Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

commercial interests of the two nations appeared to conflict,-the patient and skilful management of objections passionately suggested by national pride and prejudice, that his high authority, his calm temper, and lucid reasoning, were most conspicuously useful. If the magnitude of the interests at stake, the weight and number of the difficulties interposed by faction in both countries, and the eminent and acknowledged success of the measure are duly considered, it will be readily admitted that there are few statesmen in the history of this country whose claims to the respect and gratitude of posterity are better founded than those of Lord Somers, for his services in the accomplishment of the union with Scotland.

In the ensuing session of parliament, a bill passed the house of commons for abolishing the privy council of Scotland. It was proposed, in the house of lords, to give it a continuance for several months after the passing of the bill. This proposition was powerfully and successfully opposed by Lord Somers. The heads of his speech on this occasion are still in existence *, being preserved amongst the few fragments which were saved from the fire in Lincoln's Inn, already alluded to. His arguments in this speech against a separate council for Scotland are extremely forcible and curious, and are particularly interesting in the present day, when the question of the policy of a distinct government for Ireland is strangely brought under discussion. He declares that he is heartily desirous of making the union entire and complete, but that it cannot be perfect while two political administrations subsist. The true argument for the union was the great danger to both kingdoms from a divided state. The advantage of Scotland is to have the same easy access to the prince as England, to be under the immediate personal care of the prince, and not to owe their protection and countenance to any subordinate institution.' 'This, he says, was my argument for the union; and now if a distinct administration continue, the marks of distinction will continue; and Scotland, having now no parliament to resort to, will be in a worse state than before. I wish North Britain as happy as England; I meant it should be so in the union; and I will always do what

6

Hardwicke State Papers, vol. ii. p. 473.

lies in my little power that it shall be really so. I should think the true way to make the union well relished in Scotland is to let that country see plainly that England means no otherwise than fairly by them, and desires they should be in the very same circumstances they are themselves. In the union of Poland and Lithuania, by keeping up their distinct great offices of state and their distinct diets, though there be one general diet for their united country, their former manners of division are continued, and have occasioned perpetual dissensions and distractions in that imperfectly and unskilfully united country, so that they are much more unhappy than if they had still remained divided. Upon the suggestion that it was only proposed to continue the Scotch privy council a short time, he asks, If it be a good thing, why is it not to be continued? If it be the desire of Scotland, why show it them only to be taken away? If they are afraid of the council, why should they be terrified with it, when it is not meant to continue?' The whole tenor of the reasoning in this admirable speech is equally clear and convincing; and the inconvenience and oppression occasioned in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and earlier periods of our history, by the existence of distinct councils for various districts in England, with powers delegated by the crown, but beyond the personal control of the sovereign, are illustrated in the most ingenious and masterly manner.

In the early part of the year 1708, a change took place in the character of the ministry, by the resignation of Harley and the appointment of Mr. Boyle in his place, as secretary of state. Lord Somers had often announced his resolution never to accept any office of state while Harley continued in administration; but upon the removal of that obstacle, it became an object of the first importance to the whigs to press him into the royal service. Nor was this object opposed by the leaders in the cabinet; for the mildness and candour of his character, and his steady attachment to the principles of the revolution, had won the respect even of his rivals, and he was personally esteemed by both Lord Marlborough and Lord Godolphin. But the proposition of placing him in the administration was strenuously resisted by the queen. In a letter to Lord Marlborough* she de

• Coxe's Life of Marlborough, vol. ii. p. 423.

clares that it would be utter destruction to her to bring Lord Somers into her service, and was what she never could consent to.'

Besides political prejudices, it is probable that the queen had a strong domestic reason for her objection. Prince George of Denmark, the husband of the queen, though he interfered little in public business, had always been attached to the tory party, and had long entertained and expressed a particular aversion to Lord Somers. This antipathy might be probably traced to a circumstance which occurred in 1703, shortly after the queen's accession to the throne. To a bill for enabling the queen to settle a revenue upon the prince, in case he should survive her majesty, it was proposed to add an express exemption of the prince from the operation of the clause in the act of succession which incapacitated foreigners from being members of the privy council, from sitting in parliament, and from holding offices under the crown. This proposition was urged upon the attention of parliament by the queen, and gave rise to much warm discussion in the house of lords; and though it was ultimately adopted by a majority, Lord Somers, who took a prominent part in the debate, with several other peers, signed a protest in the journals against the decision of the house *.

It was probably from a desire to avoid offence to the prince, that the queen, who had expressed in decided terms her sense of the obligations of the country to Lord Somers for his services in promoting the union, had objected to introduce him into the administration. The death of the prince in October, 1708, removed this objection; and, shortly afterwards, Lord Somers was advanced to the post of president of the council, though still with reluctance and hesitation on the part of the queen. The great capacity and inflexible integrity of this lord,' says Burnett, 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

* Lords' Journals, Jan. 19, 1702-3. Burnet's Own Times, vol. ii. p. 339.

† Own Times, vol. ii. p. 516.

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. Thus the minds of all those who were truly zealous for the present constitution were much quieted by this promotion.'

But the sanguine hopes of the whig party were not realized by the event. Whether it was to be attributed to the declining health of Lord Somers, which, at this period, in a great degree incapacitated him for business, or to the embarrassing intrigues of Harley, afterwards Lord Oxford, with the queen, or the want of harmony and consistency which prevailed among the members of the administration, is uncertain; but there is no doubt that the government, during the two years that it remained under the direction of the whigs, exhibited but few marks of vigour or discretion. The treaty for a general peace proved entirely abortive; the war became decidedly unpopular in England; the general confidence of the whigs in their party wavered; and the public funds, which even in those times had begun to be the measure of the degree of public confidence in the government, fell rapidly and alarmingly.

In this unpromising state of things, the foolish and violent prosecution' of Dr. Sacheverel, as it is justly termed by Lord Bolingbroke, if it did not immediately induce the queen to change the ministry, at all events furnished her with a plausible and popular pretext for the dismissal of the whigs. Though Lord Somers was present at the trial, and gave his vote against Dr. Sacheverel, Dean Swift declares that he had heard him profess that his opinion was against this ill-judged impeachment, and that he foresaw it would end in the ruin of his party. The proceedings against Sacheverel were brought to a conclusion at the end of March, 1710, and immediately afterwards the parliament was prorogued. In the course of the ensuing summer a sudden and total change of ministry took place; and Lord Somers, finding that the queen had withdrawn her confidence from him and treated him with coldness and reserve, retired from his office of lord president of the council, and was succeeded by the Earl of Rochester.

During the whole of the long session of parliament after his retirement from

office, it appears from the journals that
he attended constantly upon his duty
in the house of lords, being rarely absent
from his place, and much employed in
committees and other active parliamen-
tary business. He was present during
the debates respecting the Earl of Pe-
terborough's conduct in Spain, in Janu-
ary, 1711, in the course of which reflec-
tions being cast upon the Lords Galway
and Tyrawley, and a vote of censure
being attempted against them, those
noblemen presented a petition praying
for time to answer the charges before
the lords came to any determination.
This was resisted by the ministers as
an improper interference with the de-
bates of the lords; but Lord Somers
declared, with some indignation, 'that
the petitions were neither improper nor
given in at an improper time; that it
would be too late for the petitioners to
apply to the lords after they were come
to a resolution; that he hoped it would
never be found in the book of that
house, that when the lords were going
to proceed to a censure, they refused to
hear those that were to be affected by
it; that the Lords Galway and Tyrawley
had a right to be heard and clear the
matters of fact as subjects of Great Bri-
tain; and that it was but natural justice
that men in danger of being censured
should have time to justify themselves*:
The petitions were, however, rejected
by the house; and a vote of censure
was afterwards passed upon Lords Gal-
way and Tyrawley; but a strong pro-
test was entered upon the journals
against both these resolutions, signed
by thirty-six peers, amongst whom were
Lord Somers, the Duke of Marlborough,
and Lord Cowper, the late chancellor.
Lord Somers also signed protests against
the resolution of the lords approving of
the Earl of Peterborough's conduct in
Spain, and against several resolutions
passed in the course of the same ses-
sion censuring the measures of the late
ministry respecting the prosecution of
the war.

At the commencement of the next session of parliament, in December, 1711, there were some rumours of a change of ministry. Swift says that Bolingbroke and he were both of opinion that the queen was false,' and mentions a report that the whole matter

Chandler's Lords' Debates, vol. ii. p. 309. See Lords' Journals, Jan. and Feb. 1710-11. + Swift's Journal, Dec. 9, 1711.

was arranged between her and the
whigs, and that Lord Somers was to be
In a few days, however,
treasurer.'
these apprehensions were removed, and
Lord Oxford expressly assures Swift
that all would be well, and that he
should fear nothing.'

[ocr errors]

In the early part of the year 1712, Lord Somers suffered severely from illness, which disabled him from appearing in the house of lords for a considerable portion of the session of parliament. At this point, perhaps, his political life may be considered as closed; for though he afterwards attended in parliament for several sessions, and was present upon most occasions of importance or unusual interest, he never again took a prominent part in the debates. He was present at the debate on the Earl of Findlater's motion for repealing the union with Scotland, in June, 1713, and voted with the small majority by whom that proposition was negatived. In 1714 the celebrated Schism Act was passed, by which all schoolmasters and instructors of youth were required to subscribe an acknowledgment before the ordinary, that they conformed to the liturgy of the church of England, under pain of imprisonment for three months; and upon being convicted of teaching without such subscription, were made liable to penalties and imprisonment. Against this unjust and unnecessary measure-which Lord Wharton declared to be more like a decree of Julian the apostate, than a law enacted by a protestant parliament,'-a protest was entered on the journals, and signed, amongst other peers, by Lord Somers. The reasons attached to this protest contain an excellent summary of the arguments against all religious persecution, and a perspicuous statement of the danger of irritating the dissenters against the church of England, and of promoting religious animosities in the critical state in which the Protestant succession was then placed. Fortunately, the death of the queen on the 1st of August, 1714, the very day on which the schism bill was to take effect, prevented its being brought into practical operation. On the accession of George I., a total change of ministry took place: the state of Lord Somers's health disabled him from accepting any official employment, but he took his seat in the cabinet council as a member of the new administration.

In the revolutions of the wheel of

party, it was now Lord Somers's fate, not only to find himself once more restored to office, but to witness the downfall of that intriguing statesman whose insidious schemes had undermined the whig ministry in 1710, and to whom, both personally and politically, he had declared perpetual and uncompromising hostility. But notwithstanding his dislike to Lord Oxford, there is reason to believe that Lord Somers, and also Lord Halifax and Lord Sunderland, were opposed to the violent and impetuous prosecutions which were instituted at this time against those who had supported or favoured the Pretender's title, and warmly advised the king to more moderate measures. When he left Hanover, on the death of queen Anne, the king, whose disposition was by no means implacable or severe, had determined indeed to restore the whigs to power, but resolved not to proceed harshly against any party who acknowledged and quietly submitted to his government. In consequence, however, of the joint importunity of some of the allies, and a portion of the whigs, who assured him that severity was absolutely necessary for his own safety, he was at length persuaded to adopt a different course. It is related by Lord Bolingbroke, that when Lord Townshend came triumphantly to acquaint Lord Somers with all the measures of proscription and of persecution which the ministers intended, and to which the king had at last consented, the old peer asked him "what he meant," and shed tears on the foresight of measures like to those of the Roman triumvirate *.*

The Earl of Oxford had been removed from his office of lord treasurer a few days before the death of queen Anne; and in the first parliament of her successor, he was impeached, with Lord Bolingbroke, at the bar of the house of lords, of high treason. Though become extremely feeble, Lord Somers appeared in the house of lords on every occasion when a step was taken in the proceedings against Lords Oxford and Bolingbroke, and upon the delivery of Lord Oxford's answers to the articles of impeachment in September, 1715, he was appointed a member of a committee to search for precedents as to the manner of proceeding. In the ensuing session, he again appeared in the house of lords on occasion of the impeachment of

• European Magazine, vol. xix. p. 427.

the Earl of Derwentwater, and the other misguided persons who had taken up arms in Scotland in favour of the pretender's title. Lord Somers appears to have taken a peculiar interest in the fate of these unfortunate noblemen; and the last occasion of his appearance in public life was on the 27th of January, 1716, when the preliminaries and forms for passing judgment on Lord Derwentwater were reported to the house of lords, and finally arranged. When the sentence was actually passed, he was absent from the house*.

Of the manner in which the few remaining months of Lord Somers's life were spent after his final disappearance from public business, very imperfect and unsatisfactory accounts have descended to us. There is no doubt, however, that the concluding period of his existence was darkened by severe illness and a considerable degree of mental alienation. Repeated attacks of paralysis had destroyed his bodily health, and had so impaired the faculties of his mind that he became wholly incapable of business. At intervals, however, when the pressure of disease was partially suspended, he appears to have recurred with strong interest to passing events which involved those principles of rational liberty to the support of which his life had been devoted. At the present moment, when the question of repealing the Septennial Bill is the subject of controversy, it is interesting, and may be useful, to record the dying opinion of this distinguished statesman, the oracle of the revolution, and the constant friend of popular lebrated measure. freedom, upon the merits of that cesion upon the Septennial Bill took place The decisive divion the 16th of April; 1716, and after that event had happened, Dr. Freind, the celebrated physician, called on Lord Townshend, and informed him that Lord Somers was at that moment restored to the full possession of his faculties by a fit of the gout, which suspended the effect of his paralytic complaint. Townshend immediately waited on Lord Somers, who, as soon as he came into the room, embraced 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 it in effect the reverse of what it was intended.

Lords' Journals, January, 1715-16.

You have my hearty approbation in this business, and I think it will be the greatest support possible to the liberty of the country. Within a day or two after this conversation with Lord Townshend, a fresh paralytic seizure reduced him to a state of total imbecility, from which, on the 26th of April, 1716, he was happily released by death. He was buried at Mims, in Hertfordshire, at which place a monument with a short inscription was erected by his sister, Lady Jekyll.

Lord Somers was never married. It is said that while he held the office of solicitor-general, he paid his addresses to a daughter of Sir John Bawdon, an alderman of London, and that the negotiation went so far as the arrangements for the settlements, but was broken off in consequence of the exorbitant demands of the friends of the young lady. Upon his death, his property 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, Esq., of Worcester, from whom the present Lord Somers is descended.

The scarcity of information respecting the personal history of Lord Somers renders it impossible at the present day to do full justice to his biography. It is believed that few original letters or papers, illustrative of the private and domestic habits of this eminent statesman, are now in existence. Several letters from him to Mr. Locke, in the years 1689 and 1690, have been published by the late Lord King in his Life of that great man; but they have no peculiar interest beyond the evidence they contain that, at the period to which they refer, Lord Somers and Mr. Locke were on terms of friendly and familiar intercourse. After the death of Lord Somers, his manuscripts, which filled upwards of sixty volumes in quarto, came into the possession of Lord Chancellor Hardwicke, who had married his niece. This valuable collection had been deposited in the chambers of the Honourable Charles Yorke, in Lincoln's-inn, and were there destroyed by an accidental fire in 1752. Amongst the numerous historical papers swept away by this fatal accident, were doubtless many documents relating to Lord Somers of a private nature, and of deep interest; and though some specimens of the collection, which are sufficiently

• Coxe's Life of Sir Robert Walpole, vol. i. p. 76.

valuable to enhance our regret at the loss of the rest, have been published by Lord Hardwicke, they do not relate to his personal history and character. Several years ago, great expectations were raised by the announcement of an Essay on the Life and Character of Lord Somers, by Mr. Cooksey, a gentleman who was allied by marriage to the Somers family, and who, it was supposed, might be in possession of original information on the subject. But these reasonable expectations were entirely disappointed. Amongst many inaccuracies and false traditions and speculations, Mr. Cooksey's work contained not a single true statement respecting Lord Somers which was not known and published long before. On the other hand, Mr. Cooksey, professing to wipe away the only blemish and imperfection charged upon his ancestor,' (by which he means the contemptible sneers of Swift respecting the meanness of his origin,) with a singular inconsistency, drags before the public an imputation of licentiousness, which, if true, might well have been buried in oblivion, but which is decidedly untrue to anything like the extent represented in the Essay.'

[ocr errors]

It is much to be lamented, too, that the accounts of this great man by contemporaneous writers, partake, in general, too much of the zeal of party to be of any value as delineations of his character. In this respect the undiscriminating praise of Addison is fully as objectionable as the almost gross scurrility of Swift. The following account, taken from a letter written by an unknown contemporary*, is just and temperate. His application and capacity were equally great and uncommon. At his first going to school, he never gave himself any of the diversions of children of his age, for at noon the book was never out of his hand. To the last years of his life a few hours of sleep sufficed; at waking a reader attended, and entertained him with the most valuable authors. Such management raised him to the highest eminency in his own profession, and gave him a superiority in all kind of useful knowledge and learning. Natural strength and clearness of understanding, thus improved, was the distinguishing peculiarity which appeared in all his performances. Everything was easy

Seward's Anecdotes, vol. ii. p. 114. Addi. tional MSS. in the British Museum, No. 4223.

« AnteriorContinuar »