XVII. 1735. Lorraine; a richer prize than had ever crowned CHAP. the aspiring genius of Richelieu, or the crafty refinements of Mazarin. England should, perhaps, have viewed with jealousy this aggrandisement of her powerful neighbour, yet, unless she had herself embarked in war, could scarcely have prevented it; and so favourable were the terms of the preliminaries generally thought, that even Bolingbroke is said to have exclaimed, "If the English ministers had any hand in it, they are "wiser than I thought them; and if not, they are "luckier than they deserve to be." * In another foreign quarrel, at the same time, England was more actively concerned. The servants of the Portuguese Minister at Madrid being accused of having rescued a criminal from justice, were themselves arrested and carried to prison. Complaints were made on both sides; redress given on neither. The diplomatists all took fire at this insult on one of their own order, and were eager to prosecute this important quarrel, both by memorials and by armies, to the last drop of their own ink and of others' blood. One of them, Senhor Azevedo, hastened over to England to claim succour for the King his master, under the Treaty of Alliance, and a war seemed fixed and unavoidable. But the prudence of Walpole warded off the blow: he sent a fleet of twenty * Lord Hervey to H. Walpole, January 3. 1736. Coxe's Walpole. XVII. CHAP. five ships of the line to the Tagus, under Sir John Norris, but gave him orders to act only defen1735. sively, and to urge moderation and forbearance on the Cabinet of Lisbon. At the time, the sailing of "so terrible a fleet," as Cardinal Fleury called it*, produced a strong effect, both at Paris and Madrid; the French exerted all their influence in Spain to prevent a collision; and at length, under the pacific mediation of Fleury and Walpole, harmony was restored between the two Peninsular Courts. 1736. In all these foreign negotiations the English ministers found in Fleury the same judicious and conciliatory, though sometimes a little timid, temper. They were also much assisted by the close friendship of Baron Gedda, the Swedish ambassador at Paris. But the case was far otherwise with M. de Chauvelin, the French Secretary of State, who laboured on every occasion to thwart the English councils, and to exasperate the Cardinal against them. He seems to have inherited the old maxims of Louis the Fourteenth; and was even engaged in a secret correspondence with the Pretender, as his own carelessness proved; for having, on one occasion, some papers to put into the hands of the English ambassador, he added, by mistake, one of James's letters to himself, which Lord Waldegrave immediately despatched by a messenger * Earl Waldegrave to the Duke of Newcastle, June 1. 1735. (Coxe's Walpole.) -- XVII. 1736. to England.* Walpole had endeavoured to treat CHAP. him in what might then, perhaps, be termed a Parliamentary manner. He had instructed Lord Waldegrave to seize any favourable opportunity to offer him a bribe-a good round sum, he said, "a compliment on the new year"- and not less than 5000l. or 10,000l., so as to secure his future friendship.t But it appears that Chauvelin, though he showed some inclination to this disgraceful proposal, did not finally close with it, and became more than ever a declared enemy of England. Under these circumstances, Walpole availed himself of a secret correspondence which he had opened with Cardinal Fleury, to point out the animosity of Chauvelin, and its bad effects on the harmony between the two countries; and it was probably, in a great measure, to his remonstrances that we may ascribe the dismissal of Chauvelin, which occurred a few months afterwards. In England, the session of 1736 is chiefly remarkable for an attempt in behalf of the Dissenters, and for the passing of the Gin and Mortmain Acts. I have already related the endeavours of Stanhope, in 1719, to include the Test Act in his measure of relief to the Protestant Dissenters, and * Earl Waldegrave to the Duke of Newcastle, October 11. 1736. Sir Robert Walpole to Earl Waldegrave, January 1. 1736. He shrewdly observes, that 5000l. makes a great number of French crowns. CHAP. how long he had struggled against the suggestion XVII. of "a more favourable opportunity." This 1736. more favourable opportunity had ever since been held out to them by Walpole, in appealing to their patience; but, like the horizon, it seemed to recede as they advanced. They had given the Minister their zealous support; in the elections of 1734, for example, they had issued several Declarations, pledging themselves to vote for his candidates t; and they had done so the more ostentatiously, as hoping to establish a claim to his future favour. Yet they still found Sir Robert immovable. Still did he reply to their deputations, that the time was not yet come. "You "have so repeatedly returned us this answer," at last said Dr. Chandler, "that I trust you will give "me leave to ask you, when the time will come?" "If you require a specific answer," said the Minister, provoked into sudden frankness, "I will give it you in one word-Never!"‡ Thus disappointed in the government, the Dissenters began to court the Opposition, and, in 1736, induced Mr. Plumer to bring forward a motion for the repeal of the obnoxious statute. Sir Robert was much embarrassed, wishing neither to forfeit their support nor that of the Church; but at length, after a wavering and evasive speech, voted against * See vol. i. p. 491. + Boyer's Political State, vol. xlvii. pp. 332. 436. See Coxe's Life, p. 608. No date is assigned to this anecdote; it must have happened either in 1736 or 1739. XVII. 1736. them, in a majority of 251 against 123. For this CHAP. conduct Walpole has been severely censured; yet, in justice to him, we should, perhaps, reflect, whether his ministerial power, great as it was, really sufficed to overthrow what most of the Churchmen of the time, however erroneously, respected as one of their principal bulwarks; whether, if not, it could be his duty to plunge, at all hazards, into a hopeless contest; and whether the Dissenters would not have acted far better, both for themselves and for their friends, had they shunned a struggle which afforded no chances of success, and which only retarded the march of their cause in popular opinion. As a counterpoise to his vote on this occasion, Walpole gave his support to a Bill for the relief of Quakers in the recovery of tithes. The object was to render the proceedings against them less long and costly, and the Bill passed the House of Commons; but however well designed, it appears to have been loosely and hastily drawn. In the other House, both the Chancellor and Chief Justice (Lords Talbot and Hardwicke) pointed out its defects and opposed it, and under their guidance was the measure rejected. Walpole was much irritated at this failure, even on personal grounds, the Quakers in Norfolk being very numerous, and having always assisted him in his elections. His resentment was levelled especially against Gibson, Bishop of London, who had prevailed upon his Right Reverend brethren to declare against the |