Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

1

parties." But it had been no part of Lord Bolingbroke's conception, that the patriot king should suffer his favorites to stand between him and his "most able and faithful councillors."

"2

Ministry at

cession.

The ministry whom the king found in possession of power at his accession, had been formed by a coalition the time of between the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Pitt. the king's acThe former had long been the acknowledged leader of the great Whig connection, and enjoyed extended parliamentary interest: the latter, by his eloquence and statesmanship, had become the most popular and powerful of the king's subjects. The ministry also comprised the Grenville and Bedford sections of the Whig party. It was so strong in Parliament, that for some years the voice of opposition had been scarcely heard; and so long as it continued united, its position was impregnable.

cret counsel

lors.

8

But, strong, as were the ministers, the king was resolved The king's se- to wrest all power from their hands, and to exercise it himself. For this purpose he called to his aid the Earl of Bute, and other secret counsellors, drawn from all parties. The greater number were of the Tory party, whose views of prerogative were Jacobite. According to Horace Walpole, "they abjured their ancient master; but retained their principles." It was the king's object not merely to supplant one party, and establish another in its place; but to create a new party, faithful to himself, regarding his personal wishes, carrying out his policy, and dependent on his will. This party was soon distinguished as "the king's men," or "the king's friends." Instead of relying upon the advice of his responsible ministers, the king took counsel with this "double" or "interior cabinet." Even his first speech to Parliament was not submitted to the cabinet.

[ocr errors]

1 The Idea of a Patriot King, Works, iv. 281, 282.

2 Ibid., 330.

3 Walp. Mem., i. 15.

4 Burke's Present Discontents, Works, ii. 240-242.

[ocr errors]

It had been drawn up by himself and Lord Bute; and when Mr. Pitt took exception to some of its expressions, the king long resisted the advice of his minister. It had been usual for ministers to rely upon the support of the Crown, in all their measures. They now found themselves thwarted and opposed; and the patronage, which they had regarded as their own, they saw divided by the king amongst his new adherents and their connections. This "influence behind the throne was denounced by all the leading statesmen of that time, by Mr. Grenville, Lord Chatham, the Marquess of Rockingham, the Duke of Bedford, and Mr. Burke. Occasionally denied, its existence was yet so notorious, and its agency so palpable, that historical writers of all parties, though taking different views of its character, have not failed to acknowledge it. The bitterness with which it was assailed at the time was due, in great measure, to political jealousies, and to the king's selection of his friends from an unpopular party; but, on constitutional grounds, it could not be defended.

[ocr errors]

al relations of

the king to

A constitutional government insures to the king a wide authority, in all the councils of the state. He Constitutionchooses and dismisses his ministers. Their resolutions upon every important measure of for- his ministers. eign and domestic policy are submitted to his approval; and when that approval is withheld, his ministers must either abandon their policy, or resign their offices. They are responsible to the king on the one hand, and to Parliament on the other; and while they retain the confidence of the king, by administering affairs to his satisfaction, they must act upon principles, and propose measures, which they can justify to Parliament. And here is the proper limit to the king's influence. As he governs by responsible ministers, he must recognize their responsibilities. They are not only his ministers, but also the public servants of a free country. But an influence in the direction of public affairs thus limited, by no means satisfied the ambition of the king. His

to break up

courtiers represented that the king was inthralled by the dominant party, which had become superior to the throne itself, and that in order to recover his just prerogative, it His attempts was necessary to break up the combination. But parties. what was this in effect but to assert that the king should now be his own minister? that ministers should be chosen, not because they had the confidence of Parliament and the country, but because they were agreeable to himself, and willing to carry out his policy? And this was the true object of the king. It will be seen that when ministers, not of his own choice, were in office, he plotted against them and overthrew them; and when he had succeeded in establishing his friends in office, he enforced upon them the adoption of his own policy.

Danger of the

[ocr errors]

The king's tactics were fraught with danger, as well to the Crown itself, as to the constitutional liberties of king's tactics. the people; but his personal conduct and character have sometimes been judged with too much severity. That he was too fond of power for a constitutional monarch, none will now be found to deny that he sometimes resorted to crafty expedients, unworthy of a king, even his admirers must admit. With a narrow understanding, and obstinate prejudices, he was yet patriotic in his feelings, and labored, earnestly and honestly, for the good government of his country. If he loved power, he did not shrink from its cares and toil. If he delighted in being the active ruler of his people, he devoted himself to affairs of state, even more laboriously than his ministers. If he was jealous of the authority of the Crown, he was not less jealous of the honor and greatness of his people. A just recognition of the personal merits of the king himself, enables us to judge more freely of the constitutional tendency and results of his policy.

To revert to a polity under which kings had governed, and ministers had executed their orders, was in itself a dangerous retrogression in the principles of constitutional government. If the Crown, and not its ministers, governed,

how could the former do no wrong, and the latter be responsible? If ministers were content to accept responsibility without power, the Crown could not escape its share of blame. Hence the chief safeguard of the monarchy was endangered. But the liberties of the people were exposed to greater peril than the Crown. Power proceeding from the king, and exercised by himself in person, is irreconcilable with popular government. It constitutes the main distinction between an absolute, and a constitutional monarchy. The best and most enlightened of kings, governing from above, will press his own policy upon his subjects. Choosing his ministers from considerations personal to himself, — directing their acts, upholding them as his own servants, ―resenting attacks upon them as disrespectful to himself, - committed to their measures, and resolved to enforce them, viewing men and things from the elevation of a court, instead of sharing the interests and sympathies of the people, how can he act in harmony with popular influences?

The system of government which George III. found in operation, was indeed imperfect. The influence of the Crown, as exercised by ministers, prevailed over the more popular elements of the constitution. The great nobles were too powerful. A Parliament, without adequate representation of the people, and uncontrolled by public opinion, was generally subservient to the ministers: but with all its defects, it was still a popular institution. If not freely elected by the people, it was yet composed of men belonging to various classes of society, and sharing their interests and feelings. The statesmen, who were able by their talents and influence to command its confidence, became the ministers of the Crown; and power thus proceeded from below, instead of from above. The country was governed by its ablest men, and not by favorites of the court. The proper authority of Parliament was recognized, and nothing was wanting in the theory of constitutional government, but an

improved constitution of Parliament itself. This system, however, the king was determined to subvert. He was jealous of ministers who derived their authority from Parliament rather than from himself, and of the parliamentary organization which controlled his power. The policy which he adopted, and its results, are among the most critical events in the history of the Crown.

King's inter

ened at the

tion.

The dissolution of Parliament, shortly after his accession, afforded an opportunity of strengthening the est strength- parliamentary connection of the king's friends. general elec- Parliament was kept sitting while the king and Lord Bute were making out lists of the court candidates, and using every exertion to secure their return. The king not only wrested government boroughs from the ministers, in order to nominate his own friends, but even encouraged opposition to such ministers as he conceived not to be in his interest.1

At the meeting at the cockpit, the night before the assembling of the new Parliament, to hear the king's speech read, and to agree upon the choice of a speaker, not only the Whigs and parliamentary supporters of the government attended; but also the old Tories in a strong body, though without any invitation from the ministers.2 The speaker selected by Lord Bute was Sir John Cust, a country gentleman and a Tory.

Lord Bute, the originator of the new policy, was not perMeasures tak- Sonally well qualified for its successful promotion. en to break He was not connected with the great families who up the minis- had acquired a preponderance of political influ

try.

1 The Duke of Newcastle thus wrote at this time to Lord Rockingham:"My Lord Anson has received orders from the king himself to declare to the docks (at Portsmouth) that they may vote for whom they please at the Hampshire election, even though the Chancellor of the Exchequer is a candidate." Lord Bute complained to the First Lord of the Admiralty, that he had disposed of the Admiralty boroughs without acquainting the king.Dodington's Diary, 433; Rockingham Mem., i. 61-64.

2 Rockingham Mem., i. 68; Dodington's Diary, 433.

« ForrigeFortsæt »