The Poetical Works of the Right Hon. George Granville, Lord Lansdowne/The Life of G. Granville, L. Lansdowne
THE LIFE OF
G. GRANVILLE, L. LANSDOWNE.
L. Lansdowne was deſcended from an illuſtrious family, which traced their anceſtry from Rollo, the firſt Duke of Normandy. He was ſecond ſon of Bernard Granville, and grandſon of the famous Sir Bevil Granville, killed at the battle of Lanſdowne 1643. This nobleman received the firſt tincture of his education in France, under the tuition of Sir William Ellis, a gentleman, who was eminent afterwards in many public employments.
When our Author was but eleven years of age he was ſent to Trinity-College in Cambridge, where he remained five years, but at the age of thirteen was admitted to the degree of Maſter of Arts, having before he was twelve years old ſpoken a copy of Engliſh verſes, of his own compoſition, to the Ducheſs of York, when her Royal Highneſs paid a viſit to that univerſity.
At the time when the nation was embroiled by the public diſtractions, occaſioned by the efforts of King James II. to introduce Popery, Lord Lanſdowne did not remain an unconcerned ſpectator: he had really imbibed principles of loyalty, and as ſome of his forefathers had fallen in the cauſe of Charles I. he thought it was his duty to ſacrifice his life alſo for the intereſt of his ſovereign. However miſtaken he might be in this furious zeal for a prince the chief ſcope of whoſe reign was to overthrow the law and introduce abſolute dominion, yet he appears to be perfectly ſincere. In a letter he wrote to his father upon the expected approach of the Prince of Orange’s fleet, he expreſſes the moſt ardent deſire to ſerve the King in perſon.[1] This letter we ſhall inſert, but beg our readers’ patience to make a digreſſion, which will juſtify what we have ſaid concerning James II.
The genuine mark of a tyrant is cruelty; and it is with concern we can produce an inſtance of the moſt inhuman barbarity in that prince which ever ſtained the annals of any reign. Cruelty ſhould be the badge of no party; it ought to be equally the abhorrence of all; and whoever is tainted with it ſhould be ſet up to view as a terror to the world, as a monſter, whom it is the intereſt of mankind to deſtroy.
After the ſuppreſſion of Monmouth’s rebellion, many of the unfortunate perſons engaged in it fled to London, and took ſhelter there, till the Act of Indemnity ſhould be publiſhed. They who afforded them ſhelter were either of the Monmouth faction or induced, from principles of humanity, to adminiſter to their ſafety. What would become of the world if our friends were always to forſake us in diſtreſs? There lived then in London an amiable lady, attached to no party, who enjoyed a large fortune, which ſhe ſpent in the exerciſe of the moſt entenſive beneficence: ſhe made it her buſineſs to viſit the jails, and the priſoners who were moſt neceſſitous and deſerving ſhe relieved: her houſe was an aſylum for the poor: ſhe lived but for charity, and ſhe had every hour the prayers of the widow and orphan poured out to her. It happened that one of the rebels found ſhelter in her houſe; ſhe ſuffered him to be ſcreened there; ſhe fed and clothed him. The King had often declared that he would rather pardon thoſe who were found in arms againſt him than the people who harboured or ſecretly encouraged them. This miſcreant, who ſometimes ventured out at night to a public houſe, was informed that the King had made ſuch a declaration, and it entered into his baſe heart to betray his benefactreſs. He accordingly went before a magiſtrate, and lodged an information, upon which the lady was ſecured, brought to a trial, and, upon the evidence of this ungrateful villain, caſt for her life. She ſuffered at a ſtake with the moſt reſigned cheerfulneſs; for when a woman is convicted of treaſon, it ſeems ſhe is ſentenced to be burnt.[2] The reader will eaſily judge what ſort of bowels that king muſt have who could permit ſuch a puniſhment to take place upon a woman ſo completely amiable, upon the evidence of a villain ſo conſummately infamous, and he will, we are perſuaded, be of opinion, that had his Majeſty poſſeſſed a thouſand kingdoms he deſerved to loſe them all for this one act of genuine barbarity.
Lord Lanſdowne, who did not conſider, or was not then capable of diſcovering, the dangers to which this prince expoſed his people, wrote the following letter to his father, earneſtly preſſing him to permit his entering voluntarily into King James’s ſervice.
- “Sir,
“Your having no proſpect of obtaining a commiſſion for me, can no way alter or cool my deſire, at this important juncture, to venture my life, in ſome manner or other, for my king and country. I cannot bear to live under the reproach of lying obſcure and idle, in a country retirement, when every man who has the leaſt ſenſe of honour ſhould be preparing for the field. You may remember, Sir, with what reluctance I ſubmitted to your commands upon Monmouth’s rebellion, when no importunity could prevail with you to permit me to leave the academy: I was too young to be hazarded; but, give me leave to ſay, it is glorious, at any age, to die for one’s country; and the ſooner the nobler ſacrifice: I am now older by three years. My uncle Bath was not ſo old when he was left among the ſlain at the battle of Newberry, nor you yourſelf, Sir, when you made your eſcape from your tutors to join your brother in the defence of Scilly. The ſame cauſe is now come round about again. The King has been miſled; let thoſe who miſled him be anſwerable for it. Nobody can deny but he is ſacred in his own perſon, and it is every honeſt man’s duty to defend it. You are pleaſed to ſay it is yet doubtful if the Hollanders are raſh enough to make ſuch an attempt. But be that as it will, I beg leave to be preſented to his Majeſty as one whoſe utmoſt ambition into devote his life to his ſervice and my country’s, after the example of all my anceſtors. The gentry aſſembled at York to agree upon the choice of repreſentatives for the county, have prepared an addreſs to aſſure his Majeſty they are ready to ſacrifice their lives and fortunes for him upon this and all other occaſions; but at the ſame time they humbly beſeech him to give them ſuch magiſtrates as may be agreeable to the laws of the land, for at preſent there is no authority to which they can legally ſubmit. By what I can hear, every body wiſhes well to the King, but would be glad his miniſters were hanged. The winds continue ſo contrary, that no landing can be ſo ſoon as was apprehended, therefore I may hope, with your leave and aſſiſtance, to be in readineſs before any action can begin. I beſeech you, Sir, moſt humbly, and moſt earneſtly, to add this one act of indulgence more to ſo many teſtimonies I have ſo conſtantly received of your goodneſs, and be pleaſed to believe me always, with the utmoſt duty and ſubmiſſion, Yours,” &c.
We are not told whether his father yielded to his importunity, or whether he was preſented to his Majeſty; but if he really joined the army, it was without danger to his perſon, for the Revolution was effected in England without one drop of blood.
In 1696 his comedy called The She Gallants was acted at the Theatre Royal in Lincoln’s-Inn Fields.[3] He afterwards altered this comedy, and publiſhed it among his other Works, under the title of Once a Lover and Always a Lover, which, as he obſerves in the preface, is a new building upon an old foundation.
“It appeared firſt under the name of The She Gallants, and, by the preface then prefixed to it, in ſaid to have been the child of a child. By taking it ſince under examination ſo many years after, the Author ftatters himſelf to have made a correct comedy of it; he found it regular to his hand; the ſcene conſtant to one place, the time not exceeding the bounds preſcribed, and the action entire. It remained only to clear the ground, and to plant, as it were, freſh flowers in the room of thoſe which were grown into weeds, or were faded by time; to retouch and vary the characters, enliven the painting, retrench the ſuperfluous, and animate the action, where it appeared the young Author ſeemed to aim at more than he had ſtrength to perform.”
The ſame year alſo his tragedy, entitled Heroic Love, was acted at the Theatre. Mr. Gildon obſerves, “That this tragedy is written after the manner of the Ancients, which is much more natural and eaſy than that of our modern dramatiſts.” Though we cannot agree with Mr. Gildon that the ancient model of tragedy is ſo natural as the modern, yet this piece muſt have very great merit, ſince we find Mr. Dryden addreſſing verſes to the Author upon this occaſion, which begin thus,
Auſpicious Poet! wert thou not my friend,
How could I envy what I muſt commend?
But ſince ’tis Nature’s law, in love and wit,
That youth ſhould reign, and with’ring age ſubmit,
With leſs regret thoſe laurels I reſign,
Which dying on my brow revive on thine.
Our Author wrote alſo a dramatic poem called The Britiſh Enchanters,[4] in the preface to which he obſerves, “That it is the firſt eſſay of a very infant Muſe, rather as a taſk at ſuch hours as were free from other exerciſes than any way meant for public entertainment. But Mr. Betterton, having had a caſual ſight of it, many years after it was written, begged it for the ſtage, where it found ſo favourable a reception as to have an uninterrupted run of at leaſt forty days.” To this Mr. Addiſon wrote the epilogue. Lord Lanſdowne altered Shakeſpeare’s Merchant of Venice, under the title of The Jew of Venice, which was acted with applauſe, the profits of which were deſigned for Mr. Dryden, but upon that poet’s death were given to his ſon.
In 1702 he tranſlated into Engliſh The Second Olynthian of Demoſthenes. He was returned member for the county of Cornwall in the parliament which met in November 1710, and was ſoon after made Secretary of War, next Comptroller of the Houſehold, and then Treaſurer, and ſworn one of the Privy Council. The year following he was created Baron Lanſdowne of Biddeford in Devonſhire.
On the acceſſion of George I. in 1714, he was removed by that prince from his Treaſurer’s place; the next year he entered his proteſt againſt the bills for attainting Lord Bolingbroke and the Duke of Ormond, and entered deeply into the ſcheme for raiſing an inſurrection in the weſt of England, of which, Lord Bolingbroke ſays, he was at the head, and repreſents him as poſſeſſed of the ſame political fire and frenzy for the Pretender as he had ſhown in his youth for the father. Accordingly he was ſeized as a ſuſpected perſon, and on the 26th of September 1715 was committed priſoner to the Tower, where he continued till the 8th of February 1717, when he was ſet free from impriſonment. Being confined in the ſame room in which Sir Robert Walpole had been priſoner, and had leſt his name on the window, he wrote theſe lines under it: Good unexpected, evil unforeſeen,
Appear by turns, as Fortune ſhifts the ſcene:
Some rais’d aloft come rumbling down amain,
And fall ſo hard they hound and riſe again.
In 1719 he made a ſpeech in the Houſe of Lords againſt the practice of occaſional conformity, which is printed among his works, and among other things he ſays this: “I always underſtood the toleration to be meant as an indulgence to tender conſciences, not a licenſe for hardened ones; and that the act to prevent occaſional conformity was deſigned only to correct a particular crime of particular men, in which no ſect of Diſſenters was included but theſe followers of Judas which came to the Lord’s Supper from no other end but to fell and betray him. This crime, however palliated and defended by ſo many right reverend fathers in the Church, is no leſs than making the God of truth, as it were, in perſon, ſubſervient to acts of hypocriſy; no leſs than ſacrificing the myſtical blood and body of out Saviour to worldly and ſiniſter purpoſes, an impiety of the higheſt nature! which in juſtice called for protection, and in charity for prevention. The bare receiving the holy Euchariſt could never be intended ſimply as a qualification for an office, but as an open declaration, an indubitable proof, of being and remaining a ſincere member of the Church. Whoever preſumes to receive it with any other view profanes it, and may be ſaid to ſeek his promotion in this world by eating and drinking his own damnation in the next.”
In 1722 his Lordſhip withdrew to France, and continued abroad about ten years. At his return in 1732 he publiſhed a fine edition of his Works in two Volumes quarto. The remaining years of his life were paſſed in privacy and retirement.
This accompliſhed nobleman died on the 30th January 1735, leaving no male iſſue. By his lady, widow of Thomas Thynne, Eſq. (father of Thomas Lord Viſcount Weymouth) and daughter of Edward Villiers, Earl of Jerſey, he had iſſue four daughters, Anne, Mary, Grace, and Elizabeth. His lady died but a few days before him.
Mr. Pope, with many other poets of the firſt eminence, have celebrated Lord Lanſdowne, who ſeems to have been a good-natured agreeable nobleman. The luſtre of his ſtation, no doubt, procured him more incenſe than the force of his genius would otherwiſe have attracted; but he appears not to have been deſtitute of fine parts, which were, however rather elegantly poliſhed than great in themſelves.
Lord Lanſdowne likewiſe wrote a maſk called Peleus and Thetis. His Lordſhip’s Works have been often printed both in quarto and in duodecimo.[5]
- ↑ General Dict. art. Granville.
- ↑ See Burnet’s Hiſtory of his own Times.
- ↑ General Dict. art. Granville.
- ↑ It was called A Dramatic Opera, and was decorated at a great expenſe, and intermixed with ſongs, dances, &c.
- ↑ This edition is printed from the quarto of 1732, publiſhed under his Lordſhip’s inſpection. See the following Preface for the reaſons of that edition.