
original three houses the most eastern was occupied by
Sunderland. He subsequently bought the other two and
built a very fine room for his books. These wrere moved to
Blenheim in 1749, and numbered upwards of 17,000 volumes.
For the mere love of having an unrivalled collection did he
gather this number together. The talents which he un-
doubtedly possessed were flung into the whirlpool of politics,
and, although, to a certain degree, devoted to the welfare of
his party they were devoted to a far greater degree to the
furtherance of his own selfish desires.

Considered either in his political life or in his personal
life, it is impossible to admire him. His personality and
his career are singularly unattractive. Yet he was one of
the Junto, that strong and remarkable band of men, who,
owing to their united action, exercised such a strong influ-
ence in the reign of Anne, and to whom England almost
wholly owed the triumph of the House of Hanover.

Andrew Reid & Company, Limited, Printing Court Buildings, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

i

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE
CARDS OR SLIPS FROM THIS POCKET

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARY