Introduction

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

William A. Shaw (editor)

Year published

1949

Pages

5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54

Annotate

Comment on this article
Double click anywhere on the text to add an annotation in-line

Citation Show another format:

'Introduction', Calendar of Treasury Books, Volume 23: 1709 (1949), pp. V-LIV. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=90760 Date accessed: 17 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Introduction.

The meeting of the first United Parliament of Great Britain in 1708 was delayed by reason of the length of the campaign in Flanders. The elections had taken place in April and May, but it was not until the 16th November that the Houses assembled. The Queen's speech as read by the Lord Chancellor on the 18th pressed for the vigorous prosecution of the war in the coming year and urged the Commons to grant means for a considerable augmentation of the Forces both by land and sea. The words were Marlborough's. By land the great advances made in Flanders towards entering into France had led Louis to meet the threat of invasion by drawing Troops daily to that side from Spain, Dauphine &c. and in order to maintain superiority of numbers it was necessary for the Allies to agree to a further increase of their quotas.
So also of the Forces at sea. The capture of Minorca had furnished the British Navy with a permanent wintering station in the Mediterranean. But the Queen's speech contained no specific request for a Naval increase. It mentioned only the extensive repairs which had become necessary and the advantages of the capture of Port Mahon which would necessitate extraordinary provision as being so advanced or distant a naval outpost. This guarded reference to a new disposition of the Naval Forces inevitably foreshadowed an increase in the Naval Establishment, but neither the Queen nor her Government stated this in so many words.
In their separate Addresses in reply to the Speech both Houses used the ordinary conventional phrases expressing their determination to prosecute this just and necessary war until the whole monarchy of Spain be restored to the House of Austria, and the House of Commons further assured her Majesty that they would give her such Supply as would be most effectual for reducing the enemy.
These merely stereotyped assurances did not imply any indifference to the Queen's request for an augmentation of the Land Forces. For the moment, at the outset, the prime necessity was to provide the ordinary or normal supply for all the services, Civil as well as Military and Naval, so as to keep the machinery of the State running. Within a day of the swearing in, the House of Commons resolved to grant a Supply to her Majesty (Nov. 23), went into Grand Committee on it (Nov. 24), called for the usual Estimates for Army, Navy and Ordnance and Treaty Subsidy obligations (Nov. 25), and agreed in Committee to the same number of Land and Sea Forces as last year (Nov. 26). On the following day (Nov. 27) the Grand Committee reported the Resolutions to the House which adopted them seriatim without division or opposition (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 8, 10, 13) as follows:
that 40,000 men be employed in the Sea Service for the year 1709, including 8,000 Marines: that a sum not exceeding 4l. a man per mensem be allowed for maintaining the said 40,000 men for 13 months, including the Ordnance Sea Service.
that a sum not exceeding 120,000l. be allowed for the Ordinary of the Navy for the year 1709.
that the 40,000 men which were raised to act in conjunction with the Forces of her Majesty's Allies be continued for the year 1709: that a sum not exceeding 901,827l. 13s. 6d. be granted to her Majesty for maintaining the said 40,000 men for the service of the year 1709.
that the Additional Forces of 10,000 men be continued for the year 1709: that a sum not exceeding 177,511l. 3s. 6d. be granted to her Majesty for maintaining the said 10,000 men for the service of the year 1709.
that her Majesty's proportion of 3,000 Palatines formerly taken into the service of her Majesty and the States General be continued for the year 1709: that a sum not exceeding 34,251l. 13s. 4d. be granted to her Majesty to defray her Majesty's proportion of the charge of maintaining the said 3,000 Palatines for the service of the year 1709.
that her Majesty's proportion of 4,639 Saxons taken into the service of her Majesty and the States General in the year 1707 be continued for the year 1709: that a sum not exceeding 43,251l. 12s. 6d. be granted to her Majesty to defray her Majesty's proportion of the charge of maintaining the said 4,639 Saxons for the service of the year 1709.
that her Majesty's proportion of Bothmar's Regiment of Dragoons, consisting of 800 men, taken into the service of her Majesty and the States General in the year 1707, be continued for the year 1709: that a sum not exceeding 9,269l. 16s. 6d. be granted to her Majesty to defray her Majesty's proportion of the charge of maintaining the said Regiment of Dragoons for the service of the year 1709 (Commons Journals XVI, p. 24).
Thus in five consecutive days, less than a single week, the House had voted the continuance of the normal fighting services, the Army Abroad, the Navy and the Sea Ordnance.
As usual the Estimates set out the details of the British quota of the Land Forces of the Allies (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 19–20).
£ s. d. £ s. d.
The Estimate of the 40,000 men to act in conjunction with the Forces of the Allies in the Low Countries for the year 1709.
British Part.
Horse.
Lieut Gen. Lumley's Regiment (598 men).
Lieut. Gen. Wood's (400 men).
Major Gen. Cadogan's (400 men).
Major Gen. Palmes's (400 men).
Duke of Schonburg's (400 men).
total 2,198 men 122,153 6 8
Dragoons.
Earl of Stair's Regiment (662 men).
Lieut. Gen. Ross's (662 men).
total 1,324 men 46,233 6 8
Foot. £ s. d. £ s. d.
Royal Regiment (1,876 men).
Duke of Argyll's (938 men).
Maj. Gen. Webb's (938 men).
Lord North and Grey's (938 men).
Major Gen. Howe's (938 men)
Col. Godfrey's (938 men).
Lieut. Gen. Ingoldsby's (938 men).
Col. Lalo's (938 men).
Brig. Sabine's (938 men).
Brig. Primrose's (938 men).
Col. Preston's (938 men).
Sir Richard Temple's (938 men).
Major Gen. Meredyth's (938 men).
another Regiment (938 men).
Brig. Evans's (867 men).
total 14,937 men 258,514 5 10
General [or Staff] Officers 23,785 0 10
Contingencies, upon account 10,000 0 0
Forage and Waggon money, on account 16,825 10 0
total for the 18,459 British part of the 40,000 men 477,511 10 0
Foreign part of the 40,000 men.
Danes, 6,000 men 116,282 15 0
Prussians, 2,532 men 43,018 18 6
Hessians, 3,080 men 53,685 0 0
Hanover and Celle, 10,000 men 171,329 10 0
total for the Foreign part [paid by Queen Anne], 21,612 men 384,316 13 6
Bread Waggons for the 40,000 men 20,000 0 0
Forage, Waggon money and recruits for the Foreigners, pursuant to the Treaty, upon account 20,000 0 0
total estimate for the 40,000 men for 1709 £901,827 13 6
This Estimate shows an increase of 7,555l. 10s. 0d. over the preceding year's Estimate: the increase being caused by an addition of 242 men to the Dragoons, viz. six men to each of the eight Troops and one additional Troop to each of the two Regiments of Dragoons under the Earl of Stair and Lieut. Gen. Ross.
Estimate for [the Queen's moiety of] the 20,000 Troops of Augmentation and of the other Additional Forces taken since into the service of her Majesty and the States General with the charge thereof for the year 1709.
English Foot. guilders stivers
Earl of Orrery's Regiment (876 men).
three Regiments more (2,628 men).
total 3,504 men 667,037 10
Holstein Gottorp.
two Regiments of Dragoons (1,116 men).
two Regiments of Foot (1,766 men).
total 2,882 men 578,981 5
Munster.
three Regiments of Foot (2,442 men) 352,754 5
Hesse Cassel.
one Regiment of Foot (885 men) 122,621 15
Osnabrug.
one Regiment of Foot (807 men) 110,626 18
Oost Friez.
one Regiment of Foot (797 men) 113,405 10
Liège.
one Regiment of Dragoons (581 men).
two Regiments of Foot (1,596 men).
one Regiment of Foot more (797 men).
total 2,974 men 497,513 5
Palatines.
four Regiments of Foot (2,600 men) 322,321 5
Danes.
surplus of the Danes' part of the 40,000 men transferred to the Establishment of the Troops of Augmentation (520 men).
two Regiments of Dragoons (892 men).
two Regiments of Foot (1,708 men).
total 3,120 men 663,013 7
total Troops of Augmentation, 20,011 men 3,428,275 0
whereof one half for Queen Anne 1,714,137 10
£ s. d.
which reduced to sterling at 10 guilders 10 stivers to the £ sterling make 163,251 3 6
Bread Waggons for the 10,000 men 5,000 0 0
Forage, Waggon money and Recruits for the Foreigners 9,260 0 0
total for Queen Anne's share (being 10,005 men) of the charge of the Troops of Augmentation £177,511 3 6
Other Additional Forces [agreed for beyond and since the agreements for the 20,000 Troops of Augmentation].
Palatines.
Queen Anne's share, being two thirds, of the charge of 3,000 Palatines, as by the Treaty of 26 May 1706 [Dumont VIII, p. 195], (being 2,000 men in the Queen's pay) 34,251 13 4
Saxons.
Queen Anne's share, being a moiety, of the charge of 4,639 Saxons, consisting of 1 Regiment of Horse, 2 of Dragoons and 4 of Foot (being 2,319 men in the Queen's pay) 43,251 12 6
Bothmar's Dragoons.
Queen Anne's share, being a moiety, of the charge of a Regiment of Dragoons of 800 men (being 400 men in the Queen's pay) 9,269 16 6
total for 4,717 men of the Troops of Augmentation £86,773 2 4
£ s. d.
Combined total of the two sets of Troops of Augmentation (viz. 10,005 men and 4,717 men) £264,284 5 10
Up to this point the Estimates for the war in Flanders had followed the pattern of the preceding year's figures But towards the end of the long campaign of 1708 Marlborough raised the question of a still further Augmentation. The impending capture of Lille opened the way into France and he planned an invasion of that country as an absolutely sure means of ending the war: and when the French reaction to the threat developed, when France drew her Forces from Spain and Dauphine and moved them to the Flanders front, Marlborough became more and more anxious for an all round augmentation of the Allied Armies. He had opened the subject in his letters to Godolphin as early as Oct. 1708. “You should not only resolve in England upon an Augmentation of Troops but lose no time in prevailing with the States General to do the same.” In reply, Godolphin assured him on the 12/23 November “I have got it into the [Queen's] Speech that an Augmentation should be desired for Flanders; and I hope it will be granted” (Churchill's Marlborough II, pp. 326, 329–30),
A little more than a fortnight after the House had passed the normal Estimates for the Forces in Flanders it sat down to consider the question of this further Augmentation which Marlborough desired (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 46, 48, 49; Luttrell VI, pp. 383. 384). On the 14th December 1708 it was resolved to consider the question of further Supply and on the following day the House resolved itself into Grand Committee to consider it. The Commons Journals merely state that the Committee came to a Resolution which it was directed to report next day. But Luttrell's account yields more specific information:
“Then went into a Committee upon augmenting her Majesty's Forces and after some debate Resolved that the same [the Augmentation] be 10,000 men, viz. 7,000 Foot and 3,000 Horse, all hired Troops, and that a sum not exceeding 220,000l. be given for payment of them.”
The Report made to the House on the following day, Dec. 16, merely states the sum to be granted
“that it is the opinion of this Committee that a sum not exceeding 220,000l. be granted to her Majesty as her proportion for augmenting the Troops which are to act in co-operation with her Allies in Flanders for the service of the year 1709.”
There is no record of a division on this Resolution, so that it may be taken as unanimous (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 50, 52; Luttrell VI, p. 386). Two days later, on Saturday the 18th December, the House Resolved nem. con.
“that an humble Address be presented to her Majesty that she will be pleased to use her utmost endeavours with her Allies to engage them to furnish their proportion towards the augmentation of the Forces for the year 1709.”
In reply to the Address the Queen on the 21st December assured the House “that she would use her utmost endeavour as desired.”
In this way in less than five weeks of a normal Session the Parliament had voted nearly the whole of the normal service credits, had passed a Land Tax Bill, the equivalent of a 4s. Income Tax, had voted a fresh Augmentation of 10,000 men and had smoothed out Marlborough's nightmare difficulties over the recruiting. Five years before, when the first Augmentation of 10,000 men had been adopted by the English Parliament, it had taken more than three months of negotiation and all Marlborough's patience and skill to induce the Dutch to agree to an equal Augmentation on their side, although the whole proposal had originated from themselves. But on the present occasion the British Parliament had not waited for the Dutch. They voted their own additional quota straight away and unanimously, and it was left to Marlborough to combat the reluctance of the States General to come into line with Great Britain. When they did finally, after interminable delay, agree to an increase it was only for 6,000 men, hired Troops.
In connection with this subject of the Dutch attitude towards the Augmentation of the year 1709 there is a paragraph in Lamberty, Vol. V, p. 154, which produces a feeling of uneasiness and suspicion as to his complete reliability or impartiality as a historian. He asserts that the States General on the 20th November (presumably new style, which would mean 9/20 November) wrote to Queen Anne desiring her to make an Augmentation of Troops in order to press on the war with the utmost vigour. This statement is irreconcilable with the known course of events and would seem to be intended to screen the Dutch from the obloquy which their actual behaviour merited. It seems clear that Lamberty infers the contents of the States' letter of that date from the contents of Queen Anne's reply which he prints. The prime mover in the matter of this Augmentation was Marlborough and before it was mentioned in the Queen's Speech he had learned the reluctance of the Dutch in the matter as well as the duplicity of Heinsius. And when he received the Queen's commands to press the Dutch he spoke plainly. “I shall be sure to follow her Majesty's commands” he wrote to Godolphin, “in pressing the Dutch to their Augmentations, but I fear one third is the most we can expect, but I will press them to a moitie” (Churchill's Marlborough IV, pp. 20, 47). By these words Marlborough did not mean that he wished the Dutch to pay a half of the English 10,000 men Augmentation, but that they should augment by a like number of 10,000, and so each State (Great Britain and the States General) would be paying a half towards a further or second Augmentation of 20,000 men, just as in the case of the earlier Augmentation of 20,000 men in 1703.
In the letter which he wrote to Secretary Boyle on the 7th January 1708–9 from Brussels Marlborough puts the matter in exactly this light: “You may be sure when I come to the Hague I shall use my utmost endeavours that the States come up to the like proportion [as the British], but by what I have learned hitherto they think they do a great deal if they allow one third of the whole expense” (Marlborough's Despatches IV, p. 395).
As far as the British side of this Augmentation is concerned the story of it can be stated succinctly. The total number of roughly 10,000 men was made up of Troops hired from Prussia, Saxony and Trèves.
Two fresh Treaties were made with the King of Prussia, one of the 31st March 1709 for a subsidy of 50,000l. as from 1 January 1708–9; and the other of the 12th April 1709 for the hire of 6,025 additional Troops.
In the case of the Saxon contingent it was provided for by a fresh Treaty of 22 Feb. 1708–9 and covered additional men and Troops to the number of 2,045 men and two new Battalions containing together 1,508 men: thus making a total of 3,553 additional Saxons as from 5 March 1708–9.
In the case of the Elector of Treves a fresh Treaty of 10 July 1709 provided for a further Battalion of 710 men of his Troops as from 1 June 1709.
This made a total Augmentation of 10,459 men hired and put on the British Establishment.
It was not until Marlborough had arranged his Treaties with the King of Prussia and made his arrangements with the Wurtembergers and Palatines that he returned to the Dutch and at last shamed them into agreeing a belated Augmentation of 6,000 men. (fn. 1)
It is this simple outline of fact which seems to throw a shadow of doubt and distrust on Lamberty's narrative quoted above. To my mind that narrative shows a pro-Dutch bias.
But the question of an Augmentation was not the only one which occupied Marlborough's mind for the 1709 Campaign. For some time the existing recruiting machinery had proved inefficient. It had not produced the numbers requisite to replace wastage, and the adoption of some compulsory system seemed to offer the nearest solution. Whilst not adopting such a solution, the House showed itself just as anxious to smooth out Marlborough's difficulties as it had been on the question of the Augmentation. It called for a return of levy money paid in the past year and of the numbers of men wanting to complete the Forces and the Navy (8 Dec. 1708). Within two days the returns were delivered and were considered by the Commons (Commons Journals XVI, p. 28, 6 Dec.; p. 35, 8 Dec.; pp. 37–44, 10 Dec.). They revealed that to complete the Navy in sea pay at home and to provide for the great ships then building but expected to be ready for the service of the year 1709 there was a total shortage of 10,884 men, the ships actually abroad being supposed to be fully manned. For the six Marine Regiments there was a shortage of 1,682 men, and for the whole of the Land Forces a total shortage of 14,865 men. The last item of this return is comprehensive and very instructive, especially when it is borne in mind that the recruiting for the seven Regiments of Foot which were made prisoners at the battle of Almanza had taken place in the course of the year 1708 (viz. 637 men for Blood's Regiment; 653 men for Wightman's; 628 for Mountjoy's; 602 for Mordaunt's; 653 for McCartney's; 638 for Gorge's and 530 for Bowles's).
The account of the numbers of men necessary to be raised in order to recruit the Queen's Land Forces for the 1709 Campaign as delivered in to the House by the Secretary at War was as follows (Commons Journals XVI, p. 44, 11 Dec. 1708):
men
for recruiting the 20 Battalions in the Low Countries at 150 men each Battalion over and above what are expected by exchange of prisoners 3,000
ditto for the 11 Battalions lately sent to Ostend at 200 men each, one with another 2,200
ditto for the two Battalions of Foot at Antwerp 290
ditto for the six Battalions of Foot in Portugal 1,200
ditto for the seven Battalions now in Spain 800
for completing the three Battalions of Lord Portmore, Lord Tyrawley and Lieut. Gen. Steuart, which were reduced this summer in Spain and there incorporated into other Battalions, according to their several Returns 700
for completing the five Battalions now in Garrison in South Britain, according to their several Returns 731
for completing four Battalions now raising in Great Britain for the service of Ireland in the room of four Battalions sent from thence to Portugal 1,400
10,341
for raising four Battalions of Foot which were discontinued [so that the money voted for them might be applied] for the payment of the [Almanza] prisoners in France 2,488
for raising Col. Blosset's Battalion lately broke in Spain 536
for recruiting the ten Battalions now in Ireland 1,500
4,524
men 14,865
Under the Recruiting Act of the preceding year the total number of recruits delivered over by the local authorities to the Justices of the Peace had been only 1,750 men (Commons Journals XVI, p. 43).
It was clear therefore that the Act in question (6 Anne, c. 17) had failed conspicuously to produce the requisite numbers. In the Recruiting Act for the coming 1709 Campaign therefore (7 Anne, c. 2) a different principle was adopted for setting the local machinery in action. The Justices of the Peace were superseded by County Commissioners who were required to make a speedy and effectual levy of all able-bodied unemployed. The offer of bounty money for Volunteers was raised from 2l. to 4l. and bounties (3l. to the parish and 1l. to the person listed) and day pay were provided for the men secured by the local authorities and compulsorily listed by the Commissioners. The Act received the royal assent on the 26 Jan. and became the second Act on the Statute Book for the year 1709.
The breathless speed at which the House of Commons had made provision for the war in Flanders had for the moment thrust aside the consideration of the Estimates for the Home Forces (Guards and Garrisons), for the Forces in Spain and Portugal, for the Navy Ordinary and for the Ordnance.
In the usual and natural order the consideration of the Establishment for Guards and Garrisons should have preceded that for the Forces Abroad. But the matter was not taken up by the House until the 2nd February, when Mr. Robert Walpole as Secretary at War presented an Estimate of the Guards, Garrisons and Land Forces in Great Britain, Jersey, Guernsey, the Plantations and for Sea Service for the year 1709 (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 84–5, 2 Feb. 1708–9).
The Estimate was as follows:
Men. Charge.
Horse. £ s. d.
First Troop of Guards 181
Second Troop of Guards 181
Third Troop of Guards 181
Fourth Troop of Guards 181
First Troop of Grenadier Guards 177
Second Troop of Grenadier Guards 177
Royal Regiment of Guards 598
total (Horse) 1.676 men 120,808 18 4
Dragoons.
Queen's Regiment 443
Earl of Essex's 443
Lord Polwarth's 407
Lord Carmichael's 407
Lieut. Gen. Echlyn's 589
total (Dragoons) 2,289 men 81,583 11 8
Foot.
First Regiment of Guards 2,283
Coldstream Regiment of Guards 1,143
Marquess of Lothian's Regiment of Guards 1,467
Brigadier Livesay's Regiment 760
Brigadier Wightman's Regiment 876
Col. Grant's Regiment 834
Lord Strathnaver's Regiment 834
Regiments for Sea Service.
Col. Bowles's 834
Lord Mark Kerr's 725
Major Gen. Mordaunt's in Jersey &c. 834
Brig. Handaside's at Jamaica 951
Major Gen. Maitland's at Fort William 834
Col. Jones's in the Leeward Islands 834
total (Foot) 13,209 men 253,246 2 6
four Companies at New York 449
one Company at Bermudas 58
one Company at Newfoundland 93
three Companies in North Britain 174
total 774 men 12,860 12 6
General and Staff Officers 14,045 18
Contingencies 15,000 0 0
Garrisons &c. 30,515 5 5
Invalids 11,366 15 0
total Estimate for Guards and Garrisons anno 1709 £539,427 4
To the Estimate there was to be added a sum of 9,808l. 8s. 8d. for clearing the Military Establishment in Scotland from the 1st May 1707 to 31st December 1707. The item was really in the nature of a loan and the matter has been already explained in the body of this Calendar. The addition of this sum brought the total Estimate to 549,235l. 12s.d..
The total Estimate represented an increase over that of the preceding year 1708 of 28,709l. 1s.d.. Accompanying the Estimate was a paper of particulars explaining the reasons for the increase as follows:
£ s. d.
the pay of the Regiment of Horse Guards, being augmented from 40 to 57 men [per Troop] from the 15th March 1707 7,911 7 6
the pay of the Regiment of Dragoons commanded by Major General Carpenter, being augmented from 54 to 60 men [per Troop] from same time 985 10 0
Earl of Essex's Dragoons, ditto 985 10 0
added to the Staff 292 3
added to Contingencies in regard the Regiments of North Britain are added to South Britain 7,498 3 4
the difference caused by putting Echlyn's Dragoons (at 14,520l. 18s. 4d.) on the Establishment of the Guards (at 20,652l. 18s. 4d.) in the place of Lord Paston's Regiment [of Foot raised in 1704] at 14,520l. 18s. 4d., sent to Portugal 6,132 0 0
addition to the Garrisons in North Britain 835 16 8
pay of an additional Company to Brig. Livesay's Regiment of Foot 1,003 15 0
pay of six Companies of Invalids formed out of the pensioners of Chelsea Hospital which now do duty at Sheerness, Tilbury Fort, Landguard Fort and Dover 4,872 15 0
clothing for the 11 Companies of Invalids 1,494 0 0
£32,011 1
From this total is to be deducted certain items of savings as follows, viz.: 2,022l. 14s. 2d. saved by Regiments in North Britain; 929l. 10s. 1d. saved by Garrisons in North Britain and 349l. 15s. 10d. saved by placing the Regiments of Brig. Wightman, Col Bowles and Lord Mark Kerr on this Establishment of Guards and Garrisons in the room of Lieut. Gen. Erle's, Sir Thomas Prendergast's and Col. Townshend's Regiments sent to Flanders 3,302 0 1
£28,709 1
The above Estimate for Guards and Garrisons was introduced into the House on the 2nd Feb., was considered and adopted in Grand Committee on the 4th and passed by a single block vote on the 5th without any alteration—practically in two days and without any recorded debate. (Commons Journals XVI, p. 93, 5 Feb.; Luttrell VI, p. 404.)
“Resolved: that a sum not exceeding 549,235l. 12s.d. be granted to her Majesty to defray the charge of maintaining Guards and Garrisons in Great Britain and for payment of Invalids for the service of the year 1709, including 5,000 men to serve on board the Fleet” [Troops in Sea Service, wrongly styled Marines in Luttrell's Diary].
There are few instances in English Parliamentary History of such swift and unquestioning adoption of Estimates.
Turning to the third great section of the Army Estimates, viz. Spain and Portugal, the House of Commons entered upon a thornier path. Before approaching the question of Estimates the House desired to have three accounts: (1) of the 500,000l. granted by the last Parliament for the Augmentation of the Forces in order to strengthen the Army of the Duke of Savoy, for making good the alliances with the King of Portugal and for the effectual carrying on the war; (2) of the application of the moneys given by the last Parliament for maintaining her Majesty's established Forces in Spain and Portugal for the year 1708: and of the number of effective men there (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 57, 60, 77–8, 1 Feb. 1708–9); (3) of the remittances of moneys for the said services.
These acounts had been called for on the 12th January, but it was not until the 1st February that Walpole presented the account relating to the numbers of the men.
It was as follows:
A state of the Forces of her Majesty and her Allies serving in Spain the last year [1708], with an account of the effective numbers at their return into winter quarters after the service of the last [1708] Campaign.
Foot. Effective numbers. Numbers according to the Establishment.
three Imperial Regiments 4,481 6,000
one Milanese Regiment commanded by Count Taff 1,001 1,200
ten Spanish Regiments 4,914 8,540
seven English Regiments 5,013 5,813
Palatines 1,300 1,300
one Regiment of Grisons arrived from Italy 780 780
total of the Foot in Queen Anne's pay 17,489 23,633
more Palatines 1,021 4,844
four Regiments of Dutch 1,431 3,005
five Regiments of Portuguese 1,915 3,330
total of the Foot 21,856 34,812
Horse and Dragoons.
one Imperial Regiment of Dragoons commanded by Count Herbeville 925 1,000
six Spanish Regiments of Horse 2,544 3,858
four English Regiments, whereof one of Horse and three of Dragoons 1,474 2,039
total of Horse in Queen Anne's pay 4,943 6,897
seven Portuguese Regiments of Horse 3,405 3,708
three Dutch Regiments of Horse 1,079 1,231
four Palatine Regiments of Dragoons 1,067 1,200
total of Horse and Dragoons 10,494 13,036
total of Horse and Foot in Queen Anne's pay 22,432
total of Horse and Foot of her Majesty's Allies 9,918
32,350
A state of her Majesty Queen Anne's Forces provided for by Parliament in the Estimate for Spain and Portugal for the service of the year 1708.
Horse. Numbers.
Major Gen. Harvey's Regiment 418
Dragoons.
Royal Regiment of Dragoons 589
Brigadier Pepper's Regiment 443
Count Nassau's Regiment 589
Foot.
Col. Harrison's 834
Lord Mordaunt's 876
Brig. Wade's 876
Brig. Elliott's 834
Col. Watkins' 834
Sir Cha. Hotham's 834
Col. Sibourg's 725
The above Regiments are now in service in Spain.
The Regiment of Horse and the three Regiments of Dragoons are complete.
The seven Regiments of Foot were complete most part of the last year [1708], but now by computation want 800 men.
The following Regiments were on service in Spain, but [were] reduced at several times the last year [1708] and incorporated into other Regiments, and the Officers sent home to recruit
Dragoons. Numbers
Brig. Pearce's 589
Marquis de Guiscard's 761
Foot.
Earl of Portmore's 876
Royal Fuziliers 834
Lieut. Gen. Steuart's 876
Col. Hill's 876
Col. Blossett's 725
The following Regiments are now in service in Portugal and by computation at the end of the Campaign [1708] wanted 500 men
Foot.
Brig. Pearce's 725
Earl of Barrymore's 876
Brig. Newton's 725
Lord Paston's 834
Brig. Sankey's 725
Col. Stanwix's 725
The following Regiments were discontinued and the pay of the private men applied towards the support of the [Almanza] prisoners in France, but [that pay] has not been sufficient to answer that service.
Foot.
Col. Alnut's 834
Marquis de Montandre's 834
Col. Breton's 834
Col. de Magny's 725
The following Regiments were put on the Establishment of Guards and Garrisons and the Regiments of Farrington, Livesay, Johnson and Townesend were sent to Ostend in their room.
Foot.
Brig. Wightman's 876
Maj. Gen. Gorge's 876
Lord Mountjoy's 876
Lord Mark Kerr's 725
The following Regiments were sent to Ostend under the command of Gen. Erle
Foot. Numbers.
Col. Dormer's 834
Brig. Macartny's 876
Col. Caulfield's 834
27,123
These two Regiments were raised in Portugal at the beginning of August last
Dragoons.
Earl of Galway's 589
Major Gen. Carle's 725
The other two accounts which the House had called for on the 12th January were laid before it on the 1st Feb. without being entered in the Journals. (fn. 2) On the 4th Feb., three days after the above Return, Walpole introduced the Estimates of the charge of her Majesty's Forces to serve in Spain and Portugal and [of the Sea Service Regiments] on board the Fleet as the service may require for the year 1709 (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 90–1, 4 Feb. 1708–9).
This Estimate was as follows:
In Spain. Men. Charge.
Horse. £ s. d.
Major Gen. Harvey's Regiment 418 23,107 10 10
Dragoons.
Royal Regiment 589 20,652 18 4
Brig. Pepper's 589 20,652 18 4
Comte Nassau's 589 20,652 18 4
Foot.
Col. Harrison's Regiment 834 14,520 18 4
Lord Mordaunt's 876 15,512 10 0
Brig. Wade's 876 15 512 10
Brig. Elliott's 834 14,520 18 4
Col. Watkins' 834 14,520 18 4
Sir Cha. Hotham's 834 14,520 18 4
Col. Sibourg's 725 13,179 10 10
In Portugal.
Foot.
Col. Pearce's Regiment 725 13,179 10 10
Brig. Newton's 725 13,179 10 10
Earl of Barrymore's 876 15,512 10 0
Lord Paston's 834 14,520 18 4
Major Gen. Sankey's 725 13,179 10 10
Col. Stanwix's 725 13,179 10 10
At Attorney.
Foot.
Col. Hamilton's Regiment 876 15,512 10 0
Brig. Macartney's 876 15,512 10 0
Brig. Wynn's 785 14,207 12 6
Expected every day from Ostend. Men. Charge.
Foot. £ s. d.
Col. Dormer's Regiment 834 14,520 18 4
Col. Caulfield's 834 14,520 18 4
Major Gen. Farrington's 809 14,384 0 10
Col. Moore's 834 14,520 18 4
Col. Johnson's 876 15,512 10 0
Recruiting in England.
Foot.
Earl of Portmore's Regiment 876 15,512 10 0
Royal Fuziliers 834 14,721 13 4
Lieut. Gen. Stuart's 876 15,512 10 0
In Garrison.
Foot.
Major Gen. Gorge's Regiment 725 13,179 10 10
Lord Mountjoy's 725 13,179 10 0
Discontinued.
Foot.
Col. Alnut's Regiment 834 14,520 18 4
Col. Breton's 834 14,520 18 4
Raised last year in Portugal.
Dragoons.
Earl of Galway's Regiment 589 20,652 18 4
Foot.
Major Gen. Carle's Regiment 785 14,207 12 6
Regiments to serve in Portugal in the room of Guiscard's, Montandre's, De Magny's and Blosset's, which are broke.
Dragoons, one Regiment 589 20,652 18 4
Foot, four Regiments, each 725 men: 13,179l. 10s. 10d. each 2,900 52,718 3 4
total 29,899 598,177 14 2
Foreign Forces to serve in Spain.
3,000 Imperialists and 1,200 Italian Foot 62,411 7 0
4,000 Imperial Foot and 1,000 Horse 87,415 4 2
4,000 Imperial Foot more 60,000 0 0
towards paying the Troops of his Catholic Majesty and other extraordinaries of the war upon account 210,000 0 0
1,018,003 5 4
General and Staff Officers for Spain 26,235 18 4
Contingencies for the Hospitals in Spain 5,000 0 0
General and Staff Officers for Portugal 28,843 6 8
Contingencies for Hospitals in Portugal 3,000 0 0
£1,081,083 0 4
Although this Spanish and Portuguese war Estimate was so complicated, and although the whole subject of the events in Spain was the subject of fierce controversy, the Committee of Supply does not appear to have given more than one day to the debate of the figures, viz. on the 7th Feb. On the following day, the 8th Feb., the Committee reported to the House and the House adopted without a division a resolution that a sum not exceeding 1,081,083l. 0s. 4d. be granted to her Majesty to defray the charge of maintaining the Forces in her Majesty's pay to serve in Spain and Portugal for the service of the year 1709 (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 96, 97; Luttrell VI, pp. 404–5).
This sum is the exact figure of the Estimate: so that here again the House had voted Supply on a two days' debate within less than a week of the introduction of the Estimate and without the alteration of a single figure.
To complete this story of the financial provision for the fighting Forces there remain only the comparatively minor or smaller items of the Subsidies; the Navy Ordinary; the Ordnance; Transport; and Extraordinaries for the war.
With regard to the Subsidy Treaties the House of Commons had, on the 25th Jan. 1708–9, by the usual procedure of an Address to the Queen, desired a return or account “of such Treaties or Agreements as have been made in relation to Contributions” (Commons Journals XVI, p. 69). When, however, on the 11th February, the return or account was presented to the House by Walpole, in his capacity as Secretary at War, it did not correspond to the terms of the Address. Without laying the text of the Treaties or even quoting them it simply set out in the form of an Estimate the account of the Queen's proportion of Subsidies payable to the Allies pursuant to Treaties, for the year 1709 The text of the Treaties was not submitted in a single case and no definite reference was made to them.
The account so submitted was as follows (Commons Journals XVI, p. 103, 11 Feb. 1708–9):
Crowns, per an. £ s. d.
to the King of Denmark in Bank money at Hamburg 150,000 37,500 0 0
to the King of Portugal, for defraying his Majesty's proportion of the charge of 13,000 men: 666,666 patacoons 33 stivers at 4s. 6d. each patacoon 600,000 150,000 0 0
to the Duke of Savoy 640,000 160,000 0 0
more to the Duke of Savoy 100,000 0 0
to the Landgrave of Hesse Cassell 25,000 5,952 7 6
to the Elector of Treves 25,000 5,952 7 6
to the Elector Palatine 20,000 4,761 18 6
to the King of Prussia for defraying Queen Anne's proportion of the charge of 8,000 men sent to assist the Duke of Savoy 200,000 50,000 0 0
more to the King of Prussia by virtue of the Treaties of 1701 and 1706 on account of the 12,000 men sent [by the said King] to serve in the Netherlands: viz.
guilders. stivers.
for Queen Anne's share of the agio or difference of the money current in the Empire and the rates the same money is current at in the territories where his [the said King of Prussia's] Troops are employed 109,666 10
more for Queen Anne's share of bread 153,097 16
more for her Majesty's share of forage 125,865 0
388,629 6 37,012 7 6
to the Landgrave of Hesse for her Majesty's quota, being two thirds, of his additional Subsidy of 100,000 Crowns per an. on account of two Regiments of Horse of his Troops, which were in Italy 66,6662/3 Crowns 16,666 13 4
£567,845 14 4
This account or estimate, whichever it may be termed, was considered in Grand Committee on the same day on which it was introduced, was agreed there and then and reported on the following day, Feb. 12 (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 104, 107; Luttrell VI, p. 407). On this occasion an amendment was proposed in the House and the Committee's recommendation for the full sum was reduced, on the question, from 567,845l. 14s. 4d. to 553,845l. 14s. 4d. The reduction in the Vote therefore was 14,000l., but in the absence of details of the debate it is difficult to specify the particular item against which exception was taken. (fn. 3)
With this exception the Vote was passed en bloc and as it stood.
The Navy Ordinary.
At the outset of the Session the House had voted 120,000l. for the Ordinary of the Navy Office for the year 1709. This vote had been taken upon perusal of the “ordinary” Estimate of the Navy and the “Estimate” of the Navy debt. As explained supra, p. vi, the vote might almost be regarded as being in the nature of a Vote on account. For in the following January at the first available moment the House returned to the subject.
On the 10th January it ordered “that the Commissioners of the Navy do lay before this House an account of the particular expenses for the Ordinary of the Navy since 1703” (1708 Nov. 27, Commons Journals XVI, p. 24; p. 16, Nov. 26).
Incidentally it is to be noted that the House did not address the Queen to order the account, but itself ordered the Queen's executive direct. This was unusual and marks a further step in the process by which the control of the Executive gradually passed into the hands of the Legislative body. No notice appears to have been taken of the informality, and on the 14th Jan. Sir Thomas Littleton, the Treasurer of the Navy, “in obedience to the order of the 10th,” presented as from the Navy Commissioners a statement of the particulars of the Navy Ordinary deduced year by year from what he styled “the Navy Estimates” for the years in question, which the Navy Commissioners understood had “been presented to this House from the Office of the Lord High Admiral annually.”
For the last preceding year, 1708, the account was as follows (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 55, 59; 14 Jan. 1708–9):
£ s. d.
The Council to his Royal Highness, Lord Admiral of Great Britain, the Navy Commissioners, their Secretaries, officers, clerks and instruments; rent of offices and contingencies relating thereto 30,840 17 2
pensions to superannuated sea officers and to the widows of others &c. 17,852 15 11
Yards:
Chatham 3,303 2 6
Deptford 2,751 9 9
Woolwich 2,299 12 1
Portsmouth 3,286 16 3
Sheerness 1,535 19 11
Plymouth 2,242 18 11
Kinsale 1,035 10 0
Muster-Masters and other officers of the outports 1,949 0 0
wages to ships and vessels in ordinary [in harbour] 16,227 4 3
victuals for the officers and men serving therein [in the ships in harbour] 7,342 3 0
charges of harbour mooring 19,162 0 0
ordinary repairs of the ships in harbour and of the docks, wharves, storehouses &c. 39,540 0 0
149,369 9 9
charges of the Office for Registering Seamen 34,425 4 6
The combined total was 183,794l. 14s. 3d. For the preceding years the figures were:
Navy Ordinary. Office for Registering seamen. total.
£ s. d.
1703 128,085 2 2 31,540 0 0 159,625 2 2
1704 137,362 19 6 31,525 0 0 16,888 19 6
1705 137,026 8 5 32,005 0 0 169,031 8 5
1706 148,014 8 6 33,444 0 0 181,458 8 6
1707 139,179 17 6 33,997 5 7 173,177 3 1
But although this account showed clearly that the Naval Ordinary had constantly exceeded the block annual vote of 120,000l. nothing was done in the matter for the rest of the Session in the way of reinforcing the Vote. (For the subject of the Navy Debt, see infra, p. xl.)
The Ordnance.
The usual method of dealing with the Ordnance Estimate and Vote was to separate the Sea Ordnance from the Land Force Ordnance and to include the Sea Ordnance in the block vote for the 40,000 men for the Navy, but to call for a separate and distinct Estimate for the Ordnance land service.
The usual or block vote of 4l. per man per month for the Naval complement was apportioned amongst four heads of which the last figure was 4s. [or 5 per cent.] for Ordnance (Commons Journals XVI, p. 172). This rate of computation means that on the almost stereotyped vote of 40,000 men at 4l. per man per month (which made 2,080,000l. per an.) a sum of 104,000l. was included or provided for the Naval Ordnance or Ordnance Sea Service. This vote hardly ever altered. For the Land Service of the Ordnance the House as usual called for an Estimate on the 25th November (Commons Journals XVI, p. 13), and this was brought in on the 21st January 1708–9 by General Erle. It was as follows (Commons Journals XVI, p. 65, 21 Jan.):
£ s. d.
the charge of the Holland Train [of Artillery] 45,000 0 0
the Ordinary of the Office, comprising salaries, rents, repairs of store houses, barracks, platforms, carriages, as likewise the expense of stores in the several Garrisons [in Great Britain] and other incidents 28,273 13 9
200 tons of saltpetre for supply of the [gunpowder] stores 10,600 0 0
the yearly charge at Jamaica 456 5 0
the yearly charge at New York 182 10 0
the yearly charge of powder for Portugal according to the Treaty 10,974 5 0
the yearly charge of the Officers, fireworkers, bombadiers, artificers, gunners and matrosses belonging to the [Artillery] Trains in Catalonia, Alicante and Denia 14,939 7 6
the yearly charge of Officers, an engineer, fireworkers, bombardiers, gunners and artificers at Gibraltar 3,631 15 0
the yearly charge of Officers, engineers, fireworkers, bombardiers, gunners and artificers for a Train of Artillery at Port Mahon 4,544 5 0
the charge of enlarging the fortifications at Portsmouth, Chatham, Sheerness, Edinburgh Castle, Stirling Castle, Fort William, at Inverloughy 60,000 0 0
the charge of enlarging the fortifications at Landguard Fort and fortifying Harwich 10,801 0 0
the charge of Officers, bombardiers, gunners and others belonging to the Train of Artillery in the north part of Great Britain 1,026 11 3
the charge of stores demanded for the several Garrisons in the north part of Great Britain 10,058 7
total £200,488 0
Memorandum no computation can be made of the charge of purchasing the lands and houses which will be necessary to be done for erecting the fortifications, for security of docks and harbours at Portsmouth, Chatham and Harwich, because there are several persons interested therein who have not power upon sale thereof to make titles without authority of Parliament. The King of Spain demands ordnance and store for an Artillery [Train] in Spain, which will amount to a very great sum of money if they are supplied from hence.
The vote on this Estimate did not pass until the 5th February 1708–9, when the House Resolved that a sum not exceeding 180,000l. be granted to her Majesty for the charge of the Office of Ordnance for the Land Service for the year 1709. We have no clue to the Committee proceedings, so we do not know on which items of the Estimate the reduction had been made (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 92–3; Luttrell VI, p. 404).
Neither the Estimate nor the Vote made any mention of the Ordnance Office debt, which quite early in the Session had been submitted to the House as follows (11 Dec. 1708, Commons Journals XVI, pp. 36–7).
£ s. d.
An account of the Debt of the Office of Ordnance to 30 Sept. 1708 for stores delivered and services performed.
due to artificers and others for stores delivered [to the Office of Ordnance] and services performed to 30 Sept. 1708. 197,436 14
due to the Holland Train [of Artillery] to same time 1,796 16 0
due to the Train in Spain 8,002 17
due to the Officers &c at Gibraltar 2,248 7 0
due to the engineers, storekeepers &c at New York and Jamaica 328 15 0
due to fireworkers, bombardiers &c. attending the bomb-vessels in the Mediterranean and Channel 884 18 0
due to freight of ships attending at Barcelona, Alicante, Lisbon and bomb-vessels 16,065 13
due for salaries and rents of warehouses &c. 4,111 10
230,875 11
less tallies and money in the hands of the Treasurer of the Ordnance 89,760 0 10¾
[net balance of debt not provided for] £141,115 10
The tallies and money in the hands of the Treasurer of the Ordnance as above were as follows:
tallies:
upon the Tenth 4s. Aid ranking as payable after 1,775,916l. 7s. 6d. charged thereon 4,000 0 0
upon the Eleventh 4s. Aid ranking payable after 1,650,694l. 7s. 2d. charged thereon 33,500 0 0
upon Low Wines ranking payable after 604,200l. 8s.d. charged thereon 28,592 8
money 23,667 12
£89,760 0 10¾
No provision was made for this debt during the Session.
The Transport Office and Debt.
In obedience to an Address of the House and to the command of the Queen (neither of which are entered in the Journals) the Commissioners of the Transports presented to the House on the 3rd February 1708–9 the state of the Debt for Transport Service up to 30 Sept. 1708; and a statement or Estimate of the growing charge of the Transports. These accounts were as follows (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 86–7):
£ s. d.
State of the Transport debt in general for transporting her Majesty's Forces since the beginning of the present war; as it stood upon the 30th Sept. 1708.
due by the [bill] Register for Transport bills issued out and numbered and to be paid in Course for freight of shipping, provisions and other necessaries from 17 July 1706 to 30 Sept. 1708 viz.
for freight of shipping hired by the month to transport her Majesty's Forces to Portugal and Spain 316,121 1 1
for hay, oats, beer, cheese and cask, bedding, cabins, cradle, stabling and other necessaries 21,113 6 8
for freight of ships which transported her Majesty's Forces to Holland in 1707–8 7,897 4 9
345,131 12 7
for interest on the above Transport Bills to 30 Sept. 1708 30,560 17 0
over and above which there is also remaining due, for which no Transport Bills have yet been numbered or issued out:
for 52 ships hired in Ireland which have transported her Majesty's Forces to Portugal and Spain and are discharged the service, whose accounts are not yet adjusted 22,361 0 11
for 134 ships hired at London and Portsmouth by the month for transporting her Majesty's Forces to Portugal and Spain, 115 of which were running in monthly pay at 30 Sept. 1708 76,034 2 6
for 33 ships hired at Lisbon by the month to transport her Majesty's Forces to Spain, 28 of which were running in monthly pay at 30 Sept. 1708 17,202 19 1
26 ships hired at Ostend and Newcastle to transport her Majesty's Forces upon occasion of the intended [Jacobite] invasion [of Great Britain], the freight whereof by estimation may amount to about 6,500 0 0
497,790 12 1
towards which there remains in the hands of the Receiver and Paymaster of the Transports
£ s. d.
tallies on Malt anno 1707 33,300 0 0
tallies on Land Tax anno 1708. 44,821 8
tallies on Malt anno 1708 40,000 0 0
118,121 8
Remains [to be provided] £379,669 3
Memorandum:
Upon the 30th Sept. 1708 there were in her Majesty's Transport service, running in monthly pay, 143 ships, the growing charge whereof is 16,714l. 17s. 5d. per month.
The account of the expenses for one year for transporting her Majesty's Forces, to wit for the year ended 30 Sept. 1708. £ s. d.
The are hath arose, as by the Register for Transport Bills numbered and issued out and to be paid in course, for freight of ships, hay, oats, bread, beer, cheese, cask, wheat, bedding, cabins, cradles, stabling and other necessaries for men and horses and also for incident expenses such as cooperage, lighterage, pressing hay, labourers, travelling charges, house expenses and repairing returned bedding, cabins and stabling &c. as follows:
in Oct. 1707 7,895 12 0
in Nov. 1707 11,857 16 8
in Dec. 1707 11,631 13 5
in Jan. 1707–8 11,161 18 8
in Feb. 1707–8 7,128 1 8
in March 1707–8 7,682 2 5
in April 1708 11,677 15 2
in May 1708 14,592 18 9
in June 1708 17,578 18 6
in July 1708 10,933 6 11
in Aug. 1708 18,833 0 1
in Sept 1708 10,011 9 3
140,984 13 6
for interest on the said Transport Bills to 30 Sept. 1708 5,639 7 6
over and above which there hath also arose for service within the said year for which no Transport Bills have yet been numbered or issued out, as follows:
to ships hired at London and Portsmouth by the month for their service within the said year 52,219 7 2
to ships hired at Lisbon for their service within the said year 13,064 2 9
to ships hired at Ostend and Newcastle on occasion of the late Invasion 6,500 0 0
for salaries and charges of this [the Transport] Office for one year 3,200 0 0
total £221,607 10 11
[This account is presumably included in the totals of the preceding State save as for the item of 3,200l. for salaries and Office charges.]
Five days after the presentation of this Statement the House voted, 8 Feb. 1708–9, “that a sum not exceeding 140,000l. be granted to her Majesty towards defraying the charge of transporting Land Forces” (Commons Journals XVI, p. 97, 8 Feb. 1708–9). A footnote to the Journals relative to this entry states that “the sum voted was 144,000l. as appears both from the printed votes and the original Report.” In any case the vote is to be regarded as only a provision by way of guesswork for the probable cost of transport in the coming year 1709 without any provision whatever for the existing Transport debt.
Extraordinaries of the War Hitherto not Provided for by Parliament.
It is hardly necessary to explain why the various items comprised under the head of Extraordinaries of the war could not be estimated for beforehand, and were bound to be dealt with by way of post dated claims and adjustments. In the case of the year 1709 the account of so many items as had materialised or come to light or declared themselves was presented to the House on the 11th February 1708–9 by Robert Walpole, Secretary at War, in response to the Address from the House (which again is not entered in the Journals).
The account was as follows (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 103–4, 11 Feb.):
Account of some extraordinary charges of the war already incurred and not provided for by Parliament £ s. d.
for buying 100. horses and accoutrements to augment Lord Stair's Regiment from eight Troops of 54 men each Troop to 60 per Troop and one additional Troop of [60] private men, servants excluded 1,500 0 0
the same for Lieut. Gen. Ross's Regiment of Dragoons 1,500 0 0
the pay of the said additional men for one year ended 22 Dec. 1708 7,555 10 0
for buying horses and accoutrements to complete and augment the Royal Regiment of Horse Guards and the Regiments of Dragoons of Carpenter and the Earl of Essex 8,640 0 0
for the pay of the additional men for the said Regiments from 16 March to 22 Dec. 1708 7,635 3 0
an additional charge of pay to General Officers in Great Britain to 22 Dec. 1708 2,646 5 0
levy money for augmenting the Forces in North Britain to their present Establishment 14,065 0 0
Queen Anne's proportion (being a moiety) of the charge of extraordinary forage and carriages provided for the Forces in Flanders in the service of her Majesty and her Allies this winter, occasioned by the lateness of the last [1708] campaign, the siege of Ghent and the stay of the Imperial Troops and some other German Troops who must otherwise have been obliged to return home to winter quarters: upon account 50,000 0 0
Queen Anne's share of the extraordinary forage for the Danish and Hanover Troops during their winter quarters in the years 1707 and 1707–8 8,959 8 0
Queen Anne's share of an arrear of Extraordinaries due to the Hessians for men and horses lost and for Douceurs from the beginning of this present war 18,731 8 11
for an arrear due to the King of Prussia in the late war, of 56,000 Crowns agreed to by Treaty 14,000 0 0
for arrears of Subsidies due to the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel in the late war, amounting to 254,000 Rix Dollars, pursuant to the Treaty 60,476 3
for repairs, augmentation and other services relating to the fortifications of Gibraltar and Alicante and for extraordinary expenses and disbursements upon account of the Garrisons 20,291 15
for levy money for 4,000 Germans [sent] from Vado to Catalonia at 20 Crowns per man, pursuant to Treaty 20,000 0 0
for levy money for 2,467 recruits wanting to complete the Imperial Infantry serving in Catalonia at 20 Crowns per man, pursuant to Treaty 12,335 0 0
for the pay of the General [Officers] and Staff Officers serving in the Expedition with Lieut. Gen. Erle from 1 May 1708 to 22 Dec. following 6,651 5 4
for contingent expenses on the said Expedition 1,182 13 9
for the pay of Brig. Wynn's Regiment ordered from Ireland: to wit from 24 Jan. 1707–8 to 22 Dec. 1708 12,572 16 4
for the pay of the en seconde Officers who served in the room of those which were in Spain and taken prisoners at the battle of Almanza: to wit from 5 March [1707–8] to 22 Dec. 1708 19,360 7 8
288,102 17
Expenses of the war not yet incurred.
for the pay of the said en seconde Officers from 22 Dec. 1708, upon account 12,000 0 0
for the pay of a Lieut. Governor and other Officers for the Garrison of the Castle of St. Philipp in Port Mahon in Minorca for the year 1709 at 4l. 10s. 2d. a day 1,645 10 10
£301,748 7 11¼
On the following day, Feb. 12, the Committee of Supply voted without division or any recorded dissent “that a sum of 301,748l. 7s. 11¼d. be granted to her Majesty to defray the Extraordinary charges of the war already incurred and not provided for by Parliament” (Commons Journals XVI, p. 107).
Army and Transport Debentures.
On the 8th December 1708 a petition was presented to the House of Commons from the proprietors of Army Debentures and Transport Debentures on behalf of themselves and others interested in the debt due to Army Officers and to owners of Transport ships. The petition set forth that no principal had been paid on the said Debentures other than such as had been sunk or paid by the purchase of forfeited estates in Ireland, “which are now all sold”, and the remaining unsatisfied Debentures amount to about 960,000l., which by an Act of 1 Anne [1 Anne, c. 7], for making good Deficiencies, were to be made good in the next Session of Parliament after the 24th June 1703 with interest at 5 per cent.: that provision was made by Parliament for interest due [from the said 24 June 1703] to Xmas 1706: but no provision being yet made for the remaining principal or interest has occasioned a discount of 30 per cent. upon the said Debentures, to the great discredit of the Public Funds. Therefore the petitioners pray that some effective provision be made for paying the said debt (Commons Journals XVI, p. 35, 1708 Dec. 8).
The petition was referred to the Grand Committee of Supply and on the 5th Feb. 1708–9 on the Report from that Committee the House voted that a sum not exceeding 49,310l. 4s. 10½d. be granted to her Majesty for the payment of one year's interest on the unsatisfied Debentures charged upon the Irish Forfeitures (Ibid., p. 93).
A similar petition had been presented to the House in each of the three preceding years and had been followed by similar action in the form of a grant of a year's interest on an unstated amount of debt represented by Debentures charged upon Irish forfeited lands and intended to be liquidated by conveyances of such lands, but which had not been so liquidated because the supply of Irish forfeited lands had given out or fallen short. The form or wording of the petition, which is almost stereotyped from year to year, complicates the problem of accountancy by combining Debentures issued for Army arrears with Debentures issued for Transport debt. There is a further minor point which adds to the complication of the accountancy, viz. that a large proportion, possibly the bulk, of the petitioners, holders of the 960,000l. Debentures, were purchasers, or secondhand or speculative holders of the Debentures to whom the soldiers in despair had sold their certificates of claims at such prices as they could obtain. This point seems clear from the fact that in the year 1706–7 the Army Officers who were still holders of the Debentures petitioned the House separately on their own behalf, whilst at the same time the general body of Debenture holders presented the usual stereotyped petition on behalf of themselves. In this case the Officers appear to have been reinforcing the holders' petition which may have represented both interests. If that is so, we may take the sum of 960,000l. as fairly covering the bulk or the whole of this body of unsatisfied debt.
What did that debt represent, Army Debentures or Transport Debentures, or both? I think it will be plain from the story of each of these debts that it represented mainly Army arrear Debentures and that it contained very few Transport arrear Debentures.
The subject of the debt due after the Disbandment of 1697 to the Officers and undisbanded Troops has been already explained in pp. ccix–ccxiii of the Introductory volume to Vols. XI–XVII of this Calendar and in the prefatory note on pp. 1079–80 of Vol. XVII. The fullest and clearest statement of the arrears so remaining due after the Disbandment had been effected was contained in a statement laid before the House on the 19th Dec. 1699 by the Earl of Ranelagh, Paymaster of the Forces.
In brief this statement is as follows (Commons Journals XIII, pp. 79–83): £ s. d.
arrears of pay to Troops and Regiments, detailed, in England to 25 March 1699, when they were placed on the new Establishment 447,717 14 01/8
ditto in the Plantations (in the West Indies, New York) and Jersey and Guernsey to 25 March 1699 46,762 1 0
ditto in Ireland to 12 March 1697–8, being to wit on the English Establishment up to that date and paid in Ireland from that date as on the Irish Establishment 301,529 5
ditto in Scotland to various dates between 21 Dec. 1697 and 1697–8 March 19, from which dates they were paid in Scotland 122,066 0 10½
ditto, being four English Regiments now in the service of the States General, but on the English Establishment until 1697 Dec. 21 and 1698 Oct. 11 62,570 11 3
ditto disbanded in England at various dates between December 1697 and March 1697–8 237,550 12
total £1,218,196 5
This account was comprehensive and reliable and it would have been perfectly feasible for the House of Commons to make it the basis of deliberation as to provision of Supply. Not only so; but in squarely facing the full total of the debt the House would have been morally compelled to provide some reliable and adequate fund for its extinction. But such a simple, straightforward procedure did not suit the temper of the faction which had engineered the Disbandment and which embittered the remainder of William's life and defamed his memory after his death. Following the pattern of the purely partisan Commission of Accounts a fresh Commission was set up for the consideration of Army Debts, the Transport Debt and the accounts of Prizes. At the same time the rescinding (by the Act 11–12 Wm. III, c. 1) of William's grants of Irish lands offered a convenient means of providing for the soldiers' claims by a side wind, i.e. by charging them on the resumed Irish lands as a fund. The first Commission for Army Debts was appointed by the Act 11–12 Wm. III, c. 8. It was continued or its life was prolonged by the Act of 13–14 Wm. III, c. 1, and for a further two years by the Act 1 Anne, Stat. 2, c. 24. The members of the Commission were all creatures of Harley and the amateurish confusion and ineptitude of their so-called Reports rivalled anything which was produced by the contemporary Commission of Accounts. But in this case of the Army debts which were purely soldiers' and Officers' arrears such a procedure involved a cruel hardship. Debts which were stated and known in 1698 were still being inquired into by the Army Debts Commission and were still in the process of certification in 1702 and 1704 and 1711 and 1718. How many of these poor creditors of the State had died in that twenty years' interval? And how many of them in their despair had sold their Debentures (their titles to Irish lands) at any conceivable discount to land speculators or money lenders? The so-called Country Party's treatment of Wm. III. was bad enough, but its treatment of the English Officer and soldier broke in our wars was worse, for they were at least British, and in many cases poor with families depending on them.
The first Report, so called, from the Army Debts Commission was presented to Parliament on the 30th November 1702 and is summarised in the Calendar of House of Lords Records, Vol. V, pp. 128–133. Briefly it was as follows:
Army Debts. £ s. d.
certified by us in our last [i.e the first] Commission] 251,369 9
ditto in our present Commission 554,836 2 10¼
for Chelsea Hospital 19,068 19
£825,274 11 9
for Transport services in 1693 and 1697 93,734 9 9
interest on Transport debt in 1693. 31,506 16 6
A little over a year later, viz. on the 29th January 1703–4, the Commissioners signed a further [second] statement of the Army Debts certified and of Debentures made forth since the last account thereof laid before the House of Lords. This statement certifies as follows (Ibid., pp. 440–1):
£ s. d.
arrears to Officers 198,817 7 103/5
clothiers to 25 March 1699 11,069 6 10¾
clothiers to 24 Dec. 1699 4,300 10 10
[Regimental] Agents 9,278 16 71/8
Chelsea Hospital 12,749 5 10½
non-commission Officers and soldiers 29,279 12
poundage deduction 98,367 14 53/5
£363,802 13 93/5
Apparently combining the two Reports the Commissioners claim that up to 2 Feb. 1703–4 they had certified as follows (Ibid., pp. 435–6):
£ s. d.
for Army arrears 1,058,473 17 11¾
and made out debentures for 22,311l. 7s. 7d for Chelsea Hospital 22,311 7 1
for Transport service 150,486 9 6
The final so-called Report of this revived and prolonged Commission was given in to the House of Lords on the 22nd February 1704–5, that is after the expiry of the Commission (which by the last Act was continued only to 30 June 1704) (House of Lords' Reports, Vol. VI, pp. 290–7). It merely states that they had [since the last preceding account] certified a further sum of 7,017l. 17s. 4d. for Officers and 1,258l. 19s. 11d. for Transport and that up to the time of the expiry of their Commission “during the whole time of our Commissions” they had certified as follows [as total figures]:
£ s. d.
for arrears due to the Army 1,084,500 9 10
and that they had made out Debentures
£ s. d.
for the use of the Royal Hospital at Chelsea 22,425 3 10¼
for Transport service 150,743 8 6
It is quite impossible to follow the figures of the Commissioners for Army Debts, who during the whole time of their commission had been drawing a salary of 500l. per an. each besides an allowance for clerical and other expenses. Their incompetence and the salary drawing could be forgiven, but what is intolerable is their indifference to the sufferings of the soldiers who were starving for want of the payment of their arrears. For the certification of the debts due was only the initial step towards actual payment. The second stage was to issue Debentures and the third step was to equate the Debentures against forfeited Irish lands. The final step was to execute conveyances of the lands to the soldiers, the Debentures being accepted as in payment of the purchase money. The process of conveying the lands in this way did not begin until 1702 and went on from 1703 to 1708, and the conveyances appear to account for less than half the individual cases comprised in the above stated total of 1,084,500l. 9s. 10d. soldiers' arrears. But, furthermore, that total did not include the claims of the Londonderry and Enniskillen Regiments and other items, the details of which are printed in Appendix No. 3 to Vol. XVII of this Calendar. It represents an item deriving entirely from the Irish Establishment and which therefore never came into the Earl of Ranelagh's accounts at all. This fresh or further list amounted to 372,452l. 4s. 93/8d. and no debentures appear ever to have been issued for it. Indeed at the time of the preparation of the Estimates for the year 1709 the item of the Londonderry arrears had not emerged. It was not represented. The only question in Nov. 1708 was the provision of interest for the year 1709 on such Army arrear Debentures as had not been liquidated out of Irish lands and for such Transport Debentures as had been issued to shipowners for the fresh Transport debt which had accrued in 1693 and 1697–8.
The history of the Transport debt has been outlined in pp. ccxiii–ccxviii of the General Introduction to Vols. XI–XVII already referred to. From that account it appears that the original Transport debt of 1690 which arose out of William's war in Ireland in 1690 and which amounted to 330,769l. 10s. 7d. had by the year 1703 been liquidated out of Irish lands and that the subsequent debt which had arisen in 1693 and 1697–8 had been provided for only by Debentures, i.e. by paper promises. The final Report of the Army Debts Commissioners appears to put this later Transport debt at 119,731l. 13s. 8d., which we can only understand as existing in the form of unsatisfied Debentures not charged on any valid or existing fund.
The total grant of interest for the year 1709 for unsatisfied Debentures, both Army and Transport, was 49,310l. 4s. 10½d., which at 5 per cent. would represent a principal of 986,204l. 17s. 6d. of Debentures. Deducting the 119,731l. 13s. 8d. of Transport Debentures from this total, we are left with a capital sum of 766,473l. 3s. 10d. as the unliquidated amount of Army Debentures outstanding in 1708. If this is correct, then the original total of Army arrears of 1,218,196l. 5s.d. as stated by the Earl of Ranelagh, or of 1,058,473l. 17s. 11¾d. as stated by the Army Debts Commissioners, had only been liquidated to the extent of, say, between 300,000l. and 450,000l. out of Irish lands. And, as I have already said, neither of these two statements of Army debts included the 372,452l. 4s. 93/8d. of Londonderry and Inniskillen debts which were brought to light in 1711.
In the three preceding years the vote for interest on unsatisfied Army and Transport Debentures had been:
anno 1705, 47,000l.
anno 1706, 49,000l.
anno 1707, 60,334l. 19s. 6d. for a year and a quarter.
It is therefore clear that no further liquidation took place after the fund of Forfeited Irish Lands had dried up. In other words, the interest grants during these three years provided for interest only on the outstanding Army Debentures and Transport Debentures without any amortisation of the principal.
This is only another sample of the financial irresponsibility of the political group led by Robert Harley, the originator of the crazy and disastrous Land Bank Scheme, and soon to become the originator of the still more crazy and disastrous South Sea Company Scheme. In the present instance he had engineered the Disbandment of 1697 as a party manœuvre directly aimed against William; then finding that the Parliamentary Supply voted for the Disbandment was insufficient he had engineered the revocation of William's grants of Irish lands so as ostensibly to meet the Army Officers' claims of arrears out of resumed Irish Forfeitures; then, careless of the result, when he found that the Resumed Irish lands were totally inadequate to meet the Army Officers' claims he sheered off and left the Officers to their poverty and distress just as he left Defoe in prison after having stolen his brains. During the years 1697–1702, years in which he was the unseen ruler of the House of Commons, the Army Officers received nothing on their debt claims, neither interest nor principal, though all that time Harley's incompetent friends and tools on the Commission of Accounts and the Commission of Army Debts were receiving fat salaries and screening the financial delinquencies of at least one member of the Commission of Accounts. Then from 1705, after he came into the Ministry, the Officers received interest only, with no provision whatever for liquidation of the principal sum of the debt.
The remaining heads of voted Supply for the year 1709 do not call for such detailed explanation. The 3,500l. voted for the cost of circulating the old Exchequer Bills was necessitated by the continued existence of the Trustees for Circulation until the final liquidation of the old issue. The “old” Exchequer Bills in question were the 1,500,000l. worth of Bills issued under the Act 7–8 Wm. III, c. 6, and the 1,200,000l. worth of Bills issued under the Act 7–8 Wm. III, c. 24, and the 354,604l. 11s.d. of Bills re-issued under the Act 12–13 Wm. III, c. 1. The cancellation of these Bills, the complete extinction of the issue, was provided for by or out of the funds established by the said Acts and the process or working of the machinery of cancellation was left in the hands of the Treasury and the Exchequer. By the time of the accession of Queen Anne these funds had provided for the cancellation of 2,501,177l. 1s.d. of the principal money out of a total issue of 3,054,594l. 11s.d., thus leaving an outstanding principal sum of 553,417l. 9s. 8d. in Bills uncancelled. This deficit, corrected to 515,165l. 4s.d., was provided for as the primary debt item in the Deficiencies Act of 1 Anne, c. 7, and the cancellation was effected by monthly payments which ran from Aug. 1706 regularly up to June 1710, when the last payment was made and the total issue finally and completely liquidated. During this final liquidation period the services of the Trustees for circulation could not be dispensed with, and as the Deficiencies Act of 1 Anne, c. 7, had made no provision for meeting the annual costs of this circulation machinery it fell to the House of Commons to vote annually a sum for the cost of the Trustees and their office clerks and incident expenses.
The two succeeding items of Supply arose out of the Union with Scotland and were a concession to Scotch feeling and interests. They were:
(1) The item of 28,452l. 19s. 7d. for discharging the allowances for fish and flesh exported from Scotland cured with foreign salt imported into Scotland before the Union.
and (2) similarly the item of 23,299l. 15s. 0d. for similar allowances for or purchase of such salt so imported as was still remaining on hand.
Both these items arose out of the clause (Article 8) in the Act of Union which postponed the application to Scotland of the salt Duties operating in England. This concession was made out of regard to the interests of the Scotch fish curing trade and was further defined by the Act 7 Anne, c. 11, for ascertaining and directing the payment of debentures on the export from Scotland after the Union of fish, beef and pork cured by foreign salt imported before the Union: on which exports the [rebate] allowances [or debentures] are computed at 28,452l. 19s. 7d.
As a corollary to this concession the same Act provided that the stock of foreign salt so imported before the Union and remaining on the hands of the Scotch curing trade should be purchased and paid for by the British Treasury to an amount not exceeding 51,777 bushels and valued at 23,299l. 15s. 0d. Ultimately the matter gave the Treasury much trouble before the stock of salt so paid for was actually disposed of.
The last item of Supply viz. the discount payment to the Bank of England arose out of Clause 3 of the Act of 7 Anne, c. 7, for enlarging the Capital Stock of the Bank of England. Under that clause the Bank agreed to advance 400,000l. to the State in three instalments in May, June and August of the year 1709, but was to receive a discount of 6 per cent. for so much of the said sum as it should pay down before those dates, and such discount was to be reckoned to the 1 Aug. 1701 from the days of actual payment. The precise sum to be so paid as discount could not be calculated beforehand, so that the text of the Act does not state any figure for this item, and so far as can be ascertained no precise figure was mentioned during the Committee stages of the Bill. But ultimately it was fixed at 46,512l. 16s. 9d. Towards that sum only the amount of 31,989l. 19s.d. was paid in the financial year ending 28 Sept. 1709.
The complete statement of the Parliamentary Supply which was thus voted for all the services of the year 1709 is set out infra on pp. cxxxii–cxxxiv. It totalled 6,713,645l. 5s.d. What was the fate of each item in that statement? How far was the Treasury or the financial system of the country successful in providing each service with its quota of voted supply? The evidence of the Expenditure side of the table of Revenue and Expenditure here printed furnishes one more convincing instance of the breakdown of Parliamentary Supply even in the hands of a most willing and well meaning House of Commons.
Navy Receipts, Payments and Debt anno 1709.
Issues in the financial year to Michaelmas 1709 for the Navy. £ s. d.
for the Ordinary 97,993 2 0
for Wages to seamen 826,863 3 10
for the Victualling 494,000 0 0
for Wear and Tear 603,512 1 0
Marines pay arrear 78 6 8
total £2,022,446 13 6
As against the total Vote of 2,200,000l. this shows a shortage of issue by 177,553l. 6s. 6d.
But of the total 2,022,446l. 13s. 6d. so issued as above only the sum of 1,593,714l. 10s. 10½d. was issued for the Navy service of the year 1709. The remainder consisted of items as follows which were on account of arrears of preceding years' Naval service: viz.
£ s. d. £ s. d.
on account of the year 1698: Marine Officers' arrear 78 6 8
on account of the year 1702:
Wages to seamen 2,139 6 6
Marine Regiments 70,539 4 11
Wear and Tear 12 13 0
72,691 4 5
on account of the year 1703:
Wages to seamen 41 1
Wear and Tear 3,459 1
3,500 2 11
on account of the year 1704:
Wages to seamen 458 7
Wear and Tear 356 7
on account of the year 1705: 814 14 2
Wear and Tear 3 10 6
on account of the year 1708:
Navy Ordinary 9,000 0 0
Ordinary: Yards 21,000 0 0
Wages to seamen 153,000 0 0
Sick and Wounded 5,000 0 0
Marine Regiments 61,560 3 11½
Wear and Tear 41,000 0 0
Yards 36,084 0 0
Victualling 25,000 0 0
351,644 3 11½
total issues for arrears of previous years 428,532 2
1709 shortage as above 177,553 6 6
£ s. d.
total by which the Navy services went short in the year 1709 of the Supply voted for the Navy anno 1709 606,085 9
deduct 94,592l. 17s.d. balance difference of tallies in the Navy Treasurer's hands at Mich. 1709 (viz. 218,345l. 17s.d.) over tallies in his hands at Mich. 1708 (viz. 123,753l.) and also 73,037l. 10s. 0d. for Exchequer Bills in hand at Mich. 1709 167,630 7
total shortage of Navy Supply anno 1709 £438,455 1 8
In an undated but apparently contemporary account of the Navy Debt 1702–9 contained in Treasury Board Papers CXVII, No. 24, the difference between the Parliamentary grants and the actual Exchequer issues in the year 1709 is given as follows:
Grants. Issued. Supply Complements unpaid during the year 1709.
£ £ s. d. £ s. d.
Navy Ordinary 120,000 67,993 2 0 52,006 18 0
Wages, including Marines 780,000 534,124 19 11½ 245,875 0
Victualling 494,000 494,000 0 0
Wear and Tear 702,000 497,596 8 11 204,403 11 1
Ordnance, Sea Service 104,000 78,250 0 0 25,750 0 0
£2,200,000 £1,671,964 10 10½ £528,035 9
In the case of this discrepancy I prefer the figures from the audited Revenue and Expenditure Account as representing undoubtedly the final figures ultimately passed and adopted by the Exchequer and the Treasury.
This nett shortage of Navy Supply on the years inevitably means an increase in the floating debt of the Navy.
Turning to the statement of Navy Debt we find that on the 30th Sept. 1708 it stood at 4,099,416l. 0s. 5d. as follows (Commons Journals XVI, p. 17):
£ s. d. £ s. d.
Bills on the Second Book 15,480 14 8
Wear and Tear 1,205,997 5 1
Yards 287,848 0 0
Wages to seamen 1,617,936 5 6
Victualling 1,101,535 18 5
Sick and Hurt 77,711 0 0
4,306,509 3 8
deduct money and tallies in the Navy Treasurer's hands at 30 Sept. 1708 207,093 3 3
nett Navy Debt at 30 Sept. 1708. £4,099,416 0 5
Navy Debt at 30 Sept. 1709 (Commons Journals XVI, p. 219; original in Treasury Board Papers CXVI. No. 38). £ s. d. £ s. d.
Bills on the Second Book 15,480 14 8
Wear and Tear 1,576,127 11 6
Yards 322,137 0 0
Wages to seamen 1,750,625 14 0
Victualling 1,345,894 0 1
Sick and Hurt 68,944 15 7
5,079,209 15 10
deduct money, Exchequer Bills and Tallies in the Navy Treasurer's hands at 30 Sept. 1709 109,962 13 5
nett Navy Debt at 30 Sept 1709 £4,969,247 0 5
increase of Navy Debt in the year Michaelmas 1708 to Michaelmas 1709
4,969,247 2 5
4,099,416 0 5
£869,831 2 0
This figure of increase is practically double the already stated shortage of 438,455l. 1s. 8d. of the Navy Treasurer's receipts from the Exchequer as against his issues for naval services. This discrepancy, however, is explained by the following memorandum which is appended to the Navy Debt statement as at 30 Sept. 1709 in Commons Journals XVI, p. 219:
Memorandum. over and above the sum of money remaining in the Navy Treasurer's hands he has also by him tallies for the sum of 424,316l. 9s.d. hereunder mentioned, which are reserved for such uses as the Lord Treasurer shall direct and are to be reckoned towards satisfying the debt of the Navy, but not being yet appointed to any of the particular heads of the said Debt cannot at present be placed thereto: viz.
£ s. d.
tallies on Annuities after two lives 53,673 0 0
tallies on Half Subsidies anno 1708 44,095 3 3
tallies on the Twelfth 4s Aid. 120,497 14
tallies on Half Subsidies anno 1709 206,050 12 1
£424,316 9
This memorandum practically reconciles the two statements of Navy Supply shortage anno 1709 and Navy Debt increase anno 1709. But the mere reconciliation of the two statements ought not to blind us to the fact that the real or actual increase in the Navy Debt during the year was the larger figure of 869,831l. 2s. 0d. and not the smaller figure of 438,455l. 1s. 8d. This is for the reason that the so-called assets of 424,316l. 9s.d. explained by this memorandum were simply paper assets, a mere draft on this or that fund (Land Tax or Malt &c.) in tallies and orders which the Lord Treasurer had directed into the hands of the Navy Treasurer but with explicit instructions not to realise them on the loan market until the Lord Treasurer gave the signal to do so by fixing an allowance of interest on them. In the Navy Debt account such an issue was bound to be taken to a Reserve account as cash (or paper) awaiting the Lord Treasurer's further directions. So the item is omitted from the credit side of the Debt account where normally it would appear under the general description of cash in hand and it is simply mentioned by way of Memorandum. Therefore the Navy Debt stands at the larger figure by reason of the non-inclusion of this 424,316l. 9s.d. ineffectual cash in hand, still undirected or awaiting application. In the Navy Treasurer's account the item does not appear at all on either side, either on the Debit side as cash issued to him or on the Credit side as services met and paid for under any of the heads of Ordinary, Wages, Wear and Tear or Victualling. The moment the application of this 424,316l. 9s.d. was decided upon by the Lord Treasurer it would automatically appear on both sides of the Navy Treasurer's account and would leave his statement of debt (shortage of his supply issues) at the same figure as before, viz. 438,455l. 1s. 8d., and simultaneously the statement of the Navy Debt would be reduced by the application of the 424,316l. 9s.d. to the payment of such and such heads of Naval service. But until that moment or order of application came the services to which it should ultimately be applied were going short. The Navy Treasurer was still in debt to those services to that amount.
All this simply means that the issue of unnegotiable paper to a Departmental Treasurer was no issue at all and was ineffectual as far as the reduction of service debt was concerned. At the close of the financial year ending Michaelmas 1709 the Naval services for which the Navy Treasurer was accountable were 869,831l. 4s. 0d. more in debt than they were at the beginning of that year. One half of this debt increase was due to shortage of realised Parliamentary Supply, the other half was due to actual increase in the Naval services beyond or above the Navy Estimate formed at the beginning of the year.
Without doubt the above general outline of the Navy Debt in 1709 is roughly correct. But it is symptomatic of the difficulty of stating the floating Debt of any Department of State at any particular point of time that a contemporary Estimate of the Debt differs in detail at almost every point. The Estimate in question is contained in Treasury Board Papers CXVI, No. 22, an undated and unsigned paper headed and endorsed “The Debt of the Navy exclusive of the Register [the Registry Office for seamen] as it stood at Michaelmas 1708 compared with the like Debt as it stood at Michaelmas 1709.” This statement or Estimate, whichever it was, is as follows:
The several Heads of Expense. At Michaelmas, 1708. At Michaelmas, 1709. Increase or decrease.
£ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.
on Bills incurred before the late [King William's] reign 15,480 14 8 15,480 14 8
on Wear and Tear 1,082,580 19 1 1,838,908 19 5 756,328 0 4 increase
on wages to seamen 1,363,993 9 9 1,711,009 13 1 347,016 3 4 increase
on Victualling 1,093,768 14 2 1,337,806 4 11 244,037 10 9 increase
on account of Sick and Hurt 72,680 18 10 66,041 10 4 6,639 8 6 decrease
£3,628,504 16 6 £4,969,247 2 5 1,340,742 5 11 increase
£ s. d.
Memorandum. the Debt at Michaelmas 1708 is to be reduced by 53,673l. then remaining in tallies on Reversionary Annuities and to be applied to reducing the Debt as money should be raised on them: according to a Memorandum at the foot of the said 1708 account. This would reduce it to 3,574,831l. 16s. 6d. and leaving the increase for the year as 1,340,742 5 11
[? 1,394,415 5 11]
Note: towards reducing this increase there must be abated the sum remaining in tallies at Michaelmas 1709 to be applied to any the aforegoing heads as money can be raised on them according to the account from the Navy 424,316 9
increase of Debt in 1709 916,425 16
[? 970,098 16 4½]
also: the sum remaining to complete the proportions to the Navy out of the Funds for the year 1709, the payment whereof depends upon the Bank of England's agreeing or not agreeing to the circulating of 212,739l. residue of 612,739l. for the further supply in Exchequer Bills 179,847 7 8
[if this be deducted] the net Debt increase would be 736,578 8
[?790,151 8 8¼]
The subject of the increase of the Navy Debt exercised the mind of the House of Commons considerably. It had referred the matter of the growth of that Debt from the Queen's accession (i.e. from 1701–1708) to a special Committee as far back as the 26th November 1708, but the Committee's Report was not brought in until the 21st March following (Commons Journals XVI, p. 167). When the House sat down three days later to the considerattion of that Report (ibid., p. 172) it at once appeared that the whole growth of Debt was due to a shortage of issues:
Supply voted (1701–8). Issues actually made (1701–8). Shortage.
£ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.
Wear and Tear 4,914,000 0 0 3,832,551 0 0 1,081,448 19 2
seamen's wages 5,460,000 0 0 4,815,293 0 644,706 0 0
Victualling 3,458,000 0 0 3,422,275 18 35,724 1
increase 1701–8 due to short issues £1,761,879 0 11¼
Not satisfied with this statement, the House called on the Navy Commissioners for an account of the causes of the increase (Commons Journals XVI, p. 172). To this request the Navy Commissioners replied by a Report which is printed in the Journals under the 4th April 1709 (ibid., p. 186), but it is difficult to imagine that the House received either enlightenment or satisfaction from that Report.
Turning to the Army accounts, we find the same story of the Departmental issue falling short of the Supply actually voted by the House.
Army: Issues in 1709 for Land Forces in Flanders and Spain and Portugal.
for 1705. for 1706. for 1708. for 1709. Total
£ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.
40,000 men 137,865 3 1 838,542 4 10 976,407 7 11
10,000 Troops of Augmentation 127,437 4 127,437 4
3,000 Palatines 8,593 8 28,543 1 2 37,136 9
4629 Saxons 11,428 2 36,043 0 5 47,471 3
Bothmar's Dragoons 2,416 7 3 7,724 17 1 10,141 4 4
Troops in Spain and Portugal 23,275 7 937,582 14 11½ 960,858 2 7
500,000l. for strengthening the Duke of Savoy in 1708 115,670 5 115,670 5
220,000l. for augmenting Troops in Flanders, viz:
Prussians 39,700 10
Saxons 19,929 8 1
Palatines 7,500 0 0
Treves 2,805 16
69,935 15
Subsidies to the Allies:
King of Denmark 9,375 0 0 18,750 0 0
King of Portugal for the 13,000 men 56,892 0 94,510 9 8
Duke of Savoy on his ordinary Subsidy 26,444 8 10 130,444 8 10
ditto on his extraordinary Subsidy 73,833 6 8
Landgrave of Hesse Cassel 1,488 1 10½ 2,976 3 9
ditto for his Troops of Augmentation 17,348 16 10 7,936 1 0
Elector of Treves 1,488 1 10½ 2,976 3 9
Elector Palatine 1,190 9 2,380 19 3
King of Prussia for 8,000 succours for Savoy 7,566 16 6 25,000 0 0
ditto for agio, bread and forage for 12,000 Prussians in the Netherlands 24,468 4 8
505,069 13
extraordinaries of the war:
General Officers and Contingencies in the Expedition to Spain in 1705 allowed in 1706 7,631 16 8
Duke of Savoy, extraordinary Subsidy for the Expedition to Toulon in 1707, allowed in 1708 20,483 6 0
Stair's and Ross's Dragoons 10,555 10 0
fortifications &c. at Gibraltar and Alicante 20,291 15
General Officers &c on Erle's Expedition 7,833 19 1
recruiting the Imperialists 25,473 7
extraordinary forage 31,686 9
losses sustained by the Contractor Medina 16,000 0 0
Officers en Second 4,829 18 0
Landgrave of Hesse, arrears of Subsidy 60,476 3
arrears to the King of Prussia 13,333 6 8
extraordinaries to the Hessians 18,731 8 11
for pay to Wynn's Regiment 12,572 16 4
249,899 17
for pay to General Officers serving in Flanders in 1708 and 1709 6,093 10 0
for account of pay to Officers at Gibraltar 556 0 556 0 1,112 1
£556 0 £8,187 17 £441,525 16 3 £2,656,963 0 6 £3,107,232 14
The issues detailed above were on account of the following heads of voted supply for the year 1709:
£ s. d. £ s. d.
the 40,000 men 901,827 13 6
the 10,000 Troops of Augmentation 177,511 3 6
3,000 Palatines 34,251 13 4
4,639 Saxons 43,251 12 6
Bothmar's Dragoons 9,269 16 6
Augmentation of Troops in Flanders 220,000 0 0
Troops in Spain and Portugal 1,081,083 0 4
Subsidies to the Allies 553,845 14 4
extraordinaries of the war 301,748 7 11¼
General Officers in Flanders in 1708 and 1709 6,093 10 0
3,329,922 11 11¼
issues hereon in 1709 (the rest of the above 3,107,232l. 14s.d. being on account of preceding years as detailed) 2,656,963 0 6
shortage of issue for the service of the war in Flanders. Spain and Portugal in 1709 772,959 11
Guards and Garrisons
Estimate and Vote 549,235 12
issues in 1709 411,296 16 2
shortage in issues 137,938 16
Transport
Vote 144,000 0 0
issues in 1709 180,583 14
excess in issues 36,583 14
In the case of the Army accounts there is no consecutive account of the growth of Army Departmental debt as there was of the Navy Debt, so that we cannot follow the incidence or the cumulative effect of each successive year's shortage of issue.
The remaining fighting Service was the Ordnance. Although as a Department it was financially unimportant as compared with the Navy and Army, its accounts tell exactly the same story of Departmental starvation owing to shortage of money issued as compared with the Supply votes of the House.
The Votes for the Ordnance in every year occurred under two separate heads: viz. in 1708–9 104,000l. for Ordnance Sea Service (as part of the Navy vote); 180,000l. for Ordnance Land Service as a separate vote. The two together made a total grant of Supply of 284,000l. for the financial year 1708–9. But towards this total the actual issues made were only
78,250l. for Sea Service.
98,250l. for Land Service.
total 176,500l.
This represents a shortage of issue of 107,500l. as against the total Vote of 284,000l.
In the case of the Ordnance Office there was a consecutive account of the Department's debt, so that the process of increase or decrease can be followed.
At the 30th Sept. 1708 the Ordnance debt was as follows (Commons Journals XVI, pp. 36–7):
£ s. d. £ s. d.
owing to artificers 197,436 14
salaries to Officers and Train in Holland Spain. Gibraltar New York and Jamaica and miscellaneous 33,438 17 3
230,875 11
tallies and money in the hands of the Treasurer of the Ordnance on the 30 Sept. 1708 89,760 0 10¾
payments made in the financial year 1708–9 towards the Ordnance arrears of previous years viz. 7,500l. for 1703; 325l. 18s. 11½d. for 1704; 59,500l. for 1708) 67,235 18 11½
156,995 19 10¼
nett Ordnance Debt at 29 Sept. 1709 £83,879 11
Finally with regard to the Civil List the figures stand ready to our hands in the table of Revenue and Expenditure, infra, p. clxxxviii. That statement shews that the receipts from all heads or branches of the Crown Revenue or Civil List were 18,597l. 8s. 2d. for Scotland and 573,228l. 2s.d. for England, or 591,825l. 10s.d. for the whole of Britain. Against a stipulated revenue of 700,000l. as guaranteed by Parliament this means a shortage of 108,174l. 9s.d.; and in order to meet the Civil List expenditure of 711,908l. 3s.d. for the year the Lord Treasurer had to take in loans at the Exchequer to the extent of 121,566l. 2s. 7d. on the security of what was styled “her Majesty's tin” which was in reality not a fund or an asset at all, but simply a pre-emption right.
Taking therefore the four chief heads of State expenditure which I have thus analysed, the total shortage of issues out of the Exchequer in the year 1708–9 was as follows:
£ s. d.
Navy shortage 438,455 1 8
Army shortage 772,959 11
Army: Guards and Garrisons shortage 137,938 16
Ordnance shortage 107,500 0 0
Civil List shortage 108,174 9
total shortage of payments to the services in the year Michaelmas 1708 to Michaelmas 1709 1,565,027 19
less excess of payments to the Transport service 36,583 14
final shortage of issues for the current year £1,528,444 5
What is the explanation of this shortage? What was the real nature of the Supply which the House had allocated to meet the requirements of the services?
Briefly they were as follows: £
(1) a 4s. Land Tax collectable as from 25 March 1709 chargeable with old loans transferred and new loans to be made, to a combined total of 1,880,000
(2) Duties on Malt &c. similarly chargeable: to a total of 650,000
(3) Payment by the Bank of England on their old Fund 400,000
(4) Exchequer Bills 2,500,000
(5) Act for continuing several Subsidies (7 Anne, c. 8), chargeable with loans of 645,000
(6) further supply in Exchequer Bills by a clause in the said Act 7 Anne, c. 8, “if agreed to by the Bank of England on or before 31 Dec 1709” 612,739
total Supply £6,687,739
Counting all in, and presuming that every penny of it was realised, this total of Supply was short by only 25,906l. 5s.d. of the total Estimates and the total voted Supply of 6,713,645l. 5s.d. for the fighting Services, ut supra, p. xxxix. On his part the Lord Treasurer issued the money as and when he could to the services in question, but when the money, whether paper or cash, reached the hands of the Navy Treasurer or the Army Paymaster he had first and foremost to meet the arrears of the previous years and then he attended to the current year's needs. If the House had asked for a statement of the Debt standing out on each Regiment the statement could have been presented just as the statement of Navy Debt was presented on request. But as the House contented itself with merely grumbling about the Navy Debt and then left it to accumulate it is likely enough that the Army Debt would have been treated in the same way. As it was the Army Debt can only be gathered from the Paymaster General's accounts, and as these accounts were frequently ten years behind in being audited and declared the House had no guidance on this particular head of the Army arrears save what it received from the petitions of particular Officers or Regiments or from Foreign Paymasters or from the belated and jaundiced reports of the Army Debt Commissioners. In 1702–3, for instance, and again in 1711, the Army Debts Commissioners were still enquiring into the Army arrears due on the Disbandment of 1697.
The only arrear item which had to be kept fairly up to date was that of the Extraordinaries of the war. This item was always in arrear a year or two, unavoidably from its nature; but it could not be left too long unregarded. The bread and forage contractors and the foreign Paymasters of the Allied Forces were too clamorous and Marlborough was too insistent for this item to get hopelessly in arrear; and when put squarely before the House it was met without a murmur. It is difficult to avoid the conviction that the real fault lay with the form or procedure of presenting the annual Estimate. It was expected to be merely a forecast of the number and cost of the men to be employed in the coming year or campaign. But a note should have been appended of the outstanding arrear which was immediately pressing on each sub-head; or alternatively a succinct statement of the immediately pressing floating debt on the particular service or Department concerned. The total shortage of issue on the year 1709 which I have roughly calculated at 1½ millions simply represented floating Departmental debt which the various Paymasters were wearily rolling up and pushing in front of them like a snowball, year after year.
But ultimately, speaking of English seventeenth century and eighteenth century finance, the cause of this shortage, the gradual growth of the floating Departmental debt, was not due to the exceeding of expenditure. It was due mainly to the deficiency of tax yield, and for this neither the House of Commons nor the Executive could be held responsible. The alarm which the House had shown at the persistent growth of the floating Navy debt had led it to call for a statement of tax yield Deficiencies from the commencement of Anne's reign. Up to that date the accumulated Deficiencies of William's reign had been met by two Sinking Fund Bills, styled Deficiencies Act, that of 8–9 Wm. III., c. 20, which provided for the amortization of 5,160,459l. 14s.d. and that of 1701–2 (1 Anne, c. 7) which similarly provided for the amortisation of 2,338,628l. 15s.d. On the assumption that these two Act cleared off the floating debt which had accumulated during William's reign in consequence of deficient tax yield, then Anne's reign would start free of floating debt.
On the 24th March 1708–9 in its concern for the growth of the Navy Debt the House addressed the Queen praying her to order a return or statement of the growth of Deficiencies from her accession “on account of all sums granted or voted since her Majesty's accession to the Crown and how far the same have proved deficient.” The statement was submitted to the House of Commons on the 2nd April 1709 and in brief is as follows:
Sums voted. Real sums supplied to the public. Deficiency.
for the year: £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.
1702 3,700,033 7 3,020,058 0 679,975 7
1703 3,712,318 11 5 3,216,097 2 496,221 8 10½
1704 4,229,866 18 11¾ 3,918,323 18 311,543 0 8
1705 5,055,102 16 0 4,709,457 14 345,645 1 10½
1706 5,086,761 16 2 5,081,398 15 5,363 0 11¼
1707 6,100,482 8 5,942,381 15 158,100 12 8
1708 6,021,926 6 1 6,019,067 15 2,858 10
1,999,707 2 8
less certain double charges, detailed 153,630 0 0
Deficiency of the Funds to answer the public services voted 1,846,077 2 8
Owing to the way in which this table is drawn I regard it as decidedly underestimating the actual Deficiency. But taking it as it stands there is evidence enough to point out the radical vice of our financial system of the time.
This subject of the Deficiency yield of Parliamentary Supply has been so often insisted on in these Introductions as explaining the financial trouble of the Executive that for the moment it need not be further emphasised. But there is something also to be attributed to the all-round lack of comprehension of the disturbing influence of the debt-interest position. The general supposition in the mind of the House was that if a Fond was provided for a loan operation, whether that operation was a direct loan or a lottery or an annuity contribution, the Fond was applicable all the way through its life and sufficed for repayment of principal and for payment of interest. But even if it were true this idea or presupposition took no account of the interest on the floating debt as distinct from the funded debt, the first invisible item of which was always in amount nearly equal to the actual voted Supply of the current year. For instance, the voted Supply for the year 1709 amounted to 6,713,645l. 5s.d. Hardly any of this total was realisable in the form of revenue or tax receipts within the current year. The tax year was a year behind the Supply year. The Supply for each year was realised only as loan money or advances by the Bank or as Exchequer Bills and so on. A good twelve months' interest at varying rates would be due on that voted Supply by the time it came into the Exchequer in various streams through various channels as tax money received. But the House never asked for a statement of this floating debt interest: it never faced this question of interest on the current year's Supply and the Treasury never presented the House with a clear estimate in advance of the probable amount of it. With such a system the national accounts would have been disordered even if there had been no Deficiency of tax yield.
For instance, in the year under treatment in the present Introduction, viz. the year from Michaelmas 1708 to Miachaelmas 1709, there came into the Exchequer from the Land Tax of previous years a total of 1,840,307l. 3s.d. Practically the whole of this was paid out in liquidation of loans on Land Tax taken in prior to 1708 and in paying the interest thereon. This interest, which had to be paid at the time of the repayment of the principal, came to 84,630l. 15s.d. But as an item this interest had never been estimated for at all.
In the same way the Land Tax for the year 1708–9 only began to be collectable from the 25th March 1709. But the moment it was granted by the House of Commons and before a penny came in from the tax the full total of authorised credit on it had been borrowed by the Treasury either in form of loans in cash or of tallies of anticipation. In the following year, therefore (Michaelmas 1709 to Michaelmas 1710), when the moneys from this tax came into the Exchequer, a sum of 65,877l. 15s. 0d. had to be paid for interest on those loans and tallies at the same time that the principal of the loan was repaid.
Every other item of Voted Supply for the year 1708–9 was realised as loan or was (like the Exchequer Bills) per se a form of loan and carried an interest charge in some form or other. Yet the financial system of the time left the Treasury staggering along with this ever recurring unprovided interest upon its shoulders and left the House of Commons completely in the dark as to the debt position and the debt service or interest and amortisation position.
In the year 1708–9 the total sum paid by the Treasury for interest on debt was 729,806l. 17s.d., including the allowance to the Bank on the operation of the doubling of its capital stock but not including Annuities or Lotteries. It would be enormously difficult to say how much of this total was for funded debt, supposed to be provided for, and how much for unfunded debt, which the House never had under its purview and for which it had not voted a penny: but generally speaking the unfunded debt consisted of the bulk of the Voted Supply of the preceding year plus the floating Departmental service debts.
Finally, the mischievious and disturbing influence of the inelastic Civil List system is even more incalculable. The Civil List practically meant the modern Civil Service plus the modern Civil List. As far as the three Revenue Departments are concerned, Customs, Excise and Post Office and the Tax Collecting Department representing the modern Inland Revenue Department, any increases of staff, and wages and incidents could be concealed by deducting the cost from gross receipts before arriving at the nett cash receipts which were ultimately payable into the Exchequer. As far as these Revenue Departments were concerned there was a certain amount of elasticity which enabled the Executive to meet the requirements of growth of the national finance. But for every other part of the Civil Service system (pensions, ambassadorial ordinaries and extraordinaries, Exchequer, Treasury and audit services and salaries and so on) there was no provision for expansion, and if expansion took place it was at the cost of other subheads, that is to say at the expense of the Royal Household and the Royal State. The full total of the Civil List was fixed at 700,000l., and at that figure it remained for the whole of Anne's reign, whatever changes took place as between the various sub-heads or Departments which composed the complicated entity then styled the Civil List.

Footnotes

1 For Frederick's Augmentation see Marlborough Despatches IV, pp. 351. Dec. 22; 339, Dec. 5; 336, Dec. 3. For the Estimates of Extraordinaries see ibid., pp. 335–6; Churchill's Marlborough IV, pp. 49–50.
2 Commons Journals XVI, p. 77. The two accounts are preserved in Treasury Board Papers, Vol. CXI, No. 31. They simply state the issues to the Army Paymaster on the two respective heads and all these items of issues are given seriatim in this Calendar under the successive dates. The totals are 268,095l. 10s.d. for Spain and Portugal and 90,853l. 7s.d. for Savoy.
3 The statement above, as printed in the Journals, is given verbatim in a paper among the Treasury Board Papers, Vol. CXIX, No. 21. This paper throws no light whatever on the reduction of the Vote.