A History of the Four Georges, Volume IIMcCarthy, Justin
History
A History of the Four Georges, Volume II
McCarthy, Justin
Great Britain -- History -- 1714-1837; Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1714-1837
The convention was submitted to Parliament and made known to the
country. The reception it got was just what might have been expected.
The one general cry was that the agreement gave up or put aside every
serious claim made by England. Spain had not renounced her right of
search; the boundaries of England's new colonies had not been defined;
not a promise was made by Spain that the Spanish officials who had
imprisoned and tortured unoffending British subjects should be
punished, or even brought to any manner of trial. In the heated temper
of the public the whole convention seemed an inappropriate and highly
offensive farce. On February 23d the sheriffs of the City of London
presented to the House of Commons a petition against the convention.
The petition expressed the great concern and surprise of the citizens
of London "to find by the convention lately concluded between his
Majesty and the King of Spain that the Spaniards are so far from giving
up their (as we humbly apprehend) unjust pretension of a right to visit
and search our ships on the seas of America that this pretension of
theirs is, among others, referred to the future regulation and decision
of plenipotentiaries appointed on each side, whereby we apprehend it is
in some degree admitted." The petition referred to the "cruel
treatment of the English sailors whose hard fate has thrown them into
the {164} hands of the Spaniards," and added, with a curious mixture of
patriotic sentiment and practical, business-like selfishness, that "if
this cruel treatment of English seamen were to be put up with, and no
reparation demanded, it might have the effect"--of what, does the
reader think?--"of deterring the seamen from undertaking voyages to the
seas of America without an advance of wages, which that trade or any
other will not be able to support."
[Sidenote: 1739--Carteret's attack]
The same petition was presented to the House of Lords by the Duke of
Bedford. Lord Carteret moved that the petitioners should be heard by
themselves, and, if they should desire it, by counsel. It was agreed,
after some debate, that the petitioners should be heard by themselves
in the first instance, and that if afterwards they desired to be heard
by counsel their request should be taken into consideration. Lord
Chesterfield in the course of the debate contrived ingeniously to give
a keen stroke to the convention while declaring that he did not presume
as yet to form any opinion on it, or to anticipate any discussion on
its merits. "I cannot help," he said, "saying, however, that to me it
is a most unfavorable symptom of its being for the good of the nation
when I see so strong an opposition made to it out-of-doors by those who
are the most immediately concerned in its effects."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account