Stowe, Dec. 29th, Half-past One.
Dear Sir,
I am sorry that you should have had the trouble of acknowledging
at so late a period a letter which was indeed very interesting
to me, but to which I have not even expected any answer for the
last eight weeks; and I perfectly agree with you, "that it would
be of little use to enter in[to] particulars" respecting the
considerations so immediately affecting my credit, a[nd?]
honour, which we certainly view so differently. If any
communication had been wished for from me upon these points,
upon which it was known by Mr. Grenville and by you that I was
not indifferent, I should have thought it my duty of friendship
to have stated my reasons for being confident that the new Irish
arrangements cannot be useful, upon the same principles as have
been thought (by you) sufficient to bury former distinctions of
party in this country: I have already stated to you my reasons
for considering the recal of Mr. Ponsonby and of his friends to
power and confidence in Ireland as a most dangerous measure, and
as a departure from a system to which His Majesty's Government
was pledged, not only with your approbation, but with your
strong and decided opinion. I have likewise stated the reasons
why I consider such a measure, unaccompanied with any mark to me
of the King's approbation of my conduct, as the strongest
disavowal of my Government in Ireland, and (not to use harsh
expressions) as the most personal offence to me. In that point
of view I know that it has been almost universally considered in
Ireland; because the natural intemperance of those to whom I
feel myself sacrificed has not been controlled by any proof of
the interest which it had been supposed you would have felt
naturally in whatever so nearly concerned me. And with these
impressions, I felt strongly the kindness of my brother, Mr.
Grenville, who endeavoured to calm those feelings, and to
suggest various marks of favour (if you should approve them)
which did not appear to him precluded by any difficulties of
which he was aware.
And by that kindness I was induced to acquiesce in his wish to
be permitted to open to you an idea which I find that Mr.
Grenville and you consider (in part of it) as strongly
objectionable, as hazardous to Government, and as unwise on my
part. As I cannot think of accepting the peerage for my second
son under such circumstances, I have only to express my regrets
that the idea ever has been opened to you. I was never very
particularly attached to it, and certainly feel the full force
of your arguments against it; but I likewise feel as fully that
the arrangements which you have taken, with your eyes open to
the consequences (as far as I am concerned in the question),
leave me without alternative. I need not add that the
consequences of this must be most painful to me from reflections
embittered by the warm affection I bore to those who view all
this so differently from me.
I have, from attention to you, sent back your messenger
immediately. I have, therefore, hardly had time to consider the
expressions of this letter. I shall, therefore, thank you if
(notwithstanding your press of business) you will, from
recollection of former habits, be kind enough to give me one
line, to tell me whether I have made myself understood or not;
and you will likewise think it necessary to give me some answer
respecting your _engagement_ to Mr. Gamon, in August last, to
include him in the _first list_ of Baronets. If you wish for a
copy of your letter on that subject, you shall have it, but an
immediate explanation to him from you, as well as me, is
absolutely necessary.
I am, with very sincere regrets, and with the deepest sensations
of pain for what has passed, and for what is yet to come,
Dear Sir,
Your very obedient and humble servant,
N. T.
1784.
Mr. Pitt's Administration--Lord Temple Created Marquis of
Buckingham--His Private Notes on the Coalition.
The relative position of parties at the opening of 1784 was singular and
unprecedented. The exultation of the public on the dismissal of the late
Ministers, and the accession of Mr. Pitt to power, afforded the
undeniable proof that the people were with the Sovereign and his
advisers. Addresses of thanks and congratulation poured in from the
municipal and corporate bodies in all parts of the kingdom, who felt
their privileges endangered by the East India Bills, expressing the
gratitude of the country to His Majesty for the vigour and resolution
with which he had acted. The Coalition, nevertheless, still wielded a
powerful majority in the Commons, with which they continued to harass
the Cabinet, in spite of those demonstrations of public opinion which
plainly warned them that, long as they might succeed in protracting the
struggle, it could end only in disaster and defeat. The King and the
Cabinet were, in short, brought into open hostility with the Commons by
the persevering resistance of that unnatural and unprincipled
combination which, stung by recent failure and disgrace, now manifested
greater virulence than ever. Two days after the reassembling of
Parliament, in January, Mr. Pitt introduced his India Bill. It was
immediately rejected by the Commons. This was his first defeat. Every
subsequent movement of the Government was frustrated in the same way.
All the resources of parliamentary tactics were resorted to for the
purpose of dislodging the Minister. Resolutions were passed declaring
that the late changes were not calculated to conciliate the House, and
that the continuance in office of the new Ministers was injurious to the
interests of both King and people; and, finding that these resolutions
failed of the desired effect, more violent measures were adopted. The
Mutiny Bill was postponed, and the appropriation of the supplies was
suspended.
In this desperate state of affairs, it appeared to be absolutely
impossible to carry on the business of the country; and, driven to the
last extremity, negotiations were opened with the Duke of Portland, in
the hope of appeasing the Opposition, and strengthening the hands of
Government. But the Duke of Portland made demands which were
incompatible with the dignity of the Minister, and which only tended to
increase the difficulty of the situation. It is believed that he went so
far as to stipulate for Mr. Pitt's resignation. Mr. Pitt, however,
refused to resign, and the negotiation was broken off. Throughout the
whole of this contest, Mr. Pitt maintained an attitude of firmness, and
displayed an amount of ability which greatly increased his popularity.
The Opposition, powerful as it was, finally gave way under his undaunted
spirit, their numbers daily diminishing as the inutility of perseverance
became more and more evident, until at length he reduced the majority
against him to one on a vote of confidence. At this point the Coalition
vanished. It was not, however, till the month of March that he succeeded
in crushing his formidable opponents; and having thus demonstrated the
real strength of his Government by the most constitutional means, he
dissolved the Parliament--an alternative which a less confident and
conscientious Minister might have justifiably availed himself of long
before. The appeal to the people was enthusiastically responded to; and
when the next Parliament met, an amendment on the Address, moved by Lord
Surrey, was rejected by a majority of 76. Mr. Pitt's Government was now
established on the firmest basis.
Throughout these proceedings, Lord Temple maintained a strict reserve.
Except when his opinions were solicited on the subject of Ireland, he
does not appear to have tendered his advice, or in any form to have
identified himself with the Government. His regard for Mr. Pitt isolated
him from a prominent participation in public affairs at this crisis; for
as he would not act against the Administration, and was precluded from
the opportunity of serving it as he desired to do, no choice was left to
him but that of a friendly neutrality. He still continued,
notwithstanding, to feel a deep interest in Irish affairs; but it was
limited almost exclusively to his private letters, and even in this
shape he abstained from all direct interference. Lord Northington, who
is said to have been invited by Mr. Pitt to retain the Lord-Lieutenancy,
remained in office till February, when he was displaced by the Duke of
Rutland. In the interval, Lord Temple's silence on all matters relating
to the government of that country, has left scarcely any traces of his
feelings or opinions in the scanty correspondence of this period.
On the 8th of January, writing to General Cuninghame, whom he had
formerly recommended to the command in Ireland for his "superior
fitness," and who had recently applied for it on the resignation of
General Burgoyne, he intimates his position very clearly:
Variety of circumstances have placed me in a situation wholly
divested of power or of official information; so that in the
present moment I do not even know whether General Burgoyne is
still in command or not; still less do I know the ideas of
Government upon it.
General Cuninghame, in reply, expresses the regret which he felt, in
common with others, that his Lordship, who had occupied so conspicuous a
place in the favour of the King during the late ministerial crisis, had
relinquished the power which His Majesty had invested him with.
For a thousand reasons, public and private, I am sorry you found
yourself under the necessity of resigning the Seals, and for the
same thousand reasons I hope your Lordship will soon again
accept of office.
The resignation of the Seals, here alluded to, was a step Lord Temple
felt himself called upon to take by a nice and punctilious sense of
honour; but which, upon a broader view of the exigencies of the public
service, and the peculiar demands of the occasion, could not have been
considered imperative. It had reference to the resolution of the
Commons, impugning as a high crime and misdemeanour the circulation of
the opinions of the King, with a view to influence the decision of
Parliament. That resolution was avowedly pointed at Lord Temple; and in
order that he might be enabled, without embarrassing the Sovereign or
the Government, to meet any subsequent action which the Commons might
think fit to found upon it, Lord Temple resigned. His chivalry, however,
was a mere waste of that generous self-abnegation which characterized
his whole public life. The Commons never proceeded any farther in the
matter.
In another letter to General Cuninghame, dated 1st of March, Lord Temple
expresses his regret that his recommendation of that officer to His
Majesty had not the effect he desired, and again assures him that he
possesses no power or influence with the Administration.
I am favoured with your letter upon General Pitt's appointment.
I need not repeat that if I had continued in Ireland, I should
have shown every attention to your wishes. In my present
situation I neither have been nor can be consulted in official
arrangements. My warm affection and near relationship towards
the Duke of Rutland and Mr. Pitt have disposed me to give them
the best advice which my experience in Ireland could suggest to
me; and in the course of these communications, your pretensions
to the command were stated with every advantage.
General Cuninghame replies by declaring that he considers himself very
ill-used, after having supported the British Government in Ireland for
thirty-three years in Parliament; but adds: "Why should I complain to my
benefactor, who has it not in his power to relieve me?"
Amongst the Irish correspondents who continued to look up to Lord Temple
as the statesman who best understood the circumstances and wants of the
country, was Colonel Martin, the owner of the vast estates of Connemara,
who afterwards acquired a special reputation in the Imperial Parliament,
by his Bill for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. At the period when
he was in correspondence with Lord Temple, the humanity for which he was
subsequently distinguished did not, it is said, extend to his own
species; for no man, in a land notorious for feudal violence, enjoyed a
wider celebrity as a duellist. From a letter written in the July of this
year, the following extract may be inserted, as being strikingly
characteristic both of the writer and the state of society over which,
in those belligerent days, men of such grave temperaments as the
Grenvilles were called upon to preside.
You have perhaps heard already of my affair at Castlebar with
Mr. Fitzgerald. On the 14th I went to Castlebar, where with some
difficulty and after the use of language not very consonant to
my feelings, I prevailed on Mr. Fitzgerald to meet me in the
barrack-yard. When I took my first ground, I was distant about
eight yards from him, but on his declaring in a vaunting manner
that we were not near enough, I told him he should not have
reason to complain on that head, and accordingly I advanced
within less than five yards to him, and said he had it in his
power to make it much nearer. We both fired about the same time;
he missed me, but my shot entered his waistcoat and passed along
his breast and grazed his arm. He then called to me not to fire
again until he recovered his pistol, on which I declared I would
wait any time he chose. When he was ready, we fired as before;
my shot hit him just above the waistband of his breeches and got
out on the opposite side of his waistcoat. I was wounded in the
breast, but very slightly; and I am at present so well as to be
able to travel anywhere in my carriage.
Mr. Fitzgerald shows his clothes to every person, but declares
he is not wounded; for my part, I will not declare my reasons
for believing him to be unhurt. On the ground he declared
himself sorry for the offence, and that he was _wounded_. For
the last I declared my sorrow, so everything ended.
Although Lord Temple throughout this year, as he observes in one of his
letters, "lived too little in the political world" to evince much
interest in its vicissitudes, the honours which his official career had
so well earned followed him into private life. Towards the close of
1784, he was created Marquis of Buckingham.
In his retirement, however, he was not an inattentive observer of public
affairs, and seems to have contemplated the design of drawing up an
account of that memorable struggle of parties of which he had been a
witness, and especially of the transactions in which he had been
directly and personally concerned. That he did not carry this design
into execution, and that nothing remains of it but the following
fragment, is much to be regretted, as few men were so well qualified by
experience, knowledge and ability, to become the historian of these
events. The fragment, for it is nothing more, breaking off at the most
interesting point of the narrative, which it was evidently the writer's
intention to pursue to the close, is printed with the title, and exactly
in the form in which it was left by Lord Temple. It is hardly necessary
to remark that there is an error in the date, which has reference to the
months of November and December, 1783, and not 1784, a mistake which
probably arose from the circumstance of these notes having been put
together in the latter year.