CHAPTER XX_Farmer George, Volume 2

CHARLES JAMES FOX AND WILLIAM PITT

Lord North had sent his resignation by messenger to Windsor on March 19,

1782, and George, who received the communication as he was going out

hunting, sent back a verbal reply, "Tell him I shall be in town

to-morrow morning and will then give an answer," after which he turned

to the Duke of Dorset and Lord Hinchinbrook[196] and said calmly, "Lord

North has sent in his resignation, but I shall not accept it." However,

at the interview next day Lord North was firm, and nothing that the

sovereign could say moved him from his purpose, for it was not only the

adverse majority in the House of Commons which determined him, but the

state of affairs in the colonies and abroad. "The nation, he knew well

was universally weary of a war, the misfortunes which had attended

which, though perhaps justly imputable to many other causes or persons,

were attributed principally to his errors of management. He beheld

himself now engaged in hostilities, direct or indirect, with half

Europe, in addition to America. Ireland, availing itself of our

embarrassments, loudly demanded commercial and political emancipation.

On every side, the Empire appeared crumbling into ruin. Minorca, long

invested, had already surrendered, after a defence protracted to the

last extremity. Gibraltar was closely besieged. In the East Indies, our

difficulties, financial as well as military, threatened the total

subversion of our wide extended authority in that quarter of the globe;

where Hyder Ali, though expelled by Sir Eyre Coote from the vicinity of

Madras, still maintained himself in the centre of the Carnatic. If the

First Minister looked to the West Indies, the prospect appeared still

more big with alarm. St. Christopher's attacked by the Marquis de

Bouille, might be hourly expected to surrender; and he had already

recaptured St. Eustatius, either by surprise, or by corrupting the

officer who commanded the garrison. Of all the chain of Caribee Islands

which had belonged to the Crown of Great Britain at the commencement of

the war, only Antigua and Barbadoes remained."[197]

[196] Afterwards Earl of Sandwich.

[197] Wraxall: _Historical Memoirs of My Own Times_.

George III, however, did not hold that these considerations should weigh

with his minister, whom henceforth he regarded as little better than a

traitor. It was characteristic of the King that in his anger he at once

forgot the services of twelve years, and sought to avenge himself for

the desertion, as he called it, by withholding the pension usually

granted to a Prime Minister on retirement. Lord Chancellor Thurlow, who,

apparently, had more consideration for George's reputation than the

monarch himself, represented that Lord North was not opulent, that his

father was still living, and that his sons had spent a great deal of

money. "Lord North is no friend of mine," said the ungrateful King.

"That may be so," replied Lord Thurlow, "but the world thinks otherwise:

and your Majesty's character requires that Lord North should have the

usual pension."[198] A pension of L4,000 a year was then reluctantly

granted.

[198] Nicholls: _Recollections and Reflections_.

The resignation of Lord North was a great blow to his royal master, who

saw that with the retirement of this minister would disappear the

carefully built superstructure of government by personal influence. "He

would cease to 'be King' in his own acceptance of the word, and would

have to surrender the power for which he had been struggling for

two-and-twenty years into the hands of the party most hateful to

him."[199] "At last the fatal day has come," wrote George, who

seriously thought of retiring to Hanover in preference to placing

himself in the hands of the hated Opposition. "I would rather lose my

crown than submit to the Opposition," he had declared; and on December

18, 1779, he had written to Lord Thurlow, "From the cold disdain with

which I am treated, it is evident to me what treatment I am to expect

from Opposition, if I was to call them now into my service. To obtain

their support I must deliver up my person, my principles, my dominions

into their hands."

[199] Albemarle: _Memoirs of Rockingham_.

The King, however, was not of a nature to surrender at discretion, and

Thurlow was sent to Lord Rockingham to ascertain what terms of

capitulation could be obtained for the sovereign. It is proof of the

want of trust in George III that the Duke of Richmond, who had had much

experience of the methods of the Court, should, with apologies for "this

piece of impertinent advice," write in the following strain to

Rockingham. "Let me beseech you not to think that any preliminary is

opening, for I have good reason for believing nothing but trick is

meant. For God's sake, your own and the country's sake, keep back and be

very coy. Nothing but absolute necessity and severe pressure or force

will induce the Court to come to you in such a manner as to enable you

to do any good. These times are coming, and you must soon see all at

your feet in the manner you would wish and with the full means to do

what is right. In the meanwhile they will try all little tricks, and

most amply try to flatter your prejudices, if they conceive you have

any. If to anything like this you give way, you ruin yourself and them,

and the kingdom into the bargain, whereas by firmness all will come

right yet, and you will carry the nation with you with such _eclat_ as

to ensure you the means of doing what you wish."[200]

[200] Albemarle: _Memoirs of Rockingham_.

Lord Rockingham took full advantage of this sage counsel, and to the

overture of the King made reply, "that he was very willing to serve his

Majesty but requested the honour of being admitted to a private audience

before any administration should be arranged." This demand George

ignored. "I told you that divisions would be attempted and so it has

been," Walpole wrote on March 23. "Lord Rockingham's constitutional

demands not proving palatable, on Thursday evening (21st) Lord Shelburne

was sent for to a house in the Park, and, after a parley of three hours,

declined. Next morning Lord Gower was tried, ditto. At four o'clock

to-day, and this is Saturday, no new step has been taken: if the whole

flag is not hung out this evening or to-morrow, I do not know what may

happen on Monday."

Eventually, however, the King arranged the administration with

Shelburne, and then sent him to inform Rockingham of the names of the

cabinet ministers. This irregularity angered the latter, who seriously

thought to decline to serve, for, as Admiral Keppel told Nicholls, he

"thought that the King had manifested such personal dislike to him, by

refusing him an audience, and arranging the administration with Lord

Shelburne, that, in his own opinion, he was not a fit person to be in

the King's service."[201] Besides this objection, Rockingham had no

faith in Shelburne,[202] but the latter protested as a guarantee of good

faith, "I passed my eldest to Lord Rockingham, which I had no occasion

to do, for I might have been Prime Minister myself"; and, finally,

persuaded by Fox, Burke, and the Duke of Richmond, Rockingham consented

to accept office, and kissed hands on March 27. "I was abused for lying

Gazettes," said Lord North, "but there are more lies in this one

(containing the official announcement of the Whig Cabinet) than in all

mine. Yesterday his Majesty was _pleased_ to appoint the Marquis of

Rockingham, Mr. Charles Fox, the Duke of Richmond, etc., etc."

[201] Nicholls: _Recollections and Reflections_.

[202] Shelburne was most unpopular and always suspected of insincerity.

It was to him that Goldsmith made the singularly _mal-a-propos_ remark:

"Do you know, I could never conceive the reason why they call you

Malagrida, for Malagrida was a very good sort of man."

Parliament met on April 8, and a strange sight met the eyes of the

onlookers. "Never was a more total change of costume beheld than the

House of Commons presented to the eye when that assembly met for the

despatch of business after the Easter recess. The Treasury Bench, as

well as the places behind it, had been for so many years occupied by

Lord North and his friends, that it became difficult to recognise them

again in their new seats, dispersed over the Opposition benches, in

great coats, frocks, and boots. Mr. Ellis himself appeared for the first

time in his life in an undress. To contemplate the Ministers, their

successors, emerged from their obscure lodgings, or from Brookes's,

having thrown off their blue and buff uniforms; now ornamented with the

appendages of dress, or returning from Court, decorated with swords,

lace and hair-powder, excited still more astonishment."[203]

[203] Wraxall: _Historical Memoirs of My Own Times_.

In the second Rockingham Administration Charles James Fox held the

office of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and it cost George

III much to sanction this appointment, for he hated Fox more than even

he hated Chatham, not only for his attitude in politics but also for the

irregularity of his private life. "The King," wrote Wraxall, "who

considered Fox as a man ruined in fortune, of relaxed morals, and

surrounded with a crowd of followers resembling him in these

particulars, deprecated as the severest misfortune to himself and to his

subjects, the necessity of taking such a person, however eminent for

capacity, into his confidence or councils."[204] It was inevitable,

however, that Fox should hold high office, for he was undoubtedly the

foremost man in the Rockingham party. Having entered Parliament in 1768,

he had distinguished himself in the following year by a speech opposing

the claim of Wilkes to take his seat as member for Middlesex. "It was

all off-hand, all argumentative, in reply to Mr. Burke and Mr.

Wedderburn, and excessively well indeed," said his proud father. "I hear

it spoken of as an extraordinary thing, and I am, as you see, not a

little pleased with it."

[204] _Historical Memoirs of My Own Times._

[Illustration: _Photo by Emery Walker._

_From a bust by J. Nollekens, R.A._

CHARLES JAMES FOX

_To face p. 180, Vol. II_]

Fox was rewarded for his opposition to the popular demagogue with a

Lordship of the Admiralty in February, 1770, under Lord North, but, as

it has already been stated, he resigned in order to be free to oppose

the Royal Marriage Act. He began to be recognised as a power in the

House, and Lord North soon made overtures to his erstwhile colleague to

rejoin the ministry as a Lord of the Treasury. This Fox did within a

year of his resignation, but his independence soon brought about another

rupture: and when, on a question of procedure, he caused the defeat of

the ministry by pressing an amendment to a division, the King wrote to

Lord North: "Indeed, that young man has so thoroughly cast off every

principle of common honour and honesty that he must become as

contemptible as he is odious; and I hope you will let him know you are

not insensible of his conduct towards you."[205] The Prime Minister took

the hint, and dismissed Fox in a delightfully laconic note. "Sir, His

Majesty has thought proper to order a new Commission of the Treasury in

which I do not see your name."[206] This was thought to be a good thing

for Fox; and Horace Walpole wrote on February 24, 1774: "The famous

Charles Fox was this morning turned out of his place of Lord of the

Treasury for great flippancies in the House towards North. His parts

will now have a full opportunity of showing whether they can balance his

character, or whether patriotism can whitewash it."

[205] _Correspondence of George III with Lord North._

[206] Russell: _Life and Times of C. J. Fox_.

In opposition Fox proved himself a doughty opponent of his late leader's

American policy, and his vigorous speeches on the subject earned him the

undying enmity of the King. "The war of the Americans is a war of

passion," he declared on November 26, 1778, in an endeavour to force the

ministry into a pacific path; "it is of such a nature as to be supported

by the most powerful virtues, love of liberty and of country, and at the

same time by those passions in the human heart which give courage,

strength, and perseverance to man; the spirit of revenge for the injury

you have done them, of retaliation for the hardships inflicted on them,

and of opposition to the august powers you would have exercised over

them; everything combines to animate them to this war, and such a war is

without end; for whatever obstinacy enthusiasm ever inspired man with,

you will now have to contend with in America, no matter what gives birth

to that enthusiasm, whether the name of religion or of liberty, the

effects are the same; it inspires a spirit that is unconquerable and

solicits us to undergo difficulties and dangers; and as long as there is

a man in America, so long will you have him against you in the field."

And in the following year he compared George III with Henry VI. "Both

owed the crown to revolutions, both were pious princes, and both lost

the acquisitions of their predecessors." George III could not

differentiate between doctrine and action, and, because Fox supported

the rights of the Americans, looked upon him henceforth as a rebel.

Later, when of all the colonies only Boston remained in the hands of the

English, and Wedderburn with foolhardy audacity ventured in the House of

Commons to compare North as a war minister with Chatham, Fox created a

sensation by declaring that "not Lord Chatham, nor Alexander the Great,

nor Caesar ever conquered so much territory in the course of all their

wars, as Lord North had lost in one campaign!"

[Illustration: _From a caricature published March 11th, 1784_

THE UNFORTUNATE ASS

_To face p. 183, Vol. II_]

Fox's most grievous exhibition in the eyes of the sovereign was,

however, his speech on the first day of the autumn session of 1781 in

the debate on the Address to the Crown. "Those who are ignorant of the

character of the Prince whose Speech we have just heard might be induced

to consider him as an unfeeling despot, exulting in the horrid sacrifice

of the liberty and lives of his people," he said.[207] The Speech

itself, divested of the disguise of royal forms, can only mean, "Our

losses in America have been most calamitous. The blood of my subjects

has flowed in copious streams, throughout every part of that continent.

The treasures of Great Britain have been wantonly lavished; while the

load of taxes imposed on an overburdened country is becoming

intolerable. Yet I will continue to tax you to the last shilling. When,

by Lord Cornwallis's surrender they are for ever extinct, and a further

continuance of hostilities can only accelerate the ruin of the British

Empire, I prohibit you from thinking of peace. My rage for conquest is

unquenched and my revenge unsated: nor can anything except the total

subjugation of my revolted American subjects, allay my animosity."

[207] "The autumnal session of Parliament was opened on November 27 by a

speech from the Throne, the language of which was not less determinate

than it had ever been in maintaining the necessity of continuing the

most vigorous exertions for the preservation of the essential rights and

permanent interests of the country."--Aikin: _The Annals of the Reign of

George III_.

This speech, which George III regarded as an open declaration of war

against himself, earned golden opinions for the orator. "This session

was the glorious campaign of Charles Fox," says Nicholls[208]; and

Walpole at this time wrote to Sir Horace Mann, "Mr. Fox is the first

figure in all the places I have mentioned, the hero in Parliament, at

the gaming table, at Newmarket." The King, however, very clearly showed

his opinion of Fox, when at a _levee_ early in March, 1782, the latter

presented an Address from Westminster. "The King took it out of his hand

without deigning to give him a look even, or a word; he took it as you

would take your pocket-handkerchief from your _valet-de-chambre_ without

any mark of displeasure or attention, or expression of countenance

whatever, and passed it to his lord-in-waiting, who was the Duke of

Queensberry."[209]

[208] _Recollections and Reflections._

Indeed, George III had made up his mind that under no circumstances

should this particular member of the Opposition hold office. "I was

assured last night," George Selwyn wrote to Lord Carlisle on March 13,

1782, "that the King is so determined as to Charles, that he will not

hear his name mentioned in any overtures for a negotiation, and declares

that the proposal for introducing him into his councils is totally

inadmissible.[209] I should not be surprised if this was true in its

fullest extent!"[210]

[209] _George Selwyn: His Life and His Letters._

[210] _Ibid._

Fox's attitude was certainly not conciliatory, if reliance may be placed

on George Selwyn, who was certain to exaggerate unamiable traits in the

conduct of the statesman. "He (Fox) spoke of all coming to a final issue

now within a very short space of time," Selwyn wrote on March 19, 1782;

"he talked of the King under the description of Satan, a comparison

which he seems fond of, and has used to others; so he is _sans

menagement de paroles_. It is the _bon vainqueur et despotique_; he has

adopted all the supremacy he pretended to dread in his Majesty." And Fox

apparently was not the only member of the party excited by the prospect

of power. "I stayed at Brookes's this morning till between two and

three," wrote the same correspondent two days later, "and then Charles

was giving audiences in every corner of the room, and that idiot Lord

Derby[211] telling aloud whom he should turn out, how civil he intended

to be to the Prince and how rude to the King."[212]

[211] Edward, twelfth Earl of Derby (1752-1834).

[212] _George Selwyn: His Life and His Letters._

[Illustration:

_Keppel

The King

Richmond

Shelburne

Fox_

_From a caricature published in 1782_

THE CAPTIVE PRINCE, OR, LIBERTY GONE MAD

_To face p. 186, Vol II_]

The King, faithful to the underhand methods that he had so often

employed with success, at once attempted to sow the seeds of dissension

in the cabinet; but in truth this was unnecessary, for, with five

Rockinghamites, five Shelburnites and Thurlow, the King's nominee,

comprising that body, "every man saw that such a cabinet was formed for

contention, and that it could not long hold together."[213] George

deliberately showed his aversion to the Prime Minister, by

withholding from him his confidence; and, indeed, he could not forgive

him for passing a measure for "an effectual plan of economy throughout

the branches of public expenditure," the avowed object of which was to

"circumscribe the unconstitutional power of the Crown"; that is to say,

the number of sinecures at the sovereign's disposal was effectively

diminished, the amount of secret service money was reduced, and only

those could hold patent places in the colonies who would live there.

Burke was responsible for this Bill, which deprived King and ministers

of many sources of patronage and compelled them to fall back on peerages

as rewards for services. "I fear," said Burke, referring to the

subsequent lavish bestowal of peerages, "that I am partly accountable

for so disproportionate an increase of honours, by having deprived the

Crown and the minister of so many other sources of recompense or reward,

which were extinguished by my Bill of Reform."[214]

[213] Prior: _Life of Burke_.

[214] Prior: _Life of Burke_.

[Illustration: _From a portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds_

EDMUND BURKE

_To face p. 187, Vol. II_]

"Fox already shines as greatly in place as he did in opposition, though

infinitely more difficult a task," Walpole wrote to Sir Horace Mann on

May 5. "He is now as indefatigable as he was idle. He has perfect

temper, and not only good humour, but good nature, and, which is the

first quality in a Prime Minister of a free country, has more common

sense than any man, with amazing parts that are neither ostentatious nor

affected." Not all Fox's tact, however, could avert ill-feeling between

Shelburne and himself, and this was aggravated by the clashing of the

duties of their offices in the matter of the treaty with America, for

while the negotiations with the revolted colonies belonged to the

department of Home Affairs over which the Earl presided, the arrangement

of a peace with the foreign countries with which England was at war came

within the province of the Foreign Office! "In addition to the

difficulties naturally arising from this division of responsibility, the

two Secretaries differed on policy. Fox desired an immediate recognition

of American Independence, in the hope of detaching the Americans from

the French alliance, and so putting England in a better position for

dealing with her enemies; Shelburne agreed with the King that the

acknowledgment should be a condition of a joint treaty with France and

America, for England would then have a claim to receive some return for

it."[215]

[215] Hunt: _Political History of England (1760-1801)_.

[Illustration: _Photo by Emery Walker._

_From a portrait by Sir Joshua Reynolds_

WILLIAM PETTY, EARL OF SHELBURNE

(AFTERWARDS MARQUIS OF LANSDOWNE)

_To face p. 189, Vol. II_]

Before any definite rupture came, however, Lord Rockingham caught the

influenza, and died on July 1, 1782. Nicholls has stated that when Fox

was asked who was to succeed Rockingham, he replied, "I think it must be

the Earl of Shelburne; he is first oar, and I do not see how we can

resist his claim";[216] and according to other reports Fox himself

aspired to be the leader of the party. Little credence, however, must be

given to these chroniclers, for Fox was overtly opposed to Shelburne;

and he must have known that the King would never summon him to the head

of affairs. Burke and the rest of the Rockingham party resisted the

claims of Shelburne and suggested the Duke of Portland, who himself

claimed to have a better right than anyone else to be Prime Minister.

Fox actually went to the King to propose that the vacant office should

be given to the Duke of Portland. "Mr. Fox reached the royal closet only

in time enough to learn that Lord Shelburne had just gone out with the

appointment of First Lord of the Treasury. Mr. Fox, expressing great

astonishment on hearing this, asked his Majesty, 'If under these

circumstances he had any objection to his (Fox's) naming the new

Secretary of State.' To this his Majesty replied, 'That, sir, is already

done.' On which Mr. Fox rejoined, 'Then, I trust, your Majesty can

dispense with my services.' The King replied hastily. 'That, also, sir,

is done.'"[217] Thereupon the Duke of Portland, Lord John Cavendish, and

Burke[218] also retired, as well as many other officials, and after an

interval, Keppel, who had remained at the Admiralty, joined them. Their

places were filled by Lord Grantham, Earl Temple, and William Pitt.

[216] Nicholls: _Recollections and Reflections_.

[217] Huish: _Public and Private Life of George III_.

[218] "Burke, who manifested the greatest reluctance to quit the Pay

Office, required rather to be impelled in making that sacrifice, than

appeared to feel any spontaneous disposition towards resigning so

lucrative an appointment, of which he had scarcely tasted the first

fruits."--Wraxall: _Historical Memoirs of My Own Times_.

William Pitt, like his great opponent Fox, had established himself with

his first speech, which secured the encomiums of all who were present.

"We had a debate on Monday, when Mr. Pitt for the first time made such a

speech, that it excited the admiration very justly of every man in the

House. Except he had foreseen that particular species of nonsense which

Lord Nugent was to utter, his speech could not be prepared; it was

delivered without any kind of improper assurance, but with the exact

proper self-possession which ought to accompany a speaker. There was not

a word or a look which one would have wished to correct. This, I

believe, in general was the universal sense of all those who heard him,

and exactly the effect which his speech had on me, at the time I heard

it." So wrote Anthony Storer to Lord Carlisle on February 28, 1781; and

Wraxall was not less complimentary. "It was in reply to Lord Nugent that

Pitt first broke silence, from under the Gallery on the Opposition side

of the House. The same composure, self-possession, and imposing dignity

of manner, which afterwards so eminently characterized him when seated

on the Treasury Bench, distinguished him on this first essay of his

powers, though he then wanted three months to have completed his

twenty-second year. The same nervous, correct, and political diction,

free from any inaccuracy of language, or embarrassment of deportment,

which, as First Minister, he subsequently displayed, were equally

manifested on this occasion. Formed for a popular assembly, he seemed

made to guide its deliberations, from the first moment that he addressed

the members composing it."[219] Burke declared that the young man "was

not merely a chip of the old block, but the old block itself"; Walpole

doubted "whether he will not prove superior even to Charles Fox"; while

Fox, the most generous of men, when some one said to him, "Pitt will be

one of the first men in the House of Commons," replied, "He is already."

Pitt, although but twenty-three years of age, felt so sure of himself

that he declined an offer of office from Rockingham, declaring "he would

never accept a subordinate post under Government;" and, although he was

a barrister without practice and with an income of less than L300,

refused Lord Shelburne's invitation to become Vice-Treasurer of Ireland

with a salary of L5,000, and thereupon was appointed Chancellor of the

Exchequer.

[219] _Historical Memoirs of My Own Times._

The King, at the opening of Parliament on December 5, stated that he had

offered to declare the American colonies free and independent; but what

it cost him calmly to make this announcement may be deduced from the

fact that afterwards he asked anxiously, "Did I lower my voice when I

came to that part of my speech?"[220] According to Nicholls, even now,

when conquest was impossible, peace was certainly made against the

wishes of George, "who, though he probably had no desire to remove the

Earl of Shelburne, determined to make that noble Earl feel his

displeasure. The "Household Troops" were therefore ordered to express in

Parliament their disapproval of the peace."[221] The King, however,

always denied that he intrigued against this Minister, but it is a

regrettable fact that the sovereign's word in such matters cannot be

accepted; and Shelburne certainly believed the royal influence was

directed against him, at least until the formation of the Coalition, the

success of which would place George in the awkward position of having to

bestow the seals of office upon the men he regarded as his enemies.

[220] Walpole: _Last Journals_.

[221] _Recollections and Reflections._

[Illustration: _Photo by Emery Walker. From a bust by T. Nollekens,

R.A._

WILLIAM PITT

_To face p. 192, Vol. II_]

"Charles is mad, and ruining himself, I fear to all intents and

purposes," Lady Sarah Napier wrote to Lady Susan O'Brien, July 9, 1782.

"It _is said_ that there is to-night a meeting of thirty-six members and

Lords at Lord Fitzwilliam's, all _violent_ and vowing opposition; if

this is _true_ they will have force enough to do double mischief but not

to _crush_ Lord Shelburne, whose cards they are playing by giving him

the fairest opportunity to court popular favour, by opposing good

measures and fairness to violence, instead of sticking to him like

leeches as they ought to have done and preventing his doing mischief."

Fox certainly was desirous to depose Shelburne and upon consideration

saw that this could be done if he and his friends coalesced with Lord

North and his party. Lord North, who was alarmed lest the House of

Commons should institute an inquiry into his conduct in having carried

on the war after its issue was clear, saw that this union of parties

would protect him, and, after much negotiation, an arrangement was

effected on February 16, 1783, the terms of which were that, in the

event of a change of Administration, the Duke of Portland should be

First Lord of the Treasury, North and Fox Secretaries of State, and that

the other offices should be divided between the two parties.

The day after the Coalition was settled, there was a debate on the

Articles of Peace, and the government was left in a minority, the

figures being 208-224. Thereupon Shelburne resigned.

The King then pressed Pitt to form a government, when he refused on the

27th made overtures to Gower, and eventually endeavoured to detach North

from the Coalition, by offering him the Treasury if he would desert Fox.

The King then sent for the Duke of Portland, and offered to give way on

all points except that Thurlow must remain Lord Chancellor. The Duke,

who knew Thurlow's intractability and feared his influence over the

King, refused to yield to this stipulation, and negotiations were broken

off. George's mind threatened to give way under the sense of humiliation

from which he was suffering, and William Grenville was impressed by his

mental agitation and the "inconceivable quickness" of his utterances. On

March 23 he again invited Pitt to form an administration, declaring

that, "after the manner I have been personally treated by both the Duke

of Portland and Lord North, it is impossible that I can ever admit

either of them into my service." Pitt, however, refused to lead such a

forlorn hope, and George again announced his intention to go to

Hanover[222] and was with difficulty weaned from his purpose by Thurlow.

"There is nothing easier, sir, than to go over to Hanover," said the

latter. "It may not, however, prove so easy to return from thence to

this country, when your Majesty becomes tired of Germany. Recollect the

precedent of James II, who precipitately embraced a similar expedient.

Your Majesty must not think for a moment of adopting so imprudent and

hazardous a step. Time and patience will open a remedy to the present

evils."[223] Only then did George give way, and on April 2 accept the

Coalition Ministry.

[222] "The present King [George IV]," Lord Holland wrote, "told me a

story of his father's plan of retiring to Hanover, and described, with

more humour than filial reverence, his arrangement of the details, and

especially of the liveries and dresses, about which he was so earnest

that it amounted almost to insanity."--_Memorials of Fox._

[223] Wraxall: _Historical Memoirs of My Own Times_.

The Coalition was, however, foredoomed to a brief existence. It was

unpopular in the country, where it was regarded as an unnatural

alliance, from which was apprehended, as Wilberforce happily put it, "a

progeny stamped with the features of both parents, the violence of the

one party, and the corruption of the other."

"Lord North, for twelve years, with his war and contracts,

The people he nearly had laid on their backs;

Yet stoutly he swore he sure was a villain

If e'er he had bettered his fortune a shilling.