fited by a corrupt majority of the creatures whom this minister 'retains in daily pay or engages in his particular interest by granting them those posts and places which never ought to be given to any but for the good of the public?' Sir William told of this minister pluming himself upon his scandalous victory' because he found he had got 'a Parliament like a packed jury ready to acquit him at all adventures.' Then, glowing with his subject, Sir William Wyndham ventured to suggest a case which he blandly declared had never yet happened in this nation, but which still might possibly happen. With such a minister and such a Parliament, let us suppose a prince upon the throne, either from want of true information, or for some other reason, ignorant and unacquainted with the inclinations and the interest of his people, weak, and hurried away by unbounded ambition and insatiable avarice. Could any greater curse befall a nation than such a prince on the throne, advised, and solely advised, by such a minister, and that minister supported by such a Parliament? The nature of mankind,' the orator exclaimed, cannot be altered by human laws; the existence of such a prince, of such a minister, we cannot prevent by Act of Parliament; but the existence of such a Parliament, I think, we may; and, as such a Parliament is much more likely to exist, and may do more mischief while the Septennial Law remains in force than if it were repealed, therefore I am most heartily for the repeal of it.'

This was a very pretty piece of invective. It was

1734.

WYNDHAM'S WALPOLE.

19

full of spirit, fire, and force. Nobody could have failed for a moment to know the original of the portrait Sir William Wyndham professed to be painting from imagination. It was not indeed a true portrait of Walpole; but it was a perfect photograph of what his enemies declared and even believed Walpole to be. Such was the picture which the Craftsman and the pamphleteers were painting every day as the likeness of the great minister. But it was something new, fresh, and bold to paint such a picture under the eyes of Walpole himself. The speech was hailed with the wildest enthusiasm and delight by all the Jacobites, Patriots, and representatives of the country interest; and there is even some good reason to believe that it gave a certain secret satisfaction to many of those who most steadily supported Walpole by their votes. But Walpole was not by any means the sort of man whom it is quite safe to visit with such an attack. The speech of Sir William Wyndham had doubtless been carefully prepared; and Walpole had but a short time, but a breathing-space, while two or three speeches were made, in which to get ready his reply. When he rose to address the House, it soon became evident that he had something to say; and that he was determined to give his adversary at least as good as he brought. Nothing could be more effective than Walpole's method of reply. It was not to Sir William Wyndham that he replied; at least it was not Sir William Wyndham whom he attacked. Walpole passed Wyndham by altogether. Wyndham he well knew to be but the mouthpiece of

Bolingbroke, and it was at Bolingbroke that he struck. I hope I may be allowed,' he said, 'to draw a picture in my turn; and I may likewise say that I do not mean to give a description of any particular person now in being. Indeed,' Walpole added ingenuously, 'the House being cleared, I am sure no person that hears me can come within the description of the person I am to suppose.' This was a clever touch, and gave a new barb to the dart which Walpole was about to fling. The House was cleared; none but members were present; the description applied to none within hearing. Bolingbroke, of course, was not a member; he could not hear what Walpole was saying. Then Walpole went on to paint his picture. He supposed, in this or in some other unfortunate country, an anti-minister'... 'in a country where he really ought not to be, and where he could not have been but by an effect of too much goodness and mercy, yet endeavouring with all his might and with all his art to destroy the fountain from whence that mercy flowed.' Walpole depicted this anti-minister as " who thinks himself a

person of so great and extensive parts, and of so many eminent qualifications, that he looks upon himself as the only person in the kingdom capable of conducting the public affairs of the nation.' Walpole supposed this fine gentleman lucky enough to have gained over to his party some persons really of fine parts, of ancient families, and of great fortunes, and others of desperate views, arising from disappointed and malicious hearts.' Walpole grouped

1734.

WALPOLE'S BOLINGBROKE.

21

Wal

with fine freehand drawing the band of conspirators thus formed under the leadership of this anti-minister. All the band were moved in their political behaviour by him, and by him solely. All they said, either in private or public, was only a repetition of the words he had put into their mouths, and a spitting forth of the venom which he had infused into them.' pole asked the House to suppose, nevertheless, that this anti-minister was not really liked by any even of those who blindly followed him, and was hated by the rest of mankind. He showed him contracting friendships and alliances with all foreign ministers who were hostile to his own country, and endeavouring to get at the political secrets of English administrations in order that he might betray them to foreign and hostile states. Further, he asked the House to suppose this man travelling from foreign court to court, making it his trade to betray the secrets of each court where he had most lately been, void of all faith and honour, delighting to be treacherous and traitorous to every master whom he had served and who had shown favour to him. 'I could carry my suppositions a great deal farther; but, if we can suppose such a one as I have pictured, can there be imagined a greater disgrace to human nature than such a wretch as this?' The ministers triumphed by a majority of 247 to 184. Walpole was the victor in more than the mere parliamentary majority. He had conquered in the fierce parliamentary duel.

There is a common impression that Walpole's speech hunted Bolingbroke out of the country; that

it drove him into exile and obscurity again, as Cicero's invective drove Catiline into open rebellion. This, however, is not the fact. A comparison of dates settles the question. The debate on the Septennial Bill took place in March 1734; Bolingbroke did not leave England until the early part of 1735. The actual date of his leaving England is not certain; but Pulteney, writing to Swift on April 29, 1735, adds, in a postscript: Lord Bolingbroke is going to France with Lord Berkeley, but, I believe, will return again in a few months.' No one could have known better than Pulteney that Bolingbroke was not likely to return to England in a few months. Still, although Bolingbroke did not make a hasty retreat, history is well warranted in saying that Walpole's powerful piece of invective closed the door once for all against Bolingbroke's career in English politics. Bolingbroke could not but perceive that Walpole's accusations against him sank deeply into the heart of the English people. He could not but see that some of those with whom he had been most closely allied of late years were impressed with the force of the invective; not, indeed, by its moral force, but by the thought of the influence it must have on the country. It may well have occurred to Pulteney, for example, as he listened to Walpole's denunciation, that the value of an associate was more than doubtful whom the public could recognise at a glance as the original of such a portrait. There had been disputes now and then already. Bolingbroke was too much disposed to regard himself as master