TWO:When the news of this distractedly hopeless condition of the Council in Calcutta reached London, Lord North called upon the Court of Directors to send up to the Crown an address for the recall of Hastings, without which, according to the new Indian Act, he could not be removed till the end of his five years. The Directors put the matter to the vote, and the address was negatived by a single vote. The minority then appealed to the Court of Proprietors, at the general election in the spring of 1776, but there it was negatived by ballot by a majority of one hundred, notwithstanding that all the Court party and Parliamentary Ministerialists who had votes attended to overthrow him. This defeat so enraged Lord North that he resolved to pass a special Bill for the removal of the Governor-General. This alarmed Colonel Maclean, a friend of Hastings, to whom he had written, on the 27th of March.[328] 1775, desiring him, in his disgust with the conduct of Francis, Clavering, and Monson, and the support of them by the Directors, to tender his resignation. Thinking better of it, however, he had, on the 18th of the following May, written to him, recalling the proposal of resignation. But Maclean, to save his friend from a Parliamentary dismissal, which he apprehended, now handed the letter containing the resignation to the Directors. Delighted to be thus liberated from their embarrassment, the Directors accepted the resignation at once, and elected Mr. Edward Wheler to the vacant place in the Council.
TWO:In prosecution, however, of his unrighteous engagement to Catherine, he mustered the large army he had engaged to bring against Turkey, and in February, 1788, he made a formal proclamation of war, having no cause of hostility to assign of his own, but merely that his alliance with Russia demanded that he should support that power in its equally lawless invasion of Turkey. The Prince of Saxe-Coburg, who commanded one division of Joseph's army, entered Moldavia, and spent the whole campaign nearly in the siege and reduction of the fortress of Choczim. The Emperor himself accompanied another division, the destination of which was the renewal of the siege of Belgrade. He had been led by Catherine to hope, as his reward for the co-operation, the recovery of Bosnia and Servia, the acquisition of Moldavia and Wallachia, and the extension of his boundaries to the Dnieper. But, having waited some time for the junction of the Russians, Joseph's army assembled on the banks of the Danube in February, and occupied itself in securing the banks of that river and of the Save. Joseph himself joined it in April, accompanied by his favourite marshal and counsellor, Lacy, and having also with him, but paying little attention to him or his advice, the brave and able Laudohn, who had so successfully coped with Frederick of Prussia in Silesia. On the 24th he took the little fortress of Szabatch, whilst another part of his army suffered a defeat from the Turks at Dobitza. He then sat down before Belgrade, but carried on the siege with such slackness as to disgust his own troops and astonish all Europe. He was at length roused by the advance of the vizier, Yussuff, who was coming rapidly down upon him. At his approach, Joseph precipitately retreated behind the Save, while Yussuff threw bridges over the Danube at Cladova, broke the Austrian cordon by the defeat of a portion of the forces of General Wartesleben on the heights of Meadiha, and swept through the banat of Temeswar, Joseph's own territory, which he held, and threatened to invade Hungary. Joseph hastened with forty thousand men to support Wartesleben, leaving General Laudohn to conduct the war in Croatia. The army was delighted to have Laudohn at their head instead of the Emperor. He led it on the very day of his arrival against the fortress of Dobitza, which he took; he then passed the Save, drove the Turks before him, defeated seven thousand of the enemy before Novi, and took that place, where his operations were suspended by the winter. Joseph gained little credit by his junction with Wartesleben. The Turks attacked him, and, though they were for the moment repulsed, the Emperor retreated in a dark night, and Turks and Austrians resumed their former positions. After taking Verplanka, the campaign ended with a three months' truce. But the Austrians had suffered more severely from the miasma of the marshes of the Danube and Save than from the Turks.On the whole, there was a fair amount of religious activity throughout the British islands, and as a consequence drunkenness and vulgar amusements were on the decline. Of the lights of the Establishment, Archbishop Manners Sutton was Primate until his death in 1828, when he was succeeded by the amiable Dr. Howley. Bishop Phillpotts of Exeter was undoubtedly the hardest hitter on the Episcopal bench, and zeal for the welfare of the Church was admirably represented by Bishop Blomfield of London. He was one of the most staunch supporters of King's College, and an earnest advocate of Church extension. It is hardly necessary to mention the name of the witty Canon of St. Paul's, Sydney Smith. During the earlier years of this period the tone of the Church was distinctly evangelical, but a reaction which had its origin in Oxford University had already begun, whose supporters were known as the "Tractarian party," from a series of publications, called "Tracts for the Times," written by Oxford divines, advocating patristic theology, contending for apostolic succession as necessary to the validity of the sacraments, for baptismal regeneration, and the real presence in the eucharist, condemning the Reformation as a great evil, and claiming for the Anglican Church the right to be regarded as the only true orthodox church in England. The growing strength of the party had manifested itself on the occasion of the appointment of Dr. Hampden to the Regius Professorship of Divinity at Oxford in 1836. Dr. Pusey and Dr. Newman were among the most vigorous of the protesters against that unfortunate divine, against whom the charge was made that his Bampton Lectures contained doctrines which savoured of Socinianism. The outcry was great, and the Hampden controversy threatened to break up the Establishment. Lord Melbourne, however, who had recommended Dr. Hampden on the advice of Archbishop Whately and Bishop Coplestone, declined to cancel the appointment, and the excitement died away for the time, though it was renewed in a milder form when in 1847 Dr. Hampden was created Bishop of Hereford.
