indisposed the Regent’s mind, and had a great effect in determining his
subsequent conduct. He professed himself, however, so anxious to remove
all misunderstanding that he condescended to come to me in the gout and
to explain for near three hours at my couch side in Pall Mall the whole
proceeding. He assured me that he looked forward with eagerness to the
two Lords completing their arrangements; and that he was satisfied that
on nothing, except the answer regarding the restrictions, he should ever
wish to consult with anybody but Lord Grenville and those with whom he
acted. Notwithstanding these assurances, there is reason to suspect that
he complained of the two Lords to others besides Mr. Sheridan, for Lord
Yarmouth[91] made some significant remarks on their imagining themselves
more necessary to the Regent than they really were.
The difficulties in forming a Ministry were great. The Grenvilles desired
to negotiate with Mr. Canning; others of our party, and Mr. Whitbread
in particular, would never have been brought to consent to it. Lord
Grenville was also unwilling either to resign his auditorship or to
relinquish the Treasury. In the course of discussion on the latter point
his evil genius dipped him again in pen and ink, and he argued for his
profits and places in a manner which, though neither unreasonable nor
unnatural, was more becoming a merchant than a statesman aspiring to
power and fame. Such a man should consider even fair-earned emolument as
a secondary and sometimes an incompatible object. Mr. Whitbread was not
less stubborn or less offensive in his resistance to any union, direct
or indirect, of the two offices. He acknowledged all danger from such a
measure, either in itself or as a precedent, to be a mere chimera; he did
not even dwell much on the violation of constitutional principle which it
seemed to involve. The practical advantage of a Whig Administration, he
owned, far outweighed all such considerations; but he had, it seemed, in
public and private, held language on this and similar topics, which would
expose him to the charge of inconsistency, should he acquiesce in any
such arrangements. Having put a question, he said, the year before, to
Mr. Perceval, whether Mr. Yorke received his salary as teller while First
Lord of the Admiralty, and having been answered in the negative, he could
never bring himself to defend Lord Grenville’s receiving the salary of
auditor while he was First Lord of the Treasury.
After the matter had been discussed among us with great pertinacity and
some asperity on both sides, it was at last compromised, I know not
how, by the two Lords. Other difficulties in the distribution of places
no doubt occurred, but many I have forgotten, and many never reached me.
Gout continued to confine me to my bed for some time. Lord Grey acted
throughout with judgment, temper, and firmness: he gave no reasonable
cause of dissatisfaction to recent and younger partisans; he conciliated
and gratified the old friends of Mr. Fox.
I had some scruples about the Spanish war. Lord Grenville, from economy,
Lord Grey, from a propensity to criticise military movements, were
disposed to contemplate it with less hope, and possibly with less zeal,
than myself. But as they agreed on the immediate necessity of supplying
Lord Wellington’s army with reinforcements and vigorously supporting the
plans in which he was engaged, I saw no reason for reviving the shades
of difference we might have had on the origin or early progress of the
war, nor for exacting a previous concurrence of opinion in certain
contingencies which had not yet occurred. I was willing to take my chance
of the zeal which the conduct and management of the war would inevitably
have inspired in such ardent and sanguine minds as Lord Grey’s and Mr.
Whitbread’s.
While, however, delays occurred in forming a new Ministry, those in
possession did not remain inactive. Favoured by the Queen, and aided by
at least one of the physicians, they worked with great assiduity and
address on the affections, the fear, the vanity, and, some say, the
pecuniary interests of the Prince of Wales. At one time, the King’s
disorder had taken a new turn, seemed to hold out great hopes of a speedy
recovery, or was likely to terminate ere long in a restoration of his
intellect or in death. At another, the pressure of public business
called for a stable Government, and the financial operations of the
State could not be conducted with safety or advantage till the persons
entrusted with the confidence of the executive Government were known.
The effect of a clamour against Roman Catholics, the popularity which
Mr. Perceval might give to the Princess, the consequences of any change
on the King’s health, and, above all, the reproaches to which the Prince
would thereupon be exposed, were artfully insinuated by the partisans
of the Ministers and the Queen, and perhaps really felt by others who
had more direct influence over his mind as well as the opportunity of
impressing their views in softer moments. The Minister was admitted to
the presence of the King, and the Queen wrote instantly an account of
the interview to her son. I was not allowed to copy the letter, but the
substance of it was as follows: “To assure her dearest son that she was
persuaded he would be highly gratified to hear that the King was improved
in health; that he had seen Mr. Perceval, who was much satisfied with
his whole appearance; that he had held a reasonable conversation, and
inquired with great interest about all that had been done; that he had
expressed himself with kindness towards the Prince, and pleased at his
conduct _pending the business_.” She added that she “avoided all delay in
conveying such agreeable information.”
The Prince, though aware of the artifice, and even diverted at the formal
expression of, _pending the business_, which he shrewdly observed was
“no woman’s phrase, but a lawyer’s,” was nevertheless much agitated and
intimidated by the letter. Such fears were said to be improved upon by
Sir Henry Halford,[92] who repeated observations to the King, affected
to dread the consequences of any change of Ministers, not only on the
disorder, but on the life, of the King, and is much belied if he did
not convert his professional access to the Prince of Wales to purposes
purely political. The Duke of Cumberland observed in a letter, “Vaughan
(Sir Henry Halford) has behaved nobly by us all.” I cannot vouch for the
fact of his active interference, but accounts of it reached me through
channels worthy of credit, and they were generally believed.
On January 21, 1811, Lord Grey and Lord Grenville informed the Prince
Regent by letter that they were ready to undertake the Government, but
advised him to institute a fresh inquiry into the state of the King’s
health; and if it should appear probable that His Majesty would be able
to resume the exercise of the Regal functions _within a few weeks_, then
and in that case, they recommended him not to change the Ministers;
though they disclaimed all approbation, much less adoption, of their
system of policy being implied from their recommendation, or from the
Prince Regent’s compliance with it by continuing them in office. If the
result of the inquiry was different, they then repeated their readiness
to submit without delay to the Prince Regent the appointments which they
should recommend to His Royal Highness.
On the evening of the 25th, the Prince Regent, after stating to Lord
Moira, Lord Hutchinson, and Mr. Adam the agitation of his mind and
imploring them to do justice to his feelings, sent the two last to
Camelford House to inform Lord Grey and Lord Grenville that, in
consequence of the report of physicians and the probability of the King’s
recovery, he had resolved not to remove the Ministers; he expressed his
hopes that the two Lords would approve of his determination and his
sense of the disinterested as well as judicious advice they had given.
He afterwards saw them, Mr. Ponsonby, myself, and others; referred
his determination merely and exclusively to the report of the King’s
health, which, whether true or false, would, he said, subject him to
so much reproach if he did anything to aggravate his disorder, that he
must continue for a while with men whom he hated and despised. He then
proceeded to abuse them without measure, and in many particulars without
justice, declaring that he never had and never could “break bread” in
the house of any one of them. His public reception of Mr. Perceval with
the resolution of the two Houses was not only cold but offensive. When a
Privy Council was held at Carlton House and he took the oath of Regency,
the bust of Mr. Fox was ostentatiously displayed in the apartment.
In his letter to Mr. Perceval announcing his determination to preserve
him in office, he pointedly declared that an apprehension of interfering
with the progress of his father’s recovery was the consideration which
_alone_ dictated that decision. He lamented the situation in which the
Regency Bill had placed him, said of it that it was most difficult to
reconcile it to the principles of the Constitution, and broadly hinted
throughout that nothing but peculiar circumstances could have brought
him to any communication or concert with men so obnoxious to him. They,
however, lacked some of that high and jealous honour which distinguished
Lord Grey, and were not so alive as Lord Grenville to the necessity of
preserving the constitutional relation of Prince and Ministry in all
its purity. Foreseeing the practical consequences of their temporary
continuance in office, they submitted without a murmur to the indignity
of being disavowed and reviled. They consoled themselves with the
prospect of riveting their power, either by intimidating or cajoling the
person who, in the first instance, conferred it upon them so ungraciously
and so reluctantly.
Such seems to me the solution of their conduct. With respect to the
Prince Regent, I am inclined to believe that the motives he alleged had
really some weight in determining him, though some that he suppressed
had as much or more. Persons, indeed, have carried their refinement in
suspicion so far as to imagine that the Queen’s letter, the interviews
with Lord Grey and Lord Grenville and with their friends, and the
rudeness to Mr. Perceval, were all parts of a scheme, concerted like
the plot of a comedy with the Duke of Cumberland, the Lord Chancellor,
the Queen, and the Prince Regent; and that the resolution to connect
himself with those whom he affected to style his enemies was taken
very early, and produced by the high offers which Mr. Perceval made in
the arrangement for the Household, and by the suggestions which the
Royal Family, and even the mad King himself, were instructed to make
to him during the fortnight in which Lord Grey and Lord Grenville were
occupied in preparing a Ministry. Such duplicity is surely incredible,
especially as it would have been unnecessary. It is, however, true that
the old King’s wishes on one important point were urged by himself in an
interview with the Prince Regent, _viz._, on the reinstatement of the
Duke of York. The facility with which the Ministers engaged to comply
with that measure formed a strong contrast, in the mind of the Regent,
with the scruples and hesitations of Lord Grey and Lord Grenville on the
subject.
Whether he ascribed the backwardness of the two Lords to want of will or
want of power, he drew, no doubt, an inference unfavourable to the Whigs,
as either from principle less compliant with the wishes of a Court, or
from the state of parties less capable of promoting them. The position
into which the Regent had cast himself, whether from design or accident,
was, while it lasted, peculiarly adapted to secure the gratification of
any personal object he had in view. One party was full of devices to
obtain his favour; the other, of forbearance not to forfeit it. This
did not escape the friends of the Duke of York; and Lord Lauderdale,
in particular, saw the advantage of the conjuncture for obtaining
his reinstatement. He urged that measure, which in all sincerity he
thought just and wise, with more warmth of friendship to the Duke than
consideration for the interests of the party to which he belonged.
He persuaded others, and perhaps himself, that by allowing it to be
accomplished during that intermediate state of Ministry and Opposition,
the Whigs might escape the unpopularity of doing it with the public and
the odium of resisting it with the Prince Regent. Mr. Sheridan, with more
shrewdness and pleasantry, advised the Regent to wait till his father’s
predicted recovery should enable him to resume his functions, and then to
urge _him_ to adopt the measure.
The Duke of York behaved with dignity, delicacy, and propriety. He avowed
his hopes of ultimate reinstatement, but he deprecated so unpopular an
act at the commencement of his brother’s administration of affairs.
The Regent, however, urged by his family, encouraged by his Ministers,
prompted by his pride, and swayed by some generosity of affection,
replaced him.
Lord Milton,[93] against the wishes of many of our party, moved an
address in censure of this step. He divided only 47. It must be
acknowledged that among that small number were to be found some of the
best names in the House of Commons.
The impression made on the Regent by Lord Grenville’s reluctance, Mr.
Perceval’s cordial support, and Lord Milton’s open opposition, to a
measure vindicating the honour of his family and earnestly desired by
himself, was, no doubt, like that avowed by King William to the Duke
of Wharton. “After all,” said King William, “the Tories are the best
Ministers for a King.” “Yes,” replied the Duke, “but Your Majesty is not
King of the Tories.”[94] It was the endeavour of Mr. Perceval to preclude
the application of such a reply, and to make the Regent as much King of
the Tories as of the Whigs; and in that endeavour he signally succeeded.
The Regent kept up for some time his usual habits of private intercourse
with members of the Opposition. He dined at Lord Grey’s upon his own
invitation. He there authorised Lord Hutchinson to insinuate his good
wishes, if not actually to use his name, in canvassing the Irish Peerage
in favour of Lord Leitrim, the Whig candidate for a representative seat
in the House of Lords, then vacant. His situation, as it respected our
party, was indeed most anomalous. When he avowed any hostility to his
ostensible Ministers, we were bound by the fundamental principles of our
party to condemn his conduct as unconstitutional; when he betrayed any
approbation of them, we were not backward in stigmatising his conduct
as unsteady, insincere, and deceitful to us. Such a state of things
could not last, and his cordiality with the Whigs, whether real or
affected in the outset, visibly declined during the summer. I have been
prolix in relating the facts, and rigidly scrupulous in conveying my
impression of the motives of the Prince Regent, because I am satisfied
that his character will be judged by posterity, or at least that portion
of posterity which forms the future political circle of England, with
reference to his conduct during this period of his life.
A letter from General FitzPatrick[95] to his brother Lord Ossory proves
that experienced observers formed upon the same data a different
judgment, and as it is more favourable to His Royal Highness than my own,
I subjoin it, that his reputation may have the benefit of so indulgent
a testimony from a man of acknowledged sagacity and honour, accurately
informed, and not swayed by any prepossession in his favour.
_Thursday._
DEAR BROTHER,
I have had two very long audiences at Carlton House, and have
consequently been let into the minute details of _all_ that
has passed, as well as _all_ the letters, papers, etc., that
have been written in the course of the transactions that have
preceded the Prince’s final determination not to make any
change in the Government. Much as I was prepossessed that
his decision had been wrong, both with respect to his own
character, to the public interests, and towards the persons
to whom he had given his confidence, I must confess that he
has succeeded in convincing me that under the very particular
and unexampled difficulties of his situation, he has adopted
the only line of conduct he possibly could, without exposing
himself to the most odious imputations of destroying the
sanguine hopes of his father’s recovery and even endangering
his life, in order to establish an inefficient and feeble
Government, probably of very short duration, and of no power to
act with any real advantage to the public interests, or to face
or struggle with any of the difficulties which threaten the
security of the _chose publique_ from all quarters. In taking
this resolution, however, though he cannot be justly charged
with having departed from the rules of honour or _bonne foi_,
it is certainly unfortunate for himself that he did not make a
more early communication of it to those to whom he had given
his confidence, as it throws upon his conduct the appearance
of weakness, unsteadiness, and failure in point of firmness,
to which many will be more inclined to ascribe it than to the
motives of filial duty and affection upon which he himself
entirely founds it. This decision they themselves (I mean the
two G.G.’s)[96] had recommended at an earlier period in case of
a prospect of speedy recovery: and that case is now represented
to the Prince to be arrived. Upon the whole, however, it is
evident that he is the victim of a Court intrigue, managed by
the Queen and the Ladies of Windsor, a treacherous brother—the
D. of C.,[97] and an intriguing, meddling physician.
He is, in his present temper, as much indisposed and, in his
heart, as adverse to his Ministers as possible; but how long
this disposition may endure is somewhat doubtful, for if the
King be really so far recovered as to become an actor in the
conspiracy himself, he will be as tractable as they can wish
him. If you are inclined not to give him credit for all the
filial piety he professes, his anxiety to do what his father
will approve is (whether through fear or affection) excessive.
He is already in the full conviction that the King, having
been made acquainted with the state of things, has expressed
his perfect reliance upon the Prince of Wales doing whatever
is most right and proper in his situation. I believe all the
physicians do sincerely think the recovery probable, though
perhaps not, as Halford has said, highly so in _three months_;
but surely it does appear most strange that the Chancellor and
Perceval should be permitted to see and talk upon business
with him, and one of the physicians hold an intercourse upon
politics with him, when he is not sufficiently recovered to be
allowed to see the Queen or any one of his family. The leaders
of Opposition suppress their disappointment (if they feel any),
as becomes them. As to the number of guests who were invited
and ready to fall to with craving appetites, it is natural
they should feel a little as Sancho did upon the physicians
ordering every dish to be removed from the table. As none of
the feast would have come to my share, I could, of course, feel
no disappointment. You do me justice in believing that I needed
no great stock of philosophy to be contented with _otium_
even _sine dignitate_, excepting that of closing my political
career—what the course of my life seemed little to have fitted
me for an independent Knight of the Shire[98] in the House of
Commons. My love to all your house. I rejoice to hear V. S.[99]
is going on well.
Yours affectly.
R. F.
General Fitzpatrick had refused all office on the ground of his declining
health. He retained his good sense and pleasant conversation, but he
suspected that the vigour of his mind was somewhat impaired. The above
letter certainly betrays a facility of belief in the professions of the
great, for which in his more active days he was by no means remarkable.
I now return to the events of Parliament in the Session of 1811.
A circular letter was written by Mr. Secretary Pole[100] to the
magistrates of Ireland, requiring them to arrest and commit to prison
such persons as had published any notice for electing any delegate or
representative to a Catholic Convention, styled in the said circular,
in virtue of an Irish Act of 33 Geo. III., an unlawful assembly.[101]
The Act, however, authorised no such proceeding, though it made electing
such a Convention, or voting in it, a misdemeanour. The doctrine and
practice inculcated and recommended in this circular raised many of those
questions which were afterwards more ably urged and better understood, in
1817, on the motion of Lord Grey on the circular of Lord Sidmouth. The
legal part of the question was touched upon in our debates, but I was
not sufficiently informed or confident enough in my own opinion to do
it full justice. However, I entered a short protest on the Journals, in
which the power of a magistrate to hold to bail for a misdemeanour, which
does not amount to a breach of the peace, is peremptorily denied. It is
not printed in the Registers, but it was approved of by that cautious
lawyer, Sir Arthur Pigott; and Lord Chancellor Eldon acknowledged to me
in private that the law of Secretary Pole’s letter was indefensible, and
he even called it “_slovenly_” on his legs.
There was in the measure some appearance of a design to involve the
Government of the Regent as soon as possible in an altercation with
the Roman Catholic body, but Mr. Wellesley Pole was not likely to be a
party to such a design; and as the most anti-Catholic members of the
Administration disdained all previous knowledge of the proceeding, it
is reasonable to infer that such a suspicion, though plausible, was not
justified by the fact.
During the greater part of the Session of Parliament I was employed in a
Committee to inquire into the circumstances of the death of one _Culver_,
a debtor, in the Marshalsea prison. There were strong suspicions that the
wretched man had been starved to death. The evidence given before our
Committee was so indistinct and contradictory that we could not agree on
a report; and the mere evidence which we did report did not lead to any
further Parliamentary proceeding, either in the treatment of the deceased
prisoner or the conduct of the Coroner’s jury. The exposure, however, of
the state of the prison, which was in ruin, and where persons convicted
of the most disgusting offences were associated with the unfortunate
debtors during the day and then shut up with one another during the
night, led no doubt to the speedy completion of a new prison. Such a
building had been declared necessary many years before, but more progress
was made in the course of the ensuing twelve months than in twelve years
preceding the inquiry.