Frederick Waldegrave Head.

The fallen Stuarts online

. (page 20 of 24)
Online LibraryFrederick Waldegrave HeadThe fallen Stuarts → online text (page 20 of 24)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

for the other more important instruments of their
political interests.


The forcible expulsion of Charles from France * Balance

t e i i c of Power

was the end of the international importance of his on Land.

House. As the century went on, European questions ( a ) In -

j ^ i j J.T, j Jiuenceof

grouped themselves round the new and as yet Prussia.

scarcely understood problem of the existence of
Prussia. In the war of the Austrian Succession the
fate of Silesia had been the great question for
eastern Europe. In the Seven Years' War the
existence of Prussia herself was the question for the

1 Koch and Schoell, i. 316 ; cf. Droysen, v. iii. 499.

2 D'Argenson, v. 309.

3 Lyon in Mourning, in. 253 ; Droysen, v. iv. 36.



03) Alii-
ance of

whole of Europe. This involved as a consequence
that the centre of gravity of European politics
shifted more and more eastwards. The attention
of the world was more and more drawn off from
England and the west, and Pitt's dictum that he
would conquer America in Germany might have
equally applied to an intention of conquering by
the expulsion of the Pretender from England. In
the uneasy years after the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle
the old combination of states completely broke
down. The change was due to the Austrian policy
of Kaunitz and Maria Theresa. In their eyes Prussia
must be destroyed, and a splendid opportunity for
this would be given if only France would hear
reason on the point. An attack from their here-
ditary enemy must not be waited for, nor must the
revenge of the conqueror confine itself to the re-
covery of Silesia. For a long time France refused
to join hands with the Power whom it had always
been the aim of the Bourbons to crush.

But a second great force in Europe tended to
draw attention to the east. Russia under Elizabeth
began to assert the position for which Peter the
Great had prepared her. To Frederick especially
the danger was very great, for the rivalry between
them for power in the north-east was beginning to
take the shape of Russian armies on his borders.
Prussia however saw an opportunity for escape in
the existence of her western neighbour Hanover.
It was here that France and England joined issue
on the continent. The Peace of 1748, which settled
matters in Europe, had left the American and Indian


rivalry unquenched, and struggles went on though
war was not declared. George, in terror lest reverses
like that of General Braddock in 1755 might be the
prelude to hostilities in Europe, at once turned his
attention to secure the neutrality of the Electorate
as the place most open to French attack. Austria,
dallying with France, refused to guarantee it. The
only other Power was Prussia. And to Frederick
an alliance with George was very acceptable because
George and Elizabeth of Russia had in 1755 made
an alliance. The whole position of the Prussian
King was expressed in two lines which he wrote :
" How can I avoid an invasion from Russia ? By
making with England the treaty of neutrality which
she proposes : therefore I must make it 1 ." The
treaty of Westminster in January 1756 was the
result. The news of this decided Louis. France
and Austria concluded the treaty of Versailles in
May 1756 2 .

The whole face of Europe was thus changed. (7) The
The two northern Powers, England with Hanover Eumpe.
and Prussia, stood opposite to Austria and France.
It was a re-opening in far vaster proportions of
those profound issues of the new religion and the
old which had been postponed and not permanently
settled by the great peace of Westphalia. Frederick
maintained himself by means of his own valour and
English supplies till he brought Prussia from a con-
dition in which her very existence was threatened
to one in which she was the equal and rival of

1 Oncken, 11. 73; Droysen, v. iv. 487.

2 Koch and Schoell, i. 334.


Austria for the headship of Germany. This led to
the triple struggle of Austria, Prussia, and Russia
for the headship of the east of Europe, and the
struggle was ended by the sacrifice of the state that
lay between them Poland. But this was not all.
As the attention to eastern affairs more and more
drew these Powers away from the west, they were
brought face to face with the old question which
had played an important part in the affairs of
Austria earlier in the century the attitude towards
Turkey. But what had been an eastern crusade for
Austria had now become, owing to the development
of her two neighbours, the Eastern Question for all
Europe to consider. Step by step the Powers of
Europe were being drawn away from the questions
of the west. And with the questions of the west
the fate of the House of Stuart was bound up.
ii. In- The special link which had bound the Stuart

Religion, cause to the monarchs of Europe had been religion.
But since Louis XIV and the outburst of Alberoni,
this motive for the restoration of the fallen House
had been more and more declining till even the
Popes had ceased to champion it 1 . The time was
now come for the Popes themselves to tremble for
their power in Catholic Europe. In 1759 Pombal
expelled the Jesuits from Portugal, and their expul-
sion from Spain and France led Clement XIV to
condemn the Order in 1773 2 . Catholicism was a
house divided against itself. To champion a dynasty

1 Above, p. 295.

2 Coxe, Bourbons in Spain (1815), chap. LXV. ; Eanke, Papacy,
vni. 18.


as devoted to the cause of the Jesuits as was that of
the Stuarts would have been impossible now, had
the Popes desired to do so. But the great cleavage
in religious Europe was becoming more and more
not that of Catholics and Protestants but that of
Christianity and Rationalism. The influence of
Voltaire made the religious championship of the
Stuarts by any country an impossibility, and, in the
case of France, an absurdity.

The cause of the exiled dynasty had always iii. Bai-
finally rested on the control of the sea, and the ^^erat
power vindicated by England in the war of the Sea -

I \ T

Austrian Succession was not lost in the later strug- xv and*
gles. Once again France tried to revive her naval
power in the Seven Years' War, and Choiseul took
up the mantle of Richelieu and Colbert. The issues
had now widened. It was not a question only of
the three European seas, it was a question of the
Atlantic and Indian Oceans too. But the power of
England which had secured the seas round Europe
led her successfully to secure the others. The naval
successes under Pitt's administration in 1759 were
links in the chain of maritime supremacy under
William III and George I. Once again an attempt
was made to invade England by the preparation of
a large fleet at Brest in 1759. Charles Stuart was
invited to come and hoped much from the promises
of the French Court, though the idea of Louis seems
to have been to make Charles King of Ireland 1 .
Charles published a manifesto declaring he was
coming to London and calling on the English to
1 Pickle the Spy (Lang), 301-305.


rise. Two fleets were hurriedly got together for the
purpose by Choiseul. But the total defeat of that
of Toulon off Lagos in August and that of Brest at
Quiberon Bay in September 1759 put an end to the

Once again England was mistress of the Channel
and the eastern Atlantic. The capture of Louis-
burg in Cape Breton Island and the seizure of
Quebec made England mistress of the western
Atlantic as well. The Indian Ocean had already
been secured by the failure of France to support
Dupleix or Labourdonnais. The victory of Plassey
in 1757 was made productive of further results by
rendering possible the maintenance of a naval con-
nection with India. But this supremacy of England
was doomed to failure. With the outbreak of the
American revolt France once again saw her oppor-
tunity. She could not bring back the House of
Stuart over the Channel, but she might use the
Americans to regain her power over the Atlantic.
The treaty of Paris was therefore signed with the
Americans in 1778. The colonists were to take the
place of Charles Edward, as a tool for French
interests against England. It was the French naval
assistance that led to the surrender of York town in
1781 1 , but America not France reaped the benefit.
For with the accession of Louis XVI the internal
difficulties made a strong foreign policy impossible.
Maurepas could not renew the attempts of Choiseul.
(/3) Joseph One further event might have led to changes on
the eastern side of the Channel the attempt of

1 Mahan, Influence of Sea Power on History.


Joseph II to open the mouth of the Scheldt to
Belgium, for Austria would thus have had an outlet
to the sea and the rivalry of the Ostend Company
with English trade have been renewed. But the
treaty of Fontainebleau in 1785 put an end to the
attempt 1 . England remained without a rival at sea
till the outbreak of the Revolutionary wars, and
then she only strengthened herself. Driven back
as he had been from the Channel, the Baltic and
the Mediterranean, the Stuart representative had
to see this naval power extend to the seas of other
continents, and in that very extension strengthen
the prestige of the royal House which had succeeded
to his throne. Neither as Catholic, nor as Pretender,
nor as tool against the naval tyranny of England
was there any hope for James or Charles Stuart
after 1748. Twelve years afterwards the one re-
maining ground for the expectation of help in
England itself was removed from him. For with
the accession of George III the Tory sentiment of
loyalty could find its satisfaction in the first really
English king of the House of Brunswick.


It is an element in the international politics of i. General
Europe that the history of the fallen House

Stuart has been traced. But the influence of that to En ?-

land in*
House upon the internal development of England ternaiiy.

1 Koch and Schoell, i. 488.


was also momentous. But for the " King over the
Water" the results of the Revolution of 1688 could
scarcely have been so complete as they were, while
the repeated attempts at restoration only ended
in securing the rival dynasty more firmly on the
throne. There are three special ways in which this
influence may be traced.

(a) Senti- The continuance of the fallen House of Stuart
maintained a separation between the national senti-
ment of enthusiasm and the utilitarian basis of
national life. Round the old monarchy with its his-
torical associations the national feeling had wreathed
itself. The doctrine of Divine Right had given it
expression and the Restoration had brought back
the monarchy to at least its sentimental hold on the
nation. But with the flight of James all this had
been weakened, and at the accession of George I a
new theory for royalty had to be found. The King
became the official of the nation bound by the
original contract. The antipathy of the nation to
foreigners, which exhibited itself so strongly against
William III and the German house, strengthened
the new theory. The basis of royalty in England
had changed from sentiment to utility. But the
old feelings, which reached their height under Anne,
were still strong and clung to the exiled House, with
whom the majority of the nation sympathised.
The former loyalty to the reigning line became a
passionate reverence for the exiles, and to it was
attracted much of the best feeling in the country.
It seemed a dangerous thing for the new order of
society when the object of the sentiment of the


nation was removed, and its place had to be filled
by a substitute, whose highest claim to reverence was
expediency. Yet in the end it was this very separa-
tion of sentiment from the Crown that made the
existence of the fallen House so vital to the best
interests of England. The great essential of the
country was peace. For that the best security was
the divorce between the loyalty of the nation to the
throne and the military ambition of the monarch.

Nor was this all. The spirit of toleration pro- (^Gradual
duced the desired change without any violent up- c
heaval of order. The fall of the House of Stuart
effected a re-formation not a revolution. The
essential character of the change was that it was
gradual. The strain was felt on the different ele-
ments of society at different times and could be
borne. Each element as it was changed gave
strength to the others as their turn came. It was
not so in the case of France, where the need for
change in all the elements of society had gone on
unsatisfied. A violent break with the past became
necessary, so that even now the new order of things
is scarcely stable. In England the re-formation of
the nation went on slowly for a century and a half.
But during the beginning of that period the great
reason for this slow process was the existence of the
House of Stuart. Linked with every part of the
national life, the connection between the dynasty
and the nation could not be severed at once. Yet
when all danger from that dynasty was past, every
part of the national life had been changed as the
need came, without fear of a reaction in the whole.
H. 20



ii. Par- The most obvious feature of the time of Walpole

Cases.' was the development of material prosperity. After

(a) Mate- all the wars of William III and Marlborough there

Change. followed a time of peace and recuperation. But a

great change was going on the change from land

to trade as the basis of wealth. The Tories who

had the land and who formed the majority of the

nation were for James. The Whigs who formed

the mercantile classes and numbered a few great

families were in a minority, but had the power k

To the landed proprietors there clung the sentiment

of feudalism, culminating in the divinely-appointed

King. The merchant looked to no historic past, but

saw that his wealth depended on the maintenance of

the more useful form of government. The change

from the old to the new was personified in Walpole.

Gradually the two classes blended. The wealthy

tradesman became a landowner for the sake of the

social status which it gave, and the landlords engaged

in mercantile undertakings. The old sentiment of

lord and vassal which feudalism had engendered

gradually yielded before the mere bargaining of

thing for thing. Much depended on the peaceful

working of this change, which came about because

of the existence of the banished House, whose throne

had been the security of the landlords of the Tory

party. For moderate measures towards landowners

were made necessary, in order to obviate their

opposition to the government. Gradually resistance

became acquiescence, until the landlords saw their

complete safety under the new order of things.

With Walpole the change came and the result


was the enormous development of industry and
trade which followed in the later part of the century,
owing to the inventions of the textile trades. And
with this was linked another change that of the
basis of finance. When the national income was all
drawn from land, the owners of land were of course
very closely linked with the reigning House. But
the new dynasty was forced to depend on the trading
classes for sudden emergencies and all special needs.
The use of loans grew up and the whole system of
finance and taxation was reorganised on a basis of
credit. Yet this too was a gradual process and the
mistakes of the South Sea Bubble and the East
India Company were not soon forgotten.

The material wealth of England, then, changed
from one class to another and the reason of its
gradual and harmless transfer was largely due to
the need of the support of all classes for the new
dynasty. Had not the fear of the Stuarts been
present in all the mercantile and financial measures
of Walpole, their moderation might have been less
conspicuous and the great industrial development of
the later part of the century retarded.

The connection of the fallen House with the (p) Politi-
political development of the country was still more Calchan 9 e -
marked. It marked the change from loyalty to i. Patriot-
patriotism. The revolution of 1688 had sealed the
fate of the doctrine of Divine Right and in 1714 the
new King could be nothing but an official. But the
sentiment of loyalty did not die. A decreasing
number maintained their adherence to the fallen
House. To the majority there was no object for



loyalty. Government was necessarily a matter of
convenience. But this was a doctrine which entailed
bad consequences. For the want of sentiment in
politics made possible the system of corruption by
which the government was maintained. On the
continent absolute monarchs still held sway. In
England the Whig oligarchy maintained itself during
the age of Walpole, from the fact that the return of
James III seemed the greater evil. But the senti-
ment of loyalty which had been the dominant senti-
ment of politics was lost. Nor was this fact due to
the change of dynasty only, but rather to the con-
tinuance of the exiled line. For so long as the
sentiment of loyalty existed at all, it had to turn to
the Stuart representative while his cause was still
active. Except for his existence this feeling might
have rapidly found its satisfaction in the House
of Hanover. But with the representative of the
banished House still maintaining his claims, the
element of enthusiasm could not exist between the
ruling House and the nation. Nor was the long
peace with its corruption and want of display likely
to foster it. Still more did Walpole dread a war.
For war he knew would rekindle the national
enthusiasm which would be centred in the banished

Meanwhile the new political order was being
consolidated and the new dynasty proving its utility.
Yet sentiment in politics was avoided at all costs.
At length this policy justified itself. For the war
of the Austrian Succession broke out and in 1745
the House of Stuart tried to make use of it in order


to regain the Crown. But the day for loyalty to
the Stuart was over, and the rebellion was unsup-
ported. Fourteen years later there was another war
and at length the old spirit of enthusiasm was
revived by the victories of the British arms. But it
was not now the sentiment of loyalty to the dynasty.
It was a new feeling of loyalty to the growing
Empire the feeling of patriotism. The old senti-
ment had been narrow and insular. The new
sentiment could expand with the expanding Empire.
It wreathed itself round the man who called it into
being, and William Pitt's great gift to the nation
was the restoration of sentiment into politics. The
following year George III ascended the throne and
once again the nation was conscious that the King
was an Englishman. The ideal of a Patriot King
was fitted to call up the new spirit of loyalty to the
Empire. Yet it was no small service that the
House of Stuart had rendered to the nation. For
it had withdrawn the spirit of enthusiasm from the
nation just at a time when its absence was most
needed. It was peace that England wanted, and
had a spirit of loyalty towards the House of Bruns-
wick been evoked, the military tastes of the first
two Georges might have made the continuance of
peace impossible. When the war did come, the
peace had done its work, and the result of the war
of the Austrian Succession was the conversion of the
narrower sentiment of loyalty to the person into
the wider one of patriotism for the country. With
the return of sentiment to politics the day of cor-
ruption was past.


2. The The means by which this change had been made

possible was the navy, and the navy was essentially
linked with the new feeling of patriotism. At first
it was popular as the means of defence against
France and the Pretender whom France championed,
but with the wars of the Austrian Succession and
the Seven Years' War the foundations of Greater
Britain were laid or strengthened. With that
Greater Britain the Stuart House had no link, and
its development involved no increase in the strength
of the ties between them.

3. Moder- But there was not only the transference of

sentiment. The presence of the Pretender also
involved a tolerance in politics which would other-
wise have been impossible. The Whigs could not
push their advantage to extremities. The abolition
of the law for the censorship of the Press in 1695
gave the discontented a means by which to give
expression to their opinions while the power in the
hands of the government made such expression
harmless. At the same time this secured the
country against the dangers of a doctrinaire revo-
lution, for opinions were not repressed till, as in the
case of the French Revolutionists, they had to be
put into practice in their extremest form. Thought
and action could grow up side by side till reform,
urged by the elder and younger Pitt, but repressed
by the dread of revolutionary France, could achieve
its bloodless victory in 1832. Yet, but for the
check of the older dynasty upon the Whig
oligarchy, the development must have been far less


Perhaps the greatest influence of the fallen (7) -Re-
House was in the sphere of religion. The essential change.
feature of the Church under the earlier and later
Stuarts was its national character. It was essentially
bound up with the King as the head of the nation
by its doctrine of passive obedience. Its tendency
was to become an affair of the State rather than a
matter for the individual. With the flight of James
in 1688 the link of Church and King was severed,
for the Church could not take back its own doctrine
and accept a usurper in place of the Lord's anointed.
Beside this, the true King was a Catholic. The
Church therefore, like the State, had to find a
utilitarian basis for its connection with the State.
But the old sentiment of obedience to the King as a
part of religion was gone, and instead of it Christian-
ity became a system of morals based on a rational
self-interest. To this result the continued presence
of the Pretender largely helped. For it was felt that
any recurrence of religious enthusiasm was sure to
culminate in the recall of the legitimate King. The
case of Sacheverell had supplied a precedent, which
Wai pole never forgot. All parties, except the
Catholics, were conciliated, but the Test Act was
not repealed. Toleration without enthusiasm was
the religious policy to be followed. As a result, the
religious part of the nation was reconciled to the
new dynasty, but the life of religion died out.

But this was really only the preparation for a
better change. For meanwhile, as the industrial
power of the country was developed, a new popula-
tion was growing up who were beyond the reach of


the old religion or of its attachment to the anointed
King. The masses had begun to exist. In France
it was the masses which brought about the ferocity
of the Revolution. But in England the new difficulty
was met by a religious revival, and the Methodists
brought back religion to the lower classes before
they had become politically dangerous. Nor was
this all. For one of the doctrines preached by
Wesley was loyalty or obedience to the powers that
be. But this meant loyalty to the House of Hanover
and not to the House of Stuart. A second doctrine
was intolerance of Catholicism, which further weak-
ened any connection with the fallen dynasty. The
result was that a violent revolution was avoided, for
the masses had been imbued with a spirit of religion
and respect for the existing order of society. Yet that
the old religious enthusiasm and bitterness should
be followed by a time of spiritual apathy was needed
before the reaction of Methodism could gain the
hold. And that period of apathy was the result of
the continuance of the exiled House. To it therefore
is largely due the fact that in England there was a
gradual re-formation of the body politic, not a
violent revolution as in France.

(5) George Perhaps the influence of the House of Stuart
upon England may be best seen by a consideration
of the efforts of George III to revive the personal

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 22 23 24

Online LibraryFrederick Waldegrave HeadThe fallen Stuarts → online text (page 20 of 24)