Walpole’s Whigs, privatising the crown, takeover of the east India company and the Church of England

Walpole's Whigs, privatising the crown, takeover of the east India company and the Church of England










1 July 2019

Sir Robert Walpole was born August 26, 1676, at Houghton Hall, Norfolk, England, he died March 18, 1745, in London. Robert Walpole became 1st earl of Orford in 1725. As a British statesman he held power from 1721–42, and is regarded as the first British prime minister establishing Downing Street as home of the Prime Minster. In 1705 he was made a member of Prince George of Denmark’s Council, which controlled the affairs of the navy during the War of the Spanish Succession of 1701–14.

In the late 1670s and early 1680s was an era marked by a political division that created the foundations for the establishment of the Whig and Tory factions in Parliament. The Whigs opposed the hereditary accession as monarch of the Catholic Duke of York, favouring his exclusion; whereas Charles II and the (anti-exclusion) Tories supported the Duke’s succession to the throne as James II. In this context, the episode described in Chales II’s State Papers is potentially politically significant. Leveson-Gower was a Whig and a Protestant, married to Jane Grenville, the daughter of John Grenville, the Royalist 1st Earl of Bath.

The Whigs were behind the plot against Charles I and Charles II had a aversion to the craft seen in another of Charles II’s State papers,[1] it is from this reality that membership of the Freemasons could be and was viewed pejoratively, at least by some.

The brotherhood was was active in Staffordshire in the latter part of the seventeenth century; and the Freemasons were being monitored by the government after all Secretary Jenkins had notice by several letters.

There were various reasons why Freemasonry began to be perceived negatively, and why membership of the society might be politically sensitive. At the time, membership of any supposedly secret society, no matter how banal, could be viewed as potentially treasonous and certainly suspicious by a nervous establishment; and any such suspicion could serve as a justification for possible government action. Following the 1679-1681 Exclusion Bill crisis, the 1683 Rye House Plot, an attempt to assassinate Charles and James, provided confirmation that not all establishment fears were baseless. And in the wake of the Rye House Plot, the Whigs were virtually excluded from government and a number of prominent Whig politicians exiled. Study

Walpole became a leading member of the Kit Cat Club which was a meeting place for Whig men of letters.The members of the Kit-Cat Club were writers of various kinds, politicians and aristocrats. Their names include a litany of famous authors – William Congreve, John Vanbrugh, Matthew Prior, Joseph Addison and Richard Steele – but they also included Jacob Tonson, the most important publisher in London, Robert Walpole and a shoal of peers. The unifying factor was Whiggery. In 1700, Whigs, as opposed to Tories, stood for constitutional government against royal absolutism; they were pro-parliament, progressive and hungry for cultural change. 

In January 1712 Robert Walpole was impeached for corruption as secretary at war and subsequently found guilty, expelled from the Commons, and sent to the Tower of London. Living a lavish lifestyle with many friends, his expenses were so high that he fell heavily in debt. Just the way the bankers like it.

Whig is a short form of the word whiggamore, a Scottish word once used to describe people from western Scotland who opposed King Charles I of England in 1648. The Whig Party was originally founded in 1678, as the continuum to the works of Jewish backed Oliver Cromwell, as such the creation of the Whig Party was the political move of the bankers against the party of conservation of Great Britain and the start of Britain’s modern political history they call democracy, it was another step away from the age old maxim of Constitutional Monarchy, leading ultimately to the position we find ourselves in today… a full blown corporate democracy.

The Whigs passed a number of pro-immigration measures, and laws to enable the full participation of the Jewish Rabbis, presented as the enabling of religious minorities in British public life. Perhaps the most celebrated success of the Whigs was to spearhead the move against slavery, a Jewish and Masonic affair in its entirety, when they took responsibility for the abolishment of the slave trade in 1807, eventually permeating throughout the British Empire in 1833.  This was of course a deception, as the crown shifted a split in the title created in the canon land law and thus credit account of Rome, the live birth record, to a debt account, administered through government and evidenced in the issuance of a birth certificate. Slavery went undercover with a trap procured through language.

The Whig Party was dissolved in 1868, and the reforming spirit of the Whigs was inherited by the Liberals and the Labour Party.

Many of the great reforms of the 20th Century were in the spirit of Whiggery; such as the 1918 Representation of the People Act, which gave women the vote, the establishment of the National Health Service (NHS) and the welfare state by the post-War Labour Government, and the reforms of Roy Jenkins in the 1960s, which decriminalised homosexuality and abolished capital punishment.

This Whiggish spirit was reinvigorated by the founding of the Social Democratic Party in 1981(Liberal Democrats under Nick Clegg) and the launch of New Labour in 1994, which gave us war in Afghanistan to secure the milk of the poppy for the NHS, war in Iraq, demolishing the British armed forces, war in Syria, Libya, Yemen for Israel, in direct contradiction to the national interest. New Labour gained its political mandate from the block voting of Muslim communities, who as a point of fact, are thus responsible for all the wars against Middle East Islam.

Walpole fought the government on every issue, achieving considerable success in bringing about the rejection of the Peerage Bill (1719), which would have limited the royal prerogative in the creation of peers. He was the Kings man and perhaps handled by the princess of Wales, Caroline Ansbach, suggesting the break aroused through the foreign policy of George I, which Walpole and Charles Viscount Townshend opposed, on the grounds that British interests were being sacrificed to furnish the King’s Hanoverian portfolio to gain influence.

With Walpole back in office he became caught up in the speculative frenzy associated with the South Sea Company, a joint-stock company with monopoly rights to trade with Spanish America. A scheme was set up in 1720 whereby the company would take charge of a large part of the national debt, he had invested heavily in South Sea stock. Walpole was saved from financial disaster by the insight of his Jewish banker, Robert Jacomb.

His power was based on the loyal support given to him by George I and George II. This enabled him to use all royal patronage for political ends, and Walpole’s appointments to offices in the royal household, the church, the navy, the army, and the civil service.

During the 1700s the Church of England commanded massive popular loyalty and respect, and assaults on its position would arouse nationwide discontent. Robert Walpole, had failed to shift British politics to the creed of the European bankers when in 1725, William Pulteney, an ambitious and talented politician, was dismissed from state office, he and 17 other Whig MPs aligned themselves with the 150 Tory MPs remaining in the House of Commons.

These dissidents (who called themselves Patriot Whigs) grew in number until, by the mid-1730s, more than 100 Whig MPs were collaborating with the Tories against Walpole’s nominally Whig administration. Some were motivated primarily by disappointed ambition. But many Whigs and Tories genuinely believed that Walpole had arrogated too much power to himself and that he was corrupt and an enemy to Britain’s culture.

At this time the East India Company was the crown’s most powerful trading organisation, shipping goods such as spices, fabrics, tea and porcelain from Asia to Europe in vast quantities.

From 1704, in India the East India Company became more of a ruling power than a trading company, and through the manipulation of the divisions within parliament by crown agents, moved the British government into the scapegoat position for all that would be carried out by the Black Nobilities takeover of the British crown, which required an increasing involvement of the British government into the affairs of the East India Company by individuals becoming stockholders. A period of progressive domination followed so that, by 1858, when the East India Company was dissolved and the administration of India was taken over by the Crown, the Black Nobility controlled India, Burma, Singapore and Hong Kong, yet still it was the British government that would take the rap for all that the House of Hanover would accomplish for its own interests in all nations British trade had made home. The crown would inflict commerce over all trade.

Frequent disagreements occurred between its Patriot Whig and Tory sectors. These weaknesses helped Walpole to keep the Opposition at bay until 1742. But there were other reasons for his prolonged stay in power : he retained the support of the crown, now under Hanoverian control.

Robert Walpole determined to reach an accommodation with the church, and in 1723 he came to an agreement with Edmund Gibson, Bishop of London. Gibson was to ensure that only clergymen sympathetic to the Whig administration were appointed to influential positions in the Church of England. In return, Walpole undertook that no further extensive concessions would be made to Protestant dissenters. This arrangement continued until 1736.

In essence what the Whigs could not achieve in overt British politics they would move to achieve in a  takeover of the Church of England, an essential strategy in having the Church follow the will of the Hanoverian crown to subvert Britain to the will of the Holy See, the very court the Black Nobility had served when they took over Germany after the destruction of the House Hohenstaufen in the Middle Ages. In securing the Church, the road to Israel took a huge leap forward, a Talmudic elite within the Church of England ensured the rise of usury against the population, but for this achievement to fulfil, required two World Wars and the installation of the ever encroaching communist welfare state.

[1] Charles II’s State Papers contain a previously unidentified reference to Freemasonry :
April 4, 1682
Secretary Jenkins to Mr. Chetwynd. I did not think M. Palmer’s business to be ripe enough to trouble you, but intended to have recourse to you, when a just occasion should present itself, but now there is an incident in that affair of Mr. P.’s that I must acquaint with.
Last night Mr. Leveson Gower came and desired me to help him to make a full vindication of himself against a calumny that made him a partaker, as he said, in the society of Freemasons. I never heard he was one of them, only Mr. P. intimated that he had many arms in his house. Mr. L. G. hereon charged Mr. P. of having accused him of being of this fraternity and that he had told a friend of his Mr. L. G. that he had given me advertisement of his so being. I told Mr. L. G. that I had notice by several letters of that brotherhood in Staffordshire but that I had not heard he was one, and this I said e tul, for M. P.’s accusation was that he had arms in his house.
Secretary Jenkins to Mr. Palmer. Mr. Leveson Gower desires to have the liberty of the law against you for accusing him as having part in the fraternity of Freemasons. He came to me last night with that complaint and desire, but I, not remembering anything of his being a Freemason in the notices given me, answered that no such charge was come to me and that, if any came, I would take his majesties pleasure in it, wherewith he went away seemingly satisfied.
I did not mention the charge of having arms in his house, it being his Lord Lieutenant’s business to look after that, nor did he complain of any other charge. I desire you therefore to take your measures with Mr. Chetwynd, to whom I have written.
Mr Leveson Gower was William Leveson-Gower, Bt. (c. 1647-1691) , MP for Newcastle-under-
Secretary Jenkins was the lawyer, diplomat and administrator, Sir Leoline Jenkins (1625 –1685). Jenkins was Secretary of State at the Northern Department (April 1680–February 1681) until his transfer to the Southern Department, where he served from February 1681 until his resignation in April 1684.

Encyclopedia Brittanica. Link
East India Company Sales Catalogue 1704. Link

Further Study
Headquarters of the Hanoverian empire in the Inner City
How Christianity Became A Zionist Arm, Building The Fake Israel
Freemasonry Is Deception, The Blue And Red Cross
East India Company’s Porcelain Sales Catalogue 1704.
Historical Fact Shows That Judaism Is An Inversion Of The Hebrew Tradition