Queen Anne: The Politics of Passion (89 page)

The Queen considered the Whig leaders’ objections against the peace to be spurious. She had a private meeting with Lord Cowper, but when he repeated that he feared that the renunciation would not prove binding, she grew indignant. She ‘seemed to resent her care of the kingdom and her allies were distrusted’, telling Cowper ‘she would take care
all
should be secure against France’. Talking later with Sir David Hamilton,
she ridiculed what the former Lord Chancellor had said, remarking that his ‘reasons in converse with her were so weak that a man of his sense could not believe them’. Far from conceding any grounds for concern, she told Hamilton stoutly that ‘she hoped the peace would be a good peace’.
³⁶

As soon as the French signified their assent to the articles put to them on 6 June, Ormonde was ordered to cease all martial activity. When he informed Prince Eugene of this, the latter indicated he had no intention of abandoning the struggle. Any hope that the Dutch would decide that the British defection obliged them to join in the armistice soon proved illusory. The British had nevertheless promised the French that they would remove a very sizeable contingent from the allied army, for they expected all foreign troops in Anne’s pay to down arms on Ormonde’s command. In England the resident ministers of the relevant powers were summoned by St John, who informed them that if their troops did not obey the Queen’s orders to withdraw with Ormonde, all arrears due to them would be withheld. When it appeared that these troops preferred to attach themselves to Eugene’s forces, St John represented this as the ‘rankest treachery’. ‘For the foreigners to desert her Majesty whilst her bread was in their mouths and her money in their pockets … the Queen looks upon to be such an indignity, such a violation of all faith, that she is resolved to resent it in the manner becoming so great a princess’, he proclaimed.
³⁷

In reality the Queen should have accounted herself fortunate that these troops elected to stand by their comrades-in-arms. At the start of the campaign 40,000 of the allied army’s men were either British-born or paid for by the Queen. Eugene had warned Ormonde ‘that his marching away with the Queen’s troops and the foreigners in her pay would leave them to the mercy of the French’, for the remaining forces under his command would be outnumbered by the enemy.
³⁸
If his army had been annihilated in such circumstances, Anne would have incurred everlasting infamy. As it was, Ormonde only took with him 12,000 of his compatriots, meaning that Eugene still had numerical superiority over the French.

For a time the French claimed that because the British had abstracted fewer men than expected from the allied army, they were absolved from giving up Dunkirk, but when pressed they stood by the original agreement. After separating from Eugene’s army on 5/16 July, Ormonde seized Ghent and Bruges to provide shelter for his forces. Jack Hill, meanwhile, sailed from England to take possession of Dunkirk on 8/19 July.

Following his parting with Ormonde, Eugene had rashly undertaken the siege of Landrecies, leaving himself with a dangerously extended supply line. On 13/24 July Villars attacked this at the weak point of Denain, gaining a great victory. Torcy impudently suggested to St John that Anne’s displeasure with her allies meant that the news would be ‘agreeable’ to her, and the Secretary did not categorically deny this. He told Torcy that while ‘the Queen cannot but be greatly affected that the … miseries of war should still continue’, she hoped the setback would make the Dutch less obstinate. Still Holland and Austria refused to suspend hostilities, claiming they could only seek peace ‘sword in hand’.
³⁹
Oxford and St John began to think the only means of ending their current isolation would be to convince the Duke of Savoy to detach himself from the allies and let Britain secure his interests. To complicate matters further, in the coming weeks the French recaptured a string of towns previously taken by Marlborough, making them less disposed to offer generous peace terms.

On 21 June the Queen adjourned Parliament. Until now St John’s presence in the Commons had been vital, but with the session finished he could be elevated to the House of Lords. Having been promised that he would enter the peerage at a higher rank than those given titles the previous December, he hoped to be created Earl of Bolingbroke. Oxford passed on his wishes to the Queen, but she considered a Viscountcy quite sufficient for the Secretary. Swift noted, ‘He was not much at that time in her good graces, some women about the court having infused an opinion into her that he was not so regular in his life as he ought to be’. It does not appear she was misinformed, for Bolingbroke’s correspondence to his friend Matthew Prior abounded with references to women he was chasing. In one letter he boasted of writing ‘upon the finest desk in the universe: Black Betty’s black ass’.
⁴⁰

St John had promised that if there was any difficulty about giving him an earldom, ‘I will forget that I was refused it’, but in the event he proved much less gracious. Initially he tried to turn down the peerage altogether, and though on 7 July he deigned to accept it, he admitted he ‘felt more indignation than ever in my life’ at being ‘clothed with as little of the Queen’s favour as she could contrive to bestow’. Blaming the Lord Treasurer for his disappointment, he indulged himself by ‘raving and railing at the Queen, Lady Masham, R. Harley and everyone else’.
⁴¹

To try and cheer him up Oxford agreed that the new Lord Bolingbroke could go to France to resolve some of the difficulties that stood in the
way of peace, but the Viscount was ordered to confine himself to matters such as scrutinising the text of the King of Spain’s renunciation, and devising terms that would satisfy the Duke of Savoy. Having arrived in Paris in early August, Bolingbroke was soon enjoying himself hugely. He had an affair with a former novice nun, Claudine de Ferriol, an imprudent move in view of the fact that Torcy may have bribed her to pass on to him Bolingbroke’s papers.
⁴²
Having dealt with the matters entrusted to him – perhaps rather too speedily, for the wording he approved for the King of Spain’s renunciation had later to be amended – Bolingbroke did not see why he should be constrained by his instructions. For some time he had taken the view that the Queen should ‘make use of the ill behaviour of the allies’ by reaching an agreement with France that excluded them. As well as leading the French to believe that, with the Duke of Savoy’s support, she would make a separate peace, he gave Torcy the impression that Tournai would be given back to France. His final misjudgement was failing to leave the theatre when the Pretender (who should in theory have already been expelled from France) appeared in a nearby box at the opera. On his return the Queen was ‘highly and publicly displeased’ that he had allowed himself to be ‘seen under the same roof with that person’.
⁴³

Far from being chastened, back in England Bolingbroke continued to encourage the French to pursue a separate peace. He argued that Louis XIV was entitled to demand Tournai, as the Dutch’s conduct ‘has been such and the situation of affairs so altered’, that the Queen was no longer bound by what she had said to Parliament on 6 June. This, he wrote on 10 September, was his ‘own opinion, and I believe I speak the Queen’s on this occasion’. He also conspired with the enemy to obstruct Holland from forwarding negotiations at Utrecht. The French had claimed that their plenipotentiaries had been insulted by a drunken Dutchman, and Bolingbroke encouraged them to use this is an excuse to halt talks. Anne, however, appears to have experienced qualms about what was happening. In mid September Matthew Prior, who had remained in France as Britain’s representative after Bolingbroke had gone home, warned Torcy ‘the Queen is of opinion that it is proper the conferences at Utrecht should be renewed’. By this time Bolingbroke himself was becoming conscious of having gone too far, but this did not stop him being enraged when Oxford asked Lord Dartmouth to take over all future correspondence with France.
⁴⁴

On 28 September the Dutch notified the Queen that in the interests of peace they ‘desired her good offices with France’. They would be prepared
to accept a less extensive barrier than that demanded in the past, but would not surrender Tournai. Bearing in mind his own assurances to Parliament against a separate peace, Oxford was in no doubt that their wishes must be accommodated. Bolingbroke thought otherwise, and on the evening of 28 September this prompted a dreadful row in Cabinet. Bolingbroke accused Oxford of needless delay and Dartmouth of incompetence, and he was initially supported by the Lord Keeper, Harcourt. However, as it became clear that the Dutch were willing to give up so many frontier towns to France, opinion in the Cabinet veered round. Several members commented that Holland was not to blame for the lack of progress at Utrecht, and Harcourt declared that in these circumstances it would be more than his head was worth to seal a separate peace. Seizing his advantage, Oxford attacked Bolingbroke for exceeding his instructions while in France, and said the Dutch would have just cause for complaint if Britain abandoned them. When Bolingbroke disagreed, ‘both sides grew heated and strong words were spoken’. If the Queen had ever been tempted by Bolingbroke to contemplate a separate peace, she now accepted it could not be countenanced. The painful scene that had taken place before her left her very upset, and the Hanoverian diplomat Kreienberg reported, ‘The Queen cried copiously that evening’.
⁴⁵

Oxford had won that clash with Bolingbroke, but he had no grounds for complacency. His position was weakened by the Tories’ continued displeasure at his failure to do more for them. Not only was the Lord Treasurer himself reluctant to allow the Tories to dictate to him on patronage matters, but his freedom of manoeuvre was limited by the Queen, who remained as determined as ever to deny employment to individuals she disliked. The Deanery of Wells was still vacant after the incumbent’s death the previous February, but despite being ‘teased to prefer Swift’, Anne would not oblige. In late 1712 she appears to have had a row with Oxford over appointments. She wrote to him on 27 November, ‘I … am very sorry anything I said on Tuesday morning should make you think I was displeased with you. I told you my thoughts freely, as I have always and ever will continue to do on all occasions. You cannot wonder that I who have been ill used so many years should desire to keep myself from being again enslaved; and if I must always comply and not be complied with, [it] is, I think, very hard and what I cannot submit to, and what I believe you would not have me’.
⁴⁶

One reason why the Queen was not invariably supportive of the Lord Treasurer was that he was not as efficient as she would have liked. The
Queen was also so irritated by his late arrivals at Windsor that in November 1712 she wrote firmly, ‘When you come next, pray order it so that you may be here by daylight and take more care of yourself’. Perhaps this was a hint that he was drinking too much, for one source claimed that already he would ‘scarcely … go sober once in a week and not before four in the morning to bed’. With so many things to attend to, it was perhaps inevitable that some would be neglected, but even his friends believed he made matters worse by his dilatoriness. ‘Delay is rooted in Eltee’s heart’ (as in L. T. for Lord Treasurer), Swift wrote sorrowfully. According to Bolingbroke, this affected the conduct of peace negotiations, for though Oxford insisted on keeping them in his hands, he ‘showed himself every day incapable of that attention, that method, that comprehension of different matters’ that was needful.
⁴⁷
While there were times when Oxford showed himself more steely in his dealings with the French than Bolingbroke, it is true that the peace process sometimes languished inexplicably. Lack of application on Oxford’s part may have contributed to this.

In her letters the Queen kept directing his attention to items overlooked. In August 1712, for example, she reminded him to set in place voting arrangements for Scots lords who were currently overseas. Such lapses on Oxford’s part could not fail to be provoking to one who was herself so meticulous that Sir David Hamilton remarked, ‘I wonder that under the load of so much business she could remember to regulate every such little circumstance’. Lack of money in the Treasury doubtless explained why sums owing to individuals were not paid on time, but the Queen inevitably wondered if Oxford’s inattention and forgetfulness were to blame. Her letters made frequent mention of matters such as the £100 overdue to Lord Bellenden, and the amount outstanding to Lord Abingdon.
⁴⁸

Oxford did not help himself by his enigmatic and devious manner. He wished it to be thought that he knew more than he could reveal, but often gave the impression that he was simply muddled. He tended to talk ‘very darkly and confusedly’ throwing out ‘obscure and broken hints’ that left his interlocutors perplexed. George Lockhart recorded, ‘he was indeed very civil to all who addressed him but he generally spoke so low in their ear or so mysteriously that few knew what to make of his replies’. This undermined people’s trust in him, and Bolingbroke did not fail to exploit this, making no secret of his belief that he was better fitted for leadership.
⁴⁹

In the past Oxford had derived strength from his association with Abigail Masham but he now looked on her as less of an asset. On coming
to power he had been careful to humour her, and when Swift had first been introduced to Abigail at a dinner at Oxford’s house in August 1711 he had been impressed by the deference with which she was treated. ‘She was used with mighty kindness and respect, like a favourite’, he recorded. That November, Swift went to see the Lord Treasurer one evening but was not immediately admitted because ‘Mrs Masham was with him when I came; and they are never disturbed’. ‘’Tis well she is not very handsome: they sit alone together settling the nation’, he wrote mischievously. Over the following year, however, Abigail may have begun to feel that Oxford was insufficiently attentive to her. Swift acknowledged, ‘I believe the Earl was not so very sedulous to cultivate or preserve’ her favour, which gave the impression he did not have ‘it much at heart, nor was altogether sorry when he saw it under some degree of declination’.
⁵⁰