XVII. In this Session, the justices of Middlesex thought CHAP. it their duty to present a joint petition to the House of Commons on this subject, stating that 1736. the evil had grown to an alarming pitch; "that 66 66 66 the constant and excessive use of Geneva had "already destroyed thousands of his Majesty's subjects, and rendered great numbers of others "unfit for useful labour and service, debauching "at the same time their morals, and driving them "into all manner of vice and wickedness; and "that this pernicious liquor was then sold, not only by the distillers and Geneva shops, but by many other persons of inferior trades, by which means, journeymen, apprentices, and servants, were drawn in to taste, and by degrees to like, approve, and immoderately to drink thereof." This petition having first been referred to a Committee, Sir Joseph Jekyll proposed to lay on gin, and other spirituous liquors, a tax so heavy as to amount to a prohibition for the lower classes, namely, a duty of 20s. on each gallon sold by retail, and 50%. yearly for a licence to every retailer. Neither Pulteney nor Walpole approved of the scheme; the former complained of the invidious distinction between the poor and rich the latter foresaw that such exorbitant duties had a tendency to defeat themselves, and to encourage smuggling and fraud. Sir Robert made, however, no opposition to the passing of the Bill, merely predicting that his successors would be obliged to modify it, and providing that the Civil List should not 1736. CHAP. lose in consequence. It was to the Civil List that XVII. the small duties hitherto levied had belonged, to the amount of above 70,000l. yearly; and this sum Sir Robert proposed should be granted to the King in compensation of the loss from the greatly reduced consumption of spirituous liquors. This clause, just and reasonable as it seems, was not carried without much altercation and difficulty in the House, or great clamour out of doors. To the lower classes the measure was already most unwelcome; and it was now exclaimed, that Walpole was ready to sell the comfort of the people to the highest bidder, and indifferent who might suffer so that the Revenue did not! This busy Session having closed in May, the King proceeded to visit his German dominions, as he had likewise done in the preceding year, taking with him Horace Walpole as a deputy Secretary of State, and leaving the Queen as Regent in England. During his absence, the tranquillity which England had now enjoyed for so many years was slightly ruffled. A great number of poor Irish having come over in the summer, not merely worked at the hay and corn harvest as was usual, but engaged themselves at the Spitalfields' looms at two-thirds of the ordinary wages. The weavers, thus thrown out of employment, raised riots on several nights, and attacked a public house where these Irish resorted.* Similar riots seemed impending about Michaelmas * Sir Robert Walpole to Horace Walpole, July 29. 1736. 1736. Day, when the new Gin Act was to come into CHAP. operation. Some Jacobites hoped to avail them- XVII. selves of the popular ferment for their own ends, and had planned that gin and strong waters should for two evenings be given without payment to the mob, and the latter thus spurred to any violence which their leaders might direct. Circular letters had been sent, and the watchword fixed "Sir Robert and Sir Joseph." * But the prudence of Walpole on both these occasions happily checked these riots without bloodshed or injury or danger. A riot at Edinburgh (the celebrated Porteous Mob) was both more singular in its origin and more serious in its consequences. Some years back, the real events might have excited interest: but the wand of an Enchanter is now waved over us; we feel the spell of the greatest writer that the world has yet seen in one department, or Scotland yet produced in any. How dull and lifeless will not the true facts appear when no longer embellished by the touching sorrows of Effie or the heroic virtue of Jeanie Deans! But let me proceed with the cold reality. Two noted smugglers from Fife, named Wilson and Robertson, being condemned to death for a robbery, were imprisoned together in the Tolbooth at Edinburgh, when they devised a plan of escape. They procured a file with which they rid themselves of their irons and * Sir Robert Walpole to H. Walpole, September 30. 1736. CHAP. cut through the window-bar; but Wilson insisted XVII. on making the first attempt, and being a man of 1736. unwieldy size, though of powerful strength, he stuck fast in the gap, and could neither advance nor retire. Next morning the prisoners were, of course, discovered and secured. Wilson, in whom an irregular life had not extinguished a noble nature, now lamented not so much his own fate as his comrade's. He felt, with bitter self-reproach, that had he allowed Robertson to go first, the other being slender and active would certainly have pressed through, and he resolved at all hazards to atone for the injury he had done him. It was then usual, it seems, for the prisoners at Edinburgh to be led out with a strong guard to attend Divine Service in a church adjoining to the gaol. There, accordingly, Wilson and Robertson were brought in the ensuing week under the custody of four soldiers. The service having concluded, Wilson suddenly sprang forward, and seized a soldier with each hand, and calling to Robertson to run for his life, secured a third by grappling his collar with his teeth. Robertson easily shook off the remaining soldier, and, leaping over the pews, made his escape, and was never again seen in Edinburgh. A feat so daring in its design and so generous in its motive, attracted, of course, no small degree of public interest. Wilson was universally praised and pitied; and this very pity, perhaps, gave rise to a vague rumour that an attempt would be made XVII. for his own rescue, on the day fixed for his execu- CHAP. tion, the 14th of April. The magistrates, thus forewarned, took every precaution for security, 1736. stationing a large detachment of the City Guard under the command of their captain, John Porteous, a man of great activity as a police officer, but accused of being not only strict but harsh and brutal in his official duties, and certainly most unpopular with the lower orders. The execution took place without any interruption or disturbance*, and it was not till the body had been cut down that some rabble began to attack the hangman, pelting him and also the soldiers with very large stones. Outrages of the same kind, though of less degree, were not uncommon on these occasions, and had usually been borne with patience; nor ought Porteous to have forgotten that the sentence was already fully executed, and that he should now attempt to withdraw his men but on the contrary, losing all command of temper, he snatched a musket from one of the soldiers, and fired at the crowd; the soldiers followed his exam "That deluded man (Wilson) died with great tranquillity, "and maintained to the hour of his death that he was most un'justly condemned: he maintained this in a debate with one of "the reverend ministers of Edinburgh..... He admitted that "he had taken money from a collector of the revenue by vio"lence, but that the officers of the revenue had, by their "practice, taught him this was lawful, for they had often seized "and carried off his goods, &c." (Speech of Mr. Lindsay, May 16. 1737. Parl. Hist. vol. x. p. 254.) |