Public discontents.

King's differences

with the Grenville ministry.

and as Charles I. had committed Selden and other leading members of the House of Commons, could not now have been attempted. Nor was the ill-omened venture of Charles I. against the five members likely to be repeated; but the king was violating the same principles of constitutional government as his arbitrary predecessors. He punished, as far as he was able, those who had incurred his displeasure, for their conduct in Parliament; and denied them the protection which they claimed from privilege, and the laws of their country. Yet the Commons submitted to this violation of their freedom, with scarcely a murmur.'

The riots and popular discontents of this period ought to have convinced the king that his statesmanship was not successful. He had already sacrificed his popularity to an ill-regulated love of power. But he continued to direct every measure of the government, whether of legislation, of administration, or of patronage; and by means of the faithful reports of his minister, he constantly assisted, as it were, in the deliberations of Parliament.2

In 1765, differences again arose between the king and the Grenville ministry. They had justly offended him by their mismanagement of the Regency Bill 3,-they had disputed with him on questions of patronage and expenditure, they had wearied him with long arguments in the closet 4; and, in the month of May, having completely lost his Majesty's confidence, he intimated to them his intention of dispensing with their services.

1 Parl. Hist., xvi. 1765.

2 Grenville Papers, iii. 4-15, 2137. The king's communications were sometimes sufficiently peremptory. Writing May 21st, 1765, he says: "Mr. Grenville, I am surprised that you are not yet come, when

you know it was my orders to be
attended this evening. I expect
you, therefore, to come the moment
you receive this."— Grenville Pa-
pers, iii. 40.

3 See infra, p. 142.
4 Walp. Mem., ii. 161.

But the king, after vain negotiations with Mr. Pitt through the Duke of Cumberland, finding himself unable to form another administration, was again compelled to retain them in office. They had suspected the secret influence of Lord Bute in thwarting their counsels; and to him they attributed their dismissal. 1 The first condition, therefore, on which they consented to remain in office, was that Lord Bute should not be suffered to interfere in his Majesty's councils "in any manner or shape whatever." 2 To this the king pledged himself3, and though suspicions of a secret correspondence with Lord Bute were still entertained, there is every reason for believing that he adhered to his promise.* Indeed, he had already acquired so much confidence in his own aptitude for business, that he no longer relied upon the

1

So great was the jealousy of Mr. Grenville and the Duke of Bedford of the influence of Lord Bute in 1764, that they were anxious to insist upon his remaining in the country, though he said he was tired of it, and had daughters to marry, and other business.-Mr. Grenville's Diary, 16th and 28th Jan., 1764; Grenville Papers, ii. 483, 488. 2 Minute of Cabinet, 22nd May, 1765; Grenville Papers, iii. 41; ib., 184; Adolphus, i. 170.

3" At eleven o'clock at night the king sent for Mr. Grenville, and told him he had considered upon the proposals made to him: he did promise and declare to them that Lord Bute should never, directly nor indirectly, have anything to do with his business, nor give advice upon anything whatever."-Diary; Grenville Papers, iii. 185.

Mem. of C. J. Fox, i. 65-68, 111; Mr. Mackintosh to Earl Temple, Aug. 30th, 1765, Grenville Papers, iii. 81. Wraxall's Mem., ii. 73, &c. Mr. Grenville was still so

suspicious of Lord Bute's influence, that being told in November, 1765, by Mr. Jenkinson that Lord Bute had only seen the king twice during his illness in the spring, he says in his diary : "Which fact Mr. Grenville could not be brought to believe. He owned, however, to Mr. Grenville that the intercourse in writing between his Majesty and Lord Bute always continued, telling him that he knew the king wrote to him a journal every day of what passed, and as minute a one as if, said he, your boy at school was directed by you to write his journal to you.""

Grenville Papers, iii. 220.

It was not until Dec. 1768, that Mr. Grenville seems to have been persuaded that Lord Bute's influence was lost. He then concurred in the prevailing opinion of "the king being grown indifferent to him, but the princess being in the same sentiments towards him as before.' ·Diary; Grenville Papers, iv. 408.

Negotiations with

counsels of his favourite.' He was able to rule alone;
and wanted instruments, rather than advisers. The
second condition was the dismissal of Mr. Stuart Mac-
kenzie, Lord Bute's brother, from the office of Privy
Seal in Scotland, and from the management of the
affairs of that country. In this, too, the king yielded,
though sorely against his will, as he had promised the
office for life.2 Meanwhile the breach between the king
and his ministers became still wider. They had been
forced upon him by necessity; they knew that he was
plotting their speedy overthrow, and protested against
the intrigues by which their influence was counteracted.
The Duke of Bedford besought the king "to permit his
authority and his favour to go together;"3 and these re-
monstrances were represented by the king's friends as
insolent and overbearing. An outcry was raised against
the ministers that they "desired to enslave the king,'
who was now determined to make any sacrifices to
get rid of them.

The negotiations for a new ministry were again the Whigs. conducted on behalf of the king, by his uncle the Duke of Cumberland. Such was the popular hatred of Lord Bute and his countrymen, that the Duke's former severities against the Scotch, which had gained for him the name of "the Butcher," were now a claim to popular favour. The rebellious Scots had been treated as they deserved; and he who had already chastised them, was not the man to favour their pretensions at

while the country was virtually without a government.1 Mr. Pitt was again impracticable: the further continuance of the Grenville ministry could not be endured; and, at length, the king was reduced to the necessity of surrendering himself once more to the very men whom he most dreaded.

nistry.

The Marquess of Rockingham, the leader of the ob- Rockingnoxious Whig aristocracy,—the statesman whom he had ham mirecently removed from his lieutenancy, the king was now obliged to accept as Premier; and General Conway, whom he had deprived of his regiment, became a Secretary of State, and leader of the House of Commons. The policy of proscription was, for a time at least, reversed and condemned. Mr. Pitt, when solicited by the Dismissal Duke of Cumberland to take office, had named as one condemned of his conditions, the restoration of officers dismissed on political grounds. This the king had anticipated, and was prepared to grant.2 The Rockingham administration insisted on the same terms; and according to Mr. Burke "discountenanced, and it is hoped for ever abolished, the dangerous and unconstitutional practice of removing military officers, for their votes in Parliament."3

of officers

of the

try.

The Whig leaders were not less jealous of the in- Conditions fluence of Lord Bute, than the ministry whom they Rockingdisplaced; and before they would accept office, they ham minisinsisted that the thought of replacing Mr. Mackenzie should be laid aside; and also that some of the particular friends of the Earl of Bute should be removed, as a proof to the world that the Earl of Bute should not either publicly or privately, directly or indirectly, have any concern or influence in public affairs, or in

1 Walp. Mem., ii. 192.

3 Short Account of a Late Short

2 Ibid., ii. 165; Duke of Cum- Administration. berland's Narrative; Rockingham Mem., i. 193-196.

friends.

the management or disposition of public employments." These conditions being agreed to, a ministry so constituted was likely to be independent of court influence yet it was soon reproached with submission The king's to the "interior cabinet." Mr. Pitt said, "Methinks I plainly discover the traces of an overruling influence;" and while he disavowed any prejudice against the country of Lord Bute, he declared that "the man of that country wanted wisdom, and held principles incompatible with freedom." This supposed influence was disclaimed on the part of the government by General Conway: "I see nothing of it," said he, "I feel nothing of it: I disclaim it for myself, and as far as my discernment can reach, for the rest of his Majesty's ministers." 2

Whether Lord Bute had, at this time, any influence at court, was long a subject of doubt and controversy. It was confidently believed by the public, and by many of the best informed of his contemporaries; but Lord Bute, several years afterwards, so explicitly denied it, that his denial may be accepted as conclusive.3 The king's friends, however, had become more numerous, and acted under better discipline. Some of them held offices in the government or household, yet looked to the king for instructions, instead of to the ministers. These gene

1 Paper drawn up by Duke of Newcastle, Rockingham Mem.,i. 218. 2 Debate on the Address, 1766, Parl. Hist., xvi. 97, 101.

3 His son, Lord Mountstuart, writing Oct. 23, 1773, said: "Lord Bute authorises me to say that he declares upon his solemn word of honour, he has not had the honour of waiting on his Majesty, but at his levée or drawing-room; nor has he presumed to offer any advice or opinion concerning the disposition of offices, or the conduct of

measures, either directly or indirectly, by himself or any other, from the time when the late Duke of Cumberland was consulted in the arrangement of a ministry in 1765, to the present hour."-Tomline's Life of Pitt, i. 452, n. See also Rockingham Mem., i. 358-360; Lord Brougham's Sketches of Statesmen, Works, iii. 49.; Edinb. Rev. cxli. 94; Quart. Rev., cxxxi. 236. Lord John Russell's Introduction to vol. iii. of Bedford Correspondence, xxxiii.