Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 4.djvu/17

Rh studies, and would fain have had his friends believe that he had thoroughly and voluntarily resigned himself to a life of studious retirement. He took up his abode at La Source, and in 1720, two years after the death of his first wife, married the Marquise de Villette, for whom he seems to have had a sincere affection. In 1723, by bribing the duchess of Kendal, a removal of part of his sentence was attained; he was permitted to return to England, and, by a special bill, passed two years later, was allowed to enjoy his first wife's property. He bought a magnificent estate at Dawley; and, while keeping up the appearance of single-minded devotion to study, plunged eagerly into as much of political intrigue as was open to him. He had tried in vain to conciliate Walpole, and seems to have seen that during that minister's tenure of power he could never recover his position. He accordingly united himself to the dissatisfied section of the Whigs led by Pulteney, and tried to organize out of them and the remnant of the Tories an opposition to Walpole. His aid was lent not only in preparing speeches for Windham, Pulteney, and others, who for a time were little more than his mouthpieces, but in written attacks upon the minister. His papers in the Craftsman, which gave that journal a circulation exceeding even that of the Spectator, are masterpieces of vigorous English. In their collected form as the Dissertation on Parties and Oldcastle's Remarks on History, they are valuable contributions to our knowledge of the political movements of the period. At one time, indeed, it seemed that the opposition would succeed in driving Walpole from the field. The outcry against his Excise Bill was strong, and his majority in the House was seriously diminished, but he was too firmly rooted to be easily moved; and in 1735 he retaliated on Bolingbroke by a significant and threatening speech. So evident was it that he had obtained an insight into intrigues which could not stand investigation, that Bolingbroke took alarm and a second time fled to France. Other motives, such as pecuniary embarrassments, may have contributed to force him to this step, and there can be little doubt that his reputation was of a nature seriously to damage any party with whom he united. He found that Pulteney was anxious to get rid of him, and felt with some bitterness that, like an old actor, he must retire from the political stage before being hissed off. After this second retreat he settled at Chanteloup, in Touraine, whence he paid two or three visits to England. Finally, in 1743, after the death of his father, he took up his residence at Battersea, and, finding the new statesmen little disposed to hearken even to his counsels, endeavoured to devote himself entirely to philosophy. He died at Battersea on the 12th December 1751.

Of Bolingbroke as an author but little can be said. The question asked a very few years after his death, "Who now reads Bolingbroke?" may be put with tenfold significance now. The influence of his writings on English literature has been quite inappreciable, and probably the works of few men of such ability have been so little read. Yet this neglect is in some respects undeserved. His writings may be regarded in two aspects,—as specimens of English prose, and as positive contributions to history, politics, and philosophy. In the latter aspect their worth is indeed small. His historical treatises, while containing much that is of interest and importance, are over-weighted by the constant reference to the peace of Utrecht, the defence of which is almost their sole object. It would be difficult to extract from the Dissertation on Parties, the Idea of a Patriot King, or the Letters on Patriotism anything like a consistent philosophy of government. No one has expounded better than Bolingbroke the fundamental principles of Whig policy, and yet his ideal of a king is a sovereign who, from various qualities, is able to retain nearly absolute power, and to govern without the intervention of party spirit. In philosophy he occupies but a subordinate place in the long line of English writers who drew their inspiration from Locke, and who gave the key-note to the religious enlightenment of the 18th century. He is a deist, and from the basis of the sensational theory of knowledge attacks revealed religion with force quite inferior to Toland or Tindal. Bolingbroke's philosophical works are indeed insufferably wearisome, and it is only in them that his style ever flags and grows cumbersome, for his other writings are in many respects the perfection of English prose style, and can stand comparison even with the finished compositions of Addison. For ease, grace, and oratorical vehemence and energy, the ''Letter to Sir Wm. Windham and the dedication of the Dissertation on Parties'' are nearly unsurpassed. Bolingbroke clearly was at his best when roused by strong feeling, and his most vigorous passages are those which would naturally have been spoken. That none of his parliamentary orations have come down to us is matter of deepest regret, even though our estimate of them be lower than Pitt's.

Bolingbroke's works were published in 5 vols. 4to, by David Mallet, 1753-54. Later editions have generally prefixed to them the Life by Goldsmith, a compilation of little value. Two volumes of Correspondence, were published by Parke in 1798. Materials for Bolingbroke's life are to be found in the Stuart papers, Marchmont papers, Coxe's Life of Marlborough, Swift's Journal and History of the last Four Years of Queen Anne, Somerville's Queen Anne, and Stanhope's Reign of Queen Anne and History of England, particularly vols. i. and ii. Some special information will be found in De Torcy's Mémoires, and Mignet's Negociacions relatifs à la Succession d'Espagne. See also G. W. Cooke, Memoirs of Bolingbroke, 2 vols., 1835; Rémusat, Angleterre au XVIII Siècle, vol. i.; Macknight, Life of Bolingbroke, 1863.

 BOLIVAR,, the hero of South American independence, was born in the city of Caracas, Venezuela, on the 24th July 1783. His father was Juan Vicente Bolivar y Ponte, and his mother Maria Concepcion Palacios y Sojo, both descended of noble families in Venezuela. After acquiring the elements of a liberal education at home, Bolivar was sent to Europe to prosecute his studies, and with this view repaired to Madrid, where he appears to have resided for several years. Having completed his education, he spent some time in travelling, chiefly in the south of Europe, and visited the French capital, where he was an eye-witness of some of the last scenes of the Revolution. Returning to Madrid, he married, in 1801, the daughter of Don N. Toro, uncle of the marquis of Toro in Caracas, and embarked with her for America, intending, it is said, to devote himself to the improvement of his large estate. But this plan was frustrated by the premature death of his young wife, who fell a victim to yellow fever; and Bolivar again visited Europe, in order, by change of scene, to alleviate the sorrow occasioned by this bereavement.

On his return home in 1809 he passed through the United States, where, for the first time, he had an opportunity of observing the working of free institutions; and soon after his arrival in Venezuela he appears to have identified himself with the cause of independence which had already agitated the Spanish colonies for some years. Being one of the promoters of the movement at Caracas in April 1810, he received a colonel's commission from the revolutionary junta, and was associated with Luis Lopez Mendez in a mission to the court of Great Britain. Venezuela declared its independence of the mother country on July 5, 1811, and in the following year the war commenced in earnest by the advance of Monteverde with the Spanish troops. Bolivar was intrusted with the command of the important post of Puerto Cabello, but not being supported he had to evacuate the place; and owing to the inaction of Miranda the Spaniards recovered their hold over the country.

Like others of the revolutionists Bolivar took to flight,