Biographical Memorials of James Oglethorpe - Thaddeus Mason Harris
Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23
[Footnote 1: The record of his _admittatur_, in the University
Register, is,--"1704, Jul. 9, term. S. Trin. Jacobus Oglethorpe, e
C.C.C. 16. Theoph. f. Sti. Jacobi, Lond. Equ. Aur. filius natu minor."
That is, "_In Trinity Term, July 9, 1704_, James Oglethorpe, _aged_
16, _youngest son of_ Theophilus Oglethorpe, _of St. James's, London,
was admitted into Corpus Christi College_."]
His first commission was that of Ensign; and it is dated in 1710; and
he bore that rank in the army when peace was proclaimed in 1713[1].
In the same year he is known to have been in the suite of the Earl of
Peterborough[2], ambassador from the Court of Great Britain to the
King of Sicily and to the other Italian States; whither he was
fellow traveller with the Rev. Dr. George Berkeley, his Lordship's
Chaplain[3]. Highly honorable was such a mark of favor from his
Lordship; and peculiarly pleasant and instructive, also, must have
been such companionship with the amiable and excellent clergyman;
and it afforded opportunity of concerting plans of usefulness, of
beneficence, and of philanthropy, the object and tendency of which
were apparent in the after life of each[4].
[Footnote 1: Biographical Memoir in the European Magazine, Vol. VIII.
p. 13.]
[Footnote 2: NICHOLS, in the _Literary Anecdotes of the XVIIIth
Century_, Vol. II. p. 19, says, "he was aid-de-camp;" but as that
was the title of a _military_ rank, rather than of an attendant on
a _diplomatic_ ambassador, I have substituted another term, which
however may embrace it, if it be really proper.]
[Footnote 3: Dr. Berkeley, in a letter to Thomas Prior, Esq., dated
Turin, January 6, 1714, n.s. says that he travelled from Lyons "in
company with Col. Du Hamel and Mr. Oglethorpe, Adjutant General of the
Queen's forces; who were sent with a letter from my Lord to the King's
mother, at Turin." _Works of GEORGE BERKELEY, D.D., with an Account of
his Life_. Dublin. 1704. 2 vols. 4to. Vol. I--p. xxx]
[Footnote 4: Appendix III.]
In 1714 he was Captain Lieutenant in the first troop of the Queen's
guards. By his fine figure, his soldierly deportment and personal
bravery, he attracted the notice of the Duke of Marlborough; whose
confidence and patronage he seems long to have enjoyed, and by whom,
and through the influence of the Duke of Argyle, he was so recommended
to Prince Eugene, that he received him into his service, first as his
secretary, and afterwards aid-de-camp. Thus near the person of this
celebrated general, full of ardor, and animated with heroic courage,
an opportunity was offered him in the warlike expedition against the
Turks in which the Prince was engaged, to gather those laurels in what
the world calls "the field of glory," to which he aspired; and,
in several successive campaigns, he exhibited applauded proofs of
chivalric gallantry and personal bravery. By his attentive observation
of the discipline, manner of battle array, onset of the forces, and
the instruction given him in military tactics, he acquired that
knowledge of the art of war, for which he afterwards became so
distinguished.
At the battle of Peterwaradin, one of the strongest frontier places
that Austria had against the Turks, Oglethorpe, though present, was
not perhaps actively engaged. It was fought on the 5th of August,
1716. The army of the Turks consisted of 150,000 men, of which 40,000
were Janisaries, and 30,000 Saphis, or troopers, the rest were
Tartars, Walachians, and the troops of Asia and Egypt. The army of the
Imperialists, under his Serene Highness, Prince Eugene, consisted of
but little more than half that number. The onset began at seven in the
morning, and by twelve Eugene was writing to the Emperor an account of
the victory in the tent of the Grand Vizier[1].
[Footnote 1: _Military History of Prince Eugene, of Savoy_, (a superb
work in two folio volumes, with elegant plates; compiled by CAMPBELL.)
Lond. 1737. Vol. II. p. 215. From this, and from "_The Life and
Military Actions of Eugene_," Lond. 1737, 12mo, the account of the
battles is taken.]
After a sharp contest of about four hours, the Grand Vizier Hali,
seeing the battle go against him, put himself at the head of his guard
of horse, pushed through a defile, and made a very brisk charge; but
his men could not sustain the contest; and he, having received two
wounds, was carried off the field to Carlowitz, where he died the next
day. The Aga of the Janisaries and Mahomet Bassa were also slain. The
whole loss of the Turks in this action amounted to about 22,000; and
of the Imperialists, 3,695 common soldiers, and 469 officers. There
was found in the camp 164 pieces of cannon, and a prodigious quantity
of powder, bullets, bombs, grenades, and various military equipments
and stores; and the booty in other articles was great and rich beyond
computation.
The Imperial army passed the Danube on the 6th of August, "in order to
avoid the infection of the dead bodies." The same day a council of war
was held, in which the siege of Temeswaer was proposed and resolved
on. This is a town of Hungary, upon the river Temes, whence it has
its name. It lies five miles from Lippa, towards the borders of
Transylvania, and about ten from Belgrade. The Turks took it from the
Transylvanians in 1552, and fortified it to a degree that they deemed
it impregnable. After several severe conflicts, and a most desperate
resistance, it capitulated on the 14th of October, 1716, and the Turks
entirely evacuated the place on the 17th. Thus the capital of a region
of the same name, was restored to its lawful prince after having been
in the hands of the Turks 164 years. "The success of this victorious
campaign filled not only Germany, but all Europe with joy." On this
occasion, Oglethorpe acted as aid-de-camp; and his active service in
attendance upon Prince Eugene; his prompt attention to the orders
dictated to him, or transmitted by him; his alertness and fidelity in
communicating them; and his fearless exposure to imminent peril
in passing from one division of the army to another, gained him
commendatory acknowledgments and the increased favor of his Serene
Highness.
Notwithstanding these signal victories gained over them, the Turks
were determined to continue the contest; and the next year the Grand
Signior held a great Divan at Constantinople to take measures for its
most vigorous prosecution. These purposes being put in train, Prince
Eugene undertook the siege of Belgrade, their chief strong hold. "The
Turks advanced to its relief, and besieged him in his camp. His danger
was imminent; but military skill and disciplined valor triumphed over
numbers and savage ferocity. He sallied out of his intrenchments, and,
falling suddenly upon the enemy, routed them with great slaughter, and
took their cannon, baggage, and everything belonging to their camp.
Belgrade surrendered immediately after."[1] On the 16th of August,
(1717) the capitulation was signed; and immediately afterwards the
Imperialists took possession of a gate, and the out-works; on the 19th
Te Deum was solemnly performed in the tent of the Grand Vizier, which
had become occupied by Eugene, and on the 22d the place was evacuated.
The Imperialists found prodigious riches in the camp of which they had
become possessed; "for the Sultan had emptied his coffers to supply
this army, which was by far the most numerous of any set on foot since
the famous siege of Vienna."[2]
[Footnote 1: Russell's _Modern Europe_, Vol. V. p. 3.]
[Footnote 2: CAMPBELL'S _Military History of Eugene_, Vol. II. p.
233.]
"Such was the conclusion of the siege of Belgrade; a place of the last
importance to the Imperialists and to the Turks; the bridle of all the
adjoining country; the glorious trophy of the valor and conduct of his
Serene Highness, Prince Eugene; and the bulwark, not of Germany only,
but of all Christendom on this side."
"Oglethorpe was in active command at the siege and battle of Belgrade,
on the south shore of the Danube, in 1717; where he acquired a high
and deserved reputation."[1]
[Footnote 1: _Gentleman's Magazine_ for 1785, p. 573.]
In the postscript of a letter from Alexander Pope, dated September
8th, 1717, to Edward Blount, Esq., is this remark: "I hope you will
take part in the rejoicing for the victory of Prince Eugene over the
Turks, &c." to which Dr. Warton subjoins this note; "at which General
Oglethorpe was present, and of which I have heard him give a lively
description."
The peace which took place in the following year between the Emperor
and the Sultan, left Oglethorpe without any active employment; and
he quitted, doubtless with reluctance, the staff of his friend and
patron, prince Eugene, with whom he had so honorably served; and
returned to England.
He was offered preferment in the German service; but it was, probably,
a sufficient reason with him for declining the proffer, that "the
profession of a soldier in time of peace affords but few opportunities
of promotion, and none of distinction."
In the year 1722, succeeding his brother Lewis in the inheritance of
the estate at Godalming, his weight of character and family influence
secured to him a seat in Parliament, as Burgess, for Haslemere; and
he continued to represent that borough, by successive elections, and
through various changes of administration, for thirty-two years; and,
"during this long period, he distinguished himself by several able
speeches; and, in the laws for the benefit of trade, &c. many
regulations were proposed and promoted by him."
In this august assembly, he was neither a dumb show, nor an automaton;
nor the tool of party; but independent, intelligent, and energetic,
delivered his opinions freely, spoke often, and always to the
purpose.[1]
[Footnote 1: See Appendix IV.]
His first recorded speech was on the 6th of April, 1723, against the
banishment of Dr. Francis Atterbury, the Bishop of Rochester, which he
deemed injudicious and needlessly rigorous.[1]
[Footnote 1: History and Proceedings of the House of Commons, Lond.
1742, Vol. VI. p. 308.]
A few years after, his feelings of humanity were powerfully touched on
finding a gentleman, whom he went to visit in the Fleet prison, loaded
with irons, and otherwise cruelly used.[1] Shocked by the scenes he
witnessed, he determined to expose such injustice; and, if possible,
to prevent such abuse of power. With this view, he brought forward a
motion in the House of Commons, "_that an inquiry should be instituted
into the state of the gaols in the metropolis_." This met with such
attention, that in February, 1728, the House of Commons assigned
the subject to a Committee, of which he was chosen Chairman.[2] The
investigation led to the discovery of many corrupt practices, and
much oppressive treatment of the prisoners; and was followed by
the enactment of measures for the correction of such shameful
mismanagement and inhuman neglect in some cases, and for the
prevention of severity of infliction in others.[3]
[Footnote 1: Sir William Rich, Baronet.]
[Footnote 2: Appendix IV.]
[Footnote 3: Appendix V.]
A writer, whose opinion was founded on the best means of knowledge,
has declared that "the effects of this interposition have been felt
ever since by the unhappy prisoners."[1]
[Footnote 1: Gentleman's Magazine for 1785, page 572.]
Oglethorpe thus became the precursor of HOWARD, the philanthropist,
in the cause of humanity, as it regards the amelioration of prison
discipline in general, especially the rigors of close confinement
for debt or petty offences, and that among felons and convicts. The
impression then made on his mind and heart, led him, afterwards, to
other and more extensive and efficacious measures for the relief of
poor debtors from the extortions and oppressions to which they were
subjected by gaolers, and from the humiliation and distress in which
they were often involved without any fault of their own, or by some
conduct which deserved pity rather than punishment.
At the opening of the session of Parliament on the 12th of January,
1731, the King's speech was the subject of debate in the House of
Commons. A motion was made for an address of thanks, in which they
should declare their entire approbation of his Majesty's conduct,
express their confidence in the wisdom of his counsels, and announce
their readiness to grant the necessary supplies. There were some who
opposed the motion. They did not argue against a general vote of
thanks, but intimated the impropriety, and, indeed, ill tendency of
expressions which implied an unquestioning approbation of the
measures of the ministry. In referring to this, Smollet[1] says, "Mr.
Oglethorpe, a gentleman of unblemished character, brave, generous, and
humane, affirmed that many other things related more immediately to
the honor and interest of the nation, than did the guarantee of the
Pragmatic sanction. He said that he wished to have heard that the
new works at Dunkirk had been entirely razed and destroyed; that the
nation had received full and complete satisfaction for the depradation
committed by the natives of Spain; that more care was taken in the
disciplining of the militia, on whose valor the nation must chiefly
depend in case of an invasion; and that some regard had been shown to
the oppressed Protestants in Germany. He expressed his satisfaction,
however, to find that the English were not so closely united to France
as formerly, for he had generally observed that when two dogs were in
a leash together, the stronger generally ran away with the weaker; and
this, he feared, had been the case between France and Great Britain."
[Footnote 1: History of England, Book II. chap. iv. Section xxx.]
The motion, however, was carried, and the address presented.
Possessing a vein of wit, Oglethorpe was apt to introduce piquant
illustrations and comparisons into his narratives, and sometimes with
the view of their giving force to his statements; but, though they
might serve to enliven conversation, they were not dignified enough
for a speech in so august an assembly as that he was now addressing.
They are, however, atoned for, on this occasion, by the grave tenor
of his preceding remarks, which were the dictates of good sense, the
suggestions of sound policy, and, especially, by the reference to the
distressed situation of the persecuted German Protestants which was
evincive of a compassionate consideration, truly honorable to him as a
man and a Christian. And we shall find, that, in behalf of these, he
afterwards exerted a personal and availing influence.
In 1732 he made a spirited and patriotic effort in Parliament to
restore a constitutional militia; and to abolish arbitrary impressment
for the sea-service; and, on this subject, he published a pamphlet
entitled "The Sailor's Advocate," for which Mr. Sharpe obliged him
with a sarcastic preface.
In the debate on the bill for encouraging the trade of the British
sugar colonies, Oglethorpe took an active part, and manifested
those liberal and patriotic views, and that regard for the colonial
settlements in North America, which, afterwards, became with him a
decided principle.
"In all cases," said he, "that come before this House, where there
seems a clashing of interests, we ought to have no exclusive regard to
the particular interest of any one country or set of people, but to
the good of the whole. Our colonies are a part of our dominions. The
people in them are our own people; and we ought to show an equal
respect to all. If it should appear that our Plantations upon the
continent of America are against that which is desired by the sugar
colonies, we are to presume that the granting thereof will be a
prejudice to the trade or particular interests of our continental
settlements. And, surely, the danger of hurting so considerable a part
of our dominions,--a part which reaches from the 34th to the 46th
degree of north latitude,--will, at least, incline us to be extremely
cautious in what we are going about. If, therefore, it shall appear
that the relieving our sugar colonies will do more harm to the _other_
parts of our dominions, than it can do good to _them_, we must refuse
it, and think of some other method of putting them upon an equal
footing with their rivals in any part of trade.
"Our sugar colonies are of great consequence to us; but our other
colonies in that part of the world ought also to be considered. From
them we have, likewise, yearly, large quantities of goods. We ought
not to raise one colony upon the destruction of another. Much less
ought we to grant a favor to any particular set of people which may
prove to be against the public good of the nation in general."
To these, and other matters of general moment, Oglethorpe devoted his
time, his talents, and his influence while in Parliament. He earnestly
supported the cause of silk manufacture, which had then begun to
spread in England by means of the improvement introduced by Sir Thomas
Lombe, in the invention of his large engines, which are described as
being of "a most curious and intricate structure,"[1] but which in
our own day, when mechanical ingenuity has reached a high degree
of excellence, and machinery seems itself almost an intelligent
principle, would, probably, be regarded as merely "curious and
intricate," without possessing any practical value.[2]
[Footnote 1: The 6th of the excellent _Essays_ by the Rev. Jared
Eliot, _on Field Husbandry, &_ c., 1761, is devoted principally to
recommendations of the culture of mulberry trees for the raising of
silk-worms. In page 161, is a reference to Sir Thomas Lombe, "that
eminent throwster, who erected the great engine in Derbyshire; a
wonderful structure, consisting of twenty-nine thousand five hundred
and eighty-six wheels, all set a going and continued in motion by one
single water-wheel, for working silk with expedition and success." See
also Appendix VII.]
[Footnote 2: Manuscript lecture of J. Willard, Esq.]
A Corporation was formed in London, in 1707, with the professed
intention of lending money to the poor on small pledges, and to
persons of better rank, upon an answerable security, for setting them
up, or assisting them in business. Its capital was then limited to
L30,000, but in 1730 increased to L600,000, and a charter granted to
the Corporation, by act of Parliament. But in October 1731, two of the
chief officers, George Robinson, Esq., member for Marlow, the Cashier,
and John Thompson, the Warehouse keeper, disappeared on the same day.
This gave the Proprietors great alarm; and an inspection of affairs
led to the discovery that for a capital of about L500,000, no
equivalent was found to the value of L30,000; the remainder having
been disposed of by ways and means of which no one could give an
account. In consequence of this defalcation, a petition of the
Proprietors was presented to the Parliament alleging that some who had
been guilty of these frauds had transported themselves to parts beyond
the seas, and carried with them some of the books and effects of the
Corporation; and that there was great reason to believe that such
an immense sum of money could not have been embezzled without the
connivance and participation of others who remained in the kingdom;
but that the petitioners were unable to come at the knowledge of their
combinations or to bring them to justice, unless aided by the power
and authority of that House; and therefore prayed that it might be
afforded.
On the reading of the petition, Mr. Oglethorpe rose and spoke as
follows:
"Sir, I am persuaded that this petition will be received in a manner
befitting the unhappy case of the sufferers and the justice of this
House. I can hardly suspect that any gentleman that has the honor of
being a member of this House will hesitate in giving all the relief
which we can to the number of unfortunate persons, who have been so
much injured. Yet, because I have heard it whispered out of doors,
that we ought not to receive this petition upon account, as is
pretended, that the common seal is not affixed to it, I deem it
necessary to take some notice of that objection, in case it should be
started here. Sir, I must say that if there be any irregularity as to
the affixing the seal of the Company to this petition, it is, in my
opinion, so far from being an objection to our receiving the petition,
that it is a very strong reason for it. If there be any fault in form,
it is the fault of those who had the keeping of the common seal; and,
as they may, perhaps, be of those against whom the complaints are
made, and who may, upon inquiry, be found more or less amenable for
the wrong, we are, therefore, to suspect that the withholding the seal
may be with a view of preventing the truth's being brought to light;
at any rate, we ought to discountenance and defeat such indirect
practices with regard to the use of a common seal.
"For my own part, sir, I have been always for encouraging the design
upon which this corporation was at first established; and looked upon
it as a provident act of charity to let necessitous persons have the
opportunity of borrowing money upon easier terms than they could have
it elsewhere. Money, like other things, is but a commodity, and in the
way of dealing, the use of it is looked upon to be worth as much as
people can get for it. If this corporation let persons in limited
circumstances have the use of money at a cheaper rate than
individuals, brokers, or money lenders, would be willing to do, it
was certainly a beneficent act. If they had demanded more than was
elsewhere given, they would not have had applicants, and the design
would not have proved good and useful; but the utility of it was
most evident; and the better the design, and the more excellent the
benefit, the more those persons deserve to be punished, who by their
frauds have curtailed, if not now wholly cut off, these sources
of furnishing assistance to the industrious and enterprising, and
disappointed the public of reaping the benefit which might
have accrued by an honest and faithful execution of so good an
undertaking."[1]
[Footnote 1: History and Proceedings of the House of Commons, Vol.
VII. p. 154.]
Another subject in the parliamentary discussions of Oglethorpe which I
shall mention, is his defence of the magistracy and town-guard of the
city of Edinburgh against an arraignment in the House of Lords, for
what was deemed the neglect of prompt and energetic measures for
suppressing the riotous seizure and murder of Captain Porteous by an
exasperated mob. The circumstances were these.
After the execution in the Grass-market, on the 14th of April, 1736,
of one Andrew Wilson, a robber, the town-guard, which had been ordered
out on the occasion, was insulted by rude and threatening speeches,
and pelted with stones, by the mob. John Porteous, the captain, so
resented the annoyance, that he commanded his men to fire over their
heads, to intimidate them; and then, as their opposition became
violent, he directed the guard to fire among them; whereby six persons
were killed, and eleven severely wounded. For this he was prosecuted
at the expense of the city, and condemned to die. But, a short
reprieve having been obtained, the mob, determined to defeat it,
assembled in the night preceding the seventh day of September, whereon
he was to have been executed pursuant to the sentence, and, in a very
riotous manner, seized and disarmed the city-guard, and possessed
themselves of the town-gates, to prevent the admission of troops
quartered in the suburbs. They then rushed to the Tolbooth prison;
the doors of which not yielding to the force of their hammers, they
consumed by fire, and then brought forth Porteous by violence, and
hung him on a dyer's post, or frame, in the Grass-market, nigh the
spot where the unfortunate people were killed.
The magistrates, attended with several of the burgesses, attempted to
quell the riot and disperse the mob, but were pelted with stones, and
threatened to be fired upon if they did not retire.
This insult of the sovereign authority was too flagrant to be
overlooked. Proclamations, with rewards of two hundred pounds
sterling, were issued for apprehending the rioters, and, when the
Parliament met, vigorous measures were taken in the affair. The Lord
Provost was ordered up to London in custody; the magistrates summoned
to answer the indictment, and a bill was introduced into the House of
Commons "to disable Alexander Wilson, Esq., the principal magistrate
during the riots, from ever after holding any office of magistracy in
Edinburgh or Great Britain; to subject him to imprisonment for a year;
to abolish the town guard, and to take away the gates of the nether
Bowport of the city." Oglethorpe objected to the first reading of the
bill, and it encountered his vigorous opposition. He engaged in a warm
defence of the magistrates, and of the guard, declaring that there
was no dereliction of duty on the part of the magistrates and of the
guard, but they were overpowered by numbers, and thrown into actual
jeopardy by the desperation of the mob. Hence the penalties of the
bill would be the punishment of misfortune, not of crime.