rally had obscure but lucrative offices, in the gift of influence in The king continued personally to direct the measures The king's of the ministers, more particularly in the disputes Parliament. with the American colonies, which, in his opinion, involved the rights and honour of his crown. He was resolutely opposed to the repeal of the Stamp Act, which the ministers had thought necessary for the conciliation of the colonies. He resisted this measure in council; but finding the ministers resolved to carry it, he opposed them in Parliament by the authority of his name, and by his personal influence over a considerable body of his parliamentary adherents.3 The king affected, indeed, to support the ministers, and to decline the use of his name in opposing them. “Lord Burke's Present Discontents, Works, ii. 254. The king said his ministers "would undo his people, in giving up the rights of his crown; that to this he would never consent."- 3 Walp. Mem., ii. 259, 331, n. Harcourt suggested, at a distance, that his Majesty might make his sentiments known, which might prevent the repeal of the act, if his ministers should push that measure. The king seemed averse to that, said he would never influence people in their parliamentary opinions, and that he had promised to support his ministers."' But, however the king may have affected to deprecate the use of his name, it was unquestionably used by his friends 2; and while he himself admitted the unconstitutional character of such a proceeding, it found a defender in Lord Mansfield. In discussing this matter with the king, his lordship argued that, though it would be unconstitutional to endeavour by his Majesty's name to carry questions in Parliament, yet where the lawful rights of the king and Parliament were to be asserted and maintained, he thought the making his Majesty's opinion in support of those rights to be known, was fit and becoming.”3 In order to counteract this secret influence, Lord Rockingham obtained the king's written consent to the passing of the bill.4 66 The ministers had to contend against another difficulty, which the tactics of the court had created. Not only were they opposed by independent members of the court party; but members holding office, upon whose support ministers were justified in relying, -were encouraged to oppose them; and retained their offices, while voting in the ranks of the Opposition. The king, who had punished with so much severity any opposition to measures which he approved, now upheld and protected those placemen, who opposed the ministerial measures to which 1 Mr. Grenville's Diary, Jan. 31, 1766; Grenville Papers, iii. 353. 2 Grenville Papers, iii. 374; Walp. Mem., ii. 288; Rockingham Mem., 3 Grenville Papers, iii. 374. he himself objected. In vain the ministers remonstrated against their conduct: the king was ready with excuses and promises; but his chosen band were safe from the indignation of the Government. Nor was their opposition confined to the repeal of the Stamp Act, a subject on which they might have affected to entertain conscientious scruples: but it was vexatiously continued against the general measures of the administration.' Well might Mr. Burke term this "an opposition of a new and singular character, - an opposition of placemen and pensioners." 2 Lord Rockingham protested against such a system while in office; and after his dismissal, took occasion to observe to his Majesty, that "when he had the honour of being in his Majesty's service, the measures of administration were thwarted and obstructed by men in office, acting like a corps; that he flattered himself it was not entirely with his Majesty's inclination, and would assure him it was very detrimental to his service." This system, to use the words of Mr. Burke, tended "to produce neither the security of a free Government, nor the energy of a monarchy that is absolute.” 5 4 The king, meanwhile, had resolved to overthrow the Rockingham ministry, which was on every account distasteful to him. He disapproved their liberal policy: he was jealous of their powerful party, which he desired to break up; and, above all, he resented their independence. He desired ministers to execute his will; and these men and their party were the obstacles to the cherished object of his ambition. Duke of Grafton's ministry, 1766. The king's efforts to dissolve parties. At length, in July, 1766, they were ungraciously dismissed'; and his Majesty now expected from the hands of Mr. Pitt, an administration better suited to his own views and policy. Mr. Pitt's greatness had naturally pointed him out as the fittest man for such a task, and there were other circumstances which made him personally acceptable to the king. Haughty as was the demeanour of that distinguished man in the senate, and among his equals, his bearing in the royal presence was humble and obsequious. The truth of Mr. Burke's well-known sarcasm, that "the least peep into that closet intoxicates him, and will to the end of his life," 2 was recognised by all his contemporaries.3 A statesman with at least the outward qualities of a courtier, was likely to give the king some repose after his collisions with the two last ministries. He now undertook to form an administration under the Duke of Grafton, with the office of Privy Seal, and a seat in the Upper House, as Earl of Chatham. For another reason also Lord Chatham was acceptable to the king. They agreed, though for different reasons, in the policy of breaking up party connexions. This was now the settled object of the king, which he pursued with unceasing earnestness. In writing to 1 Walp. Mem., ii. 337. 3 Chase Price said, "that at the trated by the abject terms of his letter to the king on resigning the office of Privy Seal, two years afterwards. "Under this load of unhappiness, I will not despair of your Majesty's pardon, while I supplicate again on my knees your Majesty's mercy, and most humbly implore your Majesty's royal permission to resign that high office." 14th October, 1768; Chatham Corresp., iii. 314. Lord Chatham, July 29th, 17661, he said: "I know the Earl of Chatham will zealously give his aid towards destroying all party distinctions, and restoring that subordination to government which can alone preserve that inestimable blessing, liberty, from degenerating into licentiousness." 2 Again, December 2nd, 1766, he wrote to the Earl of Chatham: "To rout out the present method of parties banding together, can only be obtained by withstanding their unjust demands, as well as the engaging able men, be their private connexions where they will."3 And again, on the 25th June, 1767: "I am thoroughly resolved to encounter any difficulties rather than yield to faction." 4 influence of By this policy the king hoped to further his cherished Personal scheme of increasing his own personal influence. To the king. overcome the Whig connexion, was to bring into office the friends of Lord Bute, and the court party who were subservient to his views. Lord Chatham adopted the king's policy for a very different purpose. Though in outward observances a courtier, he was a constitutional statesman, opposed to government by prerogative, and court influence. His career had been due to his own genius independent of party, and superior to it, he had trusted to his eloquence, his statesmanship, and popularity. And now, by breaking up parties, he hoped to rule over them all. His project, however, completely failed. Having offended and exasperated the Whigs, he found himself at the head of an administration composed of the king's friends, who thwarted him, and of discordant elements over which he had no control. 1 Introduction to vol. iii. of Bed ford Corresp., xxvii. 2 Chatham Corresp., iii. 21. 3 Ibid., iii. 137. |