Calendar of Treasury Books, Volume 20, 1705-1706. Originally published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1952.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying and sponsored by the Arts and Humanities Research Council. All rights reserved.
The first estimate was for the Guards and Garrisons, a term which covered the Household Troops and the Home Defence Force, plus a Sea Service Force (Marines in a sense) the independent Companies in the Plantations and the General Staff, Contingencies and Invalids. This Estimate had now taken on quite a stereotyped form. The first item, Household Troops or the Home Defence Force, included four Troops of Guards and the Royal Regiment of Horse Guards, in all 1,147 men ; two Regiments of Dragoons (the Queen's and Essex's), in all 814 men ; five Regiments of Foot (Royal Scots, Coldstream, Fuziliers, Mordaunt's and Lucas's) in all 5,160 men ; making a total of 7,121. The six Regiments for Sea Service made up 5,004 men (Rivers, Rooke, Lord Paston and, in the West Indies, Handaside, Livesay, Whetham) ; the four Independent Companies in New York, one in Bermudas and one in Newfoundland, came to 600 men. This made a total Home Defence, Expeditionary and Plantations Force of 12,725 men, to which was to be added the gunners in 36 tiny forts and Garrisons round the English coasts, 5,000 Invalids and the body of General Officers or General Staff. With the item of Contingencies the total Estimate for this composite Force, styled invariably Guards and Garrisons, came to 357,000l. for the year, a figure which was identical with that for the preceding year and which in fact had come to be practically stationary.
The second Estimate was for the Army operating in conjunction with the Allies in the Low Countries. This comprised two separate Establishments, the first for 40,000 men and the second for 10,000 troops of Augmentation. The 40,000 men were composed roughly half of English or "Subject" troops and half of Foreign mercenaries. The English or "Subject" troops comprised 5 Regiments of Horse (Lumley, Wood, Cadogan, Windham and Schomberg) of in all 2,195 men ; 2 Regiments of Dragoons (Lord John Hay and Ross) of in all 1,078 men ; and 15 Regiments of Foot (Royal, Churchill, Webb, Lord North and Grey, Howe, Earl of Derby, Frederick Hamilton, Scots Fuziliers, Ingoldsby, Tatton, Ferguson, Temple, Meredith, Elliott, Evans) of in all 14,937 men ; thus making the total English or "Subject" contingent up to 18,210 men.
The Foreign contingent or part of the 40,000 men comprised 6,000 Danes, 2,532 Prussians, 3,080 Hessians, 9,225 Hanoverians and a Regiment of Hanoverian Foot Guards of 775 men, making together 21,612 men. Combined with the English or "Subject" Troops they made up a total of 39,822 men ; the English or Subject part being paid according to the English rates of pay, whereas the Foreign part was paid according to treaty. But both parts of this estimate were equally on the English Establishment and were paid entirely by England.
Taken together with the items of General Staff, Contingencies, forage and waggon money for the English or "Subject" troops and with two fixed items of 20,000l. for bread waggons for the whole force and 20,000l. for forage, waggon money and recruit money for the Foreign troops the total Estimate for the 40,000 men for the year 1705 came to 885,193l. 3s. 6d. as against 884,072l. 2s. 6d. for 39,971 men in 1704, not including subsidies nor extraordinaries. This estimate was practically identical with that for the preceding year the slight automatic increase being due to the exchange with Flanders having fallen from 10 guilders 11 stivers in 1704 to 10 guilders 10 stivers in 1705.
In the annual Estimate for the remainder of the war the item of 40,000 men came to assume almost as fixed or stereotyped a character as did the item of Guards and Garrisons. But as far as British financial or parliamentary history is concerned it presented a far more complicated problem from the point of view of Treasury control and Exchequer audit procedure. This complication arose from the peculiar nature or provisions of the several treaties which were entered into in order to procure the requisite number of subsidiary or foreign troops. Both Great Britain and the States General hired foreign troops in order to eke out their own numbers, hiring them jointly in some cases and separately in others.
The confusion and want of method in these Treaties arose from the dual position occupied by Wm. III as King of England and as Stadtholder of Holland. The intimate relationship between the two countries under his leadership resulted in financial arrangements in which much was left unexpressed and much was taken for granted as in good faith. After his death the position became still more confused. In some cases the States General negotiated Treaties of subvention or Subsidy on their own behalf, in others on behalf of themselves and Queen Anne jointly, in others again Anne negotiated independently as for herself alone. In the latter cases where Queen Anne negotiated independently the obligation was solely British. In the other cases it was partly British and partly Dutch. In both cases or types of treaty the financial obligation, as defined therein, fell on the House of Commons from the moment the House accepted the estimate submitted by the executive. Usually before accepting such estimate the House of Commons requested to see the text of the treaties in question but such a request did not imply that the House of Commons claimed the right of approving treaties. The right of treaty making was left unchallenged in the hands of the Sovereign and all that the House of Commons said, after reading the text of a treaty, was "we will help your Majesty to carry out this treaty : we will find the necessary supply to enable your Majesty to carry it out." Not infrequently such Resolution of the House was retrospective in its effect. It carried back to the moment any subvention treaty came into operation by the marching of the subvention troops or from the commencement date of a subsidy as fixed in a subsidy treaty.
In those cases in which Wm. III or Anne had negotiated independently of the States General the financial obligation of the British Government was plain and gave rise to no subsequent dispute, save as to date of actual notice of termination. But in regard to those treaties which the States General negotiated as for themselves and Anne jointly or where they and Queen Anne negotiated jointly with a third power on a fifty-fifty basis, half share for the States General and half share for Queen Anne, there was an inherent and lamentable lack of precision and every possibility of a subsequent dispute, such as ultimately blazed out in the recriminations over the Treaty of Utrecht.
In view of later developments, financial and political, it becomes necessary to elucidate the financial provisions and obligations imposed upon the British Treasury when the English administration acted in conjunction with the States General under these joint treaties.
(1) the first or original group which fixed the alliance and the respective quotas of Troops to be furnished by the members of the Alliance and the subsidiary Treaties relating to the providing of those quotas.
The first group, relating to the formation of the Triple Alliance, consisted of a series of five treaties or conventions which led up to or resulted from the main Treaty of 7 September 1701 between Wm. III, the States General and the Emperor Leopold I. As far as Great Britain is concerned this group of treaties centred entirely round the 40,000 men which was the first and chief item of the British contribution to the allied Forces.
The main treaty of 7 September 1701 had constituted the Triple alliance in a general form only, but when William III communicated the text of it to the House of Commons through the mouth of Secretary Vernon he also gave to the House the details of the respective quotas of Troops which had been agreed to be furnished by him, the Emperor and the States General.
That the Emperor should furnish 90,000 men to act against France, consisting of 66,000 Foot and 24,000 Horse and Dragoons, not including the rest of his troops that will remain in Hungary or other parts of the Emperor's hereditary countries.
(a) The treaty of defensive alliance dated at Copenhagen, 15 June 1701, o.s., for 10 years confirming or renewing for 10 years the previous defensive alliances of 3 November 1690 and 3 December 1696 between Wm. III, the States General and Frederick IV, King of Denmark.
Under this Treaty Wm. III and the States General agreed to pay to the King of Denmark a subsidy of 300,000 crowns a year payable quarterly in good Bank money at Hamburg from the date of the signing and for all the time of the war with France.
In case of peace with France before or after the marching of the Danish troops then either a quarter's subsidy plus levy money should be paid to Frederick or a year's subsidy plus a quarter of the levy money.
Furthermore, England and the States General agreed jointly to pay up in good money of Holland at Amsterdam the balance of subsidy due to Denmark under the previous treaty of 3 December 1696. And still further Wm. III (for England) promised to pay to Frederick any arrears due to him under the Treaty of 1689 for 7,000 troops sent to Ireland.
Turning to the coming war Frederick undertook to
provide 3,000 Horse
to enter the service of Great Britain and States General who were jointly to pay the levy money at specified rates and the pay and entertainment at the same rates as the States General paid their Forces.
There was hardly one of these monetary clauses which did not ultimately lead to misunderstanding, but in effect for the period of the War the item of subsidised Danish Troops in English pay remained fixed at 6,000 men (as half of the total 12,000 Danes) at a round annual cost of 116,000l. In the Estimate for 1705 the figure stands at 116,282l. 15s. 0d. But to this is to be added the actual Subsidy itself to the King of Denmark viz. 150,000 cr. Bank money of Hamburg. This item stood quite apart from the troops' pay. In the English Treasury records it did not form part of the estimate for the 40,000 men.
The Treaty with Sweden was practically of no effect as far as the finance of the War was concerned It provided that Wm. III and the States General should without delay pay to the King of Sweden 200,000 Imperial dollars to be accounted as part of the succours he may demand of them by virtue of former treaties.
The Treaty between Wm. III, the States General and the King of Prussia was more important. It was dated at the Hague 30 December 1701, London 9/20 January 170. Under this agreement the King of Prussia entered the Triple Alliance. By clause 9 the treaty imposed a contingent financial liability on the King of Great Britain and the States General for forage and for any difference of exchange in the matter of the Emperor's payments for a subsidised force of 8,000 men furnished by Prussia to the Emperor. By the succeeding clause No. 10 the King of Prussia agreed to furnish 5,000 seasoned and well provided troops to the King of Great Britain and the States General without demanding levy money.
The financial clauses relating to the payment of this body are contained in the supplementary Convention appended to this treaty and printed in full in C.J. XIII, 853 and Lamberti I, 710-3. It specified that the Force should consist of two Regiments of Horse of in all 874 men and five Regiments of Foot of in all 4,255 men, making together 5,129 men ; to be paid half by the King of Great Britain and the other half by the States General as speedy and on the same foot with the troops of the King of Prussia which were in the service of the States General in the last war. The pay to commence when the troops entered the borders of the States General, but a month's pay for carriage money to be paid as soon as they were on the march.
In the British Treasury accounts this liability appears as a yearly item of about 43,000l. for the pay of a force of 2,532 Prussians. In the 1705 Estimates it amounts to 43,018l. 18s. 6d : The liability with regard to the agio or difference of exchange for the Prussian troops in Austrian pay appears periodically, but as a variable item. It did not concern the Prussian troops in the pay of Great Britain or the States General but was nevertheless an item calling incessantly for provision at the hands of the British House of Commons as an extraordinary of the war. The same remark applies to the extraordinary provision of forage for these Prussian troops in Austrian pay when quartered on the Lower Rhine and the Moselle. It is an item which does not appear as an estimate for the coming year or campaign but as a separate demand in the Extraordinaries of the War in succeeding or subsequent years i.e. after its amount had been ascertained.
(3) The Treaty with Hesse Cassel was made between
the King of Great Britain and the States General on
the one part and the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel of
the other part for the supply of
1 Regiment of Horse in all 6,000 men.
2 Regiments of Dragoons in all 6,000 men.
5 " " in all 6,000 men.
to be paid half by Great Britain and half by the States General on the same foot as the said States General pay their own Troops "and as soon as the other foreign troops of other Princes, and they shall not at any time be more than three months in arrear" and so also for waggon money and other equipage : two months' notice before being sent back or one month's marching money at the end of the war.
Two articles of this treaty stipulated for a Subsidy of 250,000 livres, money of Holland, to be paid yearly by the King of England and the States General for the first four years of the war "to commence with this present year"  and thereafter for the remainder of the war to be 125,000 livres payable yearly every year by way of anticipation. The consideration for this subsidy was "for what is above mentioned [meaning apparently the employment of the said extra 3,000 men]. And towards the support of the charges which his Highness the Landgrave will be obliged to be at at present there shall be advanced to his said Highness as soon as the ratification shall be exchanged 400,000 livres to be discounted on the first two years" [of the said subsidy].
(4) The Treaty between the Queen and the States General and the Elector of Treves dated the Hague 6 May 1702 provided that the Elector should maintain during the war 8 Battalions to garrison Ehrenbreitstein, Coblenz and Treves. The Queen and the States General were to pay him a yearly subsidy of 50,000 crowns, one half by the Queen and the other by the States General : the first quarterly payment to be made on ratification and the money to be paid at the Hague or at Amsterdam.
(5) The remaining treaty relating to the 40,000 British quota was made by Queen Anne after Wm. III's death and after the actual declaration of war. It was made with the Elector of Hanover and the Duke of Brunswick Luneburg. The Dutch did not participate in it. Under its terms the Hanoverians were to furnish 10,000 men (2 Regiments of Horse = 700, 12 Regiments of Foot=9,300) to be paid and entertained in the same manner as the troops which the said Elector and Duke now have in the service of the States General viz. 203,715 gilders 8 stivers Dutch money for a long month of 6 weeks=42 days. The detailed Establishment was appended to the Convention and the money was to be paid regularly at Rotterdam every fortnight commencing 1 June 1702.
This treaty was renewed yearly and at the time of the renewal in 1703 it was found that there was one Regiment of Foot short, the total men being then reckoned at 9,225. Accordingly an extra Prussian Regiment of 775 men was taken in to make up the full 10,000 men. In the succeeding renewal which operated for the 1705 Campaign the Hanoverian contingent was restored to its full numbers of 10,000 men by substituting a Regiment of Hanoverian Foot Guards for the extra Prussian Regiment.
The composite force thus hired and paid for by the British Treasury as a part of the British quota of 40,000 men and making up as abovesaid a total of 21,612 men had come into pay from different dates as follows
|Danes||6,000 came into pay 21 December 1701|
|Prussians||2,532 " " " 22 January 1701-2|
|Hessians||3,080 " " " 8 March 1701-1|
|Hanover||10,000 " " " 21 May 1702|
For the financial year 1704 September to 1705 September the whole of the above Force was therefore in pay, which meant full pay because each subsidised Prince was to keep his numbers complete and the treaties consequently made no mention of muster rolls. As against the total estimate ut supra, p. vi., of 885,193l. 3s. 6d. the statement of payments infra p. xv., shows only total payments of 701,485l. 15s. 8d. thus leaving a shortage or debt of 183,707l. 7s. 8d. on this head for the year 1705.
The Troops Of Augmentation.
The proposal for an augmentation of the British and Dutch quotas of troops was made by the Dutch in November 1702 immediately upon the close of the first campaign. The correspondence between the States General and Queen Anne relative to the project is printed in the Commons Journals XIV, pp. 96-101. The Dutch were apprehensive for the next spring campaign and at first pressed the Queen to increase her contingent without offering more on their side than a vague promise that they would endeavour to augment "likewise." They proposed an augmentation of 25,000 men without committing themselves to any specific share in it. Queen Anne's reply was that Parliament had settled the number of the Troops for the coming year and that the forms of the House made it useless to propose an increase of the Forces "without coming to a Prorogation, which would utterly destroy all that is already done."
As the Dutch pressed their demand the Queen sent
the whole correspondence to the House on the 4th
January 1702-3, and on the following day the Commons
that if her Majesty shall think it necessary to enter into any further negotiation for the increasing of the Forces which are to act in conjunction with the Forces of the States General this House will enable her Majesty to make good the same. (C.J. XIV, 103. 3 January, 1702-3).
Negotiations were taken in hand at once but it was not until the 15th of March that a Treaty was signed at the Hague with the States General providing for an Augmentation Force of 20,000 men to be financed half by the States General and half by Great Britain. The delay in agreeing the terms of the Treaty was attributable partly to Marlborough's being detained in England by the death of his only son but mainly to the difficulty of fixing with the Dutch the composition of the new Force. Lamberti (II, 343-8) has preserved two forms or drafts which set out separate lists of Troops, lists which differ from each other as also from that partly outlined in the Treaty and finally from that which was actually adopted by the House of Commons as the basis for its vote of Supply (C.J. XIV, pp. 215, 228).
The reason for these draft discrepancies is that the Queen or the British Treasury did not submit to the House any estimate or demand for the Augmentation Troops at all for the 1703 campaign. So many of the Troops of Augmentation as were actually employed during that campaign were financed piecemeal and from hand to mouth by the Treasury out of the total war Supply voted by the House for the year 1703. As a result the composition and the cost of the 20,000 men did not come before the House of Commons until November of that year, that is, when the 1703 campaign was over and the Estimates for the coming 1704 campaign were under consideration. By that time the composition of the new Forces, the Troops of Augmentation, or the 20,000 men, had become stabilised and a certain re-grouping had taken place in the subsidiary Treaties which had centred round the originating or main Treaty of 15 March 1702-3. Each of the two contracting Powers, Great Britain and the States General, made specific subsidiary Treaties with specific separate States for the supply of men to go towards the total of the 20,000 and accepted specific financial obligations under such treaties ; but all the men contracted for were thrown into the common pot ; and equally so all these subsidiary treaties were supposed to be ingredients in the same common pot.
As a consequence troops appear on the British Establishment as if they had been specifically bargained for by Great Britain in certain subsidiary Treaties duly laid before Parliament, and similarly the Troops comprising the remainder of the 20,000 men were on the Dutch Establishment as if specifically bargained for by the Dutch in their own separate Subsidy Treaties. But as against this mere working division of the two parallel Establishments the Estimates submitted yearly to the British House of Commons set out roughly the components or detailed complements of the whole 20,000 men and the House voted supply for a moiety thereof as if the whole Force were comprised in a single Establishment and were accounted for in a single account. This was a complete fiction although a convenient one.
The originating Treaty, that of 15 March 1702-3 between the Queen and the Dutch, had set out that the additional 20,000 men should be "raised or agreed for where it may be done" but at the same time it stated that towards the total 20,000 the States General had "already" raised at Liege three Regiments of Foot and one of Dragoons and had also 'transacted' (or had begun negotiations) with foreign Princes for three Regiments of Foot from the Prince Bishop of Munster, one Regiment [of Foot] from the Bishop of Osnaburgh, one Regiment [of Foot] from East Friezland.
These items remained as permanent constituents of the Augmentation Forces and with one exception they stayed on the Dutch Establishment and never appear in the British Army Paymaster's accounts at all. That exception is the Regiment of Dragoons under Henry de Cort, Baron Waleff. The decision to take this Regiment over and put it on the British Establishment was probably made by Marlborough himself for he refers to the Regiment more than once in his despatches. The Convention made with Baron Waleff for the hiring of his Regiment was dated 24 February 1703 (old style) and from that date his Regiment was paid as on the British Establishment. The transfer became operative at once, for Waleff's Dragoons appear in the British Paymaster General's accounts as from 14/24 February 1702-3. According to Waleff's own petition presented to the House of Commons in May 1713 he had served 11 years as a Colonel, two years as a Brigadier and two years and four months as a Major General (Commons Journals XVII, p. 357). Such a statement might seem to ante-date the transfer. But it is clear from the statement on p. xxiii infra that the Regiment was raised early in 1703 so that it can only mean that he was Colonel from 1702 to 1713.
The financial arrangements connected with this body
of Augmentation Troops were as vague and ill defined
as they possibly could be. In the principal Treaty of
15 March 1702-3 between the Queen and the States
General, Queen Anne undertook to supply six [ultimately
four] Regiments of her own subjects without [charging]
any levy money and to transport them to Holland at
her own expense. With regard to the miscellaneous
body of hired Troops the Treaty laid down that
the said Queen and the States General shall pay each their moiety of the Levy money and other charges of the Troops to be raised or negotiated.
And as to the pay of the said 20,000 men (comprehending therein the pay of the six Regiments before mentioned upon the foot of English pay) they shall divide it between them the best they can, each charging himself with a moiety of the said pay.
In all this there is not a word about musters or about audit or about appropriation accountability. Each subsidised Prince was supposed to keep his men fully recruited but no muster rolls were ever produced to the auditors of the British Exchequer to show that the Regiments were full. Yet the payments made by the British Paymaster General were always as for full Regiments. And as it was with the question of pay so also was it with the question of Extraordinaries, viz. the items of forage, waggon money and recruiting of men and recruiting of horses. The Dutch kept and adjusted the account of these items and periodically submitted particulars to the British Paymaster General of the Forces Abroad together with a certificate from Slingelandt (Secretary to the Dutch Council of State) that the States General had ordered payment of their moiety according to that account. Thereupon the British Paymaster General paid his moiety of the total without demur. He had no control whatever over the actual items themselves so as to keep them within the ambit of an Estimate or of a Vote. The account of the Extraordinaries was sent to him by the Dutch long after the event and as a consequence the House of Commons was not infrequently asked to vote special items or figures of extraordinaries with nothing to guide them save an account sent in from abroad and unsupported by vouchers in accordance with the methods of British Exchequer accountancy or audit.
All the payments made by the British Paymaster General under any of these Establishments (whether of the 40,000 men or of the 20,000 Augmentation troops or of the Troops in Spain) were made by his Deputies abroad ; and in the case of the joint accounts which they ran with the Dutch it is impossible to discern from the Declared Accounts whether those Deputies paid the British moieties en bloc to the Dutch Treasurer or actually themselves paid away the respective individual amounts to the respective payee Princes, Bishops, etc. The Declared Accounts simply enumerate payments without specifying to whom, and refer to acquittances without specifying by whom.
In this connection there is a very illuminating letter from Marlborough to Slingelandt which shows how clearly Marlborough appreciated the accountancy difficulties as sure to arise from such slipshod arrangements.
I have desired Mr. Slingelandt to send me the particular Establishments of the several corps and as soon as I receive them I shall be able to see what proportion any of them bear to our four English Regiments. But to make all this matter easy and most satisfactory to our friends in England it will be absolutely necessary that a treaty be signed by Mr. Stanhope and the Deputies of the States wherein not only all the Troops of the Augmentation agreed for by the States [in their several subsidiary Treaties] apart must be named, but the respective Establishments likewise annexed and the levy money mentioned, where any is allowed. When this is done we may afterwards make an accommodation or exchange between some of those Troops and the four English battalions.
I must also observe to you with regard to the 2,000 [? 520] Danes that for the Foot we take them upon the Treaty of 1701 but for the Dragoons I cannot answer giving them any money until the States have made a particular Treaty for them : and they must likewise be inserted with their Establishment in the Treaty with Mr. Stanhope as part of the Augmentations."
Mr. Sweet [the British Deputy Paymaster in Holland] I hope will have been with you since the writing of your letter and satisfied you upon all the demands for the Troops according to the directions sent him from hence the 3rd instant ; whereof you have here an extract, being by the first orders limited to the Troops of Holstein and Saxe-Gotha, which were thought the most pressing ; he having then received from England but what was barely necessary for the advance to those Troops.
You have [herein] likewise another extract by which he is directed to attend you to know what advances are wanting on our part for the 2,000 [? 520] Danes that he may by the first post give notice thereof into England in order to have the proper remittances from thence.
I don't know how we shall settle what you mention of some of the Troops, and particularly those of Munster, refusing to receive their money otherwise than from the Paymaster of the States [General] : but if they should insist upon it you may pay them their whole demands and we can allow it you again in the pay of our four English Regiments which make part of the augmentation.
You will please to let me have answers to the several particulars in the enclosed memorial at your first leisure, that we may be able to make an estimate of the whole augmentation for our friends in England.
Walef : the like Establishment for this Regiment and a computation of broken musters [or first month's pay] with the respective days of their entering into pay. It does not appear by the capitulation how many Troops this Regiment is to consist of.
Besides all this it will be absolutely necessary for our justification in England that Mr. Stanhope sign a treaty with the Deputies wherein all the Troops of Augmentation that have treated with the States apart must be particularly named, with the levy money, where any is allowed : and the respective Establishments and commencements must be annexed.
Some of the details and figures asked for by Marlborough are contained in a Treasury Board Paper LXXXV, No. 37, which although drawn up (form) on the 27 March 1703 cannot have been communicated to Marlborough until after May 8.
This paper supplies information only for those Treaties which the States General had negotiated separately. These particular treaties were not submitted to the British Parliament and consequently are not entered in the Journals of either House.
but from and after 29 July 1703 all these Regiments with the exception of Waleff's Dragoons disappear from the accounts of the British Paymaster General. From that date onwards the Declared Accounts deal only with the following items as far as the 20,000 Troops of Augmentation are concerned.
It is impossible to dress this list either by wholes or by halves in such a way as to make a clean cut 10,000 moiety of a 20,000 total. At the outside the British Paymaster General had no more than 9,531 on his payroll. The account therefore as between the British Paymaster General and the Dutch Treasurer must have been squared by a transfer entry from him to the Dutch Treasurer so as to make the contributions of the two States conform to the fifty fifty principle. But it is only rarely that such a transfer item can be detected in the British Declared Accounts. See one instance on p. clxxv of the Introduction to Vol. XVIII. Whatever system of adjustment was arrived at as between the British Treasury and the Dutch Treasury it must have been arrived at and carried through by the British Deputy Paymasters in Flanders and only the resultant figures can have been posted by them to the Paymaster General in London.
This explanation would account for the fact that the Estimates for the 20,000 Troops of Augmentation continued to be presented to the House of Commons in the original form long after the allocation of the component items had been drastically changed. As far as the Estimates were concerned the details did not really matter so long as a full total of 20,000 men was set out and the Queen's moiety was voted and supplied.
Furthermore this would explain why the Executive (in this instance the Secretary at War or the Secretary of State) only submitted to the House of Commons the Treaties which related to the Troops on the British pay roll, that is to say the Holstein, Saxe-Gotha, Hesse and Palatinate Treaties.
There is, as will have been seen, one item which stands out as an exception to the above statement. No explanation was ever given to the House of Commons of the position of the Regiment of Waleff's Dragoons. Initially it had been included by the Dutch among the four Regiments which they had agreed for in Lige. It ought therefore not to have occurred in the British Paymaster General's accounts. But apparently from the outset Marlborough took it over and it was paid as on the British Establishment from 14 February 1702-3. In spite of the fact that it is never named in the Estimates which were submitted annually to the House of Commons it appears regularly in the Paymaster General's accounts. This anomalous position of the Regiment may account for the harsh treatment which it received at the end of the war. The Regiment separated itself from those of the Allies who refused to obey the Commander in chief but none the less Baron Waleff did not thereafter receive any pay in the Paymaster General's Office on any Establishment although, as already stated, he petitioned the House of Commons in May 1713 showing that out of the 11 years during which he had led his Regiment of Dragoons he had served two years as a Brigadier and over two years as a Major General (see Commons Journals XVII, pp. 357, 417).
In this particular case the Convention or Treaty which had been originally made with him (? by the Dutch alone) on the 22nd or 24th February 1703, old style, although frequently referred to in the Paymaster's accounts was never submitted to the House of Commons and is therefore not to be found in the Journals, nor is any specific sum assigned in the Estimates for the Regiment. According to the abstract supra p. xxiii, the subsistence of the Regiment amounted to slightly over 14,000l. per an. The sums actually paid, according to the Paymaster General's accounts were
|1705 Subsistence (Fox)||7,117||11||5|
|1705 Subsistence (Brydges)||7,327||2||10|
Great Britain and the States General are to pay the Duke 100,000 Crowns as compensation for the expense of the Augmentation and are to transport and convoy his Troops viz. two Regiments of Dragoons of 561 men each and two Regiments of Foot of 881 men each ; paying six weeks' pay on arrival and two months [or 12 weeks] on dismissal : and further to pay recruit money.
|1703 march money and pay from 5 June|
Great Britain and the States General to pay levy money and subsistence for a total force of 2,600 men (two Regiments of Dragoons and two of Foot, previously in the service of the King of Prussia) paying one month's pay down and one month's pay on the return or dismissal.
|1703 from 8 June : pay||15,740||19||3|
For a Regiment of Foot of 870 men which the Landgraf promises to add to the 9,000 men which he has already agreed to furnish to the Allies under a Treaty of the preceding year 7 February 1702, old style. Great Britain and the States General to pay levy money at the rate of 25 Dutch croner per man or 21,000 crowns in all. The established pay of the Regiment to be 14,111 guilders 12.0 stivers per long month of 42 days or 122,621 guilders 15 stivers per an. or 11,678l. 5s. 3d. sterling at an exchange of 10 guilders 10 stivers per pound sterling.
|1703 from July 30||5,492||16||10|
for 2,600 Foot in four Battalions : instead of levy money Great Britain and the States General to pay at the Hague or Amsterdam the sum of 40,000 Crowns, one half thereof on ratification and the remainder in three months thereafter : and they shall continue the same payment of 40,000 Crowns a year by way of Subsidy by quarterly payments so long as the said Forces shall remain in her Majesty's and the States' service. (Clause 5) : the Queen and the States are to pay the Elector a further subsidy of 30,000 Crowns per an. by monthly payments from the same date which is to serve for pay, waggons, forage, hospitals, recruits, rewards or any other pretence whatsoever.
The annual Estimate for this Palatine item as part of the 20,000 men was 252,769 guilders 6 stivers exclusive of the moiety Subsidy of 20,000 Crowns (equivalent to 50,000 guilders, or 4,739l. 7s. 0d. sterling). This Subsidy was estimated for separately under the head of Subsidies ; but the two sets of payments were run together in the accounts, the total estimate being 322,321 guilders, 8 stivers or 30,697l. 5s. 6d. sterling. The Force was to march on the 1st April 1704 and the pay was to commence 15 days thereafter.
|Payments by the Paymaster General of the Forces.|
|1703||from May 24 to 24 December||5,017||10||2|
|1704||10,034||4||3||for pay etc.|
|and||1,507||4||11||for arrears of Subsidy.|
As far as the Estimates are concerned no figure was entered for this body in 1703. In the 1704 Estimates the pay was put at 252,769 guilders 6 stivers and the Subsidy moiety at 4,739l. 7s. 0d. sterling. In the 1705 Estimates the pay was put at 30,697l. 5s. 6d. sterling and the Subsidy moiety at 4,761l. 18s. 6d. sterling. The actual payments made by the Paymaster General were as above. It can only be understood that the payment which the Paymaster made in 1703 was derived from moneys issued to him for other services, seeing that no money at all was issued to him in that year for the Palatine Troops.
"Increased in 1705 in the pay of the Palatine Troops, which are to be paid according to their Establishment for the whole year ; whereas in 1704 they had only, in lieu of pay, a subsidy of 2,500 Crowns a month for January, February and March."
|1703 from 14 February||8,722||5||5|
|1703 (from 7 June)||4,675||16||7|
The Forces Employed In The Operations In Spain And Portugal.
The financial obligations which arose from the operations in Spain and Portugal were set out in the defensive alliance concluded at Lisbon on the 16th May 1703 between Queen Anne and the States General of the one hand and Peter, King of Portugal of the other. Under this Treaty, Great Britain and the States General undertook to furnish, arm, pay and recruit 12,000 soldiers for the War on the continent for Portugal and a competent number of ships on the coast of Portugal and for defence of the maritime Provinces of Portugal equal to the enemy ships.
On the same day 16 May 1703 an offensive alliance was made between the Emperor, Queen Anne and the States General of the one part and the King of Portugal of the other part for the purpose of putting the Archduke Charles, the Emperor's second son, upon the throne of Spain. For this offensive war the King of Portugal was not bound to maintain at his own charge more than 12,000 Foot and 3,000 Horse. But besides these 15,000 men he was to raise 13,000 Portuguese (viz. 11,000 Foot and 2,000 Horse), thus making his total native Portuguese Force amount to 28,000 men (23,000 Foot and 5,000 Horse). These last named 13,000 men were to be armed by "the Confederates" and for the charge of this body "the Confederates" were to give to the King of Portugal a million silver Philips, Spanish money (or as commonly called a million Patacoons) yearly as long as the war lasts "as well for their pay as for all other expenses whereof they shall stand in need as well in quarters as in the field."
(Clause 6). The payment of these 1,000,000 silver Philips, Spanish money, (or Pattacoons) shall be made by equal parts divided through all the months of the year ; viz. that part which relates to the pay of the 13,000 men shall begin from the exchange of the ratifications in proportion to the number of men which shall then be raised and as they shall afterwards be raised. But as to that part of the million which belongs to the extraordinary expenses of the Army marched out of their quarters, the payment thereof shall begin from the day the Forces shall march out of their quarters.
But it is agreed that for the payment of the first part of this million there shall be always ready at Lisbon two months' pay ; and for the payment of the second part of this million [i.e. for the extraordinaries] as soon as the army shall march from their quarters two months' pay shall be advanced which shall not be placed to account unless for the last two months of the year.
(Clause 7). But if it shall happen that the King of Portugal shall not have raised all the said 13,000 soldiers, there shall be deducted out of this million of Pattacoons, that part of the pay which shall belong to that number of soldiers who shall not effectively be raised.
(Clause 8). Besides the said 1,000,000 silver Philips which the Confederates are to give every year for the payment of the 13,000 Portuguese soldiers as abovesaid they shall be bound further to give to the King of Portugal 500,000 silver Philips or 500,000 Pattacoons for his preparations of the army and what else is necessary this first year : and they shall deliver this sum of money at the time of the ratification of this Treaty.
(Clause 10). The King of Portugal shall furnish 2,000 horses in Portugal to be bought by the Confederates for their [12,000] foreign Forces in such manner that for each horse to the private soldiers they shall pay 40,000 rials Portuguese money, or as they are called 40 milrees, and for the Officers' horses 60,000 rials of the same money or 60 milrees.
(Clause 12). With the arms for arming 11,000 out of the 13,000 Portuguese which the King of Portugal is to raise there shall be also brought [to Portugal] 10 brass cannon fitted with their carriages, of that size as to carry bullets from 12 to 24 pound weight : and these cannon together with the arms for the 11,000 Portuguese soldiers shall become the King of Portugal's own so as they shall not be required back of him nor the price of them be demanded.
(Clause 13). The Confederates shall take care that there be immediately brought [into Portugal] 4,000 quintals of powder, bought with their own money, each quintal to weigh 128 pounds of Portugal weight for the use of the expedition this first year.
And every following year while the war shall last they shall take care that before the Force march out of their quarters there shall be brought 4,000 other quintals of powder, bought with their own money.
It will be noticed that these financial clauses in the Treaty specify nothing as to any agreed division of monetary liability as between the 'Confederates' that is as between the Emperor, Queen Anne and the States General. The natural arrangement would have been for each of these three Confederate powers to assume one third of the common financial burden. But in the first Estimates submitted to the House of Commons, concurrently with the submission of the text of the Treaty, the Queen's share of liability is expressed as follows
It is clear therefore that the British administration had taken upon its shoulders the Emperor's third share of the Confederates' liability so far as this item of the 13,000 Portuguese Troops was concerned. The explanation of this unequal arrangement is afforded by the documents printed in Lamberti (II 513-520 and Klopp X, 385-392). The British Ambassador and the States' Envoy Extraordinary at Vienna finding that the Emperor could not be induced to shoulder his one third liability, obtained a promise of territorial concessions to be made by Spain to Portugal if and when the Archduke Charles obtained the throne of Spain. The King of Portugal being thus satisfied Queen Anne was content to "advance" the Emperor's one third share on the assurance of a declaration by Count Waldstein and the Admiral of Castile that Spain would pay this one third portion when the Archduke Charles should be in possession of the Kingdom. As the States General would not bear more than its own one third share it fell to Great Britain to make up the balance rather than risk the break down of the negotiations.
The two thirds contributed by Great Britain are therefore to be looked upon as a firm contribution of one third as England's due share and a loan to the Emperor of one other third part on the security put forward by unauthorised persons as if in the name of a non-existent king of a country in which he had not yet set foot.
The matter was only arranged by the 13th September 1703a few weeks before the first Estimate for the Portugal Treaty assistance was submitted to the House of Commons, although it is clear from an entry in Luttrell's Diary (V, 336) that as early as the 7th September it was common talk in town that the Queen would advance the Emperor's share. The preliminary or advance payments of the Subsidy began from the 1st November 1703.
Up to this point I have been dealing with the question of Queen Anne's share of a joint subsidy for 13,000 Portuguese Troops as merely one component in the total Forces intended to be raised in Portugal for the war. (fn. 1)
The cost of the Expeditionary Force to be sent to Portugal stood quite outside this item of Subsidy to King Peter. The Expedition landed at Lisbon in March of the following year 1704 but certain preliminary expenses connected with it had necessarily to be provided out of the funds of the year 1703.
(1) Payments out of the Exchequer to the Paymaster General of the Forces Abroad as moneys issued on account of the Alliances with Portugal (as per the General Abstract of Revenue and Expenditure in p. cxv of the Introduction to Vol. XVIII of this Calendar).
The English Parliament had not made any provision towards such expenditure in the Supply for the year 1703 for the simple reason that the question of the Portuguese alliance had not arisen when those Estimates had been submitted. The Executive therefore had been forced to meet this new or additional expenditure out of the general Supply for 1703, that is to say by utilising any funds that were immediately available even although appropriated. When the Queen referred to this matter at the opening of the succeeding session (9 November 1703, C.J. XIV, p. 211) she spoke as if the extra expenditure had been provided for out of the revenue generally and out of prizes.
I must take notice to you that though no particular provision was made in the last Session either for the charge of our present expedition to Portugal or for that of the Augmentation Troops desired by the States General yet the funds given by Parliament have held out so well and the produce of the Prizes has proved so considerable that you will find the public will not be in debt by reason of either of the additional services.
These optimistic words could only possibly have been true if there had been money which could be actually spared or saved on certain expenditure heads. Failing that contingency there was bound to be a shortage in some one or other of the services with the result later on that a claim for Extraordinaries would be made or that the current floating debt in some or other of the Departments had increased. In this particular instance both these results did follow, as will be seen. But the immediate effect of the Queen's words was that Parliament was absolved from the obligation of calling for an account of the initial expense of the Portugal Expedition, i.e. so much as had been incurred up to the end of the financial year 1703. So that the Estimates for 1704 only looked forward not backward. They did not provide for the above sum of 101,988l. 17s. 4d. which had been diverted from its true or intended appropriation. The sources from which the money had been drawn or diverted are indicated in the table on p. cxvii of the Introduction to Vol. XVIII of this Calendar : but the indications there given are so general that it would be impossible to say which service had been starved in order to pay for the opening phase of the Portugal Expedition.
As to the paying out or the distribution of the money which in this way the Treasury had placed in the hands of the Paymaster General of the Forces Abroad we have two accounts. The first and usual statement is that contained in the Declared Account of the Paymaster General (see pp. clxxvi-clxxix of the above Introduction). According to this account his payments were as follows :
It will be noticed of course that the total of this statement does not agree with the total of the moneys out of the Exchequer put into the Paymaster's hands. The reason for the difference is that the Exchequer statement of Revenue and Expenditure always ran from Michaelmas to Michaelmas whereas the Paymaster General's Declared Account ran from 1 January to the 31st December.
The second statement which we possess is in the form of an account of the moneys issued in years 1703-1710 for the purposes of the war in Spain printed as an Appendix to "An Impartial Enquiry into the Management of the War in Spain." first published in 1712 which reappeared in 1726 in identical form but with a new title page as "The History of the last War in Spain from 1702-1710." The figures are unquestionably drawn from official sources and reproduce exactly the items printed in the present Calendar. There can be little doubt that they were derived from returns made by Treasury officials to precepts from the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the war in Spain.
The first list of the Expeditionary Force was contained in the Army Estimates for the year 1704 which were submitted to the House of Commons on the 19th November 1703. These Estimates set out the details of an Expeditionary Force of 8,015 men as follows (the total Expeditionary Force of 12,000 being divided as to two thirds English and one third Dutch, here again the Queen taking upon herself the Emperor's third part).
The figures of the actual payments differ from the above Estimate in two respects. In the first place the Lord Treasurer made provision out of this 1704 Supply for certain items belonging to the preceding year 1703. For this he had no parliamentary authority. In the second place hardly one of the sub-head totals agrees with the Estimate and the total shows a big exceeding on the Vote.
In the following year's Estimate presented to the House on the 3rd November 1704 as for the service of the year 1705 the Force was increased (as from 25 October 1704) by a Regiment of Dragoons and two Regiments of Foot and by two surgeons and four mates for the Hospital in Portugal as from 25 August 1704 : as follows
There are two Declared accounts for the Army for the year 1705 viz. for Charles Fox for approximately the first half of year and for his successor James Brydges for the remainder of the year. Combining these two accounts in one total and comparing them with the sums directed to them by the Lord Treasurer it will be seen that, as usual, there are discrepancies of detail in the items but no great departure from the total.
The Foreign Subsidies.
Besides or quite separate from the stereotyped items for the three subsistence Establishments (for the 40,000 men for Flanders, the 10,000 Troops of Augmentation and the 8,000 or more men for Portugal) there appear yearly on the Estimates certain items entitled "Subsidies to Foreign Powers" for the purpose of the war and throughout its continuance.
(1) Denmark (by the Treaty of 15 June 1701 supra, p. ix) 300,000 Crowns or Rix Dollars per an. Bank money of Hamburg. The British half of this, viz. 150,000 Crowns, fluctuated between 37,200l. and 36,191l. 10s. 0d. according to the rate of exchange.
The Revenue accounts show Exchequer issues as follows on this head viz. in the account for 1703 of 18,379l. 18s. 0d. issued to the Paymaster General out of the revenue (being only two quarters of the year 1703) and 18,095l. 15s. 0d. for ditto for the year 1702 : and in the account for 1704 of 18,906l. 5s. 0d. for 1704 and 18,675l. for 1703.
for the year 1705 the issues ordered by the Treasury amounted to 18,750l. for 1705 and 18,750l. for 1704. The Declared Accounts show items of 18,750l. and 18,750l. corresponding exactly with the issue figure.
The treaty of 7 February 1702 supra p. xxvii provided for a subsidy of 250,000 livres [guilders] money of Holland for four years certain and thereafter 125,000 livres per an. : payable in advance. The British moiety or 125,000 guilders amounted approximately to 11,900l. per an. according to the exchange.
On this head the successive Revenue accounts
for 1703, 1704 and 1705 shows issues of
3,001l. 8s. 2d. in 1703 to Fox and
2,812l. 10s. 0d. to the Earl of Ranelagh for two quarters to Xmas 1702 making together 5,813l. 18s. 2d.
and 2,908l. 11s. 11d. for 1704
plus 1,488l. 1s. 10d. for 1703
and 2,906l. 19s. 6d. for 1705
plus 2,907l. for 1704.
The Declared accounts of the Paymaster General
show a payment by him of 5,813l. 18s. 8d. on
this account for the year ended at Xmas 1703
and 5,813l. 19s. 9d. for the year ended at Xmas 1704
and 5,883l. 3s. 3d. for the year ended at Xmas 1705.
The subsidy to Savoy arose out of the Treaty of Alliance made at Turin on the 25 Oct./5 Nov. 1703 between the Emperor and the Duke of Savoy. As a matter of fact Victor Amadeus had declared war on France and Spain on the 3rd October, that is to say three weeks or more before the signing of the Treaty of Alliance. The Treaty itself is an extraordinary document. Besides promising an assistance of 20,000 men the Emperor undertook 'de far' (to bring it about) that England and Holland would pay to the Duke of Savoy as from 3 October 1703 the monthly sum of 80,000 scudi or bank Ducats and in addition a sum of 100,000 scudi as towards his war expenses in the first year. The monthly subsidy was to be paid by two months in advance and the 100,000 scudi were to be made immediately available by bills on Turin.
In this Treaty the Emperor quotes no authorization whatever for his undertaking. But when Queen Anne made her own Treaty with the Duke of Savoy on the 4th August 1704 at Turin she promised to ratify and guarantee every point in the abovesaid Treaty between the Emperor and Savoy made at Turin 8 November 1703 "her said Majesty engaging in general in all the obligations and guarantees contained in the same treaty." (C.J. XIV, 397).
(clause 7). "Her Majesty of Great Britain, to give his royal Highness real proofs of her friendship and of the interest she has in his preservation, and to furnish him with means to contribute the better to the good of the common cause, obliges herself to send him a succour of 66,666 Crowns at once only [i.e. in one payment] for the first charge of this war ; and further she settles for him a monthly subsidy of 53,333 Crowns that she promises always to pay punctually every two months beforehand in the city of Turin, reckoning the Crown after the rate of 82 pence current money of Piedmont ; and this to commence from the 3rd October 1703 being the day of his Royal Highness's declaration [of war] against France and to continue during the course of this present war and two months after."
(clause 8). In consideration of the subsidy mentioned in the foregoing article and of that of 26,666 Crowns which the States General engage to pay by the Treaty which his Royal Highness is to conclude with them (the whole making 80,000 Crowns per month) his Royal Highness obliges himself constantly to keep on foot a body of his own Troops of 15,000 men viz. 12,000 Foot and 3,000 Horse, and more if he can, as long as the present war continues : of which body of 15,000 men he shall send every year into the field as great a number as the interest of the common cause requires.
Incidentally it will be noticed that these figures preserve the arrangement under which Queen Anne shouldered the Emperor's share or contribution, thus paying two thirds as against the one third paid by the States General.
This Treaty was not submitted to the House of Commons until November 1704 in connection with the Estimates for the coming year 1705. This explains the fact that there was no parliamentary provision for the Savoy Subsidy before the 1705 Estimates.
This second item however is only for arrears of Subsidy as from Savoy's declaration of war (3 October 1703). It still leaves out the 100,000 scudi for preparatory war expenses which the Emperor had promised would be advanced "immediately" by the Queen and the States General.
|Vol. XIX. p. cxlv.||l.||s.||d.|
|on account of alliances with the Duke of Savoy||215,961||18||5|
The Paymaster General's account for the same year 1704 claims allowance for 203,355l. 19s. 7d. paid for the Queen's proportion of subsidy to the Duke of Savoy. It seems clear that the first payment made to the Duke was in December 1703 as on account of the preparatory succour (Treasury Calendar, Vol. XX, p. 489) and that the payment of the monthly succour did not begin until February 1703-4. The quarter thus left unpaid for the initial period 3 October 1703 to 2 January 1703-4 was provided as an extraordinary on the above Estimate for the year 1705. The Paymaster General's figure of 203,355l. 19s. 7d. as above can therefore only cover so much of the year 1704 as extended from February 1703-4 to 24 December 1704. This is due to the fact that the estimates for 1704 did not include any item at all for the Duke of Savoy although the House addressed the Queen on 30 November 1703 assuring her that they would provide for making good such alliances as she had made or shall make with the Duke of Savoy (C.J. XIV, p. 241). All the payments above referred to were made on the strength of this promise but without any actual provision of funds by Parliament.
For the year 1705 the Revenue figures show issues to the Paymaster General of 225,419l. 1s. 10d. as paid to Charles Fox and 50,428l. 4s. 1d. as paid to James Brydges on account of subsidy to the Duke of Savoy. The Declared accounts of those two Paymasters show payments by them respectively of 89,200l. 7s. 6d. and 75761l. 10s. 9d. or together 164,961l. 18s. 3d. for the year ended 24 December 1705.
This subsidy arose out of the Treaty signed at Berlin on the 24th November 1704 which Marlborough had negociated with a view to repairing the desperate situation of Victor Amadeus of Savoy. It provided that the King of Prussia should send to Italy a body of 8,000 men (6,000 Foot and 2,000 Horse) for service in 1705. Queen Anne undertook to pay her [moiety] quota part of 300,000 Crowns per annum or 25,000 Crowns per month payable at Amsterdam in the current money of Holland, not doubting that the States General would join in and pay the like quota, "the exchange whereof shall be made good to his [Prussian] Majesty as far as Genua."
These payments were to commence on 13 January 1705 (new style) so that the Troops, which shall begin to march as soon as may be, may do whatever possible to arrive about the middle of February in the territory of the Duke of Savoy.
(Clause iv). It being impossible that the sum of money stipulated in the precedent article shall hold out to subsist so considerable a number of Troops, the Emperor shall engage himself that (besides the sum above mentioned which is to be paid by England and Holland) he will furnish and deliver, by carriages maintained at his expense to the said body of 8,000 Troops, the ordinary rations of bread during the time of their being in the field.
(Clause xi). There remaining yet to be paid by the Crown of England to the King of Prussia a sum of about 236,000 Crowns for the last war, the Queen of Great Britain shall endeavour and do her best that in the present session of Parliament of England some funds may be found to pay off that sum, or that which shall be justly due, before the end of the next year. (C.J. XIV, p. 501-2).
The text of this Treaty was submitted to the House of Commons on the 29th January 1704-5 and on the 8th February following the House voted an Address of thanks to the Queen for concluding the Treaty "which is so seasonable a support to the Duke of Savoy and so great an advantage to the common cause, and to assure her Majesty that her faithful Commons will effectually enable her to make good the said Treaty."
No sum was inserted in the 1704-5 Estimates for this service but, as before, the Executive looked upon the Resolution of the House as authorising interim expenditure upon it. Accordingly a sum of 24,500l. was issued to the Paymaster General "for the King of Prussia for the 8,000 succours sent to the assistance of Savoy."
In the Declared Accounts of Charles Fox as paymaster of the Forces the sum paid appears as 11,627l. 18s. 2d. paid to the King of Prussia for three months to 15 March 1704-5 and a similar sum for the succeeding three months "pursuant to a treaty and by virtue of a warrant from the Commander in chief of her Majesty's Forces." In the Declared Account of Brydges the succeeding Paymaster General infra p. cxcvii there appears a further sum of 12,395l. 16s. 7d. as paid to Prussia for the 8,000 men [as for a further three months] and also a sum of 45,000l. for arrears of subsidy due to the said late King in the late war to wit on or before 1 November 1697 ; being the equivalent of 180,000 Rix Dollars.
In this particular instance it is instructive to note that whilst the Lord Treasurer directed only a sum of 24,500l. to the Paymaster General for this Prussian subsidy the Paymaster actually paid, as it were out of his general Army chest, a total sum of 80,651l. 12s. 11d. and all the time the House of Commons had not voted a penny of supply for this particular service.
During the course of the years 1704 and 1705 Queen Anne made two payments to the Circle of Swabia "to encourage them to continue in the interest of the Allies and not to accept of a neutrality." The sums paid were 23,923l. in 1703 as the equivalent of 100,000 Crowns, being the Queen's moiety of 200,000 Crowns agreed to be paid to the said Circle by the Queen and the States General ; and 31,612l. 19s. 4d. similarly paid in March 1704. (Treasury Calendar XVIII, p. 312. XIX, p. 181).
Both these sums were paid out of the Queen's Civil List, literally out of Queen Anne's own pocket, and Parliament was not approached or consulted by the Executive in the matter. In Fox's Declared account as Paymaster General the second sum is stated as 31,007l. 15s. 0d. and it is entered as for two third parts of 200,000 Rix dollars "which her Majesty consented to pay to the said Circle as her share to encourage them to continue in the interest of the Allies" etc. In this case the shouldering of a two thirds share means that once again the Queen was advancing a hypothetical third share on behalf of or in place of the Emperor. This was due entirely to the importunate begging of the Dutch statesmen (see Marlborough, Despatches I, 226).
|Estimate (and Votes : being identical) C.J. XIV, pp. 396-412.||Payments by the Paymaster General of the Forces.|
|Guards and Garrisons and Land Forces in England, Jersey, Guernsey and the Plantations and for Sea Service||357,000||0||0||272,035||7||5|
|(a) in the Netherlands the 40,000 men||885,193||3||6||701,485||15||8|
|the 10,000 Troops of Augmentation||177,511||3||6||132,488||18||1|
|(b) in Portugal and Spain||222,379||5||10||157,605||4||3|
|Extraordinaries (recruit horses, levy money etc.) (fn. 2)||36,769||0||0|
|Total for the Land Forces||2,088,971||13||10||1,546,964||10||1|
This shows a Paymaster's deficit of 542,007l. 2s. 8d. But the figures of the Lord Treasurer's issues for the Army show a smaller deficit. For the Army at home and abroad the Lord Treasurer ordered issues during the year to a total of 2,060,995l. 1s. 3d.
|viz. to Paymaster Fox||1,435,274||13||0|
There was thus apparently only a shortage of 27,376l. 12s. 7d. on the issues for the Army services as compared with the Estimate. But such a conclusion is misleading. The total issues as ordered by the Lord Treasurer included items to a total of 21,569l. 2s. 1d. on account of arrears belonging to the service year 1703 and 273,021l. 10s. 0d. for arrears belonging to the service year 1704 and 24,500l. paid as advance subsidy to the King of Prussia which did not arise out of the 1705 Estimates at all. These three items total 319,090l. 12s. 2d. The deduction of these sums leaves the effective issues at 1,741,904l. 9s. 0d. which yields a Treasury issue deficit of 347,067l. 4s. 9d. as against the Estimate. Roughly therefore the Lord Treasurer's deficit of issue was 200,000l. less than the Army Paymasters' deficit of 542,007l. 2s. 8d. in his payments. This difference is nearly covered by the increased amount of paper orders in the Paymasters' hands at the end of the year : see infra pp. cxxvi, cxxix.
|Paper orders and tallies in the Paymasters' hands at Michaelmas 1705||316,816||18||8|
|ditto at Michaelmas 1704||143,746||14||9|
|increase during 1705||173,070||3||11|
The Navy Ordinary comprised the Admiralty Office Staff, the Navy Office Staff, the skeleton staff at the six Yards of Chatham, Deptford, Woolwich, Portsmouth, Sheerness, Plymouth and the Office at Kinsale. the ships in harbour, their wages, victuals, charges and repairs.
All the items under the sub-head of Navy Ordinary were practically stereotyped. For the year 1705 they amounted to 137,026l. 8s. 5d. plus 32,005l. for the charge of the Register Office and 14,993l. 13s. 0d. for bounties to widows and orphans.
The main Estimate, that for the Navy at sea, was determined entirely by the resolution of the House of Commons as to the number of men who should be employed at sea. When once the number was fixed the estimate itself was also fixed, by the simple invariable rule that a rate of 4l. per man per month was to cover the three main sub-heads of Wages, Wear and Tear, and Victualling.
The method of dealing with the Navy Ordnance had fluctuated, but usually the item of Naval Ordnance (Ordnance sea service) was included in the omnibus Vote of 4l. per man per month, even when as in the 1705 Estimates the charge of the Office of Ordnance for Sea Service was separately set out.
On the 7th November, within a fortnight of the meeting of Parliament the House resolved that 40,000 men be employed in the sea service for the year 1705 including 8,000 Marines and that a sum not exceeding 4l. a man per month be allowed for maintaining them for thirteen months including the Ordnance for sea service. But two days later the House resolved to supply a further 40,000l. for the Ordnance sea service over and above the Naval provision of 4l. per man per month. At the same time the House cut down the rate for the Navy Ordinary to 100,000l., but voted separately a further sum of 10,000l. for building a wharf and storehouse at Portsmouth.
|for the Ordinary||70,600|
|for the 10,000 Navy Vote|
|Wear and Tear and Yards||432,678||11||0|
But the whole of this amount was not applied to the service of the year 1705. The sum of 543l. 12s. 7d. was to be applied to arrears of the year 1702, and the sum of 69,140l. 6s. 5d. was to be similarly applied to the arrears of the year 1704. The deduction of these sums leaves a net amount of 1,548,970l. 0s. 6d. applied to the Navy in 1705 as against a Parliamentary Vote of 2,328,969l. 10s. 0d. The Navy therefore went short on the year by as large a sum as 779,999l. 9s. 6d. which can only be considered as added to the Navy debt. But a correction of this figure is required for the 5,000 men for Sea service. Although intended and actually employed for sea expeditionary service this Force was put on the Establishment of Guards, Garrisons and Land Forces. It therefore stands in the account of John Howe as Paymaster of that Establishment. Removing this item amounting to 98,969l. 10s. 0d. from the Navy Establishment the total Navy Vote is reduced to 2,230,000l. for the year 1705 and the shortage on the Treasury issue for the year is reduced similarly to 681,029l. 19s. 6d.
On the 30th September 1704 (that is just before the presentation of the Navy Estimates for the year 1705) the Navy debt stood at a total of 2,762,035l. 2s. 5d. of which by far the greatest item was owing for seamen's wages and had accrued since the commencement of Anne's reign.
Whilst therefore the year's shortage of Treasury issues for the Navy had amounted to 681,029l. 19s. 6d. the actual increase of debt, the Navy debt, during the same year shows only as 474,433l. 10s. 4d. The difference would not seem to be attributable to the liquidation of paper orders in the Navy Treasurer's hands as that liquidation took place in 1704. But this point is difficult to establish.
It only remains to add that besides the ordinary estimates for the Navy for this year 1705 the House of Commons had called for accounts of extraordinaries under the two separate heads of Building and Victualling.
(1) of extraordinary services in the Navy since the war and now in hand with, for vessels built and added to the Navy, repairs and fitting vessels and at office buildings, jetties, etc. total 290,486l. 6s. 10d.
The routine for the Naval or Sea service portion of the Estimates for the Ordnance Office has already been explained supra p. lii. For the Land service of the Ordnance Office the House of Commons usually insisted on a formal separate Estimate. This was presented on the 13th November and showed a normal Office charge of 28,273l. 13s. 9d. and a charge of 99,907l. 18s. 1d. for saltpetre and 42,461l. 12s. 0d. for making the same into gunpowder. Three days later the House voted a grant of 120,000l. for the Land service of the Office of Ordnance for the year 1705. The House had already on the 7th November resolved to supply a sum of 40,000l. for the Sea service of the Ordnance outside or irrespective of the 4l. per man per month of the Navy vote. The total Ordnance Office vote of Supply therefore came to 160,000l. irrespective of the Navy vote.
Towards this sum it appears from the figures of Revenue and Expenditure infra p. cxxxvii that the Lord Treasurer made issues up to a total of 202,780l. 4s. 1d. but of this total certain sums were devoted to Ordnance Office arrears of preceding years, viz. 14,103l. 16s. 5d. to arrears of 1702 ; 20,794l. 13s. 0d. to arrears of 1703 and 37,683l. 5s. 5d. to arrears of 1704. This left a sum of 130,198l. 9s. 2d. issued by the Lord Treasurer for the Ordnance service for 1705 as against 160,000l. voted. There was therefore a shortage on the issues for the year for the Ordnance Office of 29,801l. 10s. 10d. For the Ordnance Treasurer's figures in his declared Account see infra p. ccxli.
In the matter of the Transport service the House of Commons systematically went back no further than the commencement of Anne's reign or rather no further than the opening of the war with France in May of 1702. This was on the supposition that the Transport debt of the Irish war and of William's war against Louis XIV had been liquidated out of Irish forfeitures. (For this subject of the Transport debt under Wm. III see p. ccxiii of the Introduction to Vols. XI-XVII of this Calendar.)
The House of Commons voted a sum of 60,000l. on the 16th November "towards defraying the charge of transporting land Forces" without specifying whether it was in respect of arrears or of accruing service. But in the Revenue and Expenditure account the whole vote and slightly more appears as issued to John Nutin, Paymaster of Transports, wholly out of the Funds of the year 1705 but severally viz. for the Portugal, West India, Holland and Catalonia services. The issues appear as follows :
|in Charles Fox's account||3,000||0||0|
|in Brydges' account||9,010||10||6|
|out of the Exchequer||59,700||2||10|
The Declared account of the Paymaster of Transports for the year 1705 is missing in both the Pipe Office and Audit Office series : so that it is impossible to state what sums were paid and on which of the four items of service, Portugal, West India, Holland or Catalonia.
This Act was in the usual stereotyped form and granted 4s. per of the income from land or professional employment etc. It was to be collected in the course of 1705 by quarterly payments beginning from the 25th March 1705. In the expectation that it would produce not less than 2,000,000l. a loan clause in the Act authorised the Treasury to raise loans to the amount of 1,850,000l. at 5 per cent. on security of the tax. The Act contained no appropriation clause.
This Act is of a very complicated nature. The Fund for the service of the Annuities was to be the 3,700l. per week or 192,400l. per annum reserved out of the Excise. Under the preceding Annuities Act of 2-3 Anne, c. 3. there had already been sold on the same security the following Annuities :
Out of the total 192,400l. annual value of the Fund there thus remained unsold the annual sum of 46,898l. 13s. 5d. On this remainder Fund it was proposed to raise the capital sum of 877,930l. 19s. 3d. by the sale of Annuities or as it was phrased "by contributions to be advanced into the Exchequer for purchasing annuities." the purchase money to be payable in three instalments of one third each on the 1st May, 24th June and 29th September respectively of the year 1705.
Of the total 877,930l. 19s. 3d. which the Act purports to grant the capital sum of 690,000l. was to be raised by the sale of 99 years Annuities commencing from 25th December 1705 at the sale price of 15 years' purchase.
The remaining capital sum of 187,930l. 19s. 3d. (to complete the total Supply or grant of 877,930l. 19s. 3d.) was to be raised by a conversion system applicable to the three categories of life annuities created by the parent Act 2-3, Anne c. 3.
Single life annuities under that Act were to be convertible into 99 year annuities dating from 25 March 1704 by a payment representing six years' purchase : the reversion right to run from and after the single life to the end of the 99 years.
The third Act of Supply was the grant by 3-4 Anne, c. 3, of a further Subsidy on wines and merchandizes imported for four years from 8 March 1704-5. The further or additional Subsidy thus granted was two thirds of the subsidy of Tonnage and Poundage granted by the Act of 9 Wm. III, c. 23, or in other words by the original grant of Tonnage and Poundage at the Restoration of Charles II. It is invariably referred to as the Two Thirds Tonnage and Poundage.
The Act authorised a loan of 636,957l. 4s. 0d. at 6 per cent, on the security of the Duties granted by it. The proceeds of the grant were to be devoted to the war and to his Majesty's necessary and important engagements ; but the details of the appropriation of any possible surplus receipts are extremely complicated.
The fifth Act of Supply was the Act of 3-4 Anne, c. 18, for continuing to 24 June 1710 the Duties on Low Wines, Coffee, Tea, etc. and the Duties on Hawkers, Pedlars and Petty Chapmen, and for granting additional Duties on coffee, tea, etc. and a 15 per cent. Duty on calicoes and Duties on drugs, etc.
The broad way of looking at the financial system of England under Queen Anne is to consider (1) that the Civil government of the country was met or was supposed to be met out of the fixed Civil List : (2) that the cost of the war (or in time of peace the cost of the Army, Navy and Ordnance) was met out of yearly grants of new supply of whatever kind : (3) that the average interest for loan debt was roughly equal to a year's normal revenue : (4) that therefore each year's normal revenue as it accrued or came in was booked for the payment of interest and repayment of principal of yearly recurring loans i.e. the loans of the preceding year : (5) that therefore the only new or available Supply for a current year's war costs or needs was a fresh series of loans on credit of the new Supplies. The system practically amounted to a yearly renewal of loans on Supply to an amount roughly or nearly equal to the normal yearly revenue.
|Post Office and Casual||160,012||9||10|
|Deduct Civil List||609,151||7||3|
Out of this net revenue of 4,361,256l. 8s. 4d. the Lord Treasurer repaid for loan money and paid for interest on loans a joint total of 3,714,166l. 13s. 6d. He had therefore left out of the normal revenue of the country only approximately half a million (647,089l. 14s. 9d.) to meet the cost of the War.
Furthermore it so happened in this particular year that the renewal loans were disappointing in their yield. I do not construe this as a sign of financial exhaustion, for the sale of annuities went off moderately well. But in the domain of loans on Customs Duties and Excise Duties the realisation date or redemption date was progressively becoming more and more remote so that the security offered was progressively less and less attractive to the investor.
Whenever the Lord Treasurer realised that the loans on new Supply were not coming in as they should he had to fall back on the age-old device of issuing paper orders to meet the requirements of each individual Departmental Treasurer. The net result is briefly summarised in the following table :
This table shows that although Parliament had authorised loans to a total of 4,714,888l. 3s. 3d. on the whole corpus of supply granted for the year 1705 the Treasury had only been able to raise 3,091,846l. 9s. 1d. in the way of loans on the security of such Supply. The shortage was practically 1 millions (1,623,041l. 14s. 2d.)
We are thus coming within measurable distance of the shortage of funds supplied by the Treasury for the services as above pp. 1-liv. For it must be remembered that when actual loans failed and the Treasury had to fall back on the usual device of issuing paper orders to the Departmental Treasurers such orders were by no means equivalent to cash or to face value. They would stay in the drawers or the portfolios of the respective Paymasters until he or they could get them out on to the market by agreement with purchasers and there was no forecasting when such sale by agreement could be made or at what rate. To supply a service with paper was by no means the same thing as supplying it with cash.
According to the table of figures on pp. 1-liv the shortage of money supplied by the Treasury for the war amounted to slightly more than 1 millions. According to the above table p. lx the shortage of loans effected by the Treasury in the Supply for the year amounted to, say, 1 millions and towards meeting this shortage the Lord Treasurer had in his hands say half a million of ordinary residuary revenue receipts.
In such a quagmire of figures it is almost impossible to get a closer result. But the general drift and correctness of the whole is unquestionable. Broadly speaking the failure of the Treasury to supply the war services in the year 1705 was due to the inability of the Treasury to raise the necessary short term loans in spite of the fact that such loans carried a Parliamentary guarantee.
In this Introduction I have laid no stress on Deficiencies as a cause of the monetary distress which was experienced by the Treasury in this year 1705. I have simply tried to ascertain the effective revenue actually realised and to balance that income against the two liabilities of war services and debt services. If each individual tax or source of Supply had had a specific valuation or estimated yield put upon it in Committee and if that valuation had been stated in the Act and loans to the full value had been authorised by Parliament then the actual tax yield would have declared itself instanter as a Deficiency of Parliamentary Supply. It would have been gradually known that such and such a source of Supply had failed by so much to meet the loans raised upon it : and as such loans had been raised under Parliamentary guarantee the House of Commons would have been under the honourable necessity of making good that deficiency in its next grant of Supply.
But the financial system did not work in so precise a way. Roughly it was expected rather than estimated that a particular tax might yield such and such a figure. But a marginal allowance was made and the total loan sanctioned upon that fund of supply was fixed below that expected yield, in some cases considerably below it. For instance, a 4s. Land Tax was a fluctuating item in its total yield. But the general impression was that it should yield from 2 millions to 2 millions. The loans authorised upon it were fixed by Parliament at an almost stereotyped figure of 1,850,000l. So long as that sum was actually realised the yield would (in the year of collection) meet the loan which had been raised upon it. In such a case there was no Deficiency in the strict Parliamentary sense, that is to say there was no obligation on Parliament to reinforce that Supply. And yet all the time the actual yield of the tax might have dropped by anything between a quarter and a half a million. In the case for instance of the Seventh 4s. Aid which had been granted for the service of the year 1704 the completed figures which only came through in the course of the year 1705 show that the total yield was only 1,792,232l. and as this figure fell short of the 1,850,000l. authorised loans there was a technical Parliamentary Deficiency.
|On the Seventh 4s. Aid||1,815,531||5||0|
|Total yield of the Act||1,792,232||0||10|
In the case of Customs Duties or Excise Duties the normal allowance of margin as between estimated yield and authorised Parliamentary loans was, of course, much wider, because of the uncertainty as to the yield.
Consequently in the case of such funds of Supply it is much more difficult to state the drop of expected revenue as distinct from the merely technical figure of Parliamentary loans Deficiency. The general effect of accumulating deficiencies of revenue was only felt at the expiry of a period, the period being marked by some explosion of feeling or opinion, when the accumulated shortages of the services became intolerable, that is when creditors or soldiers or sailors became clamorous or when the House was warned of the growing danger.
In the financial system of the time there was only one service or head for which it was possible to state yearly the actual yield and shortage of allocated revenue. That was the Civil List. There was a Parliamentary guarantee implicit and explicit that the Civil List would be fed by specially allocated Supply to the amount of 700,000l. per annum. That Supply was calculable yearly and the shortage was expressible yearly. In the year 1705, here treated of, the Civil List funds yielded 609,151l. 7s. 3d.
There was therefore a deficiency a true Parliamentary Deficiency moral as well as technicalof 90,848l. 12s. 8d. : and as a matter of fact the figure of income in this particular case see infra, p. clxxiv, is swollen by the inclusion of two very dubious items viz. 13,151l. 11s. 3d. for First Fruits which were no longer in the Crown, and 13,351l. 11s. 0d. for the value of timber delivered to the Navy out of the royal forests, an item which is almost certainly a mere book entry and not a realised payment. In addition to this there is one further item which was exceptional as being abnormally large, viz. the figure of 16,504l. 9s. 7d. for seizures. But taking the figures as they stand and including all these dubious items, they show that the Civil List Funds had failed by 100,000l. or thereabout to produce the revenue they should have done and as those funds were in the main only two (viz. Customs and Excise) the shortage can only be attributable to diminished yield of these two sources of revenue.
As to the moral aspect of this shortage I can only repeat what has been asserted ad nauseam in these Introductions, viz. that the provision for the Civil List was in the nature of a solemn treaty, promise, or obligation permanently binding as between the House of Commons and the Crown and that the persons who suffered by any deficiency on that head formed the full circle of the country's civil administration, Ambassadors, Judges, Civil servants, pensioners etc., etc., as well as the Officers of the Crown.