1757

Manchester Mercury: Seven Years’ War
-Nate Werkneh

// Harrop’s Manchester Mercury // was a newspaper printed by Joseph Harrop in Manchester. It ran weekly from 1752 until 1828 and covered a multitude of topics including current events, politics, sports, and trade and also functioned as an advertiser. It differed from what a modern person would consider a traditional newspaper, in that it didn’t report the news impassively and impersonally. It offered opinions and sometimes, even took sides on certain issues.

In the year 1757, the //Manchester// Mercury was still a fairly new newspaper and had only been in circulation for less than five years. 1757 was a difficult year for the people who had lived through it. There was general unrest in England and the trade and export business was suffering from the high taxes. There were riots and looting and with every issue released, more and more businesses were listed as having declared bankruptcy. The general consensus seemed unsatisfied with their current leaders, describing the government as a “system of corruption and prodigality” and as a “pit of degeneracy” (//Manchester Mercury,// issue 251). This dissatisfaction wasn’t unique to England, however, as the newspaper listed several other nations in which similar things were happening.

The reason why things seemed dire was because in the year previous to this one, the Seven Years’ War had started. It was the world’s first global conflict and had two main fronts. There was hostility between Prussia and Austria and another one between England and France and Spain both over colonies. Britain and Prussia would join in an alliance, as would Austria and France sometime later.



A man named John Byng, who was an admiral in the British navy, was executed early on in 1757 by firing squad. He was killed for “failing to do his utmost” in protecting British territories from the French. He is mentioned repeatedly in the newspapers throughout 1757. Although many people were all responsible for that failure, he alone was punished for it. The newspaper speculated that his death happened not necessarily to punish him for his failure, but to serve a warning for future soldiers to appreciate the importance of personal responsibility (//Manchester Mercury,// issue 253).

To sum it all up, the main articles of the newspaper covered what was happening in the war such as arms shipments, tactical maneuvering, piracy, and battles won and lost. Some of the more minor events covered included sicknesses that seemed to be going around (such as gout and rheumatism), natural disasters that occurred throughout the year that caused massive property damage (such as earthquakes, floods, and hurricanes), and regularly listed deaths and bankruptcies (//Manchester Mercury,// issues 251-302). Lastly, a few times throughout the article, corrupt administrations were blamed for the state of things.

The London Stage: Unaffected
Despite what was going on in the world and the more local riots, tax hikes, and pamphlet controversies, the theater was largely unaffected in 1757. In fact, it was a fairly profitable year. Theophilus Cibber, a playwright notable enough to have been mentioned, returned to the theater after a hiatus. Repair bills weren’t as steep as they were in years past because unlike the year before, rioters left the theaters alone (//The London Stage// 551-552). Later in the year, activity in the theater expanded. The dancing and the music increased and although there were many restless audience members, there were absolutely no riots.

There were some lesser known things that happened in the theater during the year. The theaters began prominently supporting //The// //Marine Society// which was a charity that raised money toward “clothing friendless and deserted boys for the sea” (//The London// Stage 551). Also, a ninety-eight page pamphlet called //Theater Examiner// was released. Similar to the movie critics of modern times, it contained sharp criticism of the acting abilities of a lot of different actors and of the plays that they acted in (//The London Stage// 551).

All things considered, it was a good year for the theater.

Shakespeare’s //Measure for Measure//


//Measure for Measure// was a play written by William Shakespeare around 1604. Although it is a comedy, its bitterness and cynicism complicate its genre placement. It raises a lot of moral issues and contains plenty of manipulation and deception as is a staple in Shakespeare’s works. Some themes explored in the play are hypocrisy (Angelo’s propositioning of Isabella) and moral quandaries (Isabella letting Claudio die to retain her chastity).

The play begins as the Duke of Vienna grants Lord Angelo temporary leadership of Vienna because he claims that he has to take a leave of absence. He pretends to leave town but instead, he dresses as a friar to observe how things go in his absence. Angelo is hyper-religious, and as such, he is seen as strict, steadfast in his morals and hard-headed in his decision making. He takes it upon himself to rid the city of all sexual vices and declares what he considers immoral sexual activity to be illegal. A young nobleman named Claudio is engaged to Juliet and gets her pregnant before the actual wedding. This is of course against the law and so Angelo sentences Claudio to death to serve as an example to the rest of Vienna.

Claudio’s sister Isabella is religious, virtuous, and chaste, and is taking the final steps to becoming a nun when she hears of her brothers arrest. She goes to Angelo to plead on Claudio’s behalf, but he will hear none of it. He lets her know that she could change his mind about letting Claudio go if she will have sex with him, a proposition that horrifies and shocks her. She refuses at first but then later mulled it over in her thoughts.

The Friar (the Duke in disguise) tells Isabella the story of Angelo’s former lover, and how they were engaged to be married until Mariana lost her riches in a shipwreck and he abandoned her. The Duke and Isabella form a plan in which she will agree to have sex with Angelo but send Mariana instead (the room will be dark so he won’t know the difference). Afterwards, when faced with his own hypocrisy, Angelo will be forced to pardon Claudio. Unfortunately, Angelo refuses to pardon Claudio, regardless of his own hypocrisy and orders his execution. Fortunately, the Duke intervenes and sends the head of a dead pirate and so Claudio is saved. Later the Duke returns and rebukes Angelo for his offenses. He forces him to marry Mariana and he himself marries Isabella. Also, Claudio is pardoned.

Conclusion
//Measure for Measure//, having been written a century and a half previous to the events of the Seven Years’ War, doesn’t fully represent what was going on in the world at the time, though it does touch on some key points. Even though the Duke is seen as a good, kind, and devoted leader, he seems to have trouble maintaining order in his kingdom. He assumes it is because of his nature (he sees himself as a pushover) and so he asks for the aid of Angelo, who is thought of as more of an enforcer. Both rulers have excellent attributes. The Duke is merciful, devoted, and is loved by his people. Angelo knows how to inspire order and control. Both rulers also had some attributes that are detrimental to being a good leader. The Duke can’t maintain order and Angelo exhibits hypocritical tendencies which could lose him respect and support and cause him to become corrupt (if he isn’t corrupt already). Their failings would mean the deaths of their people or the collapse of their kingdoms.

This ties in with some points brought up in the //Manchester Mercury//, because it was repeatedly mentioned that the public thought that the cause of all the problems affecting their society had to do with their leaders who’s //corruption// and greed caused them to //lose control// of their standing with other countries plunging several countries into war. This stresses the importance of personal responsibility (as was illustrated by the execution of John Byng) and how leaders should establish a system of checks and balances in order to avoid corruption that would negatively affect the people.