Page:Cassell's Illustrated History of England vol 4.djvu/82

68 from not receiving timely and necessary information and orders. Nottingham's friends in the commons took up his defence; the lords demanded a conference; the commons refused it, and, amid this noise and animosity, the subject was left undecided.

The commons then proceeded to give the king the advice and assistance which he had so unluckily asked. They demanded that books and papers should be laid before them necessary to enable them to inquire into the management of all the government offices; but they soon came to a stand, for, inquiring into the abuses of the admiralty, the merits or demerits of Nottingham and Russell came again into question. One or both of them had been guilty of gross mismanagement, but each house defended its own member, and the only end was a motion in the commons, which, whilst it acquitted Russell, seemed to reflect on Nottingham, but not very clearly. The lords resented, made severe reprisals on the character and conduct of Russell, and then it ended.

The commons were more generally united in condemning the failure of the battle of Steinkirk and the conduct of Solmes. Some officers in the house, however, defended the conduct of the Dutch officers on that occasion, and especially of Auverquerque in bringing the remains of Mackay's troops out of the battle. They said not a word, however, in vindication of Solmes, and William, to his disgrace, still continued this insolent foreigner, who had wilfully sacrificed the lives of the brave English soldiers, in his command.

Whilst both houses were in this bad temper, the commons again took up the bill for regulating trials in case of high treason; but it was strongly opposed, so that it never went up to the lords, who would again have inserted their clause for extending the privileges of their house; and it was not a moment at which the commons were likely to concede any extension of privileges to the peers—a circumstance occurring just then to warn them had they not been sufficiently hostile without. Lord Charles Mohum, a dissolute young nobleman, was engaged, with an acquaintance named Hill, in a quarrel with Mountford, a popular actor, about a handsome actress named Anne Bracegirdle. In the quarrel, Hill killed Mountford and fled. Mohun, who was abetting him, was arrested, but, claiming to be tried by the peers, was, by a most barefaced partiality, acquitted. The commons felt that it was by no means expedient to grant more privileges to an order who thus abused what they already possessed for the frustration of justice.

The commons now went into the question of the supplies. They were fully prepared to support the king in his exertions to check the arms of France, though they protested against a fact which they had discovered by examinations of the treaty betwixt the allies, that the English paid two-thirds of the expense of the war. After grumbling, however, they voted fifty-four thousand men for the army, twenty thousand of them to remain at home. They voted two millions for the support of the army, and two millions for the navy, to consist of thirty-three thousand men, besides seven hundred and fifty thousand pounds to supply the deficiency of the quarterly poll. Still there was likely to be a deficiency. Notwithstanding the large grants of the previous year, the expenditure had far outgrown it; it was, therefore, proposed to resort to a land tax—the first imposed since the restoration, and the grand transfer of taxation from the aristocracy to the nation at large. The peers made a violent opposition, not to the tax, but to their estates being valued and assessed by any but commissioners of their own body. But they finally gave way, and a land-tax of four shillings in the pound was carried. When Louis heard of these unusual supplies, he could not forbear his amazement. "My little cousin, the prince of Orange," he said, "seems to be firm in the saddle; but no matter, the last Louis d'or must carry it."

Little did Louis know the condition of England when he said that. If the last piece of gold was to carry it, the chance lay far on the side of England. Whilst France was fast sinking in exhaustion from his enormous wars and lavish luxury—whilst his people were sunk in destitution, and trade and agriculture were languishing, England was fast rising in wealth from commerce, colonies, and internal industry, and was capable of maintaining the struggle for an indefinite period.

Yet it was at this moment that the national debt assumed its determinate shape. It had existed, indeed, ever since the fraud of Charles I. on the London merchants by shutting the exchequer. It was now said to be suggested by Burnet that there were heaps of money hidden away in chests and behind wainscoats for want of safe and convenient public security, and that, by government giving that security at a fixed per-centage, it might command any amount of money by incurring only a slight increase of annual taxation for the interest. The idea was seized with avidity by William's government, and from that moment our continental wars and domestic debt have grown together till they have left us with upwards of eight hundred million pounds of credit. The idea itself, however, was perfectly familiar to William, for the Dutch had long had a debt of five million pounds, which was regarded by the people as the very best security for their money. Accordingly, a bill was passed on the 3rd of January, 1693, for raising a million by loan, and another million by annuities, which were to be paid by a new duty on beer and other liquors; and thus, with a formal establishment of the national debt, closed the year 1692.

The close of the year was also distinguished by one of those extraordinary attempts which whigs frequently make when out of place, but resist to the death when in it. This was no other than that all persons holding office under government should be incapable of sitting in parliament, and any person holding such office who should presume to take his seat as a member should not only be ejected, but declared incapable of any future re-election. Government influence was undoubtedly supported by a whole host of placemen in the commons, but the attempt utterly to exclude ministers was certain to defeat itself. The bill passed the commons, and the lords only threw it out by a majority of two. Against this rejection a strong protest was entered by the prince of Denmark—now duke of Cumberland—Marlborough, Warrington, and others, including the earl of Mulgrave, who made a most eloquent speech on the occasion, and printed it. This was called "a parliamentary reform bill," and, as it failed three days after, Shrewsbury brought into the peers once more the triennial bill, winch, after much contest, passed both houses; but William declined to ratify it, because it