Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 4.djvu/479

A.D.1742 party, were likely to operate, as was speedily obvious. Horace Walpole, the son of the accused, endeavoured to defend the conduct of his father, but he was rudely handled in reply by Pitt, who displayed much more eloquence than generosity; and when the names of the committee were called over, it was observed that the majority were the rancorous enemies of Walpole, and two only could be termed his decided friends. Lord Limerick was chosen chairman, and such was the partial and vindictive spirit in which they went to work in examining papers and witnesses, that the honourable-minded Sir John Barnard, though so stanch an opponent of Walpole when in power, declared that he would no longer take part in the labours of a committee which displayed so little regard to the general inquiry, but concentrated all their efforts on the ruin of one individual.

But the committee found itself opposed in these objects in the highest quarter. The king displayed the most firm disposition to protect his late minister, and was in constant communication with Walpole and his friends for the purpose. Every means were used to protect those who were possessed of the most important information from the scrutiny of the committee, and to induce them to remain obstinately silent. Mr. Edgecumbe, who had managed the Cornish boroughs for Walpole, and could have revealed things which would have filled the committee with exultation, was raised to the upper house, and thus removed from the power of the commons. Paxton, the solicitor to the treasury, a most important witness, remained unshakably silent, and was committed to Newgate; nor was the committee more successful with Scrope, the secretary to the treasury. This officer, who, no doubt, held most desirable knowledge in his bosom, as firmly refused to make any disclosures, though he was now a very feeble old man. Other officials refused to make statements whose disclosure might criminate themselves, and which they were excused from doing by the great principles of our judicature.

To remove this obstacle, lord Limerick, the chairman of the committee, then moved that a bill of indemnity should be passed, to exempt witnesses from all penalties in consequence of their disclosures. This passed the commons by a majority of twelve, but was rejected in the house of lords by a large majority. It was there supported by Chesterfield, Argyll, and Bathurst, and opposed by Carteret and Hardwicke, who, as lord chancellor, designated it as an outrage on every principle of our constitution, and, if passed, destructive of all personal security. Enraged by this defeat, lord Strange, the son of the earl of Derby, moved, on the part of the committee, that the opposition of the lords in this matter was an obstruction to justice. It was supported by lord Quarndon, son of the earl of Lichfield, and led to a violent debate, and sharp recrimination betwixt Sandys and the rejected lord of the admiralty, Sir John Ilynd Cotton, but was defeated by a majority of fifty-two. The temper of the secret committee was now exasperated to fury; they again called before them the octogenarian Scrope, and handled him with an insolent barbarity disgraceful to any body of men. But the old man who had fought for Monmouth, remained as stanch as he was on Sedgemoor in the days of youth. He said, "I am fourscore years of age, and I care not whether I spend the few months I have to live in the Tower or out of it, but the last thing I will do is to betray the king, and, next to the king, the earl of Orford." The committee had sense enough to dismiss the sturdy old whig, and give him no further trouble.

After contending with such difficulties — for the committee was, in truth, combating with all the powers of the crown — it was not likely that it would produce a very effective report. In fact, desirable as it was that a deep and searching inquiry should have been made, and the mysteries of that long reign of corruption thrown open, the fact that the monarch and the minister had gone hand in hand through the whole of it, was, on the very surface, fatal to any hope of a successful issue; and what rendered this fatality greater was, that the committee too obviously went into the question hotly to crush an old antagonist who had defeated and humiliated them for a long course of years, rather than to serve the nation. When, therefore, on the 30th of June, they presented their report, the feeling, on its perusal, was one of intense disappointment. It alleged that, during an election at Weymouth, a place had been promised to the mayor if he would use his influence in obtaining the nomination of a retiring officer, and that a church living had been promised to the mayor's brother-in-law for the same purpose; that some revenue officers, who refused to vote for the ministerial nominees, were dismissed; that a fraudulent contract had been given to Peter Burrell and John Bristow, two members of the house of commons, for furnishing money in Jamaica for the payment of the troops, by which they had pocketed upwards of fourteen per cent.

But what were these few trifling and isolated cases to that great system of corruption which the whole public were satisfied had spread through the whole administration of Walpole, and which abounded with far more wonderful instances than these? These cases might have been extracted from the most virtuous administration that had ever existed. The very mention of them, and them alone, was a proclamation of defeat. The sole fact which they brought forward, which bore any proportion to the expectation of the public, was that, under Walpole, the amount of secret service money was greater than in any preceding period. The committee selected ten years from the end of the reign of queen Anne, and the commencement of the reign of George I., that is, from 1707 to 1717, and showed that the secret service money during that period amounted to three hundred and thirty-seven thousand nine hundred and sixty pounds, whilst, during the last ten years of Walpole's ministry, it amounted to one million four hundred and fifty-three thousand pounds. That was a striking and palpable fact; but the committee totally failed to discover how this money had been spent. That a large sum had gone to bribe members and electors, there could be no rational doubt; only fifty thousand pounds, however, could be traced as paid to writers of pamphlets and in newspapers, as well as to the proprietors of newspapers, in favour of government; whilst an enormous proportion must have gone to secure foreign alliances, and to keep poor and mercenary courts from swelling the host of our enemies. The result of this inquiry, began with parade, and pursued with much animosity, had the effect of injuring the committee instead of the ex-