386

Effect of the Prince's death

[1697-9

The political situation was once more totally changed. How often the immediate decease of Charles II had been foretold! But now the ailing monarch survived, and his youthful heir was dead. A new arrangement had to be devised.

In London, in Paris, at the Hague, the unexpected news caused the greatest consternation. Pensionary Heinsius for some hours refused to see anybody. Next day, speaking to the Imperial ambassador, he said, "This reminds us how transitory worldly affairs are." His fear was that France might now recommence her intrigues in Spain. The two monarchs of England and France hesitated openly to declare themselves, each of them being desirous of knowing what the other would do, before he gave his own opinion. "You will, in fact," wrote Louis to Tallard, "wait for his answer before making any overture to him on my part." Tallard answered that he was requested by William to send a courier to his master to know his opinion about this important event. "But," Tallard's letter concluded, "either I am much mistaken or they will again enter into negotiations." This proved indeed to be true. The first question was whether, after the death of the person in whose interest it was principally designed, the Treaty of Partition still practically existed. There was annexed to the Treaty a secret Article, which appointed the Elector of Bavaria, in case his son should die without children, the heir of Joseph Ferdinand in all the kingdoms and States assigned to that Prince. Could this secret Article remain in force although, contrary to its supposition, the Prince had died before the King of Spain, whose dominions he was to inherit? Or, in other words, could the Elector be considered as the heir, not only of his son's property, but also of his rights of inheritance? At first, the answer seemed not to be quite clear; but later, on the part both of the French and of the English, the conclusion was reached that the secret Article became inoperative. William read it over attentively, and convinced himself that new engagements must be entered upon.

Before we attempt to describe the ensuing negotiations and their result, the Second Treaty of Partition, it may be useful to recall William III's difficulties in England, to which reference has been made in an earlier chapter, and the hindrance they proved to the freedom of his actions abroad. Now that the War was over, public opinion in England was expectant of a lasting peace, and the old aversion against a standing land-army, dating from the military rule of Oliver Cromwell, had been revived. On the other hand, the requirements of European politics, the necessity of maintaining the position England had won by the War, of opposing the dangers that threatened from Louis XIV and from the question of the Spanish Succession, of which the solution might be near at hand, were not yet generally felt in England. In December, 1697, his Ministers suffered a resolution to be passed in the Commons that all the land forces raised since 1680 should be disbanded; but William, by means

1698]

William III and his Parliament

387

of his Civil List, succeeded for the present in keeping more troops under arms than he was allowed by the said parliamentary resolution. Hence in the negotiation for the First Partition Treaty Louis had to observe a certain moderation in his demands. When, however, in December, 1698, a new Parliament had assembled, in which the Opposition was still stronger, the Commons resolved that the land forces should be reduced to 7000 men, and consist only of English-born subjects. This meant the dismissal of several thousands of Dutch troops whom the King had brought over with him from Holland and who were still in his pay.

William, both disappointed and affronted, thought at least for a moment of leaving the country, since it would be no longer in his power to secure for England the position in Europe which he had crossed the sea to assure to her. The draft of the speech in which he indicated his intention, not of abdicating, but of absenting himself till his presence should become necessary for England's defence, still exists, though the speech was never delivered. William remained at his post.

His new move, made after some months, to the same purpose as before, by means of a message to the House asking for a retention of the Dutch troops, met with a flat refusal, in what he called a "very impertinent" address, to whose doctrinaire constitutionalism he had, however, to submit. But events told for him. As if to encourage Louis in his

resistance against the demands of William, Marshal Tallard wrote to his master: "All that has passed this year in Parliament, and the discontent of several Lords, have so weakened the royal authority that there is hardly any more attention paid to it."

The rebuffs which William met in England could not but diminish the weight of his power in the balance of Europe; and they must be remembered in order to understand the character of the negotiations as to the Spanish Succession reopened between England and France after the death of the Bavarian Prince. The pretensions now set up by Louis XIV went much beyond those which he had previously advanced. William, unable to risk a new war, was obliged to accept them. The principal heads of a new Partition Treaty were arranged, and together with Louis, William sought to win for them the assent of the Emperor, not without the fear that a separate agreement might be concluded between the Houses of Bourbon and Austria. Louis himself was to such a degree master of the situation that not only did he seem able to choose between William and Leopold, but, at the very time when these negotiations were going on, and after the Treaty was signed, his party in Spain was at work to secure the whole inheritance of Charles II, without any dismemberment, for his grandson.

It was seen above that the Treaty of October 11, 1698, was held to have become inoperative after the death of Joseph Ferdinand. Nevertheless, William had in mind the possibility of adhering, or rather of returning, to this Treaty, by taking up, in accordance with its secret

388 Negotiations for the Second Partition Treaty [1699

Article, the claim of the Elector, Joseph Ferdinand's father. The King of England and the States General, as Tallard reported, were not averse from making a new treaty; but, if this should not succeed, they desired the liberty of requiring the execution of the Treaty of the Hague. Thus, soon after the death of Joseph Ferdinand, the same persons who had accomplished the First Treaty of Partition are found again at work to find the basis for a new agreement. If Max Emanuel, in spite of the secret Article, could not take his son's place, there were obstacles of a different kind to prevent the succession of other claimants whose names were again brought forward. The Duke of Savoy would never receive the support of England since he had deserted his allies in 1696, while France was equally disinclined to countenance the claim of Portugal, which she did not want to see once more united to Spain. In these circumstances, the Powers negotiating as to the Spanish Succession naturally confined themselves to the two principal candidates; or, to put it more plainly, they examined the problem how the whole of the Spanish inheritance might best be divided between the Houses of Bourbon and Austria.

Such was the origin of the Second Treaty of Partition. Louis XIV made the earliest proposal, laying down his opinion in a letter full of political spirit, written to Tallard in February, 1699, a few days only after the death of Joseph Ferdinand. "The partition of the monarchy of Spain," he began, "divided by the Treaty of the Hague among my son and two other claimants, is naturally reduced to a division between two by the death of the Electoral Prince of Bavaria. . . . The question has, therefore, to be settled how a partition can be made into two equal halves and in a manner to assure the public tranquillity." He goes on to say that Europe would be alarmed to see his power rise above that of the House of Austria. But, on the other hand, he declares the power of the Emperor to have been so much augmented by the advantageous Peace lately concluded with the Porte at Carlowitz, that the general interest would, in case of a further increase of this power, require that France should be enabled to counterbalance it.

According to this principle, the meaning of Louis' proposal was to distribute the dominions which by the First Partition Treaty had been assigned to Joseph Ferdinand. With seeming disinterestedness, he was ready to give Spain and the Indies to the Archduke, adding to the Dauphin's portion, as it had been settled by the First Treaty of Partition, only the duchy of Milan. This acquisition would not, as he put it, cause any jealousy on the side of England or the States General, since it did not increase the power of France by sea; so that from this source there could not arise any disturbance of the trade of the Maritime Powers. Louis also dwelt on the geographic position of Milan, which, should Spain fall to the lot of the Archduke, might furnish a communication between the dominions of the two branches of the House of Austria so easy as to be prejudicial to the interests of the remainder of Europe.

1699]

Second Treaty of Partition

389

But he foresaw how difficult it would be to obtain the consent of England for a French acquisition of Milan, and therefore suggested at once as an expedient that this duchy might be given to the Duke of Lorraine, whose territory would in exchange be transferred to France. A similar arrangement was indicated as to the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, with the possibility that the French dominions might be still further enlarged by the duchy of Savoy and the county of Nice. With regard, in fine, to the Catholic Netherlands, they were to fall neither to the Dauphin nor to the Archduke. The question was left open which of four possibilities might be preferred when the time came for a decision. The foundations were herewith laid for a fresh agreement between the two Kings. It is manifest how the pretensions of France had increased since the conclusion of the First Treaty of Partition. Louis could dare so much, because he knew of William's difficulties in his last parliamentary campaign. How could William refuse what Louis demanded, when he had no hope of carrying his Parliament along with him to a war against France? The result of some months' negotiations between William and Tallard was the project of a new Partition Treaty, which received the approval of the two Kings and was signed on June 11, 1699. The States General, to be sure, had not yet given their assent, and much less the Emperor. If the two Kings could, during the lifetime of Charles II, have brought their project into the form of a definite treaty, signed by the four Great Powers of Europe, there would have been a chance the best within reach of avoiding a general war. For Spain alone was too weak to oppose the will of Europe; and even Louis XIV would hardly have ventured to violate a treaty bearing the signatures of England, Holland, and the Emperor, besides his own. According to this project, the Dauphin was to have as his share the kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, the places along the coast of Tuscany, hitherto belonging to Spain, the marquisate of Finale, and the province of Guipuzcoa. To these acquisitions was to be added, in exchange for Milan, the duchy of Lorraine, or, if the reigning Duke Leopold Joseph Charles should be unwilling to give it up, another adjacent province, such as Navarre or Savoy or Luxemburg; so that in any case a considerable aggrandisement of France proper would have resulted from this treaty. Spain, however, with all the rest of the inheritance of Charles II, was to fall to Archduke Charles, younger son of the Emperor Leopold; and care was to be taken that the two branches of the House of Austria always remained separated.

This project was sent to Vienna; and it was hoped, since the Archduke was intended to be the principal heir of Charles II, that it would meet with the approval of the Emperor. "I am glad," wrote William to Heinsius on July 6, 1699," Mr Hop has begun the negotiations at Vienna, and that no bad impression seems to have been made at the outset." But hereupon we hear of complaints as to the delays at the Imperial Court, which William feared might lead to the consummation of the

390

Attitude of the Emperor and Spain [1699-1700

great work without the Emperor. Nevertheless, the Powers were already discussing the place where the further negotiations should be carried on; and it was uncertain whether this should be Vienna, which King William thought best, or the Hague, as preferred by Louis. As in other points, so in this, William was ready to yield; "but however," he says, "if France will not have it otherwise, it must be so."

Hop had in his negotiations at Vienna not at once communicated the project of the new Treaty of Partition. The Emperor at that time still adhered to the idea that the whole inheritance must come to his House. When he learned what had been agreed on between England and France, he seemed, indeed, not so very much disappointed, for he saw his share would be large. He did not, however, yet know the exact nature of the stipulations. Thus, in the conference held by his Ministers on August 31, 1699, it was resolved to remonstrate against the injustice of these propositions, and especially to observe that the Emperor could not afford Milan. In vain William hoped to come to an understanding with Vienna, offering some additional concessions to the Emperor in compensation for Milan. When the news reached the Austrian capital that the Court of Spain had solemnly protested against the Partition Treaty, and that the Marquez de Canales had communicated to the Lords Justices in London a paper so extraordinary both in its contents and in its language, that he was ordered to leave England within eighteen days, the effect on the Imperial Court was a growing antipathy to any partition policy. At the same time it was hoped, at Vienna, that a favourable impression would be created in Spain, if the Emperor seemed to stand firm against any dismemberment of the Spanish monarchy. Would not Charles II, in his indignation against the policy of William and Louis, be easily induced to make a will in favour of the Archduke as the only possible way of avoiding a Partition?

It was clear enough that the Treaty had to be concluded without the Emperor, if it was to be concluded at all. The negotiations with Holland were continued until March, 1700, when, on the 25th, the instrument had received the signatures of the plenipotentiaries of England, France, and the States General. Article VII stated that the Emperor should be invited to accede to the Treaty within three months, and, if, after this term had elapsed, he should refuse to enter into it, the three contracting Powers would join in nominating a Prince to whom the share now assigned to the Archduke would then be given. But still the Emperor refused to accede to the Partition Treaty, never ceasing to hope that his son would obtain the Spanish inheritance undiminished. He would have the whole of Spain, or he would have war.

As to all essential points, the Second Treaty of Partition in its definite form was in close accord with the project of the previous year. Spain, the transatlantic possessions and the Netherlands were assigned to the second son of the Emperor Leopold, and were never to into

pass