without whom we had bound ourselves to enter on no treaty; that we should have withdrawn our troops in the midst of a campaign while we left them exposed to be overcome by a superior force; that we should have first deceived those confederates by the most direct falsehood in denying our clandestine treaty, and then dictated to them its acceptance, are facts so disgraceful to Bolingbroke, and in a somewhat less degree to Oxford, that they can hardly be palliated by establishing the expediency of the treaty itself."

OF THE WHIGS AND TORIES IN THE REIGN OF ANNE. "On examination", writes Lord Mahon, "it will be found that, in nearly all particulars, a modern Tory resembles a Whig of Queen Anne's reign, and a Tory of Queen Anne's reign a modern Whig. ... First, as to the Tories. The Tories of Queen Anne's reign pursued a most unceasing opposition to a just and glorious war against France. They treated the great general of the age as their peculiar adversary. To our recent enemies, the French, their policy was supple and crouching. They had an indifference, or even an aversion, to our old allies the Dutch. They had a political leaning towards the Roman Catholics at home. They were supported by the Roman Catholics in their elections. They had a love of triennial parliaments in preference to septennial. They attempted to abolish the protecting duties and restrictions of commerce. They wished to favor our trade with France at the expense of our trade with Portugal. They were supported by a faction, whose war-cry was "Repeal of the Union", in a sister kingdom. To serve a temporary purpose in the House of Lords, they had recourse (for the first time in our annals) to a large and overwhelming creation of peers. Like the Whigs in May 1831, they chose the moment of the highest popular passion and excitement to dissolve the House of Commons, hoping to avail themselves of a short-lived cry for the purpose of permanent delusion.

"The Whigs of Queen Anne's time, on the other hand, supported that splendid war which led to such victories as Ramilies and Blenheim. They had for a leader the great man who gained those victories. They advocated the old principles of trade. They prolonged the duration of parliament. They took their stand on the principles of the Revolution of 1688. They raised the cry of "No popery". They loudly inveighed against the subserviency to France-the desertion of our old allies-the outrage wrought upon the peers-the deceptions practised upon the sovereign-and the other measures of the Tory administration.

"Such were the Tories and such were the Whigs of Queen Anne. Can it be doubted that, at the accession of William the Fourth, Harley and St. John would have been called Whigs-Somers and Stanhope Tories? Would not the October Club have loudly cheered the measures of Lord Grey, and the Kit-Cat have found itself renewed in the Carlton ?"

Lord Macaulay thus expresses his dissent from his brother peer." "The absolute position of the parties has been altered; the relative position remains unchanged. Through the whole of that great movement, which began before these party-names existed, and which will continue after they have become obsolete, through the whole of that great movement, of which the Charter of John, the institution of the House of Commons, the extinction of Villenage, the separation from

the see of Rome, the expulsion of the Stuarts, reform of the Representative System, are successive stages, there have been, under some name or other, two sets of men, those who were before their age, and those who were behind it, those who were the wisest among their contemporaries, and those who gloried in being no wiser than their great great-grandfathers. It is delightful to think, that in due time, the last of those who struggle in the rear of the great march will occupy the place now occupied by the advanced guard. The Tory parliament of 1710 would have passed for a most liberal parliament in the days of Elizabeth; and there are at present few members of the Conservative Club who would not have been fully qualified to sit with Halifax and Somers at the Kit-cat.

"Though therefore we admit that a modern Tory bears some resemblance to a Whig of Queen Anne's reign, we can by no means admit that a Tory of Anne's reign resembles a modern Whig. Have the modern Whigs passed laws for the purpose of closing the entrance of the House of Commons against the new institutions created by trade? Do the modern Whigs hold the doctrine of divine right? Have the modern Whigs labored to exclude all Dissenters from office and power? The modern Whigs are indeed at the present moment like the Tories of 1712, desirous of peace, and of close union with France. But is there no difference between the France of 1712, and the France of 1832 ? Is France now the stronghold of the “Popish tyranny" and the "arbitrary power" against which our ancestors fought and prayed? Lord Mahon will find, we think, that his parallel is, in all essential circumstances, as incorrect as that which Fluellen drew between Macedon and Monmouth, or as that which an ingenious Tory lately discovered between Archbishop Williams and Archbishop Vernon."

OF THE PARTY VIOLENCE IN THE REIGN OF ANNE. "The reign of Anne is distinguished, even in the annals of England", observes Professor Smyth," for the violence of its politics. Party violence has been not uncommonly a topic of censure and lamentation with good men, and their accusations and reproaches have been urged often with sincerity, and sometimes with reason; but care must be taken on these occasions, both by those who are disposed to make these indiscriminate indictments, and those who are disposed to listen to them. It is in itself rather a suspicious circumstance, when men who are at all conversant with the business of the world are found expressing themselves very strongly or very often, against the violence of parties or the fury of factions. In a mixed and free government, there will naturally arise, as I must ever repeat, two great and leading divisions, those who lean to the side of authority, and those who lean to the side of privilege. Questions, unlike in name and form, will often involve the same general principles, and men are not, therefore, always as inconsistent as they seem. Trains of measures will often emanate from one point, and proceed in the most strictly logical succession, and must be therefore supported and resisted always by the same men. It is therefore not possible that those who are really independent and sincere should not often in free legislative assemblies, vote in sets and parties, and it is equally impossible that they should not become inflamed by sympathy and collision. Read the works of Soame Jenyns, and of Locke. Would not each of these men, for instance, while they retained their integrity,

thousand prisoners, besides all his artillery. Saragossa surrendered, and Philip abandoned the whole of Aragon. A month after Charles took possession of Madrid, in expectation of support from Portugal, but the Portuguese came not, and as the grandees forsook him, and reinforcements were coming in from France, Charles withdrew from the capital. Stanhope and Staremberg with their half-starved troops separated, and moved from Madrid in parallel lines. In December, Stanhope, resting at Brihuega, was surrounded by the Spanish army under Vendome, and after a gallant resistance was compelled to surrender with five thousand English. Within a few days, Vendome fell upon Staremberg, at Villa Viciosa. The Spaniards were severely handled, and lost a thousand men, but Staremberg also suffered so much that he nailed up his cannon, and retreated with all haste to Barcelona. Charles had now nothing left to him but Catalonia, and that lay open to incursions.

(10) THE WAR IN 1711. (a) Marlborough forces the French lines and captures Bouchain. Aug. The new ministry did not at once supersede Marlborough, as this step would have given offence to the allies, which they were not yet prepared to do. The Duke therefore again took the field, with a force weakened by his best regiments having been drawn off, either for Spain or the expedition to Quebec. Eugene too soon left him, to take part with the imperial troops on the Upper Rhine. Villars commanded the French army, which had been drawn together in the neighborhood of Cambray and Arras. The French general had established lines reaching from Bouchain on the Scheldt to Canché, and had so defended them by redoubts and other works, that they were deemed impregnable, and called Marlborough's ne plus ultra. The Duke however manoeuvred with great skill, and distracting the attention of Villars, forced the impregnable lines without the loss of a man. Bouchain was invested, and in twenty days in the possession of Marlborough, in spite of the efforts of Villars to raise the siege. The allied forces now quartered in the frontier towns, to be in readiness for the next spring.

(b) The campaign in Spain unproductive. The Duke of Argyle, withdrawn from the service in Flanders, was put in command of the forces in Spain. Everything promised well, for Vendome's army was in a wretched condition, but neither Staremberg nor Argyle was properly supported, the latter was actually obliged to borrow money on his own credit, before the British troops could take the field. One or two slight advantages were gained, though they could not be turned to account. The English ministry continuing deaf to the entreaties of Argyle, he returned to England. Charles, whose fortunes in Spain had been declining since the ill-fated battle of Almanza, set sail for Italy, and in October was elected Emperor in place of his brother who had died in the April preceding.

(c) Expedition against Quebec. May. This expedition was planned by colonel Nicholson, who had been successful in taking possession of Nova Scotia, and garrisoning Port Royal, which he named Annapolis. A land force of five thousand men, to which two regi ments were to be added from New England, and a fleet under admiral Walker, started from Plymouth in May. Brigadier Hill, a man without talents and experience," but the brother of Mrs. Masham, commanded the expedition. Meeting with a storm in the river St.

Lawrence, by which some of the transports were destroyed, the general called a council of war, and a resolution to return home was agreed upon. Hill reached Portsmouth in October, and when scarcely in port, the admiral's ship, the Edgar a seventy-four, blew up with all hands, thus giving a sad finale to an expedition already sufficiently unfortunate.

(d) Negotiations opened between England and France. From the commencement of the year, the Tories had been engaged in preliminaries designed to lead to a peace, influenced, as one of their own writers says, by a desire to mortify the Whigs and the Dutch, and to save their country from a ruinous war. The first agent employed was the Abbé Gaultier, a man of profligate character and by repute a spy. After Gaultier had made more than one journey to and fro between London and Paris, Queen Anne was pressed by her ministers to join with the Abbé, Prior, the poet, one of her own subjects and a man in whom she might place confidence. Prior therefore went to Paris with the Abbé, carrying a paper importing that he was entrusted and authorised to communicate the demands of the queen, and bring back an answer. In November the preliminary articles were signed, and communicated to the ambassadors of Holland and the Emperor. Greatly as these powers were dissatisfied, they found themselves obliged to consent to a congress, to meet at Utrecht on the 1st of January, to treat for a general peace.

(11) THE WAR IN 1712. (a) Ormond's campaign in the Netherlands. Marlborough was now displaced and in the course of the year withdrew to the continent. The Duke of Ormond took command of the British forces in Flanders, though with particular instructions not to hazard an engagement. The States General however determined to act on the offensive, and Keppel the Dutch Earl of Albemarle marched upon Arras, and reduced its magazines to ashes. In conjunction with Eugene, Ormond passed the Scheldt, and lent some assistance towards investing the town of Quesnoy. During the operations of the siege, a copy of the articles to which Louis had agreed was sent to Eugene, and the Dutch deputies, with an intimation that as Ormond was to occupy Dunkirk immediately as a pledge from France, he could no longer cover the siege of Quesnoy. Great confusion now arose among the confederated forces, the German auxiliaries in the pay of Britain refusing to follow the Duke, without orders from their respective sovereigns, declaring they would rather perish than desert the allies. Ormond with the British now separated from Eugene and took the road to Dunkirk, which place he reached full of vexation and disgust, for the Dutch refused him a passage through several towns which they held, and Villars actually offered him a retreat in France, if his difficulties made it necessary. This transaction is held by many to have branded the British name with infamy and disgrace. By reason of the defection of the British and the want of union among the remaining confederates, Villars took courage and crossing the Scheldt, achieved some measure of success, which Louis declared were visible marks of the protection of God, who knew the rectitude of his intentions.

(b) The plenipotentiaries meet at Utrecht. The conferences opened Jan. 29. England was represented by Robinson, bishop of Bristol, and the Earl of Strafford; Holland by the Deputies Buys

and Vanderdussen; France by Marshal d'Huxelles and the Abbé Polignac; the other allies also sent representatives though with reluctance. It was of course the object of the powers whose arms had been allied with ours, to put hindrances in the way of a settlement till the original purpose was secured. This led first to delays, and then to St. John, now Viscount Bolingbroke, being sent incog. to Paris, to remove all obstructions to the treaty between England and France. A suspension of arms by sea and land for four months was agreed to, to which the allies were to be invited to accede. Bolingbroke now returned, leaving Prior as resident minister at the court of France. The Duke of Savoy was the first to give way, and Portugal followed, being forced thereto by an army of twenty thousand men. Philip of Spain swore to observe the renunciation, and the French princes did the same with respect to the crown of Spain. The States General, alarmed by the defection of Savoy and Portugal, and tempted by a more advantageous barrier, at length signified their acquiesence. Austria and the Empire would not submit, though the treaty was not finally signed till the end of March in the next year, and then the Emperor was allowed till the 18th of June for consideration.

3. Results of the War of the Spanish Succession, (1) THE TREATY OF UTRECHT. 1713. By this treaty, France engaged to acknowledge the Protestant succession of the House of Hanover, and to abandon the cause of the Pretender, not suffering him to return to his dominions, or in any way to assist him; that the crowns of France and Spain should never be united; that the fortifications of Dunkirk be demolished and the harbor filled up; that Hudson's Bay remain with the English, and that Nova Scotia, and the islands of St. Christopher and Newfoundland, belong of right to Great Britain, the French however to have liberty to dry fish, and to fish within certain limits; and that commissioners meet in London to settle matters of commerce.

By this treaty, Spain was to cede to England, Minorca and Gibraltar; afterwards England obtained the Assiento or contract for supplying the Spanish colonies in South America, with four thousand eight hundred negroes from Africa, annually for thirty years. (This contract had formerly been held by Portugal, but latterly by France); to cede to the Emperor, Naples. Milan, Sardinia, and the Spanish Netherlands; to cede Sicily to the Duke of Savoy, who was to take the title of king. [That the Duke of Savoy obtained so much from this treaty, is attributed to the fact of his being next in the order of succession to the English throne, after the Pretender. Anne's minister, Bolingbroke, therefore espoused his interests, as being one of the blood-royal of England.]

(2) THE BARRIER TREATY. 1713. The purpose of this was to strengthen the frontiers of Holland. In 1701 when the