SIR ROBERT AND HORACE WALPOLE

(1676-1745; 1717-1797)

IR ROBERT WALPOLE, Prime Minister of England from 1721 to 1742, stands in the history of his time for the idea which

inspired the Sacheverell impeachment-that of "the lawfulness of resistance to unlawful authority." This central idea of the English Whigs of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was not a democratic idea, but rather the modern manifestation of the same impulse under which the English barons forced King John to sign the Magna Charta. The English Whigs of the school to which Walpole belonged believed in the use of force to expel any King who violated the Constitution, but they were as much opposed to Cromwell, backed by his Ironsides, as they were to Charles in the assertion of his prerogative.

Sir Robert Walpole was born at Houghton in Norfolk, and educated at Cambridge. He entered Parliament in 1701. In 1705 he was appointed to the Council of Queen Anne's husband, Prince George of Denmark. In 1708 he became Secretary of War ("Secretary-at-War ») and in 1710 Treasurer of the Navy. It is said that he did not approve the impeachment of Sacheverell, but he acted as one of the managers for the House of Commons in conducting it. On the defeat of the Whigs which followed it, he became one of the leaders of the opposition in the House of Commons, and made himself so formidable to the Tories that they expelled him from the House and sent him to the Tower on charges of personal corruption now admitted to have been false. After the return of the Whigs to power under George I., Walpole was advanced until he became First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer (1715-17 and 1721-42). On the ninth of February, 1742, he was raised to the peerage as Earl of Orford. Two days later he retired from office and lived in privacy at his country seat in Norfolk until his death, March 18th, 1745.

Horace Walpole, his third son, was born at London, October 5th, 1717. Entering Parliament in 1741, he attracted attention, not only because of his father's position, but of his own marked talent. His career as a public man did not satisfy him, however, and he retired in 1768, devoting the rest of his life to literature. He became fourth Earl of Orford in 1791, and died at London, March 2d, 1797. Of his numerous works his letters have been most admired by the critical,

but his romance, The Castle of Otranto,' is perhaps the best known to the general public. As orators, the Walpoles do not compare with the elder and younger Pitt, but Sir Robert Walpole occupied a position in English history by reason of which he must always command attention among parliamentary speakers, while Horace is entitled to a similar if less marked consideration, if for no other reason than that he provoked Pitt to one of his first great outbursts of eloquence.

THE DEBATE WITH PITT IN 1741

(House of Commons, March 10th, 1741)

[In the celebrated debate with the elder Pitt, the speech which provoked Pitt's reply has been attributed to Sir Robert Walpole, but in Doctor Samuel Johnson's 'Parliamentary Debates' for 1741, from the text of which (in the original edition) the debate is here republished, the speech to which Pitt replied is attributed to Horatio. The debate was on a proposition to limit the wages of sailors to thirty-five shillings a month.]

IR ROBERT WALPOLE:

Sir, the present business of this assembly is to examine the clause before us; but to deviate from so necessary an inquiry into loud exclamations against the whole bill is to obstruct the course of the debate, to perplex our attention, and interrupt the House in its deliberation upon questions in the determination of which the security of the public is nearly concerned. The war, sir, in which we are now engaged, and, I may add, engaged by the general request of the whole nation, can be prosecuted only by the assistance of the seamen, from whom it is not to be expected that they will sacrifice their immediate advantage to the security of their country. Public spirit, where it is to be found, is the result of reflection, refined by study, and exalted by education, and is not to be hoped for among those whom low fortune has condemned to perpetual drudgery. It must be therefore necessary to supply the defects of education and to produce by salutary coercions those effects which it is vain to expect from other causes. That the service of the sailors will be set up to sale by auction, and that the merchants will bid against the government, is incontestable; nor is there any doubt that they will be able to offer the highest price, because they will take care to repay themselves by raising the value of their goods. Thus, without some restraint upon the merchants, our enemies, who are not debarred by their form of government from

any method which policy can invent, or absolute power put in execution, will preclude all our designs, and set at defiance a nation superior to themselves.

WILLIAM PITT, ESQUIRE, Spoke to the following purport:— Sir, it is common for those to have the greatest regard to their own interest who discover the least for that of others. I do not, therefore, despair of recalling the advocates of this bill from the prosecution of their favorite measures by arguments of greater efficacy than those which are founded on reason and justice. Nothing, sir, is more evident than that some degree of reputation is absolutely necessary to men who have any concern in the administration of a government like ours; they must either secure the fidelity of their adherents by the assistance of wisdom, or of virtue; their enemies must either be awed by their honesty, or terrified by their cunning. Mere artless bribery will never gain a sufficient majority to set them entirely free from apprehensions of censure. To different tempers different motives must be applied: some, who place their felicity in being accounted wise are in very little care to preserve the character of honesty; others may be persuaded to join in measures which they easily discover to be weak and ill-concerted, because they are convinced that the authors of them are not corrupt, but mistaken, and are unwilling that any man should be punished for natural defects or casual ignorance. I cannot say, sir, which of these motives influence the advocates for the bill before us; a bill in which such cruelties are proposed as are yet unknown among the most savage nations, such as slavery has not yet borne, or tyranny invented, such as cannot be heard without resentment, nor thought of without horror. It is, sir, perhaps, not unfortunate, that one more expedient has been added rather ridiculous than shocking, and that these tyrants of the administration, who amuse themselves with oppressing their fellow-subjects, who add without reluctance one hardship to another, invade the liberty of those whom they have already overborne with taxes, first plunder and then imprison, who take all opportunities of heightening the public distresses and make the miseries of war the instruments of new oppressions, are too ignorant to be formidable, and owe their success, not to their abilities, but to casual prosperity or to the influence of money.

The other clauses of this bill, complicated at once with cruelty and folly, have been treated with becoming indignation; but this

3719 may be considered with less ardor of resentment, and fewer emotions of zeal, because, though perhaps equally iniquitous, it will do no harm; for a law that can never be executed can never be felt. That it will consume the manufacture of paper and swell the books of statutes is all the good or hurt that can be hoped or feared from a law like this; a law which fixes what is in its own nature mutable, which prescribes rules to the seasons and limits to the wind. I am too well acquainted, sir, with the disposition of its two chief supporters, to mention the contempt with which this law will be treated by posterity, for they have already shown abundantly their disregard of succeeding generations; but I will remind them that they are now venturing their whole interest at once, and hope they will recollect before it is too late that those who believe them to intend the happiness of their country will never be confirmed in their opinion by open cruelty and notorious oppression; and that those who have only their own interest in view will be afraid of adhering to those leaders, however old and practiced in expedients, however strengthened by corruption, or elated with power, who have no reason to hope for success from either their virtue or abilities.

SIR ROBERT WALPOLE rose, and spoke as follows:- Sir, every law which extends its influence to great numbers in various relations and circumstances must produce some consequences that were never foreseen or intended, and is to be censured or applauded as the general advantages or inconveniences are found to preponderate. Of this kind is the law before us, a law enforced by the necessity of our affairs, and drawn up with no other intention than to secure the public happiness, and produce that success which every man's interest must prompt him to desire. If in the execution of this law, sir, some inconveniences should arise, they are to be remedied as fast as they are discovered; or, if not capable of a remedy, to be patiently borne in consideration of the general advantage. That some temporary disturbances may be produced is not improbable; the discontent of the sailors may for a short time rise high, and our trade be suspended by their obstinacy; but obstinacy, however determined, must yield to hunger, and when no higher wages can be obtained, they will cheerfully accept of those which are here allowed them. Short voyages, indeed, are not comprehended in the clause, and therefore the sailors will engage in them upon their own terms; but this objection can be of no weight with

those that oppose the clause, because, if it is unjust to limit the wages of the sailors, it is just to leave those voyages without restriction; and those that think the expedient here proposed equitable and rational may perhaps be willing to make some concessions to those who are of a different opinion. That the bill will not remove every obstacle to success, nor add weight to one part of the balance without making the other lighter; that it will not supply the navy without incommoding the merchants in some degree; that it may be sometimes evaded by cunning, and sometimes abused by malice, and that at last it will be less efficacious than is desired may, perhaps, be proved; but it has not yet been proved that any other measures are more eligible, or that we are not to promote the public service as far as we are able, though our endeavors may not produce effects equal to our wishes.

MR. ATTORNEY-GENERAL spoke next to this purport:- Sir, the clause before us cannot, in my opinion, produce any such dreadful consequences as the learned gentleman appears to imagine. However, to remove all difficulties, I have drawn up an amendment which I shall beg leave to propose: "That the contracts which may be affected as the clause now stands shall be void only as to so much of the wages as shall exceed the sum to which the House shall agree to reduce the seamen's pay"; and as to the forfeitures, they are not to be levied upon the sailors, but upon the merchants or trading companies who employ them and who are able to pay greater sums without being involved in poverty and distress. With regard, sir, to the reasons for introducing this clause, they are, in my judgment, valid and equitable. We have found it necessary to fix the rate of money at interest, and the rate of labor in several cases; and if we do not in this case, what will be the consequence? A second embargo on commerce, and perhaps a total stop to all military preparations. Is it reasonable that any man should rate his labor according to the immediate necessities of those that employ him? Or that he should raise his own fortune by the public calamities? If this has hitherto been a practice, it is a practice contrary to the general happiness of society, and ought to prevail no longer. If the sailor, sir, is exposed to greater dangers in time of war, is not the merchant's trade carried on likewise at greater hazard? Is not the freight, equally with the sailors, threatened at once by the ocean and the enemy? And is not the owner's fortune equally impaired, whether the ship be dashed