^{page 3 note 1} This letter and its successor illustrate the part played by Chesterfield in forming the coalition. It also shows that the active negotiator on the official side was Newcastle, who was apt in all such matters to take the lead from his less pushing brother, Henry Pelham. Lord Marchmont's Diary confirms the prominence of Chesterfield as Opposition leader, but assigns the opening of the negotiation to the Premier.

^{page 4 note 1} George Stone was a younger brother of Andrew. There is a full account of his activities in Ireland in the Dictionary of National Biography.

^{page 4 note 2} John Hoadley, archbishop of Armagh.

^{page 4 note 3} Robert Jocelyn, Lord Newport.

^{page 4 note 4} Dr. Thomas Fletcher.

^{page 6 note 1} There is a letter from Newcastle to Henry Pelham of 19 January (O.S.) 1745, which shows that his original desire was to keep all secrets to the triumvirate in the first instance, and to exclude Harrington. “I am sure you will not think unreasonable what I now propose, that every thing, as far as possible, should be first talked over by you and I, before it is either flung out in the closet, or communicated to any of our brethren ; I always except the Chancellor, who, I know, is a third brother.” B.M. Add. MSS. 32,704, fo. 17.

^{page 8 note 1} Chesterfield had ample information of his own on this subject, as Frederick instructed the younger Podewils, his agent at the Hague, to do all in his power to gain his support. Frederick professed a great admiration for Chesterfield, and had been led by his attitude in opposition to expect his cordial support for a reconciliation with Prussia. He was disappointed to find his ministerial attitude much cooler. See Pol. Corr. IV. pp. 44–48, 67–69.

^{page 8 note 2} Prince William was Administrator of Hesse-Cassel for his brother, the Landgrave, who was King of Sweden. His son was married to Mary, one of the daughters of George II, and Hessian troops were hired by England at the outset of the war. But the house of Hesse also adhered to Charles VII, from whom they hoped to obtain electoral rank. William set himself to effect a reconciliation between England and the Emperor. He quarrelled with Carteret after the failure of the Hanau negotiation, withdrew his troops from the English service, and in 1744 joined the League of Frankfort. See two articles in the English Historical Review, July and October, 1923 (vol. XXXVIII. Nos. 151–2.

^{page 9 note 1} i.e. with George II who, on Hanoverian grounds, had many quarrels with Prussia, and who was jealous of his nephew's sudden increase of power and prestige.

^{page 9 note 2} Chesterfield had evidently been active in pacifying Pitt. But he was less eager to gratify him at the beginning of 1746, when the demand of office for Pitt supplied occasion for a ministerial crisis. See below, p. 114.

^{page 9 note 3} Hendrik Hop had been Dutch envoy in England since 1723.

^{page 10 note 1} St. Saphorin was British envoy at Vienna from 1718 to 1728. His verbosity was resented at the Foreign Office, and it became an office joke to call all letters of excessive length “St. Saphorins.”

^{page 10 note 2} Schaub was English minister in Paris from 1720 to 1724, when he was superseded by Horatio Walpole. He had been in the confidence of Stanhope, and was later in that of Carteret.

^{page 10 note 3} Count Flemming was the Saxon minister to the English court.

^{page 11 note 1} From the office letters to Harrington it is clear that Chesterfield drew his opinions on the imperial election very largely from the Grand Pensionary, van der Heim. The latter, who had held his office since 1737, was a leader of the moderate republicans, who clung to the English alliance but were opposed to an Orange restoration. His death in 1746 was a blow to his party, and contributed to the elevation of William IV in the following year.

^{page 11 note 2} The Bohemian vote had been excluded at the election of 1742, as at that time the Kingdom was largely in French and Bavarian occupation. On that ground Maria Theresa disputed the legality of the election.

^{page 11 note 3} Many German jurists held that it would be illegal to combine the crown of Poland with that of the Empire. As Augustus III, the second successive Saxon King, aspired to make the Polish crown hereditary in his family, this was one of the reasons which impelled him to refuse to become a candidate for the Imperial crown. Another very strong reason was that the Tsaritsa Elizabeth frowned upon his candidature. He owed his elevation to the Polish throne to Russian support

^{page 12 note 1} This means that the Pensionary will write to Hop.

^{page 12 note 2} This rather enigmatic sentence explains the reason for the private correspondence. It was to be kept secret from the King. This could not be done if the letters were addressed to Harrington. The King might at any moment ask him if he had any private letters in addition to his official dispatches. But he would not be likely to put such a question to ministers who had no official communication with our ambassador at The Hague.

^{page 13 note 1} It was fortunate that Newcastle had a Secretary who wrote a really good hand. His own caligraphy is almost incredibly difficult to decipher.

^{page 13 note 2} Trevor arrived at The Hague from London on 8 March (N.S.).

^{page 13 note 3} These were the Hanoverian troops which Maria Theresa was to pay with money received from England.

^{page 14 note 1} From this it appears that the suggestion of giving the command to Cumberland came from The Hague. George II had refused to give his son a command in 1744.

^{page 15 note 1} i.e. by procuring for him a substantial share in the anticipated Prussian spoils. The instructions to Villiers, our envoy at Dresden, on this subject are in the Record Office (S.P. For. Poland, 63 and 65).

^{page 16 note 1} This attitude on the part of the Dutch contributed to delay the Anglo-Prussian agreement until late in August. The Prussian possessions in Cleve and Gelderland bordered on the United Provinces, and Frederick had in 1744 strengthened his possessions in the west and gained a convenient harbour at Emden by his seizure of East Friesland. On both political and mercantile grounds this was resented by the Dutch.

^{page 18 note 1} This refers to Chesterfield's official letter to Harrington of 2 February (S.P. For. Holland, 408, fo. 141) in which he had enumerated the Dutch objections to Lord Stair, and also suggests that the King had communicated this letter to Granville.

^{page 19 note 1} The Hanoverian envoy at the Hague.

^{page 19 note 2} i.e. Hanoverian minister.

^{page 19 note 3} Chavigny, the French minister at Munich, claimed the credit of founding the League of Frankfort. He was now engaged in endeavouring to prevent a reconciliation between the young elector and the court of Vienna. He failed in this, and the preliminaries of Füssen were concluded on 22 April 1745.

^{page 20 note 1} Frederick, Prince of Wales.

^{page 20 note 2} Champigny was the agent of the Elector of Cologne.

^{page 20 note 3} Alt was the Hessian minister in London, and Mann held the same post at the Hague.

^{page 20 note 4} Steinberg was one of George II's electoral ministers. At this time he was in London, where the King always kept a German minister to attend to electoral business. His message to his son was significant, as it indicated George II's intention to go to Hanover. These continental journeys during the war were regarded with serious misgivings by the English ministers, but their remonstrances were of no avail, and would have been worse than useless in 1745.

^{page 22 note 1} i.e. Horatio Walpole, whose lengthy disquisitions upon foreign affairs, with which he had once been closely associated, were the terror of the Secretaries of State to whom they were addressed.

^{page 23 note 1} They were previously paid by England, but in 1745 they were transferred to Maria Theresa, who received an additional £200,000 to enable her to pay them. This transparent evasion was devised to meet English prejudices, and it served to enable Pitt, who had denounced the Hanoverian forces before, to defend them now.

^{page 25 note 1} Lord Scarborough, Chesterfield's most intimate and valued friend, committed suicide in 1740. See Chesterfield's sketch of his character in Letters (ed. Bradshaw) III. p. 1420.

^{page 25 note 2} “The Duke” in that generation was the Duke of Cumberland, just as in a later generation it meant the Duke of Wellington.

^{page 26 note 1} Ignaz von Wasner was the able Austrian minister at the English Court, and played a part of no small importance in guiding the relations between London and Vienna during the war. By some odd perversity Chesterfield frequently writes his name as “Wassenaer”. See below, pp. 67, 89.

^{page 27 note 1} The terms proposed by Andrié, which appear to have been authorised from Berlin on 8 March (N.S.) are in S.P. Foreign Ministers, 48. They are endorsed “Sent to E. Chesterfield, Mr Trevor and Sir Thos. Robinson.”

The relevant dispatch is not to be found in Frederick's Politische Correspondenz.

^{page 27 note 2} It is characteristic of Newcastle's underhand methods to take this communication out of the hands of the Northern Secretary, to whose department it belonged.

^{page 28 note 1} Jan van der Poll was frequently burgomaster of Amsterdam between 1718 and 1744. He was a prominent figure in the republican party, which it was Chesterfield's cue to conciliate.

^{page 30 note 1} During 1745 important efforts on the part of the allies were made to procure Russian intervention or Russian aid in the war. I have traced the story in detail in an article on “Lord Hyndford's Embassy to Russia,” which will appear shortly in the English Historical Review.

^{page 30 note 2} But the treaty of Worms had promised Sicily, if conquered, to the King of Sardinia.

^{page 31 note 1} This means that Chesterfield, as ambassador at the Hague, would have to meet the King at Helvoetsluys, and that rudeness on the King's part would make his retention of office impossible.

^{page 32 note 1} Arenberg commanded the allied army on the Rhine.

^{page 35 note 1} The King of Sweden, who was Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel.

^{page 35 note 2} This refers to his office letter about Lord Stair. See above, p. 18 note.

^{page 37 note 1} This should be Fawkener, but proper names were very capriciously spelt in the eighteenth century. Sir Everard had been ambassador at Constantinople, and was at this time private secretary to the Duke of Cumberland.

^{page 37 note 2} Henry Furnese was M.P. for New Romney, one of the Cinque Ports. He had been a member of the Committee appointed to inquire into the conduct of Sir Robert Walpole.

^{page 37 note 3} The military representatives of France at Berlin.

^{page 38 note 1} Boetzelaer had been sent over to ascertain British war aims. The answer referred to was drafted by Pelham, Newcastle and Harrington, and finally adjusted with Carteret. The draft, with Carteret's amendments, is in Add. MSS. 32,804, fo. 223. It is dated 17 May (O.S.) 1744.

^{page 38 note 2} This was the paper, drawn up by Hardwicke, which led to Carteret's resignation. See Yorke, , Life of Lord Hardwicke, I. pp. 332–5.Google Scholar

^{page 39 note 1} This was the method adopted by Maria Theresa, and previously approved by England (see above, p. 15 note). For the terms of her agreement with Augustus III see Arneth, , Maria Theresia, III. pp. 39–41.Google Scholar

^{page 39 note 2} Smissaert commanded the Dutch contingent in the army on the Rhine.

^{page 41 note 1} i.e. the service of the Prince of Wales.

^{page 42 note 1} Sir Everard Fawkener became joint Postmaster-General with Thomas Coke, afterwards Earl of Leicester, in 1745.

^{page 45 note 1} This scheme of simultaneous resignation was carried out in February 1746, when Granville returned to office for forty-eight hours. See below, p. 110.

^{page 46 note 1} The Austrian minister at the Hague.

^{page 47 note 1} Somerfeldt commanded the Hanoverian contingent on the Rhine.

^{page 47 note 2} Frederick, Prince of Wales.

^{page 48 note 1} This is blarney on Newcastle's part. On the vital subject of the imperial election their opinions were diametrically opposed.

^{page 49 note 1} Johann Adolf, duke of Saxe-Weissenfels, commanded the Saxon army at this time. He enjoyed an ill-deserved reputation as a general, and was proposed as commander-in-chief in Flanders after Charles of Lorraine. But Augustus III refused to release him. Thomas Villiers went to Weissenfels to invest the duke with the Garter on his way from Dresden to Berlin in February 1746 (S.P. For., Poland, 68).

^{page 49 note 2} The treaty of Füssen between Austria and Bavaria, signed on 22 April 1745, negatived all Chesterfield's pessimistic forecasts. The young elector recovered his father's dominions, withdrew all claims to the Austrian succession, and promised to give his vote in favour of the Grand Duke.

^{page 50 note 1} Hitherto all Chesterfield's letters have formally begun with “My Lord”. The insertion of the word “dear” meant in the eighteenth century a considerable advance in intimacy. Henceforth all his confidential letters to Newcastle are to “My dear Lord”.

^{page 51 note 1} This was a peculiarly unfortunate prophecy.

^{page 51 note 2} See above, p. 16.

^{page 51 note 3} The duchies of Liegnitz, Wohlau, and Brieg

^{page 51 note 4} Daniel Finch, Earl of Winchelsea and Nottingham, was First Lord of the Admiralty when Carteret was Secretary of State, and was removed when the latter fell.

^{page 52 note 1} Evelyn Pierrepont, first duke of Kingston, the father of Lady Mary Montague and of Lady Gower.

^{page 53 note 1} Chesterfield's letter of 12 May to “Bishop Chenevix”, announcing the final settlement, is in Chesterfield's Letters (ed. Bradshaw), II. p. 784.

^{page 53 note 2} The Abbé de la Ville was at this time the French envoy at The Hague. Later in the year he left Holland to become premier commis at the French foreign office.

^{page 54 note 1} Count Wassenaer-Twickel. On the terms which he carried to Arras in 1744, see Lodge, Studies in Eighteenth Century Diplomacy, p. 130.

^{page 55 note 1} Belleisle was at this time a prisoner in England, having been captured on Hanoverian soil in December 1744. His detention made a great sensation in Europe. As he had been engaged at the time on a diplomatic mission to Prussia, it was doubtful whether he could be regarded as a prisoner of war. Ultimately he was so regarded, and was released by way of exchange in August 1745.

^{page 56 note 1} The battle of Fontenoy, 11 May (N.S.).