Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T08:58:38.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

English Neutrality in the War of the Polish Succession

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Richard Lodge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Royal Historical Society, with the assistance of Mr. J. F. Chance, Mr. Wickham Legg, and Dr. D. B. Horn, has rendered and is still rendering valuable assistance to the study of diplomatic history. The most direct service so far has been the issue of a series of volumes giving selections from the Instructions to British envoys at foreign courts between 1689 and 1789. I devoutly wish that some well-timed benefaction might enable us to make these volumes more complete and less selective. In the meantime, while we cast envious eyes upon the sumptuous volumes which have been published in France, and upon the still more complete series issued before the War by the Imperial Society of Russian History, we have to be grateful for what this Society can give us. Its latest contribution is Mr. Legg's third volume of Instructions to our ministers in France, which was sent out to Fellows of the Society last month. The present paper was provoked by that volume, which I read in proof, and is designed to be a commentary upon that part of its contents which refers to the so-called War of the Polish Succession (1733–5). The contentions which I put forward represent convictions formed long ago, but these convictions have been strengthened and vivified by the documents in this volume. Limits of time forbid quotations from other authorities, but anyone who may desire a more detailed study can turn to Professor Vaucher's Robert Walpole et la Politique de Fleury (1731–1742), where ample references can be found.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 14 , December 1931 , pp. 141 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1931

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 153 note 1 Newcastle to Waldegrave, 17 July, 1733 (Instructions, p. 118): “ What relates singly to Poland is a very remote consideration for His Majesty.”

page 155 note 1 The late SirHeadlam-Morley, James, in his Studies in Diplomatic History (p. 111)Google Scholar, after quoting the relative clauses from the Treaty of Vienna, contends that they constitute a mere defensive alliance, and that the term “guarantee” is not strictly applicable. This may be true as regards the agreement to defend the Emperor's dominions during his lifetime, but it would seem that the pledge as to the future succession of his heir or heiress was definitely a guarantee.

page 155 note 2 Frederick the Great said that “ces troubles intestins empéchèrent l'Angleterre de prendre part à la guerre de 1733” (Mémoires, ed. Boutaric, , I P. 30)Google Scholar. Professor Vaucher regards them as at least a contributory cause (Robert Walpole et la Politique de Fleury, p. 65).

page 163 note 1 This was not discovered by the English ministers till June 1735 (p. 164). They at first refused to believe in Fleury's secret negotiation at Vienna (p. 165).

page 166 note 1 Mémoires, I, p. 24.

page 167 note 1 Diplomatic relations were broken off from 1733 to 1738: but there was no declaration of war, although Russia captured and imprisoned the French troops sent to attempt the relief of Danzig.