TREATY OF HANOVER.

The kind of Great Britain took the alarm. The emperor and he had for some time treated each other with manifest coolness. He had reason to fear some attempts upon his German dominions, and projected a defensive treaty with France and Prussia. This alliance, limited to the term of fifteen years, was negotiated and concluded at Hanover in the month of September. It implied a mutual guarantee of the dominions possessed by the contracting parties, their rights and privileges, those of commerce in particular, and an engagement to procure satisfaction to the protestants of Thorn, who had lately been oppressed by the catholics, contrary to the treaty of Oliva. The king having taken these precautions at Hanover, set out on his return for England; embarked at Helvoetsluys in the middle of December; and after having been exposed to the fury of a dreadful storm, was landed with great difficulty at Rye, from whence he proceeded by land to London. The parliament meeting on the twentieth day of the next month, he gave them to understand that the distressed condition of some of their protestant brethren abroad, and the negotiations and engagements contracted by some foreign powers, which seemed to have laid the foundation of new troubles and disturbances in Europe, and to threaten his subjects with the loss of several of the most advantageous branches of their trade, had obliged him to concert with other powers such measures as might give a check to the ambitious views of those who were endeavouring to render themselves formidable, and put a stop to the further progress of such dangerous designs. He told them that the enemies of his government were already very busy, by their instruments and emissaries in those courts whose measures seemed most to favour their purposes, in soliciting and promoting the cause of the pretender. One sees, at first sight, that the interests of Germany dictated the treaty of Hanover; but, in order to secure the approbation of Great Britain, upon which the support of this alliance chiefly depended, it was judged necessary to insert the articles relating to commerce and the protestant religion, as if the engagement had been contracted purely for the advantage and glory of England. In a word, the ministry began now to ring the changes upon a few words that have been repeated ever since, like cabalistical sounds, by which the nation has been enchanted into a very dangerous connexion with the concerns of the continent. They harangued, they insisted upon the machinations of the disaffected, the designs of a popish pretender, the protestant interest, and the balance of power, until these expressions became absolutely terms of ridicule with every person of common sense and reflection. The people were told that the emperor and the king of Spain, exclusive of the public treaties concluded at Vienna, had entered into private engagements, importing that the Imperialists should join the Spaniards in recovering Gibraltar and Port-Mahon by force of arms, in case the king of England should refuse to restore them amicably, according to a solemn promise he had made: that a double marriage should take place between the two infants of Spain, and the two archduchesses of Austria; and that means should be taken to place the pretender on the throne of Great Britain.

When the treaties of Vienna and Hanover fell under consideration of the house of commons, Horatio Walpole, afterwards termed in derision, “the balance master,” opened the debate with a long unanimated oration, giving a detail of the affairs of Europe since the treaty of Utrecht. He enumerated the barrier-treaty, the convention for executing that treaty, the defensive alliance with the emperor, the other with the most christian king and the states-general, another convention, the quadruple alliance, the congress at Cambray, the treaty of Hanover, and that of Vienna. He explained the nature of each engagement. He said the main design of the treaty of commerce concluded between the emperor and the king of Spain, was to countenance and support the East-India company established at Ostend, which interfered so essentially with the East-India companies of England and Holland, and was directly contrary to several solemn treaties still in force. He enlarged upon the danger to which the balance of power would be exposed, should the issue male of this projected marriage between the houses of Austria and Spain ever possess the imperial dignity and the kingdom of Spain together. The reader will take notice that this very man was one of those who exclaimed against that article of the treaty of Utrecht, which prevented the power of those two houses from being immediately united in the person of the emperor. He did not forget to expatiate upon the pretended secret engagement concerning Gibraltar and Minorca, and the king’s pious concern for the distressed protestants of Thorn in Poland. In vain did Mr. Shippen urge that the treaty of Hanover would engage the British nation in a war for the defence of the king’s German dominions, contrary to an express provision made in the act of limitation. These arguments had lost all weight. The opposition was so inconsiderable, that the ministry had no reason to be in pain about any measure they should propose. An address was voted and delivered to his majesty, approving the alliance he had concluded at Hanover, in order to obviate and disappoint the dangerous views and consequences of the treaty of peace betwixt the emperor and the king of Spain: and promising to support his majesty against all insults and attacks that should be made upon any of his territories, though not belonging to the crown of Great Britain. An address of the same kind was presented by the house of lords in a body. A bill was brought in, empowering the commissioners of the treasury to compound with Mr. Richard Hampden, late treasurer of the navy, for a debt he owed to the crown, amounting to eight-and-forty thousand pounds. This deficiency was occasioned by his embarking in the South-Sea scheme. The king recommended his petition; and the house complied with his request, in consideration of his great-grandfather, the famous John Hampden, who made such a noble stand against the arbitrary measures of the first Charles.

GEORGE I, 1714—1727

RIOTS IN SCOTLAND.

The malt-tax was found so grievous to Scotland, that the people refused to pay it, and riots were excited in different parts of the kingdom. At Glasgow, the populace, armed with clubs and staves, rifled the house of Daniel Campbell, their representative in parliament, who had voted for the bill, and maltreated some excisemen who attempted to take an account of the malt. General Wade, who commanded the forces in Scotland, had sent two companies of soldiers, under the command of captain Bushel, to prevent or appease a disturbance of this nature. That officer drew up his men in the street, where they were pelted with stones by the multitude, which he endeavoured to disperse by firing among them without shot. This expedient failing, he ordered his men to load their pieces with ball, and at a time when the magistrates were advancing towards him in a body, to assist him with their advice and influence, he commanded the soldiers to fire four different ways, without the sanction of the civil authority. About twenty persons were killed or wounded on this occasion. The people seeing so many victims fall, were exasperated beyond all sense of danger. They began to procure arms, and breathed nothing but defiance and revenge. Bushel thought proper to retreat to the castle of Dumbarton, and was pursued above five miles hy the enraged multitude. General Wade being informed of this transaction, assembled a body of forces; and being accompanied by Duncan Forbes, lord-advocate, took possession of Glasgow. The magistrates were apprehended and conveyed prisoners to Edinburgh, where the lords justiciary having taken cognizance of the affair, declared them innocent; so that they were immediately discharged. Bushel was tried for murder, convicted, and condemned; but instead of undergoing the penalties of the law, he was indulged with a pardon, and promoted in the service. Daniel Campbell having petitioned the house of commons, that he might be indemnified for the damage he had sustained from the rioters, a bill passed in his favour, granting him a certain sum to be raised from an imposition laid upon all the beer and ale brewed in the city of Glasgow. The malt-tax was so sensibly felt in Scotland, that the convention of the royal burghs presented a remonstrance against it, as a grievous burden, which their country could not bear: petitions to the same purpose were delivered to the commons from from different shires in that kingdom.

1726

On the twenty-fourth day of March, the king sent a message to the house by sir Paul Methuen, desiring an extraordinary supply, that he might be able to augment his maritime force, and concert such other measures as should be necessary in the present conjuncture. A debate ensued, but the majority complied with the demand. Some members in the upper house complained that the message was not sent to both houses of parliament, and this suggestion gave rise to another debate, in which lord Bathurst and others made some melancholy reflections upon the state of insignificance to which the peers of England were reduced. Such remarks, however, were very little minded by the ministry, who had obtained a complete victory over all opposition. The supplies, ordinary and extraordinary, being granted, with every thing else which the court thought proper to ask, and several bills passed for the regulation of civil economy, the king dismissed the parliament on the twenty-fourth day of May.