been only seven years at the bar, and was already rising rapidly
in the estimation of the profession; within five years he became
Solicitor-General.--E.
[146] He was Lord-Lieutenant of Lincolnshire, where he had a great
estate. He died in 1778.--E.
[147] The original MS. states the interview to have been on the
20th of June, obviously by a clerical error, for that date would
make the narrative unintelligible. In a letter to Sir Horace Mann,
of the 26th (Letters, i. p. 237), the day is correctly stated to
be the 12th, which is confirmed by a letter of the Duke of Bedford
to the Duke of Marlborough, of the 13th, giving the details of the
interview.--(Wiffen’s Memoirs of the House of Russell, p. 70.)--I have
ventured to correct the text accordingly.--E.
[148] If this narrative be true, Junius is not the libeller that the
world has supposed, and the King was unquestionably treated by his
Ministers in a manner to which a parallel is only to be found in the
reign of Charles the First. George the Third, however, was not, as
Lord Brougham justly observes, (Historical Sketches, &c., vol. iii. p.
144,) the monarch to submit to such treatment,--neither was Sandwich or
Halifax likely to have sanctioned it. Indeed Walpole must be mistaken
in making them parties to the transaction. In a letter written at the
time, he intimates that the Duke of Bedford alone waited upon the
King (i. 238); he takes no notice of any written paper, nor is there
any trace of such a document among the archives at Woburn. The only
authentic account of the interview is given in the letter of the Duke
to his nephew the Duke of Marlborough, cited in the preceding note, the
general tenor of which proves beyond dispute the writer to have been
innocent of any design to insult the King, as well as ignorant that he
had done so. His Grace says that he reminded the King of the terms on
which the Ministers had consented to resume their functions, and asked
whether the promise made to them on that occasion had been kept. He
complained of the favour shown to the opponents of the Administration,
and the very different treatment received by their friends, dwelling
especially on the influence of Lord Bute; and, finally, he besought
his Majesty “to permit his authority and his favour to go together,
and if the last could not be given to his present Ministers to
transfer to others that authority which must be useless in their
hands unless so strengthened.” Strong words these, no doubt, and an
offensive interpretation may have been put upon them by a youthful
sovereign with the notions of prerogative inculcated by Lord Bute--a
political opponent (like Burke) might not unfairly insinuate them to be
“indecent.” They furnish also a colourable foundation for the statement
in the text, which is not unlikely to have been derived partially from
the King himself. On the other hand, a dispassionate observer must
take into consideration the general truth of the Duke’s charges; the
feelings of the Ministers at their dismissal on grounds which appeared
to them utterly inadequate; and, above all, their sense of the public
danger resulting from the unsatisfactory relations of the King with his
government. The limits prescribed by the constitution to a remonstrance
of this nature are very indistinct, and the Duke will be held to
have outstepped them only by the opponent of the political opinions
with which the House of Russell have been so long and so honourably
identified.--E.
[149] The most plausible explanation of Lord Temple’s conduct on this
occasion is, that he acted on grounds purely personal. It appears
from Lady Hervey’s Letters--an excellent authority--that as far back
as March his connection with Mr. Pitt had in a great measure ceased.
His pride may have been gratified by the advances made to him by the
leading members of the Government, as unquestionably it was deeply
wounded by the proofs he had lately received of his diminished
influence over the Opposition. The gratification of his vengeance
cost him dear, for the Liberal party never forgave him, and the event
showed how entirely his importance with the country had arisen from
his relation to Mr. Pitt. The engagements into which he immediately
after entered with Mr. Grenville, only served to obstruct his return to
power, and, as will be seen hereafter, to involve him in embarrassments
still more prejudicial to his reputation.--E.
[150] Lord Villiers was the intimate friend of the Duke of Grafton,
whose attachment was to Mr. Pitt.
[151] Charles (not the famous one, but his first-cousin) was the only
son of Colonel W. Townshend, third son of Charles Viscount Townshend,
Secretary of State. This Charles Townshend was, for distinction, called
_the Spanish Charles_, from having been secretary to Sir Benjamin
Keene, Ambassador at Madrid, and was afterwards a Commissioner of the
Treasury.
[152] John Earl of Ashburnham, the chief favourite of the Duke of
Newcastle, whom he afterwards abandoned, being a very prudent and
interested man.
[153] T. Walpole was attached to Mr. Pitt.
[154] It certainly was time that they should enter upon the business
of their respective offices, for the country had now been more than
seven weeks virtually without a government. The following chronological
summary of the negotiations that passed daily at this period will bring
them more distinctly before the reader.
18th May. The King announced to Mr. Grenville his intention of changing
his Ministers.
19th. The Ministers acquaint the King that they would resign on the
following Tuesday.
20th. The Duke of Cumberland applies to Mr. Pitt, at Hayes.
20th. The King, having failed to form a new government, recalls his
Ministers.
12th June. The Duke of Bedford remonstrates with the King.
17th. The Duke of Cumberland conveys to Mr. Pitt, at Hayes, fresh
overtures from the King.
19th. Mr. Pitt has an audience with the King.
21st. Lord Temple refuses to join Mr. Pitt.
22nd. Mr. Pitt waits on the King and declines office.
23rd. Mr. Pitt has another audience, with the same result.
30th. Meeting of the Opposition at Claremont, under the auspices of the
Duke of Cumberland.
1st July. The Duke of Newcastle notifies to the Duke of Cumberland the
result of the meeting.
8th. New Ministers sworn in.--E.
[155] William Dowdeswell, formerly a Tory.
[156] Thomas, eldest son of Thomas Townshend, Teller of the Exchequer,
and member for the University of Cambridge, and second son of Charles
Viscount Townshend, Secretary of State.
[157] Henry Arthur Herbert, Earl of Powis. He died in 1772.
[158] George third Lord Edgcumbe, an admiral.
[159] Richard Lumley Saunderson, Earl of Scarborough; he had married
the sister of Sir George Saville.
[160] Thomas, afterwards Lord Pelham.
[161] Next brother to Daniel Earl of Winchelsea, father of the
succeeding earl.
[162] Thomas Viscount Gage, attached to the Duke of Newcastle, whom he
afterwards abandoned as Lord Ashburnham did, to keep their places.
[163] Sir Fletcher Norton.
[164] Little is now known of Mr. Dowdeswell, beyond the high estimation
in which he was held by the Whig party. His epitaph is by no means the
happiest of Burke’s compositions; but amidst the cloud of panegyric
the rays of truth exhibit a character of genuine English mould which
it is very agreeable to contemplate. In a private letter, Burke says,
“There never was a soul so remote as his from fraud, duplicity, or
fear, so perfectly free from any of that rapacious unevenness of temper
which embitters friendship and perplexes business. Of all the men I
ever knew, he was the best to act with in public and to live with in
private, from the manly decision and firmness of his judgment, and
the extreme mildness and pleasantness of his temper.” His speeches,
imperfectly as they are reported, prove him to have been a man of
plain, sound, vigorous understanding, and not without respectable
powers of debate. Burke exalts his knowledge of the revenue. He
certainly was one of the leading members of the House, previous to
his appointment, and the distinction conferred upon him was generally
approved, Charles Townshend being forward to claim the merit of having
suggested it. See the interesting Memoirs of Mr. Dowdeswell, in
Cavendish’s Parliamentary Debates, i. 575.--E.
[165] The opinion entertained of Lord Rockingham by many of the most
eminent men of his time, is alone sufficient to prove him not to have
been the feeble-minded and insignificant character described in the
text. He had the disadvantage of coming early into the possession of
a princely fortune. His youth was wasted in the pursuits too common
with his rank, and the only official employment he had as yet filled
was that of a Lord of the Bedchamber. From the time, however, that
he applied himself seriously to politics, he gradually obtained an
ascendancy over his associates such as was possessed by no cotemporary
statesman,--even the opinions of Lord Chatham having less weight with
the more reflecting and intelligent members of the Liberal party than
those of Lord Rockingham. A singular instance of this ascendancy used
to be related by the late Lord Spencer, who happened to witness it. At
a meeting of the Whigs, in 1782, preparatory to Lord Rockingham’s last
Administration, his Lordship read a list of the appointments which he
proposed to submit to the King. As soon as he uttered the name of Mr.
Sheridan as Under-Secretary of State, the latter, then a young man,
justly conscious of great abilities, and expecting a much higher post,
exclaimed, in an indignant tone, “I will not accept!” Lord Rockingham
fixing his eye on him, calmly but emphatically exclaimed, “You shall.”
Sheridan seemed perfectly daunted, bowed his head, and made no
further remonstrance. It was very rare, said Lord Spencer, that Lord
Rockingham’s decisions did not meet the immediate acquiescence of the
party. Nor was this purchased by the arts that exhausted the revenues
and lowered the character of the Duke of Newcastle. Lord Rockingham
stood clear of any charge of parliamentary corruption. His mode of
living, though noble as suited his rank, was simple and unostentatious,
and the disinterestedness of his political supporters may be inferred
from the honourable boast of one of the most needy of them, that they
had derived no permanent provision from his acceptance of office.[A]
The same friendly pen has recorded, in the noble monumental inscription
at Wentworth, “that his virtues were his arts,” and no doubt he was a
virtuous, high-minded, amiable man; but he owed his success mainly to
“a clear, sound, unadulterated sense,” which showed itself in great
discretion, sagacity, and tact. His views were generally correct, and
his firmness and perseverance never yielded in the most adverse and
discouraging crisis, as was strongly evinced in the great American
contest; and thus without eloquence, or any large share of the
qualifications which usually confer eminence on popular leaders, he
retained his political supremacy to the close of his life.--E.
[A] “A Short History of a Late Short Administration.”
[166] Lady Elizabeth Finch, youngest sister of Daniel Earl of
Winchelsea, and of the Marchioness-dowager of Rockingham.
[167] Lord Northington.
[168] George Lord Townshend.
[169] “The vacillation of this eminent person was so decided as
materially to lessen his influence and general consideration.” (See
Charles Townshend’s singular Letter to Mr. Dowdeswell. Cavendish’s
Debates, i. p. 576.) It eventually drew him to that fatal step which
ruined his peace of mind and hurried him to the grave.--E.
[170] John Yorke. He died in 1769.--E.
[171] The Marchioness of Grey, wife of Philip Yorke, second Earl of
Hardwicke, was the eldest daughter of the Earl of Breadalbane by his
first wife, eldest daughter and co-heiress of the last Duke of Kent.
[172] Mr. Pitt’s reply, however, was cold and ungracious, and the
Ministers must have been men of a very sanguine temperament to derive
any comfort from it. His repudiation of the charge is clogged by such a
distinct avowal of want of confidence in the Government, as must have
defeated the object for which the letter was most wanted. It could
hardly have been shown, except to friends.--Chatham Correspondence, ii.
319. It does more credit to the Duke than to Mr. Pitt.--E.
[173] Henry Lord Digby, an Irish baron, nephew of Lord Holland.
[174] The fact was this: Grenville, afraid of publishing his
rapaciousness before he was sure of success, had forborne to mention
the business to his brethren, the Commissioners of the Treasury, and
even to inquire if the reversion was not already granted; but, going
directly to the King, asked for the reversion. The King was very loth
to bestow it on him; and, on being much pressed, said, “Mr. Grenville,
I thought you were a severe enemy to all reversions!” Instead of being
abashed, he had the confidence to reply: “Sir, if your Majesty will
grant me this, I will take care you shall never give away another.”
The King yielded. When Grenville notified the boon at the Treasury, he
learned, to his inexpressible mortification, that the reversion was
already engaged. Yet in the year 1770 he had the front, in Parliament,
to censure a lucrative grant for life to Dyson!
[175] John Duke of Argyle, father of the Marquis, of Lord Lorn, of
Lord Frederick Campbell, and of the Countess of Ailesbury, wife of Mr.
Conway.
[176] Groom of the Bedchamber to the Duke, and conqueror of Belleisle.
[He had been aide-de-camp to the second Earl of Albemarle at Dettingen
and Fontenoy, and all the principal actions in Flanders. He was
subsequently transferred to the family of the Duke, whom he attended at
Culloden.--(Life of Lord Keppel, i. 298.) Several of his letters during
the expedition to Belleisle are published in Mr. Keppel’s work. They
are very well written, and their frankness, vivacity, and good feeling,
make it a subject of regret that more is not known of the writer. He
died a field marshal.--E.]
[177] A severe character of the Duke is given in the Memoirs of George
the Second, vol. i. p. 85; nor has his memory found more favour
from posterity. A love of truth, a dutiful consideration for his
parents, and a decided preference of active employment, either civil
or military, to the intrigues or frivolities of a Court, honourably
distinguished him from his elder brother. In other respects he was not
much to be esteemed.--E.
[178] He was enormously fat, had lost one eye and saw but ill with the
other, was asthmatic, and had had a stroke of the palsy, besides the
wound in his leg, that had not healed.
[179] George Keppel, third Earl of Albemarle, Lord of the Bedchamber
to the Duke, and his favourite. The promise was not only renewed, but
fulfilled at the end of the year, when the vacant garters were given
to the Prince of Wales, the Hereditary Prince, and Lord Albemarle.
[The latter was also entrusted by the King with the examination of the
Duke’s papers and the administration of his property.--(Keppel’s Life,
vol. iv. p. 384.)--E.]
[180] A statue of the Duke was erected afterwards in Cavendish Square
by General Strode, at his own expense.
[181] Robert Adam, projector of the Adelphi Buildings and other known
works. [An interesting life of him is given in the Biographical
Dictionary of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge.--E.]
[182] This statue was not finished and set up till 1772. A bitter
inscription was affixed to it in the night, supposed to be written by
Wilkes.
[183] Sir John Lambert was of a Huguenot family. He was born in 1728;
he died in 1799.--E.
[184] The concession was made too late to be of much benefit to the
original holders of the bills. It had been confidentially intimated
to the friends of the late Government, before the latter left office,
that the point would not be pressed on the French Court, and the bills,
in consequence, were sold at a very great depreciation. Sir George
Colebrooke, who was one of the sufferers, mentions the circumstance in
his MS. memoirs.--E.
[185] When the Duc de Nivernois came to England to conclude the Peace,
he would never take his remittances in bank bills, lest they should be
traced. My cousin, Thomas Walpole, told me that he had paid to that
Duke four thousand guineas in specie at a time. I do not charge the
Ministers with the guilt of this corruption. They were paid by Lord
Bute in places, honours, and power; but that French money had a share
in that infamous transaction I do not doubt. The Duc de Nivernois, a
man of economy, spent above thirty thousand pounds here in half a year.
He kept a table for the tradesmen of London, that they might harangue
for the Peace.
[186] What the French thought of our glorious successes and of our
shameful Peace, appeared from what the famous Madame Geoffrin said to
me one day at Paris,--“Vous avez eu un beau moment, mais il est bien
passé!”
[187] His long and able services deserved a less tardy reward. He had
been minister at Berlin from 1753, and was a constant companion of
Frederick the Great during the Seven years’ war. Few understood that
monarch better, and few, it is supposed, were loved by him so well.
He died at an advanced age in 1771. His correspondence during his
embassy, extending to 68 folio volumes, is preserved in the British
Museum, and furnishes many valuable illustrations of cotemporary
history--especially the letters addressed to him by his correspondents
in England. It proves, also, his sagacity in perceiving that the
minister of a representative Government requires an intimate knowledge
of the state of affairs at home, in order to discharge his duties
abroad most to the advantage of his country.--E.
[188] Reported under the name of Entick v. Carrington and others, 2
Wilson, 275. The outlawry against Wilkes being unreversed, he could not
sue.--E.
[189] An account of Terrick has been given in a former page.--E.
[190] A better reason for dissolving the Parliament was furnished by
the great measures in the contemplation of the new Government. No
doubt the character of the House fell in the public estimation by the
readiness with which the same individuals concurred in the repeal
of Acts passed after due deliberation only in the preceding year.
It is true that circumstances had altered in the interval, but the
only alteration which the country regarded as influential upon the
Parliament, was that which had taken place in the Government. Some
politicians of later date have however pronounced it a blunder in any
Minister to dissolve Parliament until it has rejected a Government
measure.--E.
[191] The following are the words of his amendment:--
“To express our just resentment and indignation at the outrageous
tumults and insurrections which have been excited and carried on in
North America, and at the resistance given by open and rebellious
force to the execution of the laws in that part of his Majesty’s
dominions.”--E.
[192] “He asserted with vehemence his approbation of the Stamp Act, and
was for enforcing it: he leant much to Mr. George Grenville’s opinion,
soothed him, and sat down determined to vote against his amendment! Mr.
Elliot the same; thereby insuring a double protection.”--Mr. Cooke to
Mr. Pitt. Chatham Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 351.--E.
[193] Lord Shelburne appears to have spoken rather against the
amendment than for the Ministers. He regarded the language applied
to the Americans by the Opposition both in their speeches and the
amendment as dangerous, and perhaps imprudent and unjust, and he
deprecated a motion which seemed to preclude a repeal before it was
considered thoroughly how far it might be necessary. His speech met
with Mr. Pitt’s entire approbation.--(Lord Shelburne’s Letter to Mr.
Pitt, and the reply in the Chatham Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 353.)--E.
[194] Lord Shelburne had attached himself to Mr. Pitt, and would not
enter the Government without him.--(Chatham Correspondence, vol. ii. p.
357.)--E.
[195] He was affectionate to his daughters, but surely not to the
Dauphin, whose life he made unhappy by excluding him from active
employment, and whose death he bore with feelings of very slight
regret.--E.
[196] He even stood at a window to see her coffin carried out of the
palace.
[197] If the French were thus ignorant of the real character of the
Dauphin, the ignorance has been of long continuance. All the French
historians regard him as a fanatic. According to Sismondi (Histoire des
Français, vol. xxix. p. 328) the Archbishop of Paris and the Molinist
clergy formed around him a cabal which at first inspired alarm, next
disdain, and at last pity. The story of his scepticism came, probably,
to Walpole from the Duc de Choiseul, who had always been on the
worst terms with him; nor is the Duc de Nivernois, the partizan of
Choiseul, a courtier of pursuits and feelings utterly dissimilar to
those of the prince, a much better authority. The only vice which the
irreproachable conduct of the Dauphin admitted of being imputed to him,
was hypocrisy. Whether he had sufficient energy of character to have
averted the destruction which afterwards overwhelmed his unfortunate
son, is more doubtful. He was personally brave, and is said to have
shown spirit and readiness at Fontenoy, and it was with difficulty
that the jealousy of the Duc de Choiseul could prevent his serving in
the seven years’ war; but the qualities requisite for the successor of
Louis the Fifteenth, were hardly compatible with his gentle, yielding,
and amiable disposition. He died on the 20th of December, 1765, in his
thirty-seventh year.--E.
[198] The Dauphin certainly preserved a tender attachment for the
memory of his first wife, the Infanta Maria Therese. She died
in child-bed in July, 1746. This did not, however, prevent his
appreciating the merit of the second Dauphiness. Observing him in tears
just before their marriage, she bade him indulge his grief, for it
assured her of what she too might expect from his regard if she had the
happiness to deserve it. She was by no means popular in the coteries
frequented by Walpole, but by the nation at large she was held in high
estimation. Her death was ascribed to a disorder she had contracted in
nursing her husband. The Duchesse de Lauragais might have treated the
expressions of a person in the agonies of death with more indulgence.
Judging from this speech, she must have been as heartless as her lover
the Maréchal de Richelieu, than whom, allowing for the difference of
sex, she was not much more respectable.--E.
[199] The Duchesse was a niece of the financier Croisat, and brought
to the Duc the great fortune of four millions of livres. After her
husband’s death she retired into a convent, and submitted to severe
privations in order to obtain the means of paying not only his
debts, but even his legacies, for he had the assurance to make large
testamentary bequests, though he must have known himself to be worse
than insolvent. She was the Duc’s second wife. His first, also a
considerable heiress, died within a year of their marriage, and he
generously restored her fortune to her relations, though he was at that
time poor.--E.
[200] His mal-administration of Brittany was an appropriate prelude to
his career as President of the Council. In both offices he incurred
almost universal hatred and contempt. It was at the Court alone that
he shone. There his brilliant success was undeniable; and indeed it is
not to be wondered at, for he was eminently adroit and specious; and,
with a noble deportment, he possessed the art of expressing himself
nobly. The English officers taken at St. Cas returned home fascinated
by his urbanity and generous sayings. Though an undisguised profligate,
he was the acknowledged leader of the religious party to which the
Dauphin belonged, and the confidant of that exemplary Prince; and this
did not prevent his subsequently becoming the minister of Louis the
Fifteenth. The Duc was the great-nephew of Cardinal de Richelieu, and
had inherited Aiguillon from the Cardinal’s favourite niece, Madame de
Combalet. He died in 1783, leaving an only son.--E.
[201] The persecution to which M. de Chalotais was subjected has been
detailed in a work extending to three volumes quarto, entitled “Procès
Extraordinaire contre MM. Caradeuc de la Chalotais,” &c., with this
singular motto: “Ad perpetuam sceleris memoriam.” He appears to have
narrowly escaped with his life. The most important witness against
him was a young Maître de Requêtes, M. de Calonne, twenty years later
unhappily celebrated as the minister of Louis the Sixteenth. The trial
gives a frightful picture of the state of criminal justice in France in
those days. M. de Chalotais had pure motives, and was an able man; but
his indiscretion, the irascibility of his temper, and the bitterness
with which he treated all who differed from him in opinion, no doubt
greatly aggravated his difficulties. His first work, “Compte rendu des
Constitutions des Jesuites,” appeared in 1762, he being then sixty-one
years of age: from that time until his death, in 1785, he maintained a
hot and incessant warfare against the Court and religious parties, who
regarded him as the representative of principles fraught with ruin to
them both. This struggle no doubt materially hastened the Revolution.
An interesting account of the proceedings against Chalotais is given
in Anquetil (Hist. de France, vol. viii. p. 106–116), one of the best
parts of a book of slender merit, and also in Sismondi (Hist. des
Français, vol. xxix. p. 321), and in the able article on Chalotais in
the Biographie Universelle.--E.
[202] It would be difficult to find, in the various histories of the
period, a more ably drawn character of the Duc de Choiseul than this.
The Duc was born in 1719. His administration lasted from 1757 to 1770,
and he died in 1785.--E.
[203] It should be recollected that D’Alembert’s intimacy with
Mademoiselle Espinasse had caused him to quarrel with Walpole’s old
friend, Madame du Deffand. He wrote much that has long ceased to be
read; but his Introduction to the Encyclopédie is a very able work, and
as a mathematician he was one of the most eminent of his day. He died
in 1783, aged sixty-six.--E.
[204] Nor could they be respected as judges are in England, as
solicitation is practised in France in all causes. Where there is
solicitation, there must be partiality. Where partiality is, there must
be injustice; and injustice will never be popular.
[205] In his youth he had served with some distinction in Italy, where,
in conjunction with the Infant Don Philip, he commanded the allied army
of France and Spain. He possessed the personal courage, the cleverness,
the turn for political intrigue, and the wrong-headedness which seemed
hereditary in his family. The part he took in the affairs of the
Parliament gained him the sobriquet, from the King, of “Mon Cousin
l’Avocat.” He died in 1776, aged fifty-nine.--E.
[206] A dissolute courtier of illustrious family, who had the poor
merit of being sincerely attached to an unworthy master. Unhappily for
his country he was trusted with high commands, even after the battle
of Rosbach, where he had shared all the dishonour of that signal
defeat. The assistance of Marshal d’Estrèes enabled him for once to be
successful at Johannisburgh. He died in 1787, aged seventy-two. The
ex-Jesuit, Georgel, who was attached to the family, has painted him in
flattering colours. See Mémoires de Georgel, vol. i. p. 278.--E.
[207] The Maréchal d’Estrèes, Louis César le Tellier, grandson of
the celebrated Louvois. He was at this time seventy years old, and
probably exhausted by long service. He had greatly distinguished
himself at Fontenoy; but his chief exploit was the victory he gained at
Hastenbeck, over the Duke of Cumberland. This did not prevent his being
harshly treated by the Court, and through the intrigues of the Maréchal
de Richelieu he was for a time deprived of his rank and employment, and
imprisoned in the Castle of Doulens on an unfounded charge of having
left his victory incomplete. He was afterwards recalled and employed,
but his last campaign against Prince Ferdinand was not a successful
one. He died in 1771, aged seventy-six.--E.
[208] See vol. i. p. 138, supra.
[209] See vol. i. p. 139, supra.
[210] He had defeated Prince Ferdinand at Clostercamp, in the battle
which made the name of the Chevalier d’Assas so illustrious in
the French annals. In the reign of Louis the Sixteenth he became
Minister of Marine and was much respected. He died in 1801, aged
seventy-four.--E.
[211] The Duc had none of the brilliancy of his cousin. His manners
were cold and reserved, which his enemies ascribed to pride, and his
friends to modesty. He never was popular. As Minister of Marine he
appears to have discharged his duties efficiently, and the French
fleet under his administration recovered the losses it had suffered in
the war. His splendid seat near Melun, still in the possession of his
descendants, and formerly the delight of the Intendant Fouquet, shows
that his public services were not unrewarded. He died in 1795, aged
seventy-three.--E.
[212] Madame de Staël paints him to the life: “C’étoit un homme
d’esprit dans l’acceptation commune de ce mot.... Sa dignité de Prêtre,
jointe au désir constant d’arriver au Ministère, lui avoit donné
l’extérieur réfléchi d’un homme d’état, et il en avoit la réputation
avant d’avoir été mis à portée de la dementir.... Il n’étoit ni assez
éclairé pour être philosophe, ni assez ferme pour être despote; il
admiroit tour à tour la conduite du Cardinal de Richelieu, et les
principes des encyclopédistes.”--Considérations sur la Révolution
Française.--His brief administrations made the Revolution inevitable,
and he was among its early victims. The manner of his death is
uncertain; the Abbé Morellet, his friend and dependant, insinuating
that he poisoned himself. According to an article in the Biographie
Universelle, which is very carefully written, he died in consequence of
the brutal treatment he received from some soldiers at Sens. The Abbé
makes a feeble effort to defend his memory.--(Mémoires de Morellet,
vol. i. p. 17; vol. ii. p. 16–467.)--E.
[213] He also became at a great age Chief Minister, in the next reign,
and died so. Walpole must have written this eulogy on Maurepas before
the latter was restored to office. Agreeable as he might be in society,
he proved a most inefficient minister, and altogether unequal to the
times. He died in 1781, eighty years old, regretted only by the King
and the courtiers, who enjoyed his wit and profited by his patronage.
One of his last acts was the disgrace of Necker, a minister who perhaps
could then have saved the monarchy, though he afterwards hastened its
downfall.--E.
[214] He was related to the Duc de Bouillon by his mother, the Princess
Clementina Sobieski.--[Lord Mahon’s Hist. of England, vol. iii. p.
523.--E.]
[215] Clement XIII. His name was Charles Rezzonico, a Venetian.
[216] Avignon.
[217] After a reign of twenty years. He had governed his small kingdom
with prudence and ability; and had shown spirit and firmness in the
manner in which he met the preparations made by Peter III. for invading
Denmark, in 1762. He has the honour of having employed the celebrated
Niebuhr, on that scientific expedition to the East, of which the latter
has left so interesting a description.--E.
[218] The Duke of Newcastle, besides having joined Lord Bute against
Mr. Pitt at the beginning of the reign, had personally offended
the latter, by contriving to have his American pension paid at the
Treasury, which subjected it to great deductions.
[219] George Bussy Villiers, only son of William Earl of Jersey.
[220] An interesting account of the debate, and especially of Mr.
Pitt’s speech, is given in a note to a letter of Mr. Pitt to Lady
Chatham.--Chatham Correspondence, vol. ii. p. 363. It agrees generally
with the text; indeed, many of the expressions are identical.--E.
[221] Mr. Pitt, however, with less kindness, said, in reply to Conway’s
defence (on the ground of defective information) against the charge
of having given such tardy notice to the House of the disturbances in
America, that “The excuse to be a valid one, must be a just one. This
must appear from the papers now before the House.”--(Parliamentary
History, vol. xvi. p. 101.)--E.
[222] Sir Francis Dashwood, Lord Despencer.
[223] Charles Montagu, Earl of Halifax, First Commissioner of the
Treasury under George I.
[224] Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford, Lord Treasurer to Queen Anne.
[225] Robert Walpole, Earl of Orford, Prime Minister to George I. and
George II.
[226] Sir William Draper, created Knight of the Bath for the conquest
of the Manillas.--[The credit he had gained by his conduct there, and
at the capture of Fort St. George, he lost by various weaknesses, and
especially by his gross flattery of Mr. Pitt and Lord Granby. In 1779
he was appointed Lieutenant-Governor of Minorca, and held that office
at the time of its capture in 1782, when he exhibited twenty-nine
charges against General Murray, his superior in command; the only
result of which was, a reprimand to himself. He died at Bath, in 1787.
Sir William Draper had been a fellow of King’s College, Cambridge,
in whose noble chapel the standards taken at the Manillas are still
preserved. See more of him in Wraxall’s Posthumous Memoirs, vol. ii.
pp. 186–7. Chatham Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 326. Walpole’s Letters
to Mann, vol. iii. p. 386.--E.]
[227] Dowdeswell.
[228] These papers are printed in the Parliamentary History, vol. xvi.
p. 112.--E.
[229] Mr. Huske was M. P. for Malden. He died in 1773.--E.
[230] Sir John Cust.
[231] It was not strictly a new paper, but a series of occasional
letters in the daily papers. Lord Sandwich will again be found a
persecutor of the press in 1773; for printers were alternately, as they
served his purposes, his tools or his prey.--[Mr. Scott afterwards
received from Lord Sandwich the lucrative appointment of chaplain
to Greenwich Hospital. He was more respectable in his profession
than might have been expected from his having such a patron, and an
accomplished scholar. See an anecdote to his honour, in Twiss’s Life of
Lord Eldon.--E.]
[232] The club in Albemarle Street, erected by the late Opposition, now
Ministers.
[233] To the bar of the House, whither members are ordered when they
violate the rules or privileges of Parliament.
[234] Mrs. Burke was a Presbyterian; the belief, however, of her being
a Papist was very general.--E.
[235] A lively description of Burke, as a speaker in the House of
Commons, is given in Wraxall’s Hist. Mem. v. ii. p. 35.--E.
[236] William Burke was M. P. for Bedwin, in Wiltshire. He shared all
his cousin’s fortunes, and lived with him on terms of the most intimate
friendship. When the prospects of the Whigs seemed to be hopeless, he
went to India; and through the support of Mr. Francis, obtained some
lucrative offices. He was a person of considerable accomplishments. He
survived Mr. Burke, and died in 1798.--E.
[237] This division was the result of a junction of the friends of the
late ministers with the friends of Lord Bute.--(Chatham Correspondence,
vol. ii. p. 380.)--E.
[238] Eldest son of Lord Bute.
[239] Lord George Sackville was intimate with Wedderburne, who had been
counsel for him on his trial.
[240] Sir William Burnaby had been Admiral and Commander-in-Chief on
the West India station. He was knighted in 1754, and made a baronet in
1767.--E.
[241] I have not been able to find another report of this important
debate.--E.
[242] The fall of the Ministers was so much expected, that it was said,
“They were dead, and only lying in state; and that Charles Townshend
[who never spoke for them] was one of their mutes.”
[243] Walpole takes no notice of the debate in the House of Lords
on the American Resolutions. It took place on the 10th of February,
and will be found in the Parliamentary History, vol. xvi. p. 168.
The speeches of Lord Camden and Lord Northington are eloquent and
interesting.--E.
[244] Prime Minister of Portugal.
[245] Mr. Frederick Vane, M. P. for Durham.--E.
[246] Whatever might be Lord Rockingham’s exultation at having carried
a measure on which he considered the safety of the empire to depend,
he was so far from being blind to his own precarious position, that a
few days after, on the 26th, he made overtures to Mr. Pitt expressing
an earnest desire to transfer the Government to him. The letters that
passed on this occasion are given in Lord Chatham’s Correspondence,
vol. ii. p. 397.--E.
[247] Mr. Fuller, no doubt, was a hearty well-wisher of the repeal. He
was a sensible man, and his opinion carried additional weight from the
decided and independent tone in which he delivered it; and Almon says,
that after his death it was discovered that he had been for many years
in the receipt of a pension from the Government of 500_l._ a year, a
fact that explains the sudden decline of his zeal mentioned by Burke,
Correspondence, ii. 8.--E.
[248] Dr. Hay was a man given up to his pleasures.
[249] Some political writers, opposed to the Rockingham Ministry,
have condemned and ridiculed this bill as inconsistent with the
principle, and calculated to defeat the object of the repeal of the
Stamp Act. Indeed, they have gone so far as to say that it raised an
insurmountable barrier to the settlement of these unhappy differences.
However unjust the charge may be, the bill proved a fertile experiment
to maintain the dignity of the country, and the best defence of the
measure is to be found in the state of political parties, which
rendered it apparently impossible to obtain the repeal without this
concession to the feelings of the King, and to public opinion. The
Colonies, also, gave themselves, at that time, little concern about
abstract resolutions of right, so long as the same were not carried
into practice. The joy with which the Repeal Act was received in
America seems to have been unqualified, and some years elapsed before
any serious objections were taken against the Declaratory Act. Even in
1775, Burke writing to his Committee at Bristol, observes, that it had
not yet become a grievance with the Colonists.--E.
[250] Lord Rockingham gave the place to Mr. Milbank, and was justified
in so doing, for the patronage did not belong to the Lord-Lieutenant,
who was very indiscreet to have a difference with Lord Rockingham on
such a subject.--E.
[251] See pp. 184–187, 202, 203, supra.--E.
[252] Stephen Fox.
[253] Mary, eldest daughter of the Earl of Ossory, by Lady Evelyn
Leveson, youngest daughter of John first Earl Gower.
[254] There is no such prohibition in the Navigation Act, but the Act
of 6 Geo. III. c. 62, seems to imply the possession of a monopoly of
the cotton trade by our West India Islands. No cotton was at that time
cultivated in North America. In 1843 our importation of cotton from the
United States exceeded 574,000,000 lbs., whilst from our West India
Islands it actually did not reach 2,000,000 lbs.--E.
[255] The Duke of Richmond had married Lady Mary Bruce, daughter by her
first husband of Lady Ailesbury, Conway’s wife.
[256] Henry Arthur Herbert had married Barbara, niece of the last
Marquis of Powis, and had been created Earl of Powis on the accession
of the fortune to him and her.
[257] This was the lady celebrated by Pope, who first ambitioned the
Crown of Poland, then sought a fortune in the mines of the Asturias,
where she met the Comte de Gages. She then was reduced to such extreme
poverty, that the young Pretender arriving in Spain, and visiting her,
she received him in bed, not having clothes to put on, and he gave her
his coat to rise in. She retired to Paris, and was at last harboured
in the Temple by the Prince of Conti, where she died not long after
the transaction and lawsuit I have mentioned in the text. The Comte de
Gages had likewise retired to Paris, and died there a little before
Lady Mary Herbert, who lived to August, 1775.
[258] Richard Viscount Howe, an Admiral, Treasurer of the Navy, and a
man of most intrepid bravery, as all his brothers were, but not very
bright, though shrewd enough when his interest was concerned. [He was
personally attached to Pitt, and probably accepted office with his
consent. If he paid an undue attention to his own interest it was to
very little purpose, for although he was frugal in his habits, and had
many opportunities of enriching himself, he died poor.--E.]
[259] He was much connected with the Duke of York, being of the same
profession.
[260] Lord Rockingham had reason to complain of Dyson’s conduct, as the
King had in some degree answered for the latter when the Government was
formed, and in consequence he had been allowed to remain in office.
There were others of the Government whose votes reflected blame only
on Lord Rockingham himself; for what can be said of his suffering Lord
Barrington to become Secretary at War, with the express understanding
that he might continue his opposition to the course pursued by the
Government on such questions as the American Stamp Act and General
Warrants?--(Political Life of Lord Barrington, p. 119.)--E.
[261] Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland.
[262] One was the establishment of a civil government in Canada, a plan
for which had lain before the Chancellor for some months, and in which
he did nothing [except declaring his entire disapprobation of the plan,
and urging that no proposition should be sanctioned by the Cabinet
until they had obtained a complete code of the laws of Canada.--1
Adolphus, 226.] It remained unsettled till the year 1774, when the
famous bill, called the Quebec Bill, in favour of Popery, was passed,
and, agreeably to the supposed author Lord Mansfield’s arbitrary
principles, took away decisions by juries.
[263] It appears that Lord Northington’s notification to the King was
on the 5th of July.--(Lord Henley’s Life of Northington.) We learn from
the same writer that the bad state of Lord Northington’s health, and
his frequent disagreements with his colleagues, had for some months
made him desirous of an honourable and quiet retreat. There is no
doubt, both from his own letters, and the traditions still extant at
the bar, that his habits of hard labour and extreme conviviality had
by this time undermined his constitution much to the deterioration of
his temper, and he perhaps suspected slights that were never intended.
Moreover, the scrupulous sense of public duty, the natural reserve and
strict propriety of deportment which characterized Lord Rockingham and
Mr. Conway were by no means to his taste. He must have felt even less
easy with such associates, than his successor Lord Thurlow did in a
later day with Mr. Pitt; and, like him, his usual course in the Cabinet
was to originate nothing, and to oppose everything. The commercial
treaty with Russia, a measure of unquestionable benefit, nearly fell
to the ground, owing to his unreasonable and obstinate opposition. He
would rarely listen to remonstrances from his colleagues, and was on
such cold terms with them as probably justified him in his own mind
in breaking up the Cabinet so unceremoniously. He was too fearless
to stoop to intrigue, and there was no necessity for it on this
occasion. His communications with Mr. Pitt, on the formation of the
new Government, are given in the Chatham Correspondence, vol. ii. p.
434.--E.
[264] These words ceased to be true in the year 1783.
[265] That Mr. Pitt’s indisposition was no pretence, is proved by his
letters to Lady Chatham. He says on the 15th of July, evidently to calm
her anxiety,--“In a word, three hot nights in town rendered a retreat
hither [Hampstead] necessary, where I brought yesterday a feverish
heat and much bile, and have almost lost it already.” Throughout their
correspondence his health is a constant topic, and the extreme delicacy
of his nervous system certainly rendered his acceptance of office a
most imprudent act.--E.
[266] In a letter of explanation to Lady Chatham, written a fortnight
after his interview with Mr. Pitt at Hampstead, Lord Temple admits
that his separation from Mr. George Grenville was conditional upon “a
public and general union of parties taking place.” This union had long
been one of the great objects of Mr. Pitt’s ambition, but was at this
time wholly impracticable, as Lord Temple well knew; and taken together
with the proposal of Lord Lyttelton for President of the Council, the
admission goes far to support Walpole’s statement, that Lord Temple
had determined not to take office without his brother. Indeed the
connections which Lord Temple had lately formed, and not less than
the opinions he had expressed in Parliament, must have rendered his
acceptance of Mr. Pitt’s overtures out of the question, unless, to use
his own words, he had chosen “to be stuck into the Ministry as a great
cypher at the head of the Treasury.”--(Chatham Correspondence, vol. ii.
p. 468.)--E.
[267] Nevertheless, had their former connection remained unbroken,
Lord Temple might have again proved a valuable colleague to Mr. Pitt.
The restless spirit and defective temper, that hurried him when in
opposition into excesses so prejudicial to his character, had not
prevented his identifying himself completely with Mr. Pitt while in
office in all great questions of public policy, and though he had no
claim to superior merit as a speaker, his knowledge of the world,
fixedness of purpose, and close attention to the details of business,
had often compensated for the absence of those qualities in Mr. Pitt.
Above all, he was really loved and trusted by him, and through Lady
Chatham’s intervention, had access to him when it was denied to every
one else. Neither of them prospered after their separation, and Lord
Temple had the mortification of finding himself alternately neglected,
distrusted, and opposed by the associates of his earlier days during
the remainder of his life.--E.
[268] I had written _Pitt_ by mistake, and forget now whom Lord Temple
pretended to have recommended. Most probably it was the Duke of Bedford.
[269] A pamphlet in defence, or rather in praise, of the part taken
by Lord Temple in those negotiations was soon afterwards published,
under the title of “An Inquiry into the Conduct of a late Right
Honourable Commoner.” It is justly described by Lord Chesterfield as
“scurrilous and scandalous, and betraying private conversation.” It is
believed to have been written by Mr. Humphry Cotes, but Lord Temple was
suspected to have furnished the materials; and it probably is to this
discreditable piece of revenge, more than to the other libels in which
Lord Temple was concerned, that Lord Rockingham alluded when he noticed
some years afterwards the objection of the Whigs to act under his
Lordship.--E.
[270] Two letters, from Mr. Townshend to Mr. Pitt, on the offer
of the Chancellorship of the Exchequer, are given in the Chatham
Correspondence, vol. ii. pp. 456, 464.--E.
[271] Sir Charles Pratt, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas.
[272] He was Lord Chamberlain, and had married the only daughter of the
late Duke of Devonshire, niece of Lord John Cavendish.
[273] Lady Henrietta Harley, sole daughter of Edward second Earl of
Oxford, and widow of William third Duke of Portland.
[274] They contested the Parliamentary interest of the counties of
Cumberland and Westmoreland, where their estates lay. More of this
rivalship will appear hereafter.
[275] Sir James Lowther had married Lady Mary Stuart, eldest daughter
of the Earl of Bute.
[276] Francis Russell, Marquis of Tavistock, only son of John Duke of
Bedford.
[277] Richard Vernon, Esq., had married the Countess-dowager of Ossory,
youngest daughter of John first Earl Gower.
[278] He continued the leader of the Rockingham party in the House of
Commons until his death, which took place at Nice in 1775. He left a
family of eleven children, of whom one of his younger sons, the Rev.
Dr. Dowdeswell, Canon of Christ Church, and Rector of Stansford Rivers,
is the present possessor of his estates, having succeeded General
Dowdeswell, an elder brother.--E.
[279] Neither had he neglected his interests whilst he held the Great
Seal. He had actually given a great sinecure to a trustee for his three
daughters.--E.
[280] Mr. Burke’s well-known tract,--a masterpiece of its kind.--E.
[281] The pamphlet has been noticed in p. 345. An attack on Lord Temple
also appeared, most bitter and personal, which was ascribed to Mr.
Pitt. A curious extract from it is given in Belsham’s History, vol. i.
p. 210.--E.
[282] Brother of the Earl of Hardwicke and Charles Yorke.
[283] The Cabinet Council is composed of the First Lord of the
Treasury, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the two Secretaries of
State, the Lord President, and the Commander-in-Chief; others are now
and then added. Lord Chatham, as first Minister, was now necessarily
one.
[284] Admiral Augustus Keppel, brother of Lord Albemarle.
[285] Son of the Comte de Virri, the late Envoy from Turin. Baron de la
Perriere, who succeeded to his father’s title, married Miss Speed, an
Englishwoman, mentioned in Mr. Gray’s long story, and was afterwards
ambassador at Madrid and Paris.
[286] Joseph, second son of the Empress Queen Maria Theresa, and of
Francis Duke of Lorrain, and Emperor.
[287] Count Kaunitz did not retire; he preserved his influence with
occasional fluctuations during the life of Joseph, and he continued
nominal Prime Minister until his own death in 1794.--E.
[288] Hans Stanley, employed to negotiate the late peace.
[289] Sir George Maccartney had travelled with Lord Holland’s eldest
son. The Czarina obtained a Polish blue riband for him, which he
afterwards laid aside on being made Knight of the Bath, while Secretary
in Ireland to Lord Townshend, to whom he was recommended by Lord Bute,
whose second daughter, Lady Jane Stuart, he married. [He subsequently
filled many other employments, having been in succession Governor of
Grenada, Governor of Madras, Ambassador to China, and Governor of
the Cape of Good Hope. In 1794–5 he was created Earl Maccartney, and
in 1796 an English Peer. He died in 1806. He had the merit of being
amiable, disinterested, and well informed. His life has been written by
his secretary, Mr. John Barrow, in 2 vols. 4to.--E.]
[290] The letters that passed between Lord Chatham and his colleagues
on the proposed Northern Alliance may be seen in the second volume
of his Correspondence. The scheme was a noble one, and had probably
been contemplated by Mr. Pitt during his former Administration,
as it certainly would have been an appropriate termination of his
brilliant prosecution of the war. Unhappily, Lord Bute’s diplomacy had
altered the feeling of foreign powers towards this country, and the
King of Prussia, especially, was thoroughly alienated from British
connections--partly from personal resentment, partly from distrust
of the strength of the Government. His Majesty received the proposal
most ungraciously; and it certainly reflects no credit on Lord
Chatham’s discretion, to have engaged in this difficult negotiation
so precipitately. He had not even consulted Sir Andrew Mitchell, the
minister at Berlin--his personal friend, and the person, above others,
best qualified to furnish correct information as to the views of the
King of Prussia.--E.
[291] George Brudenel, Earl of Cardigan, had married the second
daughter and co-heiress of the last Duke of Montagu, and had taken the
name of Montagu.
[292] Sir T. Robinson, Lord Grantham, formerly Secretary of State.
[293] Vide Parl. Hist. p. 251, for an eloquent summary of the arguments
against the suspending and dispensing prerogative.--E.
[294] Henry Clinton, Earl of Lincoln, Knight of the Garter, and
afterwards Duke of Newcastle.
[295] John, only son of Sir John Shelley, (whom he succeeded in the
baronetage,) by Margaret Pelham, his second wife, sister of Thomas Duke
of Newcastle.
[296] Sir John Shelley had also a personal claim on Lord Chatham, for,
although on confidential terms with Lord Temple, he had not followed
that nobleman into opposition. He died in 1783.--E.
[297] George third Lord Edgcumbe, [and first Earl Edgcumbe,
distinguished himself on some occasions in the navy, and rose to the
rank of Rear-Admiral of the Blue in 1762. Before entering the House
of Lords, which he did in 1761, he sat in the Commons for Fowey.
At his death, which happened in 1795, he was Admiral of the Blue,
Lord-Lieutenant of the County of Cornwall, &c. &c.--E.]
[298] This letter, a very creditable one to Mr. Conway’s feelings and
good sense, is printed in the Chatham Correspondence, vol. iii. p.
126.--E.
[299] Francis Seymour Conway, son of Francis Earl of Hertford.
[300] Lord Edgcumbe had great weight in Devonshire and Cornwall.
[301] It was a wise intention in no light. Parties are the preservative
of a free Government. The King and Lord Mansfield succeeded, though
Lord Chatham did not, in breaking all parties; and what was the
consequence? that everybody ran to Court, and voted for whatever the
Court desired. Lord Chatham, who forfeited his popularity, and set all
parties at defiance, sank into an individual of no importance.
[302] It did avail so much, that Grenville fabricated, during his
opposition, the famous bill for trying elections by select Committees,
likely to give a sore wound to the influence of the Crown, but which,
hoping to return to power, he limited in its duration; but it has since
been made permanent.
[303] The Duke of Grafton.
[304] Lord Chatham did not long preserve his power, and Lord Edgcumbe
soon came into place again, having first revenged himself on the Earl
in this humorous epigram:
Says Gouty[B] to Gawkee,[C] pray what do you mean?
Says Gawkee to Gouty, to mob King and Queen.
Says Gawkee to Gouty, pray what’s your intention?
Says Gouty to Gawkee, to double my pension.
[B] Lord Chatham.
[C] Lord Temple.
[305] By Mr. Richard Bentley, son of Dr. Bentley.
[306] According to Mr. Flood, there was little concert, and not much
ability shown by the Government in this debate, except in the speech of
Townshend, which was “very artful, conciliatory, able, and eloquent.
He stated the matter quite anew, disclaiming the officious expressions
used by Beckford.”--(Chatham Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 144,
note.)--E.
[307] Of these were the two Onslows, the Townshends, and T. Pelham,
all connected with and related to the Duke of Newcastle, who, though
sedulous in promoting the resignations, could not prevail on his own
family to quit, some of them having during their opposition attached
themselves particularly to Lord Chatham. A few more were friends of
the Duke of Grafton. Yet with these losses, Lord Rockingham’s party
remained a very respectable body for numbers and property. The weakness
and incorrigible ambition of their chief, the obstinacy of Lord
John Cavendish, the want of judgment in Burke, their own too great
delicacy, and the abandoned venality of the age, reduced them to be of
no consequence, as will appear: but the Duke of Newcastle’s impotent
lust of power, Lord Holland’s daring and well-timed profligacy, Lord
Chatham’s haughty folly, and Lord Temple’s unprincipled and selfish
thirst of greatness, had baffled all opposition, had counterworked Lord
Bute’s incapacity and cowardice; and altogether so smoothed the way,
that Lord Mansfield’s superior cowardice and superior abilities at last
ventured to act and effect almost all the mischief he burnt to execute
against the noblest and happiest Constitution in the world.--Sept.
16th, 1774.
[308] A spirited character of Saunders is given in Walpole’s Memoirs,
vol. ii. p. 394. His services at Quebec had endeared him to Lord
Chatham, and their political connection was renewed upon his Lordship’s
retirement from office. A pleasing letter from him is printed in the
Chatham Correspondence, vol. iv. p. 231, on his presenting his portrait
for the ball-room at Burton Pynsent in 1772. He died three years after,
deservedly lamented both in his profession and by the country.--E.
[309] The Duke of Bedford left an interesting account of this
negotiation in his private journal. See Cavendish’s debates, vol. i.
pp. 591, 596, giving more full details than this book could admit. It
confirms the essential parts of Walpole’s narrative, though the reader
must draw his own inferences as to the motives of the parties in the
transaction.--E.
[310] The King, too, ascribed the Duke’s refusal entirely to the
interference of the persons around him.--E.
[311] Thomas Brand, of the Hoo in Hertfordshire, had married Lady
Caroline Pierpoint, half aunt of the Duchess of Bedford. Mr. Brand was
an old Whig, but had deserted that party in hopes of getting a peerage
by the Duke of Bedford’s interest. When the Duke joined the Court after
this, he did obtain a promise that Brand should be a Baron on the first
creation, but the latter died before that event arrived.
[312] See Walpole’s Letters to Sir Horace Mann, vol. i. p. 320.--E.
[313] Nugent was immediately after created an Irish Peer, by the
title of Viscount Clare. [His coarse, clever sayings are frequently
recorded in Walpole’s Correspondence. He was the friend and patron of
Goldsmith, who dedicated to him the amusing _jeu d’esprit_ the “Haunch
of Venison,” and he aspired to be a poet himself, with indifferent
success. The Ode to Pulteney, however, contains some spirited lines,
and it was therefore pronounced by Gray not to be his. His daughter
married in 1775 the first Marquis of Buckingham, to whose interest with
Mr. Pitt he owed his elevation to an earldom in 1776. He died in 1788,
having survived his son, Colonel Nugent. The present Lord Nugent is his
grandson, and has succeeded to his Irish Barony.--E.]
[314] I include Lord Bute’s faction in the standing force of the
Crown, and the Scotch in both: but the facility with which the Duke
of Bedford had been ready to abandon Grenville, created a new party,
or sub-division, that of Grenville and Lord Temple, and their few
friends; for though on the failure of the treaty the outside of
union was preserved, they evidently remained two distinct factions,
as appeared more than once: nor did Lord Temple ever forgive the
intended separation, regarding himself and his brother as one, though
the Bedfords had frequently told Grenville that they did not look on
themselves as connected with Lord Temple, who had opposed them when
they were in power.
[315] See an account of this speech in a note to Lord Chatham’s
Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 145.--E.
[316] If this supposition be true, it is an extraordinary coincidence
that the Duke of Richmond should, eleven years later, have made the
speech which unquestionably hastened Lord Chatham’s death.--E.
[317] A Scotch Peer cannot be made an English one by the act of Union;
this is evaded sometimes, as in Lord Lorne’s case, by the heir-apparent
being created an English Peer. Lord Lorne seemed not to care whom he
courted or quitted, so he did but obtain his end. [This disability,
which the decision of the House of Lords in 1711 attached to the
Scotch Peerage, was removed in 1782, when the point was referred to
the Judges, and they delivered an unanimous opinion that the Peers of
Scotland are not disabled from receiving, subsequently to the Union, a
patent of Peerage of Great Britain.] (Journals of the Lords, 6 June,
1782; Burnet’s Own Times, 586; 1 Peere Williams, 582; Somerville’s
Queen Anne, 459.)--E.
[318] The disgraceful practice of nominating Dissenters as Sheriffs,
solely with the object of extorting the fines payable on their refusal
to act, continued until the spirited resistance of Mr. Evans. The
Corporation obtained a judgment against him in the Lord Mayor’s
Court, which they expected to be as effectual in his case as it had
proved with other contumacious Dissenters; but he appealed to the
higher City Courts, and having failed there, carried his plea before
the Judge Delegates, who, after a deliberate hearing, decided in his
favour. The Corporation then, in turn, appealed to the House of Lords,
and the Judges being consulted, Mr. Baron Perrot, the Judge who had
distinguished himself by his panegyric on Lord Bute, was the only
authority on the Bench that supported the views of the Corporation. The
House of Lords accordingly confirmed the sentence of the Delegates.
Lord Mansfield’s speech on the occasion, a composition of great ability
and eloquence, is reported in the Parliamentary History, vol. xvi. p.
317.--E.
[319] The fact, as I have since learnt from Rigby’s own account, who
bragged of it long afterwards, stood thus. He and Wedderburne went
to Grenville at Wootton, before the Parliament met, and proposed to
him to try to take off two shillings in the pound. Grenville, who not
only knew the impossibility of sparing so much, and the mischief the
country would suffer, but flattered himself he should soon be Minister
again, vehemently opposed the plan; however, as they persisted, he
compromised the matter, by making them promise they would confine the
reduction to one shilling, for which he not only voted but spoke ably,
though so much against his opinion. Perhaps he would have done less
hurt, if he had joined in the attempt to reduce it two shillings in
the pound, which would have appeared so capital a mischief, that it
might possibly have miscarried; and, indeed, supposing a possibility of
so much conscientiousness in that or the next Parliament, is paying a
compliment to them that may be thought to be overstrained.
[320] Lord Chatham’s letter to the Duke of Grafton of the 23rd of
February, in Chatham Correspondence, vol. iii. p. 218.--E.
[321] Mr. Dowdeswell shared the prejudice entertained by most country
gentlemen against the land-tax, probably as much as the resentment felt
by the Rockingham party against Lord Chatham.--E.
[322] Sir Edmund Isham, Bart., M. P. for Northamptonshire. He died in
1772.--E.
[323] Sir Roger Newdigate, Bart., M. P. for the University of Oxford,
and the founder of the prize which bears his name. He died in 1806,
aged 87.--E.
[324] What was the context, but that Lord Chatham and Grenville were
honester men when Ministers than when patriots?
[325] Quotation of Pitt on Grenville in a debate mentioned before.
[326] See Letters to Sir Horace Mann, vol. i. p. 326.--E.
[327] Sir William Maynard, M. P. for Essex, died in 1772.--E.
[328] Colonel Henry St. John, brother of Frederick Viscount
Bolingbroke. [Many of his letters are given in the Selwyn
Correspondence. They are smart and lively. He lived among the wits of
his day, and was liked by them. He died in 1818.--E.]
[329] Charles Sloane Cadogan, only son of Charles Lord Cadogan. I have
said he was attached to Grenville; it was because he thought Grenville
likely to come into power again; but when deserted by the Bedfords,
Cadogan paid his court to Lord Gower. When Lord North became Minister,
he became so servile to him, that being out shooting in Norfolk during
the Newmarket season, it was a joke with the persons who returned
thence to examine the game going to London, and at every inn was a
parcel directed by Cadogan to Lord North. [He married a daughter of
Walpole’s favourite sister, Lady Maria Churchill, from whom he was
afterwards divorced--a circumstance that ought to be weighed against
the severity of this note.--E.]
[330] He was made Master of the Mint; and in 1774, when the light
guineas were called in and recoined, he was computed to get 30,000_l._
by his profits on the recoinage.
[331] Several letters between Lord Chatham and his colleagues at this
time in confirmation of the statement in the text are given in the
third volume of the Chatham Correspondence.--E.
[332] See vol. iii. of these Memoirs.--E.
[333] Robert Jones, Esq., M. P. for Huntingdon, died in 1774.--E.
[334] Luke Scrafton, for some years Governor of Bengal. He was the
author of “Reflections on the Government of Hindostan, with a short
sketch of the History of Bengal, from the year 1739 to 1756; with an
Account of the English Affairs to 1758,” 8vo., London, 1762. A second
edition was printed in 1770. See an account of his controversy with
Mr. Vansittart, in Nichols’s “Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth
Century,” vol. ix. p. 573, and in the Gentleman’s Magazine, vol. xxxiv.
p. 55.--E.
[335] This was written in October, 1769.
[336] I am assured by my friend Lieutenant-General Sir Richard
Bourke, the editor of Mr. Burke’s Correspondence, that this charge is
unfounded, and utterly at variance with the statements of Mr. Burke’s
private affairs, to be found in his papers.--E.
[337] Henry Lyttelton, formerly Governor of Carolina, and youngest
brother of George Lord Lyttelton.
[338] Francis Russell, only son by Gertrude Leveson, the Duke’s second
wife.
[339] They were called, in the satires of the time, _the Bloomsbury
Gang_, Bedford House standing in Bloomsbury Square: of these the chief
were Earl Gower, Lord Sandwich, and Rigby. Sandwich gloried in his
artifices; Rigby was not ashamed of his, but veiled them for better
use; Lord Gower had neither feeling, shame, nor remorse. All three were
men of parts, and agreeable. Lord Weymouth became an accession, and
inferior to none of them in their worse faults; he brought pride into
the account, and a less proportion of parts.
[340] Lady Tavistock died in 1768 at Lisbon, where she had been sent
for the recovery of her health. Hers was really a case of broken
heart. From the hour that her husband’s death was made known to her,
she drooped until she sank into what she truly designated “the welcome
grave.”--E.
[341] Walpole’s hatred of the Duke and Duchess of Bedford must have
been intense, or his sagacity could have scarcely overlooked, that in
censuring Junius he condemns himself. Perhaps he is the more blameable
of the two. Junius may have believed the Duke to have been a bad
man. Walpole has elsewhere described him as having a good heart. He
knew the facts urged by Junius in support of the charge of the Duke
being an unnatural parent to be untrue; and yet he not only leaves
them uncontradicted, but frames his narration so as to facilitate
their belief. The Duke’s memory has been repeatedly vindicated from
this cruel aspersion, and never with more generous and indignant
eloquence than lately by Lord Brougham.--(Political Sketches, vol.
iii.) It has always been understood in the quarters likely to be the
best informed, that he felt his son’s loss deeply to the last hour of
his life. Instead, however, of yielding to his grief, he endeavoured
to employ his thoughts on public business, and the natural fervour
of his disposition insensibly engaged him in the scenes before him
perhaps more deeply than he was aware of. The meeting he attended at
the India House must, as appears from the Company’s books, have been
that of the 8th of April, which determined the course to be taken by
the Company on the Government propositions: a great question, in which
he took the liveliest interest. The force of mind he thus displayed
is noticed with commendation in a letter written at the time by David
Hume, who, from his connection with Conway, is assuredly an impartial
witness.--(Hume to M. de Barbantine, Cav. Debates, vol. i. p. 601.) The
absurd charge brought by Junius against the Duchess, of making money
by Lord Tavistock’s wardrobe, originated in its having been sold for
the benefit of his valet and Lady Tavistock’s maid, according to the
general practice of that day.--E.
[342] He was brother of the Member for Berkshire, and of Miss
Vansittart, favourite of the Princess of Wales, and was lost not long
after in a voyage to India, along with Mr. Scrafton, author of an
excellent tract on Indian affairs.
[343] He not only risked, but lost it in 1783.
[344] Three Lords of the Bedchamber, the Earls of Coventry, Eglinton,
and Buckinghamshire, were also in the minority. (See Chatham
Correspondence, vol. iii.) The Duke of Bedford notices the Debate
in his Journal as if he had not felt much interest in the matter.
(Cavendish’s Debates, vol. i. p. 601.)--E.
Transcriber’s Notes
Punctuation and spelling were made consistent when a predominant
preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed.
Simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced
quotation marks retained.
Ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained; occurrences of
inconsistent hyphenation have not been changed.
Text always spelled “Massachusets” that way.
Text refers to “Count d’Estain” and “Count d’Estaign”; to “Lord
Despenser” and “Lord Despencer”; all variations retained here.
Page x (Contents): Chapter XVIII begins on page 389, not page 394.
Page 129: Opening quotation mark has no matching closing mark.
Page 132: “because copied from” was printed that way.
Page 186: Two paragraphs end with commas. This appears to be
deliberate, as they lead naturally into the paragraphs that follow
them. Paragraphs on other pages occasionally end without periods when
leading into what follows.
Page 320: “haughty ought of place” was printed that way.
Page 304: Closing quotation mark has no matching opening mark.
Page 370: “and the King Lord Gower” was printed that way; the entire
sentence seems to be improperly formed.
Page 427: “antichamber” was printed that way.
Page 250: “Being pushed too home” was printed that way.