Billeder på siden
PDF
ePub

ment of the royal will. The persecution of Wilkes, the straining of parliamentary privilege, and the coercion of America, were the disastrous fruits of the court policy. Throughout this administration, the king staked his personal credit upon the success of his measures; and regarded opposition to his ministers as an act of disloyalty, and their defeat as an affront to himself.2

In 1770, Lord Chatham stated in Parliament, that since the king's accession there had been no original (i. e. independent) minister; and examples abound of the king's personal participation in every political event of this period.

While the Opposition were struggling to reverse the proceedings of the House of Commons against Public affairs Wilkes, and Lord Chatham was about to move directed by the King. an address for dissolving Parliament, the king's resentment knew no bounds. In conversations with General Conway, at this time, he declared he would abdicate his crown rather than comply with this address. "Yes," said the king, laying his hand on his sword, "I will have recourse to this, sooner than yield to a dissolution of Parliament." And opinions have not been wanting, that the king was actually prepared to resist what he deemed an invasion of his prerogative, by military force.5

[ocr errors]

On the 26th February, 1772, while the Royal Marriage Bill was pending in the House of Lords, the king thus wrote to Lord North: "I expect every nerve to be strained to carry the bill. It is not a question relating to administration, but personally to myself, therefore I have a right to

[ocr errors]

1 Walp. Mem., ii. 95, n.; ib., iii. 106, n.; Wraxall's Mem., i. 123. Mr. Massey says, Lord North was the only man of parliamentary reputation who would not have insisted" on the expulsion of the king's friends. Hist., i. 424. Always in favor of power and authority, "he supported the king against the aristocracy, the Parliament against the people, and the nation against the colonies." Ibid., 425.

2 Walp. Mem., iii. 200 and n.; iv. 75.

8 Ibid., iv. 94; Hansard's Parl. Hist., xvi. 842 (March 2d, 1770).

4 14th May, 1770. Rockingham Mem., ii. 179.

5 Massey, Hist., i. p. 489.

[blocks in formation]

expect a hearty support from every one in my service, and I shall remember defaulters." Again, on the 14th March, 1772, he wrote: "I wish a list could be prepared of those that went away, and of those that deserted to the minority (on division in the committee). That would be a rule for my conduct in the drawing-room to-morrow." Again, in another letter, he said: "I am greatly incensed at the presumption of Charles Fox, in forcing you to vote with him last night.".... "I hope you will let him know that you are not insensible of his conduct towards you.” 4 And the king's confidence in his own influence over the deliberations of Parliament, appears from another letter, on the 26th June, 1774, where he said: "I hope the Crown will always be able, in either House of Parliament, to throw out a bill; but I shall never consent to use any expression which tends to establish, that at no time the right of the Crown to dissent is to be used." 5

8

The king not only watched how members spoke and voted, or whether they abstained from voting; but even if they were silent, when he had expected them to speak. No "whipper-in" from the Treasury could have been more keen or full of expedients, in influencing the votes of members in critical divisions. He was ready, also, to take ad

1 Fox Mem., i. 76; Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 79.

2 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 80.

8 15th February, 1774. In proceedings against printers of a libel on the speaker, Sir F. Norton.

4 Fox Mem., i. 99; Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 84.

5 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 85.

6 King to Lord North, 5th April, 1770; Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 71, 88, 106, 108.

7 King to Lord North, 12th March, 1772; 6th April, 25th Oct., 1778; 28th Feb., 4th and 9th March, 1779.

8 King to Lord North, 7th Jan., 1770. "Surprised that T. Townsend was silent." King to Lord North, 19th Dec., 1772. Ibid., 81. "I should think Lord G. Germaine might with great propriety have said a few words to put the defence in motion." - King to Lord North, 2d Feb., 1778. Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 105. He was incensed against Dundas for the same reason, 24th Feb., 1778. — Ibid., 106.

9 King to Lord North, 9th Feb., 1775; 5th and 9th March, 1779.

vantage of the absence of opponents. Hearing that Mr. Fox was going to Paris, he wrote to Lord North, 15th November, 1776: " Bring as much forward as you can before the recess, as real business is never so well considered as when the attention of the House is not taken up with noisy. declamation." 1

Military officers were still exposed to marks of the king's displeasure. In 1773, Lieutenant-Colonel Barré Dismissal of and Sir Hugh Williams, both refractory members officers. of Parliament, were passed over in a brevet, or promotion; and Colonel Barré, in order to mark his sense of the injustice of this act of power, resigned his commission in the army. The king, however, appears to have modified his opinions as to his right of depriving members of military commands, on account of their conduct in Parliament. Writing to Lord North, 5th March, 1779, he says: "I am strongly of opinion that the general officers, who through Parliament have got governments, should, on opposing, lose them. This is very different from removing them from their military commands." "

[ocr errors]

The king

himself with

ministry.

Not without many affronts, and much unpopularity, the king and his minister long triumphed over all opposition in Parliament; but in 1778, the signal identifies failure of their policy, the crisis in American af- Lord North's fairs, and the impending war with France, obliged them to enter into negotiations with Lord Chatham, for the admission of that statesman and some of the leaders of Opposition into the ministry. The king needed their assistance, but was resolved not to adopt their policy. He would accept them as instruments of his own will, but not as responsible ministers. If their counsels should prevail, he would himself be humiliated and disgraced.

In a letter to Lord North, 15th March, 1778, the king says: "Honestly, I would rather lose the crown I now wear, than bear the ignominy of possessing it under their

1 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 97. 2 Chatham Corresp., iv. 243, 251.

8 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 130. 4 Fox Mem., i. 115, 119.

shackles." And, again, on the 17th of March, he writes: "I am still ready to accept any part of them that will come to the assistance of my present efficient ministers: but, whilst any ten men in the kingdom will stand by me, I will not give myself up to bondage. My dear Lord, I will rather risk my crown than do what I think personally disgraceful. It is impossible this nation should not stand by me. If they will not, they shall have another king, for I never will put my hand to what will make me miserable to the last hour of my life." ."2 Again, on the 18th, he writes: "Rather than be shackled by those desperate men (if the nation will not stand by me), I will rather see any form of government introduced into this island, and lose my crown, rather than wear it as a disgrace." The failure of these negotiations, followed by the death of Lord Chatham, left unchanged the unfortunate administration of Lord North.

The king en

Overtures, indeed, were made to the Whig leaders, to join a new ministry under Lord Weymouth, which forces his own were, perhaps unwisely, declined; and hencepolicy. forth the king was resolved to admit none to his councils without exacting a pledge of compliance with his wishes. Thus, on the 4th February, 1779, writing to Lord North, he says: "You may now sound Lord Howe; but, before I name him to preside at the Admiralty Board, I must expect an explicit declaration that he will zealously concur in prosecuting the war in all the quarters of the globe."5 Again, on the 22d June, 1779, he writes: "Before I will hear of any man's readiness to come into office, I will expect to see it signed under his own hand, that he is resolved to keep the empire entire, and that no troops shall consequently be withdrawn from thence (i. e. America), nor independence ever allowed."

6

1 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 108; Fox Mem., i. 189.
2 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 110; Fox Mem., i. 191.

3 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 111; Fox Mem., i. 193.

4 Fox Mem., i. 207; Lord J. Russell's Life of Fox, i. 193.

5 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 127; Fox Mem., i. 211, 212.
6 Ibid., 236.

At this time it was openly avowed in the House of Commons by Lord George Germaine, that the king was his own minister, and Mr. Fox lamented "that his Majesty was his own unadvised minister." 1 Nor was it unnatural that the king should expect such submission from other statesmen, when his first minister was carrying out a policy of which he disapproved, but wanted resolution to resist,2 — and when Parliament had hitherto supported his ill-omened measures. In October, 1779, Lord North, writing to the king concerning the resignation of Lord Gower, who was averse to the continuance of the American war, which, in his opinion, "must end in ruin to his Majesty and the country," says: "In the argument Lord North had certainly one disadvantage, which is that he held in his heart, and has held for three years past, the same opinion as Lord Gower." 8

Again, however, the king was reduced to treat with the Opposition; but was not less resolute in his deter- Is forced to

mination that no change of ministers should affect treat with the Opposition. the policy of his measures. On December 3d, 1779, he was prevailed upon to give Lord Thurlow authority to open a negotiation with the leaders of the Opposition, and expressed his willingness "to admit into his confidence and service any men of public spirit and talents, who will join with part of the present ministry in forming one on a more enlarged scale, provided it be understood that every means are to be employed to keep the empire entire, to prosecute the present just and unprovoked war in all its branches, with the utmost vigor, and that his Majesty's past measures be treated with proper respect." Finding the compliance of independent statesmen less ready than he desired, he writes to Lord Thurlow, 18th December, 1779: "From the cold disdain with which I am treated, it is evident to me what

1 Dec. 4th, 1778, on Mr. Coke's motion upon Clinton's proclamation; Fox Mem., i. 203.

2 Fox Mem., i. 211, 212.

8 King's Letters to Lord North; Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 151.

4 Lord Brougham's Works, iii. 139; Fox Mem., i. 237.

« ForrigeFortsæt »