the good or ill fortune of the war, be so generous as to contribute more than the principal party, and even more in proportion to his abilities, he ought at least to have his share in what is conquered from the enemy: or, if his romantic disposition transports him so far, as to expect little or nothing of this, he might, however, hope, that the principals would make it up in dignity and respect; and he would surely think it monstrous to find them intermeddling in his domestic affairs, prescribing what servants he should keep or dismiss, pressing him perpetually with the most unreasonable demands, and at every turn threatening to break the alliance, if he will not comply.

From these reflections upon war in general, I descend to consider those wars, wherein England hath been engaged since the Conquest. In the civil wars of the barons, as well as those between the houses of York and Lancaster, great destruction was made of the nobility and gentry, new families raised, and old ones extinguished, but the money spent on both sides was employed and circulated at home; no public debts contracted; and a very few years of peace quickly set all right again.

The like may be affirmed even of that unnatural rebellion against King Charles I., the usurpers maintained great armies in constant pay, had almost continual war with Spain or Holland, but managing it by their fleets, they increased very much the riches of the kingdom, instead of exhausting them.

Our foreign wars were generally against Scotland or France; the first being upon our own continent,' carried no money out of the kingdom, and were seldom of long continuance. During our first wars with France, we possessed great dominions in that country, where we preserved some footing till the reign of Queen Mary; and though some of our latter princes made very chargeable expeditions thither, a subsidy, and two or three fifteenths, cleared all the debt. Beside, our victories were then of some use as well as glory; for we were so prudent to fight, and so happy to conquer, only for ourselves.

The Dutch wars, in the reign of King Charles II. though 1 Thus in first edition. Other editions have "in this island."

[T. S.]

begun and carried on under a very corrupt administration, and much to the dishonour of the crown, did indeed keep the king needy and poor, by discontinuing or discontenting his parliament, when he most needed their assistance; but neither left any debt upon the nation, nor carried any money out of it.

At the Revolution, a general war broke out in Europe, wherein many princes joined in an alliance against France, to check the ambitious designs of that monarch; and here the emperor, the Dutch, and England were principals. About this time the custom first began among us of borrowing millions upon funds of interest: It was pretended, that the war could not possibly last above one or two campaigns; and that the debts contracted might be easily paid in a few years, by a gentle tax, without burthening the subject. But the true reason for embracing this expedient, was the security of a new prince, not firmly settled on the throne: People were tempted to lend, by great premiums and large interest, and it concerned them nearly to preserve that government, which they trusted with their money. The person' said to have been author of so detestable a project, is still living, and lives to see some of its fatal consequences, whereof his grandchildren will not see an end. And this pernicious counsel closed very well with the posture of affairs at that time: For, a set of upstarts, who had little or no part in the Revolution, but valued themselves by their noise and pretended zeal when the work was over, were got into credit at court, by the merit of becoming undertakers and projectors of loans and funds: These, finding that the gentlemen of estates were not willing to come into their measures, fell upon those new schemes of raising money, in order to create a monied interest, that might in time vie with the landed, and of which they hoped to be at the head.2

The ground of the first war, for ten years after the Revolution, as to the part we had in it, was, to make France acknowledge the late king, and to recover Hudson's Bay.

1 Dr. Gilbert Burnet, Bishop of Sarum. See note on p. 128, vol. iii., of present edition of Swift's works. [T. S.]

2 The apology alleged by the answerers of the tract was the stubborn opposition of the Tories to an excise or any other schemes for raising taxes within the year. [S.]

But during that whole war, the sea was almost entirely neglected, and the greatest part of six millions annually employed to enlarge the frontier of the Dutch. For the king was a general, but not an admiral; and although King of England, was a native of Holland.

2

After ten years fighting to little purpose; after the loss of above an hundred thousand men, and a debt remaining of twenty millions, we at length hearkened to the terms of a peace, which was concluded with great advantages to the empire and Holland, but none at all to us; and clogged soon after by the famous treaty of partition; by which, Naples, Sicily, and Lorrain, were to be added to the French dominions; or if that crown should think fit to set aside the treaty, upon the Spaniards refusing to accept it, as they declared they would, to the several parties at the very time of transacting it; then the French would have pretensions to the whole monarchy. And so it proved in the event; for, the late King of Spain reckoning it an indignity to have his

The Peace of Ryswick, concluded in October, 1697. All that Louis did for England by that peace was to acknowledge William as King of England, and to engage not to assist his enemies. The Dutch and Leopold, however, were much better treated. The former had its commerce re-established, while to the latter were given many fortresses and towns, and advantages strengthening his empire. The Peace of Ryswick was truly not a peace, but a temporary cessation of hostilities. [T. S.]

2 The Partition Treaties arose out of the troublesome question of the Spanish succession. After the Peace of Ryswick William III. and Louis XIV. attempted to settle this question by a partition of the Spanish possessions, which, without any reference either to Charles of Spain or Leopold of Austria, gave Spain, the Indies, and the Netherlands to the Electoral Prince of Bavaria, and the two Sicilies to France. Charles himself signed a will by which the Electoral Prince was to succeed him in all his possessions; but the prince died. His death necessitated a second Partition Treaty, and this was concluded between France, England, and Holland. By this second treaty the Archduke Charles succeeded to Spain, the Indies, and the Netherlands, and the Bourbons received the Milanese or Lorraine. The news of this treaty in Spain roused that country to activity, and Louis XIV., by means of Cardinal Porto Carrero and Harcourt, his ambassador, intrigued so that the anger of the Spaniards fell on England and Holland, and eventually succeeded in forcing Charles to sign a will in favour of Philip of Anjou. This perfidious conduct on the part of Louis led to the Grand Alliance and a war which, in the words of Macaulay, "agitated Europe, from the Vistula to the Atlantic Ocean, during twelve years." [T. S.]

territories cantoned out into parcels, by other princes, during his own life, and without his consent, rather chose to bequeath the monarchy entire to a younger son of France: And this prince was acknowledged for King of Spain both by us and Holland.'

It must be granted, that the counsels of entering into this war were violently opposed by the church-party, who first advised the late king to acknowledge the Duke of Anjou; and particularly, 'tis affirmed that a certain great person, who was then in the church interest, told the king in November, 1701, That since His Majesty was determined to engage in a war so contrary to his private opinion, he could serve him no longer, and accordingly gave up his employment; though he happened afterwards to change his mind, when he was to be at the head of the Treasury, and have the sole management of affairs at home; while those abroad were to be in the hands of one, whose advantage, by all sorts of ties, he was engaged to promote.

The declarations of war against France and Spain, made by us and Holland, are dated within a few days of each other. In that published by the States, they say very truly, That "they are nearest, and most exposed to the fire; that they are blocked up on all sides, and actually attacked by the Kings of France and Spain; that their declaration is the effect of an urgent and pressing necessity;" with other expressions to the same purpose. They "desire the assistance of all kings and princes," &c. The grounds of their quarrel with France, are such as only affect themselves, or at least more immediately than any other prince or state; such as, "the French refusing to grant the Tariff promised by the treaty of Ryswick; the loading the Dutch inhabitants settled in France, with excessive duties, contrary to the said treaty; the violation of the Partition Treaty, by the French accepting the King of Spain's will, and threatening the States, if they would not comply; the seizing the Spanish

2

1 This was Philip of Anjou, second son of the Dauphin. [T. S.]

He

Sidney Godolphin, one of the greatest financiers among English statesmen. He was Lord High Treasurer under Queen Anne, and an intimate friend, as well as relative by marriage, of Marlborough. was created an Earl in 1706, but was removed from his office at the fall of the Whig ministry in 1710. He died in 1712. [T. S.]

Netherlands by the French troops, and turning out the Dutch, who by permission of the late King of Spain were in garrison there; by which means that republic was deprived of her barrier, contrary to the treaty of partition, where it was particularly stipulated, that the Spanish Netherlands should be left to the archduke." They alleged, that "the French king governed Flanders as his own, though under the name of his grandson, and sent great numbers of troops thither to fright them: That he had seized the city and citadel of Liège, had possessed himself of several places in the archbishopric of Cologne, and maintained troops in the country of Wolfenbuttel, in order to block up the Dutch on all sides; and caused his resident to give in a memorial, wherein he threatened the States to act against them, if they refused complying with the contents of that memorial."

The Queen's declaration of war is grounded upon the grand alliance, as this was upon the unjust usurpations and encroachments of the French king; whereof the instances produced are, "his keeping in possession a great part of the Spanish dominions, seizing Milan and the Spanish Low Countries, making himself master of Cadiz, &c. And instead of giving satisfaction in these points, his putting an indignity and affront on Her Majesty and kingdoms, by declaring the pretended Prince of Wales, K. of England, &c." which last was the only personal quarrel we had in the war; and even this was positively denied by France, that king being willing to acknowledge Her Majesty.

I think it plainly appears by both declarations, that England ought no more to have been a principal in this war, than Prussia, or any other power, who came afterwards into that alliance. Holland was first in the danger, the French troops being at that time just at the gates of Nimeguen. But the complaints made in our declaration, do all, except the last, as much or more concern almost every prince in Europe.

For, among the several parties who came first or last into this confederacy, there were few but who, in proportion, had more to get or to lose, to hope or to fear, from the good or ill success of this war, than we. The Dutch took up arms to defend themselves from immediate ruin; and by a successful war, they proposed to have a larger extent of country,